Allied conversions

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Allied conversions

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 >> The War Room >> Allied conversions

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Allied conversions - 2/1/2017 7:25:54 PM

Revthought

Posts: 523
Joined: 1/14/2009
From: San Diego (Lives in Indianapolis)
Status: offline

I'm curious to get everyone's opinions on early war Allied ship conversions.

For example, I always:
*Convert any destroyer capable of the conversion to APDs
*Convert any sub capable of conversion into SSTs
*Convert any AKx into AGs
*Covert all to AKEs
*Convert all to AEs

I am curious if anyone feels differently (or if I am missing some key conversions).

My thoughts are that the Allies have very little, the whole war, in terms of APDs and SSTs. Usually conversion into APDs comes at the cost of not converting into DEs; however, APDs actually have quite good ASW capacities AND the Allies will eventually be swimming in escorts.

Similarly, while not as useful to the Allies as to Japan, the Allies have (almost?) no other SSTs other than the ones players can convert. In practice this means I'm giving up the good attack sub upgrades, but subs that convert into SSTs are usually slow. I think the biggest loss is probably mine laying capacity rather than sea denial; however, the utility of the SST is felt primarily in the early war where it is much harder to supply/evacuate isolated garrisons for the Allies using traditional methods.

I've made it no father than October 42 in other games, but just doing the math in my head, I'm unsure how useful those SSTs are really going to be by late 1943.

The transports are another issue altogether. I choose to convert to AKE and AE for obvious ressions--their utility as those ships is far, far greater than their utility as AKxs. AGs I am on the fence about, but still convert. Essentially I feel like trading a little cargo capacity for the AA upgrades of an AG is probably worth it.

Thoughts?

< Message edited by Revthought -- 2/1/2017 7:28:31 PM >

_____________________________

Playing at war is a far better vocation than making people fight in them.

Post #: 1

RE: Allied conversions - 2/1/2017 7:46:48 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

APDs - I am not so enthusiastic about them because they take too much damage in FT mode and in Amphib mode I can't get them to load supply. They are vulnerable to Japanese DDs and up and to aircraft. They are acceptably effective against subs. I use them for behind-the-lines cleanup and shuffling small units around. I converted about half of the Wickes/Clemsons to APD. Later in the game a number or APDs will show up. Check your ship reinforcement list sorted by type.

SSTs - I had little experience with them so this game I converted all three to SSTs. I had Nautilus and Narwhal deliver an Aussie MG Coy to an unoccupied dot base that would not auto-flip. After they took the base I tried to remove the MG Coy but the SSTs would not load them. Yes, the troops were in Move mode. I sent a couple of APDs to take them off. I have used the SSTs to get supplies to newly conquered bases with completely trashed ports.

AGs - only converted about five ships to AG. I needed cargo (supply) hauling more and the US had quite a few AGs already. Only once, when IJN subs were raiding deep into SoPac and NorPac did I wish I had a couple more AGs to reload ASW vessels. When you position those AGs around the map and have them sit there for months not reloading any ships, it seems wasteful of resources.

AKEs - I convert all the big ones (5250 ton xAK to 4200 ton AKE IIRC). Smaller AKEs are useful here and there but it is frustrating to have to send your BBs away because the smaller ones cannot load them. Afterthought - but if you lost all your old BBs in battle you might not need these big AKEs anyway!

AEs - Absolutely - convert all the C2 Lassen xAKs to AEs (5400 ton). These are the only ones that can reload the Iowa Class BBs.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Revthought)

Post #: 2

RE: Allied conversions - 2/1/2017 8:16:09 PM

Revthought

Posts: 523
Joined: 1/14/2009
From: San Diego (Lives in Indianapolis)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
SSTs - I had little experience with them so this game I converted all three to SSTs. I had Nautilus and Narwhal deliver an Aussie MG Coy to an unoccupied dot base that would not auto-flip. After they took the base I tried to remove the MG Coy but the SSTs would not load them. Yes, the troops were in Move mode. I sent a couple of APDs to take them off. I have used the SSTs to get supplies to newly conquered bases with completely trashed ports.

