Can’t add anything historically, but I do get a lot a satisfaction defending a city from an entire Roman army with a handful of phalanxes.
Don’t bother defending the walls. Park your phalanxes in the narrow streets next to the town square. Set them on “Guard Mode”, and let the meat grinder begin.
My favorite (and so far foolproof) method is to simply line the walls with archers near the front gate, allow the enemy to die for a while (more than half the time they will actually move up right into range of the walls for some strange reasons…probably broken AI), then send out a formation of 6 regiments or so of phalanx for them to charge against…all the while being rained down upon by arrows. The enemy seems incapable of changing their main axis of attack, or attacking another part of the city…or simply sitting back out of range of the walls especially if you send out a few ‘bait’ units to bring them in range. I’ve found the sieges to be almost blindingly easy from a defense perspective.
Seems the thread is dieing which is kind of sad…I love this stuff. Let me ask a further question about support troops in the ancient world. How much did either the Romans or the Greeks rely on archers and other support type troops? How good were the Roman/Greek archers. Again, in the game, the Roman archers seem to be the best in the game…longest range, best armor, best able to defend themselves if attacked, etc. This doesn’t seem to me to be very historically accurate. Anyone know how good the Roman mercenary archers REALLY were? How much did the Greeks use archers and other missile troops? How good were they?
-XT
Most of the Roman foot archery units were Cretan auxilliaries, and the Cretans were famous for their archery skill.
But everyone knows all Cretans are liars.
I’ve been made to understand that once formed Phalanxes weren’t necessarily that slow… little maneuver yes… but they supposedely could advance in formation and pressure the enemy without being “slow”. Its easier to advance than to retreat in formation I suppose.
In the end Legions were more adaptable and organized. Phalanxes lacked support troops to guard their flanks and rear.
Do remember that Spanish Tercios and their pikes were more about protecting muskeets and canoon… not the “business” part of the combat. Swisspikemen would probably be more similar to a phalanx. Relying on armor for protection instead of shields. Again they were faster than we imagine… and would aggressively pressure the enemy.
That was some centuries earlier.
It’s true, they admit it themselves. (and just as an aside, the line in one of the Pauline epistles where he references the Cretan paradox cracks me up.)