Elephants are a liability

[Thuycidides]

With 2.05c elephants are just a liability in the field of battle. Mine ran wild just by being near the battle, not actually participating in the fighting. Since my campaign started with the unit I was glad to be rid of them, as they take up space in a minor settlement that could be used for a more useful unit that needs to be garrisoned for free.

EB1 had it about right with the pachyderms. In EB2 I would never consider recruiting them as they are now.

[gosam]

There's also the fact that they can no longer be used to storm a walled settlement on the first turn too.

[Rick]

There's also the fact that they can no longer be used to storm a walled settlement on the first turn too.

Okay. With respect to the limitations currently in place, do mean you can/could have used, elephants to break down walls?

[gosam]

Okay. With respect to the limitations currently in place, do mean you can/could have used, elephants to break down walls?

I don't know about Medieval 2's limitations, but in EB1, they were able to break down wooden walls or ram gates.
It was a pretty big part of the Epirote starting strategy. You could take Pella before finishing your first turn, and Demetrias, for the second.

[HaHawk]

I don't know about Medieval 2's limitations, but in EB1, they were able to break down wooden walls or ram gates.
It was a pretty big part of the Epirote starting strategy. You could take Pella before finishing your first turn, and Demetrias, for the second.

To be fair, assaulting a city without waiting a turn is a bit cheesy, considering that the AI cannot do it. Most players who want more balance (or more challenge) usually adopt "house rules" in order to not take advantage of the AI, which is already handicapped enough as it is.

[Genghis Skahn]

To be fair, assaulting a city without waiting a turn is a bit cheesy, considering that the AI cannot do it. Most players who want more balance (or more challenge) usually adopt "house rules" in order to not take advantage of the AI, which is already handicapped enough as it is.

Starving an enemy out and forcing a sally out from their walls of an enemy is much cheesier and economically costly than assaulting a city at full strength on turn 1 imo(especially since starvation would likely not cause a sally out, but rather a capitulation on the part of the city). It takes more skill to assault a city in it's prime(and you take a lot more casualties, so it's technically more militarily costly) than to wait it out and let debt pile up; I see nothing wrong with turn one assaults caused by either spies or elephants, the AI gets huge money boosts in the early game and the player simply doesnt have the same freedom to wait in the early game that the AI does. Considering elephants cost a fortune, quick assaults would be favored in the early game. Fast warfare is almost required to take one's self out of debt for most factions in the very early game; slow nation building can come after the budget is balanced and your borders are at least partially secure.

If a player wishes to give himself/herself more difficulty in game, then he/she is free to do so, but if someone wants to use mechanics already present in the game to storm cities(which is always messy in medieval 2) then they should also feel free to do so. I dont know if we'll ever see the assault mechanics of elephants return, but I would personally love to see it happen, as it gives the player(and certain factions) more options with warfare. If you find these options OP, feel free to simply not use them.

EDIT: I don't mean to suggest that starve out sallies should be removed from the game(I actually use them in the early game because I find assaults too costly to maintain my starter army and economy with) and I apologize if I seemed rude in any way .

[alex33]

Yeah they need to be balanced. They where actually quite perfect in eb 1

[Sar1n]

Last time I used them in EBII, they were powerful, but hard to use right. Basically, you needed a good cavalry screen for them to get rid of enemy ranged troops before moving them up and charging along the battle line. Dunno if anything changed since then (it was 2.02 or 2.03 I think).

[Anubis88]

We are taking a look into elephant performence due to this thread

[The Ferret]

I played 30 turns or so of Epeiros and found their starting Varu (Asian elephant) unit quite powerful in the way I used them. I kept them in reserve until the battle was joined, and then at the critical moment unleashed them straight through the enemy lines.

At minimum this badly disrupt's the enemy's line and allows your infantry reserve to exploit the hole - but more often it causes the enemy unit in question to rout. (Seemed to be effective when the enemy was Steady/Tired and below.) Assign a light cavalry unit to pursue the routing enemy, and use your suddenly idle line infantry to roll up the enemy's line.

