War Elephants?

[Maximus07]

I'm having a lot of trouble fighting these damn things, they seem so strong, yet my units are more advanced! I was sure I would win this war as I have riflemen, cannons, cavalry, armies etc. and lots too. All the AI uses is those damn elephants. Everytime they attack they almost always kill my unit, and if I attack I die most of the time without doing a lot of damage...it can't be the terrain either because I'm on hills/cities and so are they.

Can someone offer some good advice against these things?

 

[MadScotsMan]

one answer:

 

[Whomp]

The unit attacks with a 4 and defends as a 3.

Vet cavs attacking vet WE's on flat land should win 88% of the time.
However, attacking on a hill is around 78% but a mountain drops it to 65%.

Of course there's other variables like whether they're fortified, attacking over a river, regular versus vet behind a city etc etc.

Show us a picture and it will tell the whole story.

 

[Sweetchuck]

Maybe you need some war mice.



I've never had a lot of trouble with them (elephants). They're kinda comical actually.

Do you have bombardment capability (cannons, etc.)? Maybe shift your strategy by softening them a bit before you engage them one-on-one.

 

[Quintillus]

Shouldn't a Cavalry attacking an Elephant on a mountain win less than half the time? 3 defense + 100% mountain bonus, and then plus one extra hit point?

You did say, "I'm on hills/city and so are they"

If the elephant is fortified in a city that is on a hill, that's a 125% bonus, so it'd be 6 attack v. 6.75 defense (assuming you're using Cavalry to attack...I hope you aren't attacking with the Riflemen). That's not counting the extra hit point for the elephant. So you'd lose more than half in that situation.

War Elephants would usually beat Cavalry on the attack. As to Riflemen, are they conscripts? The elephants would have a good chance then. Even regulars they'd do OK against if they were Veterans, thanks to their extra hit point.

A picture of course would allow us to see exactly what the problem is.

 

[Whomp]

You're right. I must've hit something wrong on the combat calculator and for sure forgot about the extra HP.
Again assuming vet vs. vet in the open field...
It's actually 36% win on a mountain and 30% if it's fortified.
Hills aren't much better at 52.7% and 43.8% if fortified.
69.6% on grass and drops to 58.7% if fortified.

 

[Maximus07]

Well this is all pretty bad. All I know is that those stupid elephants have low att def (4/3). My units have higher bonuses (riflemen, cavalry) so they should be winning but are not.

 

[Whomp]

Can you post a picture?

You're probably not using your combined forces properly. IE hammering them with cannons under rifles and finishing with cavs. Are you leaving your cavs without cover?

 

[Rising Star]

All terrain gives a defensive bonus, although why grasslands and plains need to I don't know. They should be the base terrain. Anyway, if these elephants are in a city on a hill, they'll easily take cavalry. Riflemen aren't an offensive unit, so don't even think about attacking with them, unless you absolutely need to. Bombard the absolute crap out of these elephants before you attack them, or goad them into coming after your riflemen.

 

[LowEndUser]

Well this is all pretty bad. All I know is that those stupid elephants have low att def (4/3). My units have higher bonuses (riflemen, cavalry) so they should be winning but are not.

Some of the combat results in Civ3 can IMO be a bit off at times , and be very frustrating, and Elephants, like all UU`s are tough beyond their rated listing it seems.

I have found that the AI is usually reluctant to attack stacks, and will _never_ attack an Army ( 3 units ) unless it`s redlined. Use the Army to pick off single units using it`s extra movement rate or lead assaults on Cities.

In fact your entire force should pivot around the Army if your luckly enough to have one.

I try to move-fight in large stacks with a defensive unit like an archer, pikeman, rifleman set as fortified with the attack units. Sometimes this doesn`t help because the AI has the benefit of picking which unit in the stack it will hit, but I have noticed that it seems to cut back on their attacking the whole stack.

