Using the Triplex Acies online!

The mighty Roman triple battle line takes the field! We use a battle of Rome against Carthage as a backdrop to discuss this unique tactic. For more information on the Triplex Acies check out my overview here: • Total War History: Tri...
For an interpretation of how lines may have switched positions, check this out: • rome 2 polybian manipu...

[@satanicmuffin9309]

"Most of the losses came at the route in the battle." This is why I love Medieval 2. Yeah, your best soldiers will fight heroically and bravely to the death, which is cool, but many units will break, and so I often find I have more captured enemy soldiers than I have killed enemy soldiers.

[@Midironica]

Which makes alot of sense, considering that in the early middle ages most armies were made up almost exclusively of levied peasants. The knights would have been quite few in number and only really powerful and rich nations would have the money to field large divisions of trained, non-noble infantry and cav.

[@satanicmuffin9309]

Precisely. I used to question the general's speech in which they mention "Today we will strike down a quarter of our foe's army today," as if that was a big deal, but it makes a lot more sense if you see it as the number of dead before the route.

[@EvilTwinn]

I take exception to the phrase "peasant levies". Most of the soldiers were actually middle class. While peasants were occasionally levied, they were not normally done so, and those that were levied were not generally in combat, and instead did much of the non fighting work.

[@timotheose]

EvilTwinn by

[@croataxeman2529]

That's why i love the SS mod with real recruitment submod. The professional troops are few so most of your armies are levies and mercenaries.

[@ΑντώνιοςΕυάγγελοςΒασιλειάδης]

Spartans would also stay dead silent when they charged....I can only imagine how scary that would look like....

[@RexGalilae]

There are stories about how unusual it was to see them silently and confidently walk into formation during deployment

[@alialahmad4329]

Arabs also did that early

[@PineFire]

*InsertStereotypicalNameHere* more often than not, the Spartans (who were not ever a professional force) marched to the tune of flutes. Hoplites never really “charged” in some instances, maybe, but they were only a militia force with decent discipline.

[@ΑντώνιοςΕυάγγελοςΒασιλειάδης]

@@PineFire Spartans were formidable because of the fact they were a professional force, their constant drilling and discipline is literally the reason they surpased all other city states in land warfare. The phalanxes Indeed marched under flute to keep a common pace (since it needs to be noted that all armies didn't simply charge from their deployment zone, they marched up until 100-50 meters from their opponents to start charging)but charging with a phalanx wasn't impossible and certainly wasn't that rare after Miltiades proved how effective it was by using the heavy weight of the phalanx and the momentum of the charge to shock the Persians at Marathon. If the Athenians which did indeed had a mandatory military service and and where not as professional as the Spartans can pull it off as effectively as they did then I doubt the Spartans couldn't do it just as good or even better.

[@MelonHead1848]

@@PineFire Research before you comment. Sparta had the most professional army the world had seen at the time with only 8,000 men spartiates. Battle of Platae 5,000 spariates led a charge to help turn the fight.. research is a wonderful thing.

[@theKbott]

8:50 that charge looks so sad.

[@Davide___92]

+Stefan Westermann Rome 1 > Rome 2

[@fluets5658]

+Davide.D What did they look like in Rome 1?

[@tofuteh2348]

+Fluets rome 1 cavalry felt like they had more impact, while in rome 2 they just look like theyre squishing together

[@Commievn]

Calvary charge in both Rome 1 and 2 are great and very effective. Tho, the Rome 1 is a bit OP thanks to their ability to jump over phalanx, lol. Imho, the Calvary charge in Med 2 is the worst, mainly because it's very buggy, the unit need quite a distant in order to charge, or otherwise, they will only *walking to* in the enemy and starting to fight,and yes, *walking*, not even running. This make Cav charge quite aweful in siege battle, on top of that, every road is so small in Med 2. The 2nd worst would probably be Shogun 2 thanks to asigaru, cheapest unit in da game btw.

[@theKbott]

Brock McClain Getting a good charge in Medieval is a science in itself, lol. It takes a lot of practice to get it just right. The cavalry needs to already be in running formation before you issue the attack, otherwise they will fuck up in one way or another.

[@Sshooter444]

Failure to disengage and retreat is one of the huge reasons I hate Rome 2 Total War. It was present in previous Total Wars.

[@julius6889]

Is there even an option on TW games where they are able to give ground?

[@najkraemer3117]

rome1 and medieval 2

[@stratdaddy]

Naj Kraemer what?

[@constantinexi6489]

The Magical Gamer the unit collision in Rome 1 allowed units to get pushed back as more and more men charged them

[@RobertWF42]

And it wouldn't be hard to program into the game. Units already get fatigued as they fight. When fatigue levels reach a threshold, say after a minute or two of melee in game time, a unit will automatically stop fighting & step back a few paces from the enemy unless egged on by a leader. That's when the Roman player can move his hastati back and bring up the principes.

