bRitvo4kA
Auto-translated
In chess, a stalemate is a draw. Therefore, it would be fairer to slightly adjust the rule for stalemate situations, for example, with the following wording:
A stalemate in battle is equivalent to an offer of a draw from the defending side.
The attacker has two options: agree to a draw or retreat (if this outcome is not satisfactory) and return with a new army.
And if a draw is not beneficial to the defender, then he must retreat from the battle.
The current rules require the attacker to lose his army in a draw situation in battle, which, in certain situations, is equivalent to losing the game. I believe this is incorrect.
A stalemate in battle is equivalent to an offer of a draw from the defending side.
The attacker has two options: agree to a draw or retreat (if this outcome is not satisfactory) and return with a new army.
And if a draw is not beneficial to the defender, then he must retreat from the battle.
The current rules require the attacker to lose his army in a draw situation in battle, which, in certain situations, is equivalent to losing the game. I believe this is incorrect.
