[House Rules] The Cruiser

[Mursilis]

@taamvan

If Japan does a J1 attack it can be very hard to come back from. Take borneo, Philippines, knock out the american fleet at hawaii, kill the UK BB, kill the Anzac destroyer/transport, take kwangtung and FIC. You are 1 or 2 turns from claiming the money islands and everyone can just stare at you. Couple this with doing a sealion and where does america go?

[Argothair]

@Mursilis Britain can manage a sea lion solo if you plan ahead. If Japan attacks J1, and Germany’s opening is compatible with sea lion, Britain builds 8 inf in London, 1 mech in south Africa. Uk2 can build at least another 7 inf in London even against a bombing run, and then if Germany does sea lion, Germany will choke on all those inf – even if Germany takes London, it’s a pyrrhic victory and Russia will eat poland and Romania and never fall. Meanwhile us goes 80% - 100% Pacific theater and eventually catches up to japan.

[Mursilis]

@Argothair

So you feel that J1 is a bad move for Japan? Germany can just veer off and hit leningrad if they wanted. They could move down towards Gibraltar and threaten a direct attack on the US.

How do you feel about making the destroyer attack on a 1 and is buffed up to a 2 when paired with a cruiser?

[Argothair]

@Mursilis No, no, sorry if that’s the impression I left. J1 is fine, but Sea Lion only works as a feint, a surprise, or a punishment for sloppy defense. If Britain puts a reasonable amount of defense into London on UK1, then buying 8 transports on G2 is a losing move.

J1 is fine, though; it’s part of a lot of winning openings.

[barnee]

@Mursilis said in [House Rules] The Cruiser:

I agree that in OOB there are not enough island chains. However in the BM3 version are are some very important 3 ipc bonus island chains that you can claim. Some even 5 if you own all 3 islands. So having the cruiser able to carry 1 infantry would make the pacific into a more interesting and active combat zone.

I think I’m going to try this on my next game actually. I am currently running 11 IPC cruisers. Still not buying them. Just no incentive.

Interesting idea on the DD CA pairing. Maybe have a CA boost 2 DDs ? My first thought is 1 doesn’t seem enough.

yea I tried dropping the price before and came to the same conclusion. I tried 10 bucks too but then I didn’t buy hardly any DDs.

As I’m sure you’re aware, BM allows you to transport the Marine unit on CAs. Marines cost more than infantry and I initially believed them too expensive, but a pile of BM games have been played by some of the most experienced players and it seems to work for them.

Personally I don’t like having BBs and CAs transport dudes. It just doesn’t feel right to me, but it does make for another way to play the game.

[Mursilis]

@barnee

That’s a good idea. 2 DD for 1 CA.

[barnee]

@Mursilis said in [House Rules] The Cruiser:

@barnee

That’s a good idea. 2 DD for 1 CA.

heh heh well…idk but it sounds like fun to try. Guess I need to add another triplea option : )

[Argothair]

@Mursilis said in [House Rules] The Cruiser:

How do you feel about making the destroyer attack on a 1 and is buffed up to a 2 when paired with a cruiser?

I’m not a fan because I think DDs are already too weak relative to subs – you pay an extra 2 IPCs for the DD, but it’s not obvious that 1 DD is stronger than 1 SS. Sure the DDs can defend against airstrikes and they have one extra point of defense, but the sub can hide from airstrikes and does convoy damage.

Still, I see what you’re getting at, and it’s a clever idea.

[barnee]

@Argothair yea I was thinking that too. Maybe drop them to 7 bucks ? It’s hard to say but would help the Cruiser. : )

[aequitas-et-veritas]

I think the CR is fine as it is.
There are enough pieces at T1 to start with. Just bc it has a cost value doesn’t mean you have to buy alot or one at all, during your whole game.
BM3 managed to get more juice out of a CR without changing too much on a CR attributes.
You can Transport a Marine if you want to.

What makes that game great is YOU playing it with your style and the benefit to HR it in your groupe if you want to.

The CR might be the “Hotels” for Monopoly.
They are in the box but you don’t have to bring 'em into Play if you want to win 😉.

The CR is likely made as some sort of a middle unit as a A3 D3 but has no special effect (s).

Shorebomb is nice but this happens every once in a While…

My 2 Cents

[barnee]

@aequitas-et-veritas said in [House Rules] The Cruiser:

The CR might be the “Hotels” for Monopoly.
They are in the box but you don’t have to bring 'em into Play if you want to win 😉.

Heh heh yea houses are the way to go. Sis always kicked our ass : )

[General 6 Stars]

For whats its worth if you want to try this. Didn’t know subs cost only 6. That is to low as Arg has stated in previous post.
Batt. C20 A4 D4 AD 1.26
Crus C12 A4 D3 AA@1 at Plane only first round only. A.67 D.50
Dest C8 A2 D2 AD .75
Sub C8 A2 D1 A.75 D.38

Still not right. Destroyer still stronger. Most will disagree. For the cost it would only take 2 Destroyers to kill a Battleship and 1 Destroyer to kill a Cruiser. Sub should always have more punch on A. Comes down to Cruiser Destroyer costs. Thats where you need to lower cost for Battleships and Cruisers to be in line with the Destroyers Cost and Punch. Most will disagree with my ideas but I base every thing on cost and Punch so
pieces are fair to each other as far as cost but IMO.

