Does patrolling with 0 unrest kill population too?

tinkthank · #1 April 25th, 2004, 11:14 AM

Short question: If I patroll (instead of defend) in a province because I have a fortress there and want to defeat incoming enemies, will this *also* reduce the population count (which happens when you patrol to reduce unrest), or only if "filthy" upstarts are killed?
thank you in advance

Minrhael · #2 April 25th, 2004, 11:35 AM

Only if you kill upstarts.

Kuroth1 · #3 April 25th, 2004, 03:14 PM

I am new to this game...

What does "Only if you kill upstarts" mean????

Thanks!

tinkthank · #4 April 25th, 2004, 03:45 PM

I think the terminus technicus is "kill filthy trouble makers": it means what you do when you try to get rid of unrest in a province by patrolling.

Endoperez · #5 April 25th, 2004, 03:59 PM

If there is unrest in province, patrolling forces look out for the troublemakers and kill them, reducing unrest. Population is lowered by a certain number (5?) for every point of unrest removed.

The question in this thread was whether patrolling reduces unrest if there is no unrest present. It doesn't, and because of this you have no reason not to patrol with your armies when they are in your fortress: if there is a surprise attack, your forces will catch the attackers.

tinkthank · #6 April 25th, 2004, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Endoperez:

The question in this thread was whether patrolling reduces unrest if there is no unrest present. It doesn't, and because of this you have no reason not to patrol with your armies when they are in your fortress: if there is a surprise attack, your forces will catch the attackers.

Just so there is no misunderstanding, the question was whether patrolling reduces *population* if there is no unrest present (*not*: "reduces unrest").
Oh, and there are still plenty of reasons not to patrol with your armies...

Endoperez · #7 April 25th, 2004, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tinkthank:

quote:
Originally posted by Endoperez:

The question in this thread was whether patrolling reduces unrest if there is no unrest present.

Just so there is no misunderstanding, the question was whether patrolling reduces *population* if there is no unrest present (*not*: "reduces unrest").
Oh, and there are still plenty of reasons not to patrol with your armies...

Doh! Thanks for correction.
And yes, there are some reasons, but most of the time if there nothing else to do it is better to patrol than not to.

tinkthank · #8 April 26th, 2004, 01:26 AM

Aha, couldnt see that because of death/growth scales.
Great, this changes my strategy considerably. I will now patrol much more often!
Thanks for the quick reply

Yossar · #9 April 26th, 2004, 11:20 AM

If you're in a castle, there are many times you don't want to patrol since that army is no longer safe. If there's no fortress and no unrest I don't think there's any reason to pick defend over patrol, though.

tinkthank · #10 April 26th, 2004, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Yossar:
If you're in a castle, there are many times you don't want to patrol since that army is no longer safe. If there's no fortress and no unrest I don't think there's any reason to pick defend over patrol, though.

Actually, if there is *no* fortress I sometimes defend instead of patrol in later game situations simply because I will find that commander with "n" again, and he might just get lost and forgotten without it.