Printable View
Ok, I'm going to let you guys make a call for me. Scythed chariots are certainly historical, they were used once or twice.
But, I think something more deserving could be put in their place, as in something that was used all the time. What do you guys think?
I haven't tried them in EB - have they been nerfed? In vanilla, they are far from crappy.
Personally, if they were literally only used once or twice - like the flaming pigs, IIRC - then I would ditch them in the interests of historical accuracy. Or nerf them so much that the player will not want to use them.
But if they were used more often then keep 'em but model their effectiveness to be what you feel is historical. (Were they really good against cavalry? I can see the scythes being an issue but thought more generally that cavalry made chariots obsolete - they would certainly be more manouvrable in a melee).
i voted no
they do provide a unique element to seleucid and pontic armies, however I think the slot would be better used for that one extra regional unit , or other etc.
plus the chariots aren't portrayed very well, and are real dodgy :furious3: :wall:
I voted no as well they just don't work properly in game especially when the AI has them in a city.
:laugh3: The poll choices are so slanted...
I say no, the inefficencies and limitations of the in-game physics engine prevent them from being accurately potrayed, so why bother with em?
I really hate how chariots turn and stuff, they just look so bad, so I voted no.
I say we need more distinctive units, so, "yes". :book:
"they were used once or twice"?
I'm no historian, but if you mean teh seleucid scythed chariot...It was a parade horse wich was used to ill succes twice....
Honestly Rhino's were used more often and more effective...
dunno If I'm correct, and definatly don't know much about pontic chariots/Casse's/gaul's...
I voted yes keep the scythed chariot because if I know only one time where they were used by the Seleucids (Magnesia), I think that they were used a lot by Pontus in the Mithridatic wars.
If I remember correctly they were used efficiently at Ennium in 61 BC with Galatian mercenaries but it's true that in others occasions they were useless.
They were a distinctive if not useful part of the Pontos and Seleucid army and should be kept in the game as far as I'm concerned.
Of course... no.
To those Yes-guys:
Remember, that the behaviour of chariots on this engine is VERY strange and that in EB's timeline chariots were rarely used with success...
Chariots are cool, you just need to know how to edit the unit text to help them make more sense.
like enhancing the attack on the vehicle if you want to make one swipe passes fatal vs infantry :)
what i do with chariots in my mods is bring the total numbers down, make them closer in formation, and raise the defense of rider and vehicle. That makes them more managable in towns and stand longer in skirmishes
Id keep em. As for distinctive units, EB has stacks of distictive units. Good grief you can fight AI armies which have 15 different units in them. lol
I think they make different and nice unit from other "normal" cavarly units. Do they need reworking, you bet. But with little investigation and work they should be included as they were.
Also as I have been told chariots were already kind of "old" during this era and were replaced with cavarly cause their manuverability and speed. I think they should be in disadvantage to cavarly cause they were that in history, but those who play the game and just want to see them on action regadless of this should have right to do so:2thumbsup:
So I vote yes!
I vote yes.
It is a challenge trying to master them and when you do then the carnage is beautiful :2thumbsup:
I voted no, just to see what other things the EB team can think of.
I vote keep em- the always scare the bejeezus out of me when I have to face them.
If they were used only once or twice you can leave them out. It doubtfull if they were effective if nobody took to the idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Urnamma
Got any idea what that next unit might be that could get in if we left them out? :grin: That might affect a decision, but then again it would probably just become one where people would agree if the unit was another addition to their favorite faction/culture groups.
Kalaharian Janissaries...:book:
I you didn't get what I meant about *chariots* being distinctive in relation to our other units...then I won't dignify that with an anwer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Baldwin of Jerusalem
BTW, this is not reffering the the Celtic chariots, only about the Selekuids or Pontus (not sure which).
I imagine the Pontic will probably stay in, unless it's the model space that we're after.
Pontic and Seleucid both. It is the model space.
I voted 'no'. I'd love to have one more common unit. :2thumbsup:
I don't really care. I voted "yes" just because its something a little different. I wouldn't mind seeing some regional unit put in instead, though.
I'm torn on it too. I would like to see pontos with a little 'wow' factor, but I don't like them much personally.
I think they should remain, but some attention should be paid to making them feel more effective.
Keep them if you can make their performance realistic .
They give Pontus a nice bit of individuality and power if used well , and are so idiocyncratic as to be worth having on that virtue alone .
I hated those things whenever I played a Vanilla campaign. The lowdown came when I realized how a Briton chariot could swipe four-five cataphracts :inquisitive:
200 of these in Gaugamela, and all the Macedonians did was to form a cursed "E". Why did the Seleucids even bother reinvigorating a failed Achaemenian shock weapon?
I voted "no". I just... hate chariots.
for the interests of historical accuracy, no. Not to mention that I always beat scythed chariots easily with missiles and soaking-up defence.