[@Greatdictator]

I wasnt aware of it but i think i used this checkeboard tactic online against a Spartan Player and for the most part it worked , the gaps in my lines allowed some enemy units to get sorrounded and kinda picked off

[@benandres9627]

Greatdictator Yeah, I tried using it against Carthage as Scipii in Rome 1 and it worked extremely well. The carthaginians would either run through the gaps and get enveloped by the secondary line or the gaps would easily allow the secondary line to flank the enemy. Lots of micro tho

[@gryphonicbaguette]

Ben Andres Your meant to form a line when attacking but okay.

[@ClockworkAnomaly]

@@gryphonicbaguette dont trust historians that think they know real war. Trust the sources.

[@gryphonicbaguette]

ClockworkAnomaly You think they would just open their line and let soldiers flood through? I’m not sure you understand war

[@ClockworkAnomaly]

@@gryphonicbaguette I'm not sure you do either. Have you ever fought in a battle line armed with sword and shield?

[@DoubleBob]

>Using the Triplex Acies online! >does not use Triplex Acies k.

[@DoubleBob]

Stewart Ashton This is just "approaching the enemy in a super empty checker board formation and then playing normal rome2". Triplex Axies is more than that.

[@red_isopat]

Because triplex acies is useless online?

[@ForeverDoubting]

+FernestHall I believe he emulated as best he could and where he did compromise he explained why.

[@draconisthewyvern3664]

hmm triplex acies was only a marching formation used to approach the enemy. the triplex acies was quite literally the opener opening to a single line, strong right flank, or wedged formation. also in standard usage of this theoretical formation the skirmishers would hold the line separating the enemy between the first line charging out and the other two lines in reserve. opening gaps for the first line to fall back through and the second line charging through at the same time. essentially the romans never engaged the enemy in a checker board formation instead using it as a opener to their other tactics etc.

[@iahvesix3779]

it did give him more maneuverability

[@adoorknob7053]

I like how he just kinda charges at the end XD like "oh hey look at this formation" and then just tactical blob.

[@anthonydonate9938]

Historically accurate

[@tyrannicfool2503]

It DID come to the triarii

[@timothyheimbach3260]

Derek Guerrero I find in total war it almost always comes to the triarii

[@ts9749]

Don't forget the enemy had -tanks- elephants

[@koreancowboy42]

Triarii/spearmen gets beaten by swordsmen, got to break your bubble. I played as Carthage and lost to Rome during a 2v2 online. I wasn't a terrible or pro/good player but atleast decent to know what im doing, I used Scared band as front line in phalanx formation with archers in front and in lose formation, cav on flanks and etc. Once engaged their losing to armored legionaries, high tier spears losing to swords. I did test run on Trarii the best spear unit Rome has and they lose to swords too. Apparently spearmen are mostly on flanks with cav only. It's my opinion and my experience

[@devoncampbell4214]

Korean Cowboy42 Your simplifying it quite a bit.

[@athaeus2667]

@@koreancowboy42 You know he's referencing history, not the game mechanics with that comment?

[@teeheeteeheeish]

While I understand the constraints placed from some of the issues with Rome 2's interface, that triplex was definitely not executed periodically correct. The biggest thing the triplex did as a whole was maintain solidarity throughout the battle, unitl the battle turned in Rome's favor. Then you would see formations give way in order to maximize devastation. The initial "charge" would look more like a brisk controlled advance. Enemy lines would usually be all one large formation (mostly because the command and control is simpler), which would be eaten up by the serrated nature of the triplex. The Hastati would initiate combat, enemy soldiers would fill in to the gaps, thinking they have successfully flanked a formation of Hastati, only to be smashed by the more heavily armoured and seasoned Principes. This would happen again (if needed) by the Triarii. However Triarii usually did not need to fight in most battles, as the Principes would do a good job cleaning up. Also imagine any disengaged Roman infantry throwing their pila while they are not in immediate contact and you can imagine the devastation. Cavalry was present mostly to secure the flanks, run down routed enemies, and cover advances and withdrawals. Cavalry were usually the wealthiest soldiers on the field, so were spared a lot of the most dangerous fighting.

[@archsys307]

no… they didnt actually fight in the checkerboard formation … the front line massed up into, indeed, a line

[@18ps3anos]

Well to be honest, you marched as triplex accies, but as soon as you intended to fight, you abandoned it, designing your maniples as phalanx . The gaps in the formations do have to exist, as you can throw javs with your retreating skirmishers and your principes if the enemy tries to surround your first row. Also, if they partially surround 1 maniple with a wider formation, they will show their backs to the maniple right next to it, and their sides to the principes. Regarding reserves, you did it correctly, using your army body rows one at a time. I find Divide et Impera a better environment to apply this doctrine, as flank javs and battle weariness have more impact in the morale of the unit. I like to complement DeI with the ultra fast battles since the moral system still applies but at least this way there are more casualties and shock cavalry is not a must to speed up outcomes.

