Kal-el's Unit Concept Sketches

[Ozymandias]

Originally posted by Xen



NOOO!

sorr yto be so brunt, but it was tha carthaginian -horsemounted- cavalry that was the creme of the crop, elephents were brought along NOT to fight the romans, but to drum up tribal support with the fantasitcal beasts that the celts, and celtiberian allies, and mercenaries had thought were the things of legends...

Oh tsk! The Romans first encountered elephants when they fought Pyrrhus in 250 BCE (not so very long before Hannibal dragged a handful of them across the Alps, hm?) The Romans had never seen the beasts before, which they called "Lucanian Oxen", and their charge was sufficient (in 250, at Heraclea) to rout the Romans.

-Oz

 

[Bobby Lee]

thats all good but what would the MODERN Carthaginian units look like....like a Carthaginian Paratrooper...or Infantry...

 

[Louis XXIV]

http://www.barca.fsnet.co.uk/elephants.htm

If people remember nothing else about Hannibal, they recall he crossed the Alps "with the elephants." In fact, Hannibal lost most of his elephants in his crossing of the Alps, and the survivors (and resupplied elephants) proved to be of lim ited military value once the Romans learnt how to deal with them..

Alexander the Great encountered them as far east as India, where they were used--none too effectively--by his opponent King Porus, in the Battle of the Hydaspes River in 326 BC.

Although his crossing of the Alps with the elephants is widely remembered, Hannibal made surprisingly little use of them. War elephants proved useful against Iberian tribal forces, though they were somewhat less effective when facing disciplined regulars. In fact, most of the 34 elephants he started with died during the mountain passage or during the severe winter that followed. The last few died after the battle of Trebbia, leaving only one (Serus?) to carry Hannibal through the Etrurian marshes.

http://www.barca.fsnet.co.uk/elephants-rome.htm

In the first encounters with Pyrrhus in the 270s, the Romans didn't deal at all well with the elephants, and in fact it was Pyrrhus' elephants that won him some of his victories. The Romans attempted to deal with elephants by fighting on ground that was unfavorable to elephant deployment and by pressing an engagement fast to decide the battle before the elephants could be brought into action. Ultimately they learned to deal with elephants by trying to disable the drivers, or harm the elephants enough to put them into a panic (as at Beneventum 275), or even disturbed the elephants with a pandemonium of shouts and trumpet-blasts (as at Zama against Carthage in 202).

Elephants that couldn't be routed would be allowed to pass through the ranks, thanks to the flexible formation of the Roman infantry.

In the Carthaginian wars, they had the aid of African allies who were more familiar with elephants. After the defeat of Carthage, Rome has elephants of its own, is able to train its cavalry to the elephants and use them in war.

In the first Punic War, there is a battle where the Romans, in order to combat Elephants, bunched the soldiers even tighter together to help withstand the impact of an Elephant charge. If you know anything about Elephant combat, you should know this is not what you do (the battle ended up being a devistating defeat because, although it probably slowed down the Elephant's movement, it didn't stop an Elephant from killing Roman soldiers). In the second Punic War, Scipio took the exact opposite approach. He spaced the Legions in columns with space in between each one. The Elephant, thinking that each column was a large creature, would go in between, where the drivers could be shot down. Also, Elephants don't like pain. Arrows and Pilums work effectively at panicking an Elephant (and probably causing it to stampede and trample its own troops).

 

[Ozymandias]

Originally posted by Bobby Lee
thats all good but what would the MODERN Carthaginian units look like....like a Carthaginian Paratrooper...or Infantry...

The only (and perhaps unique ...?) problem with projecting a modern Carthaginian force is that climate changes in North Africa made the area a lot less fertile, even in antiquity (cf. Hannibal's North African elephants going extinct).

Of course, the Romans salting the earth and all that didn't help any ...

Best,

Oz

 

[MarineCorps]

Just wondering why is it that every unit thread that has to do with Rome end up as a historical disscusion?

 

[Louis XXIV]

Because Rome is cool to talk about

 

[Bobby Lee]

I know but im saying that if Carthage had survived....like instead of being destroyed the Romans allowed them to continue to exist as a small city state or under thier rule until they broke free as rome was collapsing because they had been allowed to exist under Roman rule rather being....well crushed

basically what im saying all realities aside....IF THEY HAD survived to this day what would that military look like...aesthetically i mean....in all truth I dont think its debateable that they would use tanks with infantry armed much like sum modern country today...( I also mean is there sumthing that would make them stand out as distinctly Carthaginian?)

 

[Bobby Lee]

Originally posted by Louis XXIV
Because Rome is cool to talk about

and also perhaps because they were possibly the most influential nation in all of History...and if not the most influential they are definately in the top 3...

just thought I would add that...

 

[Ozymandias]

Originally posted by Bobby Lee
I know but im saying that if Carthage had survived....like instead of being destroyed the Romans allowed them to continue to exist as a small city state or under thier rule until they broke free as rome was collapsing because they had been allowed to exist under Roman rule rather being....well crushed

basically what im saying all realities aside....IF THEY HAD survived to this day what would that military look like...aesthetically i mean....in all truth I dont think its debateable that they would use tanks with infantry armed much like sum modern country today...( I also mean is there sumthing that would make them stand out as distinctly Carthaginian?)

