Re: FOUNDATION DOC: Forces and Numbers

From: Stewart Stansfield <stu_stansfield_at_...>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 19:20:21 -0000


"Three Star Generals"
> I was using the Lunar titles rather than modern US army equivelents
> or has Greg decided the Lunars actually now use US army ones?
> Doesn't really bother me, whatever the consensus is.

Sorry, I've done something similar. Three Star General just seems to be an easier way of saying 'General of Three Stars' (Tarsh War, p. 7).

:)

Tatius' promotion
> The only significant effect is to increase the number of
subordinates
> he has. I've put in a reasonable minimum for a Waxing Moon General,
> there could be a couple of Crescent Generals and four or five New
> Generals if they are working to book. If he's promoted to Half Moon
> General that's another layer even assuming many units and generals
> are operating elsewhere in the region. Given that each general has
> their own staff that's a lot more people, at least some of who need
> writing up.

Hey, I'm happy to have a go at that! But then I like ludicrously Byzantine command structures... I'm sure there's a happy medium. His rank as Dean of the College of Magic might suffice, as 4* Generals are usually full army commanders for the main theatre, not siege commanders.

Of course, if it's political (and yes, it always is) the rank jump would serve the political purposes of the promotion; yet in the interests of operational efficacy and the problems of campaign, we might not ever accommodate to a more bureaucratic command structure during the length of the siege.

Cheerio,

Stu.

Powered by hypermail