|
|
Post by jim1973 on Sept 30, 2020 10:59:16 GMT
It's interesting how mercenary spearmen were readily available but we don't hear much of mercenary pikemen. The second half of the 4th century saw a re-emergence of heavy armour and the panoply would be more expensive than the pike panoply. These men were professionals yet chose the spear. Given that the Successors were able to raise pikemen quickly from locals (pandatopoi) it can't be because of drill and training. These were definitely not Swiss pikes! It's just an observation but I am a firm believer that self interest is the best motivator and there's no greater self interest than staying alive as a mercenary!
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Sept 30, 2020 11:00:39 GMT
I was thinking the actual army lists rather than the one battle. The hoplite lists dominate the pikes because of the number of spear element.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Sept 30, 2020 12:04:25 GMT
I was thinking of the actual army lists rather than the one battle. The hoplite lists dominate the pikes because of the number of spear elements. Cheers Jim ...or because DBA 3.0 only gives Spears one single option... ...to form up in one long line, with no benefit from being in column. |
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Sept 30, 2020 12:06:57 GMT
Well many/most of the army lists are just an attempt at some kind of representation based on what info is available, in some cases very little. So changing them as your own House Rule makes sense. It wouldn't fly in a tournament, but who cares?  |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Sept 30, 2020 12:37:12 GMT
I was thinking of the actual army lists rather than the one battle. The hoplite lists dominate the pikes because of the number of spear elements. Cheers Jim ...or because DBA 3.0 only gives Spears one single option... ...to form up in one long line, with no benefit from being in column. As you know, not my favourite solution. Take 12 Spartan spears and place them in six columns. The enemy has 9 BW of space to turn the flank even on 600mm boards. It also doesn't seem fair that 8 ranks of hoplites needs to double up to match the combination of Hastati and Principes. But if the Spartans had 2-3 Helot hordes and 2-3 Psiloi (which undoubtedly were there) then you have an interesting mix. AND it looks cool! snowcat is right. I can do what I want at home. I don't play tournaments. But I really enjoy DBA and it can bring people into wargaming because the outlay is so little. But if the classical match ups fall over then the appeal drifts away to other rules or other games. That's why the pike issue trouble me. Hoplite v Hoplite battles work really well! Thracians defending can be hard to dislodge. Early Cathaginian and Syracuse can slug it out. But EAP and Alex Mac struggle. Just my thoughts Cheers Jim |
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Sept 30, 2020 12:55:03 GMT
I don't have a huge problem with the current matchup. I find Pikes underrated enough to suggest that they win on ties. In my playing this balances them well. They aren't an offensive killing machine by any means, though a Spear line will sweat when their side support phalanx is broken. The real power in Alexander's army is Alex with his Companions. A knight charge down the side of a Pike phalanx is usually 4 to 3 with a quick kill. This wins games.
The problem with Alex is two-fold. First, he dies on ties against Blades. Second his Aux have been nerfed against PS.
This is not the 4Ax vs BD issue. This is the "no corner overlap" against PS issue.
This is arguably historical. I won most of tournament victories under 2.2 with Alex by winning the light troop fight. 2x 3Ax and a PS are hell on most other armies in 2.2. This is not how Alex won most of his fights.
DBA 3 fixes this issue, but does not go far enough the other direction. Pike, while much better than under 2.2 in tournaments, still underperform.
I go into this in great detail in the article in Slingshot. I suggest folks play test those ideas. In one of our tests we actually had a Pike phalanx push the Romans back across the board... And uphill, before the tide turned.
Sound like a familiar narrative?
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Sept 30, 2020 13:54:31 GMT
...or because DBA 3.0 only gives Spears one single option... ...to form up in one long line, with no benefit from being in column. As you know, not my favourite solution. Take 12 Spartan spears and place them in six columns. The enemy has 9 BW of space to turn the flank even on 600mm boards. ...and the enemy will have a weak centre, which the Spear columns will plough through. (Anyone that has ALL their Spears two deep deserves to lose on the wings!
I'm assuming that players have brains, and can see how much they'll be outflanked)It also doesn't seem fair that 8 ranks of hoplites needs to double up to match the combination of Hastati and Principes. Why not? The Roman Hastati fought 8 deep, and the Principes behind them also fought 8 deep. Are you saying that 8 ranks of Hoplites is as good as 16 ranks of Roman Blades? Is a Hoplite twice as good as a Legionary, so the Romans need a deeper formation? (We are talking about Blades being CF 4 with +1 for some sort of foot rear-support,
and Spears being CF 3 with +1 for side-support PLUS they get +1 for rear-support...
... so if both are in two deep columns, both have a CF of 5, and have the same frontage)Also, as you well know, at Marathon the Athenians formed up with a thin weak centre (one element deep), but in a deeper formation on their wings (two elements deep). Forget Chaironeia and try re-fighting this engagement with the Greeks in one long line, and see if the outcome matches the historical accounts... |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Sept 30, 2020 14:22:37 GMT
As you know, not my favourite solution. Take 12 Spartan spears and place them in six columns. The enemy has 9 BW of space to turn the flank even on 600mm boards. ...and the enemy will have a weak centre, which the Spear columns will plough through. (Anyone that has ALL their Spears two deep deserves to lose on the wings!
I'm assuming that players have brains, and can see how much they'll be outflanked)It also doesn't seem fair that 8 ranks of hoplites needs to double up to match the combination of Hastati and Principes. Why not? The Roman Hastati fought 8 deep, and the Principes behind them also fought 8 deep. Are you saying that 8 ranks of Hoplites is as good as 16 ranks of Roman Blades? Is a Hoplite twice as good as a Legionary, so the Romans need a deeper formation? (We are talking about Blades being CF 4 with +1 for some sort of foot rear-support,
and Spears being CF 3 with +1 for side-support PLUS they get +1 for rear-support...
... so if both are in two deep columns, both have a CF of 5, and have the same frontage)Also, as you well know, at Marathon the Athenians formed up with a thin weak centre (one element deep), but in a deeper formation on their wings (two elements deep). Forget Chaironeia and try re-fighting this engagement with the Greeks in one long line, and see if the outcome matches the historical accounts... Ahh, but if the Romans are 16 deep why do the Pikes have to double up when they were also 16 deep?  But maybe the Romans mingled a little? Anyway, Romans didn't fight Spartans. But Hoplites fought Pikes. I'd rather try and get a roughly even numbered battle like Chaironeia to work first before looking at battles with lop-sided numbers like Marathon (or Gaugamela for that matter). Cheers Jim |
|
But maybe the Romans mingled a little?