Interstellar Operations Open Beta Test: Force Operations: Discussion

[kato]

This opens the door to employers saying that they only authorized the use of two companies for that combat action, not the full battalion that showed up!

What exactly is wrong with an employer saying "hey, i only ordered two companies, i'm not gonna pay for a battalion"?

[gomi]

What exactly is wrong with an employer saying "hey, i only ordered two companies, i'm not gonna pay for a battalion"?

And what happens when the situation develops that your merc unit is facing over-whelming odds, but your employer's Liaison officer refuses to pay for the "Extra" forces, because (thanks to Sun Tzu) they know that "On desperate ground, fight."
http://suntzusaid.com/book/11

The comment was expressing the wonderful possibilities for role-playing "contract negotiations" in combat situations. Another way to challenge the players.

[kato]

Well, if we're quoting Sun Tzu, "Walk in the path defined by rule, and accommodate yourself to the enemy until you can fight a decisive battle".   8)

[Taharqa]

OK, I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but I was re-reading this thread today and I cam across this...

The specific intent of the 5% factor in base pay was to allow a force to replace all main units every 20 missions

There is a very simple problem with the math here. This 5% "is paid out for each month of the contract." The shortest missions are 3 months and the longest are 24 months. So it will take well less than 20 missions to replace all main units.

Now, I know there have been discussions subsequent to this post that argue about what battle loss one would expect to see on a mission. These discussion are all irrelevant. First of all, battle loss is already covered by employers under battle loss compensation. Second, the actual tempo of battle will vary enormously by mission type, not to mention the style and skill of whoever is GMing the campaign. Those issues should not try to be meta-gamed. Rather the base percentage should be based on what is reasonable rate of return that would (a) make mercenary work attractive, and (b) make employers want to actually hire mercenaries rather than field their own armies. I implore you, Cray, lower this percentage!

[Taharqa]

I am looking through the loan stuff and I noticed that while there is a minimum interest rate at each level, there is no minimum collateral. Thus, it would be possible to jack up the interest rate high enough to reduce collateral to zero. Are there NINJA loans in the 31st century?

[cray]

I am looking through the loan stuff and I noticed that while there is a minimum interest rate at each level, there is no minimum collateral. Thus, it would be possible to jack up the interest rate high enough to reduce collateral to zero. Are there NINJA loans in the 31st century?

Yes. Mercenaries without much in the way of assets can get into very abusive payment schemes.

[Taharqa]

Yes. Mercenaries without much in the way of assets can get into very abusive payment schemes.

But also without much reason not to default on their loans, much like the sub-prime lenders of real life.

[Taharqa]

The rules for procuring personnel refer back to the force creation rules. However, because personnel in those rules are assumed to be hired with their associated equipment there is no baseline target number for personnel. However, it is quite common to want to hire new personnel separately during a campaign to make up for casualties. One cannot simply use the equipment baselines themselves as these vary by the weight class of units in many cases. Perhaps it should be stated that personnel use the baseline for XXX weight class equipment as a default.

[cray]

But also without much reason not to default on their loans, much like the sub-prime lenders of real life.

I'll add a reputation penalty for trying to dump debt in that manner.

[Meow Liao]

An end of SL/early SW merc unit rolls a 12 for starting funds and they can put together a nice multi-regiment force.  Add the optional PC Influence multiplier and you have a serious unit that would be the desire of every major house. 

I believe the Force Operations process would be well served with the addition of a size modifier to the Contract Employers and Missions Tables.  Maybe even add a mission length modifier for large units.  This would probably require the tables be reorganized.  Big Stompy Brigade should get more offers from major houses for missions better suited to their size.  These contracts should offer longer terms of service to reflect the house's desire to keep their services.  Big Stompy Brigade would probably prefer the stability of a long term contract.  They would not want to jump multiple regiments across the sphere every six months, hauling all of the support personnel (and maybe dependents).  Twelve of the twenty mission types have service terms of six months or less.

The merc rules have never had anything close to the five year Dragoon contracts.  It is time that the big boys had contract offers appropriate to their size.  The Big Stompy Brigade should be weighted towards a 3 or 4 year retainer/garrison contract or big assault/defense jobs, not the 3 month recon raid.  The little stuff should be offers available during their retainer period. 

Meow Liao

[doulos05]

An end of SL/early SW merc unit rolls a 12 for starting funds and they can put together a nice multi-regiment force.  Add the optional PC Influence multiplier and you have a serious unit that would be the desire of every major house. 

I believe the Force Operations process would be well served with the addition of a size modifier to the Contract Employers and Missions Tables.  Maybe even add a mission length modifier for large units.  This would probably require the tables be reorganized.  Big Stompy Brigade should get more offers from major houses for missions better suited to their size.  These contracts should offer longer terms of service to reflect the house's desire to keep their services.  Big Stompy Brigade would probably prefer the stability of a long term contract.  They would not want to jump multiple regiments across the sphere every six months, hauling all of the support personnel (and maybe dependents).  Twelve of the twenty mission types have service terms of six months or less.

The merc rules have never had anything close to the five year Dragoon contracts.  It is time that the big boys had contract offers appropriate to their size.  The Big Stompy Brigade should be weighted towards a 3 or 4 year retainer/garrison contract or big assault/defense jobs, not the 3 month recon raid.  The little stuff should be offers available during their retainer period. 

Meow Liao

I like this. You'd only need a 1d6 chart for "Regiment+" units. It could be something like:
1. Garrison
2. Garrison/Retainer
3. Retainer
4. Retainer
5. Planetary Assault/Retainer
6. Planetary Assault

Inside the retainer contracts, just have them on the normal contracts table consecutively.

[Atlas3060]

As stated by people higher than I, this thread is locked.
Thank you for your input.  [copper]