The elephants' advantage is that they don't have to charge at the exposed flank or rear to be effective, like cavalry does.

The key here is to keep them in reserve until the enemy skirmishers have mostly been driven from the field of battle or are low on ammunition. If you expose your elephants to heavy skirmisher fire, they will run amok (as actually happened in battles of antiquity). As the unit description suggests, you can screen them with skirmishers of your own - stick a unit of Akontistai on 'hold position' in front of them, let them scare off any skirmishers, and if the enemy chooses to engage with line infantry or horse, bring your infantry reserve to bear to pin them down, retreat the Akontistai, and then crush the isolated enemy with your elephants. There's good synergy here, because skirmishers are particularly vulnerable to cavalry, but elephants frighten enemy horsemen.

Now, are they worth the price? No, probably not, I'd rather have a unit of Hetairoi and bank the savings - but that's also reasonably historically accurate.

[delra]

Wait till you see how chariots are. Elephants are nothing compared to that.

[alex33]

If you are talking about scythed chariots i actually like them more here then in eb 1

[delra]

What you like, especially compared to something else, that is a completely meaningless statement. And they are useless utter crap in the battle map.

[Anubis88]

What you like, especially compared to something else, that is a completely meaningless statement. And they are useless utter crap in the battle map.

Yeah they were monsters in actual battles. That's why every nation fielded them at this timeframe... Oh wait...

[alex33]

Well i dont care if you think my comment is meaningless. You dont really have to be that rude.

Scythed chariots aren't crap but they aren't super weapons either. I think they are portrayed quite realistically here

[rovert]

I found them to be alot like EB1 myself , if you get them tied up or try rushing at the start they will die quick but i found them to be great when assaulting cities and you get tied up in the center , send those bad boys in battle over & the same goes for field battles get the line battle going get them around and run through the line sideways with them , again battle over.

[Ribtickler]

Elephants placed properly are a total game winner. Keep them shielded/screened and charge down the line of your enemy that are already engaged and its game over for them.

[Sar1n]

Elephants placed properly are a total game winner. Keep them shielded/screened and charge down the line of your enemy that are already engaged and its game over for them.

Pretty much. Here's a result of a test battle I just did to prove that elephants and oxybeles can be useful. I have faced a Roman army that was, at least I think, close to historical roster...well, except for those elephants I gave them to test how good oxybeles is against those. The battle itself was a typical left hook...phalanx and hoplites to hold the enemy, machiarophoroi as reserve, using my cavalry to exhaust enemy cavalry and skirmishers, then it was up to elephants. Oxybeles kept pounding enemy on my right flank to give some support to defending troops there. enemy units were just as pimped as mine to give them better morale and hold the battle for longer.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I don't think elephants need any buffing. Oxybeles might...as it stands now the cost and logistic issues outweigh its usefulness.

[HaHawk]

I don't think elephants need any buffing. Oxybeles might...as it stands now the cost and logistic issues outweigh its usefulness.

Do you have any ideas for increasing the usefulness of oxybeles? Can units under artillery fire take a morale penalty?

I also suggest that the number of pieces be increased from 2 to 4 per unit. Choosing one out of twenty units in an army to be a couple of these slow firing (and not necessarily accurate) weapons seems to be a no brainer from a gameplay standpoint at this time since the engine limits armies to 20 controllable units.

There should be a way to make the oxybeles more useful/attractive while maintaining realism (and in the case of increasing from 2 to 4 pieces, increasing realism?).

Edit: Having an oxybeles in an army also slows it down considerably, right?

[Floren d'Asteneuz]

Elephants placed properly are a total game winner. Keep them shielded/screened and charge down the line of your enemy that are already engaged and its game over for them.

That.

If you wanted super-heavy unbeatable units, you should have played world of tank.