Looking For Thoughts On Elephant Warfare

[Ozymandias]

Terra Fantasia is set before the last Ice Age.

One of the many ironies of human history is that horses evolved in North America, and crossed over into the Old World, during the Ice Age, via the Siberian-Alaskan land bridge - and then became extinct in North American.

In the Old World - where most of the action in Terra Fantasia takes place - various species of elephas reign supreme. Not all species are/were domesticable. There have been four species of elephas in historical times, two of which are now extinct: the North African, of Hannibal fame, and the Syrian, of the Seleucids. Of the remaining two, the Indian is domesticable, while the African is most certainly not.

In TF, I use Culture Groups in an entirely unique fashion, continuing a thought I began, long ago, in, "An Extinct Civilization Manifesto." The CGs represent the five environments which most shaped each Civ's development (Seafaring; Hills; Woods; Rivers; Plains.) Furthermore, I introduce "asymmetric" warfare: rather than stronger Attackers being introduced at the same time as stronger Defenders, they are staggered: at first, the Hillsmen's Hoplites are overcome by the first War Elephants, but they then later "get even" with a combination of Long Bows and Phalanxes.

All that being said, Horses aren't introduced into the Old World until Steam powered ships come along. This leaves time for the earliest pike-and-bow elephants to slowly give way to those carrying cannons. Historically, war elephants really didn't make much of a difference - but, then again, in TF, there aren't any horses around. Acordingly, any thoughts on the matter (oh, @Blue Monkey! ) would be much appreciated.

 

[Predator145]

Elephants made a huge difference in real life. Otherwise people wouldn't bother. They were the most expensive assets for factions that fielded them. They wouldn't go through the expenses to maintain elephant corps if it didn't pay off. People in the past weren't stupid. If something didn't work, they'd quickly figure it out. Fact is that every faction that had native access to elephants domesticated them for warfare long into the age of gunpowder.

Elephants could be decisive in delivering battle ending shock. But they needed to be used carefully. The same thing could be said about heavy cavalry and modern tanks.

But most importantly, their role is psychological. Battles are won and lost due to morale just as much as logistics and combat. Most missile fire during medieval times effect was to disrupt, confuse and demoralize enemy formations to soften them up for melee. Wounding and killing were just icing on the cake. The mere presence of giant beasts on the battlefield demoralizes the foe long before contact is made.

As for militaries, their main tasks are not for combat, but for deterring aggression. Most factions wouldn't wanna have to fight for real. Excellence in war is to subdue the enemy without bloodshed. Thus, parades are far more important than battles most of the time. Elephants oozed prestige and were perfect for showing off. To maintain an elephant corps, a faction would have to be tremendously wealthy. Stealth fighters are ridiculously expensive and mostly unproven in peer vs peer combat. But do you really wanna find out by fighting those that can afford them? Alexander's men just noped out of there after battling elephants. They did their job in deterring the most formidable military of the time.

It's actually not silly to have elephants be a 2 movement unit. Elephants can carry supplies and walk for a very long time. Thus their strategic mobility is great. They were very bad at holding ground though. Once wounded, the beasts become very unreliable. They were shock weapons. Civ2 got it right. We can give them a bit more flavor by giving them an extra HP to differentiate them from light horsemen. Mine in ancient age have 4/1/2 +1hp requiring Ivory/Elephants.

 

[Ozymandias]

Ah, I believe you paraphrase Sun Tzu

Standard combat in Civ 3 tends to stay around the 3:2 level (given all the many Terrain bonuses etc.) I'm planning on significantly higher, as my "Rock, Paper, Scissors" mode comes into play. Aforesaid Hoplites are 3-3-1, so I was thinking of the most ancient of War Elephants being along the lines of 7-2-3 -1 hp; the Phalanxes probably 6-6-1. (Elephants had the nasty habit of panicking and turning on their own troops; mahouts typically carried a spike and hammer to nail out their beast's brains should this occur.)

Elephants also freaked out Roman cavalry - until the horses were trained, by scent, not to do so.

Irrespective, much warfare for 2,000 years or so will revolve around Elephants v. Elephants, with the "Rock, Paper, Scissors" thing coming into play even here, as some are first, e.g., armed with cannon before others, etc. So there's definitely ranged warfare involved as well.

BTW, I'm planning on handling this with Techs called, "Warfare 1," followed by, "Warfare 2," etc.

