Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

AMC in contested landings

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> AMC in contested landings Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 5:11:43 AM   
Boomer Redleg


Posts: 36
Joined: 7/15/2013
Status: offline 		In amphibious landings, do AMC help suppress enemy CDs?

I'm guessing that because AMC can only be used in Escort and Cargo\Troop missions you can't really go hunting other merchant TFs - right?



_____________________________

Kaboom!

- See ya
Post #: 1
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 5:40:10 AM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline 		Yes they do, and AMCs can be used in amphibs TFs. Also they can form Surface combat TFs for exactly the reason you cite - to go hunting. Both is possible ingame.


Can it be you are mixing up AMC with ACM?

_____________________________


(in reply to Boomer Redleg)
Post #: 2
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 5:46:49 AM   
Boomer Redleg


Posts: 36
Joined: 7/15/2013
Status: offline 		this is what I was looking at...






I didn't even try to do a Surface Combat TF after reading the description. Thanks for the suggestion.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Boomer Redleg -- 7/21/2014 6:48:14 AM >

_____________________________

Kaboom!

- See ya

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 3
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 9:58:32 AM   
jmalter

 

Posts: 1673
Joined: 10/12/2010
Status: offline 		Unless the AMC is itself carrying troops/supplies, it's prob'ly not the best to accompany a PhibTF.

For PhibTFs, you'll want warships w/ at least 5" or 4.7" armament - DDs, if not CLs or CAs.

When executing an invasion, many ships will expend most of their MA ammo. If your unload lasts longer than one day, you'll want to remove ammo-expended warships (& empty phibs) from the AmphTF & add full-ammo warships (& 2nd-wave forces) to the TF.

IMO, an AMC is best suited for high-speed Transport, & shouldn't be used for amphibious assault.

(in reply to Boomer Redleg)
Post #: 4
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 11:33:03 AM   
traskott


Posts: 1546
Joined: 6/23/2008
From: Valladolid, Spain
Status: offline 		Some jap AMCs are great as raiders...

(in reply to jmalter)
Post #: 5
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 2:22:00 PM   
dr.hal


Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline 		In fact every ship with a gun in the TF helps to suppress enemy fire including the merchant ships if they have armaments. But only warships can conduct bombardment.

_____________________________


(in reply to traskott)
Post #: 6
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 2:26:54 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline 		I believe that AMCs have the same unload rate as APs and AKs, so it's good to use them when you don't have access to AKA/APA or LSDs.

Some of the IJN AMCs have some good-size guns, and a couple of the Allied ones are very useful as well. At least one has ASW capability (it's a Q-ship) and several of the Australian/New Zealand AMCs convert to LSI(L) or LSI(M) within the first year or so.

(in reply to dr.hal)
Post #: 7
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 4:49:50 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline 		As already mentioned, if you want to use a AMC as a raider, simply create a "Surface TF" and it will behave as a cruiser. If you plan to do so, it would be better to put a better captain (more naval, more aggressive skills), as AMCs start with merchant fleet captains.

I would use AMCs during the initial 3-month Japanese amphibious bonus; but I would never bring them "empty". Japan needs as much troop carrying ships as it can get during the centrifugal offensive, and most AMC have at least some marginal capacity. Some even have relatively good capacity (former liners).

After the 3-month bonus... I don't know if I would use them, ideally the requirements for amphibious landings are less and thus less needed. Then I use them as gun carrying *APs




< Message edited by Jorge_Stanbury -- 7/21/2014 5:53:08 PM >

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 8
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 6:02:51 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

As already mentioned, if you want to use a AMC as a raider, simply create a "Surface TF" and it will behave as a cruiser. If you plan to do so, it would be better to put a better captain (more naval, more aggressive skills), as AMCs start with merchant fleet captains.

I would use AMCs during the initial 3-month Japanese amphibious bonus; but I would never bring them "empty". Japan needs as much troop carrying ships as it can get during the centrifugal offensive, and most AMC have at least some marginal capacity. Some even have relatively good capacity (former liners).

After the 3-month bonus... I don't know if I would use them, ideally the requirements for amphibious landings are less and thus less needed. Then I use them as gun carrying *APs





They become even more important after the bonus expires, as they retain an unload rate of 600 points per turn, since they are commissioned ships. The bonus is listed as 1200 for all AP/AK and xAP/xAK during the bonus period. The regular rate of unload for xA* ships is 250 per turn.

I've always assumed that "per turn" means per unloading phase, and there are 2 of those in each game day.

I used AKs and AMCs exclusively when I invaded SW Australia against Bullwinkle. I lost a handful but they were worth it. 1.5 days of unloading means you can get all of the troops ashore, plus plenty of supply for the attack, with 1800 total points of unload.

