You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Total War History
Moderated by Pitt

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.188 replies, Sticky
Total War Heaven » Forums » Total War History » The Quick Question Thread
Bottom
Topic Subject:The Quick Question Thread
« Previous Page  1 2 3 ··· 8  Next Page »
Legio Yow
Legionary
posted 23 January 2007 09:42 EDT (US)         
I decided we needed one of these.

The purpose of this thread is for little questions that have objective answers, and don't merit their own thread. For example, a good question you might ask here is "Who was the emperor who built the Colosseum?" or "Where can I find a description of the Battle of Alesia?". You can also use this if you are having trouble finding previous discussions in this forum. For example, you might ask "Where can I find a detailed description of the mechanics of a corpse bridge?", which would receive an answer.

This thread is not for introducing discussion topics. You do not ask "So, who was better. Genghis Khan or Alexander the Great?". Think of it as the AH equivalent of the Roman Party thread but do not spam.

If your query starts to get replies beyond two or three posts, then consider starting a specific thread if it looks set to run. If it gets to six or seven posts, start a specific thread on it.

This forum has needed this for a while. Please obey the rules.


"That which we call a nose can still smell!"
-Reduced Shakespeare Company

"Abroad, French transit workers attempt to end a strike, only to discover that they have forgotten how to operate the trains. Everybody enjoys a hearty laugh and returns to the café." -Dave Barry

[This message has been edited by Legio Yow (edited 01-23-2007 @ 05:15 PM).]

AuthorReplies:
Legio Yow
Legionary
posted 23 January 2007 09:44 EDT (US)     1 / 188       
To start this off, what was the megalithic society in some island off Europe that Spain ran into in 1500 or so? I ran across a reference to it a while ago and can't find it for the life of me.

"That which we call a nose can still smell!"
-Reduced Shakespeare Company

"Abroad, French transit workers attempt to end a strike, only to discover that they have forgotten how to operate the trains. Everybody enjoys a hearty laugh and returns to the café." -Dave Barry
Primus Pilus
Legionary
posted 23 January 2007 11:02 EDT (US)     2 / 188       
I think you are referring to the Canary Islands. I am sure you'll find more info about the history if you search wiki or whatever.

"I see no difference between war and terrorism. Terrorism is the war of the poor, and war is the terrorism of the rich."

Sir Peter Ustinov

Legio Yow
Legionary
posted 23 January 2007 13:09 EDT (US)     3 / 188       
That's exactly it. I've been searching Wikipedia for a while, but never thought to look at the various islands in the area that aren't controlled by Spain. Thanks.

"That which we call a nose can still smell!"
-Reduced Shakespeare Company

"Abroad, French transit workers attempt to end a strike, only to discover that they have forgotten how to operate the trains. Everybody enjoys a hearty laugh and returns to the café." -Dave Barry
MisplacedPope
Legionary
(id: misplacedgeneral)
posted 23 January 2007 14:38 EDT (US)     4 / 188       
How many emporers after Diocletion actually ruled in a tetrarchy?

"It's not true. Some have great stories, pretty stories that take place at lakes with boats and friends and noodle salad. Just no one in this car. But, a lot of people, that's their story. Good times, noodle salad. What makes it so hard is not that you had it bad, but that you're that pissed that so many others had it good." Jack Nicholson
lmao
Legionary
posted 23 January 2007 15:42 EDT (US)     5 / 188       
If I asked this before, I've forgotten. A Pilum's head bends when it enters a shield, now if it's soft and weak enough to do that, how would it penetrate the surface of a metal shield in the first place?

Imagination is more important than knowledge - Einstein
D Furius Venator
HG Alumnus
posted 23 January 2007 15:48 EDT (US)     6 / 188       
Well the tip is hard and there's a lot of weight behind the point. That's why it punches through. But there's been pretty extensive testing done recently that has failed to get pila to bend. It is possible that Connelly has missed somehing, but he is very thorough when it comes to weapons and armour.