I would speculate that they would focus on light forces suitable to both patroling the Mediterranean littoral and escorting trans-Saharan traffic. So light troops (ship born and/or desert equipped); head gear analagous to the French Foreign Legion's kepi blanc perhaps -- some cross between Arab/Berber and the FFL -- with an emphasis on high horsepower-to-weight wheeled AFVs ... Just a guess

-Oz

 

[Bobby Lee]

interesting...I would have to say that I agree.... maybe they would have smaller packs infantry wise and lighter armor on vehicles for greater speed?

tis very interesting....certainly gives them flavor...not many armies now days go for true manueverability

 

[Kal-el]

Why would they focus on light forces and not use heavy armor? The US military proved that the desert is the ideal environment for the M1 in two wars with Iraq.

 

[Bobby Lee]

ummm cause it seemed to fit with the personality type? im not sure just seems like that would make since to me... On the other hand they may go with heavy armor like the US we shall never know...

 

[Kal-el]

what personality is that? the one that used War Elephants?

 

[Ozymandias]

Originally posted by Kal-el
Why would they focus on light forces and not use heavy armor? The US military proved that the desert is the ideal environment for the M1 in two wars with Iraq.

I'm thinking more of the "evolutionary pathway" -- the Brits made good use of Rolls Royce armored cars in the desert in WW1 (but not tanks) and ALL sides used predominantly light and medium tanks and whweeled AFVs in WW2.

Assuming that there is NOT a "convergence trend" towards similar force structures in this hypothetical world (due to repeated globasl conflict) each Civ would naturally evolve forces necessary to its local conditions (this is even seen in the modern world of "convergence", wherein the Israelis have developed the Merkava and the Swedes the Strindsvagen).

I'm also assuming (1) that the trans-Saharan routes to the gold and uranium of Mali etc. are important -- and really the sort of place where you'd want AFVs to fight off raiders and not MBTs and (2) again the Mediterranean littoral, meaning seaborne units -- the reason the US deployed all those Shermans in WW2 was the necessity to ship a large quantity of them across the ocean, so keeping them relatively light & compact was deemed necessary.

Also whatever expansion in the med occured would have been / be centered around islands -- Gibraltar, the Balaerics, etc. -- again giving an impetus to the best bang-for-the-buck for sea- and airborne AFVs.

Best,

Oz

 

[Kal-el]

but doesn't your argument for the Merkava in Israel equate to the Carthaginians developing their own MBT? After all Northern Africa is closer in climate and terrain to Israel than it is to Sweden.

 

[Bobby Lee]

but Israel's direct threats dont include islands for the most part thus makeing the Carthaginians more likely to use lighter weapons

 

[Ozymandias]

Also IMO part of the "argument" for the Carthaginian forces has to be (1) either the climatic deterioration of North Africa didn't occur or (2) massive irrigation and/or desalinization worked; and (3) the territory I'm envisioning a "modern" Carthage covering would cover most of Northwest Africa with colonies in the Med -- sharp conflicts over Gibraltar and whanot -- whereas the Merkava was developed strictly with a limited deployment range in mind.

-Oz

 

[Costa e Silva]

Kal-el. Carthage is important to this game... And a cool civ.
In many books and sites you can find pictures of it units. But the point is:

There are many diferences between the images, and i think that you could design this units, to "uniform" then, and make a common objective to unit makers.

Shields and armours could have some padron...
This will be very nice...

 

[Louis XXIV]

Realistically speaking, I wouldn't be suprised that, if Carthage existed into modern times, that it would do much else besides buy Soviet weapons (assuming it wouldn't buy US weapons). Of course, that's not very fun, is it?

When skipping to the modern ages, you overlook the time in between. Assuming that Carthage was never destroyed in the Third Punic War, so they could begin to return to its old self as soon as Rome fell, it is very likely that they would easily rival Byzantium as the commercial center of the world (The city-state of Carthage, right before the Final Punic War, was still very strong commercially, dispite their empire having been stripped from them).

I'm not going to think of an entire history of Carthage that never existed, but I'd assume that they would have an imperial empire, much like Britain or Italy at the turn of the 19th Century. At a time when most focus was on Africa and the Far East (India, China, Indochina), Carthage would be an African power that was non-existant at the time.

Carthage's army would probably be similar to any modern African army. I don't think they will have the highest level of technology, but I don't think Carthage will be backwards either.

 

[Costa e Silva]

Well. I ask about desingn the historical units, to create some padron, because there is many representations of punic units, and they aren't the same.

About future Carthage:

Carthage would only survive with several changes in the way of how his people saw him. Would be needed a system change, and the rise of a nation spirit, not a oligarchy club like it was...

Punics are phoenicians descendents - estoic merchants - and had a unique and cool culture. But the geographical presence, certainly, would make grow diferences among Phoenicia and its colonie - like happens in history -, the point is:

1- They live in africa, but they wouldn't be influencied by southern peoples. Probably would happen the opposite...

2- Carthage only would survive if don't fall, and this would change everything - christianism, commercial relationships, the romanic domination, germanic invasions and the islam...

3- One thing would certainly happen: They would participate in the colonization of the new world, and probably would take spain place...

4- Carthage wouldn't be religious, probably wouldn't be muslin, and will become christian but will not ntake this so seriously... (if cristianity blow in europe... because rome was the "vetor", and in this scenario there is no rome like we know...)

5- With the time Carthage would became a state ruled like vitorian England was... They will start to have their own units in middle ages, and would have units in a diferent style... European, but a lot of mediterranean view... Carthage employ mercenaries because didn't have population enough to fight against romans... It's only one city, and some colonies, far i know they never reach 300.000 people... And only the Region of Rome has more than this in the time of the second punic war... (the modern "lazio").
Punics were good soldiers and commanders, some of then were created for war(commanders), others for trade...

6- In second war they would be in no side... And probably would invade Italy...

7- It colonies in the new world wouldn't need to fight for independence, they will negociate to be "free"...