TY!

 

[Ozymandias]

"In the Battle of Hydaspes (326 BCE), King Porus (Sanskrit: Puru or Paurava; Greek: Poros) (c. 4th century BCE) staked everything on his elephants to defeat the Macedonians being personally led by Alexander the Great (356-323 BCE). His 200 elephants were posted along the front of the infantry, like bastions, in order to scare away the enemy. Alexander, however, proved to be more than a match. He focused on destroying the other arms posted at the flanks. As the Indian cavalry, infantry, and chariots were gradually routed, the elephants though managing to cause initial havoc, went berserk due to their wounds inflicted by the enemy and trampled anyone they could find, which, in this case, were mostly the Indians themselves. Porus thus lost many of his numbers; himself fighting on an elephant, he also got wounded and was taken prisoner."

-https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1241/elephants-in-ancient-indian-warfare/

 

[Predator145]

"In the Battle of Hydaspes (326 BCE), King Porus (Sanskrit: Puru or Paurava; Greek: Poros) (c. 4th century BCE) staked everything on his elephants to defeat the Macedonians being personally led by Alexander the Great (356-323 BCE). His 200 elephants were posted along the front of the infantry, like bastions, in order to scare away the enemy. Alexander, however, proved to be more than a match. He focused on destroying the other arms posted at the flanks. As the Indian cavalry, infantry, and chariots were gradually routed, the elephants though managing to cause initial havoc, went berserk due to their wounds inflicted by the enemy and trampled anyone they could find, which, in this case, were mostly the Indians themselves. Porus thus lost many of his numbers; himself fighting on an elephant, he also got wounded and was taken prisoner."

-https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1241/elephants-in-ancient-indian-warfare/

And what did the Macedonians do after that? They said: Go into this subcontinent where there's more of these things? Nope". They were traumatized.

Alex would go on to augment his elephant corps and these would be a staple among successor states. Of course the Macedonians would downplay them in their propaganda to steady their terrified men. But look at where their budgets went.

 

[timerover51]

Oz, you might want to check out the Battle of Raphia in 217 BC. Not all elephants are equal. The same holds true for mammoths, one of my favorite creatures.

Do you want me to dig out my copy of The Elephant in the Greek and Roman World for some more background?

 

[Ozymandias]

And what did the Macedonians do after that? They said: Go into this subcontinent where there's more of these things? Nope". They were traumatized.

Alex would go on to augment his elephant corps and these would be a staple among successor states. Of course the Macedonians would downplay them in their propaganda to steady their terrified men. But look at where their budgets went.

I wasn't aware that Alex added elephants, although I'm well aware of the successor states, again (especially) the Seleucids.

In the Mahabharata, the "akshauhini" battle formation is stated as consisting of a ratio of 1 chariot : 1 elephant : 3 cavalry : 5 infantry soldiers. Which seems like a very low number of foot ... although, at the battle of Ipsus in 302 BCE, Seleucus did smash Ptolemy's army with an elephant ratio of 480 to 75 ... I'll look into it some more.

... Which still leaves me with the question (returning to the Mahabharata) of how to square 1 chariot + 1 elephant + 3 cavalry into a 3 elephant to 5 foot soldier order of battle??

And I must also still ask advice on how to best Civ3-simulate 2,000 years of elephant v. elephant warfare.

 

[Ozymandias]

Oz, you might want to check out the Battle of Raphia in 217 BC. Not all elephants are equal. The same holds true for mammoths, one of my favorite creatures.

Do you want me to dig out my copy of The Elephant in the Greek and Roman World for some more background?

I was overlong in finishing up my last post - but the answer is: YES!

And I also do believe that it's been some time since I've had Proper Occasion to properly hail you as, A Gentleman & A Scholar.

 

[Ozymandias]

@Predator145 - from Ye Olde Wikipedia:

"The Macedonians adopted the standard ancient tactic for fighting elephants, loosening their ranks to allow the elephants to pass through and assailing them with javelins as they tried to wheel around; they managed to pierce the unarmoured elephants' legs. The panicked and wounded elephants turned on the Indians themselves; the mahouts were armed with poisoned rods to kill the beasts but were slain by javelins and archers.

