# Battle Elephants for the Indians **URL:** \ **Category:** II - Discussion\ **Created:** [February 28, 2020, 2:22am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614 "2020-02-28T02:22:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![JonOli12](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/jonoli12/32/50441_2.png) [@JonOli12](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/JonOli12)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 3:52pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/642 "2020-04-26T15:52:24Z")
> [@OliveCereal4714](#): > > Portuguese : again, lack a good military bonusm in my mod I gave them scouts /lightcavs that attack faster. Portuguese always had extremely poor Cavalry contingents, and were over-specialized in Infantry and Engineer corps. Why would they even have Cavalry bonii? I understand the Bloodlines and Husbandry tech, since we bought Horses from other countries that had renown for them, but our Cavalry contigents were always just scouts or few noblemen that had them because they needed them. Portuguese Cavalry was one of the worst in the world, in the Middle Ages. We had, on the other had, some of the best Infantry and Engines, and the best Navy of the period. ---
**Author:** ![LordPatito8258](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/lordpatito8258/32/65062_2.png) [@LordPatito8258](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/LordPatito8258)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 3:55pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/643 "2020-04-26T15:55:06Z")
> [@JonOli12](#): > > but our Cavalry contigents were always just scouts or few noblemen that had them because they needed them. Yeahz that’s the point. Also, Portugal travel to everywhere in the lste middle-ages, so that’s why. You were explorers, you get better scouts. ---
**Author:** ![JonOli12](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/jonoli12/32/50441_2.png) [@JonOli12](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/JonOli12)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 3:57pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/644 "2020-04-26T15:57:55Z")
Naval explorers. Even then, it would make more sense to have Scouts with more movement speed, or LOS, than attack speed. We almost never used Cavalry to begin with, and when we did, we hired locals for the most part. A Cavalry bonus makes no sense for Portugal ---
**Author:** ![LinieSpreu12610](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/liniespreu12610/32/29258_2.png) [@LinieSpreu12610](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/LinieSpreu12610)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 4:10pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/645 "2020-04-26T16:10:04Z")
I dont get why so many people without game knowledge give Civ changes feedback. Giving Indians Elefants would make them way overpowered and is just not doable. Age of Empires isnt complete correct with history and will never be because it would destroy civ balances. ---
**Author:** ![Juggernaut8704](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/juggernaut8704/32/203886_2.png) [@Juggernaut8704](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/Juggernaut8704)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 4:14pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/646 "2020-04-26T16:14:15Z")
> [@LinieSpreu12610](#): > > people without game knowledge that’s a wrong way of putting your argument. ---
**Author:** ![LordPatito8258](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/lordpatito8258/32/65062_2.png) [@LordPatito8258](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/LordPatito8258)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 4:33pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/647 "2020-04-26T16:33:28Z")
Why? Khmer bonus is faaaarbetter than indian one, and their elephants are faster and stronger. And yet people argues if they’re op or not. Why are you so sure they will be broken? If khmer are not op pocket civ, the indians won’t be either. If khmer are consider super op, well, indians are arguable ---
**Author:** ![JonOli12](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/jonoli12/32/50441_2.png) [@JonOli12](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/JonOli12)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 4:35pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/648 "2020-04-26T16:35:38Z")
Indians winrate at higher levels is way over the Khmer winrate. Like it or not, Indians are a far stronger civ than Khmer, in 1v1. ---
**Author:** ![LinieSpreu12610](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/liniespreu12610/32/29258_2.png) [@LinieSpreu12610](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/LinieSpreu12610)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 4:44pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/649 "2020-04-26T16:44:56Z")
Good balance is the most important argument. We can also discuss giving Chinese all gunpowder units just for being correct with your history argument which makes them completely overpowered. If you give Indians Elefants from stable, you give them a neutral non-trash Cav Unit. There is a reason they dont have Knights. If you make advices on balance and civ changes, you always have to consider that the game is balanced and not broken like we had it with the Step Lancers at the start of DE. ---
