Slingers vs Javelinmen

[JorgenCAB]

only chance for slingshot to kill you while wearing a Legionary panoply is, if it hits you in the face.. anything else would be just a nuisance, you might end up with a bruise, nothing more.

And one big problem with modern "tests" with javelins is the fact, not that many such testers know how to throw the javelin properly, and actually hit what they want to hit.. therefore they usually just throw it from short distance directly, with incorrect technique and therefore very reduced impact speed. but simple physics shows us how things were... for a javelin that was thrown at 50m you need to throw it at least 25-26m/s to get that far.. with ankyle attached, speed would easily increase to 27-28m/s, which if combined with typical weight of light javelin (400g) would give you around 160 joules of impact energy.. Best mail tested by dr Williams in his extremely detailed book "Knights & Blast Furnace" (which is 900 pages long book full of metallurgical data from all types of armors, together with very detailed weapon testing against these armors) could stop a projectile with kinetic energy up to 120-130 joules, so a javelin capable of 160 joules would just go right through...

about the book:
http://www.deremilitari.org/REVIEWS/williams_blast.htm

I know from first hand experience how powerful a heavy Pila really is. I have seen it penetrate both reinforced riveted mail and extremely thick padding through a meat body and almost penetrated out the back... I know what a heavy spear can do.

If we talk heavy throwing spears then yes, the ancient light javelin was not that type of weapon neither was it designed to be. They rather had more javelins than a few powerful ones for the reasons I given above. For the most part throwing a few more projectiles was far more important against the type of targets they generally faced. A Roman Velites carried around five to seven javelins so they needed to be rather light, when it comes to war you need to be very pragmatic.

[JaM2013]

From physics perspective, speed has 2x more impact on kinetic energy than weight. so throwing a twice lighter javelin with twice more speed would result in more kinetic energy for lighter projectile actually. (600g javelin thrown at 28m/s would have 235 joules, 1200g javelin thrown at 14m/s would have 117 joules of kinetic energy.)

anyway, there is an interesting study on Hasta Velitaris at academia.edu, which also include test of its penetration capability:

https://www.academia.edu/27962186/Hasta ... o=download

author claim hasta velitaris had no problem penetrating bronze breastplate 0.8mm thick or 12mm thick shield with good overmatch. test was done at distances of 15 and 25m, but without use of ammentum which was commonly used by ancient javelinmen. (amentum typically added about 30% higher kinetic energy to target)

[JorgenCAB]

Well, real life test that I have seen tell a different story. Same guy throwing a heavy spear penetrating shield and in another with lighter spear did not penetrate shield with a smaller javelin. Sure the guy was not a professional thrower but he do train and practice throwing javelins and other medieval and ancient weapons. The smaller spear did get stuck in the shield which was a typical Viking shield so a pretty strong and sturdy shield. You also need to understand that hitting a moving target normally reduce the kinetic energy since it will give after from the force, you can generally remove almost up to 20% from a relatively slow moving object such as a spear or hand weapon blow. This is also a problem I have with testing when it is done against something that is not free to move around and who will move with the incoming force. Shields in particular will bend and the impact of spears, arrows and weapons blunted allot that way.

You need to see it to believe it.

If spears had been as effective as you make them out to be it would be mentioned more in battles how much casualties were done by the javelin throwing troops. It is rather the reverse and that it was harassing the enemy, not causing major damage in the same way that archery or sling shots were. I have only found one battle so far that tell a story that a javelin armed force managed to have a large impact, that is more an exception than a rule in my opinion.

Again, javelins was a very good weapon and it was good against armour. Even Roman lighter spears was designed to stick to enemy shields but were normally not heavy enough to make the shield useless but at least you could not throw it back. I would certainly not wanted to be hit by a throwing spear even if wearing good armour since I'm likely to get seriously wounded even if it does not penetrate given they are heavier projectiles.

