Real life military organizations, equipment and personnel.

[Vasious]

It may be important to streamline all this down to what's actually meaningful in Aurora. Creating a complete OOB from Army down to Squad level, with every detail, may be tedious both to organize and later to actually manage and use in-game.

Is company level simulation worth it or can we skip to battalion level? Are regiments necessary as a larger unit? As far as I've read a while ago, like regimental ones, divisional systems were falling into disuse, giving way to autonomous "brigade combat teams" (BCT), at least in the US Army.

So the primary units could be brigades composed of 4-5 battalions (or regiments if you prefer that flavour), perhaps with some greater administrative unit encompassing them to cover fronts/planets/campaigns.

What are your thoughts?

The Drag and Drop system seems quite suited for having the Classic Organisations or even Reserve Formations and then creating AD Hoc BCTs for specific deployments.

I am tempted to try out having a variety of Modular Formations, Each type held under a "Training Regiment" HQ, and then several sized HQ formations, that can just have the Formation Elements attached of the types needed for the mission deployment, that once the mission is over can be easily disbanded or have the  Modular Formations, rotated in and out when they are damaged.

[Shadow]

Hmmmm. And how does that affect academy graduate generation?

Not in the slightest.

Are you sure? I mean, if you add a rank, you have to rename every other one since the new one is added at the top, above Fleet Admiral/General of the Army. And if you remove, say, the bottom one (Major/Lt Cmdr), do the academies begin producing that now-bottom one (Lt Col/Cmdr) in the volumes the previous one appeared? How does the game evaluate how many Ground Combat Command points to give a new/reshuffled rank?

The numbers does not represent number of men but the total "size" of the formations under them. Also the game NEVER refer to number of actual soldiers but units. You could easily have an infantry unit be referring to a fire-team of three soldier or an infantry unit with a CAP is a machine gun team of 5-6 men. Like wise one infantry unit could be a super soldier like a space marine in power armour and a bolter. A light vehicle could be a small walker or a space marine Dreadnought type individual.

The number that each commander can command is their capacity, there is nothing that says that a colonel could not command a divisions... I mean he is capable of it... he just have not attained that rank yet. You probably also could find generals that are not capable of commanding a division even though they have the rank to do so... that is how real life actually works... 

While there may be political influence, personal and other factors, ranks are generally a measure of experience in the service, and not just a title. You wouldn't promote a private to command 10,000 men right out of boot camp, if you have any sense.

While Aurora may not consider individual soldiers per se, it does so implicitly in the size/power of units. There's bound to be one value which would roughly represent the influence of a single, average soldier. Perhaps that value is 5, the size of an infantry unit with light armour and personal weapons*. Or perhaps it corresponds to a fire team (4-5 men), since 5 tons of equipment might be too much for a single soldier.

Another possible point of reference is the tank (medium vehicle, medium armour, medium anti-vehicle), which adds up to 62 tons, which might be just enough for the machine itself (taking into account advancements in materials and lower weight than a modern MBT) and a measure of associated supplies and spare parts. Perhaps that's a mech instead, an Adeptus Astartes, or a T-Rex with lasers, but it remains the equivalent of a mainstay tank-like unit of the ground forces by modern standards.

Overall, I'm trying to figure out points of reference to come up with plausibly-sized military units of standard human troops (no mechs, no titanic Space Marines) without running into things like the defeat of what I had designed as an infantry brigade at the hands of what an NPR may call a company of standard human-sized grunts.

*This estimation roughly coincides with the following fragment from the Professional Journal of the United States Army, Volume 24, Issues 1-2 (1944):



Again, the lesser weight of 5 tons could be attributed to advances in material sciences since WW2.

[Jorgen_CAB]

While there may be political influence, personal and other factors, ranks are generally a measure of experience in the service, and not just a title. You wouldn't promote a private to command 10,000 men right out of boot camp, if you have any sense.

While Aurora may not consider individual soldiers per se, it does so implicitly in the size/power of units. There's bound to be one value which would roughly represent the influence of a single, average soldier. Perhaps that value is 5, the size of an infantry unit with light armour and personal weapons*. Or perhaps it corresponds to a fire team (4-5 men), since 5 tons of equipment might be too much for a single soldier.

Another possible point of reference is the tank (medium vehicle, medium armour, medium anti-vehicle), which adds up to 62 tons, which might be just enough for the machine itself (taking into account advancements in materials and lower weight than a modern MBT) and a measure of associated supplies and spare parts. Perhaps that's a mech instead, an Adeptus Astartes, or a T-Rex with lasers, but it remains the equivalent of a mainstay tank-like unit of the ground forces by modern standards.

