Alex Ferguson:
> > I'm quite happy with the idea although the table needs expanding to
> > Regiment level and then generals which I think will be more important
> > in this publication.
>
> Regimental generic would most obviously be 'colonel'. (With due apologies
> to British Army, I think we can drop the Lt. <g>) I think ILH-1 gives
> the regional terms, sorry, don't have it to hand.
>
> For generals, we're on rather thin ground. We have the DH terms, but
> even they are not really hierarchical. i.e., we can't meaningfully say
> a two star general is a major-gen, and hence a division commander, if
> there are no such things as "divisions", much less ones composed of
> subordinate units themselves commanded by a one-star general.
>
> One questions arise is, where do vexilla commanders fit in? Are they
> considered "Warlords" in the Lunar scheme, just potentially with
> commands that are very much smaller than other such? Or do they have
> some distinguished status?
An even bigger problem is that ranks do not correspond with unit sizes or unit strengths.
In the Lunar-style army, you do have a fairly clear idea of regimental sizes, even if they may not be up to strength, so two officers of equal rank should command similar strength units. However, the same definitely does not apply to the other types of unit.
For example, a Yelmic regiment is probably headed up by a noble who has a hereditary title and hereditary rank. You could have the situation where one noble may have a very high hereditary rank and come from a house that has seen better days, so he would command a unit of fewer men and lower strength than someone with a nominally inferior rank yet from a stronger clan/house.
This also gives the situation where a higher ranking commander is given orders by a lower ranking one as the lower ranking commander is more important militarily but less important socially and politically.
You get similar things amongst the Char-Un, where a Hetman brings the warriors of his clan to fight, but one Hetman with a weaker clan may have a superior title/rank, handed down from Kargzant or Yelm.
The Malkioni also have situations where a Duke brings along his Knights and men-at-arms, but a Duke with a lower rank may have a stronger force. (The carmanians will have a similar structure, but their nobles are called something else, I believe.)
So, even if we do have a comparison between the different titles, they may bear no relationship to the actual state of play on the battlefield or even in the mess.
That's why I think the safest way is to give the other commanders an honorary rank as a Lunar, on a case by case basis, with that honorary rank being the rank we can work with. You'll have the situation where the Golden Count of the Blazing Riders is given the same rank as the Crushing Hooves of the Sons of Kargzant (or whatever the titles may be) even though the first outranks the second in the Yelmic heirarchy.
Simon (Back to Lurking)
Powered by hypermail