Looking further east again, however, Alexander could see that the kings of the Nanda Empire and Gangaridai could deploy between 3,000 and 6,000 war elephants. Such a force was many times larger than the number of elephants employed by the Persians and Greeks, which probably discouraged Alexander's army and effectively halted their advance into India.[31] On his return, Alexander established a force of elephants to guard his palace at Babylon, and created the post of elephantarch to lead his elephant units."

"Live & Learn" & All That Jazz.

 

[Snowygerry]

Iirc the problem was the ratio of elephants in the field vs. those in "reserve" so to say.

To have 3-6000 at the frontline, you'd need several 10.000s in training, young, females etc. and elaborate facilities to house them all, not to mention specialized personnel to feed, handle and train them.

The Carthaginians on several occasions "emptied the stables" and sent untrained or young animals into the field against the Romans, even then they rarely numbered more than a few dozen at the point of contact.

In this regard they are very different from ordinary horses which could be kept or raised in large numbers, just about anywhere with limited resources.

 

[Predator145]

Abul Abaz, The War Elephant Of Charlemagne - The Historian's Hut

Around the turn of the 9th century, after Charlemagne (r. 768-814) had spread his influence over much of Europe, the great king of the Franks realized there was a certain thing that he wanted but had not yet obtained—an elephant. Fortunately for Charlemagne, he had become pen pals with just the...

thehistorianshut.com

It looks like the Franks would have loved to have raised an elephant corps of their own if they had access to them. But a single one though making zero difference on the battlefield made a significant propaganda impact.

I just have ancient elephants called "battle elephant" (4/1/2 +1hp 40s, ignore forest, jungle movement cost, needs ivory) upgrading into medieval "war elephants" (6/2/2 +1hp 60s, ignore forest, jungle movement cost, needs ivory). Indians get "Elephantry" instead as their UU (8/2/2+1hp, 60s, ignore forest, jungle movement cost, needs no res) and can build knights as they're of a different line.

Elephants don't benefit much from gunpowder. Sure, there were versions with light artillery pieces and musketeers mounted on them. But that's never the selling point. Still, you can simulate those requiring Saltpeter to have a bit more attack.

 

[Vuldacon]

Seeing 3000 to 6000 Elephants coming at you would cause a panic and disruption . This is like "Shock and Awe" beginning Battles that attempt to show overwhelming Power.

The Shock and Awe factor was probably the biggest reason for using Elephants... Scare and Disrupt the enemy.

 

[Ozymandias]

One & All!

- Still: Absent horses, how would you guys think that strictly elephant v. elephant warfare might work? I'm leaning in favor of high AF / low DF and -1 HP. Defensive fire; now that Flintlock's work makes Artillery work as it should, that does help with mounted cannons.

What I've drawn up gives a massive advantage to the Attacker, and withdrawal from combat can be problematic.

I'm also beginning to lean heavily towards "combined arms" units, with an easy example being "Musket and Pike" Units, with the A Anim being Muskets and the D Anim being Pikes, so, Elephants and ... ?

 

[Ozymandias]

... It looks like my work just became more complicated -

 

[Blue Monkey]

In the Mahabharata, the "akshauhini" battle formation is stated as consisting of a ratio of 1 chariot : 1 elephant : 3 cavalry : 5 infantry soldiers. Which seems like a very low number of foot ...

... Which still leaves me with the question (returning to the Mahabharata) of how to square 1 chariot + 1 elephant + 3 cavalry into a 3 elephant to 5 foot soldier order of battle??

The akshauhini is only one amongst many battle formations used in Ancient India. In a full army of ancient India there would likely have been some regiments ( to use a modern analogy) organized as akshauhini, some as infantry, cavalry, or other types.

The best modern comparison might be to a combined arms force. In fact, according to some sources, the infantry in an akshauhini had the role of protecting the elephant rather than acting as an independent infantry unit. In which case they may have ridden the elephant to the battlefield, then dismounted. In C3 terms you might think of the infantry as the defense value of the elephant unit.

Chariots were usually ridden by commanders - or very elite warriors acting independently.

So an akshauhini ratio might look like an armored command vehicle, heavy tank ( with shielding infantry squad) & 3 motorized combat vehicles (Bradleys?) in modern equivalents.

 

[timerover51]

... It looks like my work just became more complicated -

View attachment 651152

The problem with that idea is that elephants did not like gunfire, and tended to run away from it.