[@robhara7911]

plus they would have a negative moral hit for being attacked in the flank the 1st line would have collapsed quickly, in game offcourse

[@jackblackmore787]

I was just about to go off on one just like you lmao!

[@Elnaroth]

i think he used it as much as possinble and sensible in the game

[@TheLiquelique]

@ in DEI you can set disciplined formation

[@MattParra15]

@ not true it all, I've been playing rome 2 non stop the last week and your units will stay in formation if you don't give them the order to attack a specific unit, The triple acies works perfectly

[@MuradBeybalaev]

I'm still waiting for a TW game that would implement rank rotation or even formation depth impacting morale.

[@johno121o]

The movie ' Gladiator' missed a awesome opportunity where Roman troops could of advanced on Barbarian soldiers in complete stoic silence while screaming Germanic tribes people were confused and intimidated.

[@Tinnesa]

that would have been sick

[@tothmatyasbalint3841]

the advancing foot soldiers were silent

[@golling3334]

Yeah, it's just pretty hard to show the barbarians being intimidated by a silent march and actually get that across to the audience

[@Presbiter]

Dude, you are talking about intimidating Germans? Do you even know what the term "German" mean? It means literally warrior people and they did not name themselves. You can be sure those tiny romans pissed the ground muddy fighting in the ancient german forests facing giants that stood one to two heads taller than themselves as is recorded by the roman historians that followed the legions up north^^

[@Revi_EU]

@@Presbiter "The word probably simply means "neighbor" and has been established by the ancient leader Julius Cesar. Today you can find this term not only in Romance and German languages but also in different Slavic, Asian and African languages as well." www.thoughtco.com/where-does-the-word-german-come-from-1445247 Can you link a post where it says, german means warrior people? I am German (Dutch) myself, but since we are also germanic people i am pretty interested in your claim. The funny thing is, that the germanic people themselves dont call Germany and Germans, Germans, they are Deutsch, we call them Duits, in scandinavian countries it is called tysk.

[@beejay8286]

A great video thanks for explaining actual historical vs gameplay differences that was fascinating. I have a much better understanding now, it makes it so much more interesting as well as fun.

[@InvictaHistory]

thanks, glad you could appreciate it

[@adrianaslund8605]

This worked really well when having a garrison of zombie pirates holding off barbarians in Warhammer. It allows the units in the back to get clear shots and fire on the flanks of the enemy held up by the units in front of them.

[@pakomothibi4662]

try using the Zulu bull tactics: line of light infantry in the front sort of forming a semi-circular shape "horns" then followed by a line of heavy infantry along with archers forming the "chest" then the final line of heavy infantry behind the chest with the rest of the archers forming the "loins" of the bull since the zulu army didn't have any Calvary, you're free to do what you want with them

[@cameronbruce9650]

I often try to use this tactic in Total War but often the horns can lose moral quickly as the game doesnt completely compliment this tactic

[@lollius88]

Thing is : We don't need to use the tactics of primitive tribes, when we have the might of Rome to lead us to victory!

[@kogerugaming]

@@lollius88Exactly. Why would anyone want to use a tactics from a tribe that still less advanced than a civilisation 2000+ years ago?

[@lollius88]

@@kogerugaming Ahh based individual spotted. Indeed my friend, those barbarians if left alone wouldve still been the same today if the British didnt civilise them. Meanwhile 2000 years earlier the Romans were having elections, a constitution, a Senate and a People's assembly. Huge difference

[@kogerugaming]

@@lollius88 well said

[@jtoonsfilme]

Fighting without breakfast?! BARBARIC! No way a roman solider would win under such uncivilised circumstances!

[@crystallxix1493]

Johannes Schramm THEY MAY TAKE OUR LIVES BUT THEY WILL NEVER TAKE OUR SECOND BREAKFAST

[@MrWankyTank]

what an underrated comment

[@NoOdL3z18]

Ive used this formation a lot. It allows rapid reinforcement via counter charge from the second line, helps reduce casualties from artillery and you can more readily deploy a 3 unit battle line on your flank if the enemy attempts a maneuver. I usually keep the cavalry in the rear as an initial counter charge defense until I lock the front line down. Simply, its hard for the enemy to maneuver on this formation because it is so deep compared to a standard battle line.

[@GamesExposed]

we wish CA would care about history when it comes to gameplay but it's nice of you to know all this stuff and to talk about it in the video

[@rasplez9889]

Biggest issue with playing Rome 1/2 is how much I (and the AI) were forced to use medieval formations... I wish there was a formation editor in the game so you can create your own, specifying where different units go. Spears at the sides, heavy infantry behind a spread skirmish force, artillery in the centre surrounded by light infantry on the sides etc. I don't care enough to form my own formations in every battle.

