Problem with Phalanx?

[DeuxGzuis]

Is it just me or is there a Serious problem with Phalanx?

In one of my spartans campaign i noticed something was seriously wrong with my general phalanx, I used custom battle to test this, Spartan General vs Roman Infantry General, on Phalanx mode the spartan where getting utterly destroyed, i just activated phalanx and let them there defending, but they couldn't do nothing, for every enemy they killed, they lost more than 10, at some point i got tired of this BS and disactivated the Phalanx, and at that moment everything changed, the spartan started to make up for the losses and started destroying the Romans.

Spartan had lost over 30% and the romans 3%, the moment i deactivated the Phalanx the Spartans just changed everything, the spartans lost 50% the romans 60% and until the romans utterly lost.

At this point i see literally no single point in Phalanx, they can't hold position in Phalanx (They lose a LOT of men, don't hold position for and don't kill ), without phalanx in hold position, they just behave like any other melee but they do a 100x better job than in phalanx, in no stance they can be evenly with the enemy, but in phalanx is like kill 1%, lose 10%

Dunno if this is only a problem that i have, sorry if it sounded like a rage but i got annoyed because i freaking love phalanx and their historical valor and how freaking good they were, but they look like garbage in the game, don't even serve the purpose they had to hold a position (Heck no stance can hold a position and still kill a lot of enemies)

[KAM 2150]

Read tooltip. Phalanx has 2 modes, deffensive and offensive. Double click will make them push forward and attack but also take more casualties if enemy is not tired. Wait for enemy to bleed and then order them to pish via double click. One click will just leave them in defrnsive stance. This means that in DeI you can actually control if you want hoplites to hold or push eneny back. Each double click will make them push just a bit forward, it does not mean nonstop attack (which would end with them beaing flanked). Also keep in mind that Romans are designed as phalanx killers. In DeI time period hoplites are pretty much obsolete.

[Legacy66]

Testing one on one doesnt yeild very good results, pikes are really good and perhaps one of the best units in the game when combined with other units. The AI is more than willing to throw all their units at the front of your pikes, you may not get tons of kills but they will hold them more than long enough to flank and destroy them. If anything I find phalanx overpowered still but thats mostly because the AI doesnt realize its not a good idea to charge head first into it.

[KYREAPER]

I have tested this extensively in the past and will conduct a new updated study:

Spartan(Me) "Hippeis" vs Roman "Cohors Praetoria"
Sparta defending, Rome attacking.

The Evolution of the Battle

1. Deployed Spartans in phalanx formation, and single clicked the Romans. The Spartans slow marched in-formation towards the Romans; while the Romans ran towards the Spartans.
2. Roman volley did zero casualties(but obviously damaged armor, which serves its purpose).
3. They clash, as the Spartan phalanx slow marches towards the Romans.
4. The fighting happens and so far its MOSTLY an even fight, ONE spartan goes down, then ONE roman goes down.
5. Finally the Romans start getting 1.5 kills per 1 kill for the Spartans(Roman lead).
**6. The Romans' stamina drops from fresh, to winded, and then to tired... The Spartans remain at fresh(as intended). [Picture #1 included below] Notice my unit card with my remaining men(289).
7. The Spartans' stamina drops to Active; Romans become Very Tired... The Spartans catch up and have 18 kills, the Romans have 18 kills... but the Spartans are beginning to fatigue(slowly).
8. After 15 minutes, Sparta has 32 kills, Rome has 28. Stamina remains the same.
**9. Rome now becomes "exhausted" while Sparta remains "active" with stamina... Sparta has 37 kills, Rome has 33. Its not looking good for Rome, the phalanx is conserving energy and holding its ground as the Romans struggle to breach the phalanx and begin have become exhausted [Picture #2 included below]
10. After 20 minutes of fighting, Sparta becomes "winded" while Rome is still "exhausted" - Sparta has 58 kills, Rome has 41. Could the fatigue be catching up to the Spartans? Will it save the Romans in time?
**11. After 25 minutes: Sparta(Winded/Eager) has 82 kills, Rome(Exhausted/Shaken) has 58 kills. Rome has now become SHAKEN [Picture #3 included below]
**12. ROME BREAKS!! Sparta(Winded/Eager) finishes with 87 kills, Rome(Broken/Exhausted) has 60 kills. [Picture #4 included below]

--This was WITHOUT double-clicking. This was with Sparta in Phalanx formation, using a SINGLE click to slow-march to the Romans and engage.
--There was no double clicking or single clicking after the initial start of the march.

