• We are currently performing site maintenance, parts of civfanatics are currently offline, but will come back online in the coming days. For more updates please see here.

question on War Elephants

Ision

Master
Joined
Mar 8, 2003
Messages
452
I have always disliked the combat numbers on war elephants. The 'no need for a resouce' advantage never quite cut it for me.

Whats your take on these changes:

1. The no resource requirement remains.

2. Cost factor increased from 70 to 80 shields (to reflect the higher maintenance and training requirements).

3. Hit point bonus of +1 (to reflect the sheer strength and ability to absorb punishment).


Your input would be appreciated!

Sincerely. Ision
 
If you believe that this would overpower the unit. Would a cost factor increase from 70 to 90 shields, offset this?
 
Requiring Ivory may sound logical, but in Civ game reality ... it is NOT the way to go.... Ivory is not like iron or horses in either availability or distribution throughout the map......
 
Originally posted by Ision
Requiring Ivory may sound logical, but in Civ game reality ... it is NOT the way to go.... Ivory is not like iron or horses in either availability or distribution throughout the map......

Agreed.
But since we are in the editing process here, one could add an "elephant resource", which would be a requirement for war elephants.
In PTW, i clearly think that carthaginians should have also access to war elephants. May be with different stats though than the indian ones :crazyeye:
 
My thoughts about Elephants:- :)

* Why are they only allowed in the Middle Ages? :confused:
Ancient India used them against Alexander the Great in 326 BC....
Seleucid Persia was using them from 300 BC onwards....
Carthage used then against the Romans in the 3rd century BC....
Sassanid Persia also used them against the Romans from 260 to 600 AD....

* Their defence of 3 is far too high; it encourages the AI and players to use them to defend cities.
And just how DO you use Elephants to defend a city? What do you do, stand them on top of the city walls? :crazyeye:
(If you did, then I can think of two very good reasons why not to stand underneath them....they might fall and crush you, and the other reason is not fatal, but equally unpleasant to think about! :lol: )

A defence of 2 would be better, both historically and for gameplay. :D
 
Originally posted by Kryten
My thoughts about Elephants:- :)

* Why are they only allowed in the Middle Ages? :confused:
Ancient India used them against Alexander the Great in 326 BC....
Seleucid Persia was using them from 300 BC onwards....
Carthage used then against the Romans in the 3rd century BC....
Sassanid Persia also used them against the Romans from 260 to 600 AD....

* Their defence of 3 is far too high; it encourages the AI and players to use them to defend cities.
And just how DO you use Elephants to defend a city? What do you do, stand them on top of the city walls? :crazyeye:
(If you did, then I can think of two very good reasons why not to stand underneath them....they might fall and crush you, and the other reason is not fatal, but equally unpleasant to think about! :lol: )

A defence of 2 would be better, both historically and for gameplay. :D

Their heads are weapons! :) Would you like a herd of pachaderms charging out of the gates when you're trying to take it?
 
They should have a movement that considers all forest and jungle tiles as roaded, at least as far as forests and jungles are concerned...
(I just visited a South African reserve last month, and believe me, there was no tree standing after a herd of 14 elephants passed by...) :crazyeye:
 
Originally posted by Chieftess
Their heads are weapons! :) Would you like a herd of pachaderms charging out of the gates when you're trying to take it?

I'd sooner have that than stand underneath them! :lol:

But isn't "charging out of the gates" already factored into the game, by an Elephant unit attacking out of the city against an adjacent enemy?

What about the times when people and the AI fortify their elephants, behind city walls or in fortresses.
I say again; how on earth do you fortify Elephants, and use them in a static role to defend a city? ;)
 
Originally posted by Kryten
I say again; how on earth do you fortify Elephants, and use them in a static role to defend a city? ;)

Just give them some drugs so they sleep (i don't like the killing of elephants), and lay them out around the city, and fortify the men behind their sleeping bodies... ;)
 
Originally posted by Globetrotter
Just give them some drugs so they sleep (i don't like the killing of elephants), and lay them out around the city, and fortify the men behind their sleeping bodies... ;)

....or maybe place them in 'hull-down' defensive emplacements, like tanks.... :D
 

Attachments

  • hull_down_elephant.gif
    hull_down_elephant.gif
    38.2 KB · Views: 278
:rotfl:

The fortified elephant's 88mm trunk is certainly a FATAL weapon...

If the front line remains static for some time, I'd think even industrial equipment would probably just rust away under constant shower bombardment (armor piercing ammo=salt water) while the foot units get the flu... guess why the rifleman sneezes all the time. Hence increase AD values!:D
 
@ Kryten: :worship:


...but: What's the difference between fortifying a Horse unit and an Elephant? The Pachyderm at least offers some protection if you stand behind him, but a Horse?

