Barge Carrier, Other Transports, HQ vs Inf HQ, campaign buying (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> SP:WaW Training Center



Message

mine_field -> Barge Carrier, Other Transports, HQ vs Inf HQ, campaign buying (3/11/2004 7:06:23 AM)

Some simple questions from a novice.
First, is there any difference between HQ and Inf HQ besides the large cost difference and the radio rarity? I ask this because I wonder if it would be worth it to upgrade in a campaign vs the AI.

I know how to get a unit into a large transport unit, i.e. the LCV. However, I was very frustrated in a campaign when I had two landing craft to extract 10-15 marines off a beach in a scenario some time ago. Is it possible to load more than one unit into these large transports? If you try to load, you just unload again. And you can't do vice versa of course (clicking load when you have the infantry selected). Any explanation would help. I know for something like a tank, I can load a scout patrol and then click on another scout patrol and click load for him and 'push' him in rather than 'sucking' him in via the tank. I can't 'push' troops into a landing craft. And I can't seem to tell the landing craft I want it to suck in another unit rather than spitting out the first. Does loading and unloading cost movement points for either unit?

I saw the Barge Carrier for sell in the misc section, and a post in this forum got me wondering. What is its use? Is it just a vehicle for carrying other vehicles?

When in campaign, you have the option to spend say 400 points to fix or change your units. I can do this just fine, but my question is can you use those points to get additional units? Sometimes I would rather just add another tank than sacrifice another in its place. Do you just get around this by starting with a large quantity of troops at the beginning of a large campaign?

Also in campaign, is there any way to manage your unit assignments? After about 10 battles and assigning units to different leaders, I have a totally unorganized list although I now have the units grouped as I like. By this, I mean the alpha-numerical designations have gaps and are out of order. Support units are assigned the gaps and are stuck in the middle of my list. Also, when going to the headquarters menu, I notice that the leader is stuck with his original 'job', say 'tank destroyer group' even though now he might be an ammo carrier. Does this have any effect on the leaders performance in the new role?



Twotribes -> RE: Barge Carrier, Other Transports, HQ vs Inf HQ, campaign buying (3/11/2004 7:44:52 AM)

I was unable to load more than one unit to a barge/landing craft except in the initial setup. It simply wont let you.


Barge carriers would be for river crossings, each truck carries one barge which you offload into the river and then can ferry your vehicles across.

As for a sniper killing a tank........ not likely in real world. Unless it was an assault at close range and he managed to stuff a grenade down the hatch.



mine_field -> RE: Barge Carrier, Other Transports, HQ vs Inf HQ, campaign buying (3/11/2004 12:33:00 PM)

Ahh thank you for the information regarding the barge carriers. That explains it.



robot -> RE: Barge Carrier, Other Transports, HQ vs Inf HQ, campaign buying (3/11/2004 3:06:36 PM)

When changing are upgrading it is best to use the same type. Dont change a infantry unit to a tank say. Or dont change an infantry unit to a ammo carrier. In long campaign buy similer units that are cheap and change to unit you want later. Keep your AO unit as he was not too a different hq unit. They lose there effectiveness if you do. When i purchase for my core in along campaign i buy cheap trucks if i want to change them say to TDs later. Or say cheap armored cars to change to stugs later.

After the original purchase of your core. There is no way to expand it later. Only change or upgrade is the options to you.

Im not sure about the landing craft thing. Dont know what the carry capacity of them are. But you might try moving the units in question into the same hex as carrier. That is done by holding the shift down and moving the unit on top of other unit. Then try to load the infantry unit that way.



mine_field -> RE: Barge Carrier, Other Transports, HQ vs Inf HQ, campaign buying (3/11/2004 10:18:05 PM)

