[Sharkfinn]

Something that's always bothered me about convoy missions or evacuations leading to intersystem jumps is that the GTVA seems to invariably line up their ships in a single column stretching kilometers from the node.  It's difficult for fighters traveling 80 m/s to defend the entire length of a 10 km convoy, and it's easy pickings for enemy bombers, they just have to fly down the convoy line and bomb whatever they feel like.  If they come from behind they could hit the engines of the convoy ships and then the GTVA's in real trouble.  So why does the GTVA still arrange convoys this way? 

It would seem to me a much better strategy would be to split into multiple smaller convoys on different approach vectors close to the node, instead of jumping out one at a time in a line they could jump out much faster, with multiple ships reaching the node at a given time.  Careful control would be required to avoid collisions, but it seems that this would make it possible to have ships jump out much faster. Instead of jumping one and then waiting for the next ship to reach the node, there would always be a ship at the node ready to jump.

Such a convoy, split among multiple approach vectors, would also be easier to defend.  Cross fire from convoy ships would be a problem for any hostiles that fly between two columns, and it would no longer be possible for enemy ships to sit on the side of the convoy line and destroy ships one after another without moving.  The current strategy allows one well placed cruiser or destroyer to wreak havoc across an entire convoy.  Fighters would also have an easier time, as the whole convoy operation would be more compact, there would be less space to cover.

It could also be that it's just a better mission to play defending one long convoy, I was curious to know what people think.

[Axem]

Well I think a 10km long convoy is just asking for trouble. I don't know if your idea would be any better though, since you're still spreading out the convoy. If there's two convoy groups, a 5km long one coming in on the X axis and a 5km long one coming in on the Y axis, you need to protect both which are separated at worst case 7km. So the distance to the farthest ends has been reduced by around 30%, which I guess isn't bad.

From a mission designer's point of view, you still risk the player getting too focused on one convoy segment and losing track of the other. I think it'd just be smarter to just have the convoy come and go in segments to allow for the most focused defense.

Also, I hate convoy escort missions. It's a personal belief of mine.

[Sharkfinn]

I was thinking about using at least three columns, that would cut the distance between any two to about 5 km, really the more groups you have the better, if you could just form a ring around the node that would be the most efficient (though hardest to coordinate) strategy.  Small groups is probably a simpler approach to accomplish the same thing though.

[niffiwan]

Some sort of "box" or "sphere" formation would be best to give defending fighters the least amount of distance to cover.  Fitting into & leaving the node efficiently would favour the box, rather than the sphere for a non-trivial amount of ships.  And I believe that the GTVA does use this approach, e.g. in Apocalyse there's three waypoints in the node and three columns of ships heading towards the node, all approaching in the same orientation.

The only thing that bugs me about the waves/segments approach is, where are those ships waiting before they jump in?  Are they better protected there than in a queue near the node?  Are they parked in subspace?

And I see you've just suggested the 3 column idea, although all the columns are on completely different approach vectors?  I think a single approach vector makes the convoy easier to protect vs bombers, and you're more likely to be attacked by bombers/heavy assault than a destroyer.  If a destroyer does park in your approach vector (right near the node would let you intercept all columns), well, better have some backup handy to neutralise it, otherwise you'll lose a lot of ships regardless of which approach you're using. 

Interesting really, despite the different dynamics introduced by subspace, the considerations affecting WW2 Arctic/Atlantic convoys still seem to apply in part here

[Sharkfinn]

I'd say the safest pre-convoy location would simply be anywhere the Shivans aren't.  The shivans can't be everywhere at once, so jumping to a random location and powering down until jumping into the convoy would make it very hard for the shivans to detect ships beforehand, unless they were systematically searching the entire system for hiding ships, in which case the GTVA has probably already completely lost the system.  Parking in subspace would be even better, if it's possible, I don't recall knowing if it is or isn't.

My thought about multiple columns was to have multiple approach vectors, which would cut down on the maximum separation between ships, hopefully making bomber defense easier.  For example, if three 3km convoy segments are coming in on approach vectors separated by 120 degrees (still in the same plane for simplicity), the maximum distance an escort would have to fly between ships would be 5.2 km, not the 9 it would be if it was a line.  With less space to cover, response to bomber threats could be faster, and reliance on trebuchets and long range weapons could be reduced.  At least I think that would help me.

[NGTM-1R]

We never see any 10km convoys, though. The largest single, discrete convoy was probably the one to resupply the Colossus and wasn't nearly that large. The Capella evacuation consists of multiple independent groups of ships, each of which has at least some independent escort. It's not an organized single convoy and comes out the way it does because they're short on time.