[JaM2013]

actually, it is mentioned relatively often.. Velites at Magnesia were the one who disordered the pike phalanx formed in squares, there are plenty of mentions of Gallic javelins impaling Roman legionaries made by Caesar (and the vice versa ), If you look at direct sources about war with Jughurta you will see a lot of mentions how effective numidian javelins were, similarly, Iberian caetrati gave Romans quite a beating sometimes to the point Romans even started using same type of weapons themselves. (falarica, soliferra) I've already mentioned fate of poor king Alexander who got impaled while fighitng Lucanian (who were known to be using relatively lighter equipment than other Italic tribes) and that story about jinettes being able to kill fully armored knight in late medieval period is also quite telling about how effective those light javelins were (they even called them darts)

And there are plenty of other sources available i've run into while working on Rome 2 Total Realism mod.. i had a good research team working with me, providing me with quite interesting data, and overall conclusion confirmed even by authors like Dan Howard was that javelins were actually the most effective ranged weapon used in ancient times.. and please, read it as it was written - im not claiming they were totally destructive with huge amount of casualties - i already mentioned the 2-3% casualty rate for Pilum at Pharsalus. All im saying they were most effective of all ranged weapons in use... neither sling or arrows were more effective than javelin in that time period. and Pilum penetrative power was only matched and overcomed when first steel crossbows started to be used in late medieval period...

[rbodleyscott]

actually, it is mentioned relatively often.. Velites at Magnesia were the one who disordered the pike phalanx formed in squares

Actually they caused the elephants in the intervals to panic, and that disordered the phalanx.

[JaM2013]

Bello Galico:

XXV.—Caesar, having removed out of sight first his own horse, then
those of all, that he might make the danger of all equal, and do away
with the hope of flight, after encouraging his men, joined battle. His
soldiers, hurling their javelins from the higher ground, easily broke
the enemy's phalanx. That being dispersed, they made a charge on them
with drawn swords. It was a great hindrance to the Gauls in fighting,
that, when several of their bucklers had been by one stroke of the
(Roman) javelins pierced through and pinned fast together, as the point
of the iron had bent itself, they could neither pluck it out, nor, with
their left hand entangled, fight with sufficient ease; so that many,
after having long tossed their arm about, chose rather to cast away the
buckler from their hand, and to fight with their person unprotected. At
length, worn out with wounds, they began to give way, and as there was
in the neighbourhood a mountain about a mile off, to betake themselves
thither.

XXXV.—Which command having been most carefully obeyed, when any cohort
had quitted the circle and made a charge, the enemy fled very
precipitately. In the meantime, that part of the Roman army, of
necessity, was left unprotected, and the weapons received on their open
flank. Again, when they had begun to return to that place from which
they had advanced, they were surrounded both by those who had retreated
and by those who stood next them; but if, on the other hand, they wished
to keep their place, neither was an opportunity left for valour, nor
could they, being crowded together, escape the weapons cast by so large
a body of men. Yet, though assailed by so many disadvantages, [and]
having received many wounds, they withstood the enemy, and, a great
portion of the day being spent, though they fought from day-break till
the eighth hour, they did nothing which was unworthy of them. At length,
each thigh of T. Balventius, who the year before had been chief
centurion, a brave man and one of great authority, is pierced with a
javelin; Q. Lucanius, of the same rank, fighting most valiantly, is
slain while he assists his son when surrounded by the enemy; L. Cotta,
the lieutenant, when encouraging all the cohorts and companies, is
wounded full in the mouth by a sling

- centurions usually wore high quality mail.. this one died from his javelin wound, while another was just wounded by being hit by slingshot to the face...

