Phalanx Formation Please

Users who are viewing this thread

Forlorn Hope

Recruit
So at roughly 3 minutes into that video Carl mentions the Persian troops at Cunaxa not standing against the charge of the Greeks because of the power of their formation and later goes on to say that formation makes offensive action very difficult. I won't say the Macedonian phalanx doesn't have a great offensive potential because the length of the sarissa is such that you can have many, many points threatening the enemy at the same time lends itself greatly to this role.

But that doesn't mean a Greek phalanx cannot act offensively. After all, the key to good offence just as well as defence is cohesion, so the fact that it was packed tight doesn't inhibit offensive capability particularly, but makes it more likely to succeed in either role than a less dense force Nor does the prominence of the aspis preclude offensive action. Would you say a Roman legion cannot act offensively because the shield is a prominent aspect? Of course not.

So in summary, yes a Macedonian phalanx has great (or greater) offensive potential, but a Greek phalanx can ALSO act offensively and is not inherently prevented from doing so merely by its nature, density or armament.
 

mrtats

Regular
M&BWBWF&SNW
So at roughly 3 minutes into that video Carl mentions the Persian troops at Cunaxa not standing against the charge of the Greeks because of the power of their formation and later goes on to say that formation makes offensive action very difficult. I won't say the Macedonian phalanx doesn't have a great offensive potential because the length of the sarissa is such that you can have many, many points threatening the enemy at the same time lends itself greatly to this role.

But that doesn't mean a Greek phalanx cannot act offensively. After all, the key to good offence just as well as defence is cohesion, so the fact that it was packed tight doesn't inhibit offensive capability particularly, but makes it more likely to succeed in either role than a less dense force Nor does the prominence of the aspis preclude offensive action. Would you say a Roman legion cannot act offensively because the shield is a prominent aspect? Of course not.

So in summary, yes a Macedonian phalanx has great (or greater) offensive potential, but a Greek phalanx can ALSO act offensively and is not inherently prevented from doing so merely by its nature, density or armament.
A Greek phalanx is inherently defensive. A shieldwall is inherently defensive. You can still use these as offensively but it does not change their inherent property.

Take a shield as an example it is a defensive tool, that is its inherent property. But you still can bash an enemy's head and kill them. It does not make it inherently offensive tool suddenly.

OP said a shieldwall was defensive and gave greek and macedonian phalanx as offensive examples. I am not arguing that it can not be used offensively.
 
A phalanx formation would not actually be a formation change but an attacking animation change. We would need to be able to let our soldiers attack while at the same time being able to block.
 

Forlorn Hope

Recruit
OP said a shieldwall was defensive and gave greek and macedonian phalanx as offensive examples. I am not arguing that it can not be used offensively.

I'll accept that. As far as including them in the game I'm sure a shieldwall with spear-armed troops could be a good basis at least for the Greek phalanx. As for Macedonian, I wonder if the AI can be made to present a sufficiently dense number of spearpoints to make it suitably threatening rather than just having exploitable gaps all over the place, but it'd be really cool if it could be done.
 
Wow! such controversy by so many uninformed M&Bers. 50 rank deep phalanx was not defensive - fact. But my point, that was totally missed, is that Bannerlord infantry don't keep formation. They do at the start then the commander yells "Attack" and all foot troops, individually run off to the nearest the enemy ... not good. Could this be fixed please.
 
in the end, maybe just make the AI able to hold and brace long pointy sticks and call it "Spear Wall"?

Since you can drag and form your formations to however depth you like as long as you have the number of troops on the battlefield
 
in the end, maybe just make the AI able to hold and brace long pointy sticks and call it "Spear Wall"?

Since you can drag and form your formations to however depth you like as long as you have the number of troops on the battlefield

The idea is to have something more than a "Spearwall", something that Roman / Greek modders can use.

A pike phalanx should be easy to develop - 1st 4 ranks soldiers stand with 2 handed pikes levelled at the waist, other ranks, pike is angled up.
.
A spear phalanx - 1st rank thrust overarm, all following ranks in the File, push in the back with their shield into the back of the man to his front. 50 ranks deep smash through any Spartan phalanx only 8 - 16 deep. .. "Just one more step and we've won!"

.
 

Pt.C

Veteran
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
The collision volume in the game is not suitable for all squares, the horse can easily penetrate all infantry, as long as there is no spear to stop, a hundred, a thousand, a hundred million, a line of shield-bearing infantry could not stop a horse, so long as no spear could hit it, the shield has no stopping force, and infantry is as easy to push as straw.
This is the current game system mechanics.
 
Last edited:

Terco_Viejo

Spanish Gifquisition
Grandmaster Knight
This thread will be neither the first nor the last in which we talk about phalanx, shield walls and so on. IMO we have no offensive phalanx/ shield walls or whatever you want to call it because of the scourge of casualization over the years. It is true in this game a lot of micro-management can be tedious; however the lack of it makes the game boring to the player.

If we go back through the 2016 videos again and comparing with the actual version (there has been a notable improvement in all aspects) we see that there are currently two battle commands missing.

