Research: Elephants, Healing, and Multiple Hit Points

[Red Harvest]

We've been kicking this around in another thread, but it occurs to me that it deserves its own thread (and to let that one get back on topic.)

Elephants are fun to use...I like them, but they really seem overpowered from a historical sense.

Problem 1: Elephant healing
Elephant units are often healed after suffering losses in battle (Ground Hog Day effect.) It appears that the heal function goes after the highest value (quality + type) units first. Often this is an elephant unit. Dead elephants should not heal, period. They already have multiple hit points and are very challenging to bring down. Surely the hit points already give more than enough of a "heal" function to them. This is producing an exponential effect.

Corollary Idea 1:
In fact, live elephants with a lot of lost hit points in a battle should have some probability of dying AFTER battle (with a message box about X additional beast succumbing to their wounds.) Elephant units should be a bit fragile that way. In real life you couldn't replace a dead elephant like one might a dead horse. Hannibal lost almost all his elephants after the battle of the Trebbia, apparently it is not clear if it was due to weather or wounds.

Problem 2: Multiple Hit Points & Missile Vulnerability
High multiple hit points make elephants resilient to archery and missile units in general. This seems backwards. They don't die until many, many hit points are lost. I couldn't kill a single one on medium/grassland with four units of Roman archer auxilia when they marched toward me and engaged. They did eventually rout, although without losses.

I don't know what should be done, but relying on multiple hit points creates problems where the unit does not attrit to missile volleys until the very end. (Also an issue in melee although less obvious since individual beasts get in trouble/targeted.) Seems like it would be better to have individual elephants more likely to succumb to missile fire. Perhaps some small probability of an individual animal losing ALL remaining hit points on a volley ("the lucky shot.")

Some of the multiple hit point issues apply to chariots as well, but are much less pronounced.

Problem 3: Shouldn't the mahout be vulnerable?
The driver/mahout seems impervious to missiles as well. Is he just getting lumped in with the beast? I would think this guy might be the weak link at times since he is not heavily armoured, and the elephant won't "work" without him.

Other Potential Problems:
Weather in the north could kill off/deplete elephant units on the strategy map (blizzard?)

[Bob the Insane]

As I said before, when dealing with cavalry I think the horse is just a buch of stat modifications for the rider plus giving him the property of Mounted...

I also think they have tried to use the same mechanic for elephants and chariots and it is resulting in things looking a bit clunky...

A question I have is how mulitple riders are handled in all this (elephants and chariots)... I have never seen a mount without a rider, but the additional guys do definately die "apparantly" independently of the mount...

For your comments on not healing elephants after a battle, I agree but what is being healed the elephants of the riders?? Is bringing elephants back a side effect of healing the riders perhaps as the rider can't exist without the elephant (strictly speaking in game terms of course )??

[R'as al Ghul]

I just looked up the stats for a Carthaginian Elephant unit in export_descr_unit.txt. Here're the stats and comments from the file:

type carthaginian elephant forest
category cavalry
class heavy
stat_health 1, 10
stat_pri_armour 0, 4, 0, flesh
stat_sec_armour 10, 2, flesh

; stat_health Hit points of man, followed by hit points of mount or attached animal (if applicable)
; Ridden horses and camels do not have separate hit points
; stat_pri_armour Details of the man's defences
; armour factor
; defensive skill factor (not used when shot at)
; shield factor (only used for attacks from the front of left)
; sound type when hit = flesh, leather, or metal
;
; stat_sec_armour Details of animal's or vehicle's defenses (note riden horses do not have a separate defence)
; As per stat_pri_armour, except that the shield entry is ommited

So, the mahout has 1HP, 0 armour, 4 defense and no shield
The 'phant has 10HP and 10armour, 2 defense and no shield.

To kill an elephant you have to inflict at least 11HP at a time to get through the armour (not sure about defense?) and repeat this 10 times.
Easy, ain't it? And I was trying to kill them with a range-attack of 7 from my Parthian HA.

R'as

[Oaty]

Well arrows were'nt an effective weapon at killing an elephant but great at making them route. Think about it that thick hide they have and trying to pierce it with arrows. You only have a slight chance to kill a bear with an arrow and they are much smaller and it would take a good 6 or 7 shots to down the bear more than likely. It took 45 rounds to kill an elephant that went on a rampage at a circus about 10 years ago. Now the other points I can reckon with

[Red Harvest]

Those same arrows are armour piercing in the game...so they should penetrate the skin. It's not like an archer is going to miss very often when aiming for an elephant. I dozen arrows or so and the elephant is not likely to be of much use to its rider anymore (one very upset beast.) And that mahout should come down pretty fast from archery.

[Quillan]

I have very little experience in game with elephants (not having played Carthage/Seleucids), but it certainly does seem that way. I occasionally see a chariot that's missing a crewman, but most of the time either the elephant or chariot just keels over dead/falls to pieces, rather than losing individual riders. I think it would be neat to be able to kill the driver/mahout, which should automatically make the model (not the unit) run amok. The archers would gain some protection from missiles from the wall of the chariot/elephant enclosure they're riding in, but they seem to be nearly invulnerable to missile fire for an extended period of time.

[Silver Rusher]

IMO (note the I, the M as well, oh yeah and finally the O) in the game elephants are slightly underpowered. Remember, historically elephants WERE NOT easy to bring down in the slightest sense, but they would also be far more expensive than they are in the game. And no, I tried it and the archers on the top seem to fall off/get shot most of the time before the elephants are even dead. However, this does not happen with the mahout. Maybe the mahout could die, and then that particular elephant would go on a rampage or something. That would work.

[jerby]

Those same arrows are armour piercing in the game...so they should penetrate the skin. It's not like an archer is going to miss very often when aiming for an elephant. I dozen arrows or so and the elephant is not likely to be of much use to its rider anymore (one very upset beast.) And that mahout should come down pretty fast from archery.

arrows should not be armor piercing, the chance of getting back your arrows where small so you don't make arrows from good quality steal but from bad. and it is not armor piercing ( from a documentary on agincourt, but still pretty valid for this period imo)

and against 'phants spears are more effective since its a lot more mass beiing hurled( plus the bonus peltasts get), thinking off it, spears should always do much more damage than arrows

suggetion: make arrows non-armor piercing and spear armor piercing.

[Red Harvest]

My statement about arrows being armour piercing was incorrect I believe. They don't have an AP trait listed for them. AP cuts armour rating by half. The confusion came from "piercing" in their stats, but it appears that is either not used (according to the text) or is for something else. At any rate, archer missile attack values are so high--particularly with any experience/weapons/temple upgrades, that they still tear up armoured units in a hurry.

As for historical context. Heavy armour was mostly protected from penetration, although the Parthians apparently could penetrate plate with their better bows (Carrhae.) However, mail was quite vulnerable to arrows from what Goldsworth wrote in "The Complete Roman Army."