CONCLUSION: The Romans may be phalanx breakers, however the Spartan ELITE are no ordinary phalanx, and hold true to their Legendary status. They hold from the front and win, without ever giving a double-click attacking order.
Sparta held the line for 26 minutes, and ended up winning.

Total Battle Time: 26 minutes, 1 second.

NEXT I will leave Spartans out of phalanx.

[KYREAPER]

The Evolution of the Battle (Part 2) - Out of Phalanx

1. Deployed Spartans OUT of phalanx, with a single click to walk towards marching Romans.
2. Romans throw volley, no kills. Spartans charge, Romans charge. Sparta wins the initial charge with 13 kills, Romans get 3. STATS: Spartans have 19 charge bonus, Romans have 13. [Picture #1 included below]
3. After 4 minutes of fighting, The battle turns into Spartans favor(it took about 20 minutes in the PHALANX test). Sparta(fresh) has 35 kills, Rome(active) has 25 kills; Rome is losing. [Picture #2 included below]
4. After 5.5 minutes of fighting, Sparta(active) has 50 kills, Rome(winded) has 35 kills. [Picture #3 included below]
5. Rome begins a TACTICAL RETREAT even though they are not routing(they basically have already lost the fight, and so i guess decide to pull their general back. At this point, the fight is over). [Picture #4 included below]
6. ROME BREAKS!! After only 6 minutes of fighting, Rome Breaks. Sparta(winded) has 131 kills, Rome(winded) has 38 kills. [Picture #5 included below]

Most of the Spartan kills came during Rome's "tactical retreat". KEEP IN MIND that Rome's tactical retreat is NOT the reason they lost. They basically had already lost and THEN retreated(before routing). So this does not muddle the evidence.


--This was WITHOUT double-clicking. This was with Sparta OUT of Phalanx formation, using a SINGLE click to slow-march to the Romans and engage.
--There was no double clicking or single clicking after the initial start of the march.

Total Battle Time: 6 minutes, 43 seconds

CONCLUSION:
Sparta fights for 6 minutes, and destroys Rome.
Spartan Hippeis KILLS better out of phalanx, thus proving they are a better offensive force when not using phalanx.
**Spartan Hippeis HOLDS THE LINE LESS out of phalanx, proving they are WORST defensively when not using phalanx.
"But wait, the Spartans beat the romans faster, how does this prove that the Hippeis out-of-phalanx is worst defensively at all?"
--Because the Romans killed 38 Spartans in only 6 minutes when the Spartans were OUT of phalanx...
--In the in-PHALANX test, the Romans needed 20 minutes to get 41 kills on the Spartans...

-If the Spartans(out of phalanx) would have been outnumbered, they would have been slaughtered and lost.
-If the Spartans(in phalanx) would have been outnumbered in this scenario, they would have lost, but would have lasted MUCH longer, allowing flanking units to possibly save them.

This proves: That Spartan Hippeis will LAST LONGER and will spread out their casualties(save their men) over a MUCH longer time when in phalanx(and not double clicking).
This proves: That the Phalanx is a defensive formation that is used to BUY-TIME for flanking units to come and save the day.

WHEN TO USE PHALANX vs WHEN TO NOT?
-Use phalanx when outnumbered, always. If one phalanx unit is fighting 3 enemy units, better be in phalanx so they hold out longer.
-If fighting a unit 1v1 in a big, large battle: should I use phalanx or not?
Yes, IF only if the phalanx unit has lower melee/armor stats than the enemy. Yes, if you plan on eventually flanking the enemy unit. Yes, if part of the main line.
NO, if you need to kill the enemy unit quickly(such as, your main phalanx line is already engaged, and you are using a hoplite unit to flank but they get intercepted by a lower quality enemy unit.... and you absolutely NEED your hoplite to hurry and finish that enemy unit so they can flank to save your main phalanx line(assuming they are overwhelmed/outnumbered).
NO, if your hoplite unit has superior melee/defense/armor stats and you DONT CARE ABOUT CASUALTIES for the sake of saving time.


SPECIAL NOTE:
-KEEP IN MIND, this is using an ELITE unit of Spartans... the General Unit "Hippeis". They are EXTREMELY powerful compared to other phalanx-using HOPLITES and have 300 men(other hoplites have only 200).

