The India's and the Rajput States

[Catilina]

First of all congrats, i really love this faction.
I think the unit rooster rocks, but i'm still missing some cav. ...or would that be historically wrong?

I was just wondering ...coul you guys mayeby add som more Hindu elements, more builiding, various temples with more unique units (priest like fighters without goin to fantasy on it!)...;this rich culture gives so much changes..

[Pyrebound]

Indian cavalry is ~5x the size of regular cavalry and can trample heavy infantry like it was nothing.

[MyNameIsGreat]

Indian cavalry is ~5x the size of regular cavalry and can trample heavy infantry like it was nothing.

Elephants are actually less effective than lancers from other factions...

[Lupu]

No! Only kill less on charge.

[Heinz Guderian]

Dont the indians have the Kshiva (sp?) cavalry? Those guys are like Jules from Pulp Fiction (BMF).

[KozaK101]

well they are just unbreakable heavey cav, not really on par with cataphracts and heavier ghulams and knights but still i think rajput roster is just fine

[MyNameIsGreat]

No! Only kill less on charge.

Well, yes, that's the point of the calvary, charging. And lancers go through enemy units like butter, while elephants just knock enemies over and proceed to either fall over and die, or run amok and trample your own guys.

I think Rajputs should still have a decent calvary selection... sure they used elephants, but elephants aren't calvary, and it's not like they abandoned horses completely for elephants...

[Annibal]

Yes, but the point of an elephant charge is not to break into a fresh line of enemy troops to clear a path for your heavy infantry, which India has little of (less you like using massive amounts of Indian swordsman) But it is to break the enemy army as a whole in one large slam from the sides or rear. Save your elephants till the end, and then when their men are pinned on your shields, charge away. This tactic has allowed me to use lines of simple merc spearmen and still win with one or two good elephant charges at the end.

[Ahiga]

Well, yes, that's the point of the calvary, charging. And lancers go through enemy units like butter, while elephants just knock enemies over and proceed to either fall over and die, or run amok and trample your own guys.

I think Rajputs should still have a decent calvary selection... sure they used elephants, but elephants aren't calvary, and it's not like they abandoned horses completely for elephants...

What may be done in the future is have the Chauhan Rajputs be playable, and feature a more assorted cavalry roster at the cost of Elephants being rarer. Chauhan was more cosmopolitan in it's military and actually made a big use of cavalry as well as 'not trash' infantry and were consigning Elephants to a limited role. Their cavalry it seems was largely lightly armored, but preferring to do close combat with the Turkish invaders where their individual skill trumped the Turk's preference to tactics of an entire army and long distance horse archery.

However Southern India, and one would presume Southern Rajputs, were far more linked at this point and time with earlier traditions of massed foot archery and elephants. Cavalry was not their strength and the last real Indian Heartlands Empire to use cavalry in large numbers before the Delhi Sultanate arrived was the Guptas. So they weren't really abandoning horses - they never had them to begin with. The Rajput's love of horses grew as time went on under the Delhis and Mughals.

I'd take this moment to mention something interesting, but in the times of Empire Total war Cavalry (Which were probably armed primarily with lance and sword) were in fact the largest arm of just about every Indian army, even as artillery with infantry became more valuable. There was a battle between the Maratha's and the Afghans which had 40-48 thousand cavalry on both sides, with only 15-25 thousand infantry. An army like the Maratha's even at Assaye (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Assaye) were fielding 10,000 more cavalry than they were infantry.

Of course this wasn't the case in our period, although Chauhan made greater use of cavalry than other Rajput groups.

[Request a new user name]

Well, yes, that's the point of the calvary, charging. And lancers go through enemy units like butter, while elephants just knock enemies over and proceed to either fall over and die, or run amok and trample your own guys.

Charges like that only worked if the enemy broke and ran. A straight charge into a solid stationary target is a recipe for disaster as the horses crash into hard objects such as shields weapons, and bodies. This usually broke the horse's legs and threw riders.

This overlooks the fact the horses won't charge or bump into such blocks to begin with.

Sadly the game engine can not fix that and it causes the EB team no end of headaches.

[Miraj]

I'm playing a ghorid campaign and it is quite easy to annihilate elephants in one javelin throw... I'll be asking if this is fixable.

