Kevin Rose:
>Swiss pike formations were offensive, not defensive. The Scottish spear
>formations were more of the not very mobile defensive type. The Swiss
>formed a solid block and attacked at a very rapid pace. This included
>attacking into cavalry. They originally used heavy crossbows instead of
>firearms.
I believe the swiss were primarily used defensively against cavalry and either defensively or offensively against infantry (depending on tactics). I don't think a mass of infantry could catch up to a well organized cavalry. Also, it was the use of the firearms that prolonged the use of the pikemen IMO. If they maintained the use of the crossbow, I believe the firearmed opponents would have eaten them to shreds from a distance. Once field artillery came into play, the pikemen were doomed.
>Greek city states armies were composed of the adult male citizens (his
>friends, neighbors and relatives) who generally fought prearranged single,
>decisive battles with similarly equipped foes. This later changed
>and battles got very bloody when it did. Hanson's "The Western Way of
>War" is a very good book if you want to understand this sort of warfare.
>The problem is that Praxians don't want to play by the rules that made
>Greek hoplite warfare work.
The Greeks fought many different styles of troops with and against the Persians. The battles you are refering to only apply early in Greek hoplite history - the prearranged stuff went out with the Iliad and Odyssey (along with personal combat). With the invasion of the Persians, this hoplite vs. hoplite only battles changed and more cavalry and light troops were introduced as time went on. Also, all of SC adult males are part of the army - another similarity with the greeks.
Sergio Mascarenhas:
>If you are speaking about the Sun County temple in Prax, this is
>inconsistent. For centuries the most important enemies of the Templars have
>been mounted nomads. Since infantry doesn't fight offensively against
>cavalry (unless they had a lot of mobility, they would be unable to catch
>the nomads...), their only tactic would be to fight defensively. The
>conclusion is that they would be better off with Swiss-like square tactics
>then with Roman or Greek like offensive tactics.
and Kevin says:
>The Romans did figure out some successful techniques, but they still would
>get an army crushed by the Parthans every few decades. The Roman shock
>infantry armies had a lot of problems with horse archers.
>
>I would expect that Sun Country would have worse problems, as they don't
>have any cavalry. Counting on your general always being a tactical,
>strategic and political genius (and your opponent being at best mediocre)
>seems like a poor plan. Like the saying goes, "The race is not always to
>the swift and the battle to the strong, but that's where the smart money
>is."
First off, the Sun Domers are mercenaries and would be in several foreign armies. What I was mainly refering to is infantry versus infantry where the sun domers are part of a larger more diverse army (probably the more typical scenario that you will see the Sun Domers used in an actual army), however I can also see the Sun Domers using similar tactics against cavalry in defense of their homeland against major Nomad incursions. If you look at the terain of Sun County, there are bogs and many rivers - neither of which are friendly to cavalry. If the Sun Domers secure their flanks against the nomads (which they should be able to do in Sun County lands), then they can move forward and push the cavalry back. Strategically, yes this is a defensive action, however tactics employed are offensive and consistent with how the Templars would fight against infantry (see the significance of the Shield Push games). The Templars would tactically use missile skirmishers (same as Peltasts ! IMO) to harass the nomads and pr
event the nomads from harassing the hoplites with missile fire. In the majority of situations, however, I would think that the Sun Domers are really defending against raids and would just hold up in fortified positions or harass the nomads with missile troops.
Also, everyone seems to be assuming that the Sun Domers will not have cavalry support on their side. It specifically states in Sun County that the Sun Domers use Nomad mercenaries (SC pg. 8) for their cavalry arm on occation. If there was a real outside threat by an occupying army (as opposed to just nomad raiders), I would assume that the Sun Domers would employ this cavalry - thus reducing the possibility and problem of encirclement by enemy cavalry and allowing the infantry to be brought to action. If there ever was a large scale invation/occupation of the Sun County lands, I am sure the Templars would hire nomad mercenaries to help.
Also, the Swiss pikemen did not use shields if I remember correctly. They needed two hands to handle those pikes and halberds. How do you reconcile this with the Sun Domers use of shields?
