From what I remember they Iceni chariots were used to skirmish, but most to move units on and off the battle field. A man could only really fight for about 40 minutes before they get tired in real life. The chariots would bring fresh units and take tiered and injured off the battle field. Iceni chariots were also interesting in that they had a good suspension system for a chariot, and the Iceni where very skilled in their use.
ValarOmega where did you read that a man can fight for 40 minutes? While it might sound about right, fighting tires you out with in about 5 minutes at the most and those are well trained and well disciplined units like the ROmans are Macedonians. If you read true accounts from ancient battles, units would clash for about a minute and then retreat back, the first side to waver for good usually lost the battle. Total War is a similutation but in real life combat lasted for a very short time. I agree with you on everything else though, chariots were used to move men around the battle field, at least for the iceni
tbone martinez it was meant as a rough maximum of time possible. I admit I might be way over, but I wanted a safe margin, did not think I was that far over though(even with over 20 pounds of armor alone). Also are those account about how long a rome would stay at the front of the line? I believe the Romans did have a set amount of time for rotations of formations to keep fresh men up front fighting, not sure that estimate is the case. This might be shorter than what is possible and just what is ideal(fighting at peak). Asking because I am not sure not that, not that I am questioning it.
ValarOmega Battles are incredibly chaotic and the only reason the romans were able to rotate who is on the front lines is because of their discipline. If you got a guy swinging at you constantly then your not going to be able to effectively retreat and have someone take your place. Battles would last days on end but that's the entirety of the battle. INdividual combat would last no more then 5 minutes at the most. If you have ever been in a fight you will know what I am talking about lol you get tired very very quick. Barbarians in particular would run and simply smash into the Roman shields wasting tons of energy.
***** if you have ever been in a fist fight with someone then you know what I am talking about, battles yes would last for days on end however constant combat would tire you out very quickly. Adrenaline can only take you so far, when you run on adrenaline you are less vigilant, less disciplined, and less effective in thrusting at the enemy. Sides would crash into each other, stab, slash, and swing at each other for a few minutes and then retreat back only to do it all over again in a couple minutes. The battle of watling street was an example of how badly a battle can turn out for an opponent when they fail to attack and retreat in a cohesive manner. The Iceni refused to retreat and regroup instead they pushed their own men into the iron fist of the romans to be butchered.
Yeah, the British chariots were attested in Caesar's commentaries. Here's a quote from Caesar that I'm lifting from Adrian Goldsworthy's excellent "Caesar: Life of a Colossus." "This is how they fight with chariots - to start off with they drive all over the field and throw javelins, and so with the terrifying appearance of the horses and the roaring of the wheels they often shake the order of the enemy ranks; when they have charged forward between the troops of their own cavalry, they jump down from the chariot cars and fight on foot. In the meantime the chariot drivers withdraw gradually away from the fighting and wait in such a way that, if they [the warriors] are hard pressed by a host of foes, they have an easy means of escape. Therefore in battle they combine the speed of cavalry and the steadiness of infantry, and by daily use and training they are s skilled that they are able to gallop their horses down the steepest of slopes and retain full control, to stop and to turn in an instant, to dash out along the yoke and then like lighting run back to the car."
For Goldsworthy's part regarding the chariots: "Chariots had long fallen out of use among the Gauls, but persisted in Britain and Ireland for several more centuries. They were expensive pieces of equipment, affordable only to the tribal aristocracy. The aristocratic warrior fought, while an unarmed charioteer controlled the team of two ponies. Social changes, along with increasing availability of large numbers of bigger cavalry mount, probably explained the disappearance of chariots in Continental Europe. British chariots were fast and light, but they were not projectiles that rammed into the enemy - the remarkably persistent myth that scythes were fitted to their wheels is not based on a shred of reliable ancient evidence. ... Chariots allowed an aristocratic warrior to look spectacular on the battlefield, were mobile missile platforms and allowed a warrior to go forward to fight single combats on foot and then retire as necessary. They came from an older tradition of warfare, which celebrated the personal prowess and heroism of individual warriors."
if I remember correctly, the Iceni chariots were used as taxis for their nobles. the chariots go full speed in to battle, drop off their noble, nobles fight and wreak havoc, if there is any danger they ride back in and move away from the danger. so you can imagine them as oathsworn on wheels. sadly it's not portrayed as such in the game
From what we know historically, the chariots the brithonic celts used especially against ceasars two expiditions and the claudious invasion, they were used essentially for slowing down the roman legions movement by constant barrages of archer and javelin fire and then breaking into the roman formations letting the second rider on the chariots jump of cause as much damage possible, to then try to jump onto the second wave of a chariot charge to get out of the roman formations
from what i've read and heard, they were really useful for moving troops to specific spots on the battlefield. So there would be so many more of them, than just a single general unit. They probs had one or two people on the back apart from the driver, who would jump down and fight, before jumping back on their chariot and riding off if needed. Made it really hard for the enemy to trap them - Julius Caesar had a really tough time dealing with this.
RTW2 really doesn't do the Iceni credit. Really the chariots should be flying around the battlefield dropping off units of men where they're needed, they're transports.
Iceni could do with cheap javelin cavalry in the form of their Scouts. Spear Band could become hybrid units as well. Their Chosen are slightly superior to Arverni's I think, but then again their Sword Band and Nobles lose to Arverni's. If Iceni embraced their skirmish-nature with chariots, cavalry and hybrid units they could be more fun. Dropping the price on ambush units could also be nice.
The Iceni would use their chariots 1 as 'drive by' units hurling javs while passing the enemy and also as a means of dropping off warriors on the front line. the would hurl javs, stop, drop off a few warriors then return to their lines and collect more warriors. I guess you could compare them to modern day transport helis in the military.