[@samuelmontenegroserniotti7146]

I use a lot a triplex acies in my battles. The difference is that its not Rome 2, nor the romans, its Europa Barbarorum 2 (medieval 2 mod) And i play as bosphoros (yea yea, its against the AI, i know, But the mod its indeed challenging). The difference how I deploy is that i make my units wider and thinner in the first row, and the second line its actually more long than wide. The first, because its better for direct combat (more men in the first line means u wont get your unit surrounded by a wider formation) and the later its because their objective its to go through the first line, turn 90 degrees, and flank the enemy engaged against the first line. If the enemy forms up just a line, and engages my first, so my second line cant manouver this way, then i just unload all my second line javelins. Only charging when the first line is exausted and needs a rest. Keep alternating this between the first and the second line, while leaving the third line to refuel the lost men, or to counter play enemy strategies (if they try to flank you, for example). I have came to test it a lot, and i found that its indeed a STRONG tactic, its really versatile, and it just plays itself against anything the enemy could do, as i hardy ever lose my infantry engagements (the enemy allways gets flanked, and surrounded, and gets tired a lot more than my men).

[@samuelmontenegroserniotti7146]

PLUS, my skirmishers ALLWAYS escape safely behind my guys, without making a chaos in my first line.

[@ASCG5000]

I know that you talked about Parthian tactics during your Parthia campaign, but can you make a video about Parthia's tactics when fighting the Romans?

[@pijef]

The Parthians used mass horse archers, they would force the entire Roman army into a square. When the Roman Cavalry charged the Parthians, they would leave behind all infantry support. The Parthian cataphracts would then destroy the Roman cavalry without opposition. The Horse archers would then start barraging arrows at the infantry, they would go into testudo, then the cataphracts would charge them when they were in this inflexible position. This is how the Parthians won the Battle of Carrhae.

[@ASCG5000]

pijef Yes I know that, but i want to see it in action.

[@pijef]

ASCG5000 Carrhae is recreated in 'decisive battles', a show that uses Rome 1's engine to recreate historical battles on the history channel. its on here. search it

[@ASCG5000]

pijef Alright, I'll check it out. Thanks!

[@diadokhoi5722]

ASCG5000 u just use cav

[@mishadavidgamsu]

dude. such interesting commentary. I thought this was gna be just an average video but it's like a fucking story!

[@devinwilliams3317]

This is so dope. FYI advance the principes up to the front line and then you can withdraw the hastati with no issue. 2nd line of fresh troops starting fighting immediately

[@AngellGaby]

Funny how the video starts with a disciplined formation but when it gets closer to the enemy its still the "who can make the thinner line" type of formation.

[@gryphonicbaguette]

Cause the gaps would be used against the romans. You cannot simply have gaps in your lines

[@MattParra15]

@@gryphonicbaguette yes you can, I attack with that exact formation every time, the 1st line is defense and bait, the enemy units usually spreads out with a thin line to try to surround my densely formed front units (which defends good because their packed together and made to stand gaurd instead of attack) while my 2nd line (offense line) moves up to the gaps to flank the enemies over extended line that was trying to flank my 1st line, and then it snowballs into victory with low deaths on my side I do this on hard difficulty, I started using it because I watched an online player win with this tactic and I learned that Romans really did that

[@jackwhitehead6332]

you know you know you can select them all, and go to formations and select triple axes right?

[@akshaykumarjha9136]

Yeah but in the default formation setting, the gap between the units is too less for the velites or principes to act freely. So, it is better to form Triplex Acies manually

[@GrandMoffTarkinsTeaDispenser]

excellent! I tried to recreate the battle of cannae playing with a friend yesterday, so we allowed 40 units per army, to make it look like 8 legions combined together fighting the cartaghinians. However, even though it was suposed to be a recreation ( so i was playing as the romans but i didnt intend to win) I won the battle. We thought it was pretty stupid as i made all the mistakes romans did in that battle ( such as losing both cav battles in the flanks of my massive triple acies by allowing the carthaginian cav and slingers to get favorable engagements in both flanks, and I also clumped my infantry and the center of the carthaginian infantry to let him get the good surround. After that, of course, he was suposed to charge my back with his victorious cav and end the battle. Believe it or not, the vast number of roman infantry acted like a battering ram and splitted the carthaginian center in half, allowing me to win.