**Author:** ![grizzgolf](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/grizzgolf/32/28919_2.png) [@grizzgolf](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/grizzgolf)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 4:49pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/650 "2020-04-26T16:49:16Z")
I wish they had more of the things that make the Persians strong in game. They should be more boomy than they are. ---
**Author:** ![CactusSteak2171](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/cactussteak2171/32/29684_2.png) [@CactusSteak2171](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/CactusSteak2171)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 5:38pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/651 "2020-04-26T17:38:59Z")
To me cheaper villagers sounds like a good booming bonus. ---
**Author:** ![JonOli12](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/jonoli12/32/50441_2.png) [@JonOli12](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/JonOli12)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 5:40pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/652 "2020-04-26T17:40:08Z")
It is one of the best, actually. specially since it starts from the Dark Age. ---
**Author:** ![LordPatito8258](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/lordpatito8258/32/65062_2.png) [@LordPatito8258](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/LordPatito8258)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 6:02pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/653 "2020-04-26T18:02:33Z")
No, it’s just that imperial camels are far better than elephants. Khmer eco bonus is far better ---
**Author:** ![Geojak92](https://forums.ageofempires.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/e19adc/32.png) [@Geojak92](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/Geojak92)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 10:11pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/654 "2020-04-26T22:11:34Z")
Could just grant Indians non elite War Elefants. Woukd be a nice twist since no one lacks the tech currently (there is a reason why teutons lack ligh cav, huns got no onagers, Turks no spearman, this adds intersting edges to civs) . This allows some castle age slow alternative to camels but the imperial age would not be touched much. ---
**Author:** ![DemiserofD](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/demiserofd/32/29255_2.png) [@DemiserofD](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/DemiserofD)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 10:41pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/655 "2020-04-26T22:41:54Z")
Isn’t this kind of a silly request? After all, it’s not like they don’t get elephants. As far as historical accuracy is concerned, the existence of elephant archers more than satisfies that requirement. If you want a more realistic way to help the civilization have more elephants, think of good ways to improve the elephant Archer. Adding battle elephants is a drastic change for an already decent civilization. ---
**Author:** ![Parthnan](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/parthnan/32/55505_2.png) [@Parthnan](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/Parthnan)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 5:56am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/656 "2020-04-27T05:56:11Z")
I know people will say Ele archers more than enough to portray Elephant use in India, but let me tell you that would be wrong, because, Indians have always used Melee elephants with Mahouts not just Archers atop them. So the position of Indians is **similar to Khmer** , who get Battle elephants(with bonus) as well as Ballista Elephants(with double bow) to portray their use of Elephants(which was actually much fewer than Indian Elephant use) Their Stables LITERALLY show elephants being trained inside them, and yet they cannot access the unit that perfectly fits the description. Also, one can complain that the Battle eles are wearing SE Asian hats therefore Indians cant get them, but even that does not hold as India has always had borders with SE Asia and people wearing straw hats are in eastern India as well. ---
**Author:** ![JonOli12](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/jonoli12/32/50441_2.png) [@JonOli12](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/JonOli12)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 6:03am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/657 "2020-04-27T06:03:31Z")
> [@Parthnan](#): > > I know people will say Ele archers more than enough to portray Elephant use in India, but let me tell you that would be wrong, because, Indians have always used Melee elephants with Mahouts not just Archers atop them. And Europeans always used heavily plated Lancers and had Cavalry Crossbows (Cranequins) instead of cavalry Archers, yet none of those are in the game. No one even complains taht they are missing. > [@Parthnan](#): > > So the position of Indians is **similar to Khmer** , who get Battle elephants(with bonus) as well as Ballista Elephants(with double bow) to portray their use of Elephants(which was actually much fewer than Indian Elephant use) Indians are a Camel and Archery Range civ (only miss Arbalest). Elephants would literally do nothing for them, except push up their already high winrate in 1600+ rating games. They have a much better boom and economy than Khmer, and better Gunpowder units (Khmer are likely losing Bombard cannon in next patch). No reason to give Indians anything else. at all. elephant Archers are already their Elephant unit. ---
