Defense, Offense, Defense

[Sun Jetzu]

I'm wondering if Romans will be able to use their pila for offense against cavalry?
Instead of throwing them. If so, could they switch from the pila to the gladius if need be.
If so, can say hoplites switch back and forth from spears to swords.
Will this change the rock paper scissor of past games, especially Shogun 2's sword beats spear, spear beats horse, horse beats sword?

[BlueSan]

I think you know the answer to this question

No

Would it be cool? Yes

Would many other things be cool? Yes but we cant have every single detail, especially when there arent some other things in the game.

[Heinz Guderian]

in rome 1, when my legionnaires threw their pila at horses it took down a massive amount of them. almost enough to supply three medium size Farmfoods stores.

[LewisVee]

I think we will see it, It woul make sense and tbh, wouldn't be hard to put in

[CDR Hurricane]

If this screenshot is any indication, Romans will be able to use their pila as spears at least in certain formations.

http://wiki.totalwar.com/images/6/6b...evealRome1.jpg

[Shek93]

If this screenshot is any indication, Romans will be able to use their pila as spears at least in certain formations.

http://wiki.totalwar.com/images/6/6b...evealRome1.jpg

i think it looks like roman soldiers throwing pillum in testudo formation instead of using them as spears, or at least only first line using them while others lines throw them

[Heinz Guderian]

great find CDR Hurricane

[Revan The Great]

That is an interesting picture. While the front rank seem to be using their pila as spears, the back ranks are in the 'throwing' position. Perhaps there is a 'repel cavalry' stance where the front rank holds their spears out, and the back ranks throw pila at will?

That would be pretty cool, though my gut tells me that this screenshot is of a promotional nature, and not meant to reflect the reality of the game.

[SturmChurro]

That is an interesting picture. While the front rank seem to be using their pila as spears, the back ranks are in the 'throwing' position. Perhaps there is a 'repel cavalry' stance where the front rank holds their spears out, and the back ranks throw pila at will?

That would be pretty cool, though my gut tells me that this screenshot is of a promotional nature, and not meant to reflect the reality of the game.

I doubt it. They look like they are just getting ready to throw it. They are under fire by arrows as well, so their shields are up.

[111289]

That is an interesting picture. While the front rank seem to be using their pila as spears, the back ranks are in the 'throwing' position. Perhaps there is a 'repel cavalry' stance where the front rank holds their spears out, and the back ranks throw pila at will?

That would be pretty cool, though my gut tells me that this screenshot is of a promotional nature, and not meant to reflect the reality of the game.

you're right about that as it is an anti cav formations that was historicallt used.

[DogSoldierSPQR]

you're right about that as it is an anti cav formations that was historicallt used.

I'm still convinced that I saw a unit formations menu expand when Al hovered over it in a Nile playthrough. I'm pretty sure these formations for individual units are actually in the game.

[geala]

Stirrups had nothing to do with the ability of cavalry to charge. Saddle construction and the weight and constitution and training of the horses had. The stirrup makes it easier to sit on a horse for longer rides and stabilizes wide slashes with a sword, but against a frontal impact it is of no great help. It is quite easy to charge and stab an enemy on a horse with a Lance without stirrups, you can even couch it; reenactors have proven this time and again. And it is not extremely difficult to train horses to charge into solid or spiky objects. However in campaigns a lot of horses died even out of battle and to have units of cavalry with equally trained riders and horses was difficult. The problems of cavalry in antiquity, the medieval times and the 17th to 19th c. AD were different. The biggest problem for later cavalry was the gunfire, not the bajonets. The biggest problem for cavalry in antiquity were solid formations with big shields or solid formations with pikes/sarisai. Spears are no great cavalry deterrents, because there is no real advantage in range against spear armed cavalry. If infantry waved and gaps appeared, cavalry could go in and destroy bajonet or spear armed soldiers. The former happened a lot in 18th c. battles. However, if the infantry did not wave, the riders often lose their moral and stopped in front of the infantry. It was not the horses' problem, but the riders. Therefore, if the riders had the moral, they could break even into solid, well defended carrees as at Garcia Hernandez in 1812. Most often this moral was not there. The problem of TW games is that such a cavalry warfare cannot be simulated. That's the reason why cavalry in TW is the worst depicted branch of all arms. We only can have cavalry which crash into infantry all times.

[daelin4]

The first question that popped into my mind was how long the average pilum was. Wikipedia states an average of about 6 feet, which isn't terribly long against anything. The legionary would need t handle it with a single hand as well. A commander ordering his legionaries to engage cavalry is also a symptom of that commander being quite incompetent, IMO.

This also would make legionaries quite overpowered because they would be both premier heavy infantry AND great at engaging melee, despite having rather horrible polearm weapons. In any plausible scenario desperation, or terrible army composition, would warrant legionaries attempting to fight cavalrymen with javelins. And I doubt these things are balanced to be effective at thrusting with one hand.

In any case, throwing the darn things at the cavalry would likely be much more effective.

[RGA]

A simple pointed stick won't make you a cavalry killer. Yes, spear/ pila/ bayonet/ pitchfork are effective defensive weapon to hold off cavalry attack, but only when used en masse in densely packed formations. Charging enemy cavalry is a completely different matter. Soldiers in Napoleonic period were almost always armed with bayonet, yet infantry charging cavalry is considered extremely rare incidences.