I've never had problems loading from base hexes (even with no port). I'd ask if you had them in strat mode, but you've already answered that!

quote:

AGs - only converted about five ships to AG. I needed cargo (supply) hauling more and the US had quite a few AGs already. Only once, when IJN subs were raiding deep into SoPac and NorPac did I wish I had a couple more AGs to reload ASW vessels. When you position those AGs around the map and have them sit there for months not reloading any ships, it seems wasteful of resources.

I continue to use them to move cargo. They just move less of it at once. Again, the trade off in my brain is: (a) you get the AG resupply utility (b) more importantly, you get considerable defensive upgrades.

quote:

AKEs - I convert all the big ones (5250 ton xAK to 4200 ton AKE IIRC). Smaller AKEs are useful here and there but it is frustrating to have to send your BBs away because the smaller ones cannot load them. Afterthought - but if you lost all your old BBs in battle you might not need these big AKEs anyway!

My brain: they are (a) still useful even if they cannot rearm battleships because I use cruisers for both SC and bombardment quite a bit (I may do this more than your average Allied player, I don't know), (b) I can still use them to transport supply, and (c) they too get the defensive upgrades.

_____________________________

Playing at war is a far better vocation than making people fight in them.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 3

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 12:45:35 AM

Jorge_Stanbury

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

Taking notes from honorabre Allied opponent

I won't convert all big xAKs into AKE/ AE, you don't need that many really. Besides, notice that some of the big AGs will convert to AKE later on

Also, there are 3 AMCs that will convert to the British APA equivalent... don't use them in "risky forays" as they will be your first real amph capability in early 43

(in reply to Revthought)

Post #: 4

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 4:39:08 AM

pontiouspilot

Posts: 1127
Joined: 7/27/2012
Status: offline

I have always followed someone's advice about converting all the APDs because they are said to possess better ASW numbers in this mode than any of the other modes. Their speed makes them damm handy to get troops into and out of places quickly.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 5

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 5:15:53 AM

IdahoNYer

Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline

No great expert - but some advice based on my current PBEM with L_S_T...

APDs - I converted about 1/3 of the old DDs to DEs, the rest to APDs. Both are useful. I found the DEs to be the best early war anti sub escorts for the Allies - good ASW and have radar.

SSTs - Argonaut left as a minelayer

AGs - truthfully, never see the need for AGs.

AKEs - converted many xAKs to the AKEs and AEs when avail. Allies seem to have plenty.

On thing you didn't mention is that there are a lot of xAKs that can convert to xAPs. I'd recommend doing most of these. Same for Brit xAKs that convert to LSI.

(in reply to pontiouspilot)

Post #: 6

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 1:28:25 PM

Revthought

Posts: 523
Joined: 1/14/2009
From: San Diego (Lives in Indianapolis)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Taking notes from honorabre Allied opponent

I won't convert all big xAKs into AKE/ AE, you don't need that many really. Besides, notice that some of the big AGs will convert to AKE later on

Also, there are 3 AMCs that will convert to the British APA equivalent... don't use them in "risky forays" as they will be your first real amph capability in early 43

Jorge,

You are correct! Generally speaking, my British AMCs sit in Capetown. I don't pay that close attention, do the xAKs really lose so much cargo space that it makes it sometimes not worth the conversion?

So far I haven't really felt a merchant shipping pinch, except for at the very beginning of the war.

_____________________________

Playing at war is a far better vocation than making people fight in them.

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)

Post #: 7

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 2:01:08 PM

Revthought

Posts: 523
Joined: 1/14/2009
From: San Diego (Lives in Indianapolis)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: IdahoNYer
On thing you didn't mention is that there are a lot of xAKs that can convert to xAPs. I'd recommend doing most of these. Same for Brit xAKs that convert to LSI.

Really? So the farthest I've gotten is basically November 1942, but I've noticed I have loads of xAPs that just sit in port (without converting anything.) This has been true even in my game with Jorge where we are playing DeBabes-C.

