Type of takeover vs. Region maintenance

[T0mislav]

Wiki page: http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Takeover says:

To control the peasants, you need at least a little bit of both. If they don't fear you at least a little, they get funny ideas. And if they don't like you at least a tiny bit, then all your oppression will just create hatred and you'll have a constant source of trouble on your hands.

Is this implemented?
Does type of performed takeover further affect on how easy it will be to maintain the region?

[Zakilevo]

TO isn't finished. I believe for now it doesn't really have any impact.

[Anaris]

The type of takeover you perform currently has absolutely no effect on the region post-takeover.

So far as I know, running a pure-friendly or pure-brutal takeover with the same amount of TO support actions should be the same speed. Only trying to run a balanced one (or having people work at cross purposes) should be slower.

[Coquard]

Honestly I have found brutal TOs are faster than Friendly ones.

[GundamMerc]

Honestly I have found brutal TOs are faster than Friendly ones.

Is this anecdotal? If so, it isn't really proof of anything.

[Sacha]

I've had that thought too back on the War Island. We used to retake lost lands the friendly way, but TOs took quite some time so we just went for the brutal approach, since it didn't really leave any lasting damage anyway.

It also doesn't seem to matter how many people are supporting the TO. Five nobles can take a region by 20% a turn, but twenty-five nobles will also take about that long.

[Logar]

Doesn't length of time for a TO also depend on the population of the region?

[Zakilevo]

Hostile is a lot better on War Island. It is the default option. Don't even have to tell people to change their selection.