Page 1 of 1

Support vs Motorized Support

Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2011 12:42 pm
by dbmsts
1. Are normal support squads enough to support artillery guns (not self-propelled)?

2. Is motorized support necessary for AFVs?

RE: Support vs Motorized Support

Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2011 1:19 pm
by Bradley7735
The only difference between normal support and motorized support is the load cost. They are the same. Artillery can have normal support and act exactly as if they had mot support. Armored units can have normal support and still move their faster speed.

Mot support and normal support are used to differentiate between units that contain mostly equipment and units that are mostly men. You need different shipping to move men vs machines.


RE: Support vs Motorized Support

Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2011 4:34 pm
by Knavey
I have also noticed my motorized support gets kicked in the nutz much harder during combat than my normal support squads.

RE: Support vs Motorized Support

Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2011 8:06 pm
by Don Bowen
ORIGINAL: Knavey

I have also noticed my motorized support gets kicked in the nutz much harder during combat than my normal support squads.


The lug nuts?

RE: Support vs Motorized Support

Posted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:42 am
by crsutton
ORIGINAL: Knavey

I have also noticed my motorized support gets kicked in the nutz much harder during combat than my normal support squads.


Actually it is a historical fact....IRL Allied armored units spearheaded with their trucks. It turns out that the soft trucks could absorb a lot of penetrating hits from AP rounds thus protecting the following tanks. It was "pure hell" for the truck drivers but the tankers preferred it that way..[;)]

It is one of the quirks of the game that motorized support gets beat to heck in combat. But as the Allied you get so many that it does not matter. Now sure how if affects the Japanese player because I suppose motorized support eats up production points.

RE: Support vs Motorized Support

Posted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 9:08 am
by d0mbo
The Japanese do not have all that much motorized support squads, and as it has been said above: it only matters for loading/unloading purposes.

I much prefer the non motorized support as they can be transported easily to and from small ports in amphibious mode.

I just had too many times where it took extra DAYS to unload a handful of mot. support squads, if they unload at all ;)

This mechanic thusly favors the Japanese.


RE: Support vs Motorized Support

Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:29 am
by Knavey
Case in point for me where it is a problem.

Opponent has Koumac north of Noumea. He failed to take Noumea earlier and I have pretty much cut off the 20+ units there. I have 5 divisions attacking along with plenty of support and HQ units. Also brought along half a dozen TD units. Except during the attacks their motorized support got HAMMERED. Every TD unit had 90% of its support disabled in one attack. Suddenly, all my units that had plenty of support from the extra HQs I brought along, now were at a deficit. So...had to pull back the TD units to get everything in the green again for the next attack.

Its just strange that those support units take so much of the brunt of the attack.

[&:]

RE: Support vs Motorized Support

Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:30 am
by Knavey
ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: Knavey

I have also noticed my motorized support gets kicked in the nutz much harder during combat than my normal support squads.


The lug nuts?

[:D]

RE: Support vs Motorized Support

Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 1:22 am
by PaxMondo
ORIGINAL: crsutton

ORIGINAL: Knavey

I have also noticed my motorized support gets kicked in the nutz much harder during combat than my normal support squads.


Actually it is a historical fact....IRL Allied armored units spearheaded with their trucks. It turns out that the soft trucks could absorb a lot of penetrating hits from AP rounds thus protecting the following tanks. It was "pure hell" for the truck drivers but the tankers preferred it that way..[;)]

It is one of the quirks of the game that motorized support gets beat to heck in combat. But as the Allied you get so many that it does not matter. Now sure how if affects the Japanese player because I suppose motorized support eats up production points.
recent beta patch, p5 I think, fixed this. support troops are now much less likely to be targeted IF there are any combat troops present. Huge change in combat results ... much more what you would expect.

RE: Support vs Motorized Support

Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 2:59 am
by jmalter
well i don't think it's a good idea to use a TD LCU in attack mode, anyway. their TO/E wasn't purposed for assault.

reading a memoir of an (ETO) ordnance officer in the 3rd ArmDiv, i gathered that ordnance/maintenance units, tasked w/ vehicle recovery/repair, ran around w/ minimal security - easy meat for Japanese infiltration tactics.

i also assume that AE LCU combat results aren't limited to 'the battle' alone, but include pre/post-battle results such as initial bombardment & final clean-up. so if your attack doesn't force all enemy LCU to retreat from the hex, your 'post-combat' support forces will be vulnerable to attrition.