04-30-2013, 12:22 AM
Too many variables here. If you assume both have equal numbers, are adequately supplied, motivated (i.e. being paid), engaging in a set-piece battle on open ground with no natural barriers to protect the flanks of either army, then I would estimate that the late army would have a slight advantage over the principate army. My reasoning is as follows:
1. Overall, i think the LRA had better tactical leaders, as officers tended to be from the equestrian class and battle-tested, versus some son of a senator doing his tour of duty.
2. Once the principate army exhausted their 2 pila, they would do a full frontal assault. The late army would counter with missiles and plumbatae while being charged, taking out some of the first ranks.
3. Once the lines met and engaged, the late army would have a distinct reach advantage from their spears and ability to form a "wall" with spears protruding.
4. The late army would also have a cavalry advantage and would likely rout the light principate cavalry.
5. The late army would be more adept at flanking manoeuvres, due to their lighter armour and shields.
6. The late army would also likely have a more heavy artillery weapons.
On the other hand, I do think that the principate army would be slightly better disciplined and better able to exploit any breaches in the line or, conversely, hold the line.
Whoever was victorious, it would be a meat-grinder of a battle, unless the late army was able to outflank early on.
1. Overall, i think the LRA had better tactical leaders, as officers tended to be from the equestrian class and battle-tested, versus some son of a senator doing his tour of duty.
2. Once the principate army exhausted their 2 pila, they would do a full frontal assault. The late army would counter with missiles and plumbatae while being charged, taking out some of the first ranks.
3. Once the lines met and engaged, the late army would have a distinct reach advantage from their spears and ability to form a "wall" with spears protruding.
4. The late army would also have a cavalry advantage and would likely rout the light principate cavalry.
5. The late army would be more adept at flanking manoeuvres, due to their lighter armour and shields.
6. The late army would also likely have a more heavy artillery weapons.
On the other hand, I do think that the principate army would be slightly better disciplined and better able to exploit any breaches in the line or, conversely, hold the line.
Whoever was victorious, it would be a meat-grinder of a battle, unless the late army was able to outflank early on.
There are some who call me ......... Tim?
