Difference in missions: Transport and Amphibious?

[Judykator]

What is the difference in the transport of troops in missions: Transport and Amphibious?

[DuckofTindalos]

One is intended to land at a friendly base, the other to land at an enemy base.

[Judykator]

Ask different. Why not pay to use mission Amphibious between a friendly bases?

[DuckofTindalos]

Why would you do that? It's not necessary.

[Judykator]

ORIGINAL: Terminus
Why would you do that?

Transport Mission - requires Strategic Operations Mode
Amphibious Mission - requires Combat Operations Mode

Change from Combat Operations Mode to Strategic Operations Mode = 2-3 days. Saving time.

[51st Highland Div]

Is not amphibious mode not better for unloading on very small port sizes ? I must admit this is one area where im getting confused and having to send TF's back to the original port cause they aint in the right condition for unloading...

[SireChaos]

ORIGINAL: Judykator

ORIGINAL: Terminus
Why would you do that?

Transport Mission - requires Strategic Operations Mode
Amphibious Mission - requires Combat Operations Mode

Change from Combat Operations Mode to Strategic Operations Mode = 2-3 days. Saving time.

I think, but I´m not sure, that Amphibious does not make use of port facilities for unloading, or at least not as good a use.

Also, according to the manual, with Amphibious, land units are not loaded nearly as efficiently as with Transport.

[eastwindrain]

The Waverly take's forever to load/unload here at Ayr harbour.

[51st Highland Div]

Lol thats just because its full of "tourists" from Glasgow.....not always of the sober kind [:D] Ah well thats why playing the AI is good..you can practice and experiment without getting punished (too much) from your opponent as in PBEM...

[Feltan]

Whether intended or not, I find myself using amphibious transport almost exclusively. The exception would be when I am moving a large unit, say a division, between two major ports. The converstion to strategic mode, and the resultant loss of options (for example, changing destination while enroute to a smaller port) makes the transport option frequently less than desirable.

Regards,
Feltan

[John Lansford]

You can't put a tanker in an amphibious TF, though, and IIRC certain cargo ships don't get accepted either.  But that's what I do too; if I'm sending a LCU to a small port, I use an amphib TF instead of a transport/cargo one.  It's less efficient in hauling supplies (combat loading), but you don't lose the time lag converting the LCU to strategic move mode and you don't have to worry about forgetting to change it back when it lands.
 
 

[Q-Ball]

ORIGINAL: Feltan

Whether intended or not, I find myself using amphibious transport almost exclusively. The exception would be when I am moving a large unit, say a division, between two major ports. The converstion to strategic mode, and the resultant loss of options (for example, changing destination while enroute to a smaller port) makes the transport option frequently less than desirable.

Regards,
Feltan

I agree, it seems easier to use Amphibious, with a quicker unload, even though it uses more hull space. Am I missing something?

[Wirraway_Ace]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

One is intended to land at a friendly base, the other to land at an enemy base.

While I agree with Terminus...

If you have APs and AKs (vs xAPs and xAKs) and are heading to a small port, Amphib may work better ( the much smaller amphib capability of the civilian versions should be the deal breaker except as below)
If you are operating during the Japanese Ambib bonus period and heading to a small port, amphib may work better

[mjk428]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

ORIGINAL: Feltan

Whether intended or not, I find myself using amphibious transport almost exclusively. The exception would be when I am moving a large unit, say a division, between two major ports. The converstion to strategic mode, and the resultant loss of options (for example, changing destination while enroute to a smaller port) makes the transport option frequently less than desirable.

Regards,
Feltan

I agree, it seems easier to use Amphibious, with a quicker unload, even though it uses more hull space. Am I missing something?

According to the manual units are more subject to damage in Amphibious mode.

I figure it comes down to this: Does the port have the docking facilities for unloading troops? If it's too small for that then I use Amphib.

I can understand, albeit with extreme prejudice, why the enemy won't let me use the docking facilities when I invade his ports.

[John Lansford]

I've also discovered that you can switch from Transport to Amphibious mode after the TF has been formed and LCU's loaded on board.  I found this out when a TF from Australia carrying some LCU's and supplies tried to dock in Suva and I realized it was too big.  On a whim I tried to switch it to Amphibious and it let me do it.
 
I've also used "create a new TF" and picked Amphibious, then moved ships from a Transport TF into it without any trouble.  Some ships didn't show up to be moved, but enough did that it was helpful to get troops/supplies unloaded faster.

[Wirraway_Ace]

Interesting. From some of the pre-release threads, I understood that you were specifically not supposed to be able to switch them once formed.

[PeteG662]

I understood the same thing.....hmm.....I will have to try tonight and see what happens. 

[mjk428]

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace

Interesting. From some of the pre-release threads, I understood that you were specifically not supposed to be able to switch them once formed.

I've switched them on the fly as well. Comes in handy when a Transport TF refuses to unload that last damaged recon vehicle even though it previously unloaded a dozen of them.

[Wirraway_Ace]

ORIGINAL: mjk428

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace

Interesting. From some of the pre-release threads, I understood that you were specifically not supposed to be able to switch them once formed.

I've switched them on the fly as well. Comes in handy when a Transport TF refuses to unload that last damaged recon vehicle even though it previously unloaded a dozen of them.

I would recommend reporting it as a bug. It doesn't pass the internal logic test. The load efficiency and opmode is different between the TF types. Which scenario were you playing?

[John Lansford]

I'm in the campaign game, scenario #1.  Once I realized it was possible I've refrained from changing the TF's since the loading is supposed to be different for the two modes, but it is possible.