[@keithnormoyle8789]

Awesome videos man. Love the detailed explanations of your commentary. Subbed

[@Riddick_TTC]

Im always frustrated to use 5 cohort of hadtatus and 4 principes or 5 hastati and 5 principes. Its frustrating to me to have a cohort hanging alone in only one flank. 😁

[@Joe091680]

The basic core Roman unit was the century of about 100 men. 100 equals a century, right... Anyway, two centuries equaled a maniple which is the core manipular unit of the triplex acies. I would arrange two Total War units to equal a maniple: not one. However, Total War limits units on the field so you would not have a full 30 maniples including 10 hastati, 10 principes, and 10 triarii. The maniple was arranged with the two cohorts one in front of the other. Not side by side. However, you could arrange that way if you desired for example whether you were fighting a phalanx or swordsmen. The front maniple was called the posterior cohort, and the back Corhort was the anterior cohort. The front cohort would pin a unit, and the rear cohort would flank it or fill the gap between two maniples. Once the Romans adapted the 6 century cohort, it was to add width and depth to the cohort to fight the Gauls. Roman comanders brought their legions principes forward to add depth to their hastati when engaged against the phalanx. The cool tactic with this is once your skirmisher pass through or withdraw between the maniples in checkerboard quincunx formation, you can shift over your anterior cohort to fill the gap to cover them. I noticed at about 10:04 that a a few of your hastati were routing or broke, when the anterior cohort shifts right or left to fill the manipular gaps, they can form a solid line and advance or move forward one at a time to reinforce the gaps or relieve routing units. Or even before a unit routs, you can pull them back into your new formed line and renew the fight later. This very technique was the Romans secret. They could renew the fight over and over. Sending fresh men into the melee. I'll let you know one secret of mine. Prior to sending in my new line of fresh legionaires, I'll allow them to throw their pila into the enemy while the first line is engaged. This front line prevents an enemy rush into your new line. The more the legionaires who can throw pila, the more you can drop enemy numbers. This alliviates skirmishers and archers for more heavy infantry legionaires. ;-) Good video and it's great to see this formation is use. I enjoyed watching it.

[@shoehorn2213]

It may not be affective but I can see why it might put off the your opponent by making your force look bigger and making him/her think you're a better player than they are with the use of such tactics

[@abad-enoughdude._.3919]

A nice history lesson. However when I read the title I kinda thought it couldn’t be done in R2TW.

[@TheOne-er7nk]

You're asking about the triple acies working in the game. The battle you fought lasted 3 mins. Total war needs to sort out the battle length first.

[@FirstLast-fr4hb]

you need to bring in the new troops to hold the line before with drawing the less fresh troops. In this game it takes longer for units to tire also , so it's really not necessary in most battles but the longer ones like in siege defenses against larger attackers.

[@JohnZafiridis]

Very nice video as always. however, I would like to suggest that if you could play with a friend multiplayer battles portraying such tactics with the divide et impera mod you WOULD actually demonstrate to a very good point how people could behave in battles realistically. Give it a try....that mod is all the work that CA hasnt done and should have done.

[@SkiLLCapp3d]

The breakfast and sun cheeky tricks were from the Greeks, mentioned in the Peloponnesian war

[@JaM-R2TR4]

Personally, i think those gaps are way too big.. there is no way they would leave such open space in their line. Another problem of it is in fact that it puts 2/3 of army into reserve, while 1/3 needs to match the length of enemy army, which usually was deployed in single line... which means, Roman first line had to be very thin to be able to do that.. if you read Caesars Bello Civili, he commonly mentions depth of the line of his army vs depth of enemy. (at Pharsalus, Pompey was deployed in almost 2x deeper formation than Caesar) So for some reason, Romans considered depth more important than being able to outflank the enemy.. they always matched the length of enemy. Personally, i think we are looking at it wrong.. It was never about perfect geometrical formations, but these units fought in a "cloud" like way, with front row holding the line, while rear ranks were engaging enemy from range, and reinforce the front line as required.. Common deployment of practically all armies was to put best soldiers into first line, so they hold the line.. Romans put their young in first lines, to tire the enemy best.. then withdraw them and attack with their best.. which would give them advantage because they would be fresh, fighting tired enemy.. but for that, there couldnt be huge space between young and experienced, because those young would just break.. they needed to feel support from their veterans, and therefore i think they were just few meters away, in third or fourth rank right behind them...

[@anthonydonate9938]

First cohorts or eagle cohorts need to be used as surrogate generals to help with morale and units fighting better.

[@bastek1232]

What button do you press for free mode cinematic camera. And i hate how in rome 2 troops can just go through your units with no problem, when retreating. It makes doing the openings between lines pointless, as they can just force their way through the main line(Its not like you going to ever retreat anyways). .

[@OdinsGrace]

K is the hotkey to make the HUD disappear.

[@bastek1232]

thanks

[@generalrendar7290]

Zerkovich uses a modified triplex acies in his warhammer armies now but he uses it to create gaps in the lines that he can exploit with his reserves. It's impressive to watch.