I have not seen any reference of Sun Domers going into the wide-open plains for Prax to wage campaigns against the nomads. You are right, this would be suicidal using hoplite tactics without proper cavalry support. I believe what probably happens is that the Sun Domers win in the infantry favorable Sun County, but lose in the semi-deserts of Prax creating a stale mate where the nomads are *safe* from the Templars in their homeland, while Sun County is normally *safe* from full-scale occupation in theirs.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the Pikemen developed to counter the heavy cavalry of the Knights. With the exception of the Rhino riders, the nomads of Prax would normally be considered light cavalry. *Light* cavalry would be more the type that the Greek Hoplites faced.
>Swiss pikemen used as much defensive as offensive tactics. That was their
>greatest asset. They would fight defensively against heavy cavalry and
>offensively against infantry and missiles.
Agreed. I was thinking in terms of just cavalry.
>I would call it 'prudence' and 'tactical wisdom', not cowardice. If you
>think that to stay put wainting for the rhinos to charge against you, even
>if you have your pike in front of you is cowardice... I can tell you it
>isn't: In Portuguese bullfight we have what we call a 'pega de caras'
>(something like 'face to face grapple') where a group of men called
>'forcados' have to block a charging bull formed in straight line. Even if
> the bull is tired after the bullfight (which in Portuguese bullfight is
>against mounted 'toureiros' - in Spanish toreadores) and he loosed a lot of
>blood, it requires about 6 to 10 skilled men to stop him. And the lucky
>leaders of the forcados (the first man in the line) count on broken ribs
>the number of bulls they grappled. If you meet one of them, just tell him
>he is a coward for waiting still for the bull...
>
I sort of piture the Sun Domers of having some of their DP heritage left in them. IMO the DP armies (using the Celtic/Viking analogies) use the all out attack method. Every soldier was trying to prove he was braver than the next soldier and the best way to accomplish this was to engage the enemy and defeat him quickly. Sitting back would be seen as cowardness (thus the barbarian lack of reserve troops). This is also how I interpret "Maneuver and stratagem are disdained by generals and troopers alike; the coming together of stoud, courageous warriors in honorable, decisive battle, where strength, will, and mettle are tested, is the proper Yelmalian mode of warefare." (pg.7 SC). Also, the use of pikemen requires both maneuvering and strategy, while the Greek Hoplite formations require very little. Another negative in the Swiss pike theory IMO.
Jose Ramos:
> The Yelmalions in Sun County are specialized as mercenaries for the
>nomads (who else could hire them the last five hundred years). So the
>support elements disappeared to leave the only thing the nomads could not
>provide, a core of dependable heavy infantry. Besides, they evolved a small
>unit organization to impede and punish any nomad depredation of their lands.
>
I would think the Yelmalions would be used by more people than just the nomads. The Lunar empire could use them as could the city of Pavis at various times in history.
John Medway:
>>>You may be thinking of Hypaspist which some believe were the
>>>beginings of the Roman cohort. The Hypaspist were an elite Hoplite group
>>>with lighter armor and shorter spears.
>
>Who also fought in a more open formation than hoplites, and occasionally
>carried throwing spears/javelins in addition to the proper spears they
>carried, if I am not mistaken. Essentially they were a fusion of hoplite
>and peltast.
>
Not exactly. The Hypaspists were invented to solve the problem of the rigid line of the phalanx under the Macedonian system. They used a more flexible fomation and were used to bridge the gap between the phalanx and the cavalry as the cavalry moved forward. As the cavalry moved forward, the phalanx flanks would be exposed. It was the Hypaspists job to protect that gap and create a more or less line between the cavalry and infantry. I have not seen that they used missile weapons and were closer in armament to phalanx.
Kevin Rose:
>My assumption is that the Lunars can provide some of the security now, as
>the Lunar cavalry is really tough. But what happened before the lunars
>were around, or if there are no handy Antelope Lancer troops hanging
>around?
I doubt the Lunars can help in Sun County, as there are no Lunar troops stationed in the counts lands.
>Each Praxian clan is independant, respecting no central authority. So you
>cannot make a treaty with a tribe, but only with a clan. And they, at
>laest according to the "what my father told me" write up, will not honor
>any agreement with non-praxians if they can get away with it.
Yeah, but you can buy them off or play one tribe/clan against the other or hurt them real bad so they don't want to come back.
End of The Glorantha Digest V5 #272
Powered by hypermail