Evacuation TF/Allies

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

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

User avatar
pontiouspilot
Posts: 1131
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 7:09 pm

Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by pontiouspilot »

I have never had to but I am faced with having to use a fast transport TF to evacuate some fools from Alor Star. Thy inexplicably draqgged their ass and didn't move out! In any case I have never done a seabased evac via this method. I have read the manual. I have a half dozen Cls and DDs tearing in to load what they can.

Does anybody have any experience with this? What will they load? I have 2 x Indian brigades to evacuate.
rockmedic109
Posts: 2414
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 11:02 am
Location: Citrus Heights, CA

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by rockmedic109 »

It would be very easy to interdict and I would think the likely outcome would be any force used would be sunk and the brigades dividing up into water polo teams.

Any way they can head towards Burma?
Or maybe evac inland into unoccupied areas that IJA has already been and passed. Change control of the hex to Allied so supplies can't run through it to the front?

Or force the IJA to kill them in place. Might make Singapore last a little longer by the force required to eliminate them not being used till Alor Star is taken.

And two brigades will not save Singapore. Singapore usually falls from lack of supply.
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by HansBolter »

The American DDs and CLs don't have troop capacities like their Japanese counterparts. Although I am not so sure about the British ships.

For the Americans this can only be done with APDs. If you're counting on using British ships for this you had better check to make sure they can carry troops.
Hans

spence
Posts: 5419
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 6:56 am
Location: Vancouver, Washington

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by spence »

Better check to see if the Brits had ever heard of DUNKIRK!!!![8|]
User avatar
pontiouspilot
Posts: 1131
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 7:09 pm

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by pontiouspilot »

To the Brits Dunkirk was a victory! I will report back when we see how it went. I certainly agree that they ordinarily would be sitting ducks but I don't think opponent will expect it…also weather is bad.
rockmedic109
Posts: 2414
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 11:02 am
Location: Citrus Heights, CA

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by rockmedic109 »

Ya got me there Spence!

I tried to evac something {base force I think} from that area {might have been Georgetown}. There were a couple of very small xAPs in the area. Both were successfully converted to fish reefs by Netties.
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

To the Brits Dunkirk was a victory! I will report back when we see how it went. I certainly agree that they ordinarily would be sitting ducks but I don't think opponent will expect it…also weather is bad.

Take heed of what Hans is telling you.
The Moose
User avatar
dr.hal
Posts: 3449
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:41 pm
Location: Covington LA via Montreal!

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by dr.hal »

Well Pontiouspilot, there is certainly something you can do about this situation. I found myself in a similar situation with some very brave Dutch troops that were doing a holding action on the east side of Sumatra. When they were defeated, they crossed the island to the west side and there I pulled a Dunkirk with them. Hans is right Allied DDs and other warships can not act as transport, so what I did was to get a bunch of small xAPs (you have lots of small ones in the area, they take between 500-1500 troops) and escorted them to a beach hex (no dot was there as the Dutch troops were running for their lives) and I took about three turns to pull about 10K troops off the island. My opponent didn't realize what I was doing and the one SAG he sent to intercede was defeated by a strong British surface force. You might take looses but at least you will have the satisfaction of saving some troops. In my evacuation, I lost not a man and was also able to pull off all the equipment that the troops had with them. So the Allies CAN do an evacuation. Don't think otherwise. You just have to distract the Japanese player for a few turns. Hal
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5040
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by Yaab »

If my memory serves me right, there are two AMCs in Singapore (or is it Colombo?) at start, which have troop capacity and can be used for fast transport evac.
User avatar
pontiouspilot
Posts: 1131
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 7:09 pm

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by pontiouspilot »

Thanks Hal…I found out the hard way they are not resourceful enough to load diddly on the warships…the manual had led me to believe otherwise. I have enough small old APs in area I will try it …otherwise I'm guessing you can load more and quicker in this mode than straight amphib…guess I'll find out.
spence
Posts: 5419
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 6:56 am
Location: Vancouver, Washington

