Wardogs... Why?!?

[Mementomoridc]

I am conscious about that but I don't think they would be if much use to detect massive ambush made by ten thousands soldiers. or even a smaller one. Dogs could certainly be used to guard restricted area like the camp in small patrol but I don't think a specific unit of war dog would be used to scout the area near an army in march. That was one of the main role of light cavalry.

http://www.jbmf.us/hst-vietnam.aspx
http://www.worldwar2history.info/Marines/dogs.html

Not good at finding people huh?

[KillaJules]

You feel the way you feel. I share Anna's pov on this question. It is anti-fun for me because it spoils immersion (which for me is basically an authentic feel)

It has already been explained many times that war dogs were frequently used in warfare and plenty of historical evidence has been supplied. So if it spoils immersion for you, then you are simply wrong. Period.

to have war dog units that seem like a gratuitous, dopey stunt.

And yes, in general dopey stunts tend to appeal to young teens and tend to be less appealing to grown ups. Not an ironclad rule, mind you.

So if you don't like something out of ignorance, that means that anyone that does like it is likely to be a dopey and immature teen? Right.

[Glaumir]

http://www.jbmf.us/hst-vietnam.aspx
http://www.worldwar2history.info/Marines/dogs.html

Not good at finding people huh?

Pitched battles in the ancient world were just like small scale skirmishes in the 20th century... Look, I don't think anyone here is denying the usefulness of dog and many other animals in the larger scheme of things. Total War is all about battles, though. Baring rare exceptions, large units of dogs have no place in a scenario like Cannae. You can't make dogs march in formation, it will look ridiculous, no matter how you design it.
Sent from my Lumia 800 using Board Express

[KillaJules]

It was earlier explained on this thread that war dogs were used in pitched battles. However, pitched battles are not the only type of battle in Rome 2. There are also ambushes.

[xjlxking]

Pitched battles in the ancient world were just like small scale skirmishes in the 20th century... Look, I don't think anyone here is denying the usefulness of dog and many other animals in the larger scheme of things. Total War is all about battles, though. Baring rare exceptions, large units of dogs have no place in a scenario like Cannae. You can't make dogs march in formation, it will look ridiculous, no matter how you design it.
Sent from my Lumia 800 using Board Express

please, you know nothing of warfare to say dogs have no use in large battle. Its the same view people had of rats, horse donkeys..etc

[Mementomoridc]

Pitched battles in the ancient world were just like small scale skirmishes in the 20th century... Look, I don't think anyone here is denying the usefulness of dog and many other animals in the larger scheme of things. Total War is all about battles, though. Baring rare exceptions, large units of dogs have no place in a scenario like Cannae. You can't make dogs march in formation, it will look ridiculous, no matter how you design it.
Sent from my Lumia 800 using Board Express

The simple fact is, your are understating the use of the dogs in the modern era (they found more men than what would be classified as a "skirmish" on many occasions. Not to mention they are use primarily to prevent ambushes which is exactly what we are talking about as one possible use of them in your army. As for the unit in game who says they are gona be giant packs of 200 ****ing dogs again... 12 or so dogs would be a great unit size for a small recon/run down unit. why waste your calv on fleeing enemies when you can send your dogs after them once you have used them in their primary role (finding the other guys men).

[Glaumir]

The simple fact is, your are understating the use of the dogs in the modern era (they found more men than what would be classified as a "skirmish" on many occasions. Not to mention they are use primarily to prevent ambushes which is exactly what we are talking about as one possible use of them in your army. As for the unit in game who says they are gona be giant packs of 200 ****ing dogs again... 12 or so dogs would be a great unit size for a small recon/run down unit. why waste your calv on fleeing enemies when you can send your dogs after them once you have used them in their primary role (finding the other guys men).

They will have to be super dogs if you are going to forego an unit slot that could hold a phalanx for a unit with 12 dogs.

Sent from my Lumia 800 using Board Express

[Mementomoridc]

They will have to be super dogs if you are going to forego an unit slot that could hold a phalanx for a unit with 12 dogs.

Sent from my Lumia 800 using Board Express

Illl remeber that the first time I play you online and my 12dogs (if that is how they are implemented) give me enough advanced warning of your armies setup that I out maneuver your army and trash you in a trap. and ill save my dogs yo run down your men while the rest of my guys sit back and watch your guys running from the devilish beasts

[KillaJules]

They will have to be super dogs if you are going to forego an unit slot that could hold a phalanx for a unit with 12 dogs.

Sent from my Lumia 800 using Board Express

There are accounts of cavalrymen going into battle where each cavalryman was accompanied by his dog. So it is possible that dogs won't be in their own unit but form an 'attachment' to other units. This would allow lots of dogs to be present in-game but not in a single giant squad.

[Glaumir]

Illl remeber that the first time I play you online and my 12dogs (if that is how they are implemented) give me enough advanced warning of your armies setup that I out maneuver your army and trash you in a trap. and ill save my dogs yo run down your men while the rest of my guys sit back and watch your guys running from the devilish beasts

Not before your army dies off a rat transmitted disease while I chill with my Egyptian mummy cats.
Sent from my Lumia 800 using Board Express

[Glaumir]

There are accounts of cavalrymen going into battle where each cavalryman was accompanied by his dog. So it is possible that dogs won't be in their own unit but form an 'attachment' to other units. This would allow lots of dogs to be present in-game but not in a single giant squad.

Now this is something reasonable and would actually get me excited, since it changes the way units work in TW.
Sent from my Lumia 800 using Board Express

[Anna_Gein]

http://www.jbmf.us/hst-vietnam.aspx
http://www.worldwar2history.info/Marines/dogs.html

Not good at finding people huh?

