"Should hoplites get a charge bonus?" Topic

Should there be a small bonus for hoplites charging into combat? FoG calls them "offensive spears" and they certainly were aggressive. I'd definitely give them a bonus when fighting other hoplites to speed combat up but what about charging in?

John

Yes. Same as any other close fighting troops. Give them all a charging bonus.

That was the whole point, wasn't it?

I'm not sure others deserve it. Most heavy infantry just waded in IMO. Notable exceptions are warbands and possibly roman legionares depending on how the pila are handled in the rules.

I'm not sure others deserve it. Most heavy infantry just waded in IMO.

"Just wading in" is what it's all about. That initial strike is more effective than further fighting thus justifying a "charge" bonus. If it helps, don't think of it as a "charge", but rather the effect of the initial impact.

Phil Sabin says that hoplite battles ended relatively quickly, compared to all other infantry types (he found that heavy cavalry clashes also ended quickly). I've wondered if they could be rated as warbands, but resistant to cavalry charges. See his book "Lost Battles."

IMO charge bonuses are generally silly and unnecessary, especially in IGOUGO systems. If two lines of troops head towards each other at full speed, why give an arbitary bonus to one side just because of the distance the lines started at ?
Also they discourage troops from moving to contact, as neither player will want to move his troops to within charge range of the enemy troops.
In systems where you have to roll to activate or decide which troops to activate, or card driven systems, they can make more sense.

I'm also not a big fan of charge bonuses for the same reasons that Mark mentions. With Hoplites it would really be more of a sustained push than it is a charge anyway. Hard to charge while keeping a shieldwall together.

If anyone should get a charge bonus, it should be Warbands. That was their whole schtick, charge in and sweep the enemy away in that initial rush.

IMO charge bonuses are generally silly and unnecessary, especially in IGOUGO systems. If two lines of troops head towards each other at full speed, why give an arbitary bonus to one side just because of the distance the lines started at ?

In my system, the unit not moving may still get a charge bonus (if allowed by that type) if it is hit from the front.

If anyone should get a charge bonus, it should be Warbands.

Fully agreed here!

In my system, the unit not moving may still get a charge bonus (if allowed by that type) if it is hit from the front.

OK, that makes more sense then. More like the system in FOG where you have different combat factors for the initial contact and ongoing melee. I wouldn't call it a charge bonus though, as I think that will lead to confusion.

Do you mean something like this :

Warbands vs foot, spears vs any and cavalry vs any except spears fight with an extra dice in the initial combat, as long as they are fighting to their front.
You could give this to legionaries but only in their first combat of the game, representing throwing their pila.

According to Victor Davis Hanson in "The Western Way of War, Infantry Battles in Ancient Greece", the charge was what a hoplie battle w3as all about.
link
John Keegan thought highly of his analysis.
The book is a very detailed analysis of hoplite warfare. One whole chapter is entitled "The Charge".
Why would hoplites charge, if not to attain an advantage? In this case, a mythical "charge bonus"?

Before any tool chimes in with "Huh. He is just a right wing nutjob who writes for National Review!", please tell me how that invalidates his scholarship.

Warbands vs foot, spears vs any and cavalry vs any except spears fight with an extra dice in the initial combat, as long as they are fighting to their front.
You could give this to legionaries but only in their first combat of the game, representing throwing their pila.

Something like that. I actually give Legionaries a missile shot on contact to the front. Just one per game.

According to Victor Davis Hanson in "The Western Way of War, Infantry Battles in Ancient Greece", the charge was what a hoplie battle w3as all about.
link
John Keegan thought highly of his analysis.
The book is a very detailed analysis of hoplite warfare. One whole chapter is entitled "The Charge".
Why would hoplites charge, if not to attain an advantage? In this case, a mythical "charge bonus"?

Thanks John. What I was looking for.

