http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn228/Ionut121/Hypaspistai.jpg

The elite soldiers of Alexander the Great's Infantry, these solders were used as bodyguards, to support light infantry in rough terrain, for assaults on fortifications, and for special missions. These men were truly the best of the best at what they did.

Download (http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=9164)

As always please feel free to use as you see fit, but please remember me in your credits.:goodjob:

That's a great looking unit... top-notch!

WOW maybe an Alexander Mod!??!

WOW maybe an Alexander Mod!??!


yeah the one with warlords needs an update considering all the new stuff with BTS and even Dale's mod.

Great stuff Aranor - looks like all those PMs are paying off ;)

WOW maybe an Alexander Mod!??!

Nope, they will be for EBCIV (Infact there will be 3 different variations of them in the game). I will also include them in Ionut's Civilizations as part of the Makedonia civ ( I'll release it separately as well since it has been so widely requested).

That's a great looking unit... top-notch!

Thanks.:D One thing I didn't mention, is that head on him is completely custom. I made it from the Praetorian head to look like he was wearing an attic style helmet.

yeah the one with warlords needs an update considering all the new stuff with BTS and even Dale's mod.

Great stuff Aranor - looks like all those PMs are paying off ;)

Notice, no PMs the time! :lol:

Beautiful unit Aranor! :goodjob: It's nice to see you making units again, are you taking a break from leaderheads or are you all of the leaders finished for EBCIV?

Beautiful unit Aranor! :goodjob: It's nice to see you making units again, are you taking a break from leaderheads or are you all of the leaders finished for EBCIV?

EBCIV leaders? Not even close, I think I still need to create about 7 or 8 more leaders before the factions are done. But most of the stuff I have been doing to to update the tired units and leaderheads that I had in Ionut's Civilizations ( ironically about half of those are for EBCIV too!:lol:) I hope to have IC finished in a month or so with 30 civs (short of my 45 target) meaning you can guarantee I will be back with more civs at some point!

But you can rest assured that there will be a truck load of new units from me in the future as I need to create about 300 or so units for EBCIV! ( Just wait unit you see the Elephant Cataphracts!:wow::faint: OHH MY! :lol:)

I hope Elephant Cataphracts are near the top of your list. :)

Unfortunately closer to the bottom at this stage as they are elite units. I plan on going from faction to faction, from A - Z in the order of the units so it will depend on how long it will take me to get to the Hellenic faction that use them. Heres a little something to tide you over though until they are done!
http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn228/Ionut121/seleukid_indian_elephant_armored.gif

They definately will require a whole new set of armor to be created! Trust me when I say they will be worth the wait!

The elite soldiers of Alexander the Great's Infantry, these solders were used as bodyguards, to support light infantry in rough terrain, for assaults on fortifications, and for special missions. These men were truly the best of the best at what they did.

Not to be disrespectful to a great looking unit, but the backbone of the Macedonian army were the sarissophoroi, with their 6 m long spears making up the Macedonian phalanx. (Would have beaten a Roman legion any time.);)

Not to be disrespectful to a great looking unit, but the backbone of the Macedonian army were the sarissophoroi, with their 6 m long spears making up the Macedonian phalanx. (Would have beaten a Roman legion any time.);)
Except when the Roman Legions literally defeated the Greek Phalanx in open battle?

Not to be disrespectful to a great looking unit, but the backbone of the Macedonian army were the sarissophoroi, with their 6 m long spears making up the Macedonian phalanx. (Would have beaten a Roman legion any time.);)

I think you mean Pezhetairoi who were the heart of the Makedonian military machine. I never stated that the Hypaspistai were as such. They were used mostly as line breakers, held in reserve on the field unit the general saw an opportunity to send them in to break the enemy lines and lighter troops would poor through the gap behind them. Definitely not the heart of the Makedonian military machine but still a powerful group in and of themselves ( infact they only ever numbered between 6000 to 10000 men at any one time).

Thanks for the compliment in a round about sort of way! :lol:

Except when the Roman Legions literally defeated the Greek Phalanx in open battle?

The problem with that is that by the time Rome expanded to Greece they were already in serious decline, political infighting and constant warfare for the the past 150 years or so had seriously weakened the Diadochoi kingdoms. If the Romans hod come some 100 years earlier I believe it would have been a different story.

Except when the Roman Legions literally defeated the Greek Phalanx in open battle?

Correct: Greek, not Macedonian. After Alexander's death his successors' armies gradually reverted back to pre-Philippos-style armies. The Romans never had to face Alexander (the lucky bastards).

@Aranor: Pezhetaroi is correct (they were armed with thesarissa); anyway, they formed the Macedonian phalanx (the one the Roman legion never met), as opposed to the Greek (Spartan, Corinthian, etc.) phalanx. The hypaspists were, like the Companion cavalry, part of the Royal army and in that sense they were certainly the elite; I just meant to say that the hoplites (pezhetaraoi) were the core of the Macedonian army, as with the Greeks.

Correct: Greek, not Macedonian. After Alexander's death his successors' armies gradually reverted back to pre-Philippos-style armies. The Romans never had to face Alexander (the lucky bastards).

