From Shemek hiTankolel: [I may have to break this into sections, sorry]
The Tsolyani Army is a well disciplined professional army, and I think that I am correct in presuming that there are probably quite a lot of similarities to the Roman (i.e. Marian) Army. From what we can see from Roman artwork, martial depictions are filled with images of close combat, which would indicate that they conducted their battles “up close and personal”.
Agreed. For some of Phil's source material, may I suggest "Spartacus", 1960; the final big battle was something Phil often quoted. Also "Alexander", 2004, "Gladiator, 2000, and HBO's "Rome" series; there are some great battle scenes in these.
The Romans fought in an institutionally prescribed manner, and given the nature of their military, close order drill was effectively implemented. For example, a stance employed that was common to the armatura practiced by soldiers consisted of the legionary standing with his left leg advanced behind the shield, and with the sword held horizontally by his side, ready to strike. Typically, the classic attack involved a body-slam with the shield to knock the opponent off-balance, and then a quick thrust to the belly with the gladius. Although a downward over the shield thrust, or one from beneath the shield was also probably used, as opportunities presented themselves. Even though Vegetus tells us in De Rei Militari, that this form of attack was preferred to slashing or cutting attacks, I should note that the latter attacks were also employed. This was particularly true when Rome was up against well armoured and trained enemies, where cuts and slashes on the legs, arms, or other exposed areas, were used to bring down or distract the foe so that the lethal thrust could be utilized. If we take a look at the daily martial training regime of the legionary which, among other things, consisted of slashes and cuts being practiced on a pell, it becomes evident that this form of attack was certainly employed, and taught.
Again, agreed. Phil was a very well-read Ancients scholar; he read a lot of the works you mention in the original.
He did not game the Roman 'imperial' period. He was very familiar with it, but I think he didn't game it mostly because a legion - at that time in gaming - just didn't look all that cool on the table. Phil was very much into 'spectacle', of the De Mille kind.
What type of tactics do the Tsolyani legions employ for close combat? Do they favour the Roman style of warfare or do they use a more “medieval style”? Are up close thrusting attacks preferred, or are slashing attacks more common? What is the typical Tsolyani sword like; do they use a short sword or a long sword? Are they as well trained to fight in formation, use their swords and work together as a team like the Romans were?
Well, this gets complicated. Each legion has somewhat different weapon 'load-outs' - you need a copy of the "Armies' books. Some legions have long swords as their primary weapons, and would be considered to fight in a more 'medieval' way then the long-arm legions would fight. In general, I'd say 'yes' to all of the above, depending on the units involved. Long arm units will fight like the Macedonians in "Alexander"; shorter-arm units more like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zGjex6qDtM
I know that many of the legions are pike and spear formations. I would guess that these units probably employ the usual Macedonian or Hellenic “pushing” tactics, vis-à-vis pikes, shields, etc. Are the Tsolyani as tightly organised and disciplined as say Alexander’s troops were? Do these formations work in conjunction with skirmishers, heavy (non pike), medium, and light infantry in order to turn an enemy’s flanks?
Agreed. Phil was an expert in the wars of the Diodachi, and loved to game them. His view of the way that the Tekumelyani fought is very much in line with that. The Legions are much more disciplined; most of them have been around for a very long time, and have a lot of 'regimental' tradition and spirit.
And yes, there are a lot of formations - Phil did an article on this for either 'The Dragon' or 'The Strategic Review'. All sorts of troop types are used, and in various unit and group formations.
I guess that the best way to summarize this is that what we do is phalanx warfare, but with no cavalry.
Does any of this help? A lot of your questions would be immediately answered if you had access to the references like my miniatures rules and the "Armies" series...
.
.
Originally Posted by AsenRG
You have really given me, and if I can take the liberty - us, a great insight into how Phil ran things. It really brings his games and novels to life when we find out what his motivation behind a certain action, or the creation of a thing was. 
Bookmarks