Amphibious TFs

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Amphibious TFs

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Amphibious TFs

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Amphibious TFs - 9/26/2005 7:26:14 PM

Oldsweat

Posts: 79
Joined: 4/23/2005
Status: offline

I'm playing 1.5, with the 1.6 db, against the AI and recently placed some of my AKs in amphibious groups. Anybody know what, if anything this confers on them? Improved over the beach performance? I can't seem to find it in the manual.

Post #: 1

RE: Amphibious TFs - 9/26/2005 7:43:54 PM

dereck

Posts: 2800
Joined: 9/7/2004
From: Romulus, MI
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oldsweat

I'm playing 1.5, with the 1.6 db, against the AI and recently placed some of my AKs in amphibious groups. Anybody know what, if anything this confers on them? Improved over the beach performance? I can't seem to find it in the manual.

I don't think there's anything conferred on them.

_____________________________

PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)

(in reply to Oldsweat)

Post #: 2

RE: Amphibious TFs - 9/26/2005 8:22:05 PM

Twotribes

Posts: 6929
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline

Loading/unloading at a beach is a function of ship class not TF type. Loading/unloading at a port is controled by level of port and type of thing loading.

(in reply to Oldsweat)

Post #: 3

RE: Amphibious TFs - 9/27/2005 2:31:46 PM

michaelm75au

Posts: 13500
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

If anything, they (AK) will probably attract more enemy gunfire than APs.

In real terms, AP tend to offload further from the beach and send in troops by specialised craft, where as AK will need to get closer to beach to offload its cargo.

Michael

(in reply to Twotribes)

Post #: 4

RE: Amphibious TFs - 9/27/2005 2:34:19 PM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

AK unloads equipment faster, AP troops. So if you have for example Tank Battaillon, LST or AK may be the way. I don't even know if AP can load tanks...

(in reply to michaelm75au)

Post #: 5

RE: Amphibious TFs - 9/27/2005 2:50:30 PM

michaelm75au

Posts: 13500
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline

AP can load tanks but at 6 times the space required for troops.
Michael

(in reply to Sardaukar)

Post #: 6

RE: Amphibious TFs - 9/27/2005 3:51:40 PM

patrickl

Posts: 1530
Joined: 6/20/2002
From: Singapore
Status: offline

Hi,

Take a look at this thread. It says that AKs unload troops faster than APs.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=941441&key=

_____________________________

Banner designed by rogueusmc

(in reply to michaelm75au)

Post #: 7

RE: Amphibious TFs - 9/27/2005 4:00:34 PM

tsimmonds

Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline

quote:

It says that AKs unload troops faster than APs.

...which is incorrect. Further down, it says that AKs do not unload troops faster than APs.

How long unloading takes for any given transport, is strictly a function of how many load point equivalents are on that transport at that time.

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to patrickl)

Post #: 8

RE: Amphibious TFs - 9/27/2005 4:01:53 PM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: patrickl

Hi,

Take a look at this thread. It says that AKs unload troops faster than APs.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=941441&key=

Not really..as said in thread, AKs don't have amphibious value which really hampers the troops..meaning lots of disabled squads.
As when it comes to speed, I don't think AKs are faster, nor it is said so in thread.

< Message edited by Sardaukar -- 9/27/2005 4:02:47 PM >

(in reply to patrickl)

Post #: 9

RE: Amphibious TFs - 9/27/2005 4:04:21 PM

Twotribes

Posts: 6929
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline

It only seems that AK unload troops faster. There are LESS troops on the AK and so the appearance is that they come off faster.

Remember an AK is a cargo hauler. It does not have large berthing spaces and normally the loading wells can NOT be converted to adequate troop spaces ( not with out heavy modification)

Where an LCU can load on a 6000 AP it may take 7 or 8 AK for the same unit. It really is just that AK carry less per ship and are easily loaded by the load rules.

(in reply to Oldsweat)

Post #: 10

RE: Amphibious TFs - 9/27/2005 4:17:34 PM

patrickl

Posts: 1530
Joined: 6/20/2002
From: Singapore
Status: offline

Hi all,

I am confused about this load point equivalent (LPE) mechanics

. So LCI, LCT etc are the best, than APs then AKs. But the Japanese don't have LCTs, etc right?

_____________________________

Banner designed by rogueusmc

(in reply to Twotribes)

Post #: 11

RE: Amphibious TFs - 9/27/2005 4:20:57 PM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

It's all in manual. Every piece of equipment and their load values in different ships are explained...but it's very confusing, I agree.

. With units that have no equipment, it's best to load into pure APs for transport. Units with heavy equipment will need AKs. For amphibious attacks, amphibious value is important, that effects how disrupted your troops come to beach. Dedicated landing ships are best. It's usually mixture of LST/LCI/AP/AK that works for me.