03-03-2002 02:55									#1
	About chariot warfare Full PM-box? Change here!

I received an e-mail from Mark Everson with a question about chariot warfare.

quote: BTW, do you know anything about ancient chariots? Our military lead wants to do things like preventing chariots from moving over anything but very flat ground. While I agree that chariots lost effectiveness when fighting over broken ground, they could get over it if necessary. If no other way than by being partly disassembled and carried!

Though military history is definitely NOT my subject, I hope these quotes from an excellent study on warfare will help to solve this problem:

"Once perfected, the technology of the chariot would have been easy to replicate and even easier to transport and sell; an Egyptian bas-relief of c. 1170BC shows a chariot being carried on the shoulders of one man -no feat if it weighed, as a reconstruction did, less than a hundred pounds- and such a highly marketable product would have stimulated production wherever crafstmen with the necessary skills resided. The check on overproduction of such a saleable and high-priced item would ahve been, in practice, not shortages of skills or raw material but a dearth of suitable horses. The chariot horse had to be a selected and highly schooled animal. The earliest known schooling of horses, apparently to dressage standard if an elaborate contemporary vocabulary of horsemanship is a reliable indication, can be dated from a group of Mesopotamian texts to the thirteenth and twelfth centuries BC; then as now, the young horse was intransigent in any languge spoken to it.

After the expulsion of the Hurrians, the Assyrians solved the besetting problem of Mesopotamian civilisation -the encirclement of its rich but naturally defenceless land by predators- by going over to the offensive, and progressively extending the boundaries of what became the first ethnically eclectic empire to include parts of what today are Arabia, Iran and Turkey, together with the whole of modern Syria and Israel. Thus the legacy of the chariot was the warmaking state. The chariot itself was to be the nucleus of the campaigning army.

The Assyrian was the first true long-range army, able to campaign as far as 300 miles from base and to move at speeds of advance that would not be exceeded until the coming of the internal combustion engine.
Assyrian resources did not extend to the paving of roads -of little point, in any case, in a climate which is excessively dry but, when wet, washes away untarred road metal- but the kingdom had an extensive network of royal highways, often mentioned as boundaries to fields in the land registration documents that cuneiform scribes wrote in vast numbers on the clay tablets which provide archaeologists with their information. Along these roads the horsed elements of an army might move as fast as thirty miles a day -a good march even for a modern force. Of course, the roads deteriorated in quality beyond the central plain and inside enemy territory, where military engineers would have to improve the going up hillsides and through mountain passes. The army also made use of water transport where appropriate, though both the Tigris and Euphrates are difficult to navigate, because of shoals and uneven seasonal water-flows.

The first chariot battle of which we have an account, the battle of Megiddo in northern Palestine, fought in 1469BC between the pharaoh Tuthmosis III and a confederation of Egypt's enemies under Hyksos leadership, was concluded with almost no bloodshed on either side. Megiddo is also generally counted as the first battle of history, in that we can date it, locate its site, identify the contestants and follow its course. Tuthmosis, who had just come to the throne, was pursuing the new Egyptian strategy of vigorous offensive against the outsiders who had violated the immunity of the river kingdom. Collecting an army, he marched in stages of ten to fifteen miles a day -an impressive speed of advance- along the Mediterranean coast, through Gaza and then up to the mountains on the Syrian border. The enemy seems to have counted on the difficult terrain forming a barrier against his attack. There were three routes through the mountains to the town of Megiddo; the pharaoh chose the most difficult, against advice, on the ground that he might thereby surprise them. The approach march took three days, the last spent negotiating a pass of less than two chariots' width. Late in the evening he camped on the plain in front of Megiddo and next morning deployed his army for battle. The enemy had also come forward, but, when they saw the extent of the Egyptian line, with one wing on each flank of the valley and the pharaoh commanding from his chariot in the centre, their morale collapsed and they fled in panic to the protection of the walls of Megiddo in their rear. Tuthmosis ordered a pursuit, but his soldiers stopped to plunder the enemy's abandoned camp on the way and two of the principals in the opposing army managed to get inside Megiddo. Since the city had ample water supply within its massive walls, it managed to hold out against the Egyptians -who constructed a line of circumvallation around it against any relief operation- for seven months. Only eighty-three of the enemy had been killed in the battle and 340 taken prisoner; the fugitives, however, did not rally and the besieged kings eventually surrendered, sending their children out as hostages and begging the pharaoh that 'the Breath of Life be given to their nostrils'."
(source: J.Keegan: 'A History of Warfare',1993)

