1257 replies to this topic

[mike_]

It's fairly obvious that in close combat a swordsman will win against a pikeman.
However, he has to reach him first - which is where the pike comes in.
If he manages to avoid the pike, then he will of course get a shot at the man holding it - unless the pikeman has a secondary weapon - an axe or dagger, maybe a sword - and then they would likely have to fight mano-a-mano. Despite this, the swordsman would likely have the upper hand - being better equiped for a close quarters battle.
Which, is why, there are usually several ranks of pikemen blocked up instead of a single line of them
Cheers,
-mike

[Dalf32]

if you watch the movies again they show very well (especially with aragorn) how a swordsman can knock the pike out of the way (using their sword) and then run up close. they should definetly be a pike counter imo, not jsut flanking (almost anything should be able to beat almost anything else if they flank).

[Myrdin]

if you watch the movies again they show very well (especially with aragorn) how a swordsman can knock the pike out of the way (using their sword) and then run up close. they should definetly be a pike counter imo, not jsut flanking (almost anything should be able to beat almost anything else if they flank).

wery well said

mostly a swordsman, just cuts the pike in middle, the next he usually do is that he cuts down the pikeman ( you can see that not only in LOTR movies, other mediaval age situated movies will do the job too )

[dojob]

If pikemen are so weak, then why did the Greek phalanx kick so much ass?

Even if a swordsmen knocks the pike of a pikeman aside, the guy behind him or next to him will still impale him, perhaps before he can make the killing strike on the guy he was charging. At least shielded pikemen should be able to stand up to swordsmen.

[CIL]

if you watch the movies again they show very well (especially with aragorn) how a swordsman can knock the pike out of the way (using their sword) and then run up close. they should definetly be a pike counter imo, not jsut flanking (almost anything should be able to beat almost anything else if they flank).

Pike and shield should be effective against swordsmen. Also, a weak swordsman versus a weak pikeman= sword win. A master of the pike versus a master of the sword.. the pike would win

[Dalf32]

well said SrgInsane
the greeks had shields and were extremely well trained. few evil units (basic) are trained, they are just given weapons and their killer instinct. even good pikes
no question a shielded pikeman should win but how many pike units in this game have shields? i can only think of 2; the bfme1-type soldiers of rhun and the citadel guards. they should beat swordsmen and they do, but that is because they are expensive too.

[Myrdin]

well said Dalf

you need to diference between pikes and jawelins, and halbendiers (sp?)

the wariors of Rhun use mostly halbendiers ( picture, of non Rhun weapon ) :
http://www.papiroveh...0Halapartna.jpg
http://www.drakkaria...partna-ii_2.jpg
http://www.wise.k12....ll/halberd1.jpg

weapons like this were well suited for close combat, better than normal pike, thx to they axe/pike shape. You could use the pike sting, to take down horse, and then with the axe head, kill the one who rode him.
But to master this weapon . . . . it took a lot of training and even more efort. Only the true masters could fight with this heavy weapon efectively.

And as dalf said, there were only few, well trained wariors in Middlearth who used this weapn ( Fountain Guards, and people of Rhun )

[mike_]

Halberds. The word is halberds.

[CIL]

Have any of you even used a pike in a close formation in a battle reenactment? I think not. Stick the pike in the ground, hold your tower shields close togather and secure the pike. It won't move. This is only for Fountain guards and Spears of the Havens.

[Dalmp]

Pikes were not used with shields. Nor could they be; they were too long to be carried with a shield of any importance. But it's true that pikes tended to dominate sword-wielding infantry. Head on, no other infantry units was as strong as trained pikemen, and pike formations continued to be the primary indespensible unit of mass warfare right into the 15th and 16th centuries. Head-on, anyway.

The weakness of pike formations was to flanking and ranged attackers. Flanking, because it was really difficult to turn a pike formation. Either they lifted their pikes and became essentially defensless while doing so, or they tried to turn with pikes down - and we can imagine how difficult and awkward it would be to turn a formation locked in place with poles running through it. And once entangled with the enemy, neither method of turning became easily possible, and the only foolproof solution to a flanking attack was to drop the pike and draw a sidearm. Ranged attackers were the other major weakness, simply because pike formations lacked shields and were completely defenseless to ranged fire.

But in order to use pikes realistically, we'd need to be able to provide the proper defense for their weaknesses: Skirmishers to protect the flanks, and/or crossbow units to provide direct fire. And the BFME engine is just not equipped to move mixed formations cohesively. Really this is the wrong game for it. I think it's about as close to unit realism as we're going to make it, without completely ruining the gameplay.

Edited by Dalmp, 26 March 2008 - 10:21 AM.

[Myrdin]

If you want some tactic orgy with pikes swords and cawalery just install Rome Total War, or game like this. For the peole who know that BFME isnt suited for battles of 10000 warior armies of every unit tipe, just get pikes weak to swords, and strong to cawalery.

[dojob]

When did I ever ask for a "tactic orgy" with "10000 warrior armies"?

Just make it so that pikes dominate when facing the swords and lose when being flanked. RotWK can handle that as far as I know...

[Dalmp]

What would swords dominate against in that scenario?

Edited by Dalmp, 26 March 2008 - 08:05 PM.

[Dalf32]

ok, im with dalmp. we must assume that this game is not suited for total realism and trying to make it so will remove much of the fun in it. keep the current balance system. even adding something like dojob said; where swords only beat pikes when flanking, it would make swords completely unneccessary and throw the entire game out of whack.
i say it again; dont fix it if it isnt broken.

[Devon]

actually that's the first time you've said it, it was me before

IMO:

Swords>archers+pikes
Archers>well, they're ranged, no special bonuses, but they need an increase vs cav I think from current
Pikes>Cav
Cav>swords+archers

[Dalf32]

lol sorry yoda. i guess i didnt say it in so many words.
but ditto yoda for me

[Myrdin]

yeah ( btw, dojob i hope you dont use 300 spartans for your theory of " pike domination " becoze that movie was absolute xxxxxxxxxx, add one x for each insult as you wish though when you didnt look at the history and realism site, it wasnt that bad. If swordsmen gets close enough - which isnt THAT hard, even if pikeman is trained, he usually cant micro on battlefield, then he kills pikeman no matter what, again i say this PIKE is NOT suited for CLOSE combat battle, thats what are swords axes flials, maces hammers, and other " small " weaponry for. )

Edited by Myrdin, 26 March 2008 - 09:08 PM.

[Dalmp]

That's not a guess on Dojob's part, that's just the tale history tells. All the great powers of pre-firearm history were founded at the point of a spear (or pike), with swords playing a sidearm or skirmish role.

He's not wrong. It's just a matter of BFME handling the realism without upsetting game balance, or the unique role of a unit.

Edited by Dalmp, 27 March 2008 - 03:45 AM.

[Nertea]

You might also point out that BFME2's formations aren't large enough to be traditionally effective spear walls or pike formations.