It seems like:
1. The xAPs have limited combat usefulness. They take too long to unload in amphibious TFs and sometimes cannot actually unload the entire TOE.
2. Yes, I move a lot of LCUs, but I have as of yet, not run into a situation where I just do not have xAPs to move them in a timely manner.
3. While you can still use them to carry cargo in transport TFs, the conversion to xAPs mean that cargo capacity is significantly reduced. So here is a rare occasion where it seemed to me that the conversion was not necessarily worth it based on cargo capacity changes.

As for the LSI, APA, LST conversions, I have yet to reach a point where conversion is possible for these ships (except in ONE case); however, these are ship classes that I just take for granted I will need all of. So any ship that can eventually convert to one of these ship types is sitting in harbor. I prefer East Coast for the USMN and Capetown for RN/Commonwealth ships, mostly because in the early war I actually worry that one of my opponents might have the KB pay a visit to San Francisco, the West Coast, Colombo, or Bombay. If they did so and sank said ships, it would be a very sad day for me.

The exception being APs. I only husband half of these in far away ports. I do this because, until 1943, APs are the only ship type that can be relied on to make amphibious landings. Not that this comes up much, but I want the capacity at hand on a moments notice--just in case.

In any case, I am very open to being wrong, which is why I made the thread! I've been running PBEM turns almost every day for well over a year and I still feel like a noob. I've got much respect for the rest of you, because your knowledge and familiarity with the game seems infinitely greater than mine.

< Message edited by Revthought -- 2/2/2017 2:09:32 PM >

_____________________________

Playing at war is a far better vocation than making people fight in them.

(in reply to IdahoNYer)

Post #: 8

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 2:32:26 PM

rms1pa

Posts: 370
Joined: 7/4/2011
Status: offline

annddd of course i am on the other end of the scale,

i convert them all save Argonaut, i put two AGs and an AKE in every tiny port i can. 9except the 4800 and 4900 cargo ships)
the APDs are the only USN fast transports availible and will load and unload at dot hexes. anphibiously they can take the raiders or the paras anywhere useful.

xAP conversions i do also some go from 12 knts to 13 knts
and if you only have 400 personell per ship the troops off load in one or two turns anyhow. allmost all of the conversions will see your AA go up from pitiful to simply inadequate.

rms/pa

hide the big APA/AKA/LSIL convesions well.

rms/pa

_____________________________

there is a technical term for those who confuse the opinions of an author's characters for the opinions of the author.
the term is IDIOT.

(in reply to Revthought)

Post #: 9

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 2:35:30 PM

jwolf

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline

Revthought -- I am in more or less the same position as you, still a beginner and maybe even more so. But I would echo what IdahoNY said. Here are my thoughts.

1. Convert all xAK possible to xAP, AKE, AE as the case may be. In June 42 when you start this, it may seem like you lose a lot of freighters doing this. But the Allies get a constant stream of new xAK so the loss is more than made up.

2. Once you get to 43 and the Allies start some counteroffensives, you need a lot more transports of any type you can get. A LOT more. It's depressingly easy to be in the middle of a major push, say, in the Solomons, and suddenly you just don't have enough shipping or it is all far away. Keep in mind that after you take a base, you need to bring in construction and support units under more or less peaceful conditions, and that's where the xAP ships will certainly come in handy.

3. You can convert many freighters to AKE (and a few to the bigger and better AE). Do them all. In an area such as the Solomons, when you go on the offensive you want to be able to send multiple big surface fleets for shore bombardment and then immediately rearm at a nearby base, maybe for several days in a row. Having multiple AKE greatly assists that and they will handle even your BB (don't know about the later Iowa types, but they certainly are OK for your old BB and for the ones like Washington, NC, etc that you get in late 42).

4. I also don't see the need for AG ships. The other tenders -- most of them -- seem helpful, but the AG are redundant IMHO.

5. I converted all 3 possible US subs to SST. I got some use from them in 42, rescuing some stranded ABDA troops in doomed areas of SE Asia. Since then I haven't really been able to use them in any sensible way, but it still seems nice to have them.