XLIV.—In that legion there were two very brave men, centurions, who
were now approaching the first ranks, T. Pulfio, and L. Varenus. These
used to have continual disputes between them which of them should be
preferred, and every year used to contend for promotion with the utmost
animosity. When the fight was going on most vigorously before the
fortifications, Pulfio, one of them, says, "Why do you hesitate,
Varenus? or what [better] opportunity of signalising your valour do you
seek? This very day shall decide our disputes." When he had uttered
these words, he proceeds beyond the fortifications, and rushes on that
part of the enemy which appeared the thickest. Nor does Varenus remain
within the rampart, but respecting the high opinion of all, follows
close after. Then, when an inconsiderable space intervened, Pulfio
throws his javelin at the enemy, and pierces one of the multitude who
was running up, and while the latter was wounded and slain, the enemy
cover him with their shields, and all throw their weapons at the other
and afford him no opportunity of retreating. The shield of Pulfio is
pierced and a javelin is fastened in his belt. This circumstance turns
aside his scabbard and obstructs his right hand when attempting to draw
his sword: the enemy crowd around him when [thus] embarrassed. His rival
runs up to him and succours him in this emergency. Immediately the whole
host turn from Pulfio to him, supposing the other to be pierced through
by the javelin. Varenus rushes on briskly with his sword and carries on
the combat hand to hand, and having slain one man, for a short time
drove back the rest: while he urges on too eagerly, slipping into a
hollow, he fell. To him, in his turn, when surrounded, Pulfio brings
relief; and both having slain a great number, retreat into the
fortifications amidst the highest applause. Fortune so dealt with both
in this rivalry and conflict, that the one competitor was a succour and
a safeguard to the other, nor could it be determined which of the two
appeared worthy of being preferred to the other.

-Pulfio was quite lucky that javelin hit his belt, anyway this clearly shows Gallic javelins had no problem penetrating the Scutum...

Here is Plutarch's mention of Antigonus dying:

Plutarch dramatically describes the climax of the battle:
But the old king Antigonus still kept his post, and when a strong body of the enemies drew up to charge him, and one of those about him cried out to him, ‘Sir, they are coming upon you’, he only replied, ‘What else should they do? But Demetrius will come to my rescue.’ And in this hope he persisted to the last, looking out on every side for his son's approach, until he was overwhelmed by a cloud of javelins and fell.

- another king dying from javelins.. again, Kings typically wore the highest quality armor of all men on the battlefield..

LECHAEUM (390) – Corinthian War
The Athenian general Iphicrates is best known for his military reforms. He used mercenaries, whom he armed lightly as peltasts with equipment which he modified in the interest of increased mobility. They became a forerunner of the flying squad. It was with this force that Iphicrates earned the distinction of destroying half of a Spartan contingent in the following circumstances. Lechaeum, the port of Corinth, was in Spartan hands. In this town there were some Spartan soldiers from Amyclae [Amykle] who invariably went home on leave for the festival of Hyacinthia. In view of the warfare around Corinth, the Spartan garrison commander escorted these Amyclaean troops part way to Sicyon with a mora of hoplites (about 600) and some cavalry. The cavalry then proceeded as escort; the hoplites turned back. As they passed Corinth on the return journey, Iphicrates and his peltasts rushed out of Corinth and attacked them. The peltasts kept throwing their javelins and then withdrawing at speed, only to turn and throw again. The slow, heavy-armed hoplites could never make contact with them and could not cope with this form of warfare. One by one they were picked off until, according to Xenophon, about 250 had been killed. The engagement was one of the bitterest blows to Spartan pride.
Xenophon gives a full account of the action; the other sources only mention it.
Xenophon, Hellenica, 4: 5(11–17); Diodorus, 14: 91(2); Plutarch, Agesilaus, 22(2

