A. High VP values (30%+) are good because ACW armies frequently fought for physical objectives. Ergo, this is more realistic
-Counter-argument is that ultimately this creates 'unfair' battles in favor of the side receiving the superior spawn;
B. Low VP values (2%-5%) are good because the game becomes more about superior fighting skills/tactics in game
-Counter argument is that this undervalues the importance of goals and objectives in the ACW (e.g., 'take that hill!')
C. Middle Range VP values (10%-20%) are good because, while holding vp's returns significant value, it may not be enough to overcome substantially inferior play and big casualty deficits.
Counter argument is (I suppose) that 'splitting the baby' creates a hybrid that doesn't really satisfy anyone.
And, of course, the real question here is how and why Soldier became the power broker pulling every GCM string!
![Evil or Very Mad :evil:](./images/smilies/icon_evil.gif)