Proposal for Elephant Mounted Generals

[lionheartrjc]

Welcome views on this.

The proposal would be restricted to certain armies from India and South-East Asia that maintained large stables of elephants.  It would not be available to other armies (such as Hellenistic armies).  Yes I know Ptolemy Keraunos was supposed to have been killed when on an elephant, but you could restrict that to scenario games.

Basically this would be identified in the list notes as a special rule.  It would permit generals in the army to be mounted on elephants.  When not attached to UGs, they would be restricted to moving at elephant move distances.  It would permit them to fight in elephant TuGs, adding +1 (even if a legendary general).

Richard

[Jilu]

with an aditionnal color added for the kab if killed?

[lionheartrjc]

with an aditionnal color added for the kab if killed?

No. I would prefer to keep things simple.

[Lanceflint]

That seems fine.
Would it prevent them from fighting with cavalry?
I wouldnt bother with the speed restriction. Loads of what should be pedestrian generals seem to zip about the battlefield.
L.

[lionheartrjc]

Would it prevent them from fighting with cavalry?
L.

No, I assume they could get off the elephant and mount a horse.  In which case your point about keeping it simple and not bothering with a speed restriction seems reasonable.

Richard

[nikgaukroger]

I doubt any general in a culture where it was the norm to be seen on a prestigious elephant would be getting off onto a horse.

However, I don't see that as an issue and just go with the simple approach and not worry about any rationalisation.

[lionheartrjc]

Armies that would benefit from this change would be:
2604 - Classical Indian
4702 - Tamil Indian
4703 - Gupta Indian
4704 - Late Classical Indian (except Kingdom of Balur)
4705 - Empire of Harsha
4708 - Chola Empire
4711 - Vijayanagar
4803 - Champa
4808 - Angkor Empire
4809 - Kingdom of Pagan (from 1044 CE)
4814 - Thai Kingdoms
4815 - Barmarised Shan Kingdoms
4816 - Hanthawaddy Kingdom

[nikgaukroger]

Including allied contingents taken from them I assume.

I also assume that the general must be modelled on an elephant 

[lionheartrjc]

Including allied contingents taken from them I assume.

I also assume that the general must be modelled on an elephant 

Yes.
Any general trying to claim a +1 for a model not on an elephant should be ridiculed....

[PUNCH]

Including allied contingents taken from them I assume.

I also assume that the general must be modelled on an elephant 

Yes.
Any general trying to claim a +1 for a model not on an elephant should be ridiculed....

why not a general on elephant and why not " no recover possible for elephant "( of course at cost downgraded )

[Lanceflint]

Happy with the slight change about movement distances, bring it on.
I also think it will encourage the use of more elephants, which due to their cost is only a good thing.
Lance.

[AntiokosIII]

As a fan of pachyderms, I am enthusiastic about this change.

[badhabum]

To me only problem is that it gives an advantage to some armies at no cost . I know keep it simple so simply if he is on a nellie, he can help his Nelleis not his cavalry, infantry ..it's simple isn't it

[SimonStokes]

Any limitations on how many generals could be mounted on elephants or do you just assume that all generals in a qualifying army are on eles?

[lionheartrjc]

To me only problem is that it gives an advantage to some armies at no cost . I know keep it simple so simply if he is on a nellie, he can help his Nelleis not his cavalry, infantry ..it's simple isn't it

Look at it another way, some armies are currently disadvantaged because their generals do not have an opportunity to fight with their main shock troops.
You can dismount from an elephant.

Richard