Macedonia > Rome

[ethan340]

i think they have better cavalry and peltasts and their infantry is almost invincible if you protect the flanks with hypapist spearmen. to make up for a lake of maneuverability, i only activate the phalanx right before combat.

anyway, your thoughts?

[Ba'alzamon]

The phalanx is an incredible strategy that fends off most inexperienced commanders. However, there are its flaws when it comes to combat. You can protect your flanks all you want with your spear-men, but I would just move archers (shielded by cavalry) along the outskirts of your army and take down as many spear-men as possible then sending my heavy cav in to mop up the rest. This opens up the flanks to a sturdy phalanx formation. However, sometimes if a army has a poop-ton on of archers they will cause significant damage to your missile troop.

[ethan340]

The phalanx is an incredible strategy that fends off most inexperienced commanders. However, there are its flaws when it comes to combat. You can protect your flanks all you want with your spear-men, but I would just move archers (shielded by cavalry) along the outskirts of your army and take down as many spear-men as possible then sending my heavy cav in to mop up the rest. This opens up the flanks to a sturdy phalanx formation. However, sometimes if a army has a poop-ton on of archers they will cause significant damage to your missile troop.

if your archers are brave enough for my companion cav

[mudang]

if your archers are brave enough for my companion cav

Well, to be fair nobody would put archers on the open field against a cav heavy opponent .. rather they'd put the in a position where they can retreat behind their main battle line, which reduces the chance the cavalry has to take them out.

Having said that if you gain cavalry supremacy (which companions can) on the battlefield then that would make life really difficult for the opposition.

[ethan340]

Well, to be fair nobody would put archers on the open field against a cav heavy opponent .. rather they'd put the in a position where they can retreat behind their main battle line, which reduces the chance the cavalry has to take them out.

Having said that if you gain cavalry supremacy (which companions can) on the battlefield then that would make life really difficult for the opposition.

that's the thing with the companions. i route your cav (unless you are a horseman nation, in which case screw macedonia) and then flank the archers and wipe them out in seconds usually

[mudang]

that's the thing with the companions. i route your cav (unless you are a horseman nation, in which case screw macedonia) and then flank the archers and wipe them out in seconds usually

Sure, if you manage to gain cavaly ascendancy that makes life difficult for the opposition, but it's not game over .. it all depends on who you're fighting and the situation.

One of the most interesting battles I can remember was in EB, Getai (me) vs a stack of armoured horse archers. Admittedly it was against the AI but on paper they should've won handily since they both outranged and outmanourvered me. Ambushes are marvelous equalisers though .. they ended up running into my hidden javelin skirmishers and got charged on the back by falxmen. My falxmen took a lot of losses because even trapped armoured cavalry are pretty tough but drapanai are super-cheap in EB and they made mincemeat of the trapped Sarmatians. Thus ended the tale of the armoured horse archers who should've wiped the floor with me.

Sure companions are a good set of horsemen - probably better than most things west of greece on paper - but as they say, battles aren't fought on paper.

[DarthLazy]

You forget the fact that the opponent can do the same.

[mudang]

True, if you play hammer and anvil properly then it's awfully good but even phalanx vs cohort from the front is pretty harsh for the cohort in game, even using levy phanalxes. The best counter against phallanxes might well be the getai or spanish type troops, ie. skirmish heavy, not to mention a horse archer stack.

For myself (as Romans) I rely on Cretan archers to do most of the killing against phallanxes .. a few volleys from the rear does wonders.

Interestingly my style of play with the Romans tends to be more macedonian, ie. hammer & anvil, than infrantry grinder .. maybe I'm playing the wrong faction

[Ferdiad]

Probaly , HI should do the killing, the cav are for skirmishers and routers.And HaA if your desperate.

[Derek522055]

If you maintain the initiative you can employ Scipio Africanus' strategy in Spain against Mago I believe. He shadowed Mago's center with his foreign auxiliaries and attacked Mago's flanks with his veteran legions on both sides.
...____
\\ ------ //
\\ ___ //

Kind of like that, Scipio's center never engaged the Carthaginian center where quality spearman were present, but in effect had them trapped, if the Carthaginian center attempted to wheel around and try to help either flank Scipio's center would have smashed through their lines and cut off both Carthaginian flanks from either side. Its a strategy I employ when I'm attacking the AI factions that use heavy Macedonian phalanxes that are basically immovable.

[ethan340]

If you maintain the initiative you can employ Scipio Africanus' strategy in Spain against Mago I believe. He shadowed Mago's center with his foreign auxiliaries and attacked Mago's flanks with his veteran legions on both sides.
...____
\\ ------ //
\\ ___ //

Kind of like that, Scipio's center never engaged the Carthaginian center where quality spearman were present, but in effect had them trapped, if the Carthaginian center attempted to wheel around and try to help either flank Scipio's center would have smashed through their lines and cut off both Carthaginian flanks from either side. Its a strategy I employ when I'm attacking the AI factions that use heavy Macedonian phalanxes that are basically immovable.

the AI actually does this sometimes, which is why i always keep a unit of allied phalangites in reserve

[Derek522055]

the AI actually does this sometimes, which is why i always keep a unit of allied phalangites in reserve

I've never seen the AI do that, I've seen basic flanking moves and overloading flanks but never to the tactic I explained there where the center is never engaged and mirrors the opponent center. The thing with phalangites is their extremely slow moving and offer almost zero tactical flexibility. So even if you have some units your going to telegraph your next move, and you never attempt a flanking maneuver with a heavy phalanx unit.

[DarthLazy]

COmparisons are made between troops of the same type, you dont say "My archers can shoot his back" since most probably he can get archers of his own.

[mudang]

COmparisons are made between troops of the same type, you dont say "My archers can shoot his back" since most probably he can get archers of his own.

Sure, but then you're at the point where you have to compare specific stack compositions .. basically can <insert specific stack> hope to gain sufficient tactical position to make this a viable approach?

One scenario is if you manage to route the opposition's cavalry .. their light troops will be dead shortly after, which leaves the enemy's main battle line vulnerable to being pincushioned by archers. In that scenario your main battle line is there to hold off the enemy phallangites not beat them.

IMHO arguing about phallangites vs cohorts is moot because the battle would be decided via the cavalry engagement

[Ferdiad]

Someone should get Max in here

[DarthLazy]

That is not a comparison then. Armies are compared according to unit type, there are no exceptions. What you say comes into skill.

[Jean=A=Luc]

Macedonia > Rome

Rome > Macedonia

Oh yeah, this was so worth it.

[Ferdiad]

Rome > Macedonia

Oh yeah, this was so worth it.

no u.
Macedonia > ALL

[ethan340]

no u.
Macedonia > ALL

forgetting about the seleucids? at least in custom battles/multiplayer IMO

[ethan340]

Rome > Macedonia

Oh yeah, this was so worth it.

actually i use reasoning. you just blindly mock