Yea, the speed at which you can get them is insane. I remember my first play through as Greece and I just mass produced those guys like there was no tomorrow.
Other than historical reasons, now you see why Greek Cities cavalry roster sucks so bad. Getting into an infantry slogging match with Post-Marian Reforms infantry and winning isn't a small feat. The Armoured Hoplites in the end were tanking 4 Roman units while surrounded and never broke. They held long enough until help arrived. I get what the Roman player was trying. Focus on them, break them, and then quickly realign to meet the 2 units trying to rush in. But they never broke, they held on and that complicated everything.
When watching these army videos, people have to remember that while tactics are allowed, they are supposed to be limited. While some choices made, may not have been the best decision, most were ok. One such decision was his choice to use his archers against the militia cav of the greek army. For those who saw the hammer and anvil video involving militia cav, you should know that militia cav firing into the back of cohort unit can kill about half of a unit with all of their javelins, but by focusing the militia cav with the archers, the miltia cav did very little damage and were routed from the field. So I would say it was a good choice when trying to do limited tactics. I also think QualityOldGames did a fair job of trying to flank the various hoplite units. It was not a perfect one, but it was a decent attempt. Yes, a few of his units also got isolated as well, but I think he did better with not getting isolted then the greek army. Also, i think the outcome was partially getting unlucky. Surrounded greek units where just not breaking even though their general had fled which was honestly surprising how well the held up. My conclusion is that QualityOldGames played well enough for a limited tactics video so that the battle was close and entertaining.
@@qualityoldgames7721 Сan you make battles between the units of these two editions in the following versions, for example, Egyptians with Byzantines, or Byzantines with Julians, or Dacians with Vandals. you can make either battles between individual units or whole armies using the usual composition that happens in the campaign. It is interesting to see how different the strength of the traditional Roman army is from the late army of the Western Empire
you can, for example, add similar factions from BI to certain Roman factions, so that they match in color and it is easier to understand who is fighting with whom
I am sorry but you messed up hard in this video. So much wrong I can't really name every minute detail without being here all day but I will name the key moments you really ruined your chance at victory. 1. You wasted your Roman cavalry by charging them alone when they would have been better supported by your general since the main reason the Greek Cavalry did not rout was the Greek General being nearby to support them. Wasted too much of your time against the Milita cavalry when your missiles or spearmen would have taken care of them on their own. 2. You seemed way too prioritized on taking out the skirmishers and archers instead of using your cav to flank the Hoplites which are the backbone of the Greek army. Once they are gone you can worry about the support troops later, not focusing on the real threat cost you hard just like it did in the previous video. 3. You kept trying to run your infantry away and therefore cost yourself more useless casualties and led to many of your units routing as a result. Should have just kept them in melee since Legionary Cohort's armor allows them to survive longer against Phalanx units then most units so they at least would have held on a bit longer. All that running also cost them stamina which made them fight worse and that's not even getting into the fact your attention was so chaotic and unfocused while playing which only made things worse because you could not react in time to various parts in the battle. 4. You did not take advantage of the times you had the Phalanx units on their flanks which would have not only made them easier to close the gap but also cause a morale debuff which you could have combined with things like either using your general or other infantry units to charge their flanks. Once again the constant running you did prevented this and made them fight worse.
Thanks for the comment. Good points. 1) I was surprised how well they held - ofc the battle field border was benefitting them. 2) The same missile units would have shot the cav in the back that way 3) You may very well have a point there. I tried to use superior mobility to advantage but ended up tiring the troops... 4) Perhaps :)
Though I don't condone the roman tactics in this battle, I am not surprised, my own testing has revealed that for tier basically every roman unit in the game is mid to bad. The only exceptions are hastati, equites, and urban cohorts.
How? Equites are far worse than Roman Cavalry which is also a tier 1 cavalry unit, Legionary Cohort can beat Poeni Infantry, Pharaoh's Guard, Bastarnae, and Bronze/Silver Shield Pikemen. Legionary Cavalry is OP for their tier and can beat the top tiers of other nations cavalry and that's not getting into Praetorians. Archer Auxilia is better than most factions' best archers only beaten by top tiers like Pharaoh's Bowmen and Forrester Warband. Thye are hardly bad or mid, this video was just an example of how bad tactics and reaction can make even them perform badly.