IMHO, the defense always means the dismounted defence; Knights didn't sit on their Horses while defending their castle, and the same would be true for the Elephant Riders.
 
Rather than strengthening the War Elephant, I think cutting the cost to 60 shields would be a better idea. Elephants only ever were very effective for "shock" value - against an opponent used to them, they were not stronger than medieval heavy cavalry; on the contrary.
 
A Brief history

The Asian elephant was used in battle as early as 1100 B.C., but it was not until 326 B.C., at the Battle of Hydaspes, that the first European commander encountered elephants in battle. Alexander the Great defeated an army commanded by Poros at Hydaspes, in modern Pundjab, and of the 200 Indian war elephants deployed there Alexander captured 80 animals which he later incorporated into his own army. In the course of his campaigns, Alexander was able to gather as many as 200 elephants in his army. King Pyrrhus of Epirus defeated the Romans at the battle of Heraclea (280 B.C.), on the Gulf of Tarent, primarly because of the 26 Indian elephants in his command.

After the Indian elephant had proven its worth in battle, the Egyptians and Carthaginians deployed African plains elephants in the same role. The animals were tamed and prepared for battle in eastern Sudan and Tunisia. The plains elephant is much larger and heavier than the Indian elephant. Properly armed and armoured, the plains elephant became a formidable enemy for infantry and cavalry. The crew of a Carthaginian war elephant typically consisted of four men, the Numidian Mahout who controlled the animal, and three Carthaginian soldiers in the tower: officer, archer, and infantryman armed with the Sarissa, a lance 5 - 6 m long.

The Numidians used African forest elephants in battle. Many of these animals were captured in the woods of the Atlas mountains. These relatively small animals could not carry a tower, they were ridden by a crew of two or three men. The Mahout controlled the animal, and the other two men were armed with bow and arrows, or javelins.

European military historians have often dismissed war elephants as ineffective and even dangerous, but in fact they were quite useful. They were strong beasts of burden once tamed, and thus they were of great assistance to travelling armies bearing heavy loads. They were also very useful in battle. They could charge at up to 25 kilometres per hour, and they had difficulty stopping once they reached that speed. The stampeding beasts therefore often crushed enemy armies. Elephants were also very difficult to kill, and thus opposing armies were often sent scrambling for safety when they charged. Additionally, war elephants had a frightening presence for armies that had never seen them before. Horses and camels unaccustomed to elephants were similarly spooked, and often ran off in fear. Indian armies did not simply rely on the elephants' physical presence to frighten their opponents into defeat, however. They also used the elephants' enormous size to their advantage by stationing armed soldiers atop the animals. Archers and javelin throwers atop war elephants had a distinct advantage over the army on the ground.
There were disadvantages to the use of elephants in war, however. Although they were difficult to kill, several wounds to an elephant, or the loss of the animal's driver, could cause the elephant to lose control and become dangerous to its own army. Also, with the invention and widespread use of gunpowder in warfare in the 16th century, elephants became easier to kill, and thus their effectiveness decreased.

In 1398, however, Timur was able to defeat the army of the Delhi Sultanate, and its elephants. Although it is difficult to say for sure how Timur got past the elephants, one tale says that after seeing the Delhi Sultanate's 120 war elephants, Timur offered a special prayer to Allah, then attached straw to the backs of the camels in his own army. When the camels got close to the elephants, Timur ignited the straw, thus encouraging the camels to run forward. The flaming camels racing towards them frightened the elephants, who ended up crushing many Indian troops in their haste to retreat.

However he managed to defeat them, Timur was so impressed with their performance in battle that he went to the trouble of obtaining war elephants for himself to use in his upcoming battles against the Mamluks and the Ottomans, both of whom he subsequently defeated.
 
This brings us to a couple of things:
1- War elephant should be taken further back to ancient ages, and still made available until middle ages.
2- A stronger African version of the war elephant should also be made available, for ancient times. The Indian version would be weaker in ancient times, and stronger in middle ages.
3- War elephant should have a stronger attack, but his defense should not be that high, since sometimes, when attacked, elephants used to run back and charge their own armies.

This is my opinion based on the above post ;)
 
I like the ancient elephant, upgradeable to a middle age elephant, though instead of African and Indian, maybe it's Elephant and Armored Elephant (since you can't really upgrade to a different species).

An alternative would be to take the current elephant with "knight" statistics back to the ancient, but make it expensive and take away the retreat capability due to the problematic elephant retreat.
 
Back
Top Bottom