[Arjun]

I'm playing a ghorid campaign and it is quite easy to annihilate elephants in one javelin throw... I'll be asking if this is fixable.

I have to agree with u there man....elephants were supposed to be more armored than cavalry..at least. but anyways im sure this can be ironed out


also i think the elephant charge ought to do more damage...even though in Bc the elephants do more damage by stamping and stuff; i would have expected to see elephant charges being much more damaging than they are already....in fact think about the momentum behind an elephant charge!

each elephants momentum would probably be at least 10 times that of a horse!at least they ought to have the same if not more damage-dealing charge the heavier cavalry/lancers from other factions have

Ahiga[/URL]]
What may be done in the future is have the Chauhan Rajputs be playable, and feature a more assorted cavalry roster at the cost of Elephants being rarer. Chauhan was more cosmopolitan in it's military and actually made a big use of cavalry as well as 'not trash' infantry and were consigning Elephants to a limited role. Their cavalry it seems was largely lightly armored, but preferring to do close combat with the Turkish invaders where their individual skill trumped the Turk's preference to tactics of an entire army and long distance horse archery.

i agree, its a good idea

However Southern India, and one would presume Southern Rajputs, were far more linked at this point and time with earlier traditions of massed foot archery and elephants.

Did u mean Southern India or the Southern part of the BC map? cos In Southern India Elephant warfare was very much the norm till the 14th century. its hayday was the 9th-13th centuries.Especialy during the Chola Empire

The Chola Army was centerd around it Elephant Forces and its infantry(horse cavalry was not widely used, probably they used light cavalry/cavalry archers)

Chinese geographer Chau Ju-kua , writing in about 1225, gives the following account of the Chola army:

This [Chola] country is at war with the kingdom of the [west] of India. The government owns sixty thousand war elephants, every one seven or eight feet high. When fighting these elephants carry on their backs houses, and these houses are full of soldiers who shoot arrows at long range, and fight with spears at close quarters.


even though the number "60 000" might have been an exaggeration; it does show the foremost importance elephants had on those armies

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chola_military

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ev...xes/Chola_navy



Ps:

i rem reading that these War elephants were never domesticated and were always taken from the jungles. out of every 10 elephants caught by his mahouts the king would select only one or two.The elephants were selected on the bases on size and aggressiveness. the more aggressive an elephant is, the more preferred it was

the other elephants were used for logistical duties


These selected elephants were then locked in huge pens(taken out only for training). before the battle the elephants were given a very potent liqueur made from fermented coconut-juice .this induced a "rage" in the elephant. this state was known as "madam" (literally translated into "crazed") the Mahouts were expected to keep these crazed elephants in check(war elephants are like guard dogs; in the sense that they listen to only one(maybe 2) master). also they are smart enough to understand the spoken commands of the mahout.


these mahouts keep these animals in check till they are unleashed en-masse on enemy forces.


The kings themselves used to fight in battlefields riding on such war elephants. There are a few occasions of the king dying in the battlefield on these elephants. Parantaka I's son Rajaditya died at Sripurambayam. The Chola king Rajadhiraja Chola I died on an elephant fighting the Chalukya army at Koppam. The epithet Yanai-mel-thunjiya (who slept(died) on an elephant) is attached to these kings in their inscriptions indicating their valour.

[Miraj]

Awsome info Arjun.

I have something to ask you.

We intend to always have 2 playable hindu indian factions, but as Ahiga mentions we will change up the 'Chauhans' soon and give them some more formidable cavalry and mid level kshatriya warriors to duke it out with the Muslims with. The southern/central "Solankis" we intend to make more classical Indian phant-centric armies heavy with infantry.

Now the only problem I have are the names. I want to make one or both of these factions reemergent in BC 2.0 and always providing a thorn on the side of the Muslim player. But the current names are very dynastic and clan names that wouldn't lend well to reemergent factions.

So what I was thinking was renaming the northern "chauhans" into something like "Rajputana" and make them a classical desert/north indian hindu faction. And name the solankis something else. Do you have any idea what would be the best "generic" name to give these 2 factions? It should be something that reflects on each ones roles well. The northern one being martial rajputs with high morale cavalry and fewer elephants + some rajput tribal camels, roughly representing the kingdoms of Ajmer, Thar tribes, Kanauj and Delhi. While the central/southern hindus representing a typical Gujarati, Deccan Hindu state more heavy on the elephants, infantry and archers.

