Infantry charge bonus

[torzsoktamas]

The charge bonus for most infantry units in EB2,be it barbarian or roman,is between 2 and 4(maybe 5).While the hoplites have a staggering 28 charge bonus.Why is that?Well a big charge bonus for hoplites makes sense,but shouldn't barbarian units have a biger bonus on charge than "civilized" factions infantries?Also similar units to the hoplites,like the german dugunthiz,getic stratiotai,don't have that big of a bonus?Will there be any tweeking to unit stats in the future releases?

Now I didn't really test them to see weather a hoplite kills more on the charge than a stratiotai for example,just looking at the numbers,I feel it is strange.

[Thuycidides]

I agree that the numbers are strange. My guess is that the EB2 rationale was to treat the hoplite formation as a single mass of men when considering its charge bonus.

shouldn't barbarian units have a bigger bonus on charge than "civilized" factions infantries?

Not at all clear to me. Why do you think they should?

[ExtremeBG]

Mainly because the way barbarians fought large scale battles as a coalition of tribes it was quite hard to perform any kind of strategic movements to defeat the enemy. That is why they would rely more on aggression and frenzy-like bravery when attacking. At least that is my interpretation.

[Thuycidides]

In EB1 the charge bonus was mostly a function of kinetic energy, with cavalry having the highest bonuses. It was not related to psychological factors at all.

[Sar1n]

I suppose it's also a matter of formation. Classical hoplites were both very heavy (a full panoply could weigh over 20 kg), giving them a devastating impact, and trained for charge in formation. Although time of classical hoplite was almost gone by the time of EBII, they still retained such ability.

This is in contrast with Iberian style (which was adopted by Romans and other nations) that relied on javelin barrage to break up the enemy formation, rather than sheer impact of troops. That is, I suppose, why EBII hoplites are the only infantry with such huge charge bonus.

[HernanU]

Hoplites were trainig to push, not to charge. Because of that, war between classical greek cities were pushing matches. The innovation of the teban general Epaminondas was put the weigth in one wing of the formation completely desbalance the spartan in the battle of Leuctra and, once one wing won his part of the battle, the rest is easy because their inherently poor tactical flexibility (the makedonian and helenes succesor states suffer even more at the hands of the romans because this essential disavantage). Is impossible charge medium distances with the full panoply and even short distances make them exhaust, because of that the Makedonian Phalange were better pushing with their long pointy Sarissas/lighter armour (even lighter after Alexander) and not with the hoplon (the round shield)/full hoplite panoply. And, under Alexander, the phalange were strictly defensive (the "anvil" for the cavalry "hammer"). The charge bonus is wrong, maybe they could have superior mass and pushing force. They are, after all, a excelente defensive unit but poor (in comparision with the romans and barbarians) in the offensive.

By the way, be careful to equal the technological superiority of the advance modern societies to the ancient ages. Maybe greek were the philosophical and cultural pinacle of the ancient world but the military state-of-the-art were in the lands of the celts, masters of the iron metallurgy. Much of the roman legionnaire panoply were copies of the celt equipment (the romans have been in terrible wars against celts for centuries before Cesar conquered Galia) and, mixed with the roman superior discipline and tactics (learned after massive defeats against Carthaginians, germans and gauls), the legions conquer the mediterranean world.

Sorry for my english.