xAK vs AK

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

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

Post Reply
User avatar
Zigurat666
Posts: 377
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 11:07 pm

xAK vs AK

Post by Zigurat666 »

What is the "functional" difference between xAP and xAK vessels versus AP and AK? I know the AP and AK are classified as military but does it make a difference in functionality?
User avatar
Justus2
Posts: 800
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:56 pm

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by Justus2 »

The Amphib unload rates are twice as high for AK/AP vs the xAK/xAP 600/phase vs 300/phase, they are listed in the manual under 6.3.3.3.2.1 OVER THE BEACH. Unload at ports is also faster (300 vs 125). Not sure if it impacts anything else.
Just when I get the hang of a game, I buy two more... :)
wdolson
Posts: 7648
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:56 pm
Location: Near Portland, OR

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by wdolson »

Ships with the x in front of the ship type are intended for docking at commercial docks. AKs, APs, etc. are militarized with landing craft and can operate both between existing ports and conduct amphibious operations. xAKs and xAPs unload amphibiously very slowly and should only be used for amphibious in an emergency (or during the Japanese unload bonus at the beginning of the game). AKs and APs are more flexible. They can be used as regular transports/freighters, but they unload quicker in amphib TFs.

Bill
WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer
Image
User avatar
Sardaukar
Posts: 11243
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Finland/Israel

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by Sardaukar »

AKA & APA are even better, since they are optimized for amphibious warfare. [8D]
"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-

Image
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by HansBolter »

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Ships with the x in front of the ship type are intended for docking at commercial docks. AKs, APs, etc. are militarized with landing craft and can operate both between existing ports and conduct amphibious operations. xAKs and xAPs unload amphibiously very slowly and should only be used for amphibious in an emergency (or during the Japanese unload bonus at the beginning of the game). AKs and APs are more flexible. They can be used as regular transports/freighters, but they unload quicker in amphib TFs.

Bill


Not JUST emergencies Bill, but anytime you will be unloading at a backwater location with no threat and plenty of time to get the job done.

There simply aren't enough of the military transports to go around nor do I want to risk them in any but the most important operations.

Pretty much anytime I am shipping cargo or troops to a level 1 backwater port I will use civilian shipping in amphibious mode.
Hans

User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by crsutton »

I forget, will xAP and xAKs unload heavy equipment in an amphibious assault? Will they do so it there are assault ships mixed into the TF?

For the Allies the most valuable ship after 1942 is the LST. Once these come on in numbers (along with the LCI), the Allied player can build up and maintain airfields on zero port base hexes with ease. Once I have enough of these, the too valuable AKA and APAs are held back solely for major operations.
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
wdolson
Posts: 7648
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:56 pm
Location: Near Portland, OR

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by wdolson »

Heavy equipment will load into these ships for amphibious assault, but they will likely be the last things unloaded.

Bill
WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer
Image
jcjordan
Posts: 1900
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 8:00 am

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by jcjordan »

Typically the xAK/xAP won't unload heavy equipment (radars, tractors, etc) unless it can dock at the base. If it can't dock, it won't unload them or may take an excruciatingly long time to do so w/ naval support at the base.
Numdydar
Posts: 3271
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by Numdydar »

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Heavy equipment will load into these ships for amphibious assault, but they will likely be the last things unloaded.

Bill

Or not at all [:@]

I made the mistake of taking one of Japan's few naval Gun units to a likely target of the Allies. I actually had to build the stupid port up to a lv 3 (from a 1(1)) to get the damn thing to unload [:@] Even in Amph mode the guns would not unload. Of couse the Allies bypassed the place so the whole thing was a total waste [:@]
User avatar
Reg
Posts: 2786
Joined: Fri May 26, 2000 8:00 am
Location: NSW, Australia

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by Reg »


And that would have never happened in real life.

Where's Knavey when you need him. [:D]

Cheers,
Reg.

(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Heavy equipment will load into these ships for amphibious assault, but they will likely be the last things unloaded.

Bill

Or not at all [:@]

I made the mistake of taking one of Japan's few naval Gun units to a likely target of the Allies. I actually had to build the stupid port up to a lv 3 (from a 1(1)) to get the damn thing to unload [:@] Even in Amph mode the guns would not unload. Of couse the Allies bypassed the place so the whole thing was a total waste [:@]

I am surprised you couldn't load it into small, <6000 tons xAKLs
Numdydar
Posts: 3271
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by Numdydar »

I did load it into a ship that could actually dock at a lv 1 port. Damn thing still would not unload. [:@]

Of course, it may have been unloading very, very slowly and I just did not wait long enough. But I seem to recall that there was an indicator on the ship itself saying it could not unload its cargo even when I did that. I also never bothered to check in the Editor either (too lazy [:)])

But once the port was lv 3, it unloaded just fine [:)]
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

I thought that as long as a ship can dock-undock, all carried cargo was capable of unloading.

User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by crsutton »

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

I did load it into a ship that could actually dock at a lv 1 port. Damn thing still would not unload. [:@]

Of course, it may have been unloading very, very slowly and I just did not wait long enough. But I seem to recall that there was an indicator on the ship itself saying it could not unload its cargo even when I did that. I also never bothered to check in the Editor either (too lazy [:)])

But once the port was lv 3, it unloaded just fine [:)]


Did you have naval support in the hex? Sometimes even a little bit can make a difference.
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
Numdydar
Posts: 3271
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 pm

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by Numdydar »

No Nav Sup as I was not planning on keeping it [:(] I was hoping to give the Allies a 'little' surprise if they invaded. [;)]

I guess I could have brought some in, unloaded it, then removed them, but never thought of it or decided that expanding the port was easier (and less risky) at that time.
User avatar
Justus2
Posts: 800
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 11:56 pm

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by Justus2 »

Going back to the original distinction between AK and xAK (military vs commercial), where do AMC ships fit? Are they considered commissioned/military ships for the onload rate (equivalent to AP or AK), or are they treated as merchants (xAK or xAP)?
Just when I get the hang of a game, I buy two more... :)
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by rustysi »

I guess I could have brought some in, unloaded it, then removed them, but never thought of it or decided that expanding the port was easier (and less risky) at that time.

If possible you could fly some in and then remove them. Mavis and Emily can transport things a long way.
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by rustysi »

where do AMC ships fit?

I've read here they are akin to AK's.
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
LeeChard
Posts: 1116
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:24 pm
Location: Michigan

RE: xAK vs AK

Post by LeeChard »

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

I did load it into a ship that could actually dock at a lv 1 port. Damn thing still would not unload. [:@]

Of course, it may have been unloading very, very slowly and I just did not wait long enough. But I seem to recall that there was an indicator on the ship itself saying it could not unload its cargo even when I did that. I also never bothered to check in the Editor either (too lazy [:)])

But once the port was lv 3, it unloaded just fine [:)]
I've been a victim of this too [:(]
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”