It is so much ridiculous to compare Contemporary warfare with anything prior to XIX century I won't even bother to explain why.
Find an army where formation of hundreds of dogs were used to charge the enemy and maybe you would be in position "to teach a lesson". Until that read what a user said before you use sarcasm to reply.

I think the main problem is the lack of proper sources. If we are only to go by what was written about the tribes in questioning we would end up with three different units. A warband unit with an assortment of random weapons including bows, spears and axes, Some sort of elite bodyguard unit and a cavalry unit. Ancient sources have a way of simplifying actual facts, and in many cases the author was not even present or even living in the same period.

That is why CA flavors things with berserkers, night hunters and wardogs. All of which are fringe material, maybe, but not illogical at all, and they all offers interesting and unique tactical possebilities. Like for example releasing the dogs of war on fleeing enemies or breaking the roman lines with cult-warriors like the "berserkers"

Very true.

I just think that dogs unit aren't as logical or natural than berserkers.

[Armatus]

I want to be able to custom build my personal guard as I see fit.

I want to be as crazy as I want to be, because I can.

I want to collect vices and virtues for doing the outrageous, different, provocative or plain old typical things.

[Steel*Faith]

My parents actually have an Irish Wolfhound and though they are bred to be placid and gentle nowadays they are still and intimidating sight. Our one is nearly 190 pounds.

Imagine these kind of dogs being bred and trained by a warrior culture such as the Iceni or Suebi? Not to mention most ancient Romans were under 5.5 feet tall in stature, and the dogs had a harder and more rugged life, so these barbarian war dogs would be quite a bit more intimidating in comparison.

Plus, I really can't understand how someone doesn't think this is just awesome...

[Armatus]

We used to have an Irish terrier they have a similar wire hair as the Wolf hound, but red coats and smaller mid sized breed.

They are utterly fearless and extremely protective dogs. Ours got loose and went after a neighbor's Afghan probably twice his size.

Came home with a slashed ear.

[Sharpe]

Our wolfy was soft as anyone to people, but around other dogs he was a bit uneasy - didn't know his own strength either, used to drag 13 year old me across the beach by his lead when he chased something like a gull.

[gamesguy]

Not very enthusiastic about the war dogs. But until we know more about how the Roman military and the Germanic military works we can't really judge.
Remember though that one unit of war dogs in your army = one unit slot spent on something that could have been filled with a more regular and serious unit. If I had to choose between spending a unit slot on a Roman cohort or on a unit of war dogs then the choice is very obvious...

But if the war dogs are merely a feature/attribute of generals which they can use to flush out hidden enemy units - without occupying a unit slot - then I'm all for it!

I certainly know what I'm taking when I'm campaigning in the forests of Germany, and it ain't gonna be one more cohort. There are more to armies than how many heavy infantry you could fit in a stack.

Exactly right, Anna. The hue and cry for war dogs is RTW nostalgia run amok.

Basically war dogs doesn't strike me as
"fun," they strike me as annoying. Like those explosive Kisho Ninja: "Hahaha lulz just threw a big bomb in you face!" Juvenile fun, maybe. Adult fun? Not really.

I never played RTW.

And Kisho Ninjas had niche uses. One of my highly successful army compositions for Avatar battles was all horse archers, yari cavalry, and ninjas. The horse archers drew the enemy foot archers to the front through harassment and my ninjas would do a suicide grenade volley/charge and rout them, then my horse archers ran amok shooting their now defenseless infantry to pieces.

Your need to denigrate everyone who isn't into hardcore realism as "juvenile" is also pretty pathetic, did you get picked on in highschool or something?

[Razor]

I certainly know what I'm taking when I'm campaigning in the forests of Germany, and it ain't gonna be one more cohort. There are more to armies than how many heavy infantry you could fit in a stack.

There's a difference between regular army units and special units in terms of functionality and it would be best if this is represented within the gameplay as well. I shouldn't be bothered with an artificial dilemma of taking with me either a unit of war dogs or a cohort of heavy infantry. Or - as stated in another thread - a dilemma between taking with me either several reconnaissance units (because of the line of sight) or several cohorts of heavy infantry. Ideally they shouldn't take unit slots for which otherwise regular army units would be used to fill it with.

[gamesguy]

There's a difference between regular army units and special units in terms of functionality and it would be best if this is represented within the gameplay as well. I shouldn't be bothered with an artificial dilemma of taking with me either a unit of war dogs or a cohort of heavy infantry. Or - as stated in another thread - a dilemma between taking with me either several reconnaissance units (because of the line of sight) or several cohorts of heavy infantry. Ideally they shouldn't take unit slots for which otherwise regular army units would be used to fill it with.

But this is nonsense. Special units still took up space in historical armies, they ate food, they drank water, they consumed supplies. They weren't invisible magic units that teleported in only when you needed them. If you want some specialised units to diversify your army and protect against different threats, well then you're going to have to take less mainline units. This is good for gameplay and historically accurate as well. Plus you can always you know, split your army into two stacks.

[Razor]

Most certainly not. My point has nothing to do with supply consumption. It's about the so-called opportunity cost. Why should I choose between a unit of flaming pigs that's nearly useless in like every situation you can imagine except in a battle versus elephants or a full blown cohort of heavy infantry? Why not let generals have characteristics/attributes like: clever/intelligent/inventive and that when facing elephants during a battle, they have an extra ability to make use of flaming pigs or whatever to overcome this 'problem'. Why should I specifically recruit a unit of flaming pigs or war dogs or whatever that cost you unit slots while those unit slots are actually better spent on more serious units that are more useful.