[freeciv-data] Re: Re: Artillery and sea units (PR#1476)

scripsit Raahul Kumar:
 
> You are probably right that phalanx should enjoy a bonus against
> horsemen, but most definately not knights. The knights of the Middle
> Ages would probably kill phalanxes, but not pikemen. It's also the
> case that pikemen are better armed(Iron tipped vs Bronze). Iron
> weapons vs bronze always ends with the death of the bronze armed.

Don't overestimate material technology!  There were plenty of battles in
American history where native forces with neolithic technology -- that
is, no metalworking whatsoever -- defeated foes armed with muskets.

In related terms, consider the victories that Israeli pilots scored in
the early days, flying obselete prop-driven fighters against modern (for
the time) jets.

> Here's a little quote about the Swiss and the Greeks:
[snip]

Source?

There are some interesting arguments; I'd like to see the rest of the
work.

If we take superior flexibility (i.e., better training and cohesion) to
be the difference between the phalanx and the pike formation, what is
the difference between the phalanx and the legion?  I'm not interested
in differentiating troops with spears from troops with swords from
troops with axes from troops with sharp mangoes.

-- 
Thanasis Kinias
Web Developer, Information Technology
Graduate Student, Department of History
Arizona State University
Tempe, Arizona, U.S.A.

Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazg gimbatul,
Ash nazg thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul