Change in the rebellion code

[De-Legro]

Again, you weren't there, you didnt see the scout reports showing us with double the troops and cs. Anyway, I gave this situation as an example, to demonstrate why I feel a change would benefit the game.

Well, I just wanted to point out the problem, and I proposed a solution for it. But as long as the issue is sorted, it doesn't really matter what the solution is.

No I understand that you had double the CS and troops, and you STILL LOST without even a wall to blame it on. Stop thinking CS is the magical indication of military superiority. If anything the Loyalist proved they are simply superior fighters by defeating such a larger force don't you think?

[Lefanis]

No I understand that you had double the CS and troops, and you STILL LOST without even a wall to blame it on. Stop thinking CS is the magical indication of military superiority. If anything the Loyalist proved they are simply superior fighters by defeating such a larger force don't you think?

Keep thinking that.

I came here to highlight a problem and suggest a solution, not to argue with you. I believe i have made my point clear, and won't be responding to any more attempts of yours to divert from that point.

[mikm]

So superior CS lost.That's nice.Anyway there's this you are unfamiliar with the realm sort of thing regarding curtiers.If your character just joined a realm and tries to switch to curtier he can't.However if he is already a curtier when joining new realm everything is fine.

[Shenron]

No I understand that you had double the CS and troops, and you STILL LOST without even a wall to blame it on. Stop thinking CS is the magical indication of military superiority. If anything the Loyalist proved they are simply superior fighters by defeating such a larger force don't you think?

Wait a minute. You just said that CS doesn't indicate military strength?

Awww man my head hurts....

[Bedwyr]

Wait a minute. You just said that CS doesn't indicate military strength?

Awww man my head hurts....

CS isn't a direct indication of military strength.  It's a convenient and good shorthand, but there are plenty of situations where CS is a poor indicator.

[De-Legro]

CS isn't a direct indication of military strength.  It's a convenient and good shorthand, but there are plenty of situations where CS is a poor indicator.

Exactly. One of the many ways CS can be wrong is that it doesn't take into account unit composition. Its is possible for a 100% infantry army to defeat a 100% archer army, even if the archers have near double the CS.

True military strength also needs to take into account leadership. Poor selection of marshal settings can make that extra CS edge completely irrelevant.