Cavalry in Rome

[thorpemark]

Has no one mentioned Chariots?

Chariots were absolutely feared on the plains. I would think chariots, rather than pure cavalry, will be the other-PI game equivalent of cavalry in this game. But I have no information on which to base this guess.

 

[unmerged(77286)]

Chariots shmariots. They got smacked down when rome came never to be reborn again. BUt considering that most steppe, eastern european nations are missing from the game start up seems like real cavalry powers are a bit underminded in the game anyways. Whoe the F$%^ are Roxolani?

 

[unmerged(72836)]

I disagree heavy cavalry was the decisive arm of Philip II / Alexander the Great's army which is before game start, the Parthian's also have an elite heavy cavalry force that set the Romans packing numerous times

It was the DECIDING force, yes, but come on now, the Companions would have stood no chance uniting Greece if they hadn't had the Phalanx's to pin Greek hoplites in place.

 

[HolisticGod]

thorpemark,

The power of chariots, like the power of elephants, is most decisive in Hollywood blockbusters...

 

[niceta]

Assyrian ruled with Chariots for many years but in ancient times..... Elephants was just successfully in the first Pyrrus battle and first Hannibal wars.... Nothin else

 

[hjarg]

Aye, but the main reason the chariots were useful was because horses at that time were not strong enough to carry a fully armed human. After horses were bred strong enough, the chariots died off.

 

[unmerged(10773)]

Has no one mentioned Chariots?

Chariots were absolutely feared on the plains. I would think chariots, rather than pure cavalry, will be the other-PI game equivalent of cavalry in this game. But I have no information on which to base this guess.

chariots where used because horses at that age where too small to carry
a armoured warrior. When horses through breeding became larger/stronger
chariots where rendered obsolete.

 

[unmerged(15623)]

Whoe the F$%^ are Roxolani?

One of the most well known Sarmatian tribes. IIRC they were the ones that, with Iazyges, settled in the Hungaran plain and fought against Romans in Dacian wars.

In any case Roxolani sounds cool, and as such it was the best pick for the steppe tribe.

 

[Kubelwagen]

Chariots were never especially useful in this time period

Earlier, in the 400s and 300s, yeah, they were good for the shock value. At Dascyleum, some hoplites fled at the sight of the scythed beasties, which obviously didn't improve their situation.

But they were prone to uselessness on anything except level ground thanks to the scythes protruding everywhere.

The Romans never had any issue with them, thanks to help from Greeks who knew how to counter them.

my 2 c

 

[SirGrotius]

Chariots were never especially useful in this time period

Earlier, in the 400s and 300s, yeah, they were good for the shock value. At Dascyleum, some hoplites fled at the sight of the scythed beasties, which obviously didn't improve their situation.

But they were prone to uselessness on anything except level ground thanks to the scythes protruding everywhere.

The Romans never had any issue with them, thanks to help from Greeks who knew how to counter them.

my 2 c

And a good 2 cents that is.

 

[unmerged(77286)]

One of the most well known Sarmatian tribes. IIRC they were the ones that, with Iazyges, settled in the Hungaran plain and fought against Romans in Dacian wars.

In any case Roxolani sounds cool, and as such it was the best pick for the steppe tribe.

yes but C'mon pick Rozolani over Scythians? If anyone should of ruled the steppes in game its them.

 

[Ccbasin]

thorpemark,

The power of chariots, like the power of elephants, is most decisive in Hollywood blockbusters...

HoG,

I think I will use this as a tagline over at a grognard site I visit.

 

[unmerged(6582)]

Has no one mentioned Chariots?

Chariots were absolutely feared on the plains. I would think chariots, rather than pure cavalry, will be the other-PI game equivalent of cavalry in this game. But I have no information on which to base this guess.

Chariots were used by Darios III against Alexander the Great and they were completely inefficient (I'm not sure if it was at Gaugamela or Issos)

 

[unmerged(15623)]

yes but C'mon pick Rozolani over Scythians? If anyone should of ruled the steppes in game its them.

Although Scyths did fight against Macedonians during the reigns of Philip II and Alexander the Great, as well as took part in (possibly with Sarmatians) a civil war in the Bosporan Kingdom in late 4th century BC, the 3rd century was to mark a period of steady decine to them. When the game starts, Sarmatians have started/are starting to cross the Don in large numbers and the Scyths have no option but to move along.

So the game basically begins in period of twilight of Scyths and dawn for Sarmatians. In that situaton, if you need to pick a either one, I'd pick Sarmatians and make Scyth provinces grey, even if it would be nice to see 1-2 province Scythia in Bessarabia/Crimea.