-Width
-Pace

In previous installments we had the first element distributed in Stand Closer and Spread Out (The more you pressed the key, the more or less the bots would stick). Bringing back these elements is essential for someone who wants to apply a certain tactic in the battles.
Afterwards, the pacing option is equally important to achieve less fragmented formations.
And last but not least, one of the tactical options that I find very odd is not included at the moment; use of weapons. Taking away the user's possibility to choose which weapon and when to use the ai, seems to me a bad decision. Giving that power of decision to the enemy AI seems to me to be good, however not being able to decide how to address the behavior of the ally by means of a command is at least debatable.

It certainly saddens me that users who have joined the game in recent dates are emphasizing exactly the same suggestions (no less valid) which have been given during the alpha-beta period (before the purchable version).
 

crewsk8200

Recruit
I'd love a Greek Style Hoplite Phalanx or Macedonian Pike Phalanx for my Peasants and their pitch forks. It's not a shield wall, which is defensive, A phalanx is offensive. Everyone moves together, in sync, keeping formation when attacking.
The "advance" command should already keep the formation. As of right now it's just another "charge". I haven't seen a difference. If there is please enlighten me.
 
To all, The most obvious problem from the start of a battle is that infantry don't form up in lines (Files - columns). They form up in A MESS ! Well that's how it looks. I could be wrong ? I don't see any gaps between the Files. Yes, it would be good if the player could set Frontage for each footman - 3 foot (loose)? 2 feet.(tight) etc

.But if there are game limitations, then ok, no phalanx.
 
This thread will be neither the first nor the last in which we talk about phalanx, shield walls and so on. IMO we have no offensive phalanx/ shield walls or whatever you want to call it because of the scourge of casualization over the years. It is true in this game a lot of micro-management can be tedious; however the lack of it makes the game boring to the player.

If we go back through the 2016 videos again and comparing with the actual version (there has been a notable improvement in all aspects) we see that there are currently two battle commands missing.

-Width
-Pace

In previous installments we had the first element distributed in Stand Closer and Spread Out (The more you pressed the key, the more or less the bots would stick). Bringing back these elements is essential for someone who wants to apply a certain tactic in the battles.
Afterwards, the pacing option is equally important to achieve less fragmented formations.
And last but not least, one of the tactical options that I find very odd is not included at the moment; use of weapons. Taking away the user's possibility to choose which weapon and when to use the ai, seems to me a bad decision. Giving that power of decision to the enemy AI seems to me to be good, however not being able to decide how to address the behavior of the ally by means of a command is at least debatable.

It certainly saddens me that users who have joined the game in recent dates are emphasizing exactly the same suggestions (no less valid) which have been given during the alpha-beta period (before the purchable version).

You do realize that you can do the same thing in bannerlord but they changed the way to do it. Have your infantry do a line or shield wall formation and then hit F1 to have them move, and left click and drag on the spot you want them to move to and you will see the formation change width, etc. You can make a shield wall formation and then have them bunch up a bit or extend it. As for pace, just hit F1 and f4 to have them march, then hit f1 and f6 to have them stop.
 
The "advance" command should already keep the formation. As of right now it's just another "charge". I haven't seen a difference. If there is please enlighten me.

There is a difference. When you use the advance command, the soldiers mostly move in the formation, but also when they arrive at the enemy, they hold their formation and fight in formation for the most part. Charge has them all break out of formation and go chasing whoever.
 

Terco_Viejo

Spanish Gifquisition
Grandmaster Knight
You do realize that you can do the same thing in bannerlord but they changed the way to do it. Have your infantry do a line or shield wall formation and then hit F1 to have them move, and left click and drag on the spot you want them to move to and you will see the formation change width, etc. You can make a shield wall formation and then have them bunch up a bit or extend it. As for pace, just hit F1 and f4 to have them march, then hit f1 and f6 to have them stop.
I don't think so. I am not talking about the width of the formation itself but the width between the members of the formation. That's what the stand closer/spread out of warband was all about.
And pace means running or walking for the bots while performing movement in a formation, just like you press the caps lock key to walk or run with your character.
 
I don't think so. I am not talking about the width of the formation itself but the width between the members of the formation. That's what the stand closer/spread out of warband was all about.
And pace means running or walking for the bots while performing movement in a formation, just like you press the caps lock key to walk or run with your character.

I just had my soldiers all stand super close together so that is definitely working. I just drag the formation and they get close, or drag the opposite way and they get further. Also, depends on what formation. So like a loose formation or a line formation can be dragged more outwards. Shieldwall formation lets me put them in tight. Even when i drag and extend the shield wall, they stand tighter together, line formation is a little more loose

As for pace, yeah, having them advance has them move slower and usually in formation. Charge has them run. You can form them up again too i guess.
 

luisedgm

Regular
I'd love a Greek Style Hoplite Phalanx or Macedonian Pike Phalanx for my Peasants and their pitch forks. It's not a shield wall, which is defensive, A phalanx is offensive. Everyone moves together, in sync, keeping formation when attacking.
Both Phalanx and Shield Wall can be both offensive or defensive
Also Phalanx is useless anywhere that is not fully open ground, so only a few of the battle maps would make it viable
 

Booyja

Recruit
I doubt TalesWorlds is capable in doing that. There could be so many tactical formations that would make sense. Like a spear wall (against cavalry), or as you mantioned a phalanx.
 
Top Bottom