[Revan The Great]

Ask Pompey's cavalry how poorly Caesar's legionnaires, armed with pila that they used as spears, performed against overwhelming numbers of horsemen.

The fact is that cavalry should be beaten by almost any sort of infantry in a head-on charge. The idea of a huge mass of cavalry charging into a formation of men and destroying it is largely a myth, and only happens if the victims are close to routing, and thus giving way for fear of the impending cavalry charge. Otherwise a prepared mass of infantry, weapons at the ready, will stop a cavalry charge in its tracks and likely butcher it. Cavalry is generally only effective at striking enemies on the flank, or chasing down fleeing soldiers who aren't in a coherent unit.

[RGA]

Ask Pompey's cavalry how poorly Caesar's legionnaires, armed with pila that they used as spears, performed against overwhelming numbers of horsemen.

The fact is that cavalry should be beaten by almost any sort of infantry in a head-on charge. The idea of a huge mass of cavalry charging into a formation of men and destroying it is largely a myth, and only happens if the victims are close to routing, and thus giving way for fear of the impending cavalry charge. Otherwise a prepared mass of infantry, weapons at the ready, will stop a cavalry charge in its tracks and likely butcher it. Cavalry is generally only effective at striking enemies on the flank, or chasing down fleeing soldiers who aren't in a coherent unit.

Tell that to French infantrymen who faced the devastating British cavalry charge in the battle of Waterloo

[Revan The Great]

Tell that to French infantrymen who faced the devastating British cavalry charge in the battle of Waterloo

The French Infantrymen who were presenting a solid mass of bayonet points at the charging cavalry? No, you mean the engaged French infantry who weren't in a good position to cohesively repel a cavalry charge.

Think for a minute. What was the textbook Napoleonic era response for infantry to repel a massed cavalry charge? That's right, it was to form your guys up into a tight little box, bayonets facing in all directions, taking potshots at cavalry. Why is this? Because cavalry can't just bulldoze a solid mass of men with sharp objects. And if you're grouped together in such a way as to present sharp objects in all directions, there's literally nothing cavalry can do and they have to retreat to await infantry support.

Point proven.

I know, but it seemed like he was making a general statement about cavalry. If it wasn't effective no one would have used it.

Only a general statement about cavalry in this time period, which is the only period germane to the discussion.

Obviously cavalry is effective, but the 'heroic bulldozer charge' propagated by films like Lord of the Rings didn't often exist. It could happen against untrained, or wavering infantry, of course. This is because the worst thing you can do, when faced with a cavalry charge, is turn and run - because they're faster than you. The best chance of survival is forming a tight mass of men and standing your ground, because horses generally won't just barrel into a wall of people with sharp objects pointed at them - and if they do, they quickly stumble and fall and the horses beyond them trip and fall and it's a lot of chaos - where infantry swarms the cavalry and proceeds to massacre them. It's simply impossible for cavalry to 'smash' into an army of men standing shoulder to shoulder, twenty ranks deep, and rout them if the would-be victims are disciplined and experienced enough to know to stand their ground.

Even in Medieval times, armies that took the time to think up ways to counter cavalry, or trained their soldiers in anti-cavalry ideas (English at Agincourt, Flemish any day of the week), regularly roflstomped the French cavalry, which at their heart were predicated on either jousting with other cavalry, or smashing into poorly trained, poorly armed, poorly motivated peasant levies that fled at the first sight of such a scary thing as a facemasked knight, in full armor, charging with a lance. The fact that epic cavalry charges worked at all in the middle ages was because in the ineptitude of those they were employed against - and of course the advantage of the stirrup. Please don't pull a random example out of somewhere to try and dispute this, the history of warfare is complex, nuanced, and very long - but what I'm stating is the general rule.

[Sun Jetzu]

but the 'heroic bulldozer charge' propagated by films like Lord of the Rings didn't often exist.

for the last time, movies are literally just for entertainment. Like hundreds of men flying through the air by a chariot attack. Entertainment.

[♠ Thomas Cochrane ♠]

Ask Pompey's cavalry how poorly Caesar's legionnaires, armed with pila that they used as spears, performed against overwhelming numbers of horsemen.

The fact is that cavalry should be beaten by almost any sort of infantry in a head-on charge. The idea of a huge mass of cavalry charging into a formation of men and destroying it is largely a myth, and only happens if the victims are close to routing, and thus giving way for fear of the impending cavalry charge. Otherwise a prepared mass of infantry, weapons at the ready, will stop a cavalry charge in its tracks and likely butcher it. Cavalry is generally only effective at striking enemies on the flank, or chasing down fleeing soldiers who aren't in a coherent unit.

Tell that to the Cataphracts of late antiquity and Frankish lance-bearing knights of the middle ages

Tell that to French infantrymen who faced the devastating British cavalry charge in the battle of Waterloo

Tell that to Mareshall Ney who charged the french cavalry at the British infantry squares at Waterloo.

[xjlxking]

Tell that to the Cataphracts of late antiquity and Frankish lance-bearing knights of the middle ages

Can you name one battle where Cataphracts attacked a infantry line head on who in formation? Even in medieval period, cavalry with all there armor would be stupid to charge into a strong formation of infantry. They relied on lines and formation breaking before charging. It's suicidal to charge into a spear at such heavy speed armor or no armor. Not to mention horse have fear of doing that. That's why the had to use those blind folds so the horses don't panic