Slitherine

DavidT wrote:I realise that there are tactics which could be used to counter the pikes turning (e.g. by having MF in the battle line with the legions - but this doesn't appear to have been a deployment favoured by Caeser) and when you are only 10, getting your legions forward and into contact is the big thing.

Caesar (I guess you mean Caius Julius Caesar) was not even born when Scipio defeated Seleucids. Anyway, a such tactics is surely risky against a more experienced opponent . In fact, retreating your phalanx you expose the flanks. More, you have opponent's HF very near to your back and even a little inconvenient can take to a disaster. With pike armies I think is better to delay the centre clash, with slow or no advance, also in this case you expose phalanx flanks, but you can use supporting unit, like MF or LF, to fill the gap between cavalry and pikes, like they did in real world.

rogerg wrote:A small BG of spear armed cavalry should do nicely. If the pikes turn, the cavalry can always expand and evade in a single line. The Roman cavaly would probably be outmatched by their opponents on the flank, so keeping them in reserve would be best for them. If the Seleucid cavalry attack the Roman foot, the cavalry could also present a flank attack threat. It is a nice feature of FoG that reserves behind the main line can be useful. It is often a mistake to set up in a single long line.

Yes this can be fine if you have a magic gazing ball which can predict opponent's tactic.

marioslaz wrote:Yes this can be fine if you have a magic gazing ball which can predict opponent's tactic.

Crystal Balls

philqw78 wrote:

marioslaz wrote:Yes this can be fine if you have a magic gazing ball which can predict opponent's tactic.

Crystal Balls

Sorry... I'm just an ignorant Italian man

It was an unmissable opportunity for a double entendre.

(I think you might need french and English there)

In a recent game which my son was playing (he was using Late Republican Roman against Seleucids), after my son had advanced his legions to approximately 4MU from the enemy pike blocks (4 BGs of pike), the pikes all turned 180 degrees and proceeded to march away from the legions who, as they moved at the same speed, could never catch the pikes who always kept 1MU away from them.

At present we are OK with this as we feel it is not easy to 3 execute such a withdrawal. However it may take a few goes to think through how to make it exposed for what it it.

Next time someone tries it angle your legionaries so that they just clip the 2MU restricted area and see how easy it is for him to get away; or charge one in the rear with LH skirmishers to slow it adn thens wamp it - your LH usually having broken off by now perahps DISR. With a bit of wheeling in pustruit you can usually get the Pike blocks having to march into each other; whioch then forces them to turn an fight like men!

A well executed withdrawal is something to applaud but not that easy to pull off as long as you stop them being able to walk directly away.

So see if you can fidn the tactical counter to it first.

Si

Wheeling the line and approaching within 2MU might work, except that the enemy just has to execute his withdrawal slightly sooner (at just beyond 5MU) to negate this.
Getting LH behind a Seleucid army when you are using LRR is going to be difficult as the Seleucid player usually has the superiority in mounted on the flanks while the Romas have it in their legions. Although, in this battle, Daniel did get a unit of Numidian LH behind the pikes, it was too busy with a unit of enemy Skythian LH which it had chased around the table to be able to intervene.
The ideal tactic would be the historical one - to charge the enemy who has just foolishly turned his back on you in the rear - but this isn't possible under the rules at present. I'm sure turning a battle line 180 degrees to withdraw doesn't happen often in games (in fact this was the first time I had seen it happen) but it is a tatic that is open to players which appears to be a bit unlikely.
It is also relatively risk free, as the pikes can always all turn round together again if anything does get close enough to threaten their rear, while sending the legions off to intervene in other parts of the battle leaves them open to the pikes all turning around again.
However, it didn't affect either player's enjoyment of the game which was very close and we'll just have to convert to Imperial Romans with their Legionary Lanciarii.
Regards
David

Predicting opponents tactics is part of what playing well is about. If you are reliant on heavy foot, you need a plan to deal with an opponent withdrawing and refusing the fight. Using crystal ball is cheating though.

rogerg wrote: Using crystal ball is cheating though.

And considered rude when rolled along the table at your opponents troops so that they all break!!

Steve P

It's only drilled troops that this would be a problem with, I don't know that I'd fancy it with undrilled. And it's not a retreat, it's a tactical withdrawl

Getting LH behind a Seleucid army when you are using LRR is going to be difficult as the Seleucid player usually has the superiority in mounted on the flanks while the Romas have it in their legions. Although, in this battle, Daniel did get a unit of Numidian LH behind the pikes, it was too busy with a unit of enemy Skythian LH which it had chased around the table to be able to intervene.

More charge them frontally - which is now their rear as they run away. This is usually prettty easy and slows down their running away a lot. try it.

Si

Dyeeles wrote:It's only drilled troops that this would be a problem with, I don't know that I'd fancy it with undrilled. And it's not a retreat, it's a tactical withdrawl

Of course an opponent doing the tactical withdrawal deserves a good taunting in the traditions of the 'Holy Grail' - comments about 'silly knees-bent running about advancing behavior' and even the Sir Robin song seem appropriate. All in the best possible taste and with huge grins of course - it's only a game after all.

mellis1644 wrote:

Dyeeles wrote:It's only drilled troops that this would be a problem with, I don't know that I'd fancy it with undrilled. And it's not a retreat, it's a tactical withdrawl

Of course an opponent doing the tactical withdrawal deserves a good taunting in the traditions of the 'Holy Grail' - comments about 'silly knees-bent running about advancing behavior' and even the Sir Robin song seem appropriate. All in the best possible taste and with huge grins of course - it's only a game after all.

Yase! That's what wargaming needs. More Monty Python quotes.

Spike

'Tis merely a flesh wound....

Right we'll call it a draw..

Come back here and I'll bite your kneecaps off!!

The fight with the black knight, one of the best sword battles on film... truly calssic stuff now if only our games could simulate such fights, not to mention how much easier would cavalry be to paint without horses and only scale coconuts in their hands?

Ah some of us have previously painted up said knights, and the Knights who say Ni, as part of a past 25mm army!!! Must still have them in a box somewhere "complete" with missing arms and coconut shells.

Now please write out Romans go home 100 times on a local wall in Latin!

The best, the legend.

Si

shall wrote:
Now please write out Romans go home 100 times on a local wall in Latin!

The best, the legend.

Si

Well, there's an idea for someone building a village to go with their Jewish Revolt army!

lawrenceg wrote:

shall wrote:
Now please write out Romans go home 100 times on a local wall in Latin!

The best, the legend.

Si

Well, there's an idea for someone building a village to go with their Jewish Revolt army!

Been done. Someone in Australia has said camp.

Ian