IDIDTHAT! Vol.1- Akagi AMC conversion

[CyrusSpitama]

Interesting Discussion Involving Decisions That Honestly Are Thought-provoking.

Simple idea of mine. I have many questions about decisions I make. I try to read the many AARs and Q&A that occur here, but minor details always make me wonder. So with smart bomb like precision, I am going to post a series of questions about very specific decisions I have made, that make me wonder. Please keep answers as focused as possible and I hope to be making more of these if it receives good feedback.

Now, there is a number of AMC ships that can convert to AKs (notice, not xAKs) that I have been doing in the past. I am now reconsidering this decision.



Would you make the above conversion and why?


My answer used to be, YES. Can't get enough of these AKs! New answer is (based on forum feedback): Hold off doing this because of the multi-role ability of these AMCs.

Note: this question is about THIS specific conversion with these particular arms. I will do further AMC posting. Lack of knowledge of the weaponry is my biggest question here.

[jeffk3510]

I guess it depends on your situation and what you are planning on doing.

If you need more cargo lift, then yes, you should convert.

[CyrusSpitama]

Thanks for the rapid response Jeff. I was horribly maiming my convoy setup previously and hence was starved for cargo. Not so much anymore. The AA guns on that AK are all short ranged items, so its value as an AK seems rather lessened. Are there other things to consider with this decision?

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

I guess it depends on your situation and what you are planning on doing.

If you need more cargo lift, then yes, you should convert.

Agreed.

Though if you want cargo lift that can hold its own against DDs or even some CLs, then don't comvert. They are great force multipliers. [;)]

[Dili]

Small OT: Looking at the data, why the AMC has such a low quantity of main gun rounds? with all that space and their supposed missions that could be certainly several months one would expect much more.

[Puhis]

Don't convert. AMCs are military ships like AKs, they have the same unload bonus compared to xAKs. IMO AMCs are more useful. They are only lacking AA guns, but it doesn't matter much because AKs are lousy AA ships anyway.

[helldiver]

[quote]ORIGINAL: Puhis

Don't convert. AMCs are military ships like AKs, they have the same unload bonus compared to xAKs. IMO AMCs are more useful. They are only lacking AA guns, but it doesn't matter much because AKs are lousy AA ships anyway.

+1

In addition, early war and especially for me say, south of Truk, AMCs are useful in Fast Transport TFs to quickly deploy naval infantry and other light ground forces. Even though they are minor ships, their capacity and relative speed make them among the most flexible in the inventory. I would be hesitant to convert them.

Helldiver

[Chickenboy]

The Japanese player doesn't get enough AK, AKA, APA or other fast unloading types of ships. These things are much more useful IMO than another high VP, undergunned and vulnerable AMC. Convert.

[SuluSea]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

The Japanese player doesn't get enough AK, AKA, APA or other fast unloading types of ships. These things are much more useful IMO than another high VP, undergunned and vulnerable AMC. Convert.

I'm onboard with this point of view which is my feelings exactly.

[Puhis]

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

The Japanese player doesn't get enough AK, AKA, APA or other fast unloading types of ships. These things are much more useful IMO than another high VP, undergunned and vulnerable AMC. Convert.

I'm onboard with this point of view which is my feelings exactly.

AKs and AMCs have exactly same unloading speed...

[US87891]

ORIGINAL: Puhis

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
The Japanese player doesn't get enough AK, AKA, APA or other fast unloading types of ships. These things are much more useful IMO than another high VP, undergunned and vulnerable AMC. Convert.

I'm onboard with this point of view which is my feelings exactly.

AKs and AMCs have exactly same unloading speed...

Everyone is correct. The original idea was to force a choice between big guns and load advantages. Seems Puhis found a hole in the code. But hey, no worries mates, we will fix that in Babes by severely reducing the cargo capacities of AMCs [:D]

An AMC did not have the fixtures or the integral boats, or anything, that would allow them to function as (no x)AKs. And barely enough to function as a wimpy (x)AK. Thanks Puhis for bringing this out.