[@Saint_Sin]

Its those kill boxes that the checkered board creates. There is so much debate on whether it was used in combat or just on the advance so units could filter through the unit masses but i very much hold that it was used on the actual clash of lines. It has too much function, from preventing a full charge on the line to keeping an enemy in check and wary of their flanks. Just damn genius for the age considering it would have seemed madness to those before its time due to the general approach to conflicts of the era. Edit ~ Post first reform.

[@impulzivity1665]

Saint Sin I don't know, I mean I feel like they probably would have marched with it, stopped, and then sent in the units by line. Probably by of course skirmishing for a while, then sending in the velites, then rotating with the hastati and principles (sorry if I spelled it wrong mate), then finally using triarii in emergencies with equites probably cycle charging throughout the battle. The reason being that the men they were fighting used many hit and run tactics. So those gaps could've been exploited and done before even being reinforced. Meanwhile if they were defending in a battle they probably would've made some changes unknown to my knowledge. Just my two cents.

[@matthieugroot7844]

Triplex acies does not mean 3 single lines. the gaps in the lines were used to reinforce. If they needed a single line the second line could fill the gaps at the front. But if they were flanked they could support the left or right flank.

[@rhyspowell9426]

Cavalry are just like OK we attacked and won, I really don't want to die so let's just keep chasing these fleeing people and not help our army

[@giftzwerg7345]

if you dont case them they mid reform and fall into your back

[@rui72gomes]

very good video and thx, for the historical background that you so well explaine to us, you must have been a Tribunus laticlavius in your past life.

[@itacool6457]

roblox

[@KirsakMartin]

There is a much easier way to form your troops. Make a line with your hastati and principes, mixing them (hastati/principes/hastati/pri....). Then select only the principes, and move them back. Just a suggestion ;)

[@emphasis2503]

if Creative Assembly made a tactical retreat option available, and maybe an A.I. action that will force units to chase retreating enemy units unless they are ordered to do a diffrent action. Things would be so much more complex and a wider range of strategies could be used. A give ground or being able to march backwards slowly would be cool too.

[@igloo54]

LOL! Great vid! I played these tactics back in the 90's (feint, attack, withdrawal, regroup, repeat, flanking, always maneuvering) and I was accused of being a "camper" because the snot-nose kids I walloped always preferred a mad bum rush. And I always slaughtered them even when I was outnumbered. Thanks for validating my strategy with a well made video!

[@imperatorcaesardivifiliusa2158]

No, that is how the Romans did it, keep charging at hannibal so you can beat him to a pulp.

[@igloo54]

+John Taguba Sorry, I was talking about the gamer tactics and not the actual history. Both are incredibly interesting.

[@moreshige]

1990's?? I hope you were not refering to TW series.

[@TheCrazyHeadGamer]

Thanks for this video ! Very intertaining and full of great knowledge !

[@tenderkaj3632]

LOVED the historical insight

[@Kazen169]

thank you for showing us how to do this! time to test it out in the campaign!!

[@mdmandross]

Historically accurate. Romans weren't great at skirmishing, or scouting. They used allied auxiliaries for that... Because the thing Rome was truly great at was utilizing allied tribes/nations strengths against like-minded holdouts who did not have the discipline of the Roman legions backing them up. I encourage you to read Caesars account of his conquest of Gaul as evidence of this. He references his reliance on allied Gallic auxiliaries multiple times (though he downplays it somewhat, being Roman and all... and presumably writing for a Roman audience).

[@gizel4376]

i usually use a phalanx strategy 2/3hastati and 1/3 principes, sometime even some rorarii, with 1 or 2 principes in reserve to flank the ennemy and the triarii to reinforce/prevent flanking/and countrer the cavalry, and i use very carefully my weak cavalry, mainly to cover my flanking principes from ranged unit

[@Sachems49]

if your opponent wasn't awful you would have been destroyed that battle

[@JRMusic933]

My style of fighting is based off of this, but revised to fit the style of gameplay needed for decisive victory. First off I always go for a defensive fight allowing the enemy to march at me which allows me full control over my formation whereas attack may catch me in a less organized spot. I have my Archers take point followed by a line of my standard infantry, this is often inverted as I will sometimes put my archers behind the first line and order them to hold position. Then I wait it out and see if the first line collapses or starts to weaken which is when I call in my reserve units which may be up to two lines of stronger troops. I only deploy them to weak areas and generally keep them back unless my men start to route. Then behind that line would be my Cavalry who come and quickly counter flanking maneuvers, fill holes in the line, or route troops. Siege equipment usually finds a place in the middle of the line. And that's basically my take on repurposing these ideas.

[@syroxide]

I think it’s really tough when pursuing anyone to turn your back on them and hope they don’t follow

[@athaeus2667]

That's why they wouldn't do that. Roman retreats would've been pretty organised, with men rarely, if at all, turning their back to the enemy unguarded through some clever ranks shenanigans.

