Bad Credit?

Chaplain Lovejoy · Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:05 am

Just had a leader get credit for winning a battle when (1) the battle actually was lost and (2) the leader was not the commander anyway.

Battle result, Sheridan loses:

Van Cleve credited with a victory:

But he wasn't even in charge:

Was Van Cleve getting credit for a successful rearguard action or something?

enf91 · Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:09 am

Leaders get credit when a) they destroy enemy elements or b) they inflict a much higher amount of losses than they take. Since Van Cleve is not in command of any elements, the game may just have seen that he took no losses and awarded him a seniority point.
BTW, a 4-element division? You just wasted a bunch of resources.

cptcav · Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:25 am

The other issue that I see is when one looks in the slot for identifying the leaders present. Note, Sheridan's star is there, but not Van Cleve's or Sibley's.

Regards,
CptCav

enf91 · Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:29 am

That's not Sheridan's star. That's Van Cleve's. The ranking general gets a portrait; all subordinate generals get stars with their ranks in the little slot.

slimey.rock · Tue Jul 28, 2009 2:09 am

I've seen this behavior before. I believe somewhere in the manual it mentions second in command generals. Basically it is simulating Van Cleave as Sheridan's second in command and his performance is tied to Sheridan.

soloswolf · Tue Jul 28, 2009 3:04 am

enf91 wrote:BTW, a 4-element division? You just wasted a bunch of resources.

If he was going to build a cavalry division under him at some point... Perhaps he had the resources, Sheridan was active and maybe he had a turn where he knew he'd be free from combat while his ratings recovered. Don't be so quick to judge.

GraniteStater · Tue Jul 28, 2009 3:17 am

I've seen this quite often now - I just ignore it, really.

* Clear loss, but one or more leaders hailed for their victory.

* Vice versa.

* Clear win, but column retreats to an adjacent region.

I'd also hazard that your Stance and RoE prior to the engagement play a role in the results and 'box score.'

Chaplain Lovejoy · Tue Jul 28, 2009 10:52 pm

soloswolf wrote:If he was going to build a cavalry division under him at some point... Perhaps he had the resources, Sheridan was active and maybe he had a turn where he knew he'd be free from combat while his ratings recovered.

Precisely.

Chaplain Lovejoy · Tue Jul 28, 2009 10:53 pm

GraniteStater wrote:I've seen this quite often now - I just ignore it, really.

* Clear loss, but one or more leaders hailed for their victory.

* Vice versa.

* Clear win, but column retreats to an adjacent region.

I'd also hazard that your Stance and RoE prior to the engagement play a role in the results and 'box score.'

But is it a bug or WAD?

GraniteStater · Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:17 pm

Chaplain Lovejoy wrote:But is it a bug or WAD?

As we technical writers say, a bug is just an undocumented feature

enf91 · Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:54 pm

I've seen stuff like that too. A leader getting punished after a win probably suffered disproportionately huge losses; a leader getting congratulated after a loss probably inflicted disproportionately huge losses. Retreating after a "win" is sort of weird, but I'd guess it had something to do with your units' cohesion.

Heldenkaiser · Wed Jul 29, 2009 7:26 pm

enf91 wrote:Retreating after a "win" is sort of weird ...

Depending on how you look at it ... issuing forth from a fortified position, whipping the enemy good, then returning to safety could be called a victory, no?

But yes, mostly people look at it that way. That's why Napoleon sat for two days on the battlefield of Eylau so to claim he had won since he held the ground.

Bad Credit?

Bad Credit?

Who is online