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 9
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 6:11:07 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

As already mentioned, if you want to use a AMC as a raider, simply create a "Surface TF" and it will behave as a cruiser. If you plan to do so, it would be better to put a better captain (more naval, more aggressive skills), as AMCs start with merchant fleet captains.

I would use AMCs during the initial 3-month Japanese amphibious bonus; but I would never bring them "empty". Japan needs as much troop carrying ships as it can get during the centrifugal offensive, and most AMC have at least some marginal capacity. Some even have relatively good capacity (former liners).

After the 3-month bonus... I don't know if I would use them, ideally the requirements for amphibious landings are less and thus less needed. Then I use them as gun carrying *APs





They become even more important after the bonus expires, as they retain an unload rate of 600 points per turn, since they are commissioned ships. The bonus is listed as 1200 for all AP/AK and xAP/xAK during the bonus period. The regular rate of unload for xA* ships is 250 per turn.

I've always assumed that "per turn" means per unloading phase, and there are 2 of those in each game day.

Yes, in that section of the manual "per turn" should have read "per phase", as you say there are two phases per day (and turns can be one or more days anyway depending on player option selected). That was an error in the manual that the developers pointed out.
quote:



I used AKs and AMCs exclusively when I invaded SW Australia against Bullwinkle. I lost a handful but they were worth it. 1.5 days of unloading means you can get all of the troops ashore, plus plenty of supply for the attack, with 1800 total points of unload.



_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 10
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 6:23:56 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline 		Is it confirmed by developers that AMC = navalized AKs/ APs?

instead of xAKs/ xAPs ?
if so, they are very valuable after the 3-month early bonus period.
second only to the few LSDs available

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 11
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 7:19:52 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Is it confirmed by developers that AMC = navalized AKs/ APs?

instead of xAKs/ xAPs ?
if so, they are very valuable after the 3-month early bonus period.
second only to the few LSDs available


I do vaguely remember that but I'm not 100% certain. Try using Google with

site:matrixgames.com

in front of your search term. It finds things better than the forum search.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 12
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 7:20:56 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		Found this:
quote:


Don Bowen -> RE: Japanese unload (amphib) bonus (1/8/2012 12:14:07 PM)


AMc are naval transport types - same grouping as AP.

Don Bowen is an AE developer.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 13
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 7:22:30 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		That previous post by Don seems to have had a typo (AMc versus AMC). This one is more definitive:
quote:




Message

Q-Ball -> AMCs (2/14/2013 3:35:31 PM)

Quick question: How are AMCs treated for unload rate purposes? Are they the equivalent of navalized AP - AK (as opposed to xAP or xAK?)

While on the subject, how to other use them?

As Allies, I noticed they are the only vessel other than APD that can fast transport troops; have you used that?

As Japan, I usually used them as extra landing ships/escorts; I didn't typically raid with them

Greyjoy did some raiding against me, and had some success, though the main problem with them is the low crew ratings. They get pasted by a warship.



Lokasenna -> RE: AMCs (2/14/2013 4:03:07 PM)

This is something I've wondered as well...



Don Bowen -> RE: AMCs (2/14/2013 6:01:35 PM)


Yes, AMC are transport ships for purposes of load/unload. They have the same rates as an AP.


_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 14
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 8:08:47 PM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline 		Thanks!!

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 15
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 9:14:02 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
quote:

Unless the AMC is itself carrying troops/supplies, it's prob'ly not the best to accompany a PhibTF.

For PhibTFs, you'll want warships w/ at least 5" or 4.7" armament - DDs, if not CLs or CAs.


Just an FYI, Japanese AMC's are armed with 14cm (~5.5") and 15cm (~6") guns.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 16
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 9:30:23 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Unless the AMC is itself carrying troops/supplies, it's prob'ly not the best to accompany a PhibTF.

For PhibTFs, you'll want warships w/ at least 5" or 4.7" armament - DDs, if not CLs or CAs.


Just an FYI, Japanese AMC's are armed with 14cm (~5.5") and 15cm (~6") guns.


And a few have torpedoes and float plane capability. Pretty much slower, unarmored cruisers. Very nice ships.

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 17
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 10:05:29 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Found this:
quote:


Don Bowen -> RE: Japanese unload (amphib) bonus (1/8/2012 12:14:07 PM)


AMc are naval transport types - same grouping as AP.

Don Bowen is an AE developer.


Thats hilarious, becaus AMc are coastal minesweepers.

_____________________________


(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 18
RE: AMC in contested landings - 7/21/2014 10:15:04 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Found this:
quote:


Don Bowen -> RE: Japanese unload (amphib) bonus (1/8/2012 12:14:07 PM)


AMc are naval transport types - same grouping as AP.

Don Bowen is an AE developer.


Thats hilarious, becaus AMc are coastal minesweepers.


Prolly a typo.


_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 19
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> AMC in contested landings Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.531