YNOSCEPHALAE MS (364, July) – Era of Theban Hegemony
Alexander, the brutal tyrant of Pherae in Thessaly, was waging war on all around him. The Thessalians sent to Thebes, asking for help in the form of an army commanded by Pelopidas. The Boeotians agreed and gave Pelopidas 7,000 men. As he was leaving, there was a total eclipse of the sun (13 July), which was regarded as a sinister omen. This dismayed the Thebans. According to Plutarch, Pelopidas had to leave them behind and took with him only 300 cavalry from other cities, but he was joined at Pharsalus [Farsala] by a Thessalian contingent. Alexander came to meet him with a considerably larger force. The battle centred round the control of Cynoscephalae (Dogs’ Heads) [Chalkodonion], a small range of hills rising in the middle of a plain. As both sides advanced toward the hills, Pelopidas ordered his cavalry to attack the enemy. They routed the enemy’s horsemen and chased them over the plain, but in the meantime Alexander had occupied the heights. When the Thessalian cavalry tried to force their way up the steep slopes, they were beaten back. Pelopidas ordered them to attack the main body of enemy infantry on the plain while he himself charged up the slope and joined his infantry who were battling it out in the hills. He forced his way through to the front and led a furious charge. The enemy resisted one or two such assaults but then began to waver. At the same time the Thessalian cavalry, who had routed the infantry, were coming back up to help. Pelopidas had gained the summit when he caught sight of Alexander, the man who had thrown him into a prison some years before. All his hatred of the man rose within him and he charged his enemy, who retreated to the folds of his bodyguard. Hacking away in an attempt to get at him, Pelopidas was struck by javelins and killed. While this was going on, the cavalry had launched another charge and this time they routed the enemy phalanx. The cavalry pursued the infantry for a considerable distance and cut down more than 3,000 of them, but no amount of enemy blood could compensate for the death of their beloved general.
Plutarch, Pelopidas, 31–32; Diodorus, 15: 80

CAMPI MACRI (176) – Ligurian Wars
The Ligurians did not lie low for long but rebelled again in the year after their defeat by Gaius Claudius at the Scultenna river (above). This time they decided to avoid the plains and they occupied two mountains called Letum and Ballista, which were near the Campi Macri and which they surrounded with a wall. Claudius, now proconsul, was asked to meet the consul Quintus Petilius at Campi Macri near Mutina [Modena[, where the other consul Gaius Valerius also joined them. There they divided their forces into two armies and approached the enemy from different directions. It was Petilius who had all the action. With his camp facing the two mountains, which were joined by a ridge, he marched his men up the hills in two columns, one on each side. The column which he himself led made good progress, but the other one was forced back by the enemy. When Petilius rode over to the waverers, he did indeed restore order but he was struck by a javelin and killed in the process. The column managed to conceal the death of its leader from the enemy and proceeded to dislodge them and seize the mountain. The Ligurians lost about 5,000 men killed; the Roman losses were 52.
Livy, 41: 17(9)–18(13)

[JorgenCAB]

Talk about being selective in once sources... as if these anecdotal references actually mean much. Yes, soldiers have died and been wounded by javelins... why would anyone care or even think otherwise. There are likely stories of people dying horrifically from arrows and sling stones as well, perhaps even more such stories, especially by bow shots since through out the ages it has been a more favored weapon if the culture existed to use them.

You just have to deal with the fact that javelins has always been described as a disruptive weapon and not a weapon that cause massive casualties, even if that could occasional be true... especially on a disorganized enemy but that would be equally true for arrows or sling shots. No one are disputing the fact that a single spear will be more damaging than a single sling shot. But a Javelin is thrown at very close distance and with limited ammunition and in range to be caught in melee. While arrows and sling shots could be fired at relative safety at distance and with a much higher frequency,

If it was so easy to pierce and cut through shields then most thrusting spears would pierce them too if they could. There is no real difference between the force of throwing or overhead thrusting a spear with one hand, the same force of motion of the arm and body if you test it. Have you actually held and thrust with a Pilum versus throwing it. You thrust way harder then what you throw it against the same target, a target that might even move and try to deflect the missile as well mind you. I have both thrust and thrown a Pilum and I do more penetration thrusting than throwing it 10 meters, granted I'm not trained in throwing techniques that much.