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by spence »

Apparently only the clever Japanese had ever heard of Dunkirk.
wdolson
Posts: 7648
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:56 pm
Location: Near Portland, OR

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by wdolson »

Allied warships are not allowed to carry troops because it was not done in the Pacific. The Allies never had a real opportunity to evacuate troops in a similar scenario to Dunkirk. In the early going when Allied troops were backs to the sea, the troops were very deep in enemy territory. Dunkirk was possible because the British coast was only a few miles away. Even at that, it was a touch and go operation.

Offensively the US used a fairly large fleet of APDs in small scale operations involving fast transport needs. There was no need to overload combat ships with troops and supplies which would hinder the decks in a fight.

The Japanese used DDs and CLs for fast transports because they had nothing else suitable. The Japanese were unprepared for the realities of the Solomons campaign. Especially Guadalcanal. They pressed fast warships into service in the Tokyo Express because they had a large garrison under a US air umbrella that made it impossible to send in slower transports. The few attempts they made ended in disaster.

To use warships for evacuation of troops, or for supplying troops deep in enemy territory is an act of desperation by a military unprepared for the situation they are facing. Quick transport TFs have a place, but the USN did it right with a fleet of older ships converted to the purpose.

Bill
WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer
Image
User avatar
LargeSlowTarget
Posts: 4800
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hessen, Germany - now living in France

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by LargeSlowTarget »

Well, just because there was no Dunkirk in the PTO does not mean that it could not have been done. There have been cargo runs by US DDs during the darkest days at Guadalcanal, so the ability was there. Should be a player choice to use scarce DD assets for combat or transport duty - for both sides. Luckily there is the editor [;)] To avoid possible exploits in the later part of the war with massive "DDs only" invasions, my Allies DDs lose the transport capacity with late 42 / 43 upgrades.
wdolson
Posts: 7648
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:56 pm
Location: Near Portland, OR

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by wdolson »

I don't know of any USN DDs used as fast transports during the Guadalcanal campaign. All I've ever heard of were APDs used in that role.

The problem with giving DDs cargo capacity is that they can then be used ahistorically. The only time the Allies ever used DDs as transports was in an emergency situation (such as Dunkirk). Giving the Allied DDs cargo capacity would allow them to be used as transports at any time. The US gets so many DDs that a few fast transport TFs could lift far larger forces (like division strength) into places. That was never even contemplated in the real war and would give the Allies a tremendous advantage later war on top of all the late war advantages they already get.

In short Allied DDs don't get troop carrying capacity because it would likely break the game.

Bill
WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer
Image
User avatar
LargeSlowTarget
Posts: 4800
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hessen, Germany - now living in France

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by LargeSlowTarget »

Just to make sure - I'm not criticizing the design decision. Indeed, many players would probably exploit an Allied DD transport capability. But in personal mods self-imposed house rules and Malthusian "moral restraint" will prevent that. Oh, and as I said, my Allied DDs lose the transport capacity with mid-war upgrades.

Regarding USN DD transports - see Morison Book V. The Struggle for Guadalcanal, page 226/227. USS Lansdowne DD-486 carried 90 tons of ammo for the Marines to Guadalcanal in November 1942. Granted, one swallow does not make a summer - but the ability was there.

Btw, Lansdowne seems to have been earmarked for special transport duty - on September 2nd 1945 she tranferred the Japanese emissaries to USS Missouri and back for the surrender ceremony.
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: wdolson

To use warships for evacuation of troops, or for supplying troops deep in enemy territory is an act of desperation by a military unprepared for the situation they are facing. Quick transport TFs have a place, but the USN did it right with a fleet of older ships converted to the purpose.

Bill

Just to demonstrate that naval planners in those days weren't idiots, I found this short description of the APD program. NB that to create a flush-deck DD-to-APD two whole boilers had to be ripped out, plus torpedo capacity.

