Phalanxes and Hellenistic units in general over-powered

[Dunadd]

In EB (and other mods like Extended Realism) the stats for Phalangites and for Hellenistic/successor units in general seem to be far too high. There is no non-phalanx unit that can stand against a phalanx without being massacred and phalanxes which have routed frequently rally within 10 or 20 seconds.

A phalanx should have the edge on most enemies to the front if it's in good order on even ground, but it shouldn't massacre other heavy infantry in a minute or two, one on one, without taking any significant losses. If it was capable of doing that most of the battles of Alexander and his allies wouldn't have been decided by the cavalry.

Thorakitai and 'hellenistic elite infantry' also outclass legionaries. I could accept they might be as good as legionaries - much better seems a bit unlikely.

Is there any chance of having less over-powered phalangites and less overpowered successor units in EBII?

I say that as someone who never plays Romans and usually plays as Carthaginians or Seleucids or Dacians.

[Raygereio]

Erm, wuh? I’ll confess it’s been a while since I played EB, but I really don’t remember phalanx units chewing up heavy infantry in minutes. Sure, they’ll turn light infantry in shish kebab, but that’s logical. Heavy infantry can be used to tie up the phalanx for quite some time before they’ll start suffering serious loses, heck the “heavier” heavy units like the roman legionnaires or the Neitos can punch right through most phalanx lines, save the more elite ones such as the silver shields.

I’m similarly confused regarding your comment on the thorakitai; they just aren’t dramatically overpowered compared to other units of the same class. As for elite units being stronger then non-elite units… duh? That’s why they’re elite and also why they’re expensive and have small unit sizes.

Also, most of Alexander’s battles were decided by cavalry? I’m sure that’s why he kept infantry around. Just no. If any one thing was the main deciding factor it was the cooperation and interplay between infantry and cavalry elements; you know, that whole combined arms tactics thing for which Alexander is famous.

[jazstl]

Just give my phalanx enough power to wait for the hammer.

[bobbin]

In EB (and other mods like Extended Realism) the stats for Phalangites and for Hellenistic/successor units in general seem to be far too high. There is no non-phalanx unit that can stand against a phalanx without being massacred and phalanxes which have routed frequently rally within 10 or 20 seconds.

A phalanx should have the edge on most enemies to the front if it's in good order on even ground, but it shouldn't massacre other heavy infantry in a minute or two, one on one, without taking any significant losses. If it was capable of doing that most of the battles of Alexander and his allies wouldn't have been decided by the cavalry.

Thats because in 1 on 1 situations your unit will always be attacking them head on, and there as plenty units that can take them out, or at least severely hurt them.

Thorakitai and 'hellenistic elite infantry' also outclass legionaries. I could accept they might be as good as legionaries - much better seems a bit unlikely.

They should, the Thorakitai have more armour and were some of the best line troops available to the successors.
The Peltastai Makedonikoi (I assume thats what you meant with "hellenistic elite infantry") also have more armour and well...they are elites.
Legionaries were mass produced heavy infantry, they were good but they weren't the best.

Is there any chance of having less over-powered phalangites and less overpowered successor units in EBII?

Somewhat, phalanxes won't be as tough in EBII as they won't be affected as much by the buggy behaviour they had in RTW.

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

For me the only problem with the phalanks in EB is the wear moves they are able to perform (not EB team fault though). In EB 2, afaik there wont be wear moves (especially the death spin which was impossible to perform).
---
As for real life goes, phalanks were easily outplayed by the romans (for many reason which doesnt exactly lead us to an intrinsically overwhelming superiority of the roman legions). As far as i know there were no major encounter between phalanks and the professional roman armies.

[Raygereio]

As far as i know there were no major encounter between phalanks and the professional roman armies.

o_O How about the Battle of Pydna in 168 BC?

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

o_O How about the Battle of Pydna in 168 BC?

Marian reforms took place at 107BC.

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

The romans won nevertheless...

[Raygereio]

Marian reforms took place at 107BC.

Oh, that's what you meant with professional; my apologies.

[Antiochos VII Sidetes]

Marian reforms took place at 107BC.

You seem to be forgetting the First Mithridatic War, in which Mithridates conquered Roman Asia with his phalanx-based armies before being defeated at Chaeronea in Greece by Sulla. There the professional Roman armies won an absolutely massive victory over a traditional Hellenistic force.

[bobbin]

The system as a whole yes, but we were talking about how the soldiers preformed in individual battles weren't we? That is what I understood from your statement here:

Afaik, phalanks only faced the non-professional (and therefore not the best of rome) roman army.

Anyway I think we are basically agreeing, so I'll leave it at that.

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

The system as a whole yes, but we were talking about how the soldiers preformed in individual battles weren't we? That is what I understood from your statement here:



Anyway I think we are basically agreeing, so I'll leave it at that.

Nice talking to you.

Thx

[THE IBERIAN]

who is a better soldier one defending his country, city and family from Hannibal and most important fighting for honor and glory or one defending Rome for money
I always preferred Polybian army, men fighting for something more than just money

[Mix-Master]

I usually don't have a problem with it but sometimes they can even turn when flanked.

But I heard that Indian Guild Warriors(Heavy Infantry) can take on Phalanxes at the front. I haven't tried it though.

[Dargaron]

I usually don't have a problem with it but sometimes they can even turn when flanked.

But I heard that Indian Guild Warriors(Heavy Infantry) can take on Phalanxes at the front. I haven't tried it though.

I'm not sure about the guild warriors, but I've had a few embarrassing moments involving my Deuteroi being routed by illyrian levies. From the front. While the phalangites were defending a breach. So phalanx units are not invulnerable from the front.

[Dunadd]

Likely because of the dodgy pathing and AI in RTW and on and between walls in particular - never seen it happen in a field battle.

[bobbin]

If you time the charge just right so that your soldiers get under their spears it is entirely possible to rout Phalagites from the front, it is very hard to do though.
I once managed to rout a unit of merc Phalangitai with my Galatian short swordsmen in one charge by doing this, one of my most satisfying moments playing EB that was.

[Raygereio]

You can also try forcing your unit into the enemy phalanx itself by not issuing an attack order on the phalanx, but by giving a move order just behind the phalans. This will cause your unit to start running through the wall of spears into the mass of men holding them - instead of just being polite and wait at the business end of the sarissas.
Be carefull with this though, there are phalanx units that are almost more dangerous with their secondary weapons: Pantodapoi Phalangitai know how to chop with those AP axes of theirs.