Yow: perhaps add in the title post: Think of it as the AH equivalent of the Roman Party thread but do not spam and if your query starts to get replies beyond two or three posts, then consider starting a specific thread if it looks set to run. If it gets to six or seven posts, start a specific thread on it.


Civile! Si ergo fortibusis in ero.
Wassis inem causan dux?
Gnossis vile demsis trux!

I suggest that before badgering for a translation you take the time to read it out loud. Thankyou.

[This message has been edited by D Furius Venator (edited 01-23-2007 @ 03:51 PM).]

Legio Yow
Legionary
posted 23 January 2007 17:17 EDT (US)     7 / 188       
I just took our post word for word. Good suggestion.

Quote:

How many emporers after Diocletion actually ruled in a tetrarchy?


I don't think any emperors actually had a real tetrarchy. Diocletian organized it, but everyone knew who was the boss. To get less technical, I think that none actually ruled in a tetrarchy, with the system of a two way division being preferred rather than the two major-two subordinate.

"That which we call a nose can still smell!"
-Reduced Shakespeare Company

"Abroad, French transit workers attempt to end a strike, only to discover that they have forgotten how to operate the trains. Everybody enjoys a hearty laugh and returns to the café." -Dave Barry
amateur_idiot v2
Legionary
posted 23 January 2007 17:18 EDT (US)     8 / 188       
Counting the Emperors in the tetrarchy as Diocletion to the point where Constantine took over supreme power the following emperors ruled:

Diocletian, Maximian, Constantius I Chlorus, Galerius, Severus II, Maximian, Maxentius, Constantine I, Domitius Alexander (a usurper, not actually part of the tetrarchy), Licinius, Maximinus Daia, Valerius Valens and Martinianus.

That's 12 (or 13 if you count Domitius Alexander), but a lot of Constantine's sons ruled as "co-emperors" so it really depends on how you define the tetrarchy.


_.,-=~+"^'`amateur_idiot ... lol`'^"+~=-,._
You cant beat an idiot, he'll just drag you down to his level and beat you with experience
You see, my fellow designers, the laser satellites were unnecess ary! Their minds are ours now, oh yessssss.... -CaptainFishpants
Russia has freedom of speech, its just the freedom after the speech you worry about- Anon
Eagles might soar through the sky, but weasels never get sucked into jet engines
I reject reality and subsitute my own
Gaius Colinius
Seraph Emeritus
posted 24 January 2007 12:16 EDT (US)     9 / 188       
Ace or anybody else, you've mentioned Tercio units a few times. From what I can understand, they were large blocks of pikemen with smaller groups of arqubuisers at each corner. Is that correct?

How did this work in practice when they were charged by cavalry? Did the gunners move within the block of pikemen?


-Love Gaius
TWH Seraph, TWH Grand Zinquisitor & Crazy Gaius the Banstick Kid

Got news regarding Total War games that should be publicised? Then email m2twnews@heavengames.com. My blog.
Nelson was the typical Englishman: hot-headed, impetuous, unreliable, passionate, emotional & boisterous. Wellington was the typical Irishman: cold, reserved, calculating, unsentimental & ruthless" - George Bernard Shaw
Vote for McCain...he's not dead just yet! - HP Lovesauce

D Furius Venator
HG Alumnus
posted 24 January 2007 13:59 EDT (US)     10 / 188       
I think the notion of the musketeers seeking shelter within (or under) the pikes is attractive but flawed. Consider that the musketeers are in four blocks and equal in number to the pikemen. How, if threatened by cavalry at (say) 200 metres is there time for them to take shelter? If the horse cover the ground at an average of 6kph then they only have 2 minutes before contact. That's not enough time for the pikes to form a hollow square with the musketeers inside. And there's not enough room under the pikes for all the musketeers to lie down - even if there were, the confusion would be tremendous.
I suspect that the musketeers could protect their own front from cavalry by firepower alone. Which raises the question of what the pikes were for. Partly I suspect to deter cavalry from charging the musketeers down too quickly, a pike counterattack would be nasty for disorganised horse, and also for dealing with enemy infantry.