6. I like the concept of the APD for fast transports, but I just don't see how to use them effectively because their capacity is so low.

(in reply to Revthought)

Post #: 10

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 2:37:52 PM

Lecivius

Posts: 4845
Joined: 8/5/2007
From: Denver
Status: offline

My worthless .02?

xAP's are limited in combat usefulness, but are needed to shift troops around in various theaters. I try to convert a few dozen to xAP for that reason. Saves on AP usage & risk.

British LSI, do them all. You will use them. Problem is it takes a LONG time

AG's...meh. Not much difference in these.

AE's I like, just for the usefulness & flexibility they give. AKE's too, but in a more limited stance. NO reason to fill the ocean with them, but you want them in ports when you commence operations.

I personally change all the APD's I can. They can be used as escorts in convoys even when carrying troops. Nice, if for no other reason.

SST's are nice for sneaky ops, but as noted sometimes you need to find another way to recover the poor buggers once they are ashore.

(in reply to Revthought)

Post #: 11

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 3:22:33 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

Most of my xAK to xAP conversions are the small ships like the 1750 ton xAKL that converts to 500/750 size xAP and the 3900 ton xAKs that convert to 1000/2200 size xAPs.

There are a lot of small units to be moved, or sometimes you just need a little more troop capacity to take all of a division with you, so having the little guys is useful. They unload fairly fast because of their size and they are a lot more expendable if you need to send troops in harm's way.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Revthought)

Post #: 12

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 3:30:36 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Revthought

I'm curious to get everyone's opinions on early war Allied ship conversions.

For example, I always:
*Convert any destroyer capable of the conversion to APDs
*Convert any sub capable of conversion into SSTs
*Convert any AKx into AGs
*Covert all to AKEs
*Convert all to AEs

Nice thread -

Sort of 'Tender ships advice' beyond the very good threads on what are they do or what they are.

Disclaimer : limited experience player.

or my $0.02 as well.

* I prefer the DE vs the APD.
I understand the trade off but I think the differential is marginal. Preferences verses optimization. I get enough APD in regular reinforcements (and more than enough DE eventually).

* I prefer pure Subs vs the SST
Again I think preferences as opposed to optimization

* All AGs
I think the quick reload and improved defensive capability are under appreciated. I convert all.
In the early years of the war I (the Allies) need supply supply supply and more supply forward. AGs (speed reloading) help this critical mission in the early war and make ideal dumpsters of supplies (secondary to AK and AKA) when you do advance on to island hopping and capture bases. You eventually get more than sufficient xAK and xAKL that cannot convert; timed to arrival with the bulk of your forces.

* All AKE and AE
Preference verses optimization may come into play here.
However since I tend to maximize every port (and airfield) at every base I target I like a fully loaded AKE sitting disbanded at the base. I am never certain where I will have to "react" to the IJN and I never never want to be far away from ammo for any Combat Task Force.
I generally protect the AE back at Pearl (safe bases) till 1945 when they become part of the massive 5th Fleet Support network including AO's and Aircraft tenders. By 1945 my 5th fleet TaskForce 58 has TF 58.9 full of 30 + DE / AE / AO etc

* All AP and LSL
Preference again. I tend to move troops in regimental or divisional size therefore my APD are not as valuable to me.

* All CLAA (from select Canadian / British AMC and others)
I like to embed them into Amphib task forces as an "extra" oomph...however I think their relative performance is subject to debate.

