Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ye ye they're heavy blah blah but they (*most of them*) should still be able to out pace regular inf. So is there any justification for the rule I'm missing other than simplicity?

Maneuverability. If a chariot is marching it's likely going very fast, as such if it pulled a hard wheel it could potentially tip over.

I'm sure our ancestors never thought of that before they started using chariots for war.

Simple fact is, GW's treatment of chariots has nothing to do with their historic role in combat. They did one of three things:

1)Provided a platform and transport for heroes and nobles so they wouldn't have to walk to battle.

2)Provided a heavy impact weapon that would either smash across the front of a unit, or straight through it if it wasn't deep enough.

3)OR, as the Egyptians did, were a fire support platform, used in squadron strength, running racetrack patterns in front of the enemy.

The GW model pretty much fails to support any of them correctly.

#1 falls down because that type of chariot was never intended to be in combat in the first place. The chariot would stop short of the battleline, the hero would get out and issue a challenge, another hero would answer, they'd duel, and the survivor would haul the body back to his chariot and retire to the rear to rest and relax.

#2 fails because this type of chariot depends on momentum. You would NEVER slam that type of chariot into a big unit head-on and expect to survive, much less win. As soon as the chariot stops, the horses are killed and the chariot is overturned. Dead chariot.

#3 fails because GW chariots are never allowed to muster the numbers to make it work. Tomb kings can come close... but then suffer under the TK rules and fail.

Of course all chariots became obsolete with the advent of just RIDING the horse - and even more so with the invention of the stirrup. So... in a world with late medieval heavy cavalry the Chariot should not even exist as a viable weapon of war.

C'est la guerre.

(And before you jump on me AGAIN for discussing realism in a game with magic and dragons, the word is VERSIMILITUDE. If it doesn't function in a plausible manner, that's a problem... and we KNOW what's plausible for - in this case - chariots.)

VERISIMILITUDE*

So... in a world with late medieval heavy cavalry the Chariot should not even exist as a viable weapon of war

yes and no - historical chariots with horses - likely no. None of the "current" human cultures uses them - Old tribes that became the Empire did as did the Nekharians but as in our world they stopped using them as their cavalry evolved.

Those pulled by regenerating, fearless undead horses or more impressively Lions, Cold Ones / Daemons - well thats a bit different

But...if it's better to ride horses versus riding in the chariot pulled by them...wouldn't the same logic apply to those same lions, dinosaurs, and daemons?

Warpsolution wrote:
But...if it's better to ride horses versus riding in the chariot pulled by them...wouldn't the same logic apply to those same lions, dinosaurs, and daemons?

Well, Lions aren't exactly built in such a way that they could be ridden very well. Even if they were big enough. Their spines wouldn't hold an armored person plus saddle and tack.

But a chariot wouldn't be terrible even if you could ride those things. A chariot pulled by larger more ferocious beasts would actually be able to be used in a fight. The light flimsy chariots the Egyptions used would get destroyed pretty quick. But a chariot pulled by a several ton beast that naturally fights using claws and teeth that is built to be sturdy can smash right over infantry.

And historically there were heavier chariots pulled by larger horses, and usually more than 2, that were used as shock troops. The issue is that chariots, of any type, are usually only suited to open ground with relatively few rocks or bumps that could jostle the chariot. Hence why they were only really used in desert or arid environments as a serious battlefield weapon.

If we had tamed Rhinos or something a chariot pulled by them could have been a more practical heavy shock chariot.

Ah, but knights riding said tamed rhinos/buffalo/great white sharks...

Fair point on the issues of riding a lion; I remember the CGI guys who made the Wargs in The Lord of the Rings had problems with their gait, posture, etc.
Then again, I bet elves could find a way. They don't need saddles. And these are extra big lions!