I see there has been a lengthy discussion about ground combat, truly the greatest tradition of these forums. However, there has been an update and this also merits further discussion:
Raptor-D class Drone Scout
...
Missile Box Launcher ( Missile Size: 4 Hangar Reload 100 minutes MF Reload 16 hours
Graystone GFC-20B Missile Fire Control (1) Range 19.9m km Resolution 120
Active Sensor Drone (4) Speed: 6,250 km/s End: 6.9d Range: 3,750m km WH: 0 Size: 4 TH: 20/12/6
Passive Sensor Drone (4) Speed: 6,250 km/s End: 6.9d Range: 3,750m km WH: 0 Size: 4 TH: 20/12/6
I always find these designs for scouting a bit curious. Of course the idea of sensor drones is quite solid and efficient, but with the box launcher setup I always feel that tweaking the fire controls before every 'shot' is more annoyance than it is worth. For that reason I usually prefer to use a single 30% launcher and a magazine to handle my buoys or drones.
Out of curiosity I thought to run the numbers on this. The 8x size-4 box launchers should total 240 tons in size, while a single size-4 launcher at 30% size would displace 60 tons, and even a base tech 2 HS magazine would have capacity 30 which is enough for the remaining drones and the combination adds up to only 160 tons, and I doubt any extra crew requirement comes out to another 80 tons when summed up. Maybe if you want two launchers (one active, one passive) it comes out to 220 tons plus any extra crew so then it is about even, but arguably more convenient in terms of fire control work.
The costs of taking Caprica IV continues to mount with the loss of a transport. Those ships even if NPR vintage are expensive and time-consuming to build just due to how much armor is needed, so it is a loss deeply felt on the strategic level. Personally though I am enjoying seeing Steve wrestle with the strategic and operational mechanics of planetary invasion even if not an NPR homeworld yet.
The Jungle Mountain terrain is, as Steve has shown, the roughest to fight in - not only because of the low combat hit rates, but even more so because of the slow pace of combat and thus the high logistical cost of doing battle. Hopefully the ruins turn out to be worth the costs.
In the attack on Socrates II, we see the NPRs launching AMMs in offensive mode as the player fleet closes under 500,000 km. I am curious what is the logic behind this decision from the AI? It seems to me that they should fire at maximum range, if they expect any kind of hit, or else not fire if it is a waste of missiles anyways - probably the former, as the latter would mean not putting up a fight in many cases which is lame.
The Captain of Galactica deserves a medal for their excellent performance against ground targets! I suspect he or she has a substantial ground combat skill - nice to see that underappreciated specialty coming in handy.
Colonial Intelligence had only speculation regarding the resurgence in Stave activity.
If I recall correcly, the Stave had some issue with a lack of minerals in their home system, so maybe the situation has become even more dire? Makes as much sense as anything, I think.
And to conclude we have the appearance of the Cylons at long last. Admittedly this is not the spoiler race I would have expected to be named as Cylons, based on my limited knowledge of BSG lore, but this is the race we have on-hand and will do perfectly well. Let's see how this surprising threat to Sol itself plays out - a clash between FAC and fighter swarms is not often seen in Aurora so should be very entertaining!
----
Regarding the ground combat discussion, I do think it is a little bit unclear from the terminology, but the mechanics work clearly enough and I cannot readily think of a better set of terminology that encapsulates both the mechanics and flavor (Migi's suggestions are not bad, but are I think too specific and dictate doctrines more than is desirable). Perhaps "Front Line - Positional" and "Front Line - Maneuver" are general enough, though perhaps too technical for the general player base? I'm unsure.
I would second Garfunkel's comment though, many players tend to think of ground combat in tactical terms (which is in fairness most familiar to many who come from a tabletop background, e.g., WH40K or BattleTech) when it is really implemented in operational and strategic terms only. It is an important distinction to keep in mind.