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to Lecivius)

Post #: 13

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 4:12:40 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

Not sure what you mean by quick reload on the AGs. Disbanding them and using the Replenish Support Ships button in port only loads half as much cargo as loading them at dockside. I find their dockside loading and unloading to be slow compared to cargo ships.
E.G. When I had both cargo ships and an AG show up at Panama I sent them all to Cristobal to load because it is a bigger port. They docked and started loading. The cargo ships were larger capacity and they still finished loading days before the AG did. This is the main reason I don't use support ships as cargo haulers in my backfield. Exposure to IJN subs is the other one.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 14

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 4:28:37 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Not sure what you mean by quick reload on the AGs. Disbanding them and using the Replenish Support Ships button in port only loads half as much cargo as loading them at dockside. You can press that button multiple times until either the ship(s) or port has reached the limit for the phase (which is the first phase of the turn you are entering orders for). I find their dockside loading and unloading to be slow compared to cargo ships.
E.G. When I had both cargo ships and an AG show up at Panama I sent them all to Cristobal to load because it is a bigger port. They docked and started loading. The cargo ships were larger capacity and they still finished loading days before the AG did. This is the main reason I don't use support ships as cargo haulers in my backfield. Exposure to IJN subs is the other one.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 15

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 4:29:54 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Amphib mode I can't get them to load supply.

Couple AVDs with your APDs to carry the supply!

I convert British MLs to MGBs so I can fill the MGB pool.
MGBs are deployable from supply while MLs are not.

AGs can still be used to haul supply, albeit at a slightly reduced capacity.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 16

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 4:30:06 PM

Lokasenna

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

I convert all xAPs. Even the little 4000 Endurance models.

I ignore AGs. I just don't use them. I find them useless in such a large scale conflict - it's easier for me to make sure my ports can just handle the tending operations than to bother with AGs. AGPs, on the other hand... those I could find useful, but still don't really use.

I convert all APDs. They do carry supply, just not as much. Also, I don't have problems with them taking absurd amounts of damage in FT TFs. If we're talking about a buildup of Sys damage, remember that FT TFs try to go in at night similar to bombardment TFs - therefore they might be moving a large amount of hexes at full speed instead of cruise, if you have them set to mission.

I convert a fair number of AKEs. They can be vary useful during your advance to rearm your BBs for a bombardment of an enemy airfield before it can recover from the last one, keeping it shut down.

A final point about the APDs. Even though you get a large number of them later in the war, you can never have too many. They do double duty in amphib TFs - helping to round out your troop carrying capacity (including 4-5 of them will mean you don't need to include one more APA for load safety reasons) and performing ASW (although I think if they have troops onboard they may not engage subs as often). If you do this with 3 or 4 TFs, you've freed up enough APAs to fully load another major combat unit. I find the troop load capacity on APAs is not high enough and often end up having to use "too many" APAs to get the troops fully loaded into them without crossloading into the cargo (I avoid crossloading on invasions for all major units, at all costs). Yes, I want supplies, but I can do that via AK, LST, or xAK. I want my APAs to be prioritized for combat units.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 17

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 5:07:51 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Not sure what you mean by quick reload on the AGs. Disbanding them and using the Replenish Support Ships button in port only loads half as much cargo as loading them at dockside. You can press that button multiple times until either the ship(s) or port has reached the limit for the phase (which is the first phase of the turn you are entering orders for). I find their dockside loading and unloading to be slow compared to cargo ships.
E.G. When I had both cargo ships and an AG show up at Panama I sent them all to Cristobal to load because it is a bigger port. They docked and started loading. The cargo ships were larger capacity and they still finished loading days before the AG did. This is the main reason I don't use support ships as cargo haulers in my backfield. Exposure to IJN subs is the other one.

Yes to both.

I am and was aware of that.

but a very fair point.

Limited experience but...

As I prefaced "In the early years of the war I (the Allies) need supply supply supply and more supply forward."

Replenish as disbanded 'even with half loads' from San Francisco / San Diego / Los Angeles / Seattle in the early war is enough to get my supply stockpile building at Palymra / Hilo / Christmas / Baker / Suva / Johnson / Midway. "The front line chain"

A series of small AG convoys escorted by one DD / DMS / DM build up that supply quickly.

In the instances of Johnson / Midway (in my limited experience verses the AI) the KB (or Mini-KB) seem programmed to show up to raid; the AGs survive and the xAKs do not.

The raids around Baker / Canton are often pure surface combat but again survive where an xAK doesn't.