[Arjun]

So what I was thinking was renaming the northern "chauhans" into something like "Rajputana" and make them a classical desert/north indian hindu faction.

thats a cool idea but the term "Rajputana" means "those from The Rajput lands"(or something similar)..the land was named "Rajputana" whereas the people who lived there were called "Rajputs"


"tana" is probably similar(has the same root as) to "stan" (hidustan, pakistan, afghanistan etc etc)

so Rajputana = Rajput's Stana = Rajputs Land

And name the solankis something else.

but if ur naming the Solankis as something else then u might as well want name the nothern ones Rajputs.

Do you have any idea what would be the best "generic" name to give these 2 factions?

if the southern one is supposed to be a mish-mash of the rest of the Indian factions then naming could be somewhat tricky; given the fact that central India was not exactly rajput land.There were the marathas and others too.

maybe the term "Bharatas" could be used (but then again the nothern Rajputs would fall into such a term as well..cos they too were indians... (Bharata=India (derived from a mythological king's name) Bharatas = people of India)

It should be something that reflects on each ones roles well. The northern one being martial rajputs with high morale cavalry and fewer elephants + some rajput tribal camels, roughly representing the kingdoms of Ajmer, Thar tribes, Kanauj and Delhi.

I believe the term Rajputs would describe the northern faction very well

While the central/southern hindus representing a typical Gujarati, Deccan Hindu state more heavy on the elephants, infantry and archers.

yeah this faction ought to be heavy on elephants and infantry/archers while light on cavalry.but i still couldnt think of a name right off the bat..(apart from the term "Bharat's" ) ill sleep on this and see if i can come up with some other choices as well


Ps: in the southern faction different reagons/ethnicites/nations can be represented by naming the units after them

for example in the "Bharat" army(for example, cos thats just one name i came up with as of yet) there could be "maratha light cavalry",
or "Punjabi chakra throwers", "Chola Elephants" and so on

[Miraj]

Cool, thanks for the info. The unit names sound like a good idea.

[Arjun]

Ps: i forgot to add that the War elephants were trained to carry heavy logs and throw them at enemy formations. but thats not implementable in this game

[Miraj]

Heck, I was reading that elephants were trained to grab individuals legs with their trunks, hold down their victims other extremities with their feet and then rip them in two. :-O

[Arjun]

Heck, I was reading that elephants were trained to grab individuals legs with their trunks, hold down their victims other extremities with their feet and then rip them in two. :-O

hehe you would be surprised to know that elephants in fact can understand about 20 different vocal-commands quite easily and they coupled with messages passed by the mahouts prod, make the elephants follow even seemingly complex commands.

ive seen elephants "pick up" stuff when the word for that is used by the mahout, and "drop" "carry" and so on. i was surprised!


also elephants were trained to swat raiders from horseback with their trunks(almost always armourd in a war-elephant because that is a very sensitive area for the elephants) and then stamp them


some even had their tusks "sheathed" in metal casings that had speak-like protrusions or huge 2 meter long swords swung by the trunk! like a scythe!


ps: partly due to this elephant armies; major wars between medeival indian kingdoms were pretty much over after 2-3 battles.

[Omar Nelson B.]

ps: partly due to this elephant armies; major wars between medeival indian kingdoms were pretty much over after 2-3 battles.

Yeah, hell, I'd run. I've been around tanks and bigger trucks that might some what relate battlefield wise. I must say that an elephant all armored up with spikes and all the toys would put me over the edge Esp if I only have sword/shield.

Also I agree that there does need to be at least one other Hindu/Indian faction to some what pester the power houses if nothing else.

[Arjun]

Yeah, hell, I'd run. I've been around tanks and bigger trucks that might some what relate battlefield wise. I must say that an elephant all armored up with spikes and all the toys would put me over the edge Esp if I only have sword/shield.

the tank example is quite apt . In most Indian Wars; the one who won the battle of the Eelephants-forces pretty much won the battle. also the battle stops when the sun-sets and the opposing armies go back to their tents. and renew fighting at daybreak, no such thing as fighting day and night.