12-06-2014, 04:56 AM
The Macedonians didn't need hypastpist because by the 2nd cent BC they were an obsolete fighting type. After earlier wars against the Italians and Gauls the various Hellenic kingdoms and states learned the value of the thureophoroi, a new style of infantry that could fight as line infantry or as a skirmisher. These types present in many of the battles facing the Romans.
More so, the Romans didn't win because their infantry was better than the Hellenic infantry, but because overall the Roman armies (well over half not even Roman) were superior or luckier than their enemy.
Pick the usual tactics used constantly by Alexander, pinning or creating gaps with infantry and flanking or penetration attacks with heavy cavalry, and try to see how that would work against a roman consular or double size consular army, which would have its largest contingent of allied cavalry facing the best of the Hellenic cavalry.
Romans weren't Persians.
More so, the Romans didn't win because their infantry was better than the Hellenic infantry, but because overall the Roman armies (well over half not even Roman) were superior or luckier than their enemy.
Pick the usual tactics used constantly by Alexander, pinning or creating gaps with infantry and flanking or penetration attacks with heavy cavalry, and try to see how that would work against a roman consular or double size consular army, which would have its largest contingent of allied cavalry facing the best of the Hellenic cavalry.
Romans weren't Persians.