+DuckSemenSliver the problem with 'skirmisher chariots' is that they don't really work with how rome 2 is set up. Due to the low unit number, the damage from skirmishing would be negligible, and for what benefit? To be riding a chariot instead of a horse (With 60 men instead of 16)? So you can do something well outside of the intended job for your role in the first place?
Briton chariots were used like you might see people use light cavalry. They threw javelins, they had swords and spears for when they needed them, and they ran down fleeing infantry. They might skirt the edges of a melee engagement to demoralize the enemy and pick at the fringes, too. So, basically, the Rome 2 equivalent would be to skirmish, rear charge, and chase down skirmishers. Wedge helps a lot with those functions. (I feel that you undersell cav formations on your channel, but maybe that's just my opinion). But there's more to chariots than Total War shows. The Briton chariots, for instance, would have multiple occupants (Asian chariots were similar in this way). After skirmishing and making a bunch of scary clattery noise, they would ride up and the extra guys would hop off to fight on foot. Then the chariots would retreat, but not too far. Then if the infantry engagement wasn't going too well, they could just ride up, the extra guys could hop back on, and they could run off to go engage elsewhere. This tactic gave them, as Caesar put it, both the speed of horse and the firmness of infantry. The were certainly formidable guerrilla units. Cassivellaunus famously dismissed most of his army and exclusively used about 4000 unsupported chariots to wage a guerrilla campaign against Caesar in his second trip to Britannia. He only failed because some defeated Briton tribes betrayed him and revealed his positions to the Romans. Despite the lack of dismountable infantry, they can still be effectively used to pick at the fringes of the enemy formation in game. Honestly, that's actually very similar to how Asian scythed chariots were used in real combat, too. You can't just charge a solid infantry formation with your chariot because, while your horses may be able to power through, the chariot itself doesn't have the mass and you would break an axle by trying to run over a bunch of people. The reason they had blades on them was to make chasing down loosely formed fleeing infantry easier. Rome 2 is kind of weird in that charging a solid line of infantry head on with chariots can actually do damage without instantly sacrificing your chariots. On another note, Britons were notable for heavy use of slingers where Gauls and other Celts primarily used javelinmen as foot skirmishers.
the Iceni chariots were basically troop transports historically. they had no scythes and were generally only owned by chieftains and nobles. So they'd ride up on their chariots get off and fight and then their chariot driver would come pick them up again if they called.
"Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war". Indeed Heir XD. Enjoyed seeing some Iceni action and would love to see a spam of War Dogs charging onto unwary AI attackers.
The Iceni chariots from what I know we're highly maneuverable skirmish units that threw javelin at the enemy unit they exuasted their amunnition. Then they would dismount their chariots and fight like elite soldiers leading the battle with their fierce fighting style.
The ancient Britons used chariots as a kind of personal carrier. While javelins and arrow can be shot from the platform even moving, the Brits, usually noble men, also like to ride the chariot into the midst of battle and be dropped off to fight and after a certain time the chariot would return to relieve them from the battlefield.
Warhounds are great "meatshields". You realease them just before enemy is in javelin range and then charge your enemy once the dogs have reached the enemy line. You can stand and unload your javelins before charging because the enemy units are busy killing the dogs and they cannot pull back cause they would get chewed up from the rear by the dogs. Other fun way to use dogs is to wait until late game when units are exhausted and then realease them. Dogs have usually been worth the money for me.
Briton chariots were like taxis for noblemen, or skirmishing platforms. They'd taxi up to battle, dismount and fight, then run away when things got dangerous, or just throw javelins from their chariots.
Caesar recounts that the Britons would fight with their chariots by skirmishing when their opponents were in formation and then when their opponents would break out of formation to attack them, the drivers would step down and attack the troops who were now out of formation. Caesar comments that this tactic is very effective against the heavy Roman infantry.
Iceni chosen sword band used to be probably the best mid tier barbarian sword unit in the game since they had head hunt back in the old day. And after EE, I think CA kinda forgot to price them down since they no longer had that head hunt anymore.
They would bait with the charriots then when the enemy breaks formation they would stop and form a line of infantry while one or two riders stayed with the horses, when the enemy charged they would be out of formation and charging a solid line of men, cesar writes about this in his campagins in britian.
The Iceni were excellent charioteers. The chariots contain 2 men. The driver would carry the other man to the front where they would dismount to fight like the Homeric champions. Then the drivers would swing back around to retrieve the dismounted fighters
They (penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/britannia/boudica/chariot.html (University of Chicago)) claim that early chariots were primarily skirmish based where after all javelins or other ammunition was used those in the chariot would get out and then proceed to fight on foot. Later chariots it seems incorporated scythes. I would think the best way of insuring historical accuracy would be to have good skirmish capabilities and then give them a good charge bonus and melee attack but low health and armor. This is due to the use of the chariots (particularly by the Belgae) to skirt the edges of a formation and control it and dismember those who are not in a dense formation.
HeirofCarthage Historically, Celtic tribes like the Iceni used chariots less as an actual battlefield tool and more as a means of increasing mobility and rapidly deploying heavily armored infantry. A Celtic chariot would be a two-man team, one driver and one warrior; the driver would run the chariot up to the flanks of the enemy or to a critical part of the battle and get very close, the warrior would jump off, and the driver would wheel away to safety or pick up a tired or wounded warrior to bring back. This meant their warriors could rapidly move around the battlefield without getting as tired out because of running around in armor, and they wouldn't have to sacrifice their combat performance by bringing lighter equipment. So really, if CA wanted Iceni chariots to be historically accurate, they should come with an extra rider and a special type of dismount ability where the passenger jumps off and fights as infantry while the chariot driver can still run off. Hope that helps give some perspective on Celtic chariot tactics!