Of course one is flying naval search and trying to avoid such confrontations but... one takes some risk universally to build up that base chain depending upon the action of your opponent I presume.

I admit that I have never undertaken a mathematical study to determine if:

AG "days in Pierside to convert" + disbanded load speed + fractional supplies - xAK load speed - no conversion days = positive or negative result.

I am newly informed to consider such now however

Also I had never noted AGs taking longer than xAKs to load dockside at port.. That is something I will pay attention to. I thought dockside loading is purely based on operational points as well ?? Does the tender class universally load slower ?

< Message edited by Macclan5 -- 2/2/2017 5:44:07 PM >

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 18

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 6:47:12 PM

Revthought

Posts: 523
Joined: 1/14/2009
From: San Diego (Lives in Indianapolis)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwolf
AGs

To be honest, the AG's tender abilities are really secondary. I convert them because:

1. the conversion is fast, 12 days at most
2. the added AA seems worth the very tiny drop in cargo capacity

I use them primarily to haul supply just like I would an xAK, and I feel slightly less bad about running them in places they're more vulnerable to air attack. I've never given much thought to the amount of time they take to load dockside though. I guess I haven't been paying attention, but this could effect how I play in the future depending on how much longer it actually takes.

And honestly, the same can be said of AKEs. Converting gets:

1. A tender that can be used to re-arm surface ships in port. This is useful to me because in the early war, as Jorge can attest, I run all kinds of bombardment missions with cruisers.
2. Improved defense and AA capacity
3. A ship that I can still use to simply run supply

At the cost of:

1. 8 to 12 days converting
2. A very small reduction in load capacity
3. And I've just learned, an increase in the time to load at dock (how much I'm not sure)

< Message edited by Revthought -- 2/2/2017 6:54:52 PM >

_____________________________

Playing at war is a far better vocation than making people fight in them.

(in reply to jwolf)

Post #: 19

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 7:40:50 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Not sure what you mean by quick reload on the AGs. Disbanding them and using the Replenish Support Ships button in port only loads half as much cargo as loading them at dockside. You can press that button multiple times until either the ship(s) or port has reached the limit for the phase (which is the first phase of the turn you are entering orders for). I find their dockside loading and unloading to be slow compared to cargo ships.
E.G. When I had both cargo ships and an AG show up at Panama I sent them all to Cristobal to load because it is a bigger port. They docked and started loading. The cargo ships were larger capacity and they still finished loading days before the AG did. This is the main reason I don't use support ships as cargo haulers in my backfield. Exposure to IJN subs is the other one.

Yes, but only one phase of loading takes place. Dockside loads both day and night.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 20

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 7:54:34 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Revthought

3. And I've just learned, an increase in the time to load at dock (how much I'm not sure)

Um, what?

(in reply to Revthought)

Post #: 21

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 7:58:38 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Revthought

3. And I've just learned, an increase in the time to load at dock (how much I'm not sure)

Um, what?

That is what I have seen in game. It takes about twice as long for a tender type to load and unload. I will see if I can experiment with it next time they go for upgrades.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 22

RE: Allied conversions - 2/2/2017 8:34:53 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Revthought

3. And I've just learned, an increase in the time to load at dock (how much I'm not sure)

Um, what?

That is what I have seen in game. It takes about twice as long for a tender type to load and unload. I will see if I can experiment with it next time they go for upgrades.

I don't see why it would be any different. Cargo load is cargo load.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 23

RE: Allied conversions - 2/3/2017 1:39:40 AM

Jorge_Stanbury

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

Early war, I would convert some, but not all xAKs into xAPs... for most of 42 they will be sitting as there is not a lot to move

By Q3/Q4 1942 is when I would absolutely convert all into xAPs

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 24

RE: Allied conversions - 2/3/2017 1:57:21 AM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Early war, I would convert some, but not all xAKs into xAPs... for most of 42 they will be sitting as there is not a lot to move

By Q3/Q4 1942 is when I would absolutely convert all into xAPs

I convert all. Absolutely all. You'll need them later and better to have them early than to be looking around the map for more xAPs and realize you didn't convert a gaggle of xAKs and xAKLs.

