Engaging the enemy using formations...

[pokeytrev]

I'm obsessed with creating a proper battle line when playing with the Romans. I use a checkerboard formation. and, when I engage the enemy, it seems to me as if the formation never really meant anything. So, for those of you who are reading this, what purpose does the formation serve and how can you best engage the enemy?

I have been sending the first list of cohorts into battle first. I simply pause the game, order them to charge the enemy directly in front of them--individual cohorts attack individual unit groups--and send the second line in when needed. Who here pauses the game in order to send you units forward so they all move together at the same time?

How would the real roman formation move forward to engage the enemy? Would the first line move forward and create a line with no breaks? Would the whole formation move forward to attack?

Help me out.

[Dramatic Cat]

well. I only use the manipular formations when the enmy comes at meh. Allows meh to manage reserves and organize flanking attacks better. If i goes against the enemy i dont use it, it never works.

And i has no idea of how the real roman formations would work like.

:p

[Hunterbear]

@pokeytrev

From my experience, the difficulty you play at and which exe you use doesn't really matter to the AI as to what formation you're using against them. The faction you're fighting and units in their army will behave according to their set traits. Some charge ahead of their lines, some bobble back and forth like skirmishers, while others proceed in an orderly manner to form their line before engaging yours. The AI could care less if you stand in a checker pattern or not. They will engage you on their terms. They may hit your whole line or just part of it. Also depends if there are obstacles on the terrain that the AI has to maneuver around (which really breaks them up).

I'll let a more experience Roman player/historian explain how a Roman formation may have worked in real life, not my expertise.

[Ferdiad]

Well in game manipular formations kinda fail, you can't retreat cohorts without massive losses and the spaces inherent to the Manipular formation mean units wrap around your flanks, although that means your second line will devastate the flankers with a charge.Bring your third line out wide so tha you can fire pila into their backs, It is very important that you have Fire at will off.Well IRL it worked very well.

[RebelCub]

you can't retreat cohorts without massive losses

Correct. I'm really hoping that in RTW 2 they have a system like in ETW where you can fall back without turning your back to the enemy. I've always wanted to try a proper "Cannae" strategy, but you really can't do it because the game doesn't allow you to give ground voluntarily without exposing your back.

[django]

Have a read of Roman battle tactics by ross cowan,it explains some of the different systems they used.

[pokeytrev]

Okay, sounds like the formations are kinda for show when you get down to the intricate details, though I do acknowledge their usefulness to a degree.

How does everyone here charge an enemy line? Do you pause the game and order each unit to charge an enemy unit and so on? Or do you send your units forward and let the two lines collide with no attack order?

[Dramatic Cat]

i make each unit charge at the nearest one, "sending units forward" doesnt give you any charge bonus.

And i dont pause, pausing and unpausing in-battle is for noobs

[Chris Death]

Well it's not really like who pauses is a noob and who doesn't is a pro but i agree on not
using the pause during battles if it's not a must like getting another coffee, going out with the dogs
getting some papers to clear the keyboard from a drink, etc.

I've been using the pause button too for a while and it only leads to pressing instantly pause whenever
you change anything on the battlefield and you end up playing a real time battle like a turn based one.

The ai is dumb enough to deserve getting this only advantage over the player to be able to move 20 units
simultaneously - it's the only advantage ai does have.

Using the pause button to equalize this disadvantage will make your battles very boring after a while
especially when having results like 4000 : 57 kills at the end - It makes all those heroic victories pointless
you get from it since those battles were never a real challenge.

~S~ CD

[DarthLazy]

Its useless. Just form a line and try to flank.

[AspisPhalanx90]

I use the manipular formation for alot of roman-style armies. basically have the front line hurl pila, and hold their ground. then depending on how the battle is going and how the enemy deployed, use the reserve maniples to reinforce and flank. the AI tends to hit my center, so the middle two reserve cohorts usually smash them, while the edge ones start going around.

of course, i rarely play as rome and flank the way it was meant to be done...with effective! heavy cavalry..not that roman garbage

[a-woowie.doowie]

I like to draw up a situation - so that's what I'm going to do. I prefer to outflank, surround and attack from the rear when I play RTW and I usually do it as following:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Colours:

Green = my cavalry.
Red = my auxiliary/light troops(altough very often being spearmen to deal with eventual cavalry attacks). Note; the reason for the black line in the red block is due to me always having two or more units on each side.
Black = my main infantry(either heavy infantry or phalanxes).
Purple = my general.
Pink = these are reserves, I only use these as the romans(conists of Triarii, not used after Marian Reforms).

Dark red = enemy infantry.
Blue = enemy missile units(as you know, the AI places their missiles in front of the army before the fight but moves them behind their line when stuff is about to go down - this picture is meant to show you the moment just before the clash and given orders).
Gray = enemy cavalry(not including missile cavalry in this fight).
Brown = enemy general(unless they sometimes feel like charging him first, before the fight has even gone down(this happened to me against Pyrrhus)).

Note; I'm not drawing my missle troops since I use them for ranged combat or, if needed, extra - extra reserves(and yes, there is supposed to be two "extra"), so they are so situational that I'm not drawing them.