-WHEN TRYING THIS WITH REGULAR SPARTAN HOPLITES(and reformed spartan hoplites) ... The spartan/reformed spartan hoplites CANNOT fight super well out of phalanx. The Hippeis is an exception, they are SUPER elite and are MUCH stronger than typical Elite units.

Spartan hoplites/even reformed spartan hoplites will die MUCH faster, and will get MUCH less kills when out of phalanx. Their melee stats out of phalanx are not superior to other melee units... whereas The Hippeis' out-of-phalanx stats are SUPER high and so they are a VERY effective killing unit without phalanx... but phalanx still lets them last longer.
- So phalanx is great when outnumbered.

My Conclusion:
- The Phalanx performs exactly as it should. It allows the unit to survive for extended periods of time before breaking and routing; while achieving fewer kills(as intended).
- Fighting out of phalanx, and therefore aggressively, should(and does) yield more kills in less time, however should(and does) compromise defense and lead to more losses in a shorter time.

This concludes the study.

[Kuukiz]

Could we get such a study/comparison for the long pikes, short pikes and pikes in the hoplite formation?

[DeuxGzuis]

I tested some things and i noticed that it's a fact that in Phalanx mode, the hoplites fare worse than in no stance (Even in push forward), while in phalanx mode they suffer heavier casualties and don't kill much if holding position, push forward also don't increase their killing power by much, and in the tests i made, No Stance seems to fare much better, they kill a LOT MORE, they hold for the same amount of time (Or better) than in phalanx mode and kill MUCH (Really, the difference is BIG).

Also, can someone explain to me why in place of buffing the units the Phalanx actually nerf them, they lose a lot of Melee Defence and Attack for Armor and Cavalry Counter.

[KYREAPER]

I tested some things and i noticed that it's a fact that in Phalanx mode, the hoplites fare worse than in no stance (Even in push forward), while in phalanx mode they suffer heavier casualties and don't kill much if holding position, push forward also don't increase their killing power by much, and in the tests i made, No Stance seems to fare much better, they kill a LOT MORE, they hold for the same amount of time (Or better) than in phalanx mode and kill MUCH (Really, the difference is BIG).

Also, can someone explain to me why in place of buffing the units the Phalanx actually nerf them, they lose a lot of Melee Defence and Attack for Armor and Cavalry Counter.

No, they do NOT hold even close to as good OUT of phalanx as they do IN phalanx. My test above completely destroys that point.
While in phalanx, it took them 20 minutes to take 40 casualties...
While OUT of phalanx, it took 6 minutes for them to take 40 casualties.

Sure, they kill faster out of phalanx, but if you need them to hold a line for "hammer and anvil" then doing it OUT of phalanx will get your guys killed before the flanking force arrives.

If youre NOT going to flank, then sure, dont use phalanx.

But if you try to hold the line OUT of phalanx AND try to flank, your hoplites will take 40 losses in only 6 minutes before the flanking force can maximize their casualties.


The Phalanx is NOT MEANT TO GET ALOT OF KILLS. Stop thinking its meant to just be a superior killing formation.
Its mean to HOLD THE LINE for an extended period of time - and be relieved by a flanking force.


Without a flanking force, may as well not use phalanx.

This is how it should be in my honest opinion.

[DeuxGzuis]

No, they do NOT hold even close to as good OUT of phalanx as they do IN phalanx. My test above completely destroys that point.
While in phalanx, it took them 20 minutes to take 40 casualties...
While OUT of phalanx, it took 6 minutes for them to take 40 casualties.

Sure, they kill faster out of phalanx, but if you need them to hold a line for "hammer and anvil" then doing it OUT of phalanx will get your guys killed before the flanking force arrives.

If youre NOT going to flank, then sure, dont use phalanx.

But if you try to hold the line OUT of phalanx AND try to flank, your hoplites will take 40 losses in only 6 minutes before the flanking force can maximize their casualties.


The Phalanx is NOT MEANT TO GET ALOT OF KILLS. Stop thinking its meant to just be a superior killing formation.
Its mean to HOLD THE LINE for an extended period of time - and be relieved by a flanking force.


Without a flanking force, may as well not use phalanx.

This is how it should be in my honest opinion.

You're only taking the Casualties in consideration here.
Okay, 20 min to get 40 casualties OK, and how much of the enemy did they manage to kill? 10?
20 minute to take 40 casualties, killed 20 enemies (I increased a bit because in reality is lower than that)
6 minutes to take 40 casualties, killed 60+ enemies in turn.

