I like the mounted combat end quite a lot, and plan on using that in my own games. It's potentially powerful, but that's a good thing. It gets around the odd effect where, without any judgement call by the DM, a trained mounted warrior doesn't actually do much more than a foot soldier. May as well assign some numbers to the advantage they should have instead of relying on every DM to house rule it or not.I haven't decided yet what I think about the take on mass combat. Not an insult, I just haven't grokked the numbers yet.I notice you linked Delta's Book of War for a more detailed take, which I agree with. Scaling up from the actual results of playing things out individually the way that does is kind of the holy grail of mass combat systems for D&D. It should ideally have been done the first time a mass combat system was presented, so it's surprising Delta was the first (that I know of), and that it took nearly 40 years. But then the decision to make it a miniatures rule set is a little frustrating- it leaves that ideal niche still not quite filled.
Hi DavidVery pleased you liked the rules. I didn't set out to write mass combat rules, they simply evolved out of a decision to require a morale check for any mount, and then the invention of a morale aggregate modifier, to capture the desire, or lack of desire, for victory between two opposing forces - initially the mount and what they were charging, but this led onto more and more complex scenerios.As an 'on the fly' mass combat system, it seems to work and not overly clunky, but I'll be pleased if someone, somewhere, takes any part of it and runs with it. Let me know if you go onto to use it!