Carthaginian heavy infantry?

[Ardaeshir]

Well, after quite a bit of games as the Romans vs Kart-Hadasht or vice-versa, I came to a quite suprisong conclusion. The Carthaginian heavy infantry almost exclusively fails against the roman battle line, no matter what. They can last a bit if the Romans are average, but superior Romans are unbeatable.

The only way the carthaginain heavy infantry can reliably hopt to defeat a roman principes/hastati is to have them outnumbered and strike from the flank.

This seems a tad odd, as if you read primary sources and descriptions of the battles by Polybius and Livy, you will usually see that the Carthaginian heavy infantry is either able to hold its own in battle sgainst the Romans (Trebbia), or it actually is able to break through (Trasimene, Cannae). Even in lost battles, the Carthaginain or Liby-Phoenician heavy infantry is the last to rout and usually because it is being utflanked on both sides (Metaurus, Ilipa).

Scipio created his "gimmick" setup at Ilipa precisely because he wanted to avoid the roman legionaires fighting against the african heavy infantry.

Do we see any of that in the game? Nope. One reason is that carthaginain heavy infantry (other than Hannibal's army) is only "average", while the legions can always be "superior". Also, the legions are "armored", while the heavy african infantry is listed as protected. For all we know, the Liby-phoenician heavy infantry had a "large shiled covering most of their body", greaves, helmet and a torso cuirass. It seems a bit weird that they are in the same class as regular celtic warriors who hasd just a shied and a helmet. Perhaps FoG needs an intermediate armor class between "protected" and "armored"? The same thing goes for other "shield&cuirass/breatplate" units like heavy spanish infantry, Etruscan hoplites etc.

Either way, the carthaginain heavy infantry is underpowerd in comparison with historical records. I think I'll experiment with them being superior impact offensive spearmen.

[TheGrayMouser]

Hmm, do you perhaps have the nations reversed in whom broke thru home at cannae and trasimene? It was the Roman center that broke thru the Carthaginian line and it was those few troops that actually escaped these disasters to bring the bad news back to Rome

Any ways, at least one of the carthiginaian DAG lists allows for superior offensive spears although they still tend to die when facing superior legions.

[deeter]

The African Vet speamen are quite tough, even against Romans, being Sup/Armored Off Spear. The problem is you can only have nine of them whereas Romans can have many more.

In the DAG Roman lists, there are options to take protected and/or average legionaires but nobody takes those. If falls to the historical scenarios to impose these options, but even the scenarios show a bias toward Romans. Also, Punic cavalry seems underwhelming compared to history.

Deeter

[Ardaeshir]

Hmm, do you perhaps have the nations reversed in whom broke thru home at cannae and trasimene? It was the Roman center that broke thru the Carthaginian line and it was those few troops that actually escaped these disasters to bring the bad news back to Rome

At Trasimene, the African infantry acted as the "cork of the bottle" and they formed the flank that kept the Romans from escaping by the side of the lake. At Cannae the Romans broke through the center of the ennemy line, which were celts and iberians. The Afrcan infantry were on the wings and it is they that brought the double encirclement and won the battle.

Any ways, at least one of the carthiginaian DAG lists allows for superior offensive spears although they still tend to die when facing superior legions.

They tend to die against superior Romans, but they often fail even aginst average hastati. My point is: Heavy Carthaginian infantry usually triumphed against hastati in a 1 on 1 fight, even before Hannibal gave out the Roman mail armor to many of his soldiers. At Ilipa, the Africans held out after both flanks crumbled and they basically had to fight their way out of total encirclement.

My point is taht the African Heavy foot is undrpowered, while Roman heavy foot (especially Hastati) are overpowered.

[TheGrayMouser]

Hmm Im not convinced that the cartho spears were superior to the legions based off of Canae. Hannibal was buying for time in his convex formation: 1 to allow the romans to drive deep into his center and in effect put themselves in a culdesac, 2 to ensure his cavalry wings had enough time to drive off the Roman and allied cavalry. Everything i have read about this battle is that the already deep roman formation piled in towrd the center , whether purposfully or just by nature of trying to close with the nearest enemy , which would have been the Cartho center. I dont think the spears on the wings were even engaged until the mid/end of the battle.

Now Im not saying they couldnt hold their own but at the same time the Hellnistic world had ditched the Hoplite in favour of the pike and even the pike was being subordinated to lighter and lighter types of troops that more closely resembled the legions than the hoplite

Unfortunalry fog doesnt allow anything but cavalry to break off from melee so no way to test Cannae out in a realistic manner but perhaps cannae is such a uniquie battle no game can portray it well anyways.