I also do weapons training every week so I know how to thrust and cut with swords, spears and staffs etc... you need to get into the real world where it is RARE with a perfect blow or throw... VERY RARE. For every javelin that hit you could probably expect one or a few in a hundred to hit well, the rest would be varying degrees of glancing hits. You seem think as if everything is back and white. This is not the case in a real battle field.... YES sometimes you will hit someone perfectly and a spear might penetrate both shield and body at the same time but such instance would be VERY RARE!

All in all I say these weapons act roughly equal due to how armour and defenses was designed in ancient times. Ancient bows and slings in medieval setting would be a different matter since armur evolve and generally covered the entire body, spear would be far superior, but now you had the crossbow which in general was far superior to the Javelin in so many different ways. Spears also fell out of fashion since they were not long enough or good enough against armour and so other pole-arms started seeing widespread use along side the pike.

Javelins were still used but to a rather limited degree, mostly for its limited range and it did require more training than using the crossbow.

[TheJay13]

Jam, what is your obsession with javelins, if their portrayal bothers you so much just mod the game to make them do more damage. Even so, having them be more effective probably wont change the overall result of the battle.

Besides, this game is more about the overall "big picture" of ancient warfare and its certainly obvious that javelins were weapons of disruption. If javelins were really as deadly as you are saying, no army would have ever fielded tightly packed units of heavy, shielded infantry and instead the ancient world would have been filled with armies of javelinmen.

[JaM2013]

actually, it is mentioned relatively often.. Velites at Magnesia were the one who disordered the pike phalanx formed in squares

Actually they caused the elephants in the intervals to panic, and that disordered the phalanx.

Actually, multiple battle descriptions say a bit different story:

http://hannibal-barca-carthage.blogspot ... 90-bc.html

In the centre, the Seleucid pike phalanx was forced to halt and form front on both sides, as well as in front with elephants in the intervals. In this position it was assailed by the archers and slingers, and made an easy target. The phalanx thereupon retired in good order until the elephants in its gaps became frightened and disrupted the formation and panic began to spread into Antiochus' phalanx.

Romans moved their infantry forward, began pelting Antiochus' phalanx with their javelins. Roman soldiers moved out of the way of the elephants and cut their hamstrings as opportunity allowed.

At this, the whole army broke up and the slaughter of the Seleucid infantry began. The Seleucid force was essentially annihilated before the cavalry under Antiochus could return to the field.

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/ba ... nesia.html

As the Romans were well aware the phalanx was deadly if it could operate on its own terms, charging in a dense block, but at Magnesia the Syrian phalanx would not get that chance. The Roman legions under Domitius Ahenobarbus attacked from the front, using their darts and pila to good effect, while Eumenes attacked from the flanks. The Syrian phalanx was falling back towards its camps when 22 elephants posted between its separate sections stampeded. The phalanx lost its cohesion, the Roman legions broke into it, and a slaughter followed. Antiochus is said to have lost 50,000 men, two thirds of his entire army.

so it seems like phalanx was forced to fall back by the javelin barrage and only then Elephants panicked and disordered the formation. Anyway, i will search for more detailed description or actual direct source quote.

[JaM2013]

Talk about being selective in once sources... as if these anecdotal references actually mean much. Yes, soldiers have died and been wounded by javelins... why would anyone care or even think otherwise. There are likely stories of people dying horrifically from arrows and sling stones as well, perhaps even more such stories, especially by bow shots since through out the ages it has been a more favored weapon if the culture existed to use them.

I've used these quotes specifically to show you javelins were more than capable penetrating best armors available in antiquity...