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)

Post #: 25

RE: Allied conversions - 2/3/2017 2:59:12 PM

bush

Posts: 444
Joined: 10/30/2007
From: san jose, ca
Status: offline

The AE is the only MUST conversion for me. I think there are enough of them and just plain ports to keep my bigger caliber weapons reloaded close to the front.

I go back and forth on the APD. I guess I do not use it enough in it's troop carrying capacity to make it seem worthwhile. On the other hand, there is not a big difference (especially before the later upgrade) between them and the DE.

AKE/AG seem like worthless upgrades to me. I prefer to keep the cargo capacity.

The xAP? Not sure about this one. I see the advantage later in the war as troops must constantly be brought forward, but I find just moving them in a Transport TF with Liberty ships does not cause an inordinate amount of disruption or fatigue. I also use the Symon HR of NO xAP in an Amph invasion TF.

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 26

RE: Allied conversions - 2/3/2017 3:19:16 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: bushpsu

The AE is the only MUST conversion for me. I think there are enough of them and just plain ports to keep my bigger caliber weapons reloaded close to the front.

I go back and forth on the APD. I guess I do not use it enough in it's troop carrying capacity to make it seem worthwhile. On the other hand, there is not a big difference (especially before the later upgrade) between them and the DE.

AKE/AG seem like worthless upgrades to me. I prefer to keep the cargo capacity.

The xAP? Not sure about this one. I see the advantage later in the war as troops must constantly be brought forward, but I find just moving them in a Transport TF with Liberty ships does not cause an inordinate amount of disruption or fatigue. I also use the Symon HR of NO xAP in an Amph invasion TF.

I don't know why you'd limit your invasion TFs like that, but OK.

You don't get very many actual AEs. I find the AKEs useful to supplement them, and honestly you have so many xAKs anyway... literally swimming in them.

The biggest thing about the APDs, to me, is to help fill out amphib TFs without having to use another APA when I already have plenty of cargo space in the TF but just need more troop space.

(in reply to bush)

Post #: 27

RE: Allied conversions - 2/3/2017 6:09:31 PM

bradfordkay

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

I definitely make the xAK to AKE and AE conversions as soon as I possibly can - as well as any conversions to AP/APA that are possible.

On the four piper to APD vs DE conversion I tend to run it about 50/50. The weakness of the APD conversion is a more limited range for the APDs and so I like to have a decent number of the four piper DEs as escorts - especially for the replenishment TFs, support TFs (need to get those AKEs safely to a forward base in order for them to do any good) and non-invasion troop convoys. YMMV.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 28

RE: Allied conversions - 2/3/2017 6:13:45 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

I definitely make the xAK to AKE and AE conversions as soon as I possibly can - as well as any conversions to AP/APA that are possible.

On the four piper to APD vs DE conversion I tend to run it about 50/50. The weakness of the APD conversion is a more limited range for the APDs and so I like to have a decent number of the four piper DEs as escorts - especially for the replenishment TFs, support TFs (need to get those AKEs safely to a forward base in order for them to do any good) and non-invasion troop convoys. YMMV.

It does. I really can't stress enough that having more APDs frees up an APA or two here and there throughout your invasion operations, which has enormous positive implications.

You get enough actual DEs (19- and 21-knot versions) eventually and can make due with YMS, AVD, PC, SC, etc. as escorts until then. You just need 1 escort in the TF to prevent a surface attack by a sub and you really need the DE-level ASW armament or DDs to even hit the subs anyway.

(in reply to bradfordkay)

Post #: 29

RE: Allied conversions - 2/3/2017 6:21:47 PM

bradfordkay

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

"Eventually" is not the crucial '42 time period. I need good escorts during this time and so will continue to make four piper DE conversions. This doesn't mean that I exclude APD conversions, it is just that in early - mid '42 those DEs are extremely helpful. I see where you are coming from, though so far in all my campaigns I have had enough APs and APAs to make my invasions work with the lesser number of APDs that I have converted.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 30