I don't know if I just don't how to play with barbarians, but every time I do an Iceni campaign and try to invade Gaul, it doesn't matter what units I use or where I chose to land my armies or who I decide to attack first, I always get my ass handed to me.
Iceni chariots were meant as a quick skirmishing unit that could taxi. It usually had a dedicated driver and either javelin skirmisher/light infantry or light bowmen. Surviving examples show they usually had 2 horse tethering. And light infantry or skirmishers aren't meant for prolonged contact.
HeirofCarthage From what I remember, Insular Celts did not use chariots as shock units. They used it to discharge spears, pick up the tired and injured, and drop off fresh troops.
It is impossible to use the Iceni chariots like they were used. Yeah of course they would throw stuff from them. Their main use was to transport champions to the front or any place that need men quickly. then when the men were tired of swinging their sword's around the chariot would come back to pick them up to be brought safely to the rear.
"Their mode of fighting with their chariots is this: firstly, they drive about in all directions and throw their weapons and generally break the ranks of the enemy with the very dread of their horses and the noise of their wheels; and when they have worked themselves in between the troops of horse, leap from their chariots and engage on foot. The charioteers in the meantime withdraw some little distance from the battle, and so place themselves with the chariots that, if their masters are overpowered by the number of the enemy, they may have a ready retreat to their own troops. Thus they display in battle the speed of horse, [together with] the firmness of infantry; and by daily practice and exercise attain to such expertness that they are accustomed, even on a declining and steep place, to check their horses at full speed, and manage and turn them in an instant and run along the pole, and stand on the yoke, and thence betake themselves with the greatest celerity to their chariots again." by Caius Julius Caesar, translated by W. A. MacDevitt.
Just a suggestion for the next focus series that you do Heir of Carthage. Can you do a little introduction as to who the factions are, where they’re from and what kind of builds work well with them depending on temperament ? Also you do go into a lot of technical detail between units that someone who’s not kept up with the franchise like me suffers to keep up with, saying that there’s 5 points of one difference and 10 points of some other difference, express it as a difference and whether you feel it’s worth it
The way I would use the druidic nobles is as substitution for a general because they have the encourage effect. This would allow you to choose a chariot general and worry less about morale if your general dies. Also I never heard you say anything about the scare effect on the painted ones which I think would make them good at breaking enemy morale.
The Britons used chariots as a taxi service. Moving groups of soldiers from one flank to another in pitched and set piece battles or to move much of their forces away from danger in ambushes.
The Iceni used their chariots more for skirmishing(like HA) rather than rolling through everything. There were 3-4 men on the chariot so if something happened to it these warriors were an effective battle unit capable of defending itself.
light chariots were used as a unit with the capabilities of different units. They could be used as scouts, cavalry, mobile infantry where the chariots dropped off men and picked the up where they were needed. Most had skirmishers on the back both javalins and bows. they were not scythed but they could be used to punch through an enemy infantry line, though doing this usually meant they died but the infantry line would be messed up. If this unit was not a general unit i could see them as being more effective. They were also used in high numbers and were great at running down fleeing troops.
It's not 100% clear how the chariots were used but a while ago I read a proposal that I found rather sensible, which is that chariots weren't used to "fight" but rather to "move". As depicted in the Illiad too. Meaning that rich champions would be warping around on their chariots and would then have their drivers drop them off, so they could challenge other champions from the opposing side/lend support where needed. Which would basically make the charioteers mounted infantry.
I never bother using war hounds on single horse archers units because after the horse archer routes unless their near other enemy units the war hounds just sit at the edge of the map. I usually like to wait until later on and release them into the back of engaged infantry and unless the opponent is paying close attention to the tiny dogs running around they wreck havoc among the enemy line going from unit to unit.
I'd like it if they made their Chant ability a static aura that had to be activated and which prevented movement. In exchange, they can make it a permanent morale buff so long as your units where in the radius, and also a morale penalty to enemy units within range. Romans were terrified of druidic witchcraft according to ancient sources. I wouldn't make the penalty too much, but perhaps allow it to stack with another druid's fear within the radius. The druids should be capped at 2 per army.
They were just transport, nobles would wheel around to the part of the fight they wanted to go to and dismount and fight then hop back on throw javelins and run away before they got rocked. (According to Wikipedia)
You could say, they just thought it was inefficient, but i think it speaks volumes about how much rome hated dealing with chariots that they never tried working them into their own armies. Especially because rome loved to incorporate conquered peoples technology. Carthages ships, gaulic auxiliary cav, even their awewome sword was copied from a conquered italian tribe. Not a military expert but you have to imagine that mixing roman infantry with iceni chariot transports and skirmisher support had scary potential.
CA should really change chariots to allow them have drivers and passengers, so that they can present the fact that Iceni warriors would drop off from chariots, also it will be easier to create Chinese chariots in a total conversion mod. It's sad to see that people are more interested in Japanese Warring States than Chinese Warring States.
Heir this is Caesar's account of how the British fought with chariots. Enjoy British chariots were open in front. Julius Caesar provides the only significant eyewitness report of British chariot warfare: Their mode of fighting with their chariots is this: firstly, they drive about in all directions and throw their weapons and generally break the ranks of the enemy with the very dread of their horses and the noise of their wheels; and when they have worked themselves in between the troops of horse, leap from their chariots and engage on foot. The charioteers in the meantime withdraw some little distance from the battle, and so place themselves with the chariots that, if their masters are overpowered by the number of the enemy, they may have a ready retreat to their own troops. Thus they display in battle the speed of horse, [together with] the firmness of infantry; and by daily practice and exercise attain to such expertness that they are accustomed, even on a declining and steep place, to check their horses at full speed, and manage and turn them in an instant and run along the pole, and stand on the yoke, and thence betake themselves with the greatest celerity to their chariots again.