Anyway it's not like there was much difference between the two peoples. For all I know, they both were Indo-European, they were both nomads, they both had similar costume of dress, they both buried their dead in burial mounds, and worshipped swords struck in ground (Herodotus calls those sword-in-the-ground mounds as shrines to Mars, in his typical fashion). The most important difference would be that Scythians had simply lived longer in closer touch with civilized world.

But definetly, Scythian glory days of raiding ancient middle east, nearly pillaging Egypt, and sacking Niniveh are ancient history by 280BC.

 

[Namm]

Not true that elephants were useless. They just weren't that common in the Mediterranean area you know. In India it was a very different story, and most notably the Selucids literary went to great lengths to obtain Indian war elephants.

There was a closer elephant source though: North Africa. However, as it turned out, the great power in North Africa was obliterated by a power located on the Italian Peninsula and whose most hard-pushed frontier became Northern and Western Europe with its harsh climate.

It could have been a different story though (ehr, or many different stories) and that's why we play EU...

 

[unmerged(7537)]

Not true that elephants were useless. They just weren't that common in the Mediterranean area you know. In India it was a very different story, and most notably the Selucids literary went to great lengths to obtain Indian war elephants.

There was a closer elephant source though: North Africa. However, as it turned out, the great power in North Africa was obliterated by a power located on the Italian Peninsula and whose most hard-pushed frontier became Northern and Western Europe with its harsh climate.

It could have been a different story though (ehr, or many different stories) and that's why we play EU...

North African elephants were actually of a different breed/species than Indian elephants, much smaller than the latter. So they aren't quite comparable.

 

[unmerged(77286)]

Although Scyths did fight against Macedonians during the reigns of Philip II and Alexander the Great, as well as took part in (possibly with Sarmatians) a civil war in the Bosporan Kingdom in late 4th century BC, the 3rd century was to mark a period of steady decine to them. When the game starts, Sarmatians have started/are starting to cross the Don in large numbers and the Scyths have no option but to move along.

So the game basically begins in period of twilight of Scyths and dawn for Sarmatians. In that situaton, if you need to pick a either one, I'd pick Sarmatians and make Scyth provinces grey, even if it would be nice to see 1-2 province Scythia in Bessarabia/Crimea.

Anyway it's not like there was much difference between the two peoples. For all I know, they both were Indo-European, they were both nomads, they both had similar costume of dress, they both buried their dead in burial mounds, and worshipped swords struck in ground (Herodotus calls those sword-in-the-ground mounds as shrines to Mars, in his typical fashion). The most important difference would be that Scythians had simply lived longer in closer touch with civilized world.

But definetly, Scythian glory days of raiding ancient middle east, nearly pillaging Egypt, and sacking Niniveh are ancient history by 280BC.

Heavy Sarmatian horse it is, knowing paradox that horse going to be barely average.

 

[HolisticGod]

Namm,

African forest elephants, the type domesticated in North Africa, were useless. African savanna elephants, the big kind, were virtually un-tamable.

And while Indian warfare was different, Persia itself saw little use of elephants and rarely to much effect.

 

[unmerged(72836)]

North African elephants were actually of a different breed/species than Indian elephants, much smaller than the latter. So they aren't quite comparable.

It's like Excursions vs. Volkswagens! lol

 

[Mavs]

Romans used often cavalry but the elite were always mercenaries.. Scipyon used Numids, Cesar Germans and later Gallians Farsolos was won by cavalrymens... In italy the sannites were horsemen but they were destroyed during social war in 100-90 bc

I am very well versed in the Punic Wars and during this time Rome most certainly did NOT use a lot of cavalry. Their cavalry arm was often hopelessly inferior to their enemy's. This was because the early Romans believed that to win the battle you must break the enemy's center, which they did with their superior legionaries. Cavalry was, for Rome, mainly used to screen or simply hold the flanks, if sometimes inadequately...

Scipio Africanus finally found out how to use cavalry in combination with Rome's infantry, making him virtually undefeatable during the 2nd Punic War.

Chariots were absolutely feared on the plains. I would think chariots, rather than pure cavalry, will be the other-PI game equivalent of cavalry in this game. But I have no information on which to base this guess.

Chariots....were all but useless.

Aye, but the main reason the chariots were useful was because horses at that time were not strong enough to carry a fully armed human. After horses were bred strong enough, the chariots died off.

Hmmm, nice to know. Interesting.

There was a closer elephant source though: North Africa. However, as it turned out, the great power in North Africa was obliterated by a power located on the Italian Peninsula and whose most hard-pushed frontier became Northern and Western Europe with its harsh climate

North African elephants were also much smaller than their Indian counterparts. Like Tambourmajor said...