Alright, the battle;

The AI usually has a broader line than me, but I throw my units on the enemy unit closest to them. The first unit of auxiliary troops I send to keep their unit farthest to the flank busy, while I run around with the other one and surrounds the enemy which is kept busy by the other auxiliary unit - this enemy unit usually routs fast. The enemy cavalry is often less utilized by the AI than it is by the player(with large exception of course - judging by my own experience), thus I practially always win the cavalry fight. The arrow going from the grey blocks to the center is NOT the enemy cavalry, it's mine after winning the cavalry fight. I either charge the general(if close by) or surrounds a large chunk of the enemy main line. Then it's a meat-grinder which length is decided by morale and strength(generally won by the one doing the surrounding, instead of the one surrounded). Oh and forgot the pink ones. Like I said I usually don't use these units - but they are to reinforce the main line, should it breach somewhere.

Ok the negative part with this tactic is that pretty much every single unit I have, is commited to fighting - this renders all the flexibility to my cavalry or my(hopefully) succesful flanking troops. If the enemy doesn't rout, then it takes forever - this I noticed against Hannibal before I had him killed, after that the chainrout began.

Good god that was a nsaty comment. Sorry!

[Ferdiad]

I like to draw up a situation - so that's what I'm going to do. I prefer to outflank, surround and attack from the rear when I play RTW and I usually do it as following:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Colours:

Green = my cavalry.
Red = my auxiliary/light troops(altough very often being spearmen to deal with eventual cavalry attacks). Note; the reason for the black line in the red block is due to me always having two or more units on each side.
Black = my main infantry(either heavy infantry or phalanxes).
Purple = my general.
Pink = these are reserves, I only use these as the romans(conists of Triarii, not used after Marian Reforms).

Dark red = enemy infantry.
Blue = enemy missile units(as you know, the AI places their missiles in front of the army before the fight but moves them behind their line when stuff is about to go down - this picture is meant to show you the moment just before the clash and given orders).
Gray = enemy cavalry(not including missile cavalry in this fight).
Brown = enemy general(unless they sometimes feel like charging him first, before the fight has even gone down(this happened to me against Pyrrhus)).

Note; I'm not drawing my missle troops since I use them for ranged combat or, if needed, extra - extra reserves(and yes, there is supposed to be two "extra"), so they are so situational that I'm not drawing them.

Alright, the battle;

The AI usually has a broader line than me, but I throw my units on the enemy unit closest to them. The first unit of auxiliary troops I send to keep their unit farthest to the flank busy, while I run around with the other one and surrounds the enemy which is kept busy by the other auxiliary unit - this enemy unit usually routs fast. The enemy cavalry is often less utilized by the AI than it is by the player(with large exception of course - judging by my own experience), thus I practially always win the cavalry fight. The arrow going from the grey blocks to the center is NOT the enemy cavalry, it's mine after winning the cavalry fight. I either charge the general(if close by) or surrounds a large chunk of the enemy main line. Then it's a meat-grinder which length is decided by morale and strength(generally won by the one doing the surrounding, instead of the one surrounded). Oh and forgot the pink ones. Like I said I usually don't use these units - but they are to reinforce the main line, should it breach somewhere.

Ok the negative part with this tactic is that pretty much every single unit I have, is commited to fighting - this renders all the flexibility to my cavalry or my(hopefully) succesful flanking troops. If the enemy doesn't rout, then it takes forever - this I noticed against Hannibal before I had him killed, after that the chainrout began.

Good god that was a nsaty comment. Sorry!

I can link better
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=299244
^^Sulla Tactics Guide.

[a-woowie.doowie]

Hehe, indeed you can. But I for one can raise up my hand and say "I'm never going to read that". Way too long for me to get involved with when the AI(not other players) are so easially beaten.

[5th Lieutenant]

Arrian's formations against the Alans is a good model for the Romans as it has ranged assets on the flanks facing inwards supported by [Auxilliary?] infantry with the Legions in the centre and cavalry in support.

Having archers behind the main line firing in to the enemy front works better against lighter cavalry, against shielded opponents you really need to hit their sides or rear.

[Ferdiad]

Has anyone used a weak centre that bows inwards with strong flanks?I did that once with some cheap levies and hoplites on the flanks.They bumrushed my centre and nearly routed it but my flanks rolled them up.

[Chris Death]

Has anyone used a weak centre that bows inwards with strong flanks?I did that once with some cheap levies and hoplites on the flanks.They bumrushed my centre and nearly routed it but my flanks rolled them up.

This tactics only gave you a disadvantage by getting routers in the center spreading a morale drop
to left and to right.

I don't want to say that you were using a bad tactics since vs ai any tactic is a good tactic.

Also i know what tactics you were after - i can't just remember where i've read bout that strong
flanks phalanx and the weak center being used in a historical battle but...

...but the difference of that historical battle and the version you made out of it was that the center
there didn't rout but moved backwards or better say got pushed backwards (while this was part of
the tactics) to lure the enemy center into exposed flanks - this wouldn't really be the best tactics in rtw since it causes too many unnecessary losses when being already engaged.

So all in all - it will work in singleplayer but you could have done the same job more efficient the other way around.

~S~ CD

[DarthLazy]

Why purposely have a weak centre when stronger troops can do exactly the same thing?

[DarthLazy]

Cannae

[Chris Death]

Didn't think about cannae tbh but i found the one i was referring to,
which happened to be some 200 years earlier.

the battle of Marathon:




1st phase of the battle




2nd phase of the battle

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Marathon

~S~ CD