The problem with elephants..

[Beelzebub]

There's too many of them in an elephant unit. For normal sizes, 6 elephants compared to 40 in regular units is ridiculously out of propoprtion. Imagine if the ancients had that ratio? 40000 men have 6000 elephants? Seems the only way to rout them unless you bring a long super anti-elephant troops (pigs) is to surround them with swarms of men, and you'll lose a ton in the process. Even when you rout them, they'll do some damage as you cut them down while fleeing, 6 routing elephants destroyed half of 2 of my cavalry units because whenever one fell down he'd take out 3-5 nearby horsemen.

Elephants should have 1-3 pachiderms in a unit.

[Myrddraal]

I agree, but CA obviously like their elephants...

Heres a related question. I don't have the game yet (UK release date = this friday), and so I would like to know how common units of elephants are.

PS statistical point: saying '40000 men have 6000 elephants' implies that there is one unit of elephants for one unit of any other infantry.

[lars573]

Having used elephants in my Seleucid camp I can say that a unit of 20 elephants gets ground up pretty quick. Mostly because of the elephants emergency stop feature. Which consists of a hammer and spike.

[Praylak]

Can't recall the name of that famous battle, where Hannibal attacked Rome (2nd Punic?) and kicked ass. History gurka's, help me out here. I think he had 27 elephants total. He marched them half way around the western Med to get them there. That must have been a feat.

Sidenote:
I now think differently of them. They are powerful, but they have some serious disadvantages and I think this balances it out.

- They have crap morale. Manage to kill one, and the whole unit usually goes to hell.
- Rout is one thing, but running amok is easier to obtain and unrecoverable from what I've seen.
- They will charge into a phalanx. LoL!!
- They are very expensive.
- As a cavalry unit, they are slow. Hell, skirmishers can easily out endure and outrun them.

[Underhand]

Can't recall the name of that famous battle, where Hannibal attacked Rome (2nd Punic?) and kicked ass. History gurka's, help me out here. I think he had 27 elephants total. He marched them half way around the western Med to get them there. That must have been a feat.

Trebbia. After that all his elephants died except 'the Syrian' which thereafter carried Hannibal himself.

[Dimeola]

Do like Pontus did to me....get a couple catapults and fire fireballs at them.....with a little luck you`ll score a hit which will kill a couple and rout them before you get close.
D

[Psyco]

There's too many of them in an elephant unit. For normal sizes, 6 elephants compared to 40 in regular units is ridiculously out of propoprtion. Imagine if the ancients had that ratio? 40000 men have 6000 elephants? Seems the only way to rout them unless you bring a long super anti-elephant troops (pigs) is to surround them with swarms of men, and you'll lose a ton in the process. Even when you rout them, they'll do some damage as you cut them down while fleeing, 6 routing elephants destroyed half of 2 of my cavalry units because whenever one fell down he'd take out 3-5 nearby horsemen.

Elephants should have 1-3 pachiderms in a unit.

You used cavalry!?!?!? Elephants get a bonus vs cavalry. Just use a cheap unit of Velite (about 200ish Denarii). They are able to rout the elephants quite easily. Even if they fail, so what? The elephants cost about 2000 Denarii, so even if it takes 3 units, you still come out ahead.

[Colovion]

You used cavalry!?!?!? Elephants get a bonus vs cavalry. Just use a cheap unit of Velite (about 200ish Denarii). They are able to rout the elephants quite easily. Even if they fail, so what? The elephants cost about 2000 Denarii, so even if it takes 3 units, you still come out ahead.

true story

my brother was playing his Scipii campaign last night and was seiging a settlement and an army came up behind him with a unit of elephants. he needed to take the city fast as well as neutralize the elephants. I told him to use his Velites against the elephants and it worked much better than either of us anticipated. The velites tossed their javs and got the eles attention - they proceeded to chase the much faster velites all over the map - away from the city. The elephants ended up not doing anything but at the end were at the edge of the map still trying to take on teh Velites and were Shaken, Exhausted - so one Fresh unit coming in would probably have totally ruled those elephants.

