LSD and LSV (Full Version)

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



Message

Ambassador -> LSD and LSV (8/12/2020 12:27:10 PM)

Hi everybody,

This is a question about the game, and game mechanics, not about history.

Is there any difference in the game between LSD and LSV types of vessels, apart of basic database differences ?

I checked the manual, and they share the same amphibious unloading times (like the APA/AKA), the same types of TFs they can join (which puts them apart of APA/AKA, as they can join simple Cargo TF), and their description in 20.1.2 doesn't mention they're included for the sake of historical accuracy, yet are similar to each other (albeit not identical).

So, has anyone found a gameplay difference between Belle Grove- and Catskill-class vessels (apart of their different load capacities and defensive armaments) ?



Jorge_Stanbury -> RE: LSD and LSV (8/12/2020 5:13:00 PM)

As far as I know, they are identical (apart from load capacities, devices and TF composition)

I think the key here is the TFs types that it can use (compared to an AKA/ APA)



Trugrit -> RE: LSD and LSV (8/12/2020 5:50:54 PM)


Did you mean to say Apart from Database Differences?

That would be kind of a strange Question.

I mean, apart from Database Differences, Load Capacities and Defensive Armament what is the Difference between a Destroyer and a Patrol Boat in the Game? I guess none.

If you want to look at just the Database Differences then I would say:

LSV is Faster, Lighter, More Maneuverable, More Durable and has more Endurance.
So, Yes there is a game play difference.


[image]local://upfiles/49386/4FAEDA038A584477AE629C2DDE90120A.jpg[/image]



Ambassador -> RE: LSD and LSV (8/12/2020 6:17:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Trugrit


Did you mean to say Apart from Database Differences?

That would be kind of a strange Question.

I mean, apart from Database Differences, Load Capacities and Defensive Armament what is the Difference between a Destroyer and a Patrol Boat in the Game? I guess none.

If you want to look at just the Database Differences then I would say:

LSV is Faster, Lighter, More Maneuverable, More Durable and has more Endurance.
So, Yes there is a game play difference.


[image]local://upfiles/49386/4FAEDA038A584477AE629C2DDE90120A.jpg[/image]

Yes, apart from the details. I really focus on the type of ship, not the details. A destroyer (DD) and a patrol boat (PB) have big differences regarding the types of TF they can join, which tender ship rearms or repairs them, and if I'm not mistaken even on which leader may be put in command (CDR/LCDR for DD, LCDR/LT for PB). Those are in-game differences, no matter the database values. A 12.000-ton PB with 4x2 12"-guns will still be unable to join an air combat TF or a bombardment TF, for example, but will still be able to be repaired by an AG (granted, his 12"-guns won't be rearmed).

It's game mechanics I'm looking for.



Alfred -> RE: LSD and LSV (8/12/2020 6:19:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

Hi everybody,

This is a question about the game, and game mechanics, not about history.

Is there any difference in the game between LSD and LSV types of vessels, apart of basic database differences ?

I checked the manual, and they share the same amphibious unloading times (like the APA/AKA), the same types of TFs they can join (which puts them apart of APA/AKA, as they can join simple Cargo TF), and their description in 20.1.2 doesn't mention they're included for the sake of historical accuracy, yet are similar to each other (albeit not identical).

So, has anyone found a gameplay difference between Belle Grove- and Catskill-class vessels (apart of their different load capacities and defensive armaments) ?


Read s.6.3.2.3 of the manual. There is a slight difference in terms of loading priority. However as this is essentially an under the hood transaction beyond player control, it won't really be noticed by players.

Alfred



Ambassador -> RE: LSD and LSV (8/12/2020 6:26:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

As far as I know, they are identical (apart from load capacities, devices and TF composition)

I think the key here is the TFs types that it can use (compared to an AKA/ APA)

Thanks. Until now, I've used them identically, but I wondered if there was some hidden features (as far as I know, Catskill had an full deck on top while Ashland's had an uncovered well deck - in fact, I'm not sure Catskill had a well deck, and not just a ramp to load the vehicules like on this photograph http://www.navsource.org/archives/10/17/10170114.jpg).



RangerJoe -> RE: LSD and LSV (8/12/2020 6:31:16 PM)

That does not look like a well deck.



Ambassador -> RE: LSD and LSV (8/12/2020 6:42:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Read s.6.3.2.3 of the manual. There is a slight difference in terms of loading priority. However as this is essentially an under the hood transaction beyond player control, it won't really be noticed by players.

Alfred

Thanks. I usually micromanage the loading of my assault troops, and try to avoid splitting a unit on many different types of ships (loading on separate TF before joining), so I guess I'd notice it even less.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

That does not look like a well deck.

Nope, not at all. I guess DUKW's or LVT(A)'s could be launched, but I find scarce details on the operations of those ships during the war (at least, during WW2).



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
5.891602