Cheers!

[deeter]

The Romans supposedly fielded 80,000 troops in that battle after losing tens of thousands in their numerous defeats prior. They must have been very hastily raised and probably not that well equipped or that confidant. The Alae must have been pretty unentheusiastic to boot.

The Punics (by now hardened veterens fully equiped in Roman armor and with supreme confidance in Hannibal) are where I'd put my money, numbers aside. The spearman supposedly formed the walls of the bag the Romans marched into and, as you know, some games depict these as pike phalanxes.

Deeter

[Ardaeshir]

Ok, so let's not consider cannae. What about their role at Trebbia? Again they routed the roman flanks and allowed the elephants and light troops to attck the roman line from the rear.
What about their stand at Ilipa, when the iberians on the flanks fled, while the african infantry in the center held out and foaught long after they have been totaly encircled?
Also the liby-phoenician spearmen performed well in the 1st punic war like at Bagradas plain where they kept the legions at bay, while the elephant and cavalry attack provided the coup de grace.

In all the 1st and 2nd Punic war battles, the African infantrymen were (alongside cavalry) always the decisive element in the Carthaginian armies. Wherever the iberian and celtic infantry broke and routed, the African spearmen held fast and steady. If anything, these troops should be superior to the heavy iberian and celtic infantry and a rough equivalent of Hastati.

In the game, they are basically the same quality as the iberian medium foot and in a pitched battle in open terrain they usually rout as fast as the iberians do. And that is when they are facing armored average roman infantry. When they face superior romans, they don't even last that long.

So my suggestion is that the Liby-Phoenician heavy infantry, both because their skills as well as weapons were superior to those of iberians and celts, be treated as impact foot offensive spear, average or superior depending on the decision of the player.

[deeter]

FoG considers impact foot to be throwing stuff at impact, so that wouldn't work for Punic spears.

Deeter

[Ardaeshir]

FoG considers impact foot to be throwing stuff at impact, so that wouldn't work for Punic spears.

Does it really? Ming tribesmen, Aztecs, Indonesian warriors are all listed as impact foot mind you.

[TheGrayMouser]

FoG considers impact foot to be throwing stuff at impact, so that wouldn't work for Punic spears.

Does it really? Ming tribesmen, Aztecs, Indonesian warriors are all listed as impact foot mind you.

I belive impact foot is given to troops either: known for an overwelming ferocious charge, or discorge a volly of heavier missle weapons prior to closing in.

[Ardaeshir]

FoG considers impact foot to be throwing stuff at impact, so that wouldn't work for Punic spears.

Does it really? Ming tribesmen, Aztecs, Indonesian warriors are all listed as impact foot mind you.

I belive impact foot is given to troops either: known for an overwelming ferocious charge, or discorge a volly of heavier missle weapons prior to closing in.

Yeah I was thinking that thrown weapons are not a must, especially if you start considerng that all celtic MF and HF are treated as impact foot. Not to mention those horrible Aztecs

[TheGrayMouser]

Does it really? Ming tribesmen, Aztecs, Indonesian warriors are all listed as impact foot mind you.

I belive impact foot is given to troops either: known for an overwelming ferocious charge, or discorge a volly of heavier missle weapons prior to closing in.

Yeah I was thinking that thrown weapons are not a must, especially if you start considerng that all celtic MF and HF are treated as impact foot. Not to mention those horrible Aztecs

Its the feathers that made them so formidable

[Ardaeshir]

Ran a test. I made 30 Hastati vs Carthaginian heavy spearmen fights in clear terrain, 2 turns long. All units were average quality, all were "1 on 1" frontal fights (so that routs would not incude cohesion checks on neighbouring units etc).
After 2 turns, these were the results:

3 fights ended with the hastati routing
1 fight ended with hastati fragmented
5 fights ended with both sides steady
4 fights ended with the africans disordered
2 fights ended with the africans fragmented
15 fights ended with the africans routed

These were average vs average battles mind you. In a regular game, most roman players would field some superior troops. Also, these were "1 on 1" fights. With the amount of routing africans, a big carthaginain "battle line" in a regular game would suffer from multiple cohesion checks from this, far more than the roman line.

Historcal sources seem to claim that a straight up legion vs African spearmen combat ended up a draw most of the time unless one of the sides got flanked or had cavalry support. In FoG most of the time such a "straight up" combat ends with the Afrians routed.

So the very least thing one could do when making a Carthage army list, is to give the carthaginian the option of having his spearmen superior (or some of them eltie for Hannibal in Italy).

