How to defeat pikemen

I think the answer has been thrashed out to a suitably definite: "it depends."

The answer to "pure pikes vs. pure lancers" has, I think, pretty much been decided as "Probably pikers unless they were singularly undisciplined"

Temujin: You stated that the infantry would likely have less morale--I understand the logic behind this, but I think we should generally assume similar levels of skill, discipline, and morale just to simplify the debate.

only for the sake of record i reply

Originally posted by Carpathian Wolf   Cavalry is limted in effectiveness to terrain

no, not at all, in fact cavalry is the most flexible and suitable to almost any terrain of them all. in modern armies mountain infantry still uses mules to transport equippment because mules are faster on broken ground than vehicles. irregular cavalry was able to operate virtually anywhere and i already gave examples of it above.

The point however is that given a pavise and the typical armor which can be worn by pikemen,

armour doesn't make invincible and pikemen have no pavises. and what you mean with "typical armour" anyways? whats a typcial armour for pikemen? which period do you talk about?

That is to say that the ratio of damage taken by the horse archers would be greater then the damage sustained by the pike/

no. thats just your assumption, i already mentioned why infantry is an easier target compared to HA

Originally posted by Count Belisarius I think a klibanophoros would an excellent choice for pikemen, armored lancers and horse archers all in one and a pike couldn't gut the horse becasue his armor hangs down to his knees so the shaft would get caught and the hook couldn't gut him and the klibanophoroi would have the archers in the center and they would shoot while they charged and since a pike takes both hands you can't take a sheild

1) First klibanophoros didnt fought agaisnt any pikemen during they heyday. Also it would be impossible to shoot effectively for those cavalry archers inside klibanophoros formation while charging. Most likely Cavalry archers in byzantine army (just like contemporary Arab archers) used their bows while in halt, anyway they didnt fight in steppe fashion, unlike genuine nomad horse archers.

As for cavalry armor - check what kind of cavalry faced Landsknecht pikemen during Italian wars - it was the most heaviest and most armoured cavalry every fielded in battles.

don't tell the Poles, according to them the lances of their Hussars were logner than pikes and they defeated them on occasion. 

YOU said that, there was no talk about archers unless you brought them up to defend your undefendable position

Originally posted by Roberts Originally posted by Count Belisarius I think a klibanophoros would an excellent choice for pikemen, armored lancers and horse archers all in one and a pike couldn't gut the horse becasue his armor hangs down to his knees so the shaft would get caught and the hook couldn't gut him and the klibanophoroi would have the archers in the center and they would shoot while they charged and since a pike takes both hands you can't take a sheild  1) First klibanophoros didnt fought agaisnt any pikemen during they heyday. Also it would be impossible to shoot effectively for those cavalry archers inside klibanophoros formation while charging. Most likely Cavalry archers in byzantine army (just like contemporary Arab archers) used their bows while in halt, anyway they didnt fight in steppe fashion, unlike genuine nomad horse archers. As for cavalry armor - check what kind of cavalry faced Landsknecht pikemen during Italian wars - it was the most heaviest and most armoured cavalry every fielded in battles.

Not trying to sound like some kind of close minded a**hole but why the hell would Cataphracts fight in the steppe fasion? My understanding is that they were flexable because of their wide array of different equipment which allowed for different tactics. But using heavy cavalry as a type of horse archer contradicts its purpose its like why bother if their going to be much slower.

I could see heavy cavalry using ranged weapons as a kinda softening up of the enemy before the charge but as horse archers? I.E harrassing the enemy and using steppe style feints. Why use them as horse archers when mostly countries like Parthia used them, countries that if i remember correctly were very horse archer heavy.

By harassment and feint do you mean drawing them into ambushes with fake charges and faking charges?

Great pictures Roberts . By feints yes thats what i meant Count, Also yes Parthia was cataphract heavy but the ratio of horse archers to cataphracts made the horse archer the more numerous and common component of the Parthian army.

Originally posted by Temujin don't tell the Poles, according to them the lances of their Hussars were logner than pikes and they defeated them on occasion.

According to primary sources lances of Polish hussars were longer than piks. And there still exists hussar lance which is 6,2m long. It is more than any pike of its time.

Originally posted by Carpathian Wolf don't tell the Poles, according to them the lances of their Hussars were logner than pikes and they defeated them on occasion.    One exception doesn't make a fact.