Hey, heir, this is just an idea, but I think it would be interesting to see you attempt to win with a cav-heavy Rome build. I know, it sounds bad, but I want to see what you could do with it, plus nobody would see it coming :)
You should use the dogs against light armored units like hillmen. You can clear the meatshield units off the field before the units with high charge bonus.
The Iceni were a very formidable tribe back in the days. Rome had a very tough time trying to subdue them. I learned a little about them in my High School Latin class. Their leader then was Boudica, one who often actually used chariots. They would literally use them and break the formation of Roman lines and use their swords to kill them as they would pass by. Sadly though they were greatly outnumbered and died, but they never retreated, and they knew they were outnumbered like 20 to 1.
I thought they were used for skirmishing and hunting down enemy skirmishers. You can fairly easily flank enemy troops with them and throw those javelins at their back.
Yes Chariots do have scythes. I have been reading Simon Scarrow's Eagle books series featuring two fictional characters, Cato and Macro, in late 40 AD int he roman empire fighting the Britannic tribes. This book series has fictional characters but do have non fictional tactics such as battle tactics and the British Chariots did have scythes on the wheels of chariots.
This is a book not a historical document. Yes, there is a MYTH that the Britons attached scythes to their chariots but actually they were used for skirmishing and fast extraction of troops from the battlefield.
Iceni used chariot's as a mobile missile platform they wouldn't charge through forces they would charge in front of the main force throw javelins an then keep mobile peppering the enemy infantry with missiles their are some very good accounts of Icini tactics in tacitus
Kinda sad that Rome 2 fails to depict alot of factions historically and reallistically. I still enjoy the game a lot, but I was really dissapointed with Egypt roster... they could have been a very fun and unique faction, they had that potential. Instead, they are yet-another greek faction... Ofc it's the ptolemaic dynasty what we get to see in the game but it'd have been cool to see more (and good) egyptian and nubian units. Iceni and Egypt could use some love :( Colchis too, probably.
But that's how the Ptolemaic dynasty ran things, Greeks and mercenaries in the army up until man power issues forced them to train native egyptians which screwed them over. It basically caused rebellion after rebellion.
DetailedEyes Thanks for the info, i didn't know that. I just read a little bit so I thought it was rare that egypt didnt use more of their native units... It makes sense now. They are kinda fun to use in campaign, but I wish a lot of factions were rebalanced for multiplayer too, so players could choose any without giving up on their favorites.
I feel Sword Followers shouldn't have 65 morale. At most 60 and a better number would be 55. They can keep 39 attack (still making them the best mid-tier barbarian sword), but it would help balance them out a bit if they lost some morale.
:( Athens campaign ???;( i miss watching it, i have a hard time watching these battles because ive never played the game so its hard for me to get into it. but the campains are easier for me to follow... im not sure if im the only one like that but i would atleast like to know if your not doing the Athens campaign anymore lol..
Bit late to the party here BUT you said that you don't see how the chariots did so much damage without scythe's ? Try standing in front of two charging horse's as they run over you followed by the chariot and rider. An average horse weighs 900-2,000 pounds. Just saying.
Doing a play through with them now, they are not good lol it's fun though its just like the units available will never beat the Latin or hellenic factions
From what I remember they Iceni chariots were used to skirmish, but most to move units on and off the battle field. A man could only really fight for about 40 minutes before they get tired in real life. The chariots would bring fresh units and take tiered and injured off the battle field. Iceni chariots were also interesting in that they had a good suspension system for a chariot, and the Iceni where very skilled in their use.
Interesting that they had a medievac system back in the day :D
ValarOmega where did you read that a man can fight for 40 minutes? While it might sound about right, fighting tires you out with in about 5 minutes at the most and those are well trained and well disciplined units like the ROmans are Macedonians. If you read true accounts from ancient battles, units would clash for about a minute and then retreat back, the first side to waver for good usually lost the battle. Total War is a similutation but in real life combat lasted for a very short time.
I agree with you on everything else though, chariots were used to move men around the battle field, at least for the iceni
tbone martinez it was meant as a rough maximum of time possible. I admit I might be way over, but I wanted a safe margin, did not think I was that far over though(even with over 20 pounds of armor alone). Also are those account about how long a rome would stay at the front of the line? I believe the Romans did have a set amount of time for rotations of formations to keep fresh men up front fighting, not sure that estimate is the case. This might be shorter than what is possible and just what is ideal(fighting at peak). Asking because I am not sure not that, not that I am questioning it.
ValarOmega Battles are incredibly chaotic and the only reason the romans were able to rotate who is on the front lines is because of their discipline. If you got a guy swinging at you constantly then your not going to be able to effectively retreat and have someone take your place.
Battles would last days on end but that's the entirety of the battle. INdividual combat would last no more then 5 minutes at the most. If you have ever been in a fight you will know what I am talking about lol you get tired very very quick. Barbarians in particular would run and simply smash into the Roman shields wasting tons of energy.
***** if you have ever been in a fist fight with someone then you know what I am talking about, battles yes would last for days on end however constant combat would tire you out very quickly. Adrenaline can only take you so far, when you run on adrenaline you are less vigilant, less disciplined, and less effective in thrusting at the enemy.
Sides would crash into each other, stab, slash, and swing at each other for a few minutes and then retreat back only to do it all over again in a couple minutes.
The battle of watling street was an example of how badly a battle can turn out for an opponent when they fail to attack and retreat in a cohesive manner. The Iceni refused to retreat and regroup instead they pushed their own men into the iron fist of the romans to be butchered.
Yeah, the British chariots were attested in Caesar's commentaries. Here's a quote from Caesar that I'm lifting from Adrian Goldsworthy's excellent "Caesar: Life of a Colossus."
