Lunar army effectiveness and SGU-wishes

From: Andreas Mueller <mueller_at_faw.uni-ulm.de>
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2000 10:50:34 +0200


Thanks for all the replies. I now think I understand what's going on: The lunar army is a big mix of all successful types of troops. In this, they would be very similar to late roman armies (and also the unit-gods are typical roman, I agree). Then the question is, how good are they integrated - this was one of the biggest problems the late roman armies and their successors had (apart from the social problems). In a Glorantha panel at Tentacles the question arose: Why are the Lunars so less successful than the Romans concerning the amount of land conquered? The there presented POV was, that the Lunars have their own trouble with the wanes. This considering unsatisfactory IMG, I thought until now, that the reason was their use of scimitar and thus their inferior strategy.
I understand, that the place in SGU is seriously limited, but I hope that not only the magic but also the armament and strategy of the troops are detailed enough that they make sense and the majority of facts (being left out due to space restrictions) can be interpolated by knowledge of RW trooptypes. IMHO it would be no error to have a short table with lunar trooptypes, their size, the places where they are deployed and their RW counterpart concerning armament and strategy. This information-packed table would be the thing I long for! The rest of the text could be player information about getting enlisted, three sample armies as typical trooptype-mixes, the differences to RW armies (mainly magic and the scimitar-thing) and all the things I haven't thought of. Just my wet dreams, I hope I get what I want ;-)

Cheers,

Andreas


Powered by hypermail