IJFB

IJFB (Full Version)

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

Message

Hanzberger -> IJFB (12/10/2019 1:15:38 AM)
So what's the thought on DD conversion to APD. I was thinking of converting a few, but is it worth it?

BBfanboy -> RE: IJFB (12/10/2019 6:01:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hanzberger So what's the thought on DD conversion to APD. I was thinking of converting a few, but is it worth it? Depends on where you intend to fight your battles. Firstly, converting at game start removes precious DDs for a few weeks when you really need escorts. When they come out as APDs they are good ASW vessels but gun power is weaker. Not sure about AA. If you plan to fight your war among the myriad of small islands and atolls, APDs are very handy for moving small units around to clean up all those enemy islands that you do not intend to garrison but you really don't want the enemy to be able to use (e.g. putting an AVP and patrol planes there). When you have a horde of them, you can front-load the fighting troops for a landing on the APDs before using bigger transports to bring the unit equipment and support troops. The fighting troops will land very quickly and usually with minimal disruption. You do need to have separate supply-only ships to land supply with the fighting troops. When you have troops spread out over a bunch of APDs, enemy subs and aircraft are not going to kill the unit with an attack or two, and APDs can usually escape from SCTFs with minimal losses if the commander has high naval skill.

PaxMondo -> RE: IJFB (12/10/2019 12:13:37 PM)
I rarely consider converting any DD's as there are NEVER enough DD's for the IJ. And that's before losses which will really stack up if you are aggressive at all with your navy (and I tend to be).

rustysi -> RE: IJFB (12/10/2019 5:30:56 PM)
In one of my games I did so on a large scale. Wasn't worth the effort. As Pax says there are never enough DD's for Japan, especially early in the game. Add to that for the first months lots of 'em will be in the yards for upgrades and you have a 'situation'.

Chickenboy -> RE: IJFB (12/10/2019 6:02:04 PM)
Hi Hanzberger, Like the others, I likes my DDs doing DD things-so I don't convert large numbers of them. EXCEPT for some that can convert in 8/42 to APDs with radar. I'm experimenting on pairing these with CVE groups to determine if they provide additional CAP scramble time for the air groups. Full disclosure: I don't know if this will work or not, but it seems worth a shot for a handful of them.

Kull -> RE: IJFB (12/10/2019 6:20:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy Hi Hanzberger, Like the others, I likes my DDs doing DD things-so I don't convert large numbers of them. EXCEPT for some that can convert in 8/42 to APDs with radar. I'm experimenting on pairing these with CVE groups to determine if they provide additional CAP scramble time for the air groups. Full disclosure: I don't know if this will work or not, but it seems worth a shot for a handful of them. PaxMondo made a comment elsewhere which suggested that it won't work, because the device availability date is March 1943. If so, smart move by the devs, but I'm kinda bummed!

PaxMondo -> RE: IJFB (12/11/2019 2:11:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kull quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy Hi Hanzberger, Like the others, I likes my DDs doing DD things-so I don't convert large numbers of them. EXCEPT for some that can convert in 8/42 to APDs with radar. I'm experimenting on pairing these with CVE groups to determine if they provide additional CAP scramble time for the air groups. Full disclosure: I don't know if this will work or not, but it seems worth a shot for a handful of them. PaxMondo made a comment elsewhere which suggested that it won't work, because the device availability date is March 1943. If so, smart move by the devs, but I'm kinda bummed! Correct. Device dates do work, so you can create TOE or Aircraft that has a future device as part of it. The device itself doesn't "come on" until the date is reached. It saves a lot of slots in the database.

Hanzberger -> RE: IJFB (12/11/2019 9:34:51 AM)
Ok thanks everyone, interesting thought with the radar please let us know~!

Barb -> RE: IJFB (12/11/2019 12:27:12 PM)
I had one class of DDs updated to APDs, the other not (IIRC, Minekaze & Kamikaze?). I still had some Kamikaze class DDs around doing some useful escort role, but I had already lost most of my APDs - so I would love to have the 9 Kamikaze-class APDs even in mid-1944 for the evacuation purposes. The purpose built APDs (T-1 class) are bit slow and just coming online.

Chickenboy -> RE: IJFB (12/11/2019 2:14:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PaxMondo quote: ORIGINAL: Kull quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy Hi Hanzberger, Like the others, I likes my DDs doing DD things-so I don't convert large numbers of them. EXCEPT for some that can convert in 8/42 to APDs with radar. I'm experimenting on pairing these with CVE groups to determine if they provide additional CAP scramble time for the air groups. Full disclosure: I don't know if this will work or not, but it seems worth a shot for a handful of them. PaxMondo made a comment elsewhere which suggested that it won't work, because the device availability date is March 1943. If so, smart move by the devs, but I'm kinda bummed! Correct. Device dates do work, so you can create TOE or Aircraft that has a future device as part of it. The device itself doesn't "come on" until the date is reached. It saves a lot of slots in the database. Saw this earlier-of course after I started the upgrades. [8\|] Is the database for device availability for Sc. 2 the same as what you cite above, Pax? No matter. I've been putting my APDs to good use with tactical front-line reinforcement and withdrawals. It won't kill me to have a handful more of them.

PaxMondo -> RE: IJFB (12/11/2019 8:56:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: PaxMondo quote: ORIGINAL: Kull quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy Hi Hanzberger, Like the others, I likes my DDs doing DD things-so I don't convert large numbers of them. EXCEPT for some that can convert in 8/42 to APDs with radar. I'm experimenting on pairing these with CVE groups to determine if they provide additional CAP scramble time for the air groups. Full disclosure: I don't know if this will work or not, but it seems worth a shot for a handful of them. PaxMondo made a comment elsewhere which suggested that it won't work, because the device availability date is March 1943. If so, smart move by the devs, but I'm kinda bummed! Correct. Device dates do work, so you can create TOE or Aircraft that has a future device as part of it. The device itself doesn't "come on" until the date is reached. It saves a lot of slots in the database. Saw this earlier-of course after I started the upgrades. [8\|] Is the database for device availability for Sc. 2 the same as what you cite above, Pax? No matter. I've been putting my APDs to good use with tactical front-line reinforcement and withdrawals. It won't kill me to have a handful more of them. CB: Honestly not sure, you will have to open up AEeditor and check. Sorry. (I bet it is as the devs made very few device changes between scen 1 and 2.)

Kull -> RE: IJFB (12/12/2019 2:27:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy Is the database for device availability for Sc. 2 the same as what you cite above, Pax? Yep, it's the same.

LargeSlowTarget -> RE: IJFB (12/13/2019 1:27:36 PM)
Note that some DD class converts to APDs with a top speed of a mere 18 knots, which makes them much less useful in that role. I keep them as DDs. Other classes convert to 29 knot APDs and I usually convert a division or two (4 - 8 ships) of those to run supplies to front bases under enemy air threat.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.703125