Alexander v Caeser on RTW

[Leondias]

Hello everyone. I am doing a project on what would happen if a full Macedonian army under the command of Alexander the great met an army under the command of Julius Caeser.

I have a written part to do (easy) and a visual presentation to make (Not so easy)

I was wondering if the good people on here can help me with information on the two armies particullaly the Roman side of things because my knowledge is very limited there.

Oh and I would also like to know if there is a way to do a fully scripted battle on RTW.

Thank you for your help.

[Primo]

Hello everyone. I am doing a project on what would happen if a full Macedonian army under the command of Alexander the great met an army under the command of Julius Caeser.

I have a written part to do (easy) and a visual presentation to make (Not so easy)

I was wondering if the good people on here can help me with information on the two armies particullaly the Roman side of things because my knowledge is very limited there.

Oh and I would also like to know if there is a way to do a fully scripted battle on RTW.

Thank you for your help.

There are ways to make a fully scripted battle, as you can see in the Prologue-Battle - you can achieve quite everything per scripting.

To the Roman Army:
Generals Armoured Bodyguard
Legionaire Cohort 1
Legionaire Cohort 1
Legionaire Cohort 1
Legionaire Cohort 1
Legionaire Cohort 1
Legionaire Cohort 1
Legionaire Cohort 1
Legionaire Cohort 1
Legionaire Cohort 1
Legionaire Cohort 1
Auxiliari Spearmen
Auxiliari Spearmen
Auxiliari Spearmen
Archer Auxilia
Archer Auxilia
Barbarian Cavalry Mercenarys
Barbarian Cavalry Mercenarys
Roman Cavalry
Roman Cavalry

That´s historically quite correct, I think, just edited to fit RTW-Logic.

[Artillery_Duck]

He said Alexander, not Hannible.
What sort of information do you need? Because with what you have said so far I could spend all day writing things out and you not find any of it useful.

I don't think you can do a fully scripted battle, I think the best way would be to get a friend to play as one army and for you to control the other in order to make them use their actual tactics.

[Primo]

He said Alexander, not Hannible.
What sort of information do you need? Because with what you have said so far I could spend all day writing things out and you not find any of it useful.

I don't think you can do a fully scripted battle, I think the best way would be to get a friend to play as one army and for you to control the other in order to make them use their actual tactics.

Take my word as scripter: It is possible.
Just play the prologue again, and you see its possible.

[Leondias]

He said Alexander, not Hannible.
What sort of information do you need? Because with what you have said so far I could spend all day writing things out and you not find any of it useful.

I don't think you can do a fully scripted battle, I think the best way would be to get a friend to play as one army and for you to control the other in order to make them use their actual tactics.

Anything you can give me, the more the better, I have a minimum of 5000 words so no need to worry about it being too long.

[Artillery_Duck]

Do you know how to do it Primo? If you do, please tell, I believe Leondias would find it most useful.

[Primo]

Do you know how to do it Primo? If you do, please tell, I believe Leondias would find it most useful.

I do know. But is not like you have to add a single line - you have to script every move. He can look at the prologue script in the sons_of_mars campaign, and he´ll see how to do it, but it is much work.

[Artillery_Duck]

Ok, so unless you fancy doing a lot of extra work your best option would be to have a friend control one army and you control the other, which is the point I made at the start. Albeit not for that reason, but make it I did.

[TheFoolOnTheHill]

i say duck is right because im lazy

[Primo]

Ok, so unless you fancy doing a lot of extra work your best option would be to have a friend control one army and you control the other, which is the point I made at the start. Albeit not for that reason, but make it I did.

i say duck is right because im lazy

Always when I´m explaining how to mod something, the person I´m explaining it changes his mind.

[Leondias]

Well I have until around January, would that be long enough to script a single battle?
And yes I am a modding novice and have no clue about scripting or anything like that.