If it was so easy to pierce and cut through shields then most thrusting spears would pierce them too if they could. There is no real difference between the force of throwing or overhead thrusting a spear with one hand, the same force of motion of the arm and body if you test it. Have you actually held and thrust with a Pilum versus throwing it. You thrust way harder then what you throw it against the same target, a target that might even move and try to deflect the missile as well mind you. I have both thrust and thrown a Pilum and I do more penetration thrusting than throwing it 10 meters, granted I'm not trained in throwing techniques that much.

nope. Thrusting spear is not even capable achieving such speed proper throw has. Its different movement, different trajectory, release angle, while ankyle would even extend the amount of force applicable on release..

But a Javelin is thrown at very close distance and with limited ammunition and in range to be caught in melee. While arrows and sling shots could be fired at relative safety at distance and with a much higher frequency,

Nope, not close distance at all... average throws with javelins was around 50-60 meters, with ankyle it would be perfectly possible for skilled javelinmen to throw it at 80-90 metres..

[JorgenCAB]

We all know that these missile weapons were effective for disrupting formations and discipline was mostly the most important factor. Why do you disregard this as if the javelins themselves were so devastating. It would likely take rather little casualties for an already disordered and retreating formation to fragment and break up. Why is this so difficult to believe. It is usually way harder to disrupt a well disciplined formation and in some instances impossible from missile weapons of the period.

In these instances the infantry are doing its job by disrupting the forces, enough for them to later rout them and then slaughter them. As if taken out of the book of tactics of the day.

Why do you take what is likely to be exceptions as the rule of what generally happened. It simply make no sense?!?

[JorgenCAB]

Talk about being selective in once sources... as if these anecdotal references actually mean much. Yes, soldiers have died and been wounded by javelins... why would anyone care or even think otherwise. There are likely stories of people dying horrifically from arrows and sling stones as well, perhaps even more such stories, especially by bow shots since through out the ages it has been a more favored weapon if the culture existed to use them.

I've used these quotes specifically to show you javelins were more than capable penetrating best armors available in antiquity...

Every set of armour has weaknesses and every throw of a javelin can have varying degrees of luck in impact, no strange thing if you are versed in actual fighting as I am. I have my fair share of lucky blows against me and a fair share of injures as a direct cause of it.

[JaM2013]

Talk about being selective in once sources... as if these anecdotal references actually mean much. Yes, soldiers have died and been wounded by javelins... why would anyone care or even think otherwise. There are likely stories of people dying horrifically from arrows and sling stones as well, perhaps even more such stories, especially by bow shots since through out the ages it has been a more favored weapon if the culture existed to use them.

I've used these quotes specifically to show you javelins were more than capable penetrating best armors available in antiquity...

Every set of armour has weaknesses and every throw of a javelin can have varying degrees of luck in impact, no strange thing if you are versed in actual fighting as I am. I have my fair share of lucky blows against me and a fair share of injures as a direct cause of it.

Right, just by luck they killed two Hellenic kings.. and several generals too... Armors made for kings was the best possible out there... NOBODY had better protection than them.... And how you wanna explain that knight killed by Jinnetes? also luck? through coat of plates, mail and gambeson? sounds to me there is kinda quite a lot of lucky hits then against highly armored men then...

[JaM2013]

We all know that these missile weapons were effective for disrupting formations and discipline was mostly the most important factor. Why do you disregard this as if the javelins themselves were so devastating. It would likely take rather little casualties for an already disordered and retreating formation to fragment and break up. Why is this so difficult to believe. It is usually way harder to disrupt a well disciplined formation and in some instances impossible from missile weapons of the period.

In these instances the infantry are doing its job by disrupting the forces, enough for them to later rout them and then slaughter them. As if taken out of the book of tactics of the day.

Why do you take what is likely to be exceptions as the rule of what generally happened. It simply make no sense?!?

All im saying Javelins were most effective ranged weapons of ancient era... in Field of Glory 2 they are the worst.. thats the fact. I repeat, both slingers and archers are not restricted in how many of them fire (which is quite a nonsense with slingers especially, as they needed a lot more space to operate than javelinmen or archers, yet only javelinmen are penalized - slinger needed at least 2m of space, so with entire unit of 200 slingers to fire, frontage of such formation would be 400m at least.. yet in game, they have 60m frontage so obviously they should be restricted too). they have range 1, and are being penalized from being used on the move, which is especially ridiculous considering how light javelin cavalry was actually fighting... how could a stationary light horse be more effective than one on the move?

