Matrix Games Forums

More Games are Coming to Steam! Deal of the Week: Combat Command Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great WarDeal of the Week Panzer CorpsNew Strategy Titles Join the FamilyTablet Version of Qvadriga gets new patchNew Command Ops: Battles from the Bulge UpdateCommand gets a huge update!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

USN 4 stacker conversions

 
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 >> The War Room >> USN 4 stacker conversions Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/9/2012 8:41:03 PM   
ctangus


Posts: 2151
Joined: 10/13/2005
From: Boston, Mass.
Status: offline
Q for fellow AFBs: what if any Clemson-class conversions do you do?

No Pearl strike in my current game so I'll probably keep a few of them as DDs to serve as BB escorts until I get more modern destroyers. But my opponent has also launched a painfully successful sub war and DEs would be welcome. I could additionally use more fast-transport capability so I'd also like more APDs. I haven't played AE late-game but in WITP I could have used more DMS once on the offensive - but maybe not because there are fewer mines around in AE?

I know that no 2 games are alike but I'd be interested in hearing what other players do & the reasoning behind it. Thanks!
Post #: 1
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/9/2012 10:26:38 PM   
rms1pa

 

Posts: 220
Joined: 7/4/2011
Status: offline
as APDs the Soerebya,and the cargo capable CMs are the only allied ships able to work the Fast transport Mission with cargo. I convert them all as fast as possible. the increased ASW does not hurt.

there are drawbacks to this. early war aggresive Allied commanders will miss the torpedos and carefull staggering of upgrades of other DDs will be needed to have escorts for the Air combat task forces.

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.

(in reply to ctangus)
Post #: 2
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/9/2012 10:33:34 PM   
Grollub


Posts: 6529
Joined: 10/9/2005
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rms1pa

as APDs the Soerebya,and the cargo capable CMs are the only allied ships able to work the Fast transport Mission with cargo. I convert them all as fast as possible. the increased ASW does not hurt.

there are drawbacks to this. early war aggresive Allied commanders will miss the torpedos and carefull staggering of upgrades of other DDs will be needed to have escorts for the Air combat task forces.

rms/pa


Agreed. In my earlier games I went for the 8 ASW DE conversions. Later in the war I found out that I hadn't nearly enough APDs for that time period operations, while at the same time I was swimming in modern high ASW auxilaries. So in my current campaign, I've converted all available four-stackers to APDs.

_____________________________

“Pay attention to where you are going because without meaning you might get nowhere.”

-- Winnie the Pooh

(in reply to rms1pa)
Post #: 3
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/10/2012 5:25:13 AM   
SBD

 

Posts: 54
Joined: 2/18/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Grollub


quote:

ORIGINAL: rms1pa

as APDs the Soerebya,and the cargo capable CMs are the only allied ships able to work the Fast transport Mission with cargo. I convert them all as fast as possible. the increased ASW does not hurt.

there are drawbacks to this. early war aggresive Allied commanders will miss the torpedos and carefull staggering of upgrades of other DDs will be needed to have escorts for the Air combat task forces.

rms/pa


Agreed. In my earlier games I went for the 8 ASW DE conversions. Later in the war I found out that I hadn't nearly enough APDs for that time period operations, while at the same time I was swimming in modern high ASW auxilaries. So in my current campaign, I've converted all available four-stackers to APDs.


+1

APDs for sure. They have an ASW rating of "6" so they're still useful for that duty when not otherwise engaged.

< Message edited by SBD -- 12/10/2012 6:06:33 AM >

(in reply to Grollub)
Post #: 4
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/10/2012 1:56:16 PM   
rms1pa

 

Posts: 220
Joined: 7/4/2011
Status: offline



[/quote]

+1

APDs for sure. They have an ASW rating of "6" so they're still useful for that duty when not otherwise engaged.
[/quote]

they can still fight, i had 2 Omahas and 6 Clemson APDs eat one of those E/PB/T task forces the AI is so fond of.

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.

(in reply to SBD)
Post #: 5
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/10/2012 5:13:07 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2653
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline
I converted some of my old DD's to APD's, but most went to DE's for that longer range. I honestly don't use fast transport TF's so the APD conversion isn't really helping me very much, and I'm into mid-43 in my latest campaign game. The DE's and their longer range are helpful for those long transits from PH to Australia, and into the mid-Pacific where there aren't any good base locations.

(in reply to rms1pa)
Post #: 6
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/10/2012 7:31:10 PM   
aphrochine


Posts: 187
Joined: 3/24/2008
From: Phoenix, AZ
Status: offline
+1 for APD Conversions.

As AFB, you have so few Fast Transport options, so convert every ship possible to APDs.

_____________________________

VMF-422 fanboy
Grog Virgin fanboy

(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 7
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/10/2012 9:32:40 PM   
Gridley380


Posts: 245
Joined: 12/20/2011
Status: offline
In my current game I went for DMS conversion for maximum range - next time I'm going for the APD conversion. Short range sure, but good ASW ratings early on are scarce and later on APDs make good escorts for Amphib TFs.

