Regular tanks v. amphib tanks

Regular tanks v. amphib tanks (Full Version)

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

Message

Ideologue -> Regular tanks v. amphib tanks (1/31/2006 11:14:28 PM)
Is there actually a difference in their performance in amphibious landings?[&:] Nothing's apparent from the database stats.

Terminus -> RE: Regular tanks v. amphib tanks (1/31/2006 11:19:13 PM)
There isn't. They're all AFV's...

Ideologue -> RE: Regular tanks v. amphib tanks (1/31/2006 11:21:11 PM)
Humbug. Guess the time and shipping spent preparing and concentrating Marine LVTs would've been better used with Shermans.[:'(]

Terminus -> RE: Regular tanks v. amphib tanks (1/31/2006 11:24:11 PM)
They're flavour...

afspret -> RE: Regular tanks v. amphib tanks (2/1/2006 8:07:01 AM)
Yes, there is a difference. Most U.S. Marine and Army amphib tanks had M-5 Stuart light tank turrets with 37mm guns. They were lightly armored and still had the ability to land & transport troops. They could also be landed from ships off-shore, like an AKA, APA, and LSD. Regular tanks had a 75mm or larger gun, were more heavily armored and they had to be transported to the beach from large landing craft, such as the LCM and LST. And they were used almost exclusively in the Pacific.

Terminus -> RE: Regular tanks v. amphib tanks (2/1/2006 10:06:09 AM)
He's talking about in-game difference...

afspret -> RE: Regular tanks v. amphib tanks (2/1/2006 11:32:24 AM)
It dawned on me thats what he meant as soon as hit the "OK" button.

Nikademus -> RE: Regular tanks v. amphib tanks (2/1/2006 4:05:49 PM)
'ok. The attack/defense characteristics of the tanks in the game do make a difference in terms of casualties inflicted and suffered but buried amidst a big invasion operation you'll not notice much difference in the great scheme of things.

Terminus -> RE: Regular tanks v. amphib tanks (2/1/2006 4:11:25 PM)
Yeah, but the game doesn't distinguish between an amphibious tank or a non-amphibious tank, does it? There is only the category "AFV".

Nikademus -> RE: Regular tanks v. amphib tanks (2/1/2006 4:42:38 PM)
don't believe so.

Ideologue -> RE: Regular tanks v. amphib tanks (2/1/2006 5:28:37 PM)
Yep, that I was what I was looking for. Just wondering if there was any reason to use shipping for the LTVs if better tanks were actually on hand, other than historical flavor. Seems a shame there isn't.

dereck -> RE: Regular tanks v. amphib tanks (2/2/2006 12:09:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ideologue Yep, that I was what I was looking for. Just wondering if there was any reason to use shipping for the LTVs if better tanks were actually on hand, other than historical flavor. Seems a shame there isn't. I may be wrong but I think there "may" be a difference in how much shipping is needed to transport the two. I think the amphibs may take less to ship than the regular tanks. Not 100% sure though.

Terminus -> RE: Regular tanks v. amphib tanks (2/2/2006 8:12:47 AM)
They are, but that's because their Load Ratings are lower.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.140625