@@rorschach1985ify Yes. Before the reforms with the Polybian army, the Roman melee infantry roster and skirmishers are very good. But their key weaknesses are cavalry and their archers are let's just say... "Basic." Post Marian Reforms, the Romans get one of the best all around rosters in the game. The quality of their infantry spikes up that even fewer factions can hope to square up with in an even match. Their archers improve and become much more useful but don't mistake them for Cretan Archers. More importantly their Cavalry become really strong.
@@rorschach1985ify "legionary cohorts can beat the bad units of its tier so its not mid", I said mid to bad not all bad. And I will concede roman cav are an upgraded equites, I just never distinguish them since they are the same damm thing. As for legionary cav, it is mid, of t4 cav its better than macedons macedonian cav, and egypts nile cav, but all the eastern factions get cataphracts. It also loses to melee cav one or more tiers below like the headhunting maidens, and is about even with gothic cav. Praetorian cav also lose to the heavy armored horse units. Yet another mid unit. Urbans are a standout to be sure, the others are lackluster. (only infantry that beats urbans are spartans in phalanx)
![Warcraft 2 Remastered Human Campaign Speedrun [4K]](/img/n.gif)
This is why phalanx unit is considered op by beginners, you just smash everybody together and they are mostly gonna come out on top
Thanks for the comment. Agreed - regarding Armorued Hoplites :)
Romans again lost.
But for Greeks its a Pyrrhic victory
Pyrric Victory again... I'm sure the 3rd round will be there day
Indeed. I am beginning to dislike Armorued Hoplites more and more :) Thanks for the comment.
@@josephpaul0484 :D Thanks for the comment.
Armored hoplites get the crown for most overpowered armor and cost effective infantry i think...
Especially with limited tactics, they are just so good
Agreed (with some bitter grumbling) :D Thanks for the comment.
Yea, the speed at which you can get them is insane. I remember my first play through as Greece and I just mass produced those guys like there was no tomorrow.
@@qualityoldgames7721 revenge has to wait😅
@@Gitsmasher (some more of annoyed grumbling...) :) Thanks for the comment.
Other than historical reasons, now you see why Greek Cities cavalry roster sucks so bad. Getting into an infantry slogging match with Post-Marian Reforms infantry and winning isn't a small feat.
The Armoured Hoplites in the end were tanking 4 Roman units while surrounded and never broke. They held long enough until help arrived. I get what the Roman player was trying. Focus on them, break them, and then quickly realign to meet the 2 units trying to rush in. But they never broke, they held on and that complicated everything.
Agreed. Armoured Hoplites are rather nasty to face :) Thanks for the comment.
Armored hoplites... again
Yea, rather nasty unit :) Thanks for the comment.
Those poor Romans wish they had more pilum ¯\_༼ᴼل͜ᴼ༽_/¯
Agreed on that :) Thanks for the comment.
When watching these army videos, people have to remember that while tactics are allowed, they are supposed to be limited. While some choices made, may not have been the best decision, most were ok. One such decision was his choice to use his archers against the militia cav of the greek army. For those who saw the hammer and anvil video involving militia cav, you should know that militia cav firing into the back of cohort unit can kill about half of a unit with all of their javelins, but by focusing the militia cav with the archers, the miltia cav did very little damage and were routed from the field. So I would say it was a good choice when trying to do limited tactics. I also think QualityOldGames did a fair job of trying to flank the various hoplite units. It was not a perfect one, but it was a decent attempt. Yes, a few of his units also got isolated as well, but I think he did better with not getting isolted then the greek army. Also, i think the outcome was partially getting unlucky. Surrounded greek units where just not breaking even though their general had fled which was honestly surprising how well the held up. My conclusion is that QualityOldGames played well enough for a limited tactics video so that the battle was close and entertaining.
Thank You for the analysis. Tbh, I was a bit disappointed by the loss - I had high hopes for revenge here :)
Nice Video and a Great Battle!
Thank You! :)
This is surely the gods work. Not that of mortals like us 😆
Well put :D Thanks for the comment.
History repeats itself
Indeed it does :) Thanks for the comment.
Yes it can because Rome has urban cohorts which is the best unit in the game
Thanks for the comment. Yea, Urban Cohorts would have helped quite a bit here :)
Cav trade is good when you have more cav, or more missiles.
A good point :) Thanks for the comment.
Roman was too few missile unit , I think this would be the reason that post - marian roman unit will lost too much
Thanks for the comment. Agreed, 1-2 more of archer auxilia would have helped quite a bit :)
Didn't expect such a poor performance from the roman cavalry.... or was that a strong performance from greek cavarly?