	03-03-2002 03:38									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Hi S. Kroeze, and thanks for the detailed info. I've got that book, its a really good one. I even remembered the passage on Megiddo, once presented with it. But I had forgotten it when Gary and I were discussing chariot warfare.

I should have told you this... unless its a big new topic, posts should go in the relevant model thread. FE this one could go in the Military Model V thread. The reason for that is to keep discussions concentrated, so they can be found easily later. If you want to put your post in that thread, I can delete this one. Or if not, its not a big deal for this one issue.

Thanks for the info!

-Mark

	08-03-2002 07:11									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

My contention was just that chariots could travel, cross-country, no faster than the infantry who had to carry them. They might be faster at the tactical level, on flat open terrain.

Cheers

	08-03-2002 08:33									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Hi Gary:

quote: Originally posted by Gary Thomas My contention was just that chariots could travel, cross-country, no faster than the infantry who had to carry them. They might be faster at the tactical level, on flat open terrain.

Huh? Unless I'm Vastly misremembering you had chariots Prohibited from entering or being able to move in several types of terrain during normal strategic movement. It is still that way in the code, and that is the thing I would really like to see changed. If it had been the way you say you want it above, I never would have brought the issue up. I have similar problems with horse-based units being prohibited from moving in mountains.

Anyway, it looks as if we're now at some level of agreement and that's the important thing. AFAIK there was always enough infantry traveling with chariots so that the chariots, in game terms, can "carry themselves" even if there isn't an accompanying infantry unit. Does that match your expectations also?

	08-03-2002 09:28									#5
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

What could be done in the game is that Light Chariots (or just "Chariots") are allowed to go anywhere that horses can go (the limit of where a Chariot could go would depend more upon the horses than the crafted chariot itself, because disassembling a horse for travel may be easy, but putting it back together is quite the tall task).

However, something like a "Heavy Chariot" might have been built in such a way that it can't be so easily disassembled, or that it's so heavy that you'd need more men to carry them individually than there are men available in the single unit.


What has to be considered is that this isn't just effecting Chariots, but what about Artillery, or Trebuchets, or any "packable" item?

I think it would just be too complicated to bother to try and replicate, so all that would need to be done is on ground where something could conceivably "packed up" and transported, just give the unit a very low movement rating.

And if such a feature is allowed, give it a big defense/attack penalty on such terrain also (another argument for why such a feature is desirable in some form or fashion).

The way Panzer General handles packing/trucking is good, but the game's timeframe might be such that unpacking and packing could take up so little time as not to be represented in the game.


So Chariots would be faster than Infantry on roads and open-ground like Plains, but would be slower than Infantry in areas like Forests and Jungles. A Heavy Chariot could not travel in Forests or Jungles at all.

	09-03-2002 07:32									#6
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Hi Plutarck:

quote: Originally posted by Plutarck What could be done in the game is that Light Chariots (or just "Chariots") are allowed to go anywhere that horses can go (the limit of where a Chariot could go would depend more upon the horses than the crafted chariot itself, because disassembling a horse for travel may be easy, but putting it back together is quite the tall task).

LOL, I'd like to see the assy instructions!

quote: And if such a feature is allowed, give it a big defense/attack penalty on such terrain also (another argument for why such a feature is desirable in some form or fashion). So Chariots would be faster than Infantry on roads and open-ground like Plains, but would be slower than Infantry in areas like Forests and Jungles. A Heavy Chariot could not travel in Forests or Jungles at all.