Matt

[CyrusSpitama]

Thanks all for the wonderful input. Things are now clear as mud for this decision [8D] Bottom line, I wanted to get a discussion with a very narrow focus on certain decisions we all make during the course of the war. This has certainly driven me to continue this Q&A series.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Puhis

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

The Japanese player doesn't get enough AK, AKA, APA or other fast unloading types of ships. These things are much more useful IMO than another high VP, undergunned and vulnerable AMC. Convert.

I'm onboard with this point of view which is my feelings exactly.

AKs and AMCs have exactly same unloading speed...

I did not know this ... is this in the manual?

[CyrusSpitama]

I was wondering if tests have confirmed this as well. Not that I wish to doubt Puhis, but others have shown doubts as well.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Puhis

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

The Japanese player doesn't get enough AK, AKA, APA or other fast unloading types of ships. These things are much more useful IMO than another high VP, undergunned and vulnerable AMC. Convert.

I'm onboard with this point of view which is my feelings exactly.

AKs and AMCs have exactly same unloading speed...

Even if that was the case, and is working as designed, you're still talking fast unload for 3375 tons vs. 4808 tons. You're giving up 42% of your lift / load capacity for the extra (unnecessary) guns there.

Sure, AMCs have a place in the game-particularly early on. As Allied defensive capabilities spin up, however, they are rapidly outdated, IMO. Again, I say build the AK, forego the AMC conversion. YMMV.

[CV 2]

Putting them with a convoy is a waste.

The only "real" function of leaving them as Q ships is to do long range raiding with them. Then you have to decide what kind of player you are.

1) you play for the fun of it and dont care who wins.

2) you actually want to "win the game", in which case points are everything and you have to weigh the loss points vs the damage they will cause in loss points, keeping in mind that Japan needs to get 3+ times more points out of every point they lose to make it worthwhile.

I am a player type 2. As such, they are useless to me as raiders so I personally convert them. This is also the reason I never use mini-subs.

[CyrusSpitama]

Once again I say, clear as mud Previously, I converted all AMCs that could into AKs. With this current game, I have held off doing so, but it is also quite early in the war. My change occurred when I saw convoy management was better done and I had more transport ship options, freeing these AMCs up for amphib duty. I have yet to even attempt such a tactic as raiding except when it was me catching the computer shipping things on the fringes of the front. So, the raiding thing doesn't really effect my tactics.

My primary concern and was hinted at when I started this post, is whether those weak AA guns were worth the conversion or if the other (un)known factors meant to rush and/or delay the conversion. Once again, I am thankful for all the responses and I hope this topic has aided others with similar decisions. I am preparing my next thread with a very similar ship, but one that should be an easier topic of debate. [&o]

[CV 2]

ORIGINAL: CyrusSpitama

Once again I say, clear as mud Previously, I converted all AMCs that could into AKs. With this current game, I have held off doing so, but it is also quite early in the war. My change occurred when I saw convoy management was better done and I had more transport ship options, freeing these AMCs up for amphib duty. I have yet to even attempt such a tactic as raiding except when it was me catching the computer shipping things on the fringes of the front. So, the raiding thing doesn't really effect my tactics.

My primary concern and was hinted at when I started this post, is whether those weak AA guns were worth the conversion or if the other (un)known factors meant to rush and/or delay the conversion. Once again, I am thankful for all the responses and I hope this topic has aided others with similar decisions. I am preparing my next thread with a very similar ship, but one that should be an easier topic of debate. [&o]

Well frankly, that IS one thing they are good for, and thats putting into amphib TFs to help suppress return fire. But I make so few opposed landings that when I do, I have BB support and dont need them for that. They wont take a lot of damage, so landing at even like Darwin (where there is 6" guns) is out of the question for them.

Like I said, personally, I convert them.