Overall, I'm trying to figure out points of reference to come up with plausibly-sized military units of standard human troops (no mechs, no titanic Space Marines) without running into things like the defeat of what I had designed as an infantry brigade at the hands of what an NPR may call a company of standard human-sized grunts.

*This estimation roughly coincides with the following fragment from the Professional Journal of the United States Army, Volume 24, Issues 1-2 (1944):



Again, the lesser weight of 5 tons could be attributed to advances in material sciences since WW2.

In terms of leaders it is not uncommon that unsuitable people get awarded a rank they are not really fit to command, happens all the time. In real life we have no access to peoples STATS...

As Trans-Newtonian materials are hundreds if not thousands time more efficient than basic minerals a 5 ton infantry unit probably could be whatever you want it to be. It probably also depend on the species as well... that is why it is so good to use units and not actual soldiers.

But in general I do think that Steve intended one infantry to be one soldier... but in your universe it does not have to be that way.

[Shadow]

In terms of leaders it is not uncommon that unsuitable people get awarded a rank they are not really fit to command, happens all the time. In real life we have no access to peoples STATS...

On the higher side, smaller scale (i.e. Colonel vs. Brigadier) I don't find it unlikely, but on the grand scheme of things you won't usually find large discrepancies. Of course you'll find a difference between officers with experience in administrative work versus combat exposure, but it'll be much harder to find a Captain better suited to command a division than a combat-oriented Brigadier or Colonel.

Anyway, I think the point's been established.

As Trans-Newtonian materials are hundreds if not thousands time more efficient than basic minerals a 5 ton infantry unit probably could be whatever you want it to be. It probably also depend on the species as well... that is why it is so good to use units and not actual soldiers.

But in general I do think that Steve intended one infantry to be one soldier... but in your universe it does not have to be that way.

I try to find a point of reference keeping the handwavium/space magic down to a minimum. Of course it could mean anything I want and have a company of machinegun-toting cyber-chipmunks in a single size unit. But the "reality" of what I feel the necessity to adjust to is Steve's perception and implementation, which in practice (other than his spoken/written word) should be seen in the templates he has prepared for the NPRs.

[Steve Walmsley]

Someone pinged me and asked me to comment on the 5 tons per soldier.

I have avoided being specific about individual soldiers or how many crew are required for a tank or a gun. They are just units in the game, so that a 'soldier' or a 'vehicle' can represent anything you want. The 'size' of units is not intended to be physical size, but the transport space required when moving over long distances.

When I am playing, I consider an infantryman to be a single soldier, but that is just my own interpretation, not a rule in the game.

[Shadow]

Someone pinged me and asked me to comment on the 5 tons per soldier.

I have avoided being specific about individual soldiers or how many crew are required for a tank or a gun. They are just units in the game, so that a 'soldier' or a 'vehicle' can represent anything you want. The 'size' of units is not intended to be physical size, but the transport space required when moving over long distances.

When I am playing, I consider an infantryman to be a single soldier, but that is just my own interpretation, not a rule in the game.

Thanks for your input, Steve!

Your vision is important because it's what's behind the AI's force composition. But then, pondering the subject, I don't know to what extent we can perceive that in detail, from the player's perspective. If all we see when we face enemy formations is essentially masses of hit points, armour and damage output, then the freedom of creation becomes more palpable.

[Father Tim]

Hmmmm. And how does that affect academy graduate generation?

Not in the slightest.

Are you sure? I mean, if you add a rank, you have to rename every other one since the new one is added at the top, above Fleet Admiral/General of the Army. And if you remove, say, the bottom one (Major/Lt Cmdr), do the academies begin producing that now-bottom one (Lt Col/Cmdr) in the volumes the previous one appeared? How does the game evaluate how many Ground Combat Command points to give a new/reshuffled rank?

Academies don't  produce 'ranks'.  Academies produce officers, and those officers join your fleet (or army) organization at the lowest rank.  When an opening arises, the best available officer is promoted into it.

If you add a rank, you don't "have to" do anything.  It doesn't matter if your rank is called Wind Lord, Underpriest, Sky Marshal, Baronet, Delta or Captain.

It also doesn't matter if Captains lead platoons, companies, battalions or regiments.  Or brigades.  Both the rank and the unit are entirely defined by your fiction and not the software.