[@timroberts4635]

Romans actually fought in 10 ranks... The first rank would fall to the back & the second rank fought then fall back & the third etc... They would only fight for about ten minutes then fall back & the rank behind them would take their place & so on... That's why the Roman war machine was so effective because they only expected their troops to fight in ten to fifteen minute increments then have over a 30 minute rest before having to fight again for another 10 to 15 minutes...

[@johnandan1594]

You guys should play DEI mod and in campaign the slower movement and slower battles works really well with historical tactics, pikes are also not as broken where any pike unit will beat any other infantry unless they get outflanked so I often find charging straight into them not as suicidal as in the vanilla. Also i see a lot of comments about realism and in DEi they implemented a system of supply lines where armies who cannot establish a supply line with their faction suffer attrition. Its a really challenging mod. Plus its easy to install just subscribe to all 6 parts of the mod if you bought the game from steam

[@SachinShukla]

Hate to be a nit picker but the correct way to pronounce "aciēs" is aa-kee-ays, not "axes"

[@surucipe]

Cool vid man, didn't knew you had Roman knowledge. Last time I checked (long time ago) your channel was making Halo forge maps (which were also very interesting vid's). Why did you decide to leave Halo forge stuff?

[@HH-dd2xq]

Your description of ancient melee combat (small detachments charging and falling back constantly w/ room in between the armies) is actually highly debated FYI.

[@ilailittman102]

Great content loved the in-depth explanations!!

[@metsko2318]

This is how history is supposed to be told

[@z0quetee]

if i'm not wrong, the triari were actually deployed in a continues line

[@agenthunk5070]

then explain why in some reports roman armies had used the sword on the shield .....before the 5th century?????

[@evankent6049]

"Sword on the shield"? Are you talking about shield insignia?

[@agenthunk5070]

@@evankent6049 no,I mean banging the sword on the shield during the 2nd century and third century and fourth century all the way up to the fall.Roman Units were doing this,explain???????

[@evankent6049]

@@agenthunk5070 Some did that, some did not. Legatvs legionii had a lot of leeway when it came to such aesthetic battlefield behavior. The difference between Roman units doing it vs. their barbarian counterparts was that the Romans would often do it in time with their marching, rather than at differing paces. It is important to note that even this noise, when done properly, was still meant to display discipline, and it is a toss up of whether it would serve to intimidate the enemy or not. In general, the Romans were silent though so that the commands of officers could be heard.

[@bekindpleaserewind39]

no one knows truly how they alternated their. lines highly debated to this day... when the main line falls back behind the second could have a collapse in the line.

[@RexGalilae]

Doesn't play in triple acies nor does he prevent his front line envelopment disaster

[@jean-philippelefebvre1000]

rome 2 should have an ordered, disciplined retreat for certain units like hastati pricipes or legionaire cohort so these tactics could be applied. since they don't, i always leave gap between hastati fighting so when one is overwhelm i have one cohort of principes advance and support on the flank or rear

[@GloryThyName]

You just use 10 legionaries to form a battle line and sit missiles behind then flank with general unit supported by 4 cav units then fold you line at the flanks inwards until you have mobbed the enemy army and that is the end of Rome 2.

[@aksmex2576]

Is there a way to retreat a unit from an engagement in attila? i tried and my cavalry just got murdered, any suggestions?

[@redcoat8664]

I think you would like Adrian Goldsworthy's books, especially the Fall of Carthage. Good stuff.

[@supRsid]

This was really interesting. I learned something new. Thank you

[@MrArchi1000]

Hey, wanna learn more about the military tactics and important battles of Rome, anyone know good documentaries?

[@xXDarkDubstepXx]

1:48 how do you move your units like that? An answer would be much appreciated.

[@MrKkobi]

+PervertJesus When u mark them, Pres Ctrl + G and they will get into the formation and stay in it also when u move them.. I hope u understand, my english is not best :D

[@18ps3anos]

+PervertJesus What kkobi said. Control + G can be translated as the command to create formation groups, while only G creates selection groups, not locking the current formation to those units. If you want to stop the formation/selection group just select all the units in that group and press G, so you can re-arrange your troops easily. In Atilla, you press only G for the formation groups, and control + G for the selection groups.

[@MrKkobi]

I was always did it like Ctrl + G, thanks for help.

[@ihamptonii]

Nice video and well done. What literature did you read for such detail about Roman tactics?

[@nichitamihai682]

I would be nice if you can make Alexander at Gaugamela :)

[@Strype13]

I had never thought of trying to catch my opponent before he's had breakfast.

[@agedvagabond]

Triple accies works better if u put ur rear lines into 4 wide columns and push them through the gaps or make gaps with them then u hit the enemy in the rear and flanks. I never charge the front line I absorb onto spears and charge the second through the static defenders

[@RedneckRoman]

Love your videos man, keep it up!

