Will there be a ransom option?

[LAST.MAN.STANDING]

Sometimes even the losers get to sack the camp. Guy named cyclops is pretty famous for it actually.

True...also, the baggage trains were fair game at any point DURING a given engagement, which is why most decent generals posted a force to guard the baggage train/camp during battle. Supply was (IS) vitally important to field armies.

I think you're right, but to torture the point it could be:

Winner's options-loot baggage OR pursue survivors
IF sack camp, losers options: sacrifice rearguard OR abandon baggage.

I don't think one should have to choose between sacking the camp/baggage train and pursuing the enemy. Both were done simultaneously by historical armies...ESPECIALLY victorious armies, since the baggage train can't move very fast, and the smaller force left to guard it would likely abandon it once word of defeat reached them. The goods will be there waiting for the victor when he's through chasing the enemy, and of course, he could just as well send a force to capture the loot while the rest of his troops give chase to the main enemy force.

Along those same lines, I think the baggage train should be somewhere on the battle map. Of course, generals would have ranged from the baggage train at various distances depending upon terrain and circumstances (such as the need to cover ground very quickly to exploit a positional advantage). But, things would get too complicated if you could choose how far on the campaign map you wanted to range from your supply train. Having the baggage on the battle map would solve the problem by forcing the decision in real-time to attack/defend the baggage.