This is just my suspicion. If anyone has accounts of numbers of musketeers taking shelter under pikes I'd be pleased to hear them. Equally if the pikemen did form a hollow square round the muskets, when? And what would stop the cavalry from being a latent threat and your opponents musketeers marching up and tearing the formation open by fire whilst your own muskets cower idly within the pikes?


Civile! Si ergo fortibusis in ero.
Wassis inem causan dux?
Gnossis vile demsis trux!

I suggest that before badgering for a translation you take the time to read it out loud. Thankyou.
MisplacedPope
Legionary
(id: misplacedgeneral)
posted 24 January 2007 15:29 EDT (US)     11 / 188       
From what I've seen from art-work, the muskateers stayed on the outside, they may have taken to kneeling or too laying down during a charge.

But even during Gustavus Adolphus' time it is described that the pike blocks maneuvered offensively.


"It's not true. Some have great stories, pretty stories that take place at lakes with boats and friends and noodle salad. Just no one in this car. But, a lot of people, that's their story. Good times, noodle salad. What makes it so hard is not that you had it bad, but that you're that pissed that so many others had it good." Jack Nicholson
Ace Cataphract
HG Alumnus
(id: Ace_Cataphract)
posted 24 January 2007 23:50 EDT (US)     12 / 188       

Quote:

Ace or anybody else, you've mentioned Tercio units a few times. From what I can understand, they were large blocks of pikemen with smaller groups of arqubuisers at each corner. Is that correct?

How did this work in practice when they were charged by cavalry? Did the gunners move within the block of pikemen?

As Furius stated, suggestions that the gunners mingled in with the pikes makes no sense. The Tercio formation involved a complex, yet disciplined and effective system of cycle firing. A formation of well-trained gunners (the Spanish were masters of the system with the Dutch being probably next in competency) could cycle through a formation quickly. With 2 minutes to discharge fire, it seems very likely to me that they could accomplish two things. Firstly, they could cause casualties. This is always useful in battle. Secondly, they could cause a great deal of smoke from the guns. This would confuse enemy cavalrymen. Thirdly, at a close enough range, these discharges of lines of gunners firing almost simultaneously would undoubtably have created a huge noice that likely would've made it difficult for horsemen to charge straight in. You also have to consider that the range would be greater. The arquebusiers that would've been the normal gunners would've been supplemented by musketeers at the extremities of the formation.

Against infantry, however, the gunners would likely have taken a more of a skirmishing and preventive stance. I think that this is what the pikemen are mainly for. Against cavalry, it seems logical that since horse will not collide with a solid formation, even if the corner of gunners does break, they'll likely try to retreat into the pikes, if anywhere, where it would be impossible for the horse to follow. In that way, there's no chance of the horse truly driving away the gunners.

In any case, back to infantry. It seems that the gunners, not the pikemen, would have been the main deterent against cavalry. The melee infantry in the center seems to be an anti-infantry measure. According to a book I read on the subject, they described a "forlorn hope" of musketeers having been deployed in front of the pikemen and further up from the formation as a skirmishing force against enemy gunners. I think that all of the gunners would've served mainly as skirmishing forces in the time when the formations of melee infantry began closing. After this time, I would conjecture that the gunners would retreat to the flanks where they could fire away at any flanking threats, infantry or cavalry, as well as providing nominal covering fire for the infantry against the enemy's infantry. There it would be the professionalism of the Tercio's pikemen and halberdiers that would be expected to win the infantry engagement, as often happened. Naturally, such a system calls for very deep formations, which are huge targets on a battlefield. This meant that when cannons became truly effective on the battlefield, it spelled the death of the Tercio as the formation could just be blasted to pieces by artillery bombardments. Even as such, in the final "hurrah" of the Spanish tercio at Rocroi, the Eastern Habsburg and mercenary formations broke while the Spanish tercio actually managed to withstand about four French cavalry charges with heavy cannonades in between. To illustrate best what kind of formation the Tercio could be, the surrender terms that were offered to the Spanish were the same terms that would have been offered to a force besieged inside of a fortification. The remaining men that surrendered were allowed to leave the field with their weapons and their banners raised. Of course, the battle was a total diaster for the tercio. The Spanish formations broke every French cavalry charge, but they suffered massive casualties from cannon fire since the very thing that allowed them to repel the attacks (the dense formations) made them sustain abusive casualties from the artillery.