[Jorgen_CAB]

I think you could even make the argument that for example in the 40k universe Space Marine is equal to 2 power armoured units while a Terminator are 3 Heavily Powered Armoured units while an Imperial Guard is 1 regular infantry for example... the size and how many actual soldier each unit or formation have does not have to be equal at all.

You could say that a 12 Infantry Units is equal to 8 well equipped Colonial Marines using standard armour and Personal Weapons while 10 Garrison Militia units using the same equipment is 15 infantrymen.

There are no real hard fast rules for how you can imagine them in your world... this is how I have imagined it when I prepared for my real campaign I will start eventually.

[Garfunkel]

I'll link to my template post from the development forum:

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=10116.0

It includes quite a few examples of both units and formations that roughly fit 21st century NATO/Russia/China themes. They are not super detailed but rather a fast way to get things sorted.

[Droll]

I always create a new rank (Captain) for my ground forces, and I have not see any changes related to the Academy. As the new rank is added on the top (for the promotions) and you have to rename the other ranks, the only change is to rename Major to Captain, everything else keeps as they are.

Is it really tenable to go as deep down as platoon level in Aurora... I have so far only worked with Company Level strength formations. At platoon level it seems like the individual formations get too weak and you risk breakthroughs from enemy attack quite often.

I found that platoons can make sense if you are designing space marine formations intended to be used in boarding action but otherwise the lowest I've gone is the company level. I think what GU design needs is a sort of "sub-OOB" design that allows you to pre-design a unit hierarchy using the formations that you have already designed. This means that I could make 5 divisions and not have to do the OOB layout for every single one on training.

[Rook]

I've also stuck with Platoons as the smallest formation, purely for Boarding action and troops assigned to Naval Vessels (Marine detachments similar to 19th Century Royal Navy).

As well, I've found Steve's weight system to match almost perfectly with a report I was reading from a meeting with Congress and Military personnel.  It stated that an Infantry Division would need about 120,000-130,000 short tons of transport capacity, including the personnel and equipment for 15 days.  After building some Infantry Divisions, the weight is within margins, if a little on the lighter side. 

[kenlon]

I found that platoons can make sense if you are designing space marine formations intended to be used in boarding action but otherwise the lowest I've gone is the company level. I think what GU design needs is a sort of "sub-OOB" design that allows you to pre-design a unit hierarchy using the formations that you have already designed. This means that I could make 5 divisions and not have to do the OOB layout for every single one on training.

What I've done is have a text file where I detail what the OOB looks like down to platoon level, and then have the aggregate totals listed for each step above it (really should have done it in a spreadsheet to automate adjustments, but. . . ). That way I can simply choose to build formations at whatever scale feels appropriate - most of the time I've been building battalions, with some company level attachments for things like STO batteries. (A company of STO platforms is about the same displacement as a battalion, I've found.)

[Borealis4x]

I think the best thing to base your ground units around is transport capacity.

My base units can all fit in a large troop transport (5000 tons) and the numbers that result are generally inline with how large a battalion would be. I make transport ships with 4 large drop transports to ship 4 battalions and 1 very-small drop transport to house the 100 ton Regimental HQ with 50000 HQ capacity. Garrison units are just 1 formation and take up the whole ship.

On paper at least this seems like a good setup. Regiments can swap out battalions based on need and it's easy to remember 1 ship = 1 regiment = 4 battalions and an HQ. Wonder how it will play in practice.

When I am playing, I consider an infantryman to be a single soldier, but that is just my own interpretation, not a rule in the game.

I hear you about not wanting to take away from the player's interpretation of events by making 1 infantryman = literally 1 infantryman but I do think weights should be tweaked downward a bit to somewhat reflect that thinking. Even if someone were to interpret a single infantryman, an infantryman + all support equipment (tent, food, etc), or a squad or a Korgan or something, 5 tons is still a lot and makes units smaller than I think they should be. I'd propose reducing the weight of units but making armor contribute to said weight. A solider in Power Armor shouldn't weigh as much as a solider in a ballistic vest.

[QuakeIV]

I can say I would get a kick out of the idea of it being cheaper to drop millions of basic lightly armed troopers.

I will do so anyhow, but I will be happier if its easier to do my thing.

[Garfunkel]

That 5 tons also allows said infantryman to breathe vacuum and survive any temperature environment.

Of course, ideally, the extra capabilities would add weight to a unit (and that there would be a tech line to reduce that weight) and we couldn't use units without such capabilities on rocks that lack atmosphere or have extreme temperatures and so on.