What is the right EP:CF:Risk ratio for hiring mercenaries?

If fluff allows for mercenaries, then players can use mercenaries on one of two ways (that I see):

(1) An instant force boost without the delays of construction (short-term).

(2) Long-term contracts for garrison duties, etc.

In other words, contracts would be specific because the mercenary force has to calculate risk versus reward. Mercenaries don't simply become an extension of the military--that's the way to end up as fodder and you can't spend your fee if your dead. But they do take on contracts for specific operations (to assist in taking that planet) or long-term garrison duties (to defend that system). That gives the business side of the merc outfit the ability to scope the work, measure risk and estimate a fair price.

I'm wondering what more experienced CMs have found the right cost ratios to be? I would like to have mercs, but I fear that if I attach to low a cost that mercs will replace domestic military programs and that if I attach to high a cost they won't ever be used.

Has anyone else found a sweet spot?

-Josh

Mercs are always more expensive to keep than regulars, but you don't have to pay the (large) costs of training and equipping.

As for uses, historically mercenaries are used as supplemental line troops, garrisoning imperiled areas to free up regulars for attacking elsewhere, or to bring in specific skills that aren't readily available in a nation's regular troop forces.

I think one could make a case for Intel missions to be mercs (for the fluff) if it involves killing someone or destroying something. That would be the specific skills part.

Garrisoning areas would usually be pretty short term, as mercs aren't trustworthy enough to hand over rich rear area planets to them where there's limited regulars military strength. Perhaps by paying double maintenance you could have a % of some empire stat be the limit of troops hire-able, but with no build costs.

Supplemental line troops would be pretty simple as normal ground troops or ships, possibly at a slightly lower tech base. You could even give them NPE stats and a list of contracts complete with "treaty modifiers". Since the troops would pay for their own gear you could have them cost the employer twice maint, but only cost the unit half maint to upkeep. I would probably limit the total just as for garrisons above.

Now these are just ideas,not mechanics really, but is this along the lines of what you had in mind?

Thanks, but what I really am looking for is input on correctly pricing to keep game balance. The fluff side comes easily to me, but I hesitate to implement unplaytested rules for fear of giving my hesitant players a bad first experience.

I think if you had the construction costs for mercenary units be half of normal but maintenance costs be about 50-100% more expensive, it would make the mercenaries worthwhile to have (quick to rally, expensive to maintain), but not something that is going to use to replace all of your armies.

For example, if you have a 3 EP ground unit that costs 1/2 to maintain, you could have the mercenary version cost 1 EP to build and 2/3 or 3/4 to maintain. Using the 1E maintenance brackets, 2/3 is probably better; it means that it can get very expensive very fast to keep those mercenaries around. You just have to keep a limit on how many ground units can be built at a colony each turn (equal to Census works good).

-Tyrel
_________________
"Touch not the pylons, for they are the messengers!"