Trouble with Rome

[razadecon]

Has any one else had problems fighting Roman army from the book?

I have been trying to use the new Aztec list with very little success. Does any one have any advice about fighting the Roman army? (It is almost like the Roman army is like Chaos from WFB tacticly forgiving.)

Has any one else used the Aztec army yet? If so, how did it work for you?

[Old Buzzard Bilbo]

I think the -1 to the armour save in the second round of combat on top of the other advantages that "expert swordsmen" gives them is just that bit too much.

I have won against them with the Carthaginians once. ( I am not using an elephant. Maybe I should be!)

Bill

[CWCScotty]

I've foudn them to be more historically accurate than in some other systems but it's the age old tactic against them of getting around them as they are not very good at protecting their flanks

[razadecon]

Is their a way around their Pilum?
I charge them, they use pilum, i am disrupted then i break.
I am charged, they use pilum, i am disrupted then i break.

Do you guys have the same problem?

[Mithridates]

You were unlucky to be disrupted but overall I find that the Romans are quite rightly tough under CoE. I only use 'imitation' legionaries which do not have any expert swordsmen!

The only advice I can give is to make sure you charge the legionaries so they do not get their expert swords on the 1st round - I made the mistake with pikes of letting him get the charge in. I had smashed the flanks but the legionaries beat 2 of the 3 phalanxes in the centre. After my cavalry broke (artillery fire) that ended it.

[staffordgames]

Roman armies do seem to be overly powerful which is the complete reverse of WAB where they were not powerful enough.

Disrupting a phalanx is easy, in fact you have to be unlucky not to, as all you have to do is score one casualty from your pilum and it negates the -1 to hit in combat and gives you a +1 in combat resolution!

[Old Buzzard Bilbo]

Item 10 in the phalanx rules. Page 111.
I had not seen that. If the disruption was just from loosing combat it would not be too bad, but to start that way
No wonder the page numbers are marked in legionaries

Bill.

[BlakeClare]

I charge them, they use pilum, i am disrupted then i break.

[mad ulric]

Whilst I would agree that Romans are tough to beat.............and believe me I'm having the same problems, I think that is entirely accurate, and therefore reflects the superior quality of the Roman Maniple system/training etc. We all know the 'exceptional circumstances where the Romans were defeated. So, maybe the problem lies with Initiative giving opposing armies more choice in terrain and set up perhaps.??? Either that or when facing Romans we all get FREE elephants.

These are untested thoughts and I have yet to experiment further.

[MarsUltor]

As a Roman player myself, my limited advice (i.e., what I fear barbarian players doing) was mentioned above: getting around my flank. My advice - and this is no great revelation - would be this: if the Roman uses 8 wide, you use 10 wide (16 attack warband at HTH4 on the charge); you should be able to extend your line beyond his, so try to coordinate flank attack with frontal charge and break a flanking unit to spread panic; keep the general in the center to bolster ML for the front units; if you have chariots use them to help break the cavalry (even light chariots are pretty tough ***WAB*** under CoE for cav units to deal with, and they're fearsome which can help disrupt cav units).

Phalanx guys, I'm not sure what to say except that the Romans are expensive and with few obstacles in the way you should be able to extend your line beyond his. If you're playing the heavy armor EIRs the you might be playing a bit out of period (maybe) and that's always tougher. General's bonus to DL is a real bonus here against disruption, so don't forget it.

You guys probably have thought of these things, but (as one of the ROmani) I try to be even-handed.

[Paul Young]

Playing my first game with Romans v phalanx on Friday, so looking forward to seeing how it works (or doesn't) myself.
Jeff Jonas wrote an interesting article on the interaction of maniples v phalanx; one of the conclusions drawn is that the pilum just wasn't that effective against the front of the phalanx - http://www.ancientbattles.com/WAB_Succe ... Legion.htm

Cheers
Paul.