Also, in elephant verses elephant combat with the Greeks, Indian elephants tended to dominate the smaller forest elephants that the mainland Greeks and Egyptians used.

 

[Ozymandias]

The akshauhini is only one amongst many battle formations used in Ancient India. In a full army of ancient India there would likely have been some regiments ( to use a modern analogy) organized as akshauhini, some as infantry, cavalry, or other types.

The best modern comparison might be to a combined arms force. In fact, according to some sources, the infantry in an akshauhini had the role of protecting the elephant rather than acting as an independent infantry unit. In which case they may have ridden the elephant to the battlefield, then dismounted. In C3 terms you might think of the infantry as the defense value of the elephant unit.

Chariots were usually ridden by commanders - or very elite warriors acting independently.

So an akshauhini ratio might look like an armored command vehicle, heavy tank ( with shielding infantry squad) & 3 motorized combat vehicles (Bradleys?) in modern equivalentsI

I was so very much hoping that you'd chime in on this one!

The more I dive into TF - and Civ3 in general - the more inclined I am to make units into combined arms formations, akin to the Musket-and-Pike formations which @Wotan49 o kindly made for me long ago, and which will finally see the light of day in TF (ditto his "escorted artillery" M-Units.)

So, the questions become those of "combos' (combined AF anims, etc.) and stats ...

...ideas?

 

[Theov]

They were a great part in war fare and are a great counter balance to horses in the game.
Also, there's no reason to use a little realistic fantasy... since the game is built on revisioned reality.

This is how I did it, very similar to Predator145:

(All require the elephants strat resource, they ignore jungle/forest and mountain/hill movement penalties.)

the Elephant Rider 2/1/2 (30 shields, +1HP. Stirrups)
- The Mediterranean Culture group builds the Elephant Archer 2/2/2 (30 shields, +1HP which can also enslave.)
- the Elephant Soldier 3/4/2 (70 shields, +1HP. Chivalry)
- the Elephant Cavalry 6/4/2 (80 shields, +1HP. Military Tradition)

I'd like to add more， but there arent that many good elephant units. If so, please tell me.

 

[Theov]

I was so very much hoping that you'd chime in on this one!

The more I dive into TF - and Civ3 in general - the more inclined I am to make units into combined arms formations, akin to the Musket-and-Pike formations which @Wotan49 o kindly made for me long ago, and which will finally see the light of day in TF (ditto his "escorted artillery" M-Units.)

So, the questions become those of "combos' (combined AF anims, etc.) and stats ...

...ideas?

Mounted units with a pike unit for defense or a sword/archery unit for offense is a great idea!
The Shrunken Elephants series is a good start.

 

[Ozymandias]

They were a great part in war fare and are a great counter balance to horses in the game.
Also, there's no reason to use a little realistic fantasy... since the game is built on revisioned reality.

This is how I did it, very similar to Predator145:

(All require the elephants strat resource, they ignore jungle/forest and mountain/hill movement penalties.)

the Elephant Rider 2/1/2 (30 shields, +1HP. Stirrups)
- The Mediterranean Culture group builds the Elephant Archer 2/2/2 (30 shields, +1HP which can also enslave.)
- the Elephant Soldier 3/4/2 (70 shields, +1HP. Chivalry)
- the Elephant Cavalry 6/4/2 (80 shields, +1HP. Military Tradition)

I'd like to add more， but there arent that many good elephant units. If so, please tell me.

Ares de Borg's:

• Hannibal
• Mercenary War Elephant
• Ptolemean War Elephant
• Punic War Elephant
• Seleucides Armoured War Elephant

Balam-Agab:

• Empires of the East: Khmer (3 Great Beasts)
• Empires of the East: Toungoo (3 More)
• Empires of the East: Ayutthaya (again, 3 more)
• Empires of the East: Mysore ("just" 1)
• Shrunken Kushan Elephant
• Empires of the East: Satavahana (1 more)
• Empires of the East: Maurya (1)
  Empires of the East: Khmer (another 3) *

Wotan49 did some mighty fine resizings:

• Shrunken Maratha Elephant
• Shrunken Early Mughal Elephant
• Shrunken Chola Elephant

* .. And, right about here, the site started getting "wonky" (technical term.) There are more, plus War Mammoths of every stripe, and a LOTR Beast or 2 thrown in for good measure.





... Plotinus' Amazing Mammoths!