[Thoros of Myr]

3-4 velites is a small price to pay to get rid of the phants. Horse archers would be great aswell.

[Morindin]

There is only 12 Elephants (but 30ish men) in an elephant group, on the default size setting (large I think).

Hanibal started with lots of Elephants but most of the died in the Alps.

And Triarii stand up to them very well, I think they're quite well balanced for their price.

[Red Harvest]

I agree completely about the scale problem with elephants. About 3 per unit would be manageable with the game engine. The scaling needs to be a bit different for units like elephants, than for infantry, but not like it is at present.

I had a revolt in Carthage as Scipii. There was a huge stack attacking me with four elephant units and several nice cav. I tried every trick I could. Javelins and velites had no effect. I couldn't kill any elephants and my entire army routed in seconds. I had to attack this army in three more battles and kill off everyone else in the army before I could engage the elephants properly and kill them. This was the point at which I concluded that cav heavy armies with a bit of trash infantry and slingers/archers were what RTW likes.

[Morindin]

I agree completely about the scale problem with elephants. About 3 per unit would be manageable with the game engine. The scaling needs to be a bit different for units like elephants, than for infantry, but not like it is at present.

I had a revolt in Carthage as Scipii. There was a huge stack attacking me with four elephant units and several nice cav. I tried every trick I could. Javelins and velites had no effect. I couldn't kill any elephants and my entire army routed in seconds. I had to attack this army in three more battles and kill off everyone else in the army before I could engage the elephants properly and kill them. This was the point at which I concluded that cav heavy armies with a bit of trash infantry and slingers/archers were what RTW likes.

I've had one unit of Triarii rout two units of Elephants and have about 50 men remaining afterwards.

I've had one unit of Triarii kill and rout about 4 units of Macedonian lancers alone, while being flanked and hit from every direction.

Can you build Triarii? :)

[Colovion]

I agree completely about the scale problem with elephants. About 3 per unit would be manageable with the game engine. The scaling needs to be a bit different for units like elephants, than for infantry, but not like it is at present.

I had a revolt in Carthage as Scipii. There was a huge stack attacking me with four elephant units and several nice cav. I tried every trick I could. Javelins and velites had no effect. I couldn't kill any elephants and my entire army routed in seconds. I had to attack this army in three more battles and kill off everyone else in the army before I could engage the elephants properly and kill them. This was the point at which I concluded that cav heavy armies with a bit of trash infantry and slingers/archers were what RTW likes.

that's disheartening

I played dozens of battles in teh demo trying to figure out some kind of counter to elephants with no avail. I was hoping this would be changed in the full version. I haven't come across elephants yet myself, but using velites seem to work up to a point - but I guess when you are against more than one unit of them it doesn't really go like butter.

I think 3 woudl be good - 4 or 5 might be better, and then the cost of them would be less as well. They're supposed to be huge shock troops which are usually just a one-shot thing where if they work, they're gods - if not, they're breakfast.

[LittleRaven]

*chuckle* Red, Morindin, there can be only one solution to this problem.

Ten rounds of bare knuckle boxing. I'll ref.

Failing that, you two have got to get together for some MP tests. A few trial runs could probably settle this debate quickly. First we'll give Red all cav, and Morindin all spears. Morindin should win easily. If he doesn't, there's a problem. If he does, then we can begin to look at this in more detail. (just because an all-spear army can beat an all-cav army does not mean the game is balanced...then we'd have to move on to cost issues...etc.)

[Morindin]

*chuckle* Red, Morindin, there can be only one solution to this problem.

Ten rounds of bare knuckle boxing. I'll ref.

Failing that, you two have got to get together for some MP tests. A few trial runs could probably settle this debate quickly. First we'll give Red all cav, and Morindin all spears. Morindin should win easily. If he doesn't, there's a problem. If he does, then we can begin to look at this in more detail. (just because an all-spear army can beat an all-cav army does not mean the game is balanced...then we'd have to move on to cost issues...etc.)

I have no problem with this, but firstly Red "doesnt do multiplayer" and the human "cant make decisions at once" etc etc etc excuses excuses excuses.