**Author:** ![UpmostRook9474](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/upmostrook9474/32/47514_2.png) [@UpmostRook9474](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/UpmostRook9474)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 6:09am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/658 "2020-04-27T06:09:33Z")
> [@LinieSpreu12610](#): > > giving Chinese all gunpowder units Since the ancient Chinese gunpowder weapons were mostly the **minor-caliber** cannons such like the fire lance, San Yan Chong (three-eyes gun) and Hu Dun Pao (crouching-tiger cannon), adding only the hand cannoneers to the archer-main Chinese may be more correctly and not influence the balance too much than adding all gunpowder units. Well, in my opinion. > **[San yan chong](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_yan_chong)** > > The san yan chong (simplified Chinese: 三眼铳; traditional Chinese: 三眼銃; lit. 'three-eyes gun') was a three barrel hand cannon used in the Ming dynasty. > The distinctive San Yan Chong 三眼銃, or three eyed gun was one of the most common Ming hand cannons. Three eyed guns were usually made from cast iron or crude steel, each of the three eyed gun's metal tubes would have a small hole that allows the user to pour in gunpowder. Functionally they were no different from many contemporary European hand cann... > **[Hu dun pao](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hu_dun_pao)** > > Hu dun pao (虎蹲砲) is the name of two different missile weapons in Chinese history. In the Song dynasty (960–1279), it was a trebuchet and its name is translated into English as Crouching Tiger Trebuchet; in the Ming dynasty (1368–1644), the name was given to a type of bombard and it is known in English as Crouching Tiger Cannon. > According to the Song dynasty military compendium Wujing Zongyao (published 1044), the hu dun pao is depicted as a traction trebuchet with a triangular frame. It is opera... ---
**Author:** ![Parthnan](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/parthnan/32/55505_2.png) [@Parthnan](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/Parthnan)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 6:21am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/659 "2020-04-27T06:21:04Z")
> And Europeans always used heavily plated Lancers and had Cavalry Crossbows (Cranequins) instead of cavalry Archers, yet none of those are in the game. > No one even complains taht they are missing. As of now, there are no ‘Cranequins’ in the game. When they are added for one civ, then i wouldn’t mind if the other Euro civs get them. It would be fun. As of now, the Heavy Cavalry Archer can be considered a similar counterpart. Whereas, as of now, there is already melee elephant unit at the stable that has been given to 4 other civs that border India, that the Indians are still denied access too even though their stable literally portrays elephants being trained. **And even though the Mongols have now been retroactively given Steppe Lancers in a similar fashion** Hence the request for Indian battle elephants will have higher priority than cranequins naturally. ---
**Author:** ![JonOli12](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/jonoli12/32/50441_2.png) [@JonOli12](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/JonOli12)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 6:23am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/660 "2020-04-27T06:23:35Z")
That is not the point. The point is that Indians do not need Elephants. It is clear that devs wanted to add them in with DE (Elephants in the Stables), but have chosen against it for some reason. I think it would just overcompensate the lack of Knights, and take out one of the incredibly few weaknesses Indians have. They have almost the full Tech Tree otherwise. > [@Parthnan](#): > > And even though the Mongols have now been retroactively given Steppe Lancers in a similar fashion They should have never done it, since it opened the flood gates. ---
**Author:** ![Parthnan](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/parthnan/32/55505_2.png) [@Parthnan](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/Parthnan)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2020, 6:25am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614/661 "2020-04-27T06:25:21Z")
**even though the Mongols have now been retroactively given Steppe Lancers in a similar fashion?** The Mongols are just as strong as Indians(Actually higher overall winrate from before 36202) and yet they got Steppe lancers retroactively, they also didnt need them did they! lol [Previous page](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614.md?page=5) [Next page](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/battle-elephants-for-the-indians/72614.md?page=7)