Other notes about it are that it was only comprised of men who volunteered to serve specifically in the tercio formations. They were recruited from anywhere and could even included men from countries that were enemies of the Habsburgs at the time. Of course, the men were mainly Hispanic or Germanic, the two largest groups from Habsburg lands or Italian, most of whom were mercenaries or from Italian Habsburg lands (The Kingdom of Two Sicilies). A special royal liscence was also needed to be able to recruit men for the tercio.

Of course, the 1:1 correspondence between pikes and guns was only the origional one. By the time that the Spanish were operating in the Netherlands, the ratio heavily favored pikemen.

I'm also in the process of reading through Spanish sources online about them. It's actually amazing how vastly greater the amount of information is on the tercio from Spanish sources, while English sources say little about one of the most significant formations in military history. The Spanish Wikipedia article claims that this is partly due to the Black Legend, which prejudicies the formation. While that's probably a part of it, it likely has more to do with the fact that a formation invented by one group likely has the most sources about it in their own language. In any case, I'm going to do some scouring around the internet for information about the tercio from Spanish sites and I'll try to have more solid conclusions about the formation drawn from this meager research.


I put a dollar in one of those change machines. Nothing changed. ~George Carlin

[This message has been edited by Ace Cataphract (edited 01-25-2007 @ 00:09 AM).]

MisplacedPope
Legionary
(id: misplacedgeneral)
posted 25 January 2007 06:24 EDT (US)     13 / 188       
I thought the Dutch created a more flexible battle system to combat the Tercio?

"It's not true. Some have great stories, pretty stories that take place at lakes with boats and friends and noodle salad. Just no one in this car. But, a lot of people, that's their story. Good times, noodle salad. What makes it so hard is not that you had it bad, but that you're that pissed that so many others had it good." Jack Nicholson
Gaius Colinius
Seraph Emeritus
posted 25 January 2007 08:24 EDT (US)     14 / 188       
I think we might need to look at a specific thread on the Tercio.

Before I checked Wiki, I imagined that it would be like the phalanx squares of RTW with gunners on the inside but I knew that wouldn't work as the gunners would hit their own men.
The Wiki article had some diagrams that showed the actual alignment but I was curious about the purpose of the pikemen as it seemed that the gunners were doing all the work. The best article I found was obviously written by somebody who didn't have english as a first language but it was interesting nonetheless. It said that gunners comprised approx 27% of the total tercio unit so that's still a heck of a lot of pikemen.

I think we'll all be interested to read the fruits of your hunting through Spanish sources Ace.


-Love Gaius
TWH Seraph, TWH Grand Zinquisitor & Crazy Gaius the Banstick Kid

Got news regarding Total War games that should be publicised? Then email m2twnews@heavengames.com. My blog.
Nelson was the typical Englishman: hot-headed, impetuous, unreliable, passionate, emotional & boisterous. Wellington was the typical Irishman: cold, reserved, calculating, unsentimental & ruthless" - George Bernard Shaw
Vote for McCain...he's not dead just yet! - HP Lovesauce

Legio Yow
Legionary
posted 25 January 2007 11:17 EDT (US)     15 / 188       
The tercio conversation is getting a bit out of hand. Perhaps a thread?

My question, however, is this: What are the chances of rediscovering lost works in this day and age? Is there a possibility that is some archeological dig, we might find a chest that has Sulla's memoirs (I remember that several letters from Roman soldiers were found in a dig not too long ago)? Or perhaps a work of Diogenes is sitting in some mosque gathering dust?

In short, is there any hope?


"That which we call a nose can still smell!"
-Reduced Shakespeare Company

"Abroad, French transit workers attempt to end a strike, only to discover that they have forgotten how to operate the trains. Everybody enjoys a hearty laugh and returns to the café." -Dave Barry
MisplacedPope
Legionary
(id: misplacedgeneral)
posted 25 January 2007 11:29 EDT (US)     16 / 188       
You know, I often think about how much work that was written that we will never know of.