[Primo]

Well I have until around January, would that be long enough to script a single battle?
And yes I am a modding novice and have no clue about scripting or anything like that.

Well, unless you want to start real modding it is probably not worth it. If you do, it would be a nice start.

[DarthShizNit]

Depends on whether or not Alexanders phalanxes could hold Ceasers legions long enough for Alexander to make one of his end game calvary charges. Im gonna say Alexander would win, his phalanxes were of excellent quality, great officers, and superior calvary. All he would have to do is pin down the legions with his phalanxes, route the roman cav, and flank the legions.Ceaser would have to do a lot of trickery manuvering in order not to get flanked and at the end of the day Alexanders Calvary would wipe the floor with ceasers, meaning he would have to play the battle entirely on the defensive in order to avoide bing outflanked. Ceasers legions could probably break the phalanxes here and there, but Alexanders mastery of calvary would win him the day in my opinion.

[Leondias]

Primo, thanks for the heads-up, I have downloaded Blender and am using a nice thick book to figure out how to use it, when I am finished (if ever) I will put it on TW for them to enjoy, I know how much the people on here enjoy these things.

I would like all the information that people can give me on Caeser and the pre-marian army.
DarthShiznit, that was pretty much the conclusion I came to.

[DarthShizNit]

Primo, thanks for the heads-up, I have downloaded Blender and am using a nice thick book to figure out how to use it, when I am finished (if ever) I will put it on TW for them to enjoy, I know how much the people on here enjoy these things.

I would like all the information that people can give me on Caeser and the pre-marian army.
DarthShiznit, that was pretty much the conclusion I came to.

Ceasers leagions were post marian reforms and proably the best the roman legions would ever get. Professional soldiers in every sense of the word, the legion was more flexible than the phalanxe (hence the phalanxes fading into history). the legions had better armour (Alexanders phalanxes has leather armor, the legions had flexible plate strips for armor). They also fought in a way that enabled them to rotate their front line of troops to the back meaning they were always able to present a fresh and rested line of troops to the enemy (this cant be replicated in RTW). The romans loved their heavy infantry, and mostly focused on that, reylying mostly on auxilia or straight up mercanary calvary, and then auxilia to round out their archers and support troops. Basically the legion is one giant mass of heavy infantry that can act well on defense and offense with enough support units to make it "flexible" in a combat position.

[Leondias]

Ceasers leagions were post marian reforms and proably the best the roman legions would ever get. Professional soldiers in every sense of the word, the legion was more flexible than the phalanxe (hence the phalanxes fading into history). the legions had better armour (Alexanders phalanxes has leather armor, the legions had flexible plate strips for armor). They also fought in a way that enabled them to rotate their front line of troops to the back meaning they were always able to present a fresh and rested line of troops to the enemy (this cant be replicated in RTW). The romans loved their heavy infantry, and mostly focused on that, reylying mostly on auxilia or straight up mercanary calvary, and then auxilia to round out their archers and support troops. Basically the legion is one giant mass of heavy infantry that can act well on defense and offense with enough support units to make it "flexible" in a combat position.

Ah my bad, I knew I had made a mistake somewhere. Some of the phalanx's had bronze armour but stripped it in the hot climate of asia (or so it says in Robin Lane Fox's book)

Unflexible but near invulnerable from the front is the phalanx. Roman legions were just the business in the ancient world. My two favorite ancient generals using my two favorite ancient units going head to head.

[Van Daan]

Caesar would likely see Alexander as the hot blooded young general he was and withdraw to more favorable terrain, knowing Alexander would follow for the glory a battle would bring. So the battle would take place in either a plain, which had advantages for both sides, or a heavily wooded area, so the phalanx and cavalry would both be diminished in value, wheras the Romans would still have the flexibility of their legions to manuever. A flat plain would be best for a visual though.