I was wondering where you get your information from. Is there anywhere that it states formally that the unit loses its effectiveness? In the future I will follow your guidelines. I only question it because these things get started and roll into pseudo-fact. For instance, the idea of moving a unit with its range set to zero affecting the enemy's ability to spot is inaccurate and rolled out of the idea of limiting a unit's op-fire (by setting range to zero) to prevent unneccesary exposure.
I can certainly see where you would get the idea from. It makes sense not to take a guy who used to have a flamethrower and then expect him to accurately fire a tank main gun. Is the game mechanic reason for this the leader stats, i.e. it is not wise to make infantry a tank because the leader's stats state he is much better at taking on infantry? (I assume the leader numbers [infantry artillery armor] refer to the ability to attack a unit of that type.) I noticed that for the group it does have a role, i.e. TD Section. I can't see where this is anymore of a label. I have been doing very well so far with my motley group of units, but I would like to know for future campaigns if I should follow your reccommendations to the T for most effectiveness.

I got a little information regarding the landing craft in another post. The carry capacity is very large, and it can carry several infantry units. The problem is that when in human deploy or editing mode, it is quite easy to load more than one unit into the landing craft because you can 'push' them into it (select the passenger and hit L as opposed to selecting the carrier and hitting L). In combat, it is impossible to push a unit into a Landing Craft because it is at sea, a place that the infantry cannot move out into. So you can only pull them in via the LC from one hex away. However, if you try to pull in more than one unit you just dump your original cargo. So in the game Landing Craft and other sea based transports have their carry capacity effectively cut in half or greater.

Still I must ask the question. Is there any difference between a US HQ unit and a US Inf HQ unit? Does one rally better? I know the cost and radio rarity is different. But an additional 180 build points for +80% for a radio seems unreal. Surely they aren't using a supercomputer radio.



robot -> RE: Barge Carrier, Other Transports, HQ vs Inf HQ, campaign buying (3/11/2004 10:41:02 PM)

Mine field i havent done too many of the ocean types landings so cant answer you there. I was refering to a river crossing where you dont put men into a barge. They come with a rubber boat.



mine_field -> RE: Barge Carrier, Other Transports, HQ vs Inf HQ, campaign buying (3/11/2004 10:46:49 PM)

I was more or less explaining a bug / issue with ocean going transports. I on the other hand don't have experience with river crossings, so I am delighted to hear how it occurs with infantry.
Thank you for the tip.



Alexandra -> RE: Barge Carrier, Other Transports, HQ vs Inf HQ, campaign buying (3/12/2004 4:16:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mine_field

I was wondering where you get your information from. Is there anywhere that it states formally that the unit loses its effectiveness? In the future I will follow your guidelines. I only question it because these things get started and roll into pseudo-fact. For instance, the idea of moving a unit with its range set to zero affecting the enemy's ability to spot is inaccurate and rolled out of the idea of limiting a unit's op-fire (by setting range to zero) to prevent unneccesary exposure.
I can certainly see where you would get the idea from. It makes sense not to take a guy who used to have a flamethrower and then expect him to accurately fire a tank main gun. Is the game mechanic reason for this the leader stats, i.e. it is not wise to make infantry a tank because the leader's stats state he is much better at taking on infantry? (I assume the leader numbers [infantry artillery armor] refer to the ability to attack a unit of that type.) I noticed that for the group it does have a role, i.e. TD Section. I can't see where this is anymore of a label. I have been doing very well so far with my motley group of units, but I would like to know for future campaigns if I should follow your reccommendations to the T for most effectiveness.

****
Yes, there are guidelines on this. Each unit has, as you've noted, a command rating for Armor, Infantry, and Artillery. These numbers represent the commander of that unit's knowlege and ability to use each type of weapon. So, if you convert a rifle squad with an Inf 85, Arm 12, to a tank, then until the Sgt of that unit gets his armor rating up that tank will be less effective, as the commander and crew have no idea what they are doing :)

*******

Still I must ask the question. Is there any difference between a US HQ unit and a US Inf HQ unit? Does one rally better? I know the cost and radio rarity is different. But an additional 180 build points for +80% for a radio seems unreal. Surely they aren't using a supercomputer radio.