(in reply to aphrochine)
Post #: 8
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/11/2012 1:55:54 AM   
Crackaces


Posts: 2607
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gridley380

In my current game I went for DMS conversion for maximum range - next time I'm going for the APD conversion. Short range sure, but good ASW ratings early on are scarce and later on APDs make good escorts for Amphib TFs.


+1 IN my current game I was being terroized by IJN subs off the west coast so I opted for the DE option. Now I am in Oct 1943 there are so many DE/DD's I can't count. But I can count the number of APD's and there is not enough as I get stuff of atolls before the port level = 2. [enough to park the bigger xAK's xAK's > 6K tons ..]

_____________________________

Patients and providers of healthcare win with interprofessional practice http://ipep.arizona.edu/blog

(in reply to Gridley380)
Post #: 9
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/11/2012 4:22:19 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2653
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline
I just use the LST/LCI/LCVP's to unload/load at atolls with small ports. They can unload in one turn and don't need a port to get maximum loading, but they are slow.

(in reply to Crackaces)
Post #: 10
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/11/2012 11:08:13 PM   
ctangus


Posts: 2151
Joined: 10/13/2005
From: Boston, Mass.
Status: offline
Thanks for all the responses. I've decided to convert at least 2 divisions of Clemsons to APDs & just converted the first two ships. I'll do the upgrades over time so I don't have them all off line at once.

I have @ 4 divisions of Clemsons still afloat (17 DDs to be precise). I'm still considering converting 1-2 divisions to DMS for future offensive ops. I don't see a lot of DMS in the reinforcement queue but I do see a ton of minesweepers. How is later war allied minesweeping capability in AE? I remember that in WITP mines/CD guns could be a lethal combination and DMS performed much better than minesweepers. At the very least they weren't sunk in droves.

(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 11
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/12/2012 1:27:37 AM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2653
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline
If you're playing against the AI you will never need minesweepers to get rid of mines ahead of an invasion. The DMS conversion isn't very useful, therefore, against the AI; I'd convert them to either APD's or DE's instead.

(in reply to ctangus)
Post #: 12
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/12/2012 9:29:17 PM   
ctangus


Posts: 2151
Joined: 10/13/2005
From: Boston, Mass.
Status: offline
PBEM if it makes a difference.

(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 13
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/12/2012 9:54:08 PM   
jeffk3510


Posts: 4005
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline
The DEs have the most ASW, but it is nice to have an APD around or two.

However, the difference in ASW (8 vs 6) for the DE or APD, it might not be worth it to convert to DE. In other words, anything you want to convert to DE, probably convert to APD if you feel that 8 vs 6 in ASW isn't much at all. On top of that, you have small troop carrying abilities.

_____________________________

Follow our WiTPAE team PBEM game against bilbow and hartwig.modrow http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2965846&mpage=1&key=?

Follow my WITPAE PBEM game against Schanilec. http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3495605

(in reply to ctangus)
Post #: 14
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/12/2012 10:22:02 PM   
ctangus


Posts: 2151
Joined: 10/13/2005
From: Boston, Mass.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

The DEs have the most ASW, but it is nice to have an APD around or two.

However, the difference in ASW (8 vs 6) for the DE or APD, it might not be worth it to convert to DE. In other words, anything you want to convert to DE, probably convert to APD if you feel that 8 vs 6 in ASW isn't much at all. On top of that, you have small troop carrying abilities.


Thanks. Since starting this thread I'm now convinced APDs > DEs at least for me. Still trying to decide if I might want some more DMS though.

(in reply to jeffk3510)
Post #: 15
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/14/2012 4:40:09 PM   
General Patton


Posts: 966
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in OHIO
Status: online
APD's are more flexable.

(in reply to ctangus)
Post #: 16
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/14/2012 6:02:45 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 7031
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Initially, you are short of both APDs and ASW assets. You will start to get a good flow of decent ASW assets and upgrades by the end of 1942. By the end of 1943 you will have more ASW than you can use. You will "never" have enough APDs. The choice is easy.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to General Patton)
Post #: 17
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/17/2012 1:50:50 PM   
Commander Cody


Posts: 843
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline
You'll get AMs out the wazoo in time. I'd go APD.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 18
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/17/2012 5:51:09 PM   
Gridley380


Posts: 245
Joined: 12/20/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ctangus

Thanks for all the responses. I've decided to convert at least 2 divisions of Clemsons to APDs & just converted the first two ships. I'll do the upgrades over time so I don't have them all off line at once.

I have @ 4 divisions of Clemsons still afloat (17 DDs to be precise). I'm still considering converting 1-2 divisions to DMS for future offensive ops. I don't see a lot of DMS in the reinforcement queue but I do see a ton of minesweepers. How is later war allied minesweeping capability in AE? I remember that in WITP mines/CD guns could be a lethal combination and DMS performed much better than minesweepers. At the very least they weren't sunk in droves.


I wouldn't waste those AM's either - a lot of them have excellent range and good ASW ratings = great convoy escorts!

(in reply to ctangus)
Post #: 19
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/29/2012 7:53:29 PM   
wneumann


Posts: 2512
Joined: 11/1/2005
From: just beyond the outskirts of Margaritaville
Status: offline
A word of caution for those not immediately converting Wickes or Clemson DD to another ship type (APD, DM, DMS, etc).