Thanks for the comment. I was surprised by the result. I expected the Greek Cav to break from the initial charge... :)
Influirá el terreno? Gran combate
Thanks for the comment. I don't think terrain affected this one :)
how did you add troops from BI to the original Rome
Thanks for the comment. I have some vids where we pit units from BI vs vanilla Rome Units. ToNerdIsToHuman has made a vid guiding how to do that :)
@@qualityoldgames7721 thank you )))
@@qualityoldgames7721 Сan you make battles between the units of these two editions in the following versions, for example, Egyptians with Byzantines, or Byzantines with Julians, or Dacians with Vandals. you can make either battles between individual units or whole armies using the usual composition that happens in the campaign. It is interesting to see how different the strength of the traditional Roman army is from the late army of the Western Empire
you can, for example, add similar factions from BI to certain Roman factions, so that they match in color and it is easier to understand who is fighting with whom
I bet against Ankka. Why did I bet against Ankka?
;D Thanks for the comment.
I am sorry but you messed up hard in this video. So much wrong I can't really name every minute detail without being here all day but I will name the key moments you really ruined your chance at victory.
1. You wasted your Roman cavalry by charging them alone when they would have been better supported by your general since the main reason the Greek Cavalry did not rout was the Greek General being nearby to support them. Wasted too much of your time against the Milita cavalry when your missiles or spearmen would have taken care of them on their own.
2. You seemed way too prioritized on taking out the skirmishers and archers instead of using your cav to flank the Hoplites which are the backbone of the Greek army. Once they are gone you can worry about the support troops later, not focusing on the real threat cost you hard just like it did in the previous video.
3. You kept trying to run your infantry away and therefore cost yourself more useless casualties and led to many of your units routing as a result. Should have just kept them in melee since Legionary Cohort's armor allows them to survive longer against Phalanx units then most units so they at least would have held on a bit longer. All that running also cost them stamina which made them fight worse and that's not even getting into the fact your attention was so chaotic and unfocused while playing which only made things worse because you could not react in time to various parts in the battle.
4. You did not take advantage of the times you had the Phalanx units on their flanks which would have not only made them easier to close the gap but also cause a morale debuff which you could have combined with things like either using your general or other infantry units to charge their flanks. Once again the constant running you did prevented this and made them fight worse.
Thanks for the comment. Good points.
1) I was surprised how well they held - ofc the battle field border was benefitting them.
2) The same missile units would have shot the cav in the back that way
3) You may very well have a point there. I tried to use superior mobility to advantage but ended up tiring the troops...
4) Perhaps :)
Though I don't condone the roman tactics in this battle, I am not surprised, my own testing has revealed that for tier basically every roman unit in the game is mid to bad. The only exceptions are hastati, equites, and urban cohorts.
How? Equites are far worse than Roman Cavalry which is also a tier 1 cavalry unit, Legionary Cohort can beat Poeni Infantry, Pharaoh's Guard, Bastarnae, and Bronze/Silver Shield Pikemen. Legionary Cavalry is OP for their tier and can beat the top tiers of other nations cavalry and that's not getting into Praetorians. Archer Auxilia is better than most factions' best archers only beaten by top tiers like Pharaoh's Bowmen and Forrester Warband. Thye are hardly bad or mid, this video was just an example of how bad tactics and reaction can make even them perform badly.
Legionaries (cohort and cav) as well as auxiliary archers are some darn good units especially for how flexible they are
@@rorschach1985ify Yes. Before the reforms with the Polybian army, the Roman melee infantry roster and skirmishers are very good. But their key weaknesses are cavalry and their archers are let's just say... "Basic."
Post Marian Reforms, the Romans get one of the best all around rosters in the game. The quality of their infantry spikes up that even fewer factions can hope to square up with in an even match. Their archers improve and become much more useful but don't mistake them for Cretan Archers. More importantly their Cavalry become really strong.
Thanks for the comment. Or Armoured Hoplites are just good :)
@@rorschach1985ify "legionary cohorts can beat the bad units of its tier so its not mid", I said mid to bad not all bad. And I will concede roman cav are an upgraded equites, I just never distinguish them since they are the same damm thing. As for legionary cav, it is mid, of t4 cav its better than macedons macedonian cav, and egypts nile cav, but all the eastern factions get cataphracts. It also loses to melee cav one or more tiers below like the headhunting maidens, and is about even with gothic cav.
Praetorian cav also lose to the heavy armored horse units. Yet another mid unit.
Urbans are a standout to be sure, the others are lackluster. (only infantry that beats urbans are spartans in phalanx)