Ran a 2nd test. This time it was a "battle line" fight. 30 lined up African spearmen attacked by 30 hastati.

Results after 2 turns
13 Africans routed
2 Africans Fragmented
6 Africans disrupted
6 Hastati disrupted
3 hastati fragmented

Again, easy triumph for the legions, not one unit got routed. The legions broke through in the middle of the ennemy line and on one flank, so they would have likely mopped the rest up in turn 3 and 4 by flanking.

So... why the unhistorical easy triumphs? Well, my theory is that aside of the poa for impact foot 1st round, the African spearmen fell victim to FoG having only 4 armor classess. From what we know today, the African spearmen had a large shield "covering most of their body" (perhaps an oval shiled like the Celtic ones, or a large hoplon-like one), greaves, helmet and a bronze cuirass.
Roman Hastati of the 1st and 2nd punic war had... very similar defensive equipment actually. A scutum and a small bronze breastplate or later greaves, full bronze cuirass or mail if they could afford it.

In FoG these very similarly armored warriors got assigned very different armor classess. The African spearmen got "rounded down" to protected class, making them on pair with "shield&helmet" gauls or iberians, while the hastati got "rounded up" to armored class on pair with mail wearing Triarii or armored Hetairoi.

[davouthojo]

Having recently been beaten by Deeter's Carthaginians, I think the "In Italy" army is one of the strongest combined armies in period - the 9 superior veteran armoured spears can stop a roman or pike attack cold, an MF force that will wipe the floor with most opponents in the rough and your cavalry will either outclass or be able to evade from all opponents.

Agree with the op that the other Carthaginian armies suffer when protected spears go up against Roman armoured foot...but that is historical, neh?

[deeter]

I recall they didn't do so well against your huge Slave Army.

Deeter

[Ardaeshir]

Agree with the op that the other Carthaginian armies suffer when protected spears go up against Roman armoured foot...but that is historical, neh?

That's the whole point, its not historical. I do no recall even one historicall example of the african spearmen being routed by roman legions other than by being encircled or outflanked by cavalry.

Ask the romans who got whacked at Trebbia or Bagradas. Not to mentions the lads taht had to crush that last stand at Ilipa.
Wherever the legions fougth large carthaginian armies, they managed to brake and rout the iberians and celts, but had much more trouble with the africans. In FoG the romans rout the africans as easy (or even easier if it stough terrain) than the iberians and celts.

I'd expect that a 1 on 1 average Carthaginain spearmen vs average Hastati fight would go 50-50% and historically it should eb an equal contest. Read my last post and you will see how rarely the romans will rout in such a contest and how easily they defeat the africans.

[Old_Warrior]

For this era in the Roman army they were NOT superior to the Phalanx of the Carthage forces. Thus in combat they should be losing battle matchups with the HI of Carthage not winning them. Otherwise just build a huge infantry army of Romans and the Carthage forces never have a chance. Der! How did Hannibal win then?

This is the pre Marian army and plainly it needed numbers in order to win against civilized armies. It fared decent against the barbarians and the hoplite armies.

I feel the same way with MI vs. HI. In many games I see MI holding off HI. How is this possible? Most MI were not able to do this. Yet game after game I see my HI attack MI with bows and get Disordered. I find it impossible to believe that English longbow could hold off dismounted men at arms without any field works. Yet this happens. Or really any MI archers. Yes, the FIRE could disorder troops and melee/impact may be taking this into account but consistently the MI (w/out bows) seems to hold their own quite well against HI. Then why pay so much for HI?

Another point - I see in the points system that Drilled is the same cost as non-drilled. I cannot figure that one out.

Also the hits system - I see far too many 3-4 hit Impacts/Melees where nothing happens. No change in unit status. Then a unit with 80 percent of its strength takes one hit and routs from normal morale. Again how is that possible? I also hit units in the rear (knights) and nothing happens. If you hit a knight unit from behind just like normal troops they should Disorder automatically. That was their weak point.

We really want to enjoy playing this system. Ancient warfare was rock paper scissors. HI beat MI which beat LI. LI could wear down HI with missle fire. For cavalry the maps are too small. We end up pinned to the map edge.

Again, this is a great system. Do the following to keep our interest:

1. Lower the amount of good Roman troops for the earlier periods. Make plenty of them Average and if you have to take the Impact Foot bonus away due to their historical poor performance.

2. Make the maps wider. So wide that the board edge is not even a consideration. Yes, keep the baseline of both sides the same. Its the width that needs help.