I find it depressing.


"It's not true. Some have great stories, pretty stories that take place at lakes with boats and friends and noodle salad. Just no one in this car. But, a lot of people, that's their story. Good times, noodle salad. What makes it so hard is not that you had it bad, but that you're that pissed that so many others had it good." Jack Nicholson
Ace Cataphract
HG Alumnus
(id: Ace_Cataphract)
posted 25 January 2007 21:42 EDT (US)     17 / 188       
Well, I found out some interesting things from the Spanish Wikipedia article alone. Firstly, there's the fact that the gunners most often deployed not on the corners, but on the flanks of the pikemen. They only deployed on the corners in very open battlefields where there was space to allow the gunners to move around.

In any case, apparently, it was a sort of rock-paper-scissors situation. The cavalry were actually meant to attack the gunners who would have been extremely vulnerable to a charge after firing, the pikemen would ideally by deployed against the cavalry and the gunners would be deployed against the pikemen. It rules out the former idea of gunners countering cavalry. The way I see it is that since on a battlefield, several tercios would be deployed. The distance between the tercios would ensure that if a cavalry charged the infantry head-on they could try to get to the gunners, but when deployed in any significant width, they would have to fight the pikemen as well as the gunners lest they not have enough space to deploy on the battlefield in significant numbers at all. It would explain why cavalry are almost universally deployed on the flanks unlike in some medieval battles where they would be placed in front. As such, the tercio's own cavalry would likely be expected to hold the enemy cavalry on the flanks at bay with fire support from the gunners.

In any case, it seems that the gunners would just provide support fire while the pikemen would do the actual close combat. The pikemen were, of course, also extremely competent swordsmen. The pikes were divided into heavy pikemen, which would operate on the extremities of the formation, while the more lightly armored pikemen would be the ones in the center of each tercio. Discipline was apparently extremely strong. The formation had to move in extreme silence so that orders could be commaded. The only thing that pikemen were allowed to utter was either to yell "Espanya" or "Santiago" at the moment of contact.

Quote:

I thought the Dutch created a more flexible battle system to combat the Tercio?


They created a sort of more flexible tercio. It was the same idea but the basic formation was of only several hundred men, while a tercio was much larger. The Dutch ones were supposedly the exact number of men in a Roman cohort and they deployed in the Quincunx deployment. These met with very varied success against the tercio. The only battle that it ever one against a Spanish tercio was one where they outnumbered the Spanish and fought defensively with all of the weather conditions favoring them. Even despite this, they still suffered pretty brutal casualties and while it was tactically a victory (3:1 kill to loss ratio and they held the field), winning the victory achieved pretty much nothing for them strategically.

Quote:

The Wiki article had some diagrams that showed the actual alignment but I was curious about the purpose of the pikemen as it seemed that the gunners were doing all the work. The best article I found was obviously written by somebody who didn't have english as a first language but it was interesting nonetheless. It said that gunners comprised approx 27% of the total tercio unit so that's still a heck of a lot of pikemen.


As to what the pikemen did, they were essentially there to make sure that cavalry couldn't charge in against the gunners without being in severe danger of counter-attack by the pikemen. Furthermore, they would have been the main force against enemy infantry.

This is the last big post on the Tercio, I plan to make, btw, Legio. I'll probably post more, but not such big posts.


I put a dollar in one of those change machines. Nothing changed. ~George Carlin
D Furius Venator
HG Alumnus
posted 26 January 2007 00:39 EDT (US)     18 / 188       

Quote:

The cavalry were actually meant to attack the gunners who would have been extremely vulnerable to a charge after firing

Not if they were formed in a deep block and firing by files (Spanish system) or ranks (Dutch) because then you'd always have men with loaded weapons in the front rank...


Civile! Si ergo fortibusis in ero.
Wassis inem causan dux?
Gnossis vile demsis trux!