AFIIK hoplites charged at a trot, not a run, otherwise their formation would become disordered. The real force majeur for hoplites was the 'shove', most casualties being caused in the push back, or when one side broke.
Some troops benefit from not charging; formed infantry facing uncontrolled 'true' fanatics, or charging cavalry for instance, where being contacted whilst moving might unform them.
Troops failing a 'to charge' morale test might still advance to contact rather than stop.
The Romans are a seperate case, and any rules which fail to treat the gladius and pila as a'weapons system' do them a dis-service. They are much more than just 'blades'

Depends on who/ what the hoplites were facing, but they didn't charge in the same way as warband types did, it seems from written evidence that a fast walk / or slow trot was the best closing speed, to keep the drilled formation.

They then seemed to have ranks of pushing, with selected ranks (not the first two seemingly) involved in spearpoint fencing, attempting to destroy key soldiers of the enemy…

So I suggest a first contact bonus for drilled hoplites, providing they are not disordered/shaken

But I have always allowed pila showers a chance to disorder hoplites (and woe betide the hoplites if it does)

Something like that. I actually give Legionaries a missile shot on contact to the front. Just one per game.

I like that. Am going to incorporate it.

I like that. Am going to incorporate it.

Glad you like it. If I don't have too many legionaries on the table, it's easy to remember. Otherwise, I generally will use a small bead or tiddly wink to represent ammo. Once shot the marker is removed.

Agree with OFM. Hanson's scholarship on phalanx warfare is probably as close as we get. Phalanxes charged with great impact. The Greeks even had a specialized vocabulary to describe the sound of the crash. But after this initial impact it turned into a scrum until one side got pushed back enough to convince the rear ranks that it was time to break for home. Though a fantasy, the clash of shield walls is nicely depicted in the movie The Three Hundred. So a bonus on first contact by charging Hoplites could receive a bonus, or a stationary phalanx receiving a charge could be penalized. Or it could already be built into the combat value. Depends on the rules.

IMHO, the hoplite formation was better suited for the defending side, forming a shieldwall with multiple ranks of spears sticking through. Give any bonus to the better drilled or trained hoplite whether attacking or defending. If two equally adept sides meet in combat favor the defending hoplite, a hoplite shieldwall is a tough nut to crack.

But that is not how they fought. See Hanson. Or Herodotus. Or Thucydides. BOTH would charge each other.
They must have known something that logical wargamers did not.

Possibly the same rationale that Frederick the Great used in retraining his cavalry: if everyone in the formation is rushing forward and shouting, no shirkers can stop and slink away. It's a group bonding thing…..

In the hoplite period by charge you mean walking through the beaten zone maintaining the shield wall and trotting the last 10 yards or so into contact for the impetus?

Opposing hoplites would be ill advised to receive such a charge stationary.

On pila: Caesar in his Gallic Wars mentions several times where the enemy charges so quickly the Romans have no time to throw their pila. Yet many rules, including these so far, allow legionaries to throw pila when attacked. I propose that it is something they did as a preliminary to an attack. Of course that might lead to gaminess about who gets to charge first…

John Keegan thought highly of his analysis.

I no longer think so highly of Keegan. But that says nothing about Hanson's analysis of hoplite warfare.

The ideas/words we're looking for in hand to hand combat I think regardless of how close combat was attained 'whether charging, trotting, waiting in formation or whatever is used' are the words Initial impact then Impetus to sum up not how they came to combat but the outcomes of it. So even AngloSaxon sheildwalls could be conceived as aggressively receiving a Norman cavalry charge and get bonuses for the initial impact "all those Danish axes swinging and the push and shove would be as much as leveled spears/lances in combat IMO" after this initial combat the impetus of the mounted may or may not prevail depending on the kill ratios.
Cheers and yes I think hoplites 'fresh only' should get a bonus even if at a standstill in a IGOYGO game (caveat here, there should be enough space/time to react to the opposition no matter what they are.

I may be missing the point, but I can't see what makes Hoplites any different from any other close order infantry with a spear?
Someone please enlighten me.