Now the effects of the Hammer + Anvil

20 min, 40 casualties, killed 20, flanks killed 80.
6 min, 40 casualties, killed 60+, flanks killed 80
Yes, hold position for longer for what? have a extremelly boring and slow battle? on top of that they don't kill nothing, they suffer too MUCH losses, seriously, in phalanx mode it took 10 minutes to kill 6 enemies, >>6<< i'm better off rushing them.

Also if the point of this mod is realism, then that's WRONG, yes, Phalanx was used as a defensive formation but it was A DEADLY formation, if Pikes and Phalanx did so poorly like they do in the game they wouldn't even be used in historical battles.

Also realistic battles isn't as dragged as in this mod, Real battles people don't spend 10 minutes blocking, Parrying for life, no, the lifes where lost in seconds, 1x1 confronts didn't last more than 10 seconds and put that into the middle of a chaotic battle with hundreds or thousands of soldiers, people died right and left the moment they came in contact with the enemy, they don't stay in place and goes back and forth blocking and Parrying (The point of this is not the realism of the mod in itself but the extremelly dragged combat and how everything focus only on Morale, if there wasn't a morale system battles would last more than an hour in this mod).

And yes, Phalanx and Pikes were used as Defensive Formation but they weren't the time wasting suicide formation that is in this mod, they were deadly formations, i believe the motive of this is BALANCE, and not realism.

[LEXI2016]

This is exactly what is needed in Dei for a better understanding of how things work.A small presentation (with half a dozen or so images) explaining how some of the units function.Another example is the throwing of pilum & missile units in general.
+rep

[DeuxGzuis]

Since i don't know how to edit a Post here is the pictures, i don't know how to make it small also.
Here you can see the Loses in Phalanx, killed 7, lost 19, in NO single moment i moved then, i just activated Phalanx and started battle.


Here is the One in NO STANCE, in NO SINGLE MOMENT I MOVED THE UNITS, in this case i just started battle and waited to see what happens, and as you can see, they lost 18, killed 30, the more time they battle, the more the difference grows, in the end the Spartans can kill all 200 enemy units without losing 100 (Different from Phalanx mode).

I Also tested in JUST CHARGING the spartans against the roman general, and in the charge they killed more than 10 units at the same time, and procceded to massacre the enemy.

Seriously, can someone explain to me WHAT is happening with phalanx and hoplites, how come Phalanx is less useful than No Stance and why does it nerf the Melee Defence and Attack.

[DeuxGzuis]

I thought Hoplites in Phalanx was bad until i got to the Pikes, MY GODNESS, what happened with this game, first time i heard people talking about DEI i thought, the mode would be Realistic but i could list a few of unrealistic things in this mod.

What happened with the Killing Power of the Pikes? seriously, they get massacred on melee, their pikes don't do , i send them to push forward onto a enemy flank, but holy , they didn't kill anything, in the end they killed 1 enemy unit and lost 15, even thought they attacked the flanks of the enemy, the enemy just turned and started to kill the pikes like it was nothing.

What are the worth of pikes and phalanx now, my main reason for Greeks was those 2, but now i'm just going with a barbarian faction, seriously, no point in wasting time, seriously, hope 1.2.1 fix that, until then i'm dropping this mod.

[KYREAPER]

No, reread my entire post kid.

I took casualties and SURVIVAL TIME into account.

The NUMBER ONE FUNCTION of a phalanx is to survive longer.

Its not to get kills, its not to push people back, its not any of that.
-Those are simply natural buy-products of the formation.

The number ONE function of the Phalanx is to hold-the-line. And it does that.

In phalanx, they last over 20 minutes. Out of phalanx, they lost 40 in six minutes. That means in 20 they would have lost more than 200(since casualty rate is faster over time due to decreasing armor and health of units).
____________________________

You say "hold position for what? Have an extremely boring and slow battle?"
- I already answered: If you use phalanx WITHOUT a flanking force, you are using it WRONG.

The phalanx is NOT meant to sit in phalanx and just wait until the enemy in front dies.
The phalanx is MEANT to have a flanking unit always. Thats why its called HAMMER and ANVIL. Not just hammer, not just anvil.

So no, its not for you to have an extremely boring and slow battle. if you have a slow boring battle, its because you used a phalanx unit like a legionaire unit and just rammed them forward into a unit and waited.. and waited.... and waited.
-You achieved part 1 of the tactic, then neglected part 2, and suffered for it.

