RE: Loading troops in SST's..

RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition

Message

witpqs -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/19/2016 7:56:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget Only units with the editor value "symbol" = 19 can load on subs in combat mode. The ordinary para units have the "symbol" value = 13 which add the para wings symbol to the infantry icon and makes the unit eligible for airdrops. The value 19 designates commando / raider type units, they also get the wings symbol, can jump and can be loaded on subs in combat mode. Just tested this Marine Para (13) can load on subs only in move mode, Marine Raiders (19) can load combat ready. First I have heard of that.

geofflambert -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/19/2016 8:02:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: witpqs quote: ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget Only units with the editor value "symbol" = 19 can load on subs in combat mode. The ordinary para units have the "symbol" value = 13 which add the para wings symbol to the infantry icon and makes the unit eligible for airdrops. The value 19 designates commando / raider type units, they also get the wings symbol, can jump and can be loaded on subs in combat mode. Just tested this Marine Para (13) can load on subs only in move mode, Marine Raiders (19) can load combat ready. First I have heard of that. LST, are you saying those Aussie raider units that load and unload so well from subs can be airdropped? Do they need parachutes?

wneumann -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/19/2016 8:04:57 PM)
To me it seemed like personnel elements (infantry, support, construction engineer, etc) without equipment could load/unload on SST based on my experience. Unfortunately I cannot recall mode of the LCU from which I loaded elements aboard the SST - though it was likely Combat mode and the LCU in question was definitely construction engineers. Also note that I was loading the LCU elements from a size 0 port (no docking).

geofflambert -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/19/2016 8:08:36 PM)
Construction engineers usually have heavy equipment like bulldozers. You can get some of the personnel on the sub but the bulldozers will be left behind.

geofflambert -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/19/2016 8:13:13 PM)
Often, IIRC, support personnel may be left behind as well. This discussion doesn't just apply to SST transport or SS transport but amphibious landing as well. Sometimes you will find that a substantial element of your LCU will not unload without a port or having been loaded on truly amphibious ships.

Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/19/2016 8:31:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter quote: ORIGINAL: witpqs quote: ORIGINAL: Dili Does not have to be classified as commandoes? IIRC, should be para capable unit to be loaded on a sub in combat mode. Commando is just a name in this game, not a designation the code recognizes. Which is odd to the maximum because commando IS a device type that one has limited supplies of. The code has sufficient discernment to prevent a para engineer device from being airdropped along with the rest of the devices of a para battalion. Why doesn't it have sufficient discernment to differentiate a commando squad device from any other ordinary kind of infantry squad device? It's especially tough because a few of the commando units have "para" in their unit name, but they don't have the para flag in the DB.

Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/19/2016 8:34:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: witpqs quote: ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget Only units with the editor value "symbol" = 19 can load on subs in combat mode. The ordinary para units have the "symbol" value = 13 which add the para wings symbol to the infantry icon and makes the unit eligible for airdrops. The value 19 designates commando / raider type units, they also get the wings symbol, can jump and can be loaded on subs in combat mode. Just tested this Marine Para (13) can load on subs only in move mode, Marine Raiders (19) can load combat ready. First I have heard of that. Me too. From memory, in stock, I've never gotten a Marine Raiders to SST load in Combat.

LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/19/2016 9:07:27 PM)
I'm playing with the Beta patches. Check the WhatsNew.pdf

Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/19/2016 9:51:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget I'm playing with the Beta patches. Check the WhatsNew.pdf I don't see anything except an entry about supply subs (not SSTs) having ammo loads altered when they load cargo. Can you direct me to the line about SSTs? In my game the Raiders are all withdrawn.

LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/19/2016 10:49:39 PM)
Readme1125.pdf : - page 9, New 8. - page 10, Changed 8. - page 12, Notes 3. Search the pdf for "symbol".

witpqs -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/19/2016 10:58:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget Readme1125.pdf : - page 9, New 8. - page 10, Changed 8. - page 12, Notes 3. Search the pdf for "symbol". That last one is what says it. OK. [8D]

Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/20/2016 2:25:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: witpqs quote: ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget Readme1125.pdf : - page 9, New 8. - page 10, Changed 8. - page 12, Notes 3. Search the pdf for "symbol". That last one is what says it. OK. [8D] I see the note now. But looking in the editor I can't find where this code is entered.

BBfanboy -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/20/2016 3:08:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: geofflambert Construction engineers usually have heavy equipment like bulldozers. You can get some of the personnel on the sub but the bulldozers will be left behind. Clear lack of will and effort! Just remove the useless deck gun and tie the bulldozer down on the deck. It will even help the sub submerge! Really Fast! And Really Deep!

geofflambert -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/20/2016 3:40:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy quote: ORIGINAL: geofflambert Construction engineers usually have heavy equipment like bulldozers. You can get some of the personnel on the sub but the bulldozers will be left behind. Clear lack of will and effort! Just remove the useless deck gun and tie the bulldozer down on the deck. It will even help the sub submerge! Really Fast! And Really Deep! You know, that's how I feel about body piercings. Throw them overboard and see if they sink (or synch). What to do about tattoos?

