War Elephants vs. Pikemen

[Sim_One]

1. Hi new Civ4 player here. I was wondering when given the choice to build both either War Elephants and Pikemen (assuming you have all the necessary resources and technologies), what would be your choice of units to counter enemy mounted units?

2. Now of course, what might be the more important question is that assuming you can only build one but you might soon have access to building the other (ie, you're very close to getting ivory, iron, etc.), then what would you do?

3. My initial thoughts on this question so far is that War Elephants appear to be a "luxury" unit that if you can build it, you should have some, but only in moderation. I have noticed the AI has a tendency to build a lot of them when they can.

4. I have also found that a good strategy when playing either the Greeks or the Zulus is that it's better to have 2 Phalanxes or Impis than to have 1 Pikeman or War Elephant, both from a financial and strategic point of view. I was wondering if the experts player agrees with that statement.

Thanks for your comments. By the way, I only have the Warlords expansion.

 

[Molybdeus]

War elephants for sure. Both have str 12 vs. mounted units at the same cost, but war elephants can be useful offensively as well. They are also available much earlier than pikemen.

 

[control740]

War elephants for sure. Both have str 12 vs. mounted units at the same cost, but war elephants can be useful offensively as well. They are also available much earlier than pikemen.

Actually that's not how it works, only Combat promotions directly alter a units own strength. All other modifiers work against the unit it's fighting. So what this means is

Pikemen vs.
Chariot: 6 vs 2
Horse Archer 6 vs 3
War Elephant 6 vs 4
Knight: 6 vs 5
Cuirassier: 6 vs 6
Cavalry: 6 vs 7.5

War Elephant vs
Chariot 8 vs 3
Horse Archer 8 vs 4.5
War Elephant 8 vs 8
Knight 8 vs 7.5
Cuirassier 8 vs 8
Cavalry 8 vs 10

Not that this changes your conclusion much. What this all amounts to is the pikeman has a slight advantage on everything below the Cuirassier, and is exactly the same vs Cuirassier and Cavalry. Now does this make up for the 2 base strength difference it loses to the War Elephant? Probably not, add in the stable which gives you level 2 elephants out of the gate and the clear winner is the War Elephant.

But, as was mentioned, you don't always have access to ivory, and iron is more common, so often one doesnt have the luxury of choice.

 

[Monkeyfinger]

But, as was mentioned, you don't always have access to ivory, and iron is more common, so often one doesnt have the luxury of choice.

This. War elephants are designed to be a unit that would be really strong, arguably overpowered, if you could get them reliably, but are rare.

I don't like this implementation of them much.

 

[CivCorpse]

Actually that's not how it works, only Combat promotions directly alter a units own strength. All other modifiers work against the unit it's fighting. So what this means is

Pikemen vs.
Chariot: 6 vs 2
Horse Archer 6 vs 3
War Elephant 6 vs 4
Knight: 6 vs 5
Cuirassier: 6 vs 6
Cavalry: 6 vs 7.5

War Elephant vs
Chariot 8 vs 3
Horse Archer 8 vs 4.5
War Elephant 8 vs 8
Knight 8 vs 7.5
Cuirassier 8 vs 8
Cavalry 8 vs 10

Not that this changes your conclusion much. What this all amounts to is the pikeman has a slight advantage on everything below the Cuirassier, and is exactly the same vs Cuirassier and Cavalry. Now does this make up for the 2 base strength difference it loses to the War Elephant? Probably not, add in the stable which gives you level 2 elephants out of the gate and the clear winner is the War Elephant.

But, as was mentioned, you don't always have access to ivory, and iron is more common, so often one doesnt have the luxury of choice.

I don't think you're doing the correct math. The promotions affect the unit attackings base strength. Then a ration of the modified strength compared to the base strength is determined. That ratio is then applied to the defenders strength. And the combat odds are determined using the attackers base strength vs the modified defnders strength. Example is using a knight. the contemporary mounted unit of pikemen.