********
I'm assuming that by US HQ you mean the A0 unit, and US Inf HQ you mean a company HQ unit. Yes, there is a huge difference. The A0 is the battalion commander (ie you) and his (or in my case, her :)) staff. The US Inf HQ is a company commander, his RTO, and a few runners. A true HQ unit can help any unit to rally, as long as it's in the command range of the A0, and, can all in arty, even platoon level arty. I'd assume a Co HQ in the A0 slot, would not get that benefit, or, it would be on a lower scale. The only thing you might want to upgrade an A0 into would be a command tank, but, I'd not even reccomend that.

*********

Alex



mine_field -> RE: Barge Carrier, Other Transports, HQ vs Inf HQ, campaign buying (3/12/2004 9:02:02 PM)

Alexandra,
Thank you for your help. You have also alerted me to the fact that women do play SP:WAW. I don't mean this as a sexist comment or even a statement based on some stereotyped image of gamers. I only have a curiousity in regards to what type of people play this particular game, as it lacks the visual punch of newer games yet it has rare depth of thinking that seems to attract certain people. I draw this conclusion from the nature and character of the posts on the forum. You don't find as many flames and other 'lamer' posts, as well the l337 types that follow the newest and best games. Just a little pondering.

In regards to your comments, I have pulled this from the manual (v 5.0)
"Leader Data
In the upper right corner of the screen is information on the leader commanding the unit. Leaders
are rated for their abilities to rally friendly units’ fire, as well as their skill in directing the fire of
friendly infantry, artillery and armor. High numbers are best. Rally rating is the base percentages
chance that a leader will pass a rally check and reduce a subordinate unit’s suppression by one
half. The Skill ratings for armor, infantry and artillery are used when the leader checks to see how
successful the unit is at a variety of tasks like spotting for artillery, assaulting tanks, using antitank
weapons, hitting targets and avoiding being spotted."


Ah it seems you are right. I had misread that section when I first went over it. I focused on the last part, and read it as the numbers meaning how effective the leader is in ATTACKING those units, not in directing attacks from those units.

In regards to the guidelines. I still ask if the section's name has any effect on performance. So far I gather that only the leader's ratings are important. If you are wondering what the heck I'm saying, go into headquarters menu while in game and click on any random section. It should have some title indicating what that section is, i.e. TD Section.

You assumed wrong with regards to the US HQ and US Inf HQ, although your information is helpful. When I started the campaign I am currently playing (Long Long Road to Victory), I somehow was assigned a US Inf HQ in my A0, battalion commander, location.
You do talk about this situation and you suspect that a company unit in the A0 spot is less useful. Anyone experimented with this? It is the situation I now am in, and am wondering if the switch in UNIT for my A0 spot would have any difference. Upgrading would be 200 build points (out of the usual 350 or 400 I get), so it would be nice to know if there is any difference.

Thanks again Alex.



RobertS -> RE: Barge Carrier, Other Transports, HQ vs Inf HQ, campaign buying (3/13/2004 3:10:43 AM)

Alexandra meant that there is a significant difference in the command level between A0 and company commanders. In other words, you can have any unit type as an A0. What you are assigned initially is just the standard representation of HQ staff. If I'm feeling gamey, sometimes I convert to a coastal gun.[:'(]
If your lucky enough to find a water or deep water hex with a bridge section, move your barge into that hex. You'll be able to load the maximum carrying capacity. Otherwise, during the battle, only one unit can be loaded.



mine_field -> RE: Barge Carrier, Other Transports, HQ vs Inf HQ, campaign buying (3/13/2004 4:07:16 AM)

Haha, well if you can get away with a coastal gun then I guess it doesn't matter who is running the platoon.
Thanks for the information regarding the bridge technique.

To tell the truth, this originally stemmed from one scenario, 075 A deadly trap by Wild Bill. Well in 8.0 it is missing its text file. Had I that file, then I would've read that not only it is known, but probably intended that only one unit can be ferried by water per transport. Perhaps a bug, perhaps just the way it was coded.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.265625