"APDs were intended to deliver small units such as UDT teams and Army Ranger units onto hostile shores. They could carry up to a company size unit. They were also capable of standing off shore and providing gunfire support as needed. The earliest High-speed Transports were World War I vintage flush-deck destroyers. These ships had two boilers and their stacks along with all of their torpedo tubes removed during conversion to APDs. These were replaced by four landing craft (LCP(L)s, their handling machinery and troop stowage and quarters. Because of the kamikaze threat being encountered, the fast transports were relatively well armed; 3"/50s replacing her original 5"/50s, single 40mm guns aft along with five 20mm A.A. guns. To offset these additions four depth charge throwers and a single depth charge stern rack were removed.The later APDs were newly constructed DEs. These ships were converted to High-speed Transports by increasing troop berthing and equipment storage amidships, adding four LCVPs and a boom crane aft. All APDs in the Navy inventory on 1 January 1969 were redesignated (LPR)."

http://www.navsource.org/archives/10/04/04idx.htm

That was to carry a company of raiders. And not all the way across the Pacific either.

Folks in the forum who have never been to sea--most of them--never seem to consider pedestrian things like the fact that troops eat, sleep, crap, and drink. Crapping is not resource-constrained, but the others are. Potable water capacity is something real sailors have to worry about every day. Especially in the tropics. Troops need berthing; they can't go a week sleeping on the main deck lashed to the lifelines. They need to eat and a DD has barely enough galley and messing space for the crew. All of that has to be accounted for in a rip-out/re-design. Then there are the other non-trivial topics like underway stability depending on where a company of humans is going to put their weight in a storm, how the landing craft will ride, and be launched/recovered.

Saying any projected op n the PTO should be like Dunkirk is to ignore realities. Yeah, you can mod in DD troop capacity in the editor and yeah, you can poof it away at a date certain. But that doesn't make it possible in any world those men lived in.
The Moose
User avatar
LargeSlowTarget
Posts: 4800
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hessen, Germany - now living in France

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by LargeSlowTarget »

Many moons ago I suggested in the forum that ships should require supplies not just for ammo but also because crews must eat...

I am aware of the limitations by design and "life support" available on ships not designed to carry large numbers of people on top of the regular crew.

And I also do not propose packing hundreds of soldiers aboard DDs Dunkirk-style or converting DDs into quasi-APDs for trans-oceanic operations - that is putting words in my mouth.

I'm just saying that having NO capacity whatsoever to carry a few additional men or supplies in an emergencies is ignoring reality as well - and that just because it was not done does not mean that it could not have been done.

Several US submarines - with even less space and "life support" than DDs - evacuated 25 people per run from Corregidor to Soerabaja. That is almost 50% of their regular crew and over quite a bit more distance than Dunkirk to Dover.

None of the evacuees died of starvation or thirst (neither from lack of crapping, for which the necessary facilities ARE ressource-constrained as well in a WW2 submarine ).

I have set my DDs at less than one third the capacity of an APD. They can carry a few squads or tons of supplies in an emergency, but no one must be concerned about massive DD-borne evacuations or invasions.
spence
Posts: 5419
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 6:56 am
Location: Vancouver, Washington

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by spence »

It would seem that the constraints on heavy weaponry/support would be enough to render the "DD only" Allied invasion a fool's errand. If more can be achieved thereby the fault seems to lie with the overly generous limits on what DDs can carry. The Japanese certainly never achieved much more than moving riflemen and (completely inadequate) supply between islands with their Tokyo Express. If their fast transport ability exceeds bare minimums then it's the GAME'S fault
Nobody used fast transport for moving large units across substantial parts of the Pacific. Frankly, it seems sort of gamey to say that the Japanese can do what the Brits "invented" but the Brits can't. From the initial post it seems we are discussing evacuating some riflemen from Alor Star to Singapore: not launching a DD only invasion of some heavily fortified atoll.