@Aranor: Pezhetaroi is correct (they were armed with thesarissa); anyway, they formed the Macedonian phalanx (the one the Roman legion never met), as opposed to the Greek (Spartan, Corinthian, etc.) phalanx. The hypaspists were, like the Companion cavalry, part of the Royal army and in that sense they were certainly the elite; I just meant to say that the hoplites (pezhetaraoi) were the core of the Macedonian army, as with the Greeks.



In that you are correct, hense the term body guards or more aptly "Shield Bearers" which is what Hypaspistai translates to more or less.

I should point out however that the Southern Greeks for the most part did not use the Sarissa or for the most part the Macedonian phalanx. They continued to use the Xyston spear in an overhand fashion as they had for 5 centuries previous to Alexander's and Phillip's campaigns in Greece.

Correct: Greek, not Macedonian. After Alexander's death his successors' armies gradually reverted back to pre-Philippos-style armies. The Romans never had to face Alexander (the lucky bastards).
You know there is a reason why nobody is using the Macedonian Phalanx anymore in battle... it (like many other things) became outdated.

While nearly unstoppable in it's time, the Roman tactics were considerably improved and more flexible. A Phalanx (especially Macedonian) could do one thing and one thing only... move forward. It was a very inflexible formation, and once out-flanked, it was doomed. The tactics and formations of the Roman Legion would have had little difficulty with a Macedonian Phalanx... Alexander the Great himself may have been able to "outsmart" the Romans with guise and trickery, as he did with numerically superior Persian armies, but the Macedonian Phalanx itself was outdated and outmoded by the time of the Roman Legion.

You know there is a reason why nobody is using the Macedonian Phalanx anymore in battle... it (like many other things) became outdated.

While nearly unstoppable in it's time, the Roman tactics were considerably improved and more flexible. A Phalanx (especially Macedonian) could do one thing and one thing only... move forward. It was a very inflexible formation, and once out-flanked, it was doomed. The tactics and formations of the Roman Legion would have had little difficulty with a Macedonian Phalanx... Alexander the Great himself may have been able to "outsmart" the Romans with guise and trickery, as he did with numerically superior Persian armies, but the Macedonian Phalanx itself was outdated and outmoded by the time of the Roman Legion.

This is true, however the phalanx style of warfare did see a revival in the middle ages with the Pikeman of some European armies with great success. It was not the inflexibility of the phalanx (although it was a factor), however the general lack of any notable generals in the Diadochoi kingdoms also greatly contributed to their defeat by the Romans. As the Hellenic armies had evolved somewhat with more flexible troops such as the Thureophoroi who were lighter troops than the Pezhetairoi but heavier than Peltastai (Hellenic Skirmishers) and were used as harassing troops on the flanks of the Phalangites. The style of warfare that the Thureophoroi used lead to many Roman writers to refer to them as imitation Legionaries.

man,I hate getting into debates when there are plenty of mods to do. But the phalanx and it revival are linked to the mass of "relatively" untrained armies. The roman maniple system with its checkerboard pattern required more out of the legionaires in terms of training or disciple. The phalanx required veterans to stand behind the the cherries/noobs in oreder to keep cohesioon. When the legion faced off against the phalanx all you had to do was eliminate eith the anchor on the flanks or face it uneven terrain and the phalanx wouldn't hold and the gaps would break it.. the legion didn't need to be tight knit, the gaps were already built in , once someone fell into the checker board you were surrounded by a gladius-armed pirannas. having said that there wer cases of the legion using the phalanx especially as they faced moe cavalry in the later years and the phalan was able to absorb the shock of cavalry better then the legion (when needed).


Ontopic: awesome units. you know that you can subdivide polygons and then stretch it to give more shape right?

also I just learned a new selection trick in blender. in UV faces mode if you just click one polygon the goto the select button to the left of the mode button you'll see options like select linked faces. I found that this made removing stuff like hair and Alex's wreath a 5 minute job (in some cases ;) ). I'll add this to my next tut.

You know there is a reason why nobody is using the Macedonian Phalanx anymore in battle... it (like many other things) became outdated.

While nearly unstoppable in it's time, the Roman tactics were considerably improved and more flexible. A Phalanx (especially Macedonian) could do one thing and one thing only... move forward. It was a very inflexible formation, and once out-flanked, it was doomed. The tactics and formations of the Roman Legion would have had little difficulty with a Macedonian Phalanx... Alexander the Great himself may have been able to "outsmart" the Romans with guise and trickery, as he did with numerically superior Persian armies, but the Macedonian Phalanx itself was outdated and outmoded by the time of the Roman Legion.

The Roman legion lacked one thing though: shock cavalry. Which is why Hannibal defeated every Roman army he met - until, defeated by attrition, he met his equal in Scipio at Zama (who simply copied his tactics with a bigger army). And which is why Alexander would have done the same (no trickery involved BTW, just military genius: Alexander never lost a battle).

Which is why Hannibal defeated every Roman army he met - until, defeated by attrition, he met his equal in Scipio at Zama (who simply copied his tactics with a bigger army). And which is why Alexander would have done the same (no trickery involved BTW, just military genius: Alexander never lost a battle).