unpromoted vs unpromoted.
War elephant 8+50% (12) 8 is 66% of 12 so you multiply the knights strength of 10 by 66%. The odds are then 8 vs 6.66 or 73%
A pikemen is strength 6+100% (12) 6 is 50% of 12 so you multiply the knights strength by 50% The odds are then 6 vs 5 or 73%
With Combat2 and formation the war elephant gains a slight advantage. However an aggresive civ can get formation promotions with just 5exp where a war elephant needs 10. without a GG settled you can not get 10exp from scratch. You can get 9 with barracks/stables/vassalage/theocracy. However mounted units can get shock from the very beginning which negates the formation bonus for the pikes.
I would have to give the overall advantage to pikes for the flexibility in promotions and the ability to take advantage of defensive bonuses.
War elephants are really meant to be strong overall attackers vs stacksin the years before engineering.The high base strength combined with combat 1 and shock (available right from the start without help from civics) means the worst case scenario (attacking a combat2 formation spearman from an aggressive civ running vassalage or theocracy) the combat odds are 50%. without the third promotion they defeat spearmen 69.7% of the time. Once pikes are in play for both sides war elephants are best for stack defense vs crossbows.
I have attached screen shots showing how the end result of the math from above.

 

[control740]

Oops, you're right, my math is off, but you don't quite have it exactly right either. Basically it's (attacker base str + combat bonus) vs (defender base str+(net of all other bonuses involved))

So for an unpromoted WE vs unpromoted knight
WE is just 8 since he has no combat bonus
knight has a -50% bonus from the war elephants mounted bonus which is:
10/(1+(50/100)) = 10/1.5 = 6.66
If the knight had combat 1 it would be 10/1.4 = 7.14
If both had combat 1 it would be WE(8.8) vs Knight(7.14), as combat is the only bonus applied to the attacker, the rest are applied to the defender. I just tested this in world builder and this all bears out.


revised WE numbers(all unpromoted)
vs Chariot 8 vs 2.66
vs Horse Archer 8 vs 4
vs War Elephant 8 vs 8
vs Knight 8 vs 6.66
vs Cuirassier 8 vs 8
vs Cavalry 8 vs 10

I believe that's right.

 

[vicawoo]

Pikemen takes engineering, which takes machinery, which is why people say war elephants have no good counter early (especially shock elephants). Also, you don't need horseback riding for elephants in warlords. And shock knights do reasonably well vs pikemen, whereas formation is much harder to get.

Let's say you're using war elephants to counter attack a stack. If you used a spearman/pikeman, it would die horribly to an axe.

 

[CivCorpse]

Pikemen takes engineering, which takes machinery, which is why people say war elephants have no good counter early (especially shock elephants). Also, you don't need horseback riding for elephants in warlords. And shock knights do reasonably well vs pikemen, whereas formation is much harder to get.

Let's say you're using war elephants to counter attack a stack. If you used a spearman/pikeman, it would die horribly to an axe.

Basically comparing war elephants to pikemen is comparing apples to oranges since they come at very different times. As for the spearman/pikeman dying to an axeman that will never happen...the crossbow would have butchered them way before the axeman ever did

 

[Chairo Hisui]

So is the basic consensus is Pikemen win out?

 

[_invy_]

Nope, conclusion should be to mix both, and build more War Elephants War Elephants can kill Axes, Swords, Longbows, Xbows, and even Macemen.. while Pikes are useless there. So overall I think WE are better and should be built more. Unless you programmed AI to build only mounted units :x.

 

[slobberinbear]

Promotions matter too, and help highlight the different roles for the units.

When I build a pikeman, I am intentionally building an anti-mounted unit. I have no qualms giving him Combat I & II and Formation, because that's his role.

When I build an elephant, I am building an all-purpose tough unit. I am going to consider the Flanking and Combat promotions, and possibly one of the counter promotions. But I'm not setting out to build an anti-mounted unit here, even though that's one of the unit's traits. I consider that a bonus that helps keep elephants relevant in the Medieval period.

 

[Gwynnja]

Head to head, I'll take the pikeman. I build those guys to protect my attackers, healers, seige, and with a few xbows and maces, each other.

 

[azzaman333]

Elephants come earlier, and are unstoppable until Pikes, or against other elephants.


I vote the elephants.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Basically comparing war elephants to pikemen is comparing apples to oranges since they come at very different times. As for the spearman/pikeman dying to an axeman that will never happen...the crossbow would have butchered them way before the axeman ever did

If you go mass stupid monty warring with elephant/axe/catapult, the axes are definitely your only hope vs pikes, but they do quite well there!

What's funny is doing that and wheezing one's way to heroic epic and either vassalage or theo. Cats normally suck vs longbows but not if they're CR III. Early CR III cats are usually reserved for CHA or IMP leaders though.