"This is how they fight with chariots - to start off with they drive all over the field and throw javelins, and so with the terrifying appearance of the horses and the roaring of the wheels they often shake the order of the enemy ranks; when they have charged forward between the troops of their own cavalry, they jump down from the chariot cars and fight on foot. In the meantime the chariot drivers withdraw gradually away from the fighting and wait in such a way that, if they [the warriors] are hard pressed by a host of foes, they have an easy means of escape. Therefore in battle they combine the speed of cavalry and the steadiness of infantry, and by daily use and training they are s skilled that they are able to gallop their horses down the steepest of slopes and retain full control, to stop and to turn in an instant, to dash out along the yoke and then like lighting run back to the car."
For Goldsworthy's part regarding the chariots:
"Chariots had long fallen out of use among the Gauls, but persisted in Britain and Ireland for several more centuries. They were expensive pieces of equipment, affordable only to the tribal aristocracy. The aristocratic warrior fought, while an unarmed charioteer controlled the team of two ponies. Social changes, along with increasing availability of large numbers of bigger cavalry mount, probably explained the disappearance of chariots in Continental Europe. British chariots were fast and light, but they were not projectiles that rammed into the enemy - the remarkably persistent myth that scythes were fitted to their wheels is not based on a shred of reliable ancient evidence. ... Chariots allowed an aristocratic warrior to look spectacular on the battlefield, were mobile missile platforms and allowed a warrior to go forward to fight single combats on foot and then retire as necessary. They came from an older tradition of warfare, which celebrated the personal prowess and heroism of individual warriors."
+Leetsarge Reminds me of the Samurai
yes. they were used like this. they can also throw their jav-volley and run away. they were basically just like dragoons.
Reminds me of modern ifv and troop carriers. The troop carriers can keep soldiers mobile and then support the infantry once they have departed
if I remember correctly, the Iceni chariots were used as taxis for their nobles. the chariots go full speed in to battle, drop off their noble, nobles fight and wreak havoc, if there is any danger they ride back in and move away from the danger. so you can imagine them as oathsworn on wheels. sadly it's not portrayed as such in the game
I think your confusing then with rly old Greek chariots the Britons used them in melee and as skirmishers
From what we know historically, the chariots the brithonic celts used especially against ceasars two expiditions and the claudious invasion, they were used essentially for slowing down the roman legions movement by constant barrages of archer and javelin fire and then breaking into the roman formations letting the second rider on the chariots jump of cause as much damage possible, to then try to jump onto the second wave of a chariot charge to get out of the roman formations
from what i've read and heard, they were really useful for moving troops to specific spots on the battlefield. So there would be so many more of them, than just a single general unit. They probs had one or two people on the back apart from the driver, who would jump down and fight, before jumping back on their chariot and riding off if needed. Made it really hard for the enemy to trap them - Julius Caesar had a really tough time dealing with this.
RTW2 really doesn't do the Iceni credit.
Really the chariots should be flying around the battlefield dropping off units of men where they're needed, they're transports.
Iceni could do with cheap javelin cavalry in the form of their Scouts. Spear Band could become hybrid units as well. Their Chosen are slightly superior to Arverni's I think, but then again their Sword Band and Nobles lose to Arverni's. If Iceni embraced their skirmish-nature with chariots, cavalry and hybrid units they could be more fun. Dropping the price on ambush units could also be nice.
also painted ones have a scare everyone effect,maybe not as effective as bezerkers but still...late game rear charge?
The Iceni would use their chariots 1 as 'drive by' units hurling javs while passing the enemy and also as a means of dropping off warriors on the front line. the would hurl javs, stop, drop off a few warriors then return to their lines and collect more warriors. I guess you could compare them to modern day transport helis in the military.
+DuckSemenSliver the problem with 'skirmisher chariots' is that they don't really work with how rome 2 is set up. Due to the low unit number, the damage from skirmishing would be negligible, and for what benefit? To be riding a chariot instead of a horse (With 60 men instead of 16)? So you can do something well outside of the intended job for your role in the first place?
Briton chariots were used like you might see people use light cavalry. They threw javelins, they had swords and spears for when they needed them, and they ran down fleeing infantry. They might skirt the edges of a melee engagement to demoralize the enemy and pick at the fringes, too. So, basically, the Rome 2 equivalent would be to skirmish, rear charge, and chase down skirmishers. Wedge helps a lot with those functions. (I feel that you undersell cav formations on your channel, but maybe that's just my opinion). But there's more to chariots than Total War shows. The Briton chariots, for instance, would have multiple occupants (Asian chariots were similar in this way). After skirmishing and making a bunch of scary clattery noise, they would ride up and the extra guys would hop off to fight on foot. Then the chariots would retreat, but not too far. Then if the infantry engagement wasn't going too well, they could just ride up, the extra guys could hop back on, and they could run off to go engage elsewhere. This tactic gave them, as Caesar put it, both the speed of horse and the firmness of infantry. The were certainly formidable guerrilla units. Cassivellaunus famously dismissed most of his army and exclusively used about 4000 unsupported chariots to wage a guerrilla campaign against Caesar in his second trip to Britannia. He only failed because some defeated Briton tribes betrayed him and revealed his positions to the Romans. Despite the lack of dismountable infantry, they can still be effectively used to pick at the fringes of the enemy formation in game.
Honestly, that's actually very similar to how Asian scythed chariots were used in real combat, too. You can't just charge a solid infantry formation with your chariot because, while your horses may be able to power through, the chariot itself doesn't have the mass and you would break an axle by trying to run over a bunch of people. The reason they had blades on them was to make chasing down loosely formed fleeing infantry easier. Rome 2 is kind of weird in that charging a solid line of infantry head on with chariots can actually do damage without instantly sacrificing your chariots.
