I also haven ' t played it , but I know it sucks . Saw 5 minutes of twitch gameplay , and right of the bat , knew the game was shit . We ' re not alone . <| sep |> Everett Wheeler disputes the assumption of Keegan 1976 , 6970 , who draws upon the Battle Studies 1880 of Ardant du Picq for this assumption which is itself based purely on Napoleonicera warfare , that heavy cavalry were not capable of inflicting physical shock on infantry formations . He makes the specific suggestion that Arrian , in planning his order of battle against the Alans , appears to have believed that the Alanni heavy cavalry might physically crash into his infantry formations 181 Acies 26 . Wheeler suggests that a proper discussion of shock , du Picq and ancient battle has not yet been made and requires a separate paper . When it comes to Keegan ' s work and the influence it has had , just because something is widely accepted in ancient military studies doesn ' t mean it is true . As Wheeler demonstrates , du Picq has his own issues as a source , and SLA Marshall is an absolutely atrocious source , especially for drawing assumptions about ancient warfare , and yet these two books outdated even in the field of modern warfare are the source of most of Keegan ' s ' novel ' ideas . The best example of fairly uncritical acceptance of one of Keegan ' s ideas in ancient military studies is the idea that the ' primary group ' ref . Shils Janowitz 1948 was central to the morale of the Roman army , which it almost certainly was not . That said , I think when Keegan drawing from du Picq argues that cavalry would generally not charge directly into a steadfast closeorder infantry unit , he is half correct in that this generally appears to have been the case , though there were probably also exceptions to this . Source Wheeler , Everett . Firepower Missile Weapons and the ' Face of Battle ' in Roman Military Studies , ed . E . Dabrowa , Electrum Vol 5 , Krakow 2001 .