 

[fed1943]

Against mounted unpromoted elephants or pike are similar, promoted ele are better.
Against non-mounted ele are better.
Ele v. pike, pike are better.
Best regards,

 

[Skallagrimson]

First civ to get a crossbows/elephants combo really really screwed up if they don't end up owning the continent.

 

[dragomaster]

I think this is a........

Come on, unless you are the HRE, we are the kings.

 

[InvisibleStalke]

First civ to get a crossbows/elephants combo really really screwed up if they don't end up owning the continent.

Why?

What conceivable difference do the crossbows make? Shock elephants can protect your stack from maces and axes can protect it from spears and pikes.

I would attack with elephants/catapults/axes. Thats an awesome combination that doesn't really start to falter until the AIs have engineering. By which time you should have a lot of territory to consolidate.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Why?

What conceivable difference do the crossbows make? Shock elephants can protect your stack from maces and axes can protect it from spears and pikes.

I would attack with elephants/catapults/axes. Thats an awesome combination that doesn't really start to falter until the AIs have engineering. By which time you should have a lot of territory to consolidate.

I don't see what special threat engineering affords. There will be some pikes but typically the unit you have to get through remains the longbows (they're a lot more prevalent, and elephants will tend to have shock, not cover. Lbows will have CG, pikes will not, so pikes will only be marginally better than them and more rare). If pikes are really a problem just CR axes or even swords will usually handle that. The most painful enemy tech jump points for cat/axe/elephant are feudalism (where every city defender will cut down way more catapults) and gunpowder.

Muskets can, of course, kill anything in that stack with relative ease. Generally speaking though this stack is good until then with some exceptions. HRE really can screw you with engineering since the axes won't hold. Japan can make things miserable as elephants are not immune to first strikes and shock elephants aren't going to have flanking II (and toku will likely have access to formation if needed on his UU). China will screw you just with the collateral. Rome will get in the way with its UU even though you can still beat it. Finally, while SB doesn't get any units that would especially dominate this, massed CG III archers from a high unitprob AI is just loads of "not fun" for a catapult war.

Of course, all that is for the AI. Any effort involving massed siege defensively will seriously reduce the life span of this stack. Combat longbows or even axes start getting >50% odds vs elephants somewhat quickly after a few cats. AGG and PRO hold an advantage in this realm of course, as both have access to formation after 2 promotions. One doesn't see many formation longbows from a protective AI, but if you think about it that would actually be threatening to elephants as elephants can't get cover and aren't typically immune to those first strikes. ANY collateral would set the elephant pretty far back vs a feudalism PRO guy. Of course, C2 formation would be serviceable against shock elephants post-siege, too.

So while elephants are very, very good, the extra very is from AI stupidity. Otherwise they're just very good .

 

[Diamondeye]

1. Hi new Civ4 player here. I was wondering when given the choice to build both either War Elephants and Pikemen (assuming you have all the necessary resources and technologies), what would be your choice of units to counter enemy mounted units?

Pikeman. This unit is dedicated to defending against mounted and does not get killed by mistake against enemy xbows or maces.

2. Now of course, what might be the more important question is that assuming you can only build one but you might soon have access to building the other (ie, you're very close to getting ivory, iron, etc.), then what would you do?

If I am still looking for a anti-mounted unit (meaning I am sure to face many mounted units), I would wait for the pike even if Ivory was linked up. Perhaps bring some elephants as alternative attackers once the CR melee units are drained/open field fighters.

3. My initial thoughts on this question so far is that War Elephants appear to be a "luxury" unit that if you can build it, you should have some, but only in moderation. I have noticed the AI has a tendency to build a lot of them when they can.

Good observation. You should not count on having access to Ivory, and thus, the War Elephant is a luxury. Use them if you have Ivory (early Elephants can be devastating - in Warlords they do not req Horseback Riding), I would say use them to some extent if you tech right for Constr. Cats/Elephants makes a fine stack until the enemy has Engi or Feu.

4. I have also found that a good strategy when playing either the Greeks or the Zulus is that it's better to have 2 Phalanxes or Impis than to have 1 Pikeman or War Elephant, both from a financial and strategic point of view. I was wondering if the experts player agrees with that statement.

... Depends on lots of things. First of all, How are Phalanx in Warlords (this unit has been changed alot, and in BtS it is an axeman with 100% against chariots, not a spearman)?
It also depends on how lategame it is. If the enemy has HAs, War Ellies or Pikes will outweight the lesser, cheaper units. Since this will probably be the issue once you have Pikes, I would not suggest using this strategy (then again, I am not a Warlords player).