On another note, Britons were notable for heavy use of slingers where Gauls and other Celts primarily used javelinmen as foot skirmishers.
I'm love when you do the faction focus, every time i learn more and more!
the Iceni chariots were basically troop transports historically. they had no scythes and were generally only owned by chieftains and nobles. So they'd ride up on their chariots get off and fight and then their chariot driver would come pick them up again if they called.
"Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of war". Indeed Heir XD. Enjoyed seeing some Iceni action and would love to see a spam of War Dogs charging onto unwary AI attackers.
The Iceni chariots from what I know we're highly maneuverable skirmish units that threw javelin at the enemy unit they exuasted their amunnition. Then they would dismount their chariots and fight like elite soldiers leading the battle with their fierce fighting style.
The ancient Britons used chariots as a kind of personal carrier. While javelins and arrow can be shot from the platform even moving, the Brits, usually noble men, also like to ride the chariot into the midst of battle and be dropped off to fight and after a certain time the chariot would return to relieve them from the battlefield.
Warhounds are great "meatshields". You realease them just before enemy is in javelin range and then charge your enemy once the dogs have reached the enemy line. You can stand and unload your javelins before charging because the enemy units are busy killing the dogs and they cannot pull back cause they would get chewed up from the rear by the dogs.
Other fun way to use dogs is to wait until late game when units are exhausted and then realease them.
Dogs have usually been worth the money for me.
Most chariots used by Celts were to transport soldiers, but Boudica used Scythed Chariots. I think you show have skirmish chariots and Scythed ones
now you iceni me now you dont
When you see that texture and modeling. Thats just awesome. :)
Briton chariots were like taxis for noblemen, or skirmishing platforms. They'd taxi up to battle, dismount and fight, then run away when things got dangerous, or just throw javelins from their chariots.
Caesar recounts that the Britons would fight with their chariots by skirmishing when their opponents were in formation and then when their opponents would break out of formation to attack them, the drivers would step down and attack the troops who were now out of formation. Caesar comments that this tactic is very effective against the heavy Roman infantry.
THIS IS ME I LOVE YOU HEIR
Iceni chosen sword band used to be probably the best mid tier barbarian sword unit in the game since they had head hunt back in the old day. And after EE, I think CA kinda forgot to price them down since they no longer had that head hunt anymore.
They would bait with the charriots then when the enemy breaks formation they would stop and form a line of infantry while one or two riders stayed with the horses, when the enemy charged they would be out of formation and charging a solid line of men, cesar writes about this in his campagins in britian.
The Iceni were excellent charioteers. The chariots contain 2 men. The driver would carry the other man to the front where they would dismount to fight like the Homeric champions. Then the drivers would swing back around to retrieve the dismounted fighters
AI "I have a unit with expert charge defense, i need to make sure they're facing the wrong direction"
Chosen Sword band used to have head hunt which made them powerful...
+Nichita Mihai And Spear Band used to have CCT
They (penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/britannia/boudica/chariot.html (University of Chicago)) claim that early chariots were primarily skirmish based where after all javelins or other ammunition was used those in the chariot would get out and then proceed to fight on foot. Later chariots it seems incorporated scythes. I would think the best way of insuring historical accuracy would be to have good skirmish capabilities and then give them a good charge bonus and melee attack but low health and armor. This is due to the use of the chariots (particularly by the Belgae) to skirt the edges of a formation and control it and dismember those who are not in a dense formation.
HeirofCarthage Historically, Celtic tribes like the Iceni used chariots less as an actual battlefield tool and more as a means of increasing mobility and rapidly deploying heavily armored infantry. A Celtic chariot would be a two-man team, one driver and one warrior; the driver would run the chariot up to the flanks of the enemy or to a critical part of the battle and get very close, the warrior would jump off, and the driver would wheel away to safety or pick up a tired or wounded warrior to bring back. This meant their warriors could rapidly move around the battlefield without getting as tired out because of running around in armor, and they wouldn't have to sacrifice their combat performance by bringing lighter equipment. So really, if CA wanted Iceni chariots to be historically accurate, they should come with an extra rider and a special type of dismount ability where the passenger jumps off and fights as infantry while the chariot driver can still run off. Hope that helps give some perspective on Celtic chariot tactics!
Some other Briton tribes used the yokes to get on and off "at lightning speed"
Source: Commentarii de Bello Gallica by Julius Caesar.
I don't know if I just don't how to play with barbarians, but every time I do an Iceni campaign and try to invade Gaul, it doesn't matter what units I use or where I chose to land my armies or who I decide to attack first, I always get my ass handed to me.
It's believed that they were more used either for skirmishing or for transporting warriors quickly across the battle field
Ja Heiro of Chartage wat sê jy nog als. Ek aanskou jou videos en ondervind dit awsome hoop jy het 'n lekker dag verder
As far as I understand it, Brit chariots were used mostly as skirmish platforms, not for charging braced infantry.
Iceni chariots were meant as a quick skirmishing unit that could taxi. It usually had a dedicated driver and either javelin skirmisher/light infantry or light bowmen. Surviving examples show they usually had 2 horse tethering. And light infantry or skirmishers aren't meant for prolonged contact.
HeirofCarthage From what I remember, Insular Celts did not use chariots as shock units. They used it to discharge spears, pick up the tired and injured, and drop off fresh troops.
I play Iceni, speed run whole Britannia and ready for Romans come
Iceni what your doing here!
dragonkingofthestars druidic nobles op
It is impossible to use the Iceni chariots like they were used. Yeah of course they would throw stuff from them. Their main use was to transport champions to the front or any place that need men quickly. then when the men were tired of swinging their sword's around the chariot would come back to pick them up to be brought safely to the rear.
