Unsure how to read Demand a Line of Succession - CLOSED -

[Aatar]

Okay, I'm saying this fully knowing I might just be being stupid not knowing how to read this, but I'm really unsure about what I'm meant to try and do here.

The line "We will be forced into a large Civil War, the size of which will be inversely proportional to our stability." is confusing me. The way I want to read it, I think that means that if I have LESS stability, the smaller the civil war... but I'm not sure that makes sense in a logical or a gameplay sense? Should I tank my stability or boost it?

EDIT:

So, after 9 years of civil war, I managed to win. Good times. So, the question is answered: As usual, more stability is more good. Who knew?

 

[Bovrick]

Okay, I'm saying this fully knowing I might just be being stupid not knowing how to read this, but I'm really unsure about what I'm meant to try and do here.

View attachment 682703

The line "We will be forced into a large Civil War, the size of which will be inversely proportional to our stability." is confusing me. The way I want to read it, I think that means that if I have LESS stability, the smaller the civil war... but I'm not sure that makes sense in a logical or a gameplay sense? Should I tank my stability or boost it?

Haven't done it yet, but the logical thing would be that the size of the opposition will be proportional to (100-Stability)%.

Click it and tell us what happens, so you can ruin your game instead of me having to ruin mine

 

[Aatar]

Haven't done it yet, but the logical thing would be that the size of the opposition will be proportional to (100-Stability)%.

Click it and tell us what happens, so you can ruin your game instead of me having to ruin mine

See, you say that, but I have no idea what the other way around should look like. Maybe it's apocalyptically large either way.

 

[andersonm]

Inversely proportional should mean:

High stability => Small civil war
Low stability => Large civil war

 

[Aatar]

At low stability, the answer is clear.

It was probably obvious, but still.

 

[cristofolmc]

Okay, I'm saying this fully knowing I might just be being stupid not knowing how to read this, but I'm really unsure about what I'm meant to try and do here.

View attachment 682703

The line "We will be forced into a large Civil War, the size of which will be inversely proportional to our stability." is confusing me. The way I want to read it, I think that means that if I have LESS stability, the smaller the civil war... but I'm not sure that makes sense in a logical or a gameplay sense? Should I tank my stability or boost it?

Inversley proportional means that the less stability obviously the bigger it will be. Other wise it would be just proportional.

So yeah if you have a high stability, youll have an easier time winning the civil war

 

[Aatar]

Inversley proportional means that the less stability obviously the bigger it will be. Other wise it would be just proportional.

So yeah if you have a high stability, youll have an easier time winning the civil war

As I said. I was aware I might just be an idiot. Been a long day.