Why are chariots so effective in killing cavalry? ( Is it historically correct?)

[VikingPower]

Well in regard to cavalry attack then would it not have been just best to attack the chariots from each flanks instead of making a frontal charge against them, to negate the effects from the spinning blades and other mechanical contraptions?

However I forgot to remember the problem of the cavalry before the invention of the stirrup, so I was first thinking that the cavalry would employ a long spears against such chariots but it must have been limited to some degree or impractical.

[Arjos]

About the stirrup, I've started to believe that our modern way of riding has spoiled us XD
The cavalry charges are renowned for their powerful striking power, and also broken lances are attested, seems reasonable to me that if these episodes were possible the rider must have had a pretty firm hold on both horse and lance...
My personal view is that horsemanship was far better in ancient times...

[vartan]

Chariot melee attack lethality = 1. Nuff said.

Can't somebody make that less? I mean, they're moving around and the guy next to the driver is spearing the guys to the side that he comes across. Does it HAVE to be lethality 1? I know if you get hit by a really fast chariot you're bound to get KILLED but can't it be like 0.5 or something? 1 is like MASSACRE lethality.

[Apázlinemjó]

Chariot melee attack lethality = 1. Nuff said.

Can't somebody make that less? I mean, they're moving around and the guy next to the driver is spearing the guys to the side that he comes across. Does it HAVE to be lethality 1? I know if you get hit by a really fast chariot you're bound to get KILLED but can't it be like 0.5 or something? 1 is like MASSACRE lethality.

Actually, Cidainh doesn't have scythed blades at the wheels nor anything which could do damage except the skirmisher, so it shouldn't have 1 lethality. However scythed ones are a different story and they are already nerfed (morale 6, running amok (btw the latter is missing from the Cidainh's attributes)).

[vartan]

Actually, Cidainh doesn't have scythed blades at the wheels nor anything which could do damage except the skirmisher, so it shouldn't have 1 lethality. However scythed ones are a different story and they are already nerfed (morale 6, running amok (btw the latter is missing from the Cidainh's attributes)).

1) I haven't seen a chariot on the battlefield.

2) Forget the model, whether you see blades or not. That's not important. Look at the stats. The actual damage inflicted. Let's assume the unit doesn't have spears, scythes, whatnot. It still has an attack (that's what the computer knows, no more no less). Apparently, that attack is 100 percent lethal. Simple as that. Who can explain the reasoning behind the lethality?

[Brennus]

Celtic Might!

Possibly the weight of the chariot itself? Although that's unlikely since Celtic chariots were renowned for being of light build.

Do they inflict damage whilst stationary or walking, as opposed to being at full gallop?

[Kikaz]

I don't see the issue with them having 1 lethality. On the battlefield, they produce extraordinarily lackluster results roughly 70% of the time. Aside from that, they often knock down enemy soldiers without killing them, usually more often than actually killing them.

[athanaric]

Do they inflict damage whilst stationary or walking, as opposed to being at full gallop?

Even in RTW with its idiosyncrasies, standing chariots are dead meat. That's why so many players hate Casse bodyguards: In theory, they're very dependable, with 16 morale, command "aura", fear effect, good stamina, and a huge stack of javelins for ammo. In reality, they like to die at every corner, even more readily than Scythed Chariots (which are far better armoured, thus it's logical).

I don't see the issue with them having 1 lethality. On the battlefield, they produce extraordinarily lackluster results roughly 70% of the time. Aside from that, they often knock down enemy soldiers without killing them, usually more often than actually killing them.

I concur; they don't need to be nerfed any further in this respect. The most kills come from running down routers, anyway.

[Apázlinemjó]

Celtic Might!

INDEED!

Chariots are deadly against cavalry (but if you use unorthodox tactics, you can beat them ), but very weak against tightly packed infantry, archer and skirmisher units.

By the way, Cidainh might be a bit OP'd, they have high morale (16), more soldier/unit compared to scythed ones, no running amok feature, they inspire friendly troopers and scare foes, they are cheaper than most cavalry and scythed, their lethality is 1. Actually their only drawback is the low armour value, but who cares when you get so many bonuses. But again, a simple Peltastai could make short work of them, Lol.

Edit: Whoops, I was slow. Anyway the whole thing is different in MP, chariots can be match-winner or match loser units there, it depends who uses them, how, on what terrain and against who.

[MechWarrior]

Chariot melee attack lethality = 1. Nuff said.

Can't somebody make that less? I mean, they're moving around and the guy next to the driver is spearing the guys to the side that he comes across. Does it HAVE to be lethality 1? I know if you get hit by a really fast chariot you're bound to get KILLED but can't it be like 0.5 or something? 1 is like MASSACRE lethality.

1 is like MASSACRE lethality.

...MASSACRE...

I'm sorry, but I laughed. Hard.

On-topic, though, chariots WITH scythed wheels
should absolutely be bad for horses legs.

Chariots without scythes, though, I agree with
their lethality being lowered, as the guy next to the driver
has what, a longsword at best, right?

[Brennus]

Something tells me vartan has had a few bad encounters with chariots.

I say keep the lethality at its current level, remember the lethality also represents the passenger when he is dismounted. Due to the limitations of the RTW engine you can't have nobelmen dismount from their chariots.