Past all that stuff, you don`t usually need to attack cities on hills, which can bleed even a more advanced Army if fortified as the the AI will often do with size 2 cities. If there is a Barracks in there and your failed attacks have raised an AI unit, even just an archer unit to Elite rating expect to lose a lot of good, more advanced units killing him off.....obsessing on taking one City can actually lose a Game for you as the years fly by.

Depending on the Game Date and your Victory Rating it`s often better early - mid Game to try and just cripple an AI by picking off a soft target near a Lux/resource.

I`m sure more experienced Warmongers will respond to you, but it`s helpful if you list the level your playing on and what Civ. and if PTW or Conquests.

 

[Mursi lives]

...it can't be the terrain either because I'm on hills/cities and so are they.

Being on a hill give a defensive bonus, but attacking from a hill doesnt give any bonus to the attacker. Check also that you are not attacking through a river (+ 50% to the defender).
Either ignore this city or use many canons to redline defenders before attacking.

 

[King Hannibal]

Have you tried having say 1 cav per 2-3 cannons? And just bombard everything cities to 1 pop? thats how i normaly do

 

[drakdan]

Have you tried having say 1 cav per 2-3 cannons? And just bombard everything cities to 1 pop? thats how i normaly do

Unless you're playing Vanilla or bombarding to 1pop to save trouble with the city, you can bombard units to 1 hp and then attack, which is what I usually do.

 

[civverguy]

You should use artillery to weaken them first.

 

[ilovesimgolf]

Maximus07,

Just remember that luck plays an important part in the outcome of CivIII battles. This is how we end up with the infamous "spearman vs. tank" problem.

Just make sure that your turning the luck in your favour, do all of the things mentioned above, and, if your superior units still die, just take it lightly and remember that it is just a game.

I've heard that the combat system is better in Civ4 (I haven't tried it). If this really bugs you, maybe you should try Civ4.

Good luck! (Remember: )

Happy civ-ing

--ilovesimgolf

 

[PaperBeetle]

Well this is all pretty bad. All I know is that those stupid elephants have low att def (4/3). My units have higher bonuses (riflemen, cavalry) so they should be winning but are not.

Ah. If that's all you know, then you need to take some time to get more data about the situation. Then you can make an informed decision on how to fight the elephants.

 

[Tribute]

Actually, I'm not too sure how combat works. Is it just a Random Number, which is then compared to the fraction (your attack)/(your attack+ enemy's overall defense)? If it is less than, you do damage; else, they do damage? And what about defensive bombard? Does that target the attacker's defense, or attacker's offensive power?

I have a feeling that the defensive bombard targets the attacker's defense. But the normal attack thing, doesn't quite make sense. Lots of times, ancient cavs and war elephants win more than they ought to, even if they're not veteran. I curse them for always running over my pikemen when I'm going through marshes.

Sometimes, I think there ought to be terrain with a negative defensive terrain bonus. And Guerrillas should get an attack and defense bonus in jungles and marshes. But it's too late for that, with Civ IV around.

 

[Othniel]

I have a feeling that the defensive bombard targets the attacker's defense. But the normal attack thing, doesn't quite make sense. Lots of times, ancient cavs and war elephants win more than they ought to, even if they're not veteran. I curse them for always running over my pikemen when I'm going through marshes.
.

I'm no expert on the math behind the Civ combat algorithm so take what I say below with a grain of salt:

I understand computing the free defensive shot more like this:
The eligible defensive unit has an "bombard attack" value that is less than that unit's normal attack. That bombard attack value is compared to something like a dice roll generated by the pRNG e.g. sorta like trying to roll a "2" or less on a dice and computing the probability of doing so. If you get a 2 or less, you get a hit; otherwise it's a miss. I don't think there is ever a comparison between the defender's free shot rating and the attacker's defensive rating...but I could well be wrong.

The extra hit point of AC and war elephants makes a huge difference statistically in terms of winning in combat. Just reference a combat calculator to see visual proof. That's probably why those darned things seem to win so often, even against "improbable" odds. That's also why vet units are so much more valuable to build than regulars...