Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread: C# Edition

[Iestwyn]

How is the repair cost for components determined? Trying to reduce the supply requirements on my ships and not quite sure how to go about it.

[TheTalkingMeowth]

When a component suffers a maintenance failure, it can be repaired using MSP equal to the component's cost.

If a component is destroyed, either through battle damage or because a maintenance failure happened without sufficient supplies to fix it, you can repair it via the damage control queue at a cost of twice the component cost in MSP.

Not sure about repair in shipyards.

[Iestwyn]

Oh, it's just the cost (or double the item's cost in extreme circumstances). Good to know! So minimizing the maintenance burden would just involve smaller, less advanced components?

Although... that doesn't take failure rates into account, and I don't know how they're determined either.

[vorpal+5]

HQ for ground units ...

1. Why NOT check 'Avoid Combat' for a HQ?

2. If I design 50k HQ (lets call it a brigade HQ) and want to fit 2 25k formations there (regiments), it means I have no room for artillery assets at the brigade level, right? I know this is a stupid/obvious question but I want to be sure that in this case, if I want brigade-level assets, I better instead create a 60k HQ.

3. If the HQ is static, the whole formation can't do breakthrough, right? But if an infantry-HQ (they are cheaper to design and I play with 20% research speed, so the cost difference is significant), then I can. And given that's a HQ for a rather large unit, baring a complete rout, it should be safe from harm, right?

[Droll]

HQ for ground units ...

1. Why NOT check 'Avoid Combat' for a HQ?

2. If I design 50k HQ (lets call it a brigade HQ) and want to fit 2 25k formations there (regiments), it means I have no room for artillery assets at the brigade level, right? I know this is a stupid/obvious question but I want to be sure that in this case, if I want brigade-level assets, I better instead create a 60k HQ.

3. If the HQ is static, the whole formation can't do breakthrough, right? But if an infantry-HQ (they are cheaper to design and I play with 20% research speed, so the cost difference is significant), then I can. And given that's a HQ for a rather large unit, baring a complete rout, it should be safe from harm, right?

1 - you might have an HQ unit that has some sort of significant armament where you might like it to participate in combat (I haven't done this so idk if good idea)
2 - Yes, the HQ capacity not only includes the size of the subordinate formations but also the HQ formation itself. In your case 60k capacity means x2 25k regiments and a 10k brigade formation
     with the HQ.
3 - I'm pretty sure that breakthroughs happen element-wise so although your HQ itself wont breakthrough, infantry in the same formation should still be able to I think (i might be wrong here)

[db48x]

3. If the HQ is static, the whole formation can't do breakthrough, right? But if an infantry-HQ (they are cheaper to design and I play with 20% research speed, so the cost difference is significant), then I can. And given that's a HQ for a rather large unit, baring a complete rout, it should be safe from harm, right?

No, that's not true. When computing the Breakthrough Value of the formation, static units count as zero value, and infantry counts as half the value of vehicles. By making your HQ unit an infantry unit instead of static, you can give your formation a few extra points here. Your HQ is not a very large percentage of the formation (especially with 25kt formations), however, so it won't be a very large boost.

If the formation does break through, then the whole formation gets a second attack, including the static elements. Of course, your HQ probably has no weapons either.

These details are found here: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg109786#msg109786

[Garfunkel]

There is absolutely no reason to NOT tick "Avoid Combat" box for HQ. Even if your HS is a vehicle with multiple modules and those modules are weapons, you're still putting the far more valuable command module at risk for negligible improvement in your firepower.

Breakthroughs are calculated by formation basis, not element nor unit as db48x said.

What you might want to do with your HQs, is to use two layers. You should have both a Brigade HQ and a Regiment HQ. The Regiment HQ is inside the same formation with your infantry or tanks or whatever so it's INF-HQ or VEH-HQ. It's also just big enough to command the formation so it'll have 25k ton capacity.

Then you make your Brigade HQ formation to include your Static Headquarters that is big enough to have as many regiments as you want as well as your artillery. It can be alone in that formation, there is no need for other elements, or you can put in static HAA if you want to roleplay a little.

Your regiments are in Frontline and your Brigade is safely in Rear.

[vorpal+5]

ok ... so to clarify, even if my HQ is static (so buffier than infantry), given the brigade size of 60k it hampers in a negligible way the breakthrough possibility? Seems like a good deal to me.

[TheTalkingMeowth]

Don't forget about evasion!

Infantry have a 40% chance to dodge a hit while on front line attack, while statics have 0. As a result, if the enemy weapons are capable of reliably one-shotting your statics, infantry are actually more survivable (in front line attack).

[nuclearslurpee]

Don't forget about evasion!

Infantry have a 40% chance to dodge a hit while on front line attack, while statics have 0. As a result, if the enemy weapons are capable of reliably one-shotting your statics, infantry are actually more survivable (in front line attack).

In this case LVH is even more survivable, especially for a large HQ when the extra 12 tons of target size is negligible. 60% dodge chance in front-line offensive and extra armor to resist CAP fire (compared to plain INF, obviously STA can have heavier armor).

Except for special cases (e.g. boarding marines) there's no reason for an HQ to be INF unless you're trying to save tonnage or RPing. STA on defense, vehicles on offense are usually optimal.

[vorpal+5]

Don't forget about evasion!

Infantry have a 40% chance to dodge a hit while on front line attack, while statics have 0. As a result, if the enemy weapons are capable of reliably one-shotting your statics, infantry are actually more survivable (in front line attack).

But that's for HQ, I'm not saying I'll create static units for attack. What is more durable, for a HQ, to be squishy as an infantry with some invasion, or to be a static and have more HP? If by being static you don't prevent your whole formation to breakthrough, I would tend to say you better design all your HQ as static (or vehicles if you can, I can't), but I don't know, not having fought any significant battle.

[TheTalkingMeowth]

My point was that if enemy weapons have high enough AP and damage, statics higher armor and HP doesn't make up for not having evasion. In that scenario, infantry are actually less squishy.

This only applies to front line attack, since formations NOT set to front line attack don't get to benefit from evasion.

[vorpal+5]

ok, thanks.

I had a retirement from a LCDR in active duty (in a fighter), at age of 31. This was along 2 others retiring because not assigned, 10 years after game start. Seems an error to me?

[nuclearslurpee]

ok, thanks.

I had a retirement from a LCDR in active duty (in a fighter), at age of 31. This was along 2 others retiring because not assigned, 10 years after game start. Seems an error to me?

Nah, you just got unlucky. Minimum period of service for a military commander is ten years plus five for each rank above the lowest, so for a LCDR it would just be ten years. After that, a commander has a 20% chance to retire each year, which is doubled if they don't have a command.

Civilian leaders (admins and scientists) I believe have a fixed 40-year minimum service life and then similar should apply.

[vorpal+5]

Aaah ok, because I had two doing this. But in essence, a LCDR even with a command have 20% chance to retire at 31 (initial age of 21 + 10 years of service), seems a lot for someone commanding  a ship.

Unrelated, if a ground unit has no HQ, there is no point in assigning a leader, right?

And can STO with a HQ benefits from a leader? There is no bonus relevant to them it seems.