Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
User avatar
derhexer
Posts: 251
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:04 am

Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by derhexer »

What is the downside to creating and using an amphibious TF to transport troops a long distance to an invasion site? I'm playing the Allies in Downfall and I'm forming amphib TFs in Manila to invade Japan. Is there an impact to troop training or readiness to using an Amphib TF to carry them 30-40 hexes.

I'm trying to avoid creating a Transport TF to carry troops to Okinawa, unloading the troops, changing the TF mission to Amphib, then reloading my troops.

Thanks
[:D]
Chris
(Did you ever stop to think and forget to start?)
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by witpqs »

Fatigue and disruption. Forget the page, but it's covered in the manual with a table saying how much per turn per ships type.
User avatar
Justus2
Posts: 800
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:56 pm

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by Justus2 »

Pg 118-121 has the chart with Daily Disruption by ship type, but I don't see anything about effect of the TF type (Amp vs Tran)
Just when I get the hang of a game, I buy two more... :)
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by witpqs »

The daily disruption is only for amphib, AFAIK. Transport doesn't cause any. That might be earlier in the text.
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24520
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by Chickenboy »

Obviously, a considerable decrease in the amount of cargo / supplies carried by a given ship (amphibious v. transport too).
Image
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 9796
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by PaxMondo »

Amphib is limited to I beleive 80% of capacity for load.
Pax
rms1pa
Posts: 370
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 6:32 am

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by rms1pa »



when picking up an LCU in an anphib task force it will often leave behind devices and squads it cannot deliver over a beach.

such as motorized support or large ART. leaving behind a fragment, you will have to transport once you have taken/built a port.

rms/pa
there is a technical term for those who confuse the opinions of an author's characters for the opinions of the author.
the term is IDIOT.
User avatar
dr.hal
Posts: 3449
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:41 pm
Location: Covington LA via Montreal!

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by dr.hal »

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Amphib is limited to I beleive 80% of capacity for load.
Yes Pax, on page 123 of the manual, all are at 80% except "beaching craft" which retain 100%. Hal
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: rms1pa

when picking up an LCU in an anphib task force it will often leave behind devices and squads it cannot deliver over a beach.

such as motorized support or large ART. leaving behind a fragment, you will have to transport once you have taken/built a port.

rms/pa
Naval Support or Shore Party capable troops can help get those things ashore. As can ships with built-in landing craft (AP, APA, AK, APA as opposed to xAP, xAK, xAKL) and beaching craft (LSI, LCI, etc.) when those ships are in the same TF. Even still it is an issue of size versus support.
rms1pa
Posts: 370
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 6:32 am

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by rms1pa »

Naval Support or Shore Party capable troops can help get those things ashore. As can ships with built-in landing craft (AP, APA, AK, APA as opposed to xAP, xAK, xAKL) and beaching craft (LSI, LCI, etc.) when those ships are in the same TF. Even still it is an issue of size versus support.

hmm, all of my amphib experience is in '42, what are these APA/AKA/LSI/LCI you speak of. my experience is having to put the 12 knt William Ward Burroughs into my 16knt invasion task force.... arrgh

rms/pa
there is a technical term for those who confuse the opinions of an author's characters for the opinions of the author.
the term is IDIOT.
Alfred
Posts: 6683
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:56 am

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by Alfred »

Some ships can only be used in one of the taskforce types and not in the other.

Alfred
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »


There is no clear statement of having different fatigue levels (or daily disruption) between amp and transp

Accorfing to the manual " Ground units with a Fatigue of less than 50 will gain 1 extra Fatigue per turn if at sea on a
transport. If 50 Fatigue is reached in this manner, their Fatigue will not increase beyond this level"

I have always assumed they suffered the same... can someone confirm?
User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by crsutton »

ORIGINAL: rms1pa



when picking up an LCU in an anphib task force it will often leave behind devices and squads it cannot deliver over a beach.

such as motorized support or large ART. leaving behind a fragment, you will have to transport once you have taken/built a port.

rms/pa

This will not happen if you have a healthy surplus of cargo and troop space. Try to cut it close and some devices might get left behind. But this is not limited to amphip TFs. Troop transport can do the same.

Best to give yourself some extra room.

what are these APA/AKA/LSI/LCI you speak of

Dedicated amphibious ships and craft that will put your troops ashore fast. Usually within one day-with less disruption. You pretty much will need these if you invade a defended atoll.
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury


There is no clear statement of having different fatigue levels (or daily disruption) between amp and transp

Accorfing to the manual " Ground units with a Fatigue of less than 50 will gain 1 extra Fatigue per turn if at sea on a
transport. If 50 Fatigue is reached in this manner, their Fatigue will not increase beyond this level"

I have always assumed they suffered the same... can someone confirm?

Not sure where (what page) you found that. Could you say so I can find it?

On page 118, just before the table that was referenced above:
6.3.2.4.3 DAILY DISRUPTION
The Maximum Daily Disruption to troops embarked. The actual disruption will be a random
number up to this amount. Keeping troops aboard ship is damaging to morale, physical
conditioning, and makes troops and equipment subject to damage or destruction.
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

sure

page 251; at the bottom of 15.3.1 SUPPLY/FATIGUE EFFECTS ON LAND UNITS

so it is a double combo... units will get fatigue and disruption
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Downside to using Amphib TFs to transport?

Post by witpqs »

Thanks.
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”