"Their mode of fighting with their chariots is this: firstly, they drive about in all directions and throw their weapons and generally break the ranks of the enemy with the very dread of their horses and the noise of their wheels; and when they have worked themselves in between the troops of horse, leap from their chariots and engage on foot. The charioteers in the meantime withdraw some little distance from the battle, and so place themselves with the chariots that, if their masters are overpowered by the number of the enemy, they may have a ready retreat to their own troops. Thus they display in battle the speed of horse, [together with] the firmness of infantry; and by daily practice and exercise attain to such expertness that they are accustomed, even on a declining and steep place, to check their horses at full speed, and manage and turn them in an instant and run along the pole, and stand on the yoke, and thence betake themselves with the greatest celerity to their chariots again." by Caius Julius Caesar, translated by W. A. MacDevitt.
Just a suggestion for the next focus series that you do Heir of Carthage. Can you do a little introduction as to who the factions are, where they’re from and what kind of builds work well with them depending on temperament ? Also you do go into a lot of technical detail between units that someone who’s not kept up with the franchise like me suffers to keep up with, saying that there’s 5 points of one difference and 10 points of some other difference, express it as a difference and whether you feel it’s worth it
The way I would use the druidic nobles is as substitution for a general because they have the encourage effect. This would allow you to choose a chariot general and worry less about morale if your general dies. Also I never heard you say anything about the scare effect on the painted ones which I think would make them good at breaking enemy morale.
Only 25 weapon damage on the Painted Ones when the Sword Band has 40?
Wooo Iceniii!!!!
The Britons used chariots as a taxi service. Moving groups of soldiers from one flank to another in pitched and set piece battles or to move much of their forces away from danger in ambushes.
That's the best name I've ever seen.
The Iceni used their chariots more for skirmishing(like HA) rather than rolling through everything. There were 3-4 men on the chariot so if something happened to it these warriors were an effective battle unit capable of defending itself.
The nobles and champions along the Briton tribes would ride before the armies in their chariots dismount and fight then remount and exist the field.
Love the Mr. Burns reference lol
Totally agree with you Heir with the chariots, very odd.
A much under looked faction that had so much potential though in my opinion.
Historially they were basically discount Gauls
Actually, no.
@@christianweibrecht6555 not really.
light chariots were used as a unit with the capabilities of different units. They could be used as scouts, cavalry, mobile infantry where the chariots dropped off men and picked the up where they were needed. Most had skirmishers on the back both javalins and bows. they were not scythed but they could be used to punch through an enemy infantry line, though doing this usually meant they died but the infantry line would be messed up. If this unit was not a general unit i could see them as being more effective. They were also used in high numbers and were great at running down fleeing troops.
It's not 100% clear how the chariots were used but a while ago I read a proposal that I found rather sensible, which is that chariots weren't used to "fight" but rather to "move". As depicted in the Illiad too. Meaning that rich champions would be warping around on their chariots and would then have their drivers drop them off, so they could challenge other champions from the opposing side/lend support where needed. Which would basically make the charioteers mounted infantry.
I never bother using war hounds on single horse archers units because after the horse archer routes unless their near other enemy units the war hounds just sit at the edge of the map. I usually like to wait until later on and release them into the back of engaged infantry and unless the opponent is paying close attention to the tiny dogs running around they wreck havoc among the enemy line going from unit to unit.
I'd like it if they made their Chant ability a static aura that had to be activated and which prevented movement. In exchange, they can make it a permanent morale buff so long as your units where in the radius, and also a morale penalty to enemy units within range. Romans were terrified of druidic witchcraft according to ancient sources. I wouldn't make the penalty too much, but perhaps allow it to stack with another druid's fear within the radius. The druids should be capped at 2 per army.
They were just transport, nobles would wheel around to the part of the fight they wanted to go to and dismount and fight then hop back on throw javelins and run away before they got rocked. (According to Wikipedia)
Ya dude… 200 seconds for an ability that lasts 20 seconds is NUTS
You could say, they just thought it was inefficient, but i think it speaks volumes about how much rome hated dealing with chariots that they never tried working them into their own armies. Especially because rome loved to incorporate conquered peoples technology.
Carthages ships, gaulic auxiliary cav, even their awewome sword was copied from a conquered italian tribe.
Not a military expert but you have to imagine that mixing roman infantry with iceni chariot transports and skirmisher support had scary potential.
CA should really change chariots to allow them have drivers and passengers, so that they can present the fact that Iceni warriors would drop off from chariots, also it will be easier to create Chinese chariots in a total conversion mod. It's sad to see that people are more interested in Japanese Warring States than Chinese Warring States.
Yeah like dismounting the passenger and get a new unit. That is how the britains used it.
Heir this is Caesar's account of how the British fought with chariots. Enjoy
British chariots were open in front. Julius Caesar provides the only significant eyewitness report of British chariot warfare:
Their mode of fighting with their chariots is this: firstly, they drive about in all directions and throw their weapons and generally break the ranks of the enemy with the very dread of their horses and the noise of their wheels; and when they have worked themselves in between the troops of horse, leap from their chariots and engage on foot. The charioteers in the meantime withdraw some little distance from the battle, and so place themselves with the chariots that, if their masters are overpowered by the number of the enemy, they may have a ready retreat to their own troops. Thus they display in battle the speed of horse, [together with] the firmness of infantry; and by daily practice and exercise attain to such expertness that they are accustomed, even on a declining and steep place, to check their horses at full speed, and manage and turn them in an instant and run along the pole, and stand on the yoke, and thence betake themselves with the greatest celerity to their chariots again.
Hey, heir, this is just an idea, but I think it would be interesting to see you attempt to win with a cav-heavy Rome build. I know, it sounds bad, but I want to see what you could do with it, plus nobody would see it coming :)
You should use the dogs against light armored units like hillmen. You can clear the meatshield units off the field before the units with high charge bonus.
