Rare Battle Result

[sIg3b]

After adding the Legions Dlc, in my first game -4th Century Romans vs. Romans Gov AI- I got a curious result: Both armies breaking in the same turn.

Question: In such a case, do I always lose, or only if my rout% is higher?
Bonus Question: What happens when rout% is exactly equal? (Would also apply to campaigns and MP.)

[Ludendorf]

Hmm...

I think you lose if it's open battle against the AI. If you're fighting a rearguard, I think it favours you. But I'm not sure.

I'd imagine it's whoever has more of their army left that wins in multiplayer.

[Froz]

I think you lose if it's open battle against the AI. If you're fighting a rearguard, I think it favours you. But I'm not sure.

Hmm, this is unclear to me as well. Is the rearguard battle the one where you engage enemy not with your main army units but with some low quality troops? I had that recently and first time I lost, then I reloaded and won. In both battles both armies had over 60% losses. I even think (though I'm not sure) I had a bit higher losses than the enemy (in both battles). It is possible that I also hit the turn limit at the same time with the second battle (and it made me the winner perhaps?).

[rbodleyscott]

Epic Battles may have special victory conditions, but for custom battles, the victory in a "drawn" battle (nightfall or mutual destruction) is decided as follows:

1) Open battle:
i) If non-campaign SP battle, AI wins.
ii) If campaign battle, side with least % routed wins. (If rout % is exactly equal, the AI wins).
iii) If MP battle, side with least % routed wins. (If rout % is exactly equal, Side B wins. This is because the engine does not recognise the existence of draws so someone has to win. However, this does not affect the score in automated tournament games, as neither side gets the +60 points in "drawn" games, so if both sides had 61% routed, both would score 61 points).

2) Reinforcement battles: The side that was waiting for reinforcements wins.

3) Escort mission: The ambushers win.

4) Campaign rearguard missions: The rearguard side wins. (Campaign rearguard battles were only introduced in v1.5.3, and are not present in any of the currently existing historically based campaigns, so you may not have seen one yet. They are similar to the "Rearguard (Survival Mode)" custom battle scenario, but the army breakpoints are the same as in normal battles and the victory conditions only require the player to avoid defeat until nightfall.

[sIg3b]

Thank you!

There is one case here I am rather unhappy with: If I understand that correctly, tourny rules totally discourage retreating to save your army.

A penny saved is a penny earned, and losses avoided should count for as much as losses caused; just my .02, of course.

[Froz]

4) Campaign rearguard missions: The rearguard side wins. (Campaign rearguard battles were only introduced in v1.5.3, and are not present in any of the currently existing historically based campaigns, so you may not have seen one yet. They are similar to the "Rearguard (Survival Mode)" custom battle scenario, but the army breakpoints are the same as in normal battles and the victory conditions only require the player to avoid defeat until nightfall.

Is this the option "fight with them with your rear echelon forces" in the campaign field of glory module (the randomized campaigns, not the scripted ones)?

[rbodleyscott]

4) Campaign rearguard missions: The rearguard side wins. (Campaign rearguard battles were only introduced in v1.5.3, and are not present in any of the currently existing historically based campaigns, so you may not have seen one yet. They are similar to the "Rearguard (Survival Mode)" custom battle scenario, but the army breakpoints are the same as in normal battles and the victory conditions only require the player to avoid defeat until nightfall.

Is this the option "fight with them with your rear echelon forces" in the campaign field of glory module (the randomized campaigns, not the scripted ones)?

No. See above.

It is the one where you fight with about a quarter of your field army and the enemy arrives in waves. As I say, you probably have not come across it yet.

[rbodleyscott]

Thank you!

There is one case here I am rather unhappy with: If I understand that correctly, tourny rules totally discourage retreating to save your army.

A penny saved is a penny earned, and losses avoided should count for as much as losses caused; just my .02, of course.

Tourney scoring systems are designed for a very specific purpose: To encourage enjoyable hard-fought one-off battles.

That is what most tourney players want. They don't want their opponent to turtle up in a corner, and they don't want him to simply retreat off the field without really fighting because he doesn't like the look of the matchup. It may be realistic, but it isn't fun.

The [automated] tourney scoring system does in fact reward a player for achieving victory with the minimum possible losses to his own side, because the victor scores 60 points plus the difference between the enemy rout % and his own. So the fewer losses he suffers, the higher his score. So a Pyrrhic victory could score as little as 61 points, whereas a decisive victory can score well over 100 points.

[sIg3b]

That´s true, with the victor´s score I see no problem.

What I am not entirely happy with is the loser´s score rewards General Custer: If you inflict 2% more losses, a catastrophic defeat will earn you more points than a marginal one.

[rbodleyscott]

That´s true, with the victor´s score I see no problem.

What I am not entirely happy with is the loser´s score rewards General Custer: If you inflict 2% more losses, a catastrophic defeat will earn you more points than a marginal one.

Agreed, it isn't realistic. But the aim is to encourage players to fight hard, because that is what most tourney players want from tourney games.