Im not saying the game is balanced. Im arguing that the game is barely week old and NONE of us are experianced enough to make blanket statements about the game based on a couple of battles.

We might find out tomorrow that town watch are overpowered against Elephants, who knows.

[Adrian II]

Im arguing that the game is barely week old and NONE of us are experianced enough to make blanket statements about the game based on a couple of battles.

Weren't you the guy who started another thread yesterday with the blanket statement that 'naval battles are crap'? Come on, Morindin, it's only fair to allow for other peoples' complaints. I'm on your side though, even though I don't have the game yet, because I appreciate your single-handed fight to give the developers a fair chance. Besides it's a bad thing if everyone starts modding and patching and customizing tactics and strategy. In no time we'll all be playing an entirely different game and any discussion of tactics on these boards will be a dialogue of the deaf.

[Morindin]

Weren't you the guy who started another thread yesterday with the blanket statement that 'naval battles are crap'? Come on, Morindin, it's only fair to allow for other peoples' complaints. I'm on your side though, even though I don't have the game yet, because I appreciate your single-handed fight to give the developers a fair chance. Besides it's a bad thing if everyone starts modding and patching and customizing tactics and strategy. In no time we'll all be playing an entirely different game and any discussion of tactics on these boards will be a dialogue of the deaf.

Just for the sake of an argument this is what I posted

Anyone else feel naval battles are just, well, crap?

Im not asking for a 3d battlefield or anything like that, but I seem to lose about 90% of my naval battles regardless of quality or quantity of my ships.

Also the fact its near on impossible to destroy ones fleet makes naval battles for me more irritating than fun.

At least the AI builds LOTS of ships.

In other words, im not making a blanket statement about the game but asking other peoples opinions to see if I am doing something wrong.
In that example, I got a post from someone saying "try this" and I am indeed going to try it.

Thats different from saying "Elephants are overpowered because they beat their match up. CA should DO THIS AND THIS TO MAKE ME HAPPY! *throws toys out of the cott"

[Adrian II]

CA should DO THIS AND THIS TO MAKE ME HAPPY! *throws toys out of the cott"

LOL, you've made your point I believe. Remember though that for most players historical detail and references are a huge part of the fun, if not their main reason for playing the game in the first place. Otherwise what's the point in playing a TW game instead of the single most brilliant abstract game in the world, i.e. chess? That's why they are 'nit-picking' as you would call it. It's impossible to recreate history, but the game has to have that 'feel' about it. That's a fine line. For some the killing speed is killing the game. For me the graphics are a horrible disappointment, no matter how brilliant the game may turn out to be with respect to tactics, the new integrated stategy map and other fantastic new features. Anyway I'll shut up until I have the game.

[Goofball]

*chuckle* Red, Morindin, there can be only one solution to this problem.

Ten rounds of bare knuckle boxing. I'll ref.

Okay ladies, square off. Handbags at twenty paces...

[Red Harvest]

*chuckle* Red, Morindin, there can be only one solution to this problem.

Ten rounds of bare knuckle boxing. I'll ref.

That would hardly be fair. I'm an amateur boxer... Plus, when I've fought bare knuckle I tended to break a knuckle or two.

[Osbot]

That would hardly be fair. I'm an amateur boxer... Plus, when I've fought bare knuckle I tended to break a knuckle or two.

Oh lord. Amatuer boxing means zilch. I've fought people who were into "karate" or "amatuer boxing". Ya, they were tough, untill we actually fought. I'd look out Morindin, I think this guy is IRL and wants to punch you out O.o

On the intraweb I am 8 feet tall, have a 36 inch penii and I shoot lazer beams out of my anus. I am a jujitsu world champ and my daddy can beat up your daddy.

Oh and btw, if you tend to "break a knuckle or two" when you fight, you either 1) do not know how to punch 2) Have some bone density problems. ANYONE who knows anything about proper punching technique knows that hitting someone/thing properly is like hitting a golf ball properly or a baseball. You don't even feel it, its hitting the sweet spot.