Most other close oreder infantry with a spear would huddle together to form a shield wall.
Not knowing any better, and totally oblivious to the confusion they would cause wargamers 2500 years in the future, hoplites fought an almost ritual battle. See Hanson, cited above. The armies of the various city states would march out to the , for lack of a better word, "traditional" battlefields. All the free citizens would show up, even the elderly, After the sacrifices and speeches were made, they would busk themselves and charge.
After the initial clash, a savage brawl would ensue, with stabbing, gouging, biting, etc.
Inevitably one side would break and suffer appalling casualties.
That would end things.
Again, see Hanson.
Interestingly, Plato thought that this kind of fighting came naturally, with little real training needed.

The problem with our "one size fits all" Ancient gaming rules is that hoplite warfare was quite different from other close order spear armed combat. Would Sassanid levy spearmen act like this? I think not.

The difference with Sassanid levy spearmen huddling is that they would be unlikely to charge. If they did, then the mechanics would be the same, a large group of men running forward with spears sticking out, not being able to stop because of those behind are going to have a greater effect than relatively stationary troops poking spears at each other.
So I believe that all charging troops should get a bonus, however not all troops should always be allowed to charge.

The Hoplites definitely did try and make a "hit" at the move, all authors at the time mention it. Apparently the Spartans scared everyone with their order and precision and speed so the opponent's morale was down before they even contacted.

Though I did read somewhere that at Thermopylae they took the Persians at the halt, probably had a perfect position and didn't want to be flanked. The Persian apparently didn't charge as one unit, so hit the Hoplite wall in a more scattered way, makes me think that a simultaneous hit along a line was the aim of a Hoplite charge? Anyway, the Spartan wall waited for the Persians to all be in contact, then gave the hoplite heave, pushing the Persians over and stabbing them as they lay on the ground.

Pila did not seem to discomfit Poeni heavies that much, and they by all accounts were essentially hoplites

"all those Danish axes swinging and the push and shove would be as much as leveled spears/lances in combat IMO"

I went to the Viking open air museum at Ribe in the holidays, lots of re-enactors and Viking scholars spend their holidays there. They reckoned that the 1st 2 ranks of a Danish shield wall took the brunt of any enemy charge with shields and spears, the dane-axe guys stood behind this and then started hacking when the enemy were halted against the shield wall. No fun trying to push against a shield wall when some mad axemen are raining blows on your heads.

BTW I saw "real" dane axes, the head is smaller than modelled or drawn usually, and quite – light and its on a c 6ft pole

Also makes more sense when thinking about stopping Norman cavalry, horses don't like a wall of spears

@ John the Selucid
Sorry John, when I said spear armed close order spear armed troops, I was envisaging fighting troops, not hangers on and troops there to make up the numbers.

@ John the OFM
I'm sorry John, I'm not convinced. I think what you're describing is only applicable for perhaps a 200-250 year period at the beginning/middle of hoplite warfare between parochial city states. Once armies spread further afield, different/unfamiliar terrain, increased differention in troop-types encountered, ,exposure to better/more numerous cavalry, all had their effect on the stylised/ritual hoplite warware you describe. These caused changes in the hoplite troop-type, variations in armour, depth of formation, and the increased use of mercenaries.
In addition, I think that the savage brawl, stabbing, biting, gouging (desperation?) you describe is inherent in all ancient troops of a martial nature and tradition, once melee capeable troops come to close contact. I don't think it's peculier to Hoplite type troops.
Over a period, hoplite types evolved to fight alongside phalangites an peltast types and were eventually supplanted by them.
John, I don't disagree with what you, (or Hanson), say, only that it should only apply in the early classical period, and then only between city states in that period or sphere, of hoplite influence.
By the way, I'm a great believer in only fighting battles between historical opponents, or those who could have historically (or likely) made contact.

@freecloud
You said, 'Pila did not seem to discomfit Poeni heavies that much, and they by all accounts were essentially hoplites'
AFAIK when the Romans were fighting Poeni heavies (in Sicily, for instance) only the hastati were armed with pila.
later, when both hastati and principes were pila armed, there is some dispute as to wether Poeni citizens and Libyan infantry were still long spear armed, or had converted to javelins.