I get these are board game rules, yet they are supposed to portray ancient combat, yet they dont follow base principles.. there is no difference with frontal or flanking hits from ranged weapons, armor rating applies no matter what (but of course plays minimal role anyway), so even units that got armor rating protected due to shield, are benefiting from it even from behind.. Or do you want to tell me flanking shooting has no tactical purpose? flanking is there for melee, why not for ranged too? especially when you have limited ammo.. (Pike and Shot had it.. yet it had unlimited ammo)

Solution? simply give javelinmen less penalty for shots made during movement. especially for light javelin cavalry. It would make them more dynamic to use at least.. and reduce amount of casualties slingers cause.. I guess making flanking fire scripts now would be too demanding on testing.

[Jagger2002]

Well I don't know but I must say I have enjoyed the debate. The various viewpoints are certainly interesting and thought provoking.

Ps: XLIV.—In that legion there were two very brave men, centurions, who
were now approaching the first ranks, T. Pulfio, and L. Varenus.

Anyone remember Pullos and Varenus from HBO Rome?

[Patrick Ward]

Well I don't know but I must say I have enjoyed the debate. The various viewpoints are certainly interesting and thought provoking.

Anyone remember Pullos and Varenus from HBO Rome?

I was just going to say the same thing.

As for JaMs Javelin Love .. wouldn't it be a good idea for you to create a mod and make it available so everyone else can make their own minds up? Anecdotes are really interesting and a goo starting point but we're going round in circles and surely the only thing that matters is the result in game. Prove your case practically.

[stockwellpete]

I was just going to say the same thing.

As for JaMs Javelin Love .. wouldn't it be a good idea for you to create a mod and make it available so everyone else can make their own minds up? Anecdotes are really interesting and a goo starting point but we're going round in circles and surely the only thing that matters is the result in game. Prove your case practically.

I was going to ask you if you had time to design a "Trial by Combat" so we can finally resolve this.

[JaM2013]

i've never modded Pike & Shot game, so i'm new in this, therefore it might take me some time to do something in this area (besides small changes).. but in the long run, its quite probable i'll be releasing such a mod.

I agree this discussion is running in circles, I had to repeat same point like 5 times already just to get dragged into same round of arguments over and over.. kinda waste of time..

Patrick Ward:

It's not about my love of javelins.. its about my interest in ancient warfare where those javelins played very important role. After all, Legions were dominantly using these javelins in large numbers.. It always fascinated me how javelins disappeared from battlefields, yet they still were quite viable weapons so they reappeared in some form, or were used in small numbers for quite some time.. Castilian Jinettes, Almogavars, Moor cavalry, but also Irish Kerns, Norman Heavy cavalry, Vikings or Slavic/Polish infantry they all used javelins for quite some time and in some cases well beyond the medieval period..

And another interesting fact was how javelin throwing skill practically completely disappeared from Europe only to be restored in form of Olympic games in the early 20th century.. And even with relatively modern weapons like British infantry used during their colonial wars in Africa, they still got defeated by very primitive force of Zullu tribesmen armed by throwing javelins (and some muskets btw but thats not the point)..

Personally, im more surprised about the status archery has today..

[JaM2013]

Well I don't know but I must say I have enjoyed the debate. The various viewpoints are certainly interesting and thought provoking.

Ps: XLIV.—In that legion there were two very brave men, centurions, who
were now approaching the first ranks, T. Pulfio, and L. Varenus.

Anyone remember Pullos and Varenus from HBO Rome?

Authors of the TV shows used real historical person within their script, but very freely.. If I recall correctly, this is the only mention of them in Bello Gallico.