[@segelflieger92]

I used the Triplex Acies today in a couple battles but I used legionaries instead of principes. It worked quite well actually :)

[@painfulstorm1]

Pretty awesome video, nicely dealt with the elephants

[@alexanderrahl7034]

I tried making a checkerboard like formation based on this type, in empire total war. I put all my line infantry into square formation and deployed them about half their firing distance apart. The idea being that the enemy (all melee units, dervishes, mob, and islamic swords) would get caught in a 3 sided crossfire wherever they were. It failed SO hard lol omg it was awful

[@95DarkFire]

Actually, the Triarii were suppossedly depolyed in a single line, not in quincunx

[@deovindice2625]

isn't the triarii line supposed to be straight, not checkered like the others

[@garrwheezington6990]

What's that drawing function, I haven't seen it before. Was it there in the original release? Or is it a mod, cause I can't find the mod anywhere.

[@PDSW08]

how do you "lock" those infantry units into formation? like at 3:50?

[@gogos1003]

how did roman stop being flanked by simply longer enemy line?

[@crystalheresy7812]

The scale is wrong... you need 1200 velites in front, in a straight line. Then you need 10 maniples each of hastati, principes, and trarii (triarii maniples composed of 60 men each), and roughly 200 Roman cavalry, as well as around 900 allied cavalry, and many allied infantry. But good job, and I understand a battle of that scale would be hard to do with regular hardware

[@bingobongo73]

On my campaign I did something like this with Epirus and it worked well

[@johnmcmanus2447]

Weren't the triarii held in reserve though, not the first to fight? I thought normally velites engaged, then hastati, principes and the triarii were the "oh shit" button

[@athaeus2667]

There was even a common proverb in Rome for when trouble really struck. It's come to the triarii.

[@Pprokop87]

damn, man. you talked about showing how the tri-line formation works, but you mixed it into two battle lines and made it a classic front and reserves. i used it for most of the time. so it is nothing like classic roman triple-line with switching the fighting units and place for the front units to pull back and be replaced by the next in line...

[@igorkorzun5988]

+Pprokop87 you can't micromanage that. The problem is that in total war games you have to micro manage the troops. They are not autonomous. If this was a real situation, then the general would just issue the signal for the hastati to retreat and the hastati commanders would notice it, sound the retreat and leg it, while the pricipes would know what to do when this happens and get ready. If that fails, the triarii do the same, then form a long phalanx line and hold the enemy, while the hastati and pricines rally. You cannot micromanage this kind of complexity by individually clicking every unit and ordering to move.

[@Pprokop87]

i did that kind of micromanage unts with a 6-line formations. i rushed the second line to atrike the enemy on the flanks of a unit that nidded to retreat and pulled it back when the second line units got into combat and got the enemy to focus on them. but i had the first and second line about 70meters apart and separate units in a line 50meters spread (or so, hard to calculate). i kept triari inbetween first and second line to suport first line and help to retreat the first line units if needed. also, triari, or auxliary infantry, helped me to keep the enemy from going beyond the first line.

[@Pprokop87]

true

[@Epicbigbird93]

I use a variation of the triplex acies online and i find it pretty cost effective. Throw some evacoti's out there instead of those pre marian infantry and they'll hack through most of your problems.

[@OysterMassage]

How do you see the shape of your ranks as they move out? I cant describe it, but when the golden ghosts of units would pop up helping you organise lines.

[@lukbohra]

Shawn Seward i think if you hold spacebar

[@Fabianwew]

What if you form one loooong line and wrap around the legions.

[@nayas1885]

"We had done cannibal and canine tactics"

[@davidquezada50]

I prefer the simplex version. also I thought everyone would use these formations. I prefer these over long lines.

[@0SamHall]

are you a historian or something? Whats your sources?

[@someguy1022]

what he just said were available on wikipedia (mostly) i just read it 3 min ago

[@PenguinzAreAwesome]

It's all pretty common knowledge

[@Cynane27]

He must've studied at university.

[@palasta]

Not really common knowledge. Not at all. Not by a longshot.

[@TheStrategist23]

not that common if a lot of people dont know about it...

[@grievoustulip3100]

how did the infantry keep the original spacing formation when moving them up at the start of the battle?? they always clump together in a single line when i do it

[@ildpind]

Looks like he organized them in groups and locked their formations :)

[@VL1975]

You know the game sets it up for you in the formations? lol

[@HUNTERKILLER20001]

Your opponent was kind of incompetent, tbh. He should've been using his elephants to roll up your Hastati from the flanks, turned around, and swept through the Principes from the other flank as they engaged.

[@patriciobaezbuchanan2484]

Can someone please tell me how did he moved the hole formation in minute 1:45. What do you have to press on the keyboard after selecting the hole formation?

[@lukbohra]

Patricio Baez Buchanan ctrl + g

[@nileriversoftware4070]

If the maniple is better than the phalanx, why do the triarii fight in a phalanx???