Question About LCU Loading at Ports

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Question About LCU Loading at Ports

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Question About LCU Loading at Ports

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Question About LCU Loading at Ports - 11/6/2011 6:22:43 AM

Treetop64

Posts: 926
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: 519 Redwood City - BASE (Hex 218, 70)
Status: offline

I'm certain this has been asked before but I couldn't find anything about in the forums. My apologies.

I had an unfragmented American infantry division loading onto two large APs and two C3 AKs in a Transport TF in San Francisco, bound for Lahaina, HI. I allocated the load using the Minimum Ships option, then verified the load. 100% of the division was allocated to all the ships in the task force, with no unallocated troops or equipment/supplies remaining, and with a bit of wiggle room remaining for both troops and equipment/supplies. I clicked Accept Load and went on my merry way.

Three days later I went back to SF to check on things and found that the TF had just completed loading, with all ships at either 99% or 100% capacity. However, there was still a significant amount of troops and equipment/supplies for the division that never got loaded, and would have been left behind had the TF steamed off. I had to add another AP and two more AKs to the TF to make room for these guys and get them loaded.

A similar situation occurred earlier when I loaded the 6th Australian Division at Aden, bound for Melbourne. Initially the whole of the division was allocated for the TF and assigned for loading, only to discover later that a huge chunk of the division got left behind in the middle east when the TF steamed off. Had to create another two-ship TF to carry these guys to OZ.

I try to be as efficient as possible when assigning ships to Cargo and Transport TFs, and I monitor the allocation and space remaining percentages for the latter when assigning loads. If it tells me that everything about the load allocation is peachy, I wanna believe it, and not add in more ships just to cover some "fudge factor". I don't have that many AKs and APs to spare this early in the war for that.

Am I missing something, or is it a technical issue?

Thanks.

Oh, forgot to mention: Using Official v1.01.06i

< Message edited by Treetop64 -- 11/6/2011 8:44:59 AM >

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: Question About LCU Loading at Ports - 11/6/2011 11:31:25 AM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

I think that if you use Minimum ships option, you might want to use "Do not load supplies" switch, since otherwise certain amount of space is reserved for supplies aboard.

And to add, if it's not PBEM, you should uprgade to latest beta (or even if it is and your opponent agrees).

< Message edited by Sardaukar -- 11/6/2011 11:36:51 AM >

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von B�lov, 1870-

(in reply to Treetop64)

Post #: 2

RE: Question About LCU Loading at Ports - 11/10/2011 7:13:22 PM

awadley

Posts: 153
Joined: 9/1/2004
From: Wichita, KS
Status: offline

Another thing that has caught my attention, if you have replacments on and the unit is taking new replacments the size of load is changing. Also, was the LCU at 100/100 strength or at something like 87/103?? Which would suggest that the LCU is not up to TOE and is still building.

_____________________________