Why do I think so:1) Territories fall even to an already inactive player;2) Territories go to a minor player. Who is not capable of territorially changing anything himself;3) Recovering territories is a unnecessary waste of time;4) Territorial rebellion - a complete misunderstanding. There were no such events in any war;5) Personally, it annoys me a lot.
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.
11 Replies
5 Jun 2020, 01:44
Insurgents, guerrillas, rebels, etc have always been a part of war. This isn’t a make believe mechanic.
War is a game that is played with a smile. If you can't smile, grin. If you can't grin keep out of the way til you can. - Winston Churchill VorlonFCW Retired from Bytro staff as of November 30, 2020. >>> Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket <<<
5 Jun 2020, 01:57
In addition to gold use or troops, morale can be improved with the building of fortifications and infrastructure improvements ...
5 Jun 2020, 02:00
Hmmmm, must have been a good reason that conquerors keep troops in cities/provinces/countries that they have conquered. Pretty sure it wasn't for the cuisine lol
5 Jun 2020, 02:32
Siegfrid Goth wrote:
. There were no such events in any war
Arab Revolt 1916-1918, Russian Revolution 1917, Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, Poland 1943, Warsaw Uprising, Poland 1944, Yugoslavia 1941-1945, Czechoslovakia 1968, to name a few ..... you were saying?
5 Jun 2020, 09:49
gusv wrote:
In addition to gold use or troops, morale can be improved with the building of fortifications and infrastructure improvements ...
infrastructure 1 lvl -> food, goods, oil, money 900x20=18k; 750x20=15k; 250x20=5k; 1900x20=38k <- all for 5% of morality. !!! With a 0 probability of no rebellion.
WascallywabbitCDN wrote:
Siegfrid Goth wrote:
. There were no such events in any war
Arab Revolt 1916-1918, Russian Revolution 1917, Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, Poland 1943, Warsaw Uprising, Poland 1944, Yugoslavia 1941-1945, Czechoslovakia 1968, to name a few ..... you were saying?
and which of the mentioned countries joined Antarctica ?
VorlonFCW wrote:
Insurgents, guerrillas, rebels, etc have always been a part of war. This isn’t a make believe mechanic.
Low morale = low productivity, that should be the result of resistance.
5 Jun 2020, 09:52
I do think there should be rebellion. But there is a bit too much now. Maybe decrease the chance of rebellions.
5 Jun 2020, 14:39
Rebellions have been present in the game for some time now, and they add another layer of strategy as you're forced to keep your people happy, but I do have a suggestion to make.
Could rebels perhaps make their own country, and not choose to side with another. I was playing Poland and nearly everyone except 4 people became inactive, one of the inactive players was Germany, so I took him over. Then, one of the provinces rebelled and was given to Austria, but the thing is, since they're a bot country I can't make a deal with them, forcing me to declare war on them to get my territory back which was a hassle to have to take all of Austria.
I was thinking rebel states, would become an independent state, allowing a country to destroy them, but not declare war with another country.
5 Jun 2020, 15:09
Siegfrid Goth wrote:
WascallywabbitCDN wrote:
Siegfrid Goth wrote:
. There were no such events in any war
Arab Revolt 1916-1918, Russian Revolution 1917, Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, Poland 1943, Warsaw Uprising, Poland 1944, Yugoslavia 1941-1945, Czechoslovakia 1968, to name a few ..... you were saying?
and which of the mentioned countries joined Antarctica ?
VorlonFCW wrote:
Insurgents, guerrillas, rebels, etc have always been a part of war. This isn’t a make believe mechanic.
Low morale = low productivity, that should be the result of resistance.
The problem is not that revolts happen but that they join random countries, which I agree is silly.
Low morale = the people do not want you to be their ruler and if you don't give them a good reason why they should be (a few thousand soldiers pointing guns their way), they will refuse to accept your rule.
5 Jun 2020, 15:20
Siegfrid Goth wrote:
gusv wrote:
and which of the mentioned countries joined Antarctica ?
VorlonFCW wrote:
As Antarctica is not a sovereign country, even though it is a continent, no countries "joined her" .......
5 Jun 2020, 17:55
eruth wrote:
Low morale = the people do not want you to be their ruler and if you don't give them a good reason why they should be (a few thousand soldiers pointing guns their way), they will refuse to accept your rule.
You said it bro ... That is the reality of life.
6 Jun 2020, 06:17
Archduke William wrote:
Could rebels perhaps make their own country, and not choose to side with another.
RiverWolf74 wrote:
I do think there should be rebellion. But there is a bit too much now. Maybe decrease the chance of rebellions.
I think these decisions would be right.
WascallywabbitCDN wrote:
Siegfrid Goth wrote:
gusv wrote:
and which of the mentioned countries joined Antarctica ?
VorlonFCW wrote:
As Antarctica is not a sovereign country, even though it is a continent, no countries "joined her" .......