Caesar wrote that the Britons used chariot for getting in combat fast, the men would have jumped out if them and fight in foot usually...
Chariots were usually used to transport troops faster to the frontlines and back to camp. They weren't actually used in battle.
They were used in battle. Julius Caesar himself wrote about it in his accounts, during his invasion of Britain.
Not sure how well this will play out, but popping the druids' chant when your lines are in a mass waver might change the course of battle.
Would be great if ambushers could be able to deploy inside enemie's deplyoment zone :D
The Iceni were a very formidable tribe back in the days. Rome had a very tough time trying to subdue them. I learned a little about them in my High School Latin class. Their leader then was Boudica, one who often actually used chariots. They would literally use them and break the formation of Roman lines and use their swords to kill them as they would pass by. Sadly though they were greatly outnumbered and died, but they never retreated, and they knew they were outnumbered like 20 to 1.
BlizKrieg rome was outnumbered actually
@@marcusgodioso277 yeah, Boudicca is commonly seen as a great leader when she was actually not suited at all for leading a military rebellion.
heir are you planning to do a total war Attila campaign once it comes out and if so will their be a faction vote for it?
I thought they were used for skirmishing and hunting down enemy skirmishers. You can fairly easily flank enemy troops with them and throw those javelins at their back.
How do you make the chariots (or any melee unit with javs) fire into a specific spot?
chariots were typicaly transport but did have javelins.though they did not have sythes
Yes Chariots do have scythes. I have been reading Simon Scarrow's Eagle books series featuring two fictional characters, Cato and Macro, in late 40 AD int he roman empire fighting the Britannic tribes. This book series has fictional characters but do have non fictional tactics such as battle tactics and the British Chariots did have scythes on the wheels of chariots.
This is a book not a historical document. Yes, there is a MYTH that the Britons attached scythes to their chariots but actually they were used for skirmishing and fast extraction of troops from the battlefield.
Im just saying that it has got some historical elements...
Hiero II of Syracuse "Some" is the key word here. Though this seems like an interesting book. :)
its great you should read em
Iceni used chariot's as a mobile missile platform they wouldn't charge through forces they would charge in front of the main force throw javelins an then keep mobile peppering the enemy infantry with missiles their are some very good accounts of Icini tactics in tacitus
I don't know what's a better name. The mlg freemen or the yolo falxman?
Kinda sad that Rome 2 fails to depict alot of factions historically and reallistically. I still enjoy the game a lot, but I was really dissapointed with Egypt roster... they could have been a very fun and unique faction, they had that potential. Instead, they are yet-another greek faction... Ofc it's the ptolemaic dynasty what we get to see in the game but it'd have been cool to see more (and good) egyptian and nubian units.
Iceni and Egypt could use some love :( Colchis too, probably.
But that's how the Ptolemaic dynasty ran things, Greeks and mercenaries in the army up until man power issues forced them to train native egyptians which screwed them over. It basically caused rebellion after rebellion.
DetailedEyes Thanks for the info, i didn't know that. I just read a little bit so I thought it was rare that egypt didnt use more of their native units... It makes sense now.
They are kinda fun to use in campaign, but I wish a lot of factions were rebalanced for multiplayer too, so players could choose any without giving up on their favorites.
I feel Sword Followers shouldn't have 65 morale. At most 60 and a better number would be 55.
They can keep 39 attack (still making them the best mid-tier barbarian sword), but it would help balance them out a bit if they lost some morale.
i would think this is the type of fight axemen would do best in
if they don't do well against armored spears, what good are they at all?
What are some main multiplayer rules I’m asking because i mostly play campaign and don’t know most rules like 124
:( Athens campaign ???;( i miss watching it, i have a hard time watching these battles because ive never played the game so its hard for me to get into it. but the campains are easier for me to follow... im not sure if im the only one like that but i would atleast like to know if your not doing the Athens campaign anymore lol..
Eastern slingers would have been a better hoice for him, and he'd have 450 extra talents for another unit.
Iceni painted ones.. ??? how do i get them?? my mission is asking for 20 unis. and i cant figure out how to get these guys
i am winning with iceni in augustus campaign
Will Ca be doing any more patches for Rome2 ? probably not
I know it sounds weird but........ Royal Scythia next?
24:15 PUPPY POWER!
Why is it other than chariots, Caesar didn't write about any 'specialized' units of any type.
Can someone please tell me what is yhe iceni people religion during those time
Can someone pls tell me if it is a good game i love rome total war 1 i really want to buy this one but is it smart to do
Bit late to the party here BUT you said that you don't see how the chariots did so much damage without scythe's ? Try standing in front of two charging horse's as they run over you followed by the chariot and rider. An average horse weighs 900-2,000 pounds. Just saying.
Wish they would buff Iceni ;_;
Wait what's you nationality than heir?
Odd choice with all the infantry as Armenia. Am I not right in assuming Armenia is best played similar to Parthia?
Doing a play through with them now, they are not good lol it's fun though its just like the units available will never beat the Latin or hellenic factions
How'd you get Rome one music?
Late reply, but there is a mod for it on the steam workshop
The comments on this video are hilarious
and click 'unit info' ffs
Stinks that the Iceni don't seem all that strong. I was actually really wanting to play them but...oh well.
monkaykong they are strong in campaign
I'd say the Armenian player should have gone for more of the skirmish heavy army.
The dogs would have destroyed them though
crazychameleon 2 units of dogs can only do so much.
Wow, for you to say that any barbarian cav can do ONLY ok against roman cav, they must suck.
ua-cam.com/video/LOCBWh5Iwm4/v-deo.html
Skip to 8:50 and you'll see at least one way they were used
lol
Wil graag saam of teen jou speel is dit reg so
Were are female warriors though?
Exactly where they were throughout history.