VP flip

[spruce]

I was getting curious when I saw VP points from battles flipping from -6 to +6 and this happening many times in a row. The statistics page seems to prove this...

I'm under the impression the VP points are calculated on the last battle - and not on the "historical" battle result.

So example - I have a bad turn agains the computer and I lose 3 battles (2 of them are medium (one of the medium battles is really discutable) and one is small) - still the VP points from battles go from +6 to -6 ???

This is really weird and shouldn't be happening at all ? Can others confirm this ? Cause my statistics diagram seems to support the bouncing from -6 to +6 to -6 to +6 etc.

[ericbabe]

The testers reported this, but I thought I'd fixed it (I believe it was reported as such).  Are you playing detailed or quick battles when this happens?

[spruce]

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

The testers reported this, but I thought I'd fixed it (I believe it was reported as such).  Are you playing detailed or quick battles when this happens?

I play on advanced options and detailed battle - but I always choose either quick combat to select for reinforcments or instant battles ... I think there were 2 instant battles and 1 quick combat (which happens always when a brigade or 2 brigades ran into a bigger container).

[Hard Sarge]

I think that is in the rules, part of the score is based on the last 3 battles, and what can happen, is you have 3 Wins in a row, the score shows one thing, if the other side wins a battle on the next turn, it changes the score, you win a couple of battle more and it knocks the other sides win off the board and the score is back to what it was

[spruce]

well I'm pretty sure one of these battles was a very small battle - and it snatched me one of my VP's and give it to the Union.
 
I really think those 6 points should only be based on "decisive battles" ... anyhow I'll make a suggestion in the corresponding forum.

[ericbabe]

They are given for battles that are not "small" battles -- that is, battles with more than 5000 casualties.  "Decisive battles" are ones with more than 40,000 men on both sides and that have more than 10,000 casualties (if I remember correctly).  Since decisive battles modify national will, I kind of like keeping the criteria for modifying battle VP's distinct, but I'll consider changing it if a consensus of opinion forms.

I did find a bug in the routine that totals up the victory points from battles.  I had fixed a related bug late in testing, but the fix for that seems to have caused this problem.  (You'd think code to add three numbers together wouldn't be so hard to write!)

Thanks for the report!

[spruce]

Eric, I would like to congratulate you and the team on this outstanding game!

[spruce]

I would like to ask others opinion on this matter - aren't you guys thinking VP's from battles are behaving in a weird way ?

[elmo3]

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

...  Since decisive battles modify national will, I kind of like keeping the criteria for modifying battle VP's distinct, but I'll consider changing it if a consensus of opinion forms.

...

The distinction makes sense to me. Decisive battles should affect National Will but not the other battles.

[spruce]

yeah, but contribution from the decisive battles is way too small in comparison with the VP-battle flip.
 
In my current CSA game I have 9 Nation Will - that means 4.5 VP - but the VP flipped from losing or gaining small battles is not realistic imho.

[Temple]

I just had a flip as the Union, from -6 in battles to +6. During this turn I fought two battles, one was a Quick Battle with no losses to either side, the other I won as Union, CSA casualities were 6054, mine were 1596. The latter was obviously not a "small" battle since casualties were over five thousand, but I was surprised at the complete flip. Could it be something to the effect that after a while with no non-small battles, any non-small battle will then cause all points (+3, +2 and +1) to go to the winning side? I could understand this from a political point of view, since there were no other recent non-small battles, the public and the politicians will focus on this single encounter. However, it is rather lethal since it's a twelve point swing. I think it needs to work as the manual says, +3 for the most recent, +2 for the one before that, and +1 for the one before that.

[Joram]

ORIGINAL: spruce

I would like to ask others opinion on this matter - aren't you guys thinking VP's from battles are behaving in a weird way ?

I've only ever lost one battle (I always play detailed) so no, can't say I have ever noticed this.

[spruce]

ORIGINAL: Temple

I just had a flip as the Union, from -6 in battles to +6. During this turn I fought two battles, one was a Quick Battle with no losses to either side, the other I won as Union, CSA casualities were 6054, mine were 1596. The latter was obviously not a "small" battle since casualties were over five thousand, but I was surprised at the complete flip. Could it be something to the effect that after a while with no non-small battles, any non-small battle will then cause all points (+3, +2 and +1) to go to the winning side? I could understand this from a political point of view, since there were no other recent non-small battles, the public and the politicians will focus on this single encounter. However, it is rather lethal since it's a twelve point swing. I think it needs to work as the manual says, +3 for the most recent, +2 for the one before that, and +1 for the one before that.

exatcly wat I noticed - glad I'm not the only one - I really describe this as od behaviour as there are between - 6 and +6 VP to gather - and I find myself 100% of time either at -6 or +6. This points out that something is behaving weird ... I'm not sure.

[Hard Sarge]

we will look at it, but normally if you get that flip, when you win another battle it flips back ?

I had asked before, but it was thought to be okay, as they game looks at the last few battles, but will be relooked into

[spruce]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

we will look at it, but normally if you get that flip, when you win another battle it flips back ?

I had asked before, but it was thought to be okay, as they game looks at the last few battles, but will be relooked into

I guess it also takes into account small battles and even very small battles - like when a sole brigade is chased away ...

My vision on this topic is that decisive battles eat away the nation will slowly - and as such it's already in the game - each NW point gives you a 0.5 VP point.

But the problem now is that 3 brigades chased equals the same amount of change in VP points as 3 decisive battles from the past (see NW).

I'm not opposed to the idea to seperate recent big victories from "historical exahaustion" - but the points shouldn't flip that easely - if you look at the VP graph, you'll notice that the thing is flipping all the time. So not all battles should flip over from -6 to +6 and vice versa.

[Temple]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

we will look at it, but normally if you get that flip, when you win another battle it flips back ?

I had asked before, but it was thought to be okay, as they game looks at the last few battles, but will be relooked into

Yes, I just had this happen, the turn after it flipped to +6 Union, -6 Rebels, I fought another battle with about six thousand casualties and I lost. The point count for battles did indeed flip-flop from me +6, Rebs -6 to me -6, Rebs +6.

[Joram]

I just confirmed this too. I did an instant battle where I had 25k and the opponent had 15k but beat me (which is exactly why I almost always do detailed battle!). I had 6 battle vp (+1 europe) to the union -6 and after this one battle, it flipped to +6 to -6 reb. Lots of 6's, maybe there's something in that.