I forget El are classed as Mounted and not Beasts as they should be,
so good call Stevie (it's why we keep you around).
Ha! “A good idea is still a good idea, no matter the source”.
I think we should keep in mind exactly what scouter's actually ‘
are’.
I envision them to be small bodies of men sent out to find the enemy and suitable battlefields.
Being in such small handfuls, they're vulnerable to larger enemy units, who easily overwhelm them.
After all, a scouting party that doesn’t report back what they have found is of no use at all.
So concealment and stealth is of primary importance.
This eliminates huge ponderous Elephants, as what general is going to send them out on their own to scout?
I think it also eliminates any kind of chariot, who cannot leap over hedges (like horsemen can), nor jump over
streams and ditches (like horsemen can), and are practicality useless in woods, even when dismounted.
(Some people may question why Auxiliaries and Psiloi are considered to be good scouting material, but in
forested or mountainous terrain they can actually be better at scouting than mounted troops)That leaves us with those rich aloof aristocratic Knights, who consider scouting to be below their status.
Here we have to take into account DBA play-balance issues.
Do we really want Knight heavy armies to blunder mindlessly into unsuitable battlefields?
Hmmm...sometimes they did (i.e. HYW French), and sometimes they didn’t.
As for Roads, why not leave it as it is...whoever chooses and places the terrain gets to decide.
If the invader has out-scouted the defender, they are unlikely to want to limit their base-edge selection.
And if the defender has out-scouted the invader, they may want a Road, just as they do at present.
All-in-all, I think your excellent original suggestion works best with the following modification.
“Add to the scouting roll:-
+1 if more mounted (not counting Ele, Kn, or any chariots, but including Mounted-Infantry), and
+1 if more Light Horsemen, and
+1 if more Auxiliaries+Psiloi.”
