Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition

[Stormtrooper]

Do I need HQ for boarding squads? Or is it better to just not bother at all?

[serger]

There is no such need.
Normal boarding squads are small, and even a minimum-size HQ will take remarkable portion of their tonnage, and so even if you find some very good officer with relevant skills - it will be hard to outweigh, and in addition, these squads will be in this case a killer-traps for these good officers, because there is no such thing as rear echelon during board combat, and it might be some level of boarding-drop casualties.
Though if you have large boarding squad to take large enemy stations and immobilized large ships - then HQ might contribute well with acceptable risk.

[Borealis4x]

Do garrisons need logistics units?

Whats a good rule of thumb to determine how much logistics a force should have?

[nuclearslurpee]

Do I need HQ for boarding squads? Or is it better to just not bother at all?

There is no such need.
Normal boarding squads are small, and even a minimum-size HQ will take remarkable portion of their tonnage, and so even if you find some very good officer with relevant skills - it will be hard to outweigh, and in addition, these squads will be in this case a killer-traps for these good officers, because there is no such thing as rear echelon during board combat, and it might be some level of boarding-drop casualties.
Though if you have large boarding squad to take large enemy stations and immobilized large ships - then HQ might contribute well with acceptable risk.

The absolute minimum size for an HQ is 10 tons assuming an infantry base type. For a small (say, 250 tons) platoon I would agree it is not worth it, but a larger company-sized formation of nearer to 1,000 tons it can be good value. You can even at this tonnage double up (20 tons) to improve survivability, but generally for such a large boarding formation the casualty rate will be very low simply because the kill rate will be very high.

Do garrisons need logistics units?

Whats a good rule of thumb to determine how much logistics a force should have?

They don't need them but they can use them.

LOG modules only matter for direct combat, i.e. when Army A is shooting at Army B. For day-to-day sitting around on a colony breaking up bar fights and arresting petty thieves no GSP is consumed or needed. However if your garrison gets into a fight they will probably need LOG modules to last long enough against the enemy - however, if you have a 5,000-ton garrison and the enemy lands 500,000 tons of troops logistics will be the least of your concerns.

There isn't a good rule of thumb, but in general the amount of logistics a formation requires is enough for ten rounds of combat (one round is 8 hours). So what you really need to do is work out how many forces are involved, estimate what kind of kill rate you expect, and then based on that work out how long you expect combat to last and embark enough supplies to resupply your formations for that many rounds.

As this is a lot of work, my rule of thumb is "a lot". 

[Droll]

There isn't a good rule of thumb, but in general the amount of logistics a formation requires is enough for ten rounds of combat (one round is 8 hours). So what you really need to do is work out how many forces are involved, estimate what kind of kill rate you expect, and then based on that work out how long you expect combat to last and embark enough supplies to resupply your formations for that many rounds.

Actually a better rule of thumb would be to consider the time it takes for your transports to make a round trip from the warzone to a planet with logistics and back. You ideally want your force to be able to fight without resupply for slightly longer than that. This also means that the travel distance should also matter when deciding how much GSP to bring. If it takes 30 days for resupply, make sure you can fight for 45 days for example.

This assumes you have spare logistics that were overproduced in a colony so you can get even more advanced and incorporate the training time of a logistics formation into the equation as well.

[Borealis4x]

There isn't a good rule of thumb, but in general the amount of logistics a formation requires is enough for ten rounds of combat (one round is 8 hours). So what you really need to do is work out how many forces are involved, estimate what kind of kill rate you expect, and then based on that work out how long you expect combat to last and embark enough supplies to resupply your formations for that many rounds.

Actually a better rule of thumb would be to consider the time it takes for your transports to make a round trip from the warzone to a planet with logistics and back. You ideally want your force to be able to fight without resupply for slightly longer than that. This also means that the travel distance should also matter when deciding how much GSP to bring. If it takes 30 days for resupply, make sure you can fight for 45 days for example.

This assumes you have spare logistics that were overproduced in a colony so you can get even more advanced and incorporate the training time of a logistics formation into the equation as well.

Is 'logistics' an item that transports can carry? Or do you mean logistics units that you swap out and refill at colonies?

[Droll]

There isn't a good rule of thumb, but in general the amount of logistics a formation requires is enough for ten rounds of combat (one round is 8 hours). So what you really need to do is work out how many forces are involved, estimate what kind of kill rate you expect, and then based on that work out how long you expect combat to last and embark enough supplies to resupply your formations for that many rounds.

