[Valerius]

A few comments related to the Pan/Ermor war.

Revelers are probably my favorite Pangaean unit. They have some issues defensively with poor protection, no shield, and lowered defense when they go berserk but they make up for that by packing quite a punch. They are size two units with two attacks per round so they can dish out 6 attacks per square. And as Numahr mentioned, that kick attacked isn't fixed damage but tied to strength. So when their strength is buffed or they go berserk that second attack also gets better (unlike the typical cavalry hoof attack). This is of course a nice feature of Pan's centaurs as well.

The recently fought battle was very important to Pan as losing that fort would have given Ermor access to the Pangaean heartland. I had a decision to make as I had 50 centaur longbows hidden in a neighboring province. Do I break siege and have the longbows join in the fight or do I try to defend the fort with what I've got and sneak the longbows in for use next turn?

While the longbows would have been an enormous help I didn't want to risk being flanked so I decided to take advantage of the castle walls and wait in the fort. And of course if Ermor had decided to just send in a scout to see what was inside then I would have had the combined forces available next turn (and the longbows wouldn't have been in his scouting report).

There had also been one other development that downgraded this fight from crucial to very important. I had found enchantresses and my first or second one had been an F2. I could research flaming arrows in two turns so I felt that even if I lost the fort everything wouldn't be lost.

I also want to mention one other thing here. This was of course a no diplomacy game but that doesn't mean you can't read signals and it doesn't mean you are forced to fight every war to the death. In this case Ermor and Pan basically reset things and stopped fighting, deciding they didn't want to be stuck in a similar situation to Bandar/Abysia.