Greeks always fought outnumbered?

[PMBardunias]

Earlier in the battle of Cunaxa they seem to had taken their traditional role of heavier infantry which implies heavier equipment than just a shield and a spear.

You seem to believe that a full hoplite panoply was needed to fight in a hoplite phalanx. I do not believe this. All you need is an aspis and dory. If you have the money you you would have more equipement, up to the idealized panoply of bronze thorax, helmet, greaves, etc. But this is not needed to fight in a hoplite phalanx. The scramble Xenophon writes of to find armor for the men who were made into cavalry implies to me that much of the infantry never had any.

What he could not have is an army of say 30-40,000 heavy hoplites carrying their own stuff all over the place. This was possible for 200-300 kms if extraordinary events required it but impossible for several 1000s.

Leaving aside that much of the time shields would be carried by slaves or in carts, the average hoplite with a ~7 kg aspis and 8' dory surely had no more trouble marching than a sarissaphoroi with a smaller shield, but much heavier and more unweildy weapon. Some percentage of Alexander's sarissaphoroi wore body armor and metal helmets after all- just as SOME hoplites did. A Roman with Scutum and chain mail and multiple pila would weigh more than an average hoplite.

As for the pikes, for the majority of them this could imply carrying only the heads, joints and savroters.The heavy wood needed could be supplied on the spot.

I find that statement improbable, can you source it? I would love to fight an enemy that marches with a spearhead in its hands trusting to find the right trees on its march and hoping that I will wait while the whittle.