No gain in inflicting as heavy losses as possible

[KarlXII]

Right now I am invading Australia as the last scenario of my Japanese campaign. During my advance I have cut off the northwest part of the map from supplies by controlling the middle portion of the map in a west-easterly direction. I know there are allied troops spread out in the area that are unsupplied and should be easy targets. But why should I destory them ? If I destroy them it doesn´t affect anything. I won´t get command points, nor requisition points, nor will I fulfill any objectives. What´s the reasoning behind this ? Why not implement a carrot of some sort that would give me any reason to destroy these troops. And no, my core units are not there, I have only auxilisary units available at that part so the XP gain argument is not valid.

In every war there is always a gain by inflicting as much losses as possible to the enemy but not in this game. Unless you fulfill some kind of secondary objective. Perhaps the amount of destroyed enemy units in one sceario in the campaign could affect a modifier to the next scenarios pool of requisition points or requisition points per turn for the enemy ? That would give me a reason to try to destroy as much units as possible. Either that or every inflicted strength point in losses could give you the same amount as requsition points ?

If there were a casualties summary report in the game, at least I could try to beat my own records if I am replaying a scenario.

[Erik2]

It pays to eliminate AI units that may attack your own, the AI is not (yet?) capable of purchasing units.
Against a human opponent it may be better to cripple more units rather than eliminate fewer.