Actually a better rule of thumb would be to consider the time it takes for your transports to make a round trip from the warzone to a planet with logistics and back. You ideally want your force to be able to fight without resupply for slightly longer than that. This also means that the travel distance should also matter when deciding how much GSP to bring. If it takes 30 days for resupply, make sure you can fight for 45 days for example.

This assumes you have spare logistics that were overproduced in a colony so you can get even more advanced and incorporate the training time of a logistics formation into the equation as well.

Is 'logistics' an item that transports can carry? Or do you mean logistics units that you swap out and refill at colonies?

Yes I mean logistics units, since GSP is not it's own transportable entity. But I guess more specifically I'm referring to supply trucks (LVH LOG) since logistics infantry is useless

[serger]

You can even at this tonnage double up (20 tons) to improve survivability, but generally for such a large boarding formation the casualty rate will be very low simply because the kill rate will be very high.

Out of Steve's formulas and my own testing battles - there will be no (commander) survivability improve: doubling HQ units are halving probability of officer being killed when some HQ unit is destroyed, but they are simultaneously doubling the same probability that some HQ unit will be destroyed, so no resulting difference.
Though it will be some sense of doubling HQ units on formations, designed for independent service, because if their main HQ will be destroyed with their commander - you'll have an option to manually replace commander without a route of troop transport.

[Borealis4x]

What do ground fighters actually need to work properly besides box launchers to mount attack pods?

Do they need sensors? Fire Controls? Do they even need an engine and fuel?

[Jorgen_CAB]

What do ground fighters actually need to work properly besides box launchers to mount attack pods?

Do they need sensors? Fire Controls? Do they even need an engine and fuel?

You want fighter pod bays instead of box launchers if you want dedicated ground fighters... regular fighters do OK as well of course but dedicated fighters can be more useful as you can build them specifically for the job.

I always give my bombers at least two levels of armour, that allow me to retreat them instead of them being destroyed most of the time as one example. You usually don't armour your missile fighters very often.

[nuclearslurpee]

Out of Steve's formulas and my own testing battles - there will be no (commander) survivability improve: doubling HQ units are halving probability of officer being killed when some HQ unit is destroyed, but they are simultaneously doubling the same probability that some HQ unit will be destroyed, so no resulting difference.

I don't have a link at hand, I used to think the same thing but Steve at one point corrected me that doubling the HQs did give some direct benefit for commander survivability though I can't remember the specifics. As this is from the man himself I don't question it unless of course the intended behavior is bugged and not WAI.

[Rince Wind]

For logistics I bring pure logistics formations of 80 supply vehicles and set them to be used as replacements. The actual combat formations only have a few of those each. Is is very easy to scale as well for fights in less favourable terrain. Set to rear echelon of course.

[Jorgen_CAB]

Out of Steve's formulas and my own testing battles - there will be no (commander) survivability improve: doubling HQ units are halving probability of officer being killed when some HQ unit is destroyed, but they are simultaneously doubling the same probability that some HQ unit will be destroyed, so no resulting difference.

I don't have a link at hand, I used to think the same thing but Steve at one point corrected me that doubling the HQs did give some direct benefit for commander survivability though I can't remember the specifics. As this is from the man himself I don't question it unless of course the intended behavior is bugged and not WAI.

Mathematically it should be a very small difference... such as in a simple example...

A formation with 1000t have an HQ at 10t and there is a 1% chance the commander is killed.

If you add another 10t HQ the formation is 1010t and there is a 1.98% risk it is hit and a 50% chance the commander is killed thus a total of less then 1% he is killed in total.

But the difference is generally so small that it should be inconsequential for that reason.

I always have two HQ as every military formation generally operate in this way in reality... I also add extra junior HQ in the higher command structure as well and move them to formations that loose an HQ due to combat losses.

[Theoatmeal2]

Does a diplomatic ship need to be civilian? I thought I was clever by combining ELINT with diplomatic module, vessels size was small just 4000 tons. Every time I try to go be diplomatic:(Pop into system, turn on friendly transponder, keep a respectful distance.) they ask me to leave with threat.

[TheTalkingMeowth]

Does a diplomatic ship need to be civilian? I thought I was clever by combining ELINT with diplomatic module, vessels size was small just 4000 tons. Every time I try to go be diplomatic:(Pop into system, turn on friendly transponder, keep a respectful distance.) they ask me to leave with threat.

They aren't going to be happy about ships in their home system, period. Diplomatic or not, commercial or not, if they spot it they will complain (unless you are allied).

I park my spy ships 200 million km from the homeworld and stooge along at 100 km/s or less. That way I don't get spotted.