Alexander fought undisciplined hordes led by inept commanders. His greatness stems from the sheer territorial conquest, not his military brilliance. Hannibal fought Roman generals and trained legions, and met his superior at Zama. Scipio consistently won victories using varied tactics and suprises/tricks, against capable opponents, and he never lost a battle. Also see sig... ;)

Alexander fought undisciplined hordes led by inept commanders. His greatness stems from the sheer territorial conquest, not his military brilliance. Hannibal fought Roman generals and trained legions, and met his superior at Zama. Scipio consistently won victories using varied tactics and suprises/tricks, against capable opponents, and he never lost a battle. Also see sig... ;)

Alexander fought all kinds of armies (Greek falanxes, Persian armies with Greek contingents, Centralasian tribal cavalry, Indian armies with elephants). Also, as concerns Hannibal, the forces at Zama weren't equal - Scipio took no chances (and refused to negotiate), with a very predictable result.

What's this with dissing Alexander? His battles were studied throughout history and the greatest generals saw him as an example. Those are the facts, plain and simple.

I dont think anyone is actually dissing Alexander here, but to any that do think of this:

Reading some Arrian "Alexanders' March upcountry"=ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΥ ΑΝΑΒΑΣΙΣ, for both the voicemod, and personal enjoyment, I have only this to quote, not directed at you in anyway but to all those who throughout the time have doubted, cursed, spat upon and generally mistreated he who is the greatest general/Tactician of all times. (Hannibal very close second)

I imagine Arrian wrote it, as he himself must have been hearing ugly stuff about Alexander from whichever source and for whatever reason..

In capital, as ancient greek was written at the time,


Arrian's "ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΥ ΑΝΑΒΑΣΙΣ" , Book 7, Chapter 28, 1-2 and Chapter 30, 1-2"

... ΟΣΤΙΣ ΔΕ ΚΑΚΙΖΕΙ ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΝ
... ΟΥΤΩ ΔΗ ΕΚΛΟΓΙΖΕΣΘΩ ΟΣΤΙΣ ΤΕ ΩΝ ΑΥΤΟΣ ΚΑΙ ΟΠΟΙΑΙ ΤΥΧΗΙ ΚΕΧΡΗΜΕΝΟΣ ΟΝΤΙΝΑ ΓΕΝΟΜΕΝΟΝ ΕΚΕΙΝΟΝ...
... ΣΜΙΚΡΟΤΕΡΟΣ ΤΕ ΩΝ ΑΥΤΟΣ ΚΑΙ ΕΠΙ ΣΜΙΚΡΟΙΣ ΠΟΝΟΥΜΕΝΟΣ ΚΑΙ ΟΥΔΕ ΤΑΥΤΑ ΕΝ ΚΟΣΜΩΙ ΤΙΘΕΜΕΝΟΣ.

=


... Αnd to whoever disapproves/accuses Alexander
... let him ponder who he is (the one who disapproves/accuses), what he has achieved so far in his life at and compare this to how accomplished Alexanders' (life was)...
... while he himself is insignificant, bent on insignificant things, unable to complete even those.

I think will make this my stock answer to those trying to diminish ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΣ and his legacy, for whichever ugly/fatal flaws his character had, his accomplishments and pure wonder, are nothing but awe inspiring.

What Arrianos wrote is nothing but the truth, millenia ago, and also now. It will also be truth, millenia from now, written in the same letters you see in the first quote, but translated in a different language we can't even imagine, assuming mankind exists then.

THAT is Megas Alexandros' power.

:On Topic: Thanks again Ekmek, I'm not sure about subdividing polygons, I'm just playing in blender and seeing what the results are!:lol: Any new tricks that I might learn I think I will have to wait until your next tut as the visual aids help me in blender one hell of alot more than written instructions!:lol:

For an interesting discussion reguarding the Roman Maniples and the Hellenic Phalanx I recommend reading this (http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=100672). There were some interesting posts both for and against each side.

Thx for the Arrian quote! (I'd read it in a biography of the Great one, but I didn't have it at the ready. It was a similar thought that, reportedly, made Caesar weep, seeing a buste of Alexander, considering that he, at the age of forty, hadn't achieved anything yet - but he made good on that.);)

Yeah its a great quote. I got it from one of the historians from EB who keeps this particular quote in his Sig.

What's this with dissing Alexander? His battles were studied throughout history and the greatest generals saw him as an example. Those are the facts, plain and simple.

My post was actually not aimed at dissing Alexander, although I can see why you read it as such. My point was that Scipio's victory over Hannibal was not as simple as you made out. The battle at Zama did indeed almost become a foregone conclusion (and imagine calling a battle against a commander, who for over 15 years had terrorized Rome, the most feared adversary ever for the legions, a foregone conclusion), but only because the battle was fought entirely on Scipio's conditions, as chosen by him. Scipio's campaign in Africa, and his entire handling of the war with Carthage was indeed a brilliant and nearly flawless accomplishment.


EDIT: Sorry, that's a great looking unit!!! :D

EDIT: Sorry, that's a great looking unit!!! :D

No Worries!:goodjob: Thanks for the compliments ( finally:p:lol:)