LargeSlowTarget -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/20/2016 9:38:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58 I see the note now. But looking in the editor I can't find where this code is entered. Locations tab, right column (starts with the Fatigue value), ninth box from top = Symbol

BBfanboy -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/20/2016 3:32:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: geofflambert quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy quote: ORIGINAL: geofflambert Construction engineers usually have heavy equipment like bulldozers. You can get some of the personnel on the sub but the bulldozers will be left behind. Clear lack of will and effort! Just remove the useless deck gun and tie the bulldozer down on the deck. It will even help the sub submerge! Really Fast! And Really Deep! You know, that's how I feel about body piercings. Throw them overboard and see if they sink (or synch). What to do about tattoos? Have you tried sandpaper? Use an orbital sander to get in the corners.

Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/20/2016 4:26:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget quote: ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58 I see the note now. But looking in the editor I can't find where this code is entered. Locations tab, right column (starts with the Fatigue value), ninth box from top = Symbol Wow. I have never been an editor ninja, but looking in Locations for an LCU factor never occurred to me. Thanks.

wneumann -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/21/2016 1:46:49 PM)
quote: Construction engineers usually have heavy equipment like bulldozers. You can get some of the personnel on the sub but the bulldozers will be left behind. +1. It makes complete sense. Actually the construction engineer LCU in my instance had no bulldozers left, they had already been bombed to oblivion. The SST in my game did exactly as expected - it loaded personnel. Allowing personnel only to load as cargo aboard an SST (whether construction engineers, commando infantry or civilians) works perfectly fine. quote: Just remove the useless deck gun and tie the bulldozer down on the deck. It will even help the sub submerge! Really Fast! And Really Deep! I'm hoping my opponent is sending an SST to pick up the bulldozers.

geofflambert -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/21/2016 2:05:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy quote: ORIGINAL: geofflambert quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy quote: ORIGINAL: geofflambert Construction engineers usually have heavy equipment like bulldozers. You can get some of the personnel on the sub but the bulldozers will be left behind. Clear lack of will and effort! Just remove the useless deck gun and tie the bulldozer down on the deck. It will even help the sub submerge! Really Fast! And Really Deep! You know, that's how I feel about body piercings. Throw them overboard and see if they sink (or synch). What to do about tattoos? Have you tried sandpaper? Use an orbital sander to get in the corners. Orbital sanders? Hadn't tried that yet. Tried belt sanders and reciprocating sanders but all my favorite porn stars keep getting more tattoos. What's a poor little gorn to do?

Dili -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/21/2016 3:25:39 PM)
So after all there are commandoes, i thought i have read it somewhere.

BBfanboy -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/21/2016 8:41:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dili So after all there are commandoes, i thought i have read it somewhere. This seems to be a segue from the Gorn's discussion of tattoos, but I am not going to get into details about manner of dress ...or not. [;)]

geofflambert -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/21/2016 9:00:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy quote: ORIGINAL: Dili So after all there are commandoes, i thought i have read it somewhere. This seems to be a segue from the Gorn's discussion of tattoos, but I am not going to get into details about manner of dress ...or not. [;)] Well, I was going to raise a stink about the way Dili spelled "commandoes" but politics are not allowed in this forum and in any case I see that commandos with an e added is actually a legitimate spelling.

BBfanboy -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/21/2016 9:15:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: geofflambert quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy quote: ORIGINAL: Dili So after all there are commandoes, i thought i have read it somewhere. This seems to be a segue from the Gorn's discussion of tattoos, but I am not going to get into details about manner of dress ...or not. [;)] Well, I was going to raise a stink about the way Dili spelled "commandoes" but politics are not allowed in this forum and in any case I see that commandos with an e added is actually a legitimate spelling. Did Dan Quayle tell you that?

geofflambert -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/21/2016 9:24:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy quote: ORIGINAL: geofflambert quote: ORIGINAL: BBfanboy quote: ORIGINAL: Dili So after all there are commandoes, i thought i have read it somewhere. This seems to be a segue from the Gorn's discussion of tattoos, but I am not going to get into details about manner of dress ...or not. [;)] Well, I was going to raise a stink about the way Dili spelled "commandoes" but politics are not allowed in this forum and in any case I see that commandos with an e added is actually a legitimate spelling. Did Dan Quayle tell you that? Shhhhhh!

Dili -> RE: Loading troops in SST's.. (7/21/2016 10:17:01 PM)
Ok i get it, tricky English

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.265137