Regarding the question of the Alma timeline confusion, if occurs to me: what if the claim of Alma having also spent her whole life in monasteries just outright wasn't true, instead a cover story?
...Actually, though. Thinking on it more... it would be a bit of an odd cover story, but a good for specifically for getting close to the princess. Hm. Then, of course, the question would be, though: on whose behalf, and for what purpose?
Also, some more thoughts on the coming changes to warfare:
First, it can probably be assumed that any enemy that can be dealt with by gun-Chemists will be, so combat units can roughly be divided into gun-Chemists (though potentially in various forms -- leg infantry, mounted, in carts, emplaced, militia...) and various sorts of super-units.
If the super-units don't have access to some sort of rapid redeployment (teleportation, flight, etc.), as soon as one's committed at one point on the front lines, the enemy will know (though there might be some communication lag) that it isn't anywhere else and can adjust accordingly; deploying a super unit to an area gives an initial advantage, but with the expectation a countering super unit will be on the way and the potential cost of enemy advancement elsewhere (though that could also be used to set traps...).
If they do have access to rapid movement, then they're probably going to spend most of their time garrisoning strategic points (forts, cities, river crossings, etc.) with only brief jumps out for surprise attacks -- because leaving those strategic points undefended for too long risks enemy super units jumping to them, right past the front lines, and potentially making the front line advantage moot.
The above, though, assumes symmetric warfare, where both sides have roughly equal resources and capabilities -- and there's an important reason why, at least initially, that might not be the case, that being that how uneasy this kind of war makes the relationship between the peasants and the nobility. If the nobility don't train and arm large numbers of peasants as gun-Chemists, and the other side does the same thing, no problem, war continues more or less as normal. If the other side does have a gun-Chemist army in addition to noble super units, though, then the nobility is in big trouble. The complication, of course, is that if the nobility does raise an army of gun-Chemists, and that army then decides it doesn't like the nobility very much, the nobility is in, if anything, potentially worse trouble.
Importantly, though, in the latter situation, the monarchy potentially isn't. Those peasants might decide they want a republic (or at least to raise their own emperor), but they might also retain more conservative support, and the support of the monarchy itself, by declaring themselves for the monarch and against the corrupt nobility. The peasants win by getting a lower tax burden, since there's no longer a hierarchy of nobles all wanting significant cuts, the monarch wins by having more centralized power, potentially even slightly more tax revenue, and a large and loyal army of gun-Chemist peasants.
So if the nobles prevent their peasants from being armed, they basically just have to desperately hope that all of their enemies do the same thing. If they do arm their peasants, they have to convince those peasants not to overthrow them, which potentially involves having to make concessions to both the peasants and the monarch. Their main potential lever in this setting is probably that the army will still also need super units, for which the nobility is the best source... but still not the only potential source. And it's not necessarily all the noble families that would be needed...
In other words, just all around not a great time to be the average noble.