My view of what the armies would be:
Caesar
1 roman general s/s
2 roman cavalry b/b
2 auxilia b/b
9 legionary cohorts b/b
1 legionary first cohort b/b
1 archer auxilia b/b

Alexander
1 generals armoured bodyguard b/b
1 companion cavalry
1 macedonian cavalry
6 phalanx pikemen
1 royal pikemen
2 peltasts
1 cretan archer

The weapon and armor upgrades for the Romans are because the time difference between these generals saw an improvement in the way blades and armor were forged.

The setup would see Caesar having a checkerboard formation with two lines, so five legions in the front with gaps between them followed by another line in the same arrangement. The roman cav and auxilia would be paired up, one pair to a flank, and the generals armoured bodyguard would be behind the legions. The archer auxilia would be in front of the legions.

Alexander, by contrast, would line up his phalangites in a single line sixteen men deep. On the right flank would be Alexander and the companion cavalry, the left hosting the thessalian cavalry. The cretan archers would be behind the phalanx, the peltasts supporting the cavalry, and the royal pikemen on the right flank with the companions, serving the role of the royal hypaspist, the troops who supported the companion cavalry in their charge.

As for the victor, Caesar would win hands down. Alexander, facing a new foe and seeing a battle line no wider than his own, would march forward in his standard formation. Caesar would use his front line of legions to engage the phalanx, then command his back line to sweep around the flank and systematically destroy the phalanx from the rear. Alexanders cavalry would be a problem, but Caesars auxilia spearmen would allow him to delay the companions long enough to do irreperable damage to the phalanx. Afterwards, he would either withdraw into a defensive square or attack Alexanders cavalry from the rear if they were still engaging his left flank.

[caesar_37th]

Before saying Alexander would win I would recommend reading about the battle of Cynoscephalae. Note: that was a Pre-Marian Roman army fighting uphill. Note: not only did the Macedonians have another 100 years since Alexander to improve weapons, Caesar had another 150 years of armor upgrades and tactics. He would win.

Pydna was even worse for Macedon.

[DarthShizNit]

Before saying Alexander would win I would recommend reading about the battle of Cynoscephalae. Note: that was a Pre-Marian Roman army fighting uphill. Note: not only did the Macedonians have another 100 years since Alexander to improve weapons, Caesar had another 150 years of armor upgrades and tactics. He would win.

Pydna was even worse for Macedon.

The romans won that battle by attacking a section of the line that wasnt properly formed, the romans were getting owned by the downhill phalanxe . And the army they faced there was NOT alexander the greats army that had conquered more territory in a few years than ceaser could ever have dreamed off lol. Also, once again, alexander knew how to use the best calvary in his time with devistating affect, all the phalanxe has to do is hold of the romans (a phalanxe is pretty deep and theromans would have to take thier time getting through it) long enough for the companion calvary to come crashing through. The legion was a better unit, but Alexanders calvary would win him the day on an open feild of battle.

[Artillery_Duck]

Also, once again, alexander knew how to use the best calvary in his time with devistating affect, all the phalanxe has to do is hold of the romans (a phalanxe is pretty deep and theromans would have to take thier time getting through it) long enough for the companion calvary to come crashing through. The legion was a better unit, but Alexanders calvary would win him the day on an open feild of battle.

I think you are forgetting the fact that, due to the length of the sarissa (Macedonian pike) Alexander's men could only use small pelte shields which offered very little protection. The Roman pila, which they would throw before charging, would destroy the first few ranks of the phalanx, disrupting its cohesion. In addition, as you have said, Roman commanders had had plenty of experience engaging both hoplite and pike phalanxes, whereas Alexander would have no idea what the strengths and weaknesses of a legion were.
Furthermore, as a young man Caeser would probably have been taught about Alexander and therefore know that he favoured his cavalry, so he would set up his formation to counter that.
However, having said all this, I still think that Alexander would be capable of emerging victorious, unlike his Diadochi, he used skirmishers, cavalry and pikemen together. Alone, as his successors used them, phalanxes were weak, supported they could be unstoppable.