I'd go see a doctor have those rat claws you call hands checked out.

[Red Harvest]

Osbot,

On the boxing subject...

The broken knuckles came from bare knuckle fights before I started boxing amateur. With adrenaline flowing I didn't really feel the damage until after the fight. All it takes is hitting something hard (like a forehead) at a less than perfect angle. Folks don't stand stationary for that... Most boxers I know won't hit someone bare knuckle if they can avoid it, because of the tendency to screw up their hands. Even with gloves and wraps it is easy to get hand injuries--happens to the pro's all the time. I hit so much harder now than I did back in pre-boxing days that I really don't want to risk a hand injury. I've noticed the same increase in power when coaching new boxers, their hitting power improves several fold as they learn how to shift their weight and drive into the punch.

The serious amateurs are better boxers than most of the pro's. The biggest difference I see is that most pro's can take more punishment. Durability vs. technique. Boxing as a sport is much better in the amateurs.

[DemonArchangel]

you should see my knuckles, they're covered with scabs where i tore the skin off punching people/things. Trust me, humans are harder objects than they look.

[Silencer]

try the catapults with fire, they rock versus elephants.

try 8 armoured elephants versus 8 catapults in a custom battle, the Catapults win everytime.

you ony need to hit one or 2 elephants and they go bezerk. also, the exploding fire all around them in kinda bad for morale.


had a several bridgebattles yesterday.
I had only 3 legoin cohorts and 6 catapults.
AI got a full army. by the time they reach my side, they're already running....
I always pack 2-3 catapults in mly army. when they gain experience, the're accuracy is even far better. (silver cevron catapult hits 30-35%, thus one out of 3 volleys)

[Lemur]

Frankly, I love all of the animal units. War dogs, elephants, camels, I just can't get enough. I think my ideal army could consist of war hounds, armored elephants, a wing of flaming pigs and some camels.

I'm probably just weird.

[Swoosh So]

Probably :D

[Soulflame]

try the catapults with fire, they rock versus elephants.

try 8 armoured elephants versus 8 catapults in a custom battle, the Catapults win everytime.

you ony need to hit one or 2 elephants and they go bezerk. also, the exploding fire all around them in kinda bad for morale.


had a several bridgebattles yesterday.
I had only 3 legoin cohorts and 6 catapults.
AI got a full army. by the time they reach my side, they're already running....
I always pack 2-3 catapults in mly army. when they gain experience, the're accuracy is even far better. (silver cevron catapult hits 30-35%, thus one out of 3 volleys)

o(w)nagers are just crazy when used right. it can win you almost any battle. In fact, in most battles I played after introducing 2 pairs of o(w)nagers per army, the greatest losses of my troops are from my own o(w)nagers accidentally firing at them.

But on topic:
Elephants should be countered not by spearmen, but my ranged fire. Like horse archer, normal archers, skirmishers... etc. Just light troops. Light troops have more chance of walking free of the elephant, turning the elephants, and peppering them so they flee.
In fact, I have never as yet sent any cavalry or infantry against them. That's just asking for trouble I think. I bought some mercenary war elephants (at a hefty 4000 dinarii), and the way I use them is against heavy infantry and cavalry, NOT against skirmishers or archers.

The few times I encountered elephants, I set my archers on firing flaming arrows, and just pepper them for a long time, add a javalin unit and they are either kept busy for the battle, or flee/run amok. Note that you probably won't kill many elephants this way, but when you route, you can give chase and kill them more easily. Also, if you destory most of the rest of the army, chances are the whole army will disband (including the elephants).

Really, what do you expect, that shields protect you from an elephant trampling you? defense doesn't matter vs elephants (in fact, lower defense might mean more manouvrability sometimes, which is alot better) or that you can spear an elephant running around?
Elephants are big targets, archers and skirmishers easily hit them.

Well, that's my personal experience from the battefield, so I might have a different RTW version, or just been lucky, but for me it works.
And o(w)nagers are just crazy (when used right).