[JorgenCAB]

We all know that these missile weapons were effective for disrupting formations and discipline was mostly the most important factor. Why do you disregard this as if the javelins themselves were so devastating. It would likely take rather little casualties for an already disordered and retreating formation to fragment and break up. Why is this so difficult to believe. It is usually way harder to disrupt a well disciplined formation and in some instances impossible from missile weapons of the period.

In these instances the infantry are doing its job by disrupting the forces, enough for them to later rout them and then slaughter them. As if taken out of the book of tactics of the day.

Why do you take what is likely to be exceptions as the rule of what generally happened. It simply make no sense?!?

All im saying Javelins were most effective ranged weapons of ancient era... in Field of Glory 2 they are the worst.. thats the fact. I repeat, both slingers and archers are not restricted in how many of them fire (which is quite a nonsense with slingers especially, as they needed a lot more space to operate than javelinmen or archers, yet only javelinmen are penalized - slinger needed at least 2m of space, so with entire unit of 200 slingers to fire, frontage of such formation would be 400m at least.. yet in game, they have 60m frontage so obviously they should be restricted too). they have range 1, and are being penalized from being used on the move, which is especially ridiculous considering how light javelin cavalry was actually fighting... how could a stationary light horse be more effective than one on the move?

I get these are board game rules, yet they are supposed to portray ancient combat, yet they dont follow base principles.. there is no difference with frontal or flanking hits from ranged weapons, armor rating applies no matter what (but of course plays minimal role anyway), so even units that got armor rating protected due to shield, are benefiting from it even from behind.. Or do you want to tell me flanking shooting has no tactical purpose? flanking is there for melee, why not for ranged too? especially when you have limited ammo.. (Pike and Shot had it.. yet it had unlimited ammo)

Solution? simply give javelinmen less penalty for shots made during movement. especially for light javelin cavalry. It would make them more dynamic to use at least.. and reduce amount of casualties slingers cause.. I guess making flanking fire scripts now would be too demanding on testing.

You are just flat out wrong... javelins was NOT the best or most effective ranged weapon of the ancient times. Every weapon served a role and were useful in their own right. It also is rather strange that generals tended to favor bows over javelins if they had the option to use them. It was far easier to train javelin throwers as is evident by normal Roman training methods to that of normal archery training. Every evidence show how expensive archers was for professional armies and the cost of mercenary archers.

It also is not very strange to you why the Roman sought to replace their light Velites with more archers and cavalry?!?

Skirmishers main job was NEVER the actual battle... they were deployed and tactics built because they had them. As soon as they could they gladly replaced them with archers and cavalry who performed their role more efficiently. Archers provided good support fire and where excellent in defensive positions while true cavalry provided good battlefield performance as well as scouting, foraging and raiding capabilities. These were roles previously given to the Velites. An army could ever just be so big so the Generals always had to make pragmatic decisions what troops they brought if they had a choice. If these javelin troops had been so extremely effective as you make them out to be they would not reduce their numbers and eventually abandon them altogether and only bring them in small numbers as mercenaries. In eastern Roman armies they often replaced them entirely with archers and light cavalry with bows. Roman western armies also tended to use them less and less

Javelins were used by Vikings quite frequently where they used to throw them from behind their shieldwalls. They used them as a distraction weapon in the same way the Romans did but not in as a disciplined manner so they were not even remotely as effective.

I'm not commenting on the numbers available to throw their weapons and in case of slingers I might agree that they do require lots of space to use their weapons. I suppose they could to some degree rotate in and out while loading their weapon. In case of javelin infantry it probably has to do with how close they need to be to throw their weapon which is the main reason they are restricted. Someone more knowledgeable than me have to answer that.

In regards to moving penalties I think of that as more of an act thing and timing... you just have less time to attack and that will make it less effective. It has nothing to do if the person using the weapon is moving while using it or not.