PS - inasmuch as relative expense goes, not sure if there is any joy there. A Seleucid Silver Shield with light armour, shield, sarissa, an average statline and no special abilities is 16 points, while a Republican Roman hastatus with the same statline, same armour value (large shield), pilum, expert swordsman and maniple special abilities is 15 points (can be upgraded to drilled for +1 point). The Romans also have what appears to be an uncosted bonus of being able to operate under minimum unit strength without penalty.

[MarsUltor]

PS - inasmuch as relative expense goes, not sure if there is any joy there. A Seleucid Silver Shield with light armour, shield, sarissa, an average statline and no special abilities is 16 points, while a Republican Roman hastatus with the same statline, same armour value (large shield), pilum, expert swordsman and maniple special abilities is 15 points (can be upgraded to drilled for +1 point). The Romans also have what appears to be an uncosted bonus of being able to operate under minimum unit strength without penalty.

Thanks for the article. Jeff always has a good eye for analysis. I've noticed in reading some of these battles individually that the Romans are pushed back and only won when they made flank/rear attacks or (as I think Allen said) the phalanx just suffered some catastrophy. Makes me think that perhaps the pilum could get the +1 for disruption but they retain their frontal bonus. Just a thought. Stuart's (and others') suggestion that the phalanx take a DL test can mitigate the effect of the pilum too. As to your comparison between the Hastatus and the phalangite, though, wouldn't you say that the Silver Shield phalangite in effect does have the Phalanx and Pike rules to add to his benefit? He composes the former and comes armed with the latter. And these are no mean rules either!

[Paul Young]

Just a thought. Stuart's (and others') suggestion that the phalanx take a DL test can mitigate the effect of the pilum too.

Agreed, looks like a good idea but it seems to have dropped off the radar (wasn't in last errata/optional rule document).

As to your comparison between the Hastatus and the phalangite, though, wouldn't you say that the Silver Shield phalangite in effect does have the Phalanx and Pike rules to add to his benefit? He composes the former and comes armed with the latter. And these are no mean rules either!

True. At the present time though it only takes one hit from a pilum to strip away the 'Phalanx' benefits. One lost round of combat and the pike no longer strikes first. Still fight in two ranks though so that is something. Anyway, will see how it goes.

Cheers
Paul.

[MarsUltor]

Another thought I had (and easily do-able, I think) is to drill two tiny holes in each Roman movement tray and stand up two of those extra pilum bits in each tray. Take one away each time the Roman declares a pilum throw. When they're done, that's all. Now it's just a big shield and a little sword.

Might not make a huge difference at the beginning, but could equalize things toward the end (of course after the main damage is done! )

[stuartmcc]

I have addressed this as an experimental rule in the upcoming errata update.

[Paul Young]

As it turned out, the phalanx v pila interaction wasn't a big issue in Friday night's game. Another issue involving the pilum did arise though, hoping I might be able to get some clarification:
1. Companion unit (with sub-commander) charges hastati maniple in the Movement Phase.
2. Hastati throw pila at start of Hand-to-Hand Phase and cause 25% casualties. Given that these hits are resolved as for a shooting attack, is this cause for an out-of-sequence ML test for 25% shooting casualties? Or does it just cause disruption for the ensuing combat?
Thanks,
Paul.

[stuartmcc]

I have addressed this as an experimental rule in the upcoming errata update.

And here it is: http://www.greatescapegames.co.uk/clash ... ires/rules

[socalwarhammer]

I really thinks this helps balance out the pilum vs. the phalanx. Great job Stuart! This is why COE is so great, experimental rules, trial lists and loads of player input. I just can't seem to wait for even more lists and supplements.

[Old Buzzard Bilbo]

I have addressed this as an experimental rule in the upcoming errata update.

And here it is: http://www.greatescapegames.co.uk/clash ... ires/rules

Might get the greeks out again now

I have just finished my holiday reading of Persian Fire by Tom Holland. I recommend it
It covered aspects of the cultures I had never considered before and set me thinking to what might have happened if the Persians had won.
If it were a novel it would have finished "and they all lived happily ever after...." but life was not/is not like that

Bill

[staffordgames]

The problem with it being an experimental rule is that it is optional and all our Roman players don't want to use it and all our 'Phalanx' players want to give it a try!