Chariots

[Rex Somnorum]

In EBI, chariots were generally clumsy, difficult to manoeuvre and too expensive for what little combat power they offered. As a ranged unit, chariots also provided relatively low volume of fire compared to cheaper foot troops. Most chariots could serve best as a mere terror unit. DBM improved the situation somewhat; chariots are definitely more agile. How is the situation in EBII? For instance, how difficult is it for chariots to draw back after a charge? Has firepower changed?

On a side note, what sort of tactics did various "Celtic" charioteers use? Did they integrate chariots with other troop types or concentrate them into a separate striking arm?

[QuintusSertorius]

Chariots weren't used as cavalry, even by Celts in this period, but as "battle taxis". They'd get a lord to the fighting so he could dismount and do battle, and if need be remount and swiftly exit.

[Edorix]

It's not very clear. Caesar gives a very detailed description of British charioteers throwing javelins and then dismounting at the beginning of Book V of The Gallic War; but we have references elsewhere which dimly hint at a more varied picture. The Battle of Telamon has the Gaulish chariots engaging the Roman cavalry, and the same at the Battle of Mons Graupius according to Tacitus. A later part of Caesar's account of his British expedition has the chariots harassing his line on the march in the woods - in other words clearly highly manoeuvrable, I would speculate more throwing missiles than dismounting and running away.

[Tar-Andukanaro]

hello.....I was just about to ask exactly the same question.....In EBII we are going to have many more chariots than in EBI. i know that the Pritanoi are having generals on foot, but chariots are plenty.... Garamantine chariots, gallic chriots and the pritanoi are recruiting them also. Besides I supose the Seleukids will have them in some manner; finally we'll have the general of the Takshashila Satrapy faction also riding a chariot.....so any clues as how are they gonna be depicted in the game or how can we use them????In EBI I didn't know how to use them on the battlefield at all.....many times got bogged down iin the middle of infantry or cavalry......

[Ibrahim]

Tar-Andukanaro What you ideally should be doing (with scythed chariots) is slam into the line, and then "thread through" the enemy: they should in turn be followed as closely as practicable by the infantry. That enemy should ideally be disorganized ahead of schedule as well--Scythed Chariots are pretty much psychological weapons: I'd suggest archers or javelineers for that. Throwing the scythed charioteers into a regular mass of the enemy will end the same way as it did in real life: utter disaster.

of course, do this right, and the enemy will be disorganized, and then the chariots will have torn massive wholes in the enemy line, and then the infantry could exploit the gaps, and rout the enemy.

as to the Celtic chariots: you skirmish with them. Have them hurl some javelins, then run away. I believe you've already seen the African examples, and should be able to say the same here about.

I will not comment on the Indian ones.

[moonburn]

charriots are shock and terror groups it sucks in sieges but hving them move arund the batlefield does help alot to break the enemies moral the keltic ones at least

[Tar-Andukanaro]

Thanx for the great pieces of advice.....It seems that the Indian chariots will have some mystery around..... can't wait to play the game !!!!!!! EBI rules!!!!

[Cybvep]

I wasn't a fan of chariots because of pathfinding issues (especially during sieges) and the fact that terrain didn't have enough of an impact on them (they should be useless in woods etc., but useful in open terrain). Also, the thing that they should excel at (disruption) didn't work so well, because disrupting formations wasn't as important in RTW as IRL - units would quickly reform during fighting and you couldn't really exploit the gaps.

[moonburn]

ceasars coments says the brittons used them in wooded terrain

ofc that if you know the terrain you shouldn´t have many issues with riding your charriot on the forest

[Rex Somnorum]

I find that comment suspect. Most un-managed woodland was and is impenetrably thick - that's why, even today, forests are considered barriers to conventional army formations, like rivers or mountains. Not just vehicles, but infantry too has trouble maneuvering in woods. Unless the charioteers were following tracks in single file, I don't see how they could do it.

This does bring up the point that terrain is underrepresented in Total War. Even EBI failed to accurately model the effects of groundtypes on combat and movement.

[Maeran]

Or maybe it wasn't unmanaged woodland. This was south-east Britain in the iron age. It had been a managed landscape for some time.

Or perhaps Cassivellaunus was pre-empting Macchiavelli.

"Philopoemen, Prince of the Achaeans, among other praises which writers have bestowed on him, is commended because in time of peace he never had anything in his mind but the rules of war; and when he was in the country with friends, he often stopped and reasoned with them: "If the enemy should be upon that hill, and we should find ourselves here with our army, with whom would be the advantage? How should one best advance to meet him, keeping the ranks? If we should wish to retreat, how ought we to set about it? If they should retreat, how ought we to pursue?" And he would set forth to them, as he went, all the chances that could befall an army; he would listen to their opinion and state his, confirming it with reasons, so that by these continual discussions there could never arise, in time of war, any unexpected circumstances that he could deal with."

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

The Celts using chariots in a town is like the Wehrmacht using light tanks in the streets of Warsaw in September 1939. (Hint: the Germans lost literally dozens of light tanks fighting in the confined city streets, and all their assaults on Warsaw failed. The city surrendered because of a water shortage, it wasn't stormed.)

Using chariots to actually fight the enemy in a town assault is a bad idea. Maybe have them behind a thick screen of friendly infantry, as morale boosters, but nothing else. Street fighting is a job for infantry.

[Rex Somnorum]

Or maybe it wasn't unmanaged woodland. This was south-east Britain in the iron age. It had been a managed landscape for some time.

By "managed" I naturally mean "cleared of all vegetation and large obstacles except the tallest trees." I mean gardening the forest so that it makes a nice place to picnic, not just felling trees for lumber and firewood, which would leave most of the undergrowth in a forest intact. As far as ancient Britain is concerned, we know that the Weald - a thick belt of trees in southern England, now sadly decimated - posed a significant barrier to Saxon expansion into Romano-Britain.

And the fact is, even relatively open forest is still an impediment to bulky formations, like heavy infantry. It disorganizes the lines and retards the march - not a just a little but a lot. Forests are the domain of guerrilla forces and light infantry.

[moonburn]

some historians are now claiming that the saxon invasion never happened but the people moved steadly and in low numbers for centuries to work as merchant a few mercenaries or tile the abandoned lands after the romans left but a true invasion never happened and it was either a miss interpretation of what happened after the romans left or a made up history for a dozen of diferent stories

[Rex Somnorum]

Note I said "expansion" not "invasion." Given the lack of evidence, an invasionist theory isn't that implausible anyway. The later Norse invasions possibly followed a paradigm set by previous Germanic incursions - small bands of seaborne raiders establish a beachhead and gradually expand into the interior through peaceful integration or subjugation by force.

[Tar-Andukanaro]

Perhaps chariots can be given some kind of bonus so as to make them more effective....but no too effective niether since historically, chariots were more of a liability than an advantage....for instance we see that chariots at Magnesia were repulsed and smashed and disorganized their own line of battle.....DariusIII's chariots at Gaugamela weere ineffective also, even when they were thought to be the winning card