Port size load/unload restrictions

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
HansBolter
Posts: 7457
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

Port size load/unload restrictions

Post by HansBolter »

Is there a data base available to players that details what devices can and cannot be unloaded at various size ports?

Rule sections 9.3.3 Port Size and 9.3.3.2 Cargo and Fuel Handling don't seem to provide the data I am looking for.

The reason I ask is that repeated attempts to reinforce Midway and Wake with additional Marine Defense Battalions always creates a situation wherein the battalions' 5" coastal defence guns cannot be unloaded at the size 1 ports. This, of course, begs the question: How on earth did the Marine defence battalions already occupting those atolls get thier 5" coastal defense guns unloaded?

It would really be great to know what I should not send to various size ports. Can some one pointg me in the direction of that info?
Hans

xj900uk
Posts: 1345
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 1:26 pm

RE: Port size load/unload restrictions

Post by xj900uk »

Have you tried loading/unloading them amphibiously?  You might suffer a few losses overboard & in the surf,  but this type of transport is a lot more flexible re your point of destination
Rainer79
Posts: 603
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 7:49 am
Location: Austria

RE: Port size load/unload restrictions

Post by Rainer79 »

I had no trouble deploying my Marine Defense Battalions using amphib TFs. I did try to make sure though that there is at least one true AK available per TF.
Lifer
Posts: 390
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2003 3:37 am
Location: East Coast, USA

RE: Port size load/unload restrictions

Post by Lifer »

I've read on these forums that you should use Amphib TFs when unloading at ports 3 and below.  The load cost of the unit's equipment exceeds the capability of the port.  Naval support should reduce the cost of unloading I think.

Greg
Man does not enter battle to fight, but for victory. He does everything that he can to avoid the first and obtain the second.
Ardant du Picq
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7457
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: Port size load/unload restrictions

Post by HansBolter »

Thanks to all for the replies.

I hadn't thought, or read, to use amphibous TFs for this purpose. It certainly makes sense.

I probably wouldn't want to put naval support LCUs into a level 1 port at an atoll, even though they would help with the task under discussion.
Hans

User avatar
Blackhorse
Posts: 1415
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Eastern US

RE: Port size load/unload restrictions

Post by Blackhorse »


. . . and, for the Wake example, using amphibious TFs is historically accurate, too.

The US was still dredging a channel through Wake's reef into the lagoon when the war began. Before the war, the garrison and civilian contractors were brought in on transports that (weather permitting) anchored in the surf. Each transport averaged three days to unload its men and cargo via lighters to the shore.
WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”