Change what DD's/CL's can carry and one doesn't have to make special rules for the Japanese and Allies.
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget

Many moons ago I suggested in the forum that ships should require supplies not just for ammo but also because crews must eat...

I am aware of the limitations by design and "life support" available on ships not designed to carry large numbers of people on top of the regular crew.

And I also do not propose packing hundreds of soldiers aboard DDs Dunkirk-style or converting DDs into quasi-APDs for trans-oceanic operations - that is putting words in my mouth.

I'm just saying that having NO capacity whatsoever to carry a few additional men or supplies in an emergencies is ignoring reality as well - and that just because it was not done does not mean that it could not have been done.

Several US submarines - with even less space and "life support" than DDs - evacuated 25 people per run from Corregidor to Soerabaja. That is almost 50% of their regular crew and over quite a bit more distance than Dunkirk to Dover.

None of the evacuees died of starvation or thirst (neither from lack of crapping, for which the necessary facilities ARE ressource-constrained as well in a WW2 submarine ).

I have set my DDs at less than one third the capacity of an APD. They can carry a few squads or tons of supplies in an emergency, but no one must be concerned about massive DD-borne evacuations or invasions.

Some factual errors here.

A "few" men is what, 8? Certainly not 50.

The subs in question largely evacuated children and nuns. Not a lot of combat gear involved. And the stability issue does not arise with subs. Nor were nuns put ashore in a combat landing that required small craft.

25 is less than 1/3 of their regular crew.

Crapping is not resource-constrained. Sea water to flush. Product sent over the side, not tanked.

Could DDs store a few cases of small arms ammo in corners? Sure. But that's not what you're saying. Even one supply point is more than that.

And if you believe what you say, why take away the capability on Date X? If they could tote a few cases of ammo early they still can late.

I don't know what you mean by "a few squads." A squad is 10-11 men. A few--4-5?--is 50 men. And yeah, that many would SEVERELY tax a WWII DD, particularly a WWI design, if aboard more than a day with no additional water or berthing capacity. Not to mention how to get them ashore.
The Moose
wdolson
Posts: 7648
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:56 pm
Location: Near Portland, OR

RE: Evacuation TF/Allies

Post by wdolson »

ORIGINAL: spence

It would seem that the constraints on heavy weaponry/support would be enough to render the "DD only" Allied invasion a fool's errand. If more can be achieved thereby the fault seems to lie with the overly generous limits on what DDs can carry. The Japanese certainly never achieved much more than moving riflemen and (completely inadequate) supply between islands with their Tokyo Express. If their fast transport ability exceeds bare minimums then it's the GAME'S fault
Nobody used fast transport for moving large units across substantial parts of the Pacific. Frankly, it seems sort of gamey to say that the Japanese can do what the Brits "invented" but the Brits can't. From the initial post it seems we are discussing evacuating some riflemen from Alor Star to Singapore: not launching a DD only invasion of some heavily fortified atoll.

Change what DD's/CL's can carry and one doesn't have to make special rules for the Japanese and Allies.

The way the code is right now, if a ship can be used to carry troops in evacuation mode, they can also be used for invasion. Giving one capability enables the other. With Dunkirk, there was no need to consider any of the problems of keeping troops alive at sea since the trip was an hour at most. The distance was less than a hex. A distance much longer than that and you have concerns about hygiene and feeding the people on board. Evacuating more than a hand full of troops from Malaya by warship was an impossible task, so it wasn't done. Hand fulls of Americans were rescued from the Philippines with PT boats and aircraft, but the numbers evacuated would amount to maybe one disabled squad per PT boat, if that.

It is technically possible to change the code to distinguish between evacuation and invasion TFs, but it would be a lot of work for what really amounts to a very small payoff. The game now allows you to rebuild most destroyed units for a low PP cost. That more than makes up for the lack of evacuation capability.

Bill
WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer
Image
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”