Board Thread:The Last Sovereign Discussion/@comment-29984007-20170712165254/@comment-32166397-20170718050824

I took a look. The code is correctly registering doing well against IK,c but it just assigns the point in a confusing manner. In the code, you get a point for NOT doing Sabotage. You get a point for NOT doing Chalice Sabotage. And you get a point for doing WELL against IK. So in your playthrough, you got three points and the game sent you to the military district (Defend Ardoheim/Focus on Dealing Damage/ Keep Order) like it was supposed to. If you want the game to send you to the battleground (Defend Ardoheim/Capture Succubi/Keep Order), you must have either 1 or 2 points. To get that you could do both Sabotages plus do well against IK (1 pt total), do only one Sabotage plus do well against IK (2 points total), or do only one Sabotage and do poorly against IK (1 point total). While the code IS correctly registering the IK point, you have brought up a more subtle potential bug. By looking at the character text, it seems that the intention was to send the player to different places based on how well the war is progressing in Ardoheim. You get sent to the Castle Interior if you are doing great (Aka: "I'm glad the situation is so under control"). You can get sent to the Military District if you are doing poorly (Carina: "This...looks bad..."). Or get sent to the battleground if you are somewhere in the middle. How well the war is progressing should be based on how many aggressive actions the player has taken against IK, but the code as it is doesn't reflect that. By not doing Sabotage actions (non-aggressive actions), you get points. However, by winning against IK (aggressive action), you also get a point. This mixing of giving points for both aggressive and non-aggressive means that you can end up in weird situations where the player can be hammering IK (Both sabotages plus winning against IK), but get the middle result (2 pt total). Or you could let the IK walk all over you (No sabotages plus losing against IK) and also get the middle result (1 pt total). And strangely, to get either the great or bad result, you need a mix of actions. Either no sabotage plus a win against IK (3 pts, great result) or both sabotage plus a loss against IK (0 pts, poor result). As long as this isn't all a deliberate design choice, the easiest fix would be to give a point for doing poorly against IK, instead of when you did well. This would make the all the points a counter for non-aggressive actions which seems to line up with the intention of the condition tests below which decide where to send the player. Oops, just realized that I was looking at v28.1 code...=(...I don't think there was a change here between 28.1 and 28.2, but if there was my bad. According to JC on Patreon this is how the point system works.