I'm starting 5/43 in my PBEM and did not convert any US Clemson or Wickes class DD from their DD configuration, my original plan was not converting any of these DD until such time as I determined exactly what I wanted to convert them to. In the meantime, I had been applying ship upgrades for these two classes as they became available. At this point in the game (5/43), I was beginning to consider plans for converting these DD to either APD or DMS.

While looking at displays for individual Clemson/Wickes DD’s, I noticed options for converting these ships to other configurations (APD, DM, DMS) had disappeared from the Ship Displays. I did some research using archived save files from previous game turns to determine when the conversion options disappeared and perhaps why they did.

I found type conversion options to APD, DM, DMS on Clemson/Wickes DD were no longer available after these ships completed upgrade to “LR Class” in 1942 – the “LR” upgrade for Clemson occurring in 4/42, “LR” upgrade for Wickes in 5/42. What appeared to happen is the “LR” ship upgrade for these two DD classes removes type conversions to APD, DM and DMS from the upgrade paths – once an individual Clemson or Wickes class DD passes the 1942 “LR” upgrade, you have basically committed this ship for use as a DD or DE.

The moral of the story… You can leave Clemson and Wickes class DD’s unconverted but make sure ship upgrade on individual ships is turned off (Upgrade = "No") if you're intending to convert these at any later time from DD to an APD, DM or DMS. Once these DD go through a ship upgrade after 2/42... Oops! It appears Clemson and Wickes DD can go through the 2/42 upgrade without losing the ability to convert to APD, DM, DMS, etc – after that, all bets are off.


< Message edited by wneumann -- 12/29/2012 7:56:03 PM >

(in reply to Gridley380)
Post #: 20
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/31/2012 5:48:15 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 7031
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wneumann

A word of caution for those not immediately converting Wickes or Clemson DD to another ship type (APD, DM, DMS, etc).

I'm starting 5/43 in my PBEM and did not convert any US Clemson or Wickes class DD from their DD configuration, my original plan was not converting any of these DD until such time as I determined exactly what I wanted to convert them to. In the meantime, I had been applying ship upgrades for these two classes as they became available. At this point in the game (5/43), I was beginning to consider plans for converting these DD to either APD or DMS.

While looking at displays for individual Clemson/Wickes DD’s, I noticed options for converting these ships to other configurations (APD, DM, DMS) had disappeared from the Ship Displays. I did some research using archived save files from previous game turns to determine when the conversion options disappeared and perhaps why they did.

I found type conversion options to APD, DM, DMS on Clemson/Wickes DD were no longer available after these ships completed upgrade to “LR Class” in 1942 – the “LR” upgrade for Clemson occurring in 4/42, “LR” upgrade for Wickes in 5/42. What appeared to happen is the “LR” ship upgrade for these two DD classes removes type conversions to APD, DM and DMS from the upgrade paths – once an individual Clemson or Wickes class DD passes the 1942 “LR” upgrade, you have basically committed this ship for use as a DD or DE.

The moral of the story… You can leave Clemson and Wickes class DD’s unconverted but make sure ship upgrade on individual ships is turned off (Upgrade = "No") if you're intending to convert these at any later time from DD to an APD, DM or DMS. Once these DD go through a ship upgrade after 2/42... Oops! It appears Clemson and Wickes DD can go through the 2/42 upgrade without losing the ability to convert to APD, DM, DMS, etc – after that, all bets are off.



Good point. The good news is that by the end of the year. You will have little need for APDs and it won't matter.

The Allies need APDs the most in 1942 and early 1943. After that, I found that I did not use them so much. You get a flood of them in 1944 but by then your overwhelming air and sea power allows for the use of better and bigger ships.


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to wneumann)
Post #: 21
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/31/2012 6:10:30 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 5953
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/now in Israel
Status: offline
APDs help in Amphibious TF, since not only they unload fast, but are well armed and suppress defences a bit.

_____________________________

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


(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 22
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 12/31/2012 10:29:55 PM   
JeffK


Posts: 5108
Joined: 1/26/2005
From: Back in the Office, Can I get my tin hut back!
Status: offline
I have split mine about 50/50 APD /DE.

Especially early on you need some assault shipping as well as LR convoy escorts.

By late 43 attrition has bitten into both types so the late war arrivals serve to rebulid the force rather than be an addition.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 23
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 1/1/2013 12:02:45 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 8299
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
Something similar happens with the three (?) subs which can convert to SST. If you do you lose their ability to carry the really good mines in 1943.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to wneumann)
Post #: 24
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 1/1/2013 12:08:24 AM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 5953
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/now in Israel
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Something similar happens with the three (?) subs which can convert to SST. If you do you lose their ability to carry the really good mines in 1943.


Guess how many times that has happened to me..


_____________________________

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


(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 25
RE: USN 4 stacker conversions - 1/1/2013 6:01:38 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 7031
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Yes, I find the SST to be of little use.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 26
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> USN 4 stacker conversions Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.123