3. Create a wider division between the heavy troops and the lighter troops to where 90 Foot units in a trashy Welsh army do not end up beating the best infantry in the world one a unit for unit basis.

I think I now understand why I am seeing fewer large point games. A lot of folks seem to be dropping back to playing with just 400-500 pts ... harder for the Welsh army lovers to keep their beloved advantage in numbers.

[TheGrayMouser]

Some thoughts:

Trebbia:
Sempronius, for reasons not clear decided he had to attack imedietly across the Trebbia, and with such haste he appears to have forgotten to even feed his soldiers. menahwile sources say Hanibbal fed his troops and had them oil their bodies to fight the biting cold ( oh yeah it was snowing out too) So the Romans advanced with the veteran legions in the center, the ecently rasied allied legions on the flanks and cavalry on the wings. The forded the freezing river in battle formation and must has suffered quite a bit sopping wet as they emerged . Hannibal deployed with his center comrpising the celts and ibrians in the centerm flanked by the spears and vavalry on the wings. Sources say his infantry line was long but thin, likly an effort to ensure his frontage matched that of the Romans . Of course Mago was waiting in ambush. After crossing the Trebbia, the Roman velites were getting beat up by the carthis lights so Sempronius with dre them and advanced, the carthoginainn cavaly charged and , as usual drive off the Roman cavalry. Now the allied Romans had to fae the brunt of carthos spears to the front and cavalry on flanks and rear, they didnt last too long, coupled with mago charging in from the rear). Now I have hear 2 accounts of what happened next. Either Sepromius in the center was able to plow thru the weaker cartho center and make his escape, or I have heard he fromed his center into a lage hollow "square. Either way he was able to mainain fwrd movement and make his escape. This battle imho doesnt especially reflect any superiority of the Cartho Spears vs the Romans, just Hannibals over all generalship. Ok the spears did good work? yes but vs the newly raised ( and presumebly not to spirited) allied legions whom were also being overwheled in flank and rear.

Ilipa :
Carthos deploy with spears in center, iberians on flanks and cavalry on wings with elephants in front of teir cavalry. (odd deployment imho) Scipio Veteren legion in center iberians flanks , cavalry on wings. Howver for 2-3 days each army deployed and then as noone wanted to commit, march back to camp. The 3rd or 4 day a little diffent . Scipio awaited the carthos to deploy and harrassed them with lights until he was assured they were deployed as previous days (and o keep them busy in th ehot sun), he then deployed with his Iberians in the center and the legions on the flanks and immediatly attacked. Hovwer the iberains in the center satyed put ( he refused his center) the legion attcked the carthos flanks obliquely. It apears the cartho elephants were driven off and THRU their own cavaly disordering it and the the legions made short workl of the cartho Iberians. The spears? Well they were pinned: they could advance vs the Roman cnter as they would have exosed their flanks and rear to the legions, nor could they face outward to fight the legions as the Roman center could advance and take em in the same. My undrstanding is at this point either : 1 the spears fought a retraet to their own camp, or 2 a massive rain storm made it impossible for anything to really happen , exept the spears retrested to their camp. There they began to desert and Hasdrubal, reognising the defeat let with a small retinue leaving the rest behind.
again, I think this battle simply shows the effect of superior generalship vs any superior qulaities of the carthos spears.

Anyways I look at is like this Pre-marian legions could reasonably hold their own vs Pikes ( ie Phyruss whom was regarded as the formost captain of his age)
Pikes cetainly proved suprior to the hoplite system , so it seams resonable pre-marion legions would have been at the very least been equal to hoplites if not with an advantage

One final item: does anyone with any certainty know how the carthogian "spears" were armed and armoured, especially in the later battles ( like Zama) For all we kow they could have closely resembled the legions themselves).

Cheesr!

[JocaRamiro]

Here is an attempt to widen the controversy.

I think that FOG has a systematic Northern bias. Just as the Romans seem to have an ahistorical edge on the Carthegenians, I think the northern barbarians do better then they should when taking on the legion.

What are people's thoughts? I so admit that leadership (of which I do not claim a great amount)could be more important for managing the civilized armies.

[deeter]

I really doubt Romans could field that many superior troops against Hannibal. The rate at which he slaughtered them and the huge expansion of the legions to deal with him would suggest hastily trained and randomly equiped troops.

Admittedly, the Romans at Trebbia were trained to the normal standard, but they were exhausted, starving and freezing before they even engaged. GBoH rates the infantry as average to poor as a result.

FoG 2.0 TT rules are taking steps to lessen their effectiveness against warbands, which is good. Hope this makes its way to the PC.

Deeter