need some explanation

[Sennacherib]

hi,

I would like to talk about three points:

- light chariot moving in woods, how it is possible ?
- light infantry standing in the open against heavy cavalry, something change in the rule and make some really stupid situation really common.
- change to come for heavy chariot, can you give me historical evidence of such impact power ? what heavy chariot ever complete in a historical battle in classical period ?


Thanks for your clarifications !

[rbodleyscott]

hi,

I would like to talk about three points:

- light chariot moving in woods, how it is possible ?

The Ancient British are known to have done so. I guess it depends on the density of the woodland - primary deciduous woodland (which is pretty rare in modern times) tends to be relatively open because the canopy of the mature trees tends to keep down the undergrowth.

- light infantry standing in the open against heavy cavalry, something change in the rule and make some really stupid situation really common.

I am not aware of any change that could have caused this. Can you recall when you first noticed an apparent change?

They don't evade if they have too high a chance to be caught, but recent changes should make at least archers and slingers break quicker against cavalry than they used to, as they get an extra -1 CT modifier.

I agree that there is room for making them even quicker to break, or possibly make them always evade in open terrain even if they are likely to be caught. (But in the latter case, perhaps some people would then complain that they have become even harder to catch).

- change to come for heavy chariot, can you give me historical evidence of such impact power ? what heavy chariot ever complete in a historical battle in classical period ?

Well there is the battle of Krimisos in 341 BC.

However, this is rather beside the point, the design philosophy is to get the right effect of various troops in their own time period, not in anachronistic matchups. Early tests indicated that Heavy Chariots needed a slight boost to be appropriately effective in their heyday. (And give a reason for the Assyrians to bother to keep fielding them when they also have extremely effective cavalry).

The change is an increase in their impact POA from +100 to +150, which is significant but not massive, but does give them a chance of riding down Light Spear, Sword Medium Foot in open terrain.

It is still cancelled by steady spears, lancers etc., so it won't do them any good vs steady hoplites, pikes or xystophoroi. Hence in the period when some nations (Carthaginians and possibly Kyreneans) were still using them, without much success, they are unlikely to get the benefit of the change anyway.

[Sennacherib]

SINCE last DLC i really find that foot skirmishers stay most of the time when charge by mounted, even with support behind where they can find safety they stay with no chance to win, this is incredible! the enemy is not disorganized with full moral, in a battle a line of four light archers in open charge by four heavy armoured superior lancer stay like dummy hoping to stop them…. i play a lot of battle and i don't remember seing so often things like that,and it happened often !


For chariot in woods, do you think that forest in antiquity where mostly light one ? so an exception make the rule ? actually i play a battle against indian, i have a wood in tropical terrain, inside some medium infantry and light ones, in front a lot of indian cavalry and light chariots, cavalry pinned my foot, after three turn i'm still fighting against them winning laboriosly and in the same time light chariots easily outflank me by the wood, and it is a bg one…… is this serious ? so maybe if there is orchard or palmeraie it is easier, but i don't think there is a lot of them at that time. i really think that mounted in such terrain must have bigger penalties for fighting and moving.


For heavy chariot if they were so efficient why cavalry replace them ? does the heavy chariot of carthaginian or kyrenean have such impact as assyrian in an another time ? i really doubt !


English is not my first language, it is difficult to argue about technical rules problem this is why i only debate for things who really seems incoherent to me !

[rbodleyscott]

For heavy chariot if they were so efficient why cavalry replace them ?

Chariots were less flexible and also very expensive to maintain. The fact that the Assyrians continued to use them long after they had highly effective cavalry suggests that they still found them worth fielding, despite the expense.

You can find these arguments made elsewhere in the literature, but I don't really have time to search out references for you at present. Je suis désolé.

Anyway, as I explained above, the change won't have much effect outside their historical period of true effectiveness. Carthaginian chariots were ineffective against hoplites (as they will be despite the change), but they were effective against the Syracusan cavalry.

[MVP7]

One reason for why chariots were around for a long time (even after horses had been bred enough to be ridden in war) was their prestige and status as the weapon of the elite. It's no weirder than cavalry still being used offensively in both world wars even though it had obviously become increasingly obsolete over the last century. The main problem of the chariots was presumably their heavy reliance on expensive maintenance which was ultimately unjustified expense when compared to what cavalry could offer.

The "impact power" of the chariots is a combination of physical combat and the psychological effect that the big machines carrying the perceived elite would have on the less confident opponent. Even on the physical level the charge is not just a formation of chariots ramming into a neat formation of infantry. Especially the undrilled non-heavy infantry infantry might be budging and giving way for the chariots while the charioteers would be firing their bows from close range while looking for weaknesses from the formation.

[Sennacherib]

i see something strange with the light infantry, i play many battle with stream on terrain, this stream has no effect on any troops, i don't know why but ok, and in a battle i saw that i can attack heavy troops with my light infantry and it is normally impossible in good terrain. and i remember the example i explain in my second post that the four light one where in a stream when attack by heavy lancers, is it possible that they think they are in bad terrain for heaviest troops and that's why they stay ?

[rbodleyscott]

i see something strange with the light infantry, i play many battle with stream on terrain, this stream has no effect on any troops, i don't know why but ok, and in a battle i saw that i can attack heavy troops with my light infantry and it is normally impossible in good terrain. and i remember the example i explain in my second post that the four light one where in a stream when attack by heavy lancers, is it possible that they think they are in bad terrain for heaviest troops and that's why they stay ?

Streams do have an effect, they count as non-open terrain, which cancels some impact POAs such as the one for Lancers.

[Sennacherib]

so this is suffisant for light troops standing against heaviest one ?

[rbodleyscott]

so this is suffisant for light troops standing against heaviest one ?

No. We will be beta testing a change.

[Sennacherib]

it will be cool to have a icon on a corner who explain the terrain effect when you click on it !