I suggest that before badgering for a translation you take the time to read it out loud. Thankyou.
Legio Yow
Legionary
posted 26 January 2007 08:42 EDT (US)     19 / 188       
OK, the tercio conversation needs a thread. This is turning into a debate, which is counter to the purpose of this thread.

Now, does anyone have the answer to my question?


"That which we call a nose can still smell!"
-Reduced Shakespeare Company

"Abroad, French transit workers attempt to end a strike, only to discover that they have forgotten how to operate the trains. Everybody enjoys a hearty laugh and returns to the café." -Dave Barry
Gaius Colinius
Seraph Emeritus
posted 26 January 2007 09:22 EDT (US)     20 / 188       
I don't know about that Legio. We're discovering new stuff all the time with the aid of better technology.
http://www.niot.res.in/m3/arch/index.htm
It's possible that we may not find the stuff we are looking for but make other interesting discoveries instead.
There's always discoveries to be made. That's why we need to keep looking.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/11/1118_vaticanbasilica.html

-Love Gaius
TWH Seraph, TWH Grand Zinquisitor & Crazy Gaius the Banstick Kid

Got news regarding Total War games that should be publicised? Then email m2twnews@heavengames.com. My blog.
Nelson was the typical Englishman: hot-headed, impetuous, unreliable, passionate, emotional & boisterous. Wellington was the typical Irishman: cold, reserved, calculating, unsentimental & ruthless" - George Bernard Shaw
Vote for McCain...he's not dead just yet! - HP Lovesauce

Gaius Colinius
Seraph Emeritus
posted 02 February 2007 07:40 EDT (US)     21 / 188       
Apologies for the double post but I have a question:
The Consul who only presided for one day and who Cicero quite mercilessly pulled the mickey out of, why did he preside for only one day?

-Love Gaius
TWH Seraph, TWH Grand Zinquisitor & Crazy Gaius the Banstick Kid

Got news regarding Total War games that should be publicised? Then email m2twnews@heavengames.com. My blog.
Nelson was the typical Englishman: hot-headed, impetuous, unreliable, passionate, emotional & boisterous. Wellington was the typical Irishman: cold, reserved, calculating, unsentimental & ruthless" - George Bernard Shaw
Vote for McCain...he's not dead just yet! - HP Lovesauce

Roman Warlord
Legionary
posted 02 February 2007 10:39 EDT (US)     22 / 188       
Just through some searching i came up with this website that does a pretty good chart of roman history, though it does take just a little time to read

http://www.unrv.com/

Legio Yow
Legionary
posted 02 February 2007 18:47 EDT (US)     23 / 188       
@Gaius:

I think it was because Caesar wanted him off to be a governor but didn't want to wait a year, so he made him consul for a day. I'm sure Furius has a more comprehensive answer, though.

Also, "pulled he mickey"?


"That which we call a nose can still smell!"
-Reduced Shakespeare Company

"Abroad, French transit workers attempt to end a strike, only to discover that they have forgotten how to operate the trains. Everybody enjoys a hearty laugh and returns to the café." -Dave Barry

[This message has been edited by Legio Yow (edited 02-02-2007 @ 06:47 PM).]

TotalWarFanatic
Legionary
posted 02 February 2007 22:25 EDT (US)     24 / 188       
Are there any historical references of cavalry charging head-on into a formation of infantry carrying 16-foot pikes? If so, what happened? Any links?

Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.
It would be a violation of my code as a gentleman to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed person.-Veeblefester
Ego is the anesthetic for the pain of stupidity.-me A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.
I've put most of my units/skins and ss of them on my new site!:
http://totalwarfantic.tripod.com/
Proud winner of most underrated forumer award!
Carthage
Legionary
posted 03 February 2007 04:19 EDT (US)     25 / 188       
Well I don't know about 16 foot pikes, but Alexander at the battle of Chaerona charge straight at the Theban Sacred Band and broke through, anyone else know more?

Carthage
And beyond, green fields under a swift sunrise
Oh well, thats not so bad, is it?
No, no it's not

Proud joint winner of the M2TWH Saladin award
« Previous Page  1 2 3 ··· 8  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Total War Heaven | HeavenGames