Well I’m going to bow out of this discussion now because its going in the direction most of these G40 discussion go. Just a ball bouncing around in a 4 corner room and not stopping for play testing. LOL It was another good topic to talk about. Thanks.

[Mursilis]

Well the other option that was rattling around in my head was slightly adjusting costs for not only the cruiser but the BB. The cruiser would drop to 10 IPC’s and the BB would drop to 18 IPC’s. Every other attribute would stay the same. The destroyer is the infantry of the sea so the cruiser would be the fighter of the sea. Except fighters would still defend on 4s and can be used anywhere. And 1 cruiser and 1 destroyer would still be equal in price to a BB. The BB and cruiser would get a little more play due to cost reduction but would still not remove the value of the carrier and fighters.

And SS GEN I’m coming up with these ideas because I’m already playtesting the 11 IPC cruiser. And since it takes a while to play one game I want to start with the best suggestion.

I like 10 cruiser 18 BB.
Also cruiser normal price and can carry 1 infantry.
Last would be the destroyer at 1 A 2 D and 2 can pair up with a cruiser. Maybe drop destroyer price to 7 and cruiser to 11.

But the first two are simple. Usually keeping things simple is the best solution to a problem.

After much consideration I think these three are probably the most realistic and easiest fixes. So the question is which one do you guys like best? I’m going to play test whichever one you guys think would best balance out the cruiser in my next game.

And thanks again for all your time and deliberation guys!

[taamvan]

The balance of sea combat isn’t the problem with the game.

[General 6 Stars]

I know that. Have said that for years now and in above posts. Fix the other issues first. Naval values just disregard.
W. E.

[Mursilis]

@taamvan

I’m thinking BM3 in combination with your modification of Caucasus and stalingrad 5 ipcs to 3, starting tank in urals and fighter in moscow and leningrad worth 5 still might completely fix game balance. I’m also considering if having cruisers able to transport 1 infantry will change japan power in pacific because everyone can take those money islands that much faster slowing down japan.

[General 6 Stars]

Yo Barney I’m still here today anyway.
I’m going to try this in are next game. This will be the Cruiser being represented by the Light and Heavy Cruiser being a combo ship. So you don’t need to add another piece to game as the Heavy Cruiser. L Cruisers really only had Anti AA guns for planes and Shore bombardments.
Cruiser D12 die system
A3 D3 ? AD 25% AD .44 Have to see yet in play test.
A4 D4 AD 33% AD .59 at a plane or ship for every round of combat.
M3
C9
SHS @3

[taamvan]

@Mursilis I think you’re changing a bunch of stuff at once and that makes it difficult to judge the effect of any given change. I created my mod after having played global about 120 times (the other 70 or so games are 42.2, AAZ in my grand count) We used to have a bunch more changes we were trying to implement. However most of those changes were kind of “neither here nor there” as far as making the game better, more balanced or more fun, so in the third iteration of that effort, reduced the changes to just what I think is need to balance my games.

Lots of people play with thick layers of modification for their home group starting very early and accumulating over time. After this process, the game might be better (see Siredblood’s Mods) but also going to be a totally different game than the base game as far as decisions go because so many small modifications taken together amount to a massive change in moves, strategy, buys, balance etc.

[Mursilis]

@taamvan

I’m not changing a bunch of at once I’m coming up with as many ideas that I like at once and testing them one at a time. I just want to do the best ones first. For example my next game I’m going to test the 12 IPC cruiser with the ability to carry 1 infantry but that ability won’t take effect until the second round of the game. This way it won’t change the initial set up drastically but can still play a pivotal roll in the game.

I also love how the BM mod makes minor island strands an important national objective to claim and fight over. However I find the vichy france rules to be unnecessary as it hurts the allies and the axis at the same time for no real reason and kills all point of having france in the game.

Anyway I just like to have as many options on the table for me to ponder over.

[General 6 Stars]

I’ve been using the 3 island group NO now for a year. So I don’t know if BM designer got that idea from me? Probably not. It does make Pacific and Med way more interesting. My island groups mostly have at least 1 island in 2 different groups to grab more or to block more. I also make that 1 island worth 3 icps.
Midway 3 Carolinas 3 Solomon 3

Anyway why is there changes going on to this BM when it’s suppose to be balanced ?

If Moscow falls every time beef Russia.
Japan to strong slow them down.
I like to see some results with Russia Inf D+1 on first 2 turns Germany attacks Russia.
Or let Rusdia go first before Germany and Italy neutral on UK turn 1.
Give Russia an Inf at every factory per turn once at war and put in a LL.
Those would be the 3 main changes I would try
With slowing down Japan.

The Cruiser should not be able to tranport an Inf. There’s other changes you can make.