If you arent going to use the formation correctly, then your example and complaints lose ALL validity.

Pike phalanx is not a suicide formation. They dominate from the front. They dont get kills right at the beginning - they start slow, but as the enemy's armor wears down then the kills suddenly get turbo-charged and the enemy starts dropping like flies. Happens everytime unless ur figthing 2h weapon units(thracians/dacians/iceni claymores).

---- You say "Real battles people dont spend 10 minute blocking, parrying for life.. life is lost in seconds"
You obviously know nothing about phalanx warfare, historically.
If you did, then you would know that in a phalanx warfare, people DID block and parry for over 10 minutes, with very few casualties for a long time. History has documented that in phalanx battles, the ENTIRE phalanx unit would ROUTE after losing only about 10-20 men(of say 200)... why? because the phalanx was impossible to hold once that many died.. too many holes being formed and pushed into, and the formation was deemed BROKEN... the battle was suicide to continue and the ENTIRE unit would be killed. So what did they do? They broke and RAN. THIS caused MANY of them to be killed, but maybe 20-30 escape alive, instead of ALL being killed.

So in a phalanx battle, YES they did block for 10+ minutes and casualties started very slow.... then when one side began to give, the other routed, and the winning side chased(this is where historians documented that HUGE losses occured... during the route... after a unit would ROUTE after only a small handful because the formation was broken... Phalanx warfare was almost 100% about troop quality and density. Sparta lost horribly when they left their wing at standard density, and their opponent had triple depth and broke them. Thats what it comes down to.


NOW, in NON-PHALANX warfare, yes life is lost in mere seconds, instantly on the charge, and then continuously thereafter..
The only exceptions are in very disciplined units with tight formations. They used those formations to minimize casualties.

So far just about everything you say is either 1. proven wrong by history, or 2. proven wrong by the game.

The game now does an EXCELLENT job at being close to realism in terms of the functions of units.

If you arent going to use the unit correctly, then you are going to have stupid results.

if you throw swordsmen at cavalry, then duh, ur swordsmen are going to take more casualties than if you would have used spearmen.
^ that example is basically how you appear to think. You think Phalanx units are some kind of "300" movie where they were mass killing machines. NO.

Go research almost all historical phalanx battles.. ONE side breaks through and FLANKS the losing side, crushing them and winning. Hammer and Anvil.

Not Pinning them and just fighting frontally until theres no one left.

[gerfand]

Did the changes to H. Phalanx solved the Problem w/ pikes?

Did not had time to text it

[KAM 2150]

Ok, after what that guy wrote about 10 seconds hollywood confonrtations as real time of combat between troops and that pikes have no killing power in DeI I am 100% sure he is trolling.

[KYREAPER]

Ok, after what that guy wrote about 10 seconds hollywood confonrtations as real time of combat between troops and that pikes have no killing power in DeI I am 100% sure he is trolling.

).: I fail at the internet, I never can tell when someone is trolling. He just made me waste precious moments of my life.

[Dresden]

Someone reset the "days since pike phalanx is over/under powered discussion" counter.

[geala]

I don't think the TS is trolling, he seems just to be the result of watching movie battles and TV combat only.

Let's take reality out of the discussion and stay in the game. If you don't get Kyreapers point in his loss-time arguments, you probably did not have a lot of massive battles with more than one enemy stack. If you have to fight a lot of enemies, there is usually a thick bunch of warriors before and at the side of your phalanx, may it consist of hoplites or sarissa pikemen. You often cannot reach the enemy units directly at your phalanx with flanking units, you first have to battle other enemy troops. You need your main line to hold quite some time.

So it is really important that you get few losses over time to avoid breaking. It is not that important wether you could get more or the same amount of enemy casualties in a theoretical comparison of out-of-phalanx and in-phalanx mode.

BTW when you say that pikes are weak, weaker than hoplites, what faction do you play and what pike units do you use? Short pike units are good in attacking and long pike units good in defense, but even my long pike Chalkaspides units kill a lot of enemies in longer fights. You literally see walls of dead bodies at the line of the pikes after battles.

[LEXI2016]

It wasn't waisted i gave you rep for your effort

[PietrolEremita]

KYREAPER don't feel bad, your test was very well documented and contributes to the body of knowledge and feedback that is essentially how the players contribute to the mod.