This was pretty much what I'd been thinking too.

	10-03-2002 04:37									#7
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: If it had been the way you say you want it above, I never would have brought the issue up. I have similar problems with horse-based units being prohibited from moving in mountains.

I agreed with you on this a long time ago, and, as far as I know, changed the prohibition some time ago (at the time you said that the new Delenda didn't allow Hannibal to move). Of course I might not have sent you the military.xml file...

Cheers

	10-03-2002 19:15									#8
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Hi Gary:

quote: Originally posted by Gary Thomas I agreed with you on this a long time ago, and, as far as I know, changed the prohibition some time ago (at the time you said that the new Delenda didn't allow Hannibal to move). Of course I might not have sent you the military.xml file...

First I've heard of it, aside from your post above . If you did send a comment to that effect by email, then obviously I missed it... good to have this one resolved. That only leaves 324 issues to go before v1.0.

	11-03-2002 02:06									#9
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Here it is: earlier concession that chariots could travel cross-country

Unfortunately, mountains were not specifically mentioned. What we really need is to add mobility restrictions to the terrain effects. Although chariots can be carried over mountains, they cannot fight there.

Cheers

	11-03-2002 02:39									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Hey Gary:

BTW, next time you want to reference a specific post or two, please put the date/time so I know where to look. I had to skim the whole thread to find out what you were referring to. There is also a way to refer to a specific post through a link, but I can't remember how to do it . I have it in my notes somewhere.

quote: Originally posted by Gary Thomas Unfortunately, mountains were not specifically mentioned. What we really need is to add mobility restrictions to the terrain effects. Although chariots can be carried over mountains, they cannot fight there.

It was the mountain and other terrain restrictions that I was primarily talking about above. I know you'd said before that movement on flat terrain without roads was allowed before, but that wasn't what I was on about. I think we now agree that pretty much all ancient land units should be able to move through at least some mountains (if there's a pass, which we don't have coded yet ). Mountains with no passes should be prohibited for just about everything I think. Either that or we need two grades of mountains, one of which is impassable without a pass. The other grade would be inconvenient but be able to be moved through with some severe inconvenience. It should be noted that a square shown as mountain I take to mean a square that is Largely mountainous, meaning there is still room for valleys where movement isn't that tough. Of course trying to move through the valleys when there's someone up above that doesn't want you to move is where much of the difficulty of mountain fighting comes in IMO.

Some units will certainly get a big restriction to their usefullness in terrain for which they aren't suited. IMO that doesn't meant they "cannot fight" since units can always dismount or make other changes if the terrain isn't suited to their usual way of fighting. But your charioteers might become effectively archers, etc. I'm not sure how detailed we want to get on this.

	11-03-2002 05:24									#11
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: BTW, next time you want to reference a specific post or two, please put the date/time so I know where to look. I had to skim the whole thread to find out what you were referring to. There is also a way to refer to a specific post through a link, but I can't remember how to do it . I have it in my notes somewhere.

Dammit, I was quite sure that I had included the actual post reference, too. But I remember deciding that it wasn't necessary to actually check it...

We have to be a bit careful about the assumption that terrain such as mountains has sufficient flat land for, say, chariots. We are likely to completely remove any effective terrain differences that way.

Cheers

	11-03-2002 18:27									#12
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Gary Thomas We have to be a bit careful about the assumption that terrain such as mountains has sufficient flat land for, say, chariots. We are likely to completely remove any effective terrain differences that way.

Hey Gary:

I don't think my stated approach will eliminate terrain differences at all. Just because there are valleys in a mountain (passable) tile doesn't mean you can necessarily travel Exclusively in valleys. I just wanted to make it clear that you're not exclusively climing mountains either. Most of your proposed tick rates in the charts in the thread you referenced above are fine by me (at least for movement under perfect conditions). It was all the "na"s that bothered me. And it seems we've agreed that most of them should be gone.