As I understand it, if you wanted a missile that did this:

• Cruise to a waypoint,
• Loiter at the waypoint,
• Attack the first detected enemy.

...then you'd need a THREE stage missile:

• Booster stage:  fuel + engine, no sensor, separation = 0 (or maybe <5 seconds flight time to account for sim inaccuracy).
• Sentry stage:  no fuel or engine, any (powerful enough) sensor, separation = attack range.
• Attack stage:  fuel + engine, any (powerful enough) sensor.

If you're using a minelaying ship, you could skip the booster stage by having the minelayer do the "navigate to waypoint" part of the job.

I think the point is that the loitering at the waypoint is undesired behaviour. The second stage should use it's sensors to lock on the nearby enemy and engage them.

BTW I've got nothing to add to this thread so far, besides that I've tried to figure this out a few times before and really wish I could make it work.

It may help to share your missile designs, including separation distance for first stage.  Multiple-stage missiles have historically been a bit buggy but also easy to set up incorrectly so it's hard to tell which is the case here without more detail.

2nd Stage Active - this is 2nd stage payload.  I have also tried a thermal sensor version with the same results.

Missile Size: 4.5000 MSP  (11.25000 Tons)     Warhead: 4.000    Radiation Damage: 4.000
Speed: 27,911 km/s     Fuel: 268     Flight Time: 110.2 seconds     Range: 3,075,803 km
Active Sensor Strength: 0.84   EM Sensitivity Modifier: 8
Resolution: 1    Maximum Range vs 50 ton object (or larger): 1,462,545 km
Cost Per Missile: 5.4839     Development Cost: 370
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 279.1%   3k km/s 93%   5k km/s 55.8%   10k km/s 27.9%
I have tried multiple types of 1st stages so I will just post a few:

Cruise Active 0 Separation

Missile Size: 9.000 MSP  (22.5000 Tons)     Warhead: 0    Radiation Damage: 0
Speed: 14,378 km/s     Fuel: 1,518     1st Stage Flight Time: 51 minutes    1st Stage Range: 43.97m km
2nd Stage Flight Time: 110 seconds    2nd Stage Range: 3,075.8k km
Active Sensor Strength: 0.49   EM Sensitivity Modifier: 8
Resolution: 1    Maximum Range vs 50 ton object (or larger): 1,117,037 km
Cost Per Missile: 9.5029     Development Cost: 487
Second Stage: 2nd Stage Active x1
Second Stage Separation Range: 0 km
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 143.8%   3k km/s 47.9%   5k km/s 28.8%   10k km/s 14.4%

Cruise Thermal 150 Separation

Missile Size: 9.00 MSP  (22.500 Tons)     Warhead: 0    Radiation Damage: 0
Speed: 14,378 km/s     Fuel: 1,518     1st Stage Flight Time: 51 minutes    1st Stage Range: 43.97m km
2nd Stage Flight Time: 110 seconds    2nd Stage Range: 3,075.8k km
Thermal Sensor Strength: 0.3    Detect Sig Strength 1000:  4,330,127 km
Cost Per Missile: 9.1989     Development Cost: 479
Second Stage: 2nd Stage Active x1
Second Stage Separation Range: 150,000 km
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 143.8%   3k km/s 47.9%   5k km/s 28.8%   10k km/s 14.4%

Cruise No Sensor 0 Separation

Missile Size: 9.0 MSP  (22.50 Tons)     Warhead: 0    Radiation Damage: 0
Speed: 16,778 km/s     Fuel: 2,768     1st Stage Flight Time: 94 minutes    1st Stage Range: 94.98m km
2nd Stage Flight Time: 110 seconds    2nd Stage Range: 3,075.8k km
Cost Per Missile: 9.2589     Development Cost: 481
Second Stage: 2nd Stage Active x1
Second Stage Separation Range: 0 km
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 167.8%   3k km/s 55.9%   5k km/s 33.6%   10k km/s 16.8%


I am trying to make a long range two stage missile for use against raiders.  The idea is that I would fire the first stage at a waypoint and then the thermal tracking second stage would do the rest.  Instead, the 2nd stage just stays at the waypoint until it runs out of fuel.  I have tried this with actives and then thermals on the 2nd stage, and also with both on the 1st stage and have not found a way to make this work.  I have tried deleting the waypoint after firing after reading that somewhere to no success.

Interestingly, using the "Launch Ready Ordnance" command makes them function as short-lived mines where the 2nd stage tracks and attacks targets as expected, so that's something I suppose.

Am I missing something and this is WAI? Or is this a bug?

Quote from: Ulzgoroth on December 02, 2023, 02:57:32 PM

Not only is LVH fine, it's the only option.

This is categorically untrue.

Not in the context where it was posted.

Not only is LVH fine, it's the only option.

This is categorically untrue.

Only light vehicles can carry the LOG module. (Infantry get the exclusive LOG-S module which is less tonnage-efficient but slightly cheaper per unit of supplies and, as you say, has to be directly in the formation where resupply is needed. Critical for boarding teams and potentially good for garrison forces.)

You don't need very many INF+LOG-S in a formation in practice. You only need enough for the rest of the formation to draw supply, which is usually going to be 2-3% of your total tonnage. The majority of your infantry-based logistics should be held in the rear echelon and moved to the front automatically using the reinforcement/replenishment mechanics. The benefit of infantry-based logistics is that you get 25% more GSP per build point compared to LVH logistics, which is not negligible. 1000 GSP will cost you 2.48 BP for the LVH versus 2.0 BP for the INF. So it is true that having INF+LOG-S in your combat formations uses a little bit of tonnage, but the cheaper build cost is more than enough to offset this and with the BP you save you can just build more combat formations.

The benefit of LVH+LOG is that it is more tonnage efficient: 1000 GSP will take up 62 tons for the LVH versus 100 tons for the INF. This means LVH logistics are better in cases where tonnage is more important than build cost, which mostly means heavy armored offensive formations which are intended to make up the first drop wave of a major invasion force (when you are usually limited by transport capacity and need the most tonnage efficiency as a result). For defensive combat and smaller offensives where you are not limited by transport capacity, infantry-based logistics are usually going to be more efficient.

Also, note that boarding combat does not consume supplies, so you do not need logistics elements in a boarding combat formation.

For historical interest: It used to be that the benefit of LVH logistics was automatic resupply, whereas infantry-based logistics were MUCH more efficient but required manual replenishment during combat which was too much for most players. After the Unit Series and replenishment mechanics were added in 1.12, this was no longer the case and infantry-based logistics were strictly superior in every way, which is why the capacity of the vehicle-mounted LOG component was doubled to bring balance back to the Force, erm, I mean, the logistics.