[Spino]

Yell at me all you want but elephants ARE unbalanced, not because they trash heavy infantry but because they're too damn tough to take down. I was expecting elephants in RTW to be like those seen in Time Commanders; extremely dangerous but vulnerable to light troops and concentrated missile fire. Instead I get Giant-Four-Legged-Pink-Bastard-Tanks from hell. Let me share with you a recent story...

I'm currently playing a modded campaign as Armenia on Hard/Hard with Large sized units. Beyond the fact that Armenia is playable I am using Adonys' Kill Rate mod (.5 setting) which only effects melee speeds. The Selecuids decided to siege one of my cities with four units; one unit of Phalanx Pikemen, two units of Levy Phalanx Pikemen and one unit of War Elephants (12 pachyderms in all, the unarmored kind with the two archers on top). I sallied out of the city with the following: one 80 man unit of javelin wielding Peltasts, 1 120 man unit of Eastern Infantry, two 20 man General units (Eastern Heavy Cavalry, armed with javelins) and four 54 man Horse Archer units. Sounds like pretty good odds eh?

I sallied through the side gates so I could flank them. Eventually the Seleucids were effectively sandwiched between my lines and were fidgeting about trying to figure out which way to face. I then ordered my four Horse Archer units to get within range and fire exclusively on the elephants. Two Horse Archer units to the elephants' front, two directly to their rear and all four HA units were stationary while firing. After several volleys I noticed not a single elephant had been killed but the pike unit directly in front of them was taking casualties. I thought, "Hey, my Horse Archers are not aiming at the elephants like I ordered them to!" so I double checked and saw that the arrows were actually landing amongst the elephants but the combined short and long shots from both sides were killing those pikemen. The odd thing is whenever I right clicked on the elephants units to target them the arrow blinked from red to yellow as if all my HA units were not in range and couldn't fire. Why was it doing that if the HA units were clearly in range? Anyway, out of frustration I sent forth my Peltast unit to fill those pachyderms full of javelins... two volleys gave me nothing. I then reconcentrated my HA fire on the pikemen and hoped that if the elephants were the only unit left the AI would retreat them. Not a chance. After all three pike units were filled full of arrows and routed the elephants proceeded to charge my two general units around the map while the archers riding shotgun were slowly picking them off. The general units were in skirmish mode and chucking javelins at the elephants while running but of course, not a single elephant bought the farm. Out of desperation I charged the elephants with my Peltast and Eastern Infantry units. In no time my infantry routed with nothing to show for it, not even a brief moment of panic for the elephants which by now were EXHAUSTED. Even the rapid fire arrow towers around my city didn't make an impression on them when the elephants got too close to my city walls.



Why in blazes did CA make elephants so damn resiliant? To justify their cost or to please the RTS kiddies who think they're supposed to be four legged tanks of doom? I set up a perfect morale sapping killing zone that sends most AI units in a routing tizzy and yet those elephants survived unscathed. Taking arrow fire in the ass should have done something to them. In the battle prior to this I was confronted with a mixed force that included a single 50 man unit of Parthian Cataphracts, a hard nut to crack. And yet with similar flanking positions and fewer Horse Archers I managed to kill a little more than half of them. Last I checked cataphracts are supposed to be more impervious to missile fire than elephants so what gives?

Please spare me the "You need to use better tactics" speeches. When you sandwich 12 unarmored war elephants between 108 horse archers there ought to be a noticeable number of pachyderm carcasses on the ground. I wasn't looking for a massacre but was simply hoping to inflict enough rear/flanking shots on those elephants to cause them to panic and route off the field.

It's time to mod the unit stats...

[Praylak]

Yell at me all you want but elephants ARE unbalanced, not because they trash heavy infantry but because they're too damn tough to take down.

With all due respect Spino, Why didn't you use you Phalanx against the Elephants? This will drop an elephant like a sack of potatos. If you did try it and it didn't do anything I would reconsider that killrate-mod your using.

[son of spam]

You know what would be cool? If arrows and other missiles could somehow snipe those damn archers and mahout.

It's like the elephant has a big force shield surrounding the towers and the mahout.