Cruisers attack @ 4 when paired with an undamaged Battleship.
What do you think?
Yes!
Far too good.
Far too good.
Really? Nobody in our groups ever buys cruisers, and if you consider the fact that first hits are always applied to damaging battleships… Cruisers would get just 1 combat round @4, 2 at the most.
This is the boost they need to be more functional, and reasonable to purchase.
Of course, this wouldn’t boost bombards to 4, just combat.
The game starts with more cruisers on the board than battleships so I could see this promoting more battleships to pair up with the cruisers already afloat (especially USA).
What would happen if you let a cruiser soak a non-repairable hit if paired with a destroyer (i.e. you tip the cruiser the first time it is hit, the second hit sinks it, and a naval base can’t repair it). Maybe more defensive than destroyer/2subs but about the same value overall?
Trust me, I have racked my brain trying to think what would make players buy more Cruisers. When a buddy of mine told me the idea this morning at work… a light went off in my head and I thought “What An Awesome Idea”.
I say if America gets lead into buying more battleships to make their cruisers attack at 4, than power to them. However, when both fleets are sunk and it’s time to rebuild, every time a Battleship goes in the water… I bet a cruiser is the next thing to get purchased.
One thing for sure, it will make the decision of removing casualies even more difficult.
@Young:
One thing for sure, it will make the decision of removing casualies even more difficult.
I think this is the best part of your idea. Instead of always going for that first hit on the battleship now you have to weigh your options. I can see a player buying more destroyers to absorb the hits so your combo battleship/cruiser can last longer with the higher dice roll.
Good idea.
I had a tech for Cruisers a while back
Flack Batteries: “Cruisers that roll 1 during combat may be assign that hit to enemy an aircraft if possible”
Well we know where that came from, or the idea of them moving 3 spaces with or without a NB ( in case somebody brings this idea up).
Just sayin…
Take it to the patent office IL.
@Imperious:
I didn’t say i had these idea first, i just made them public first.
:roll:
@Imperious:
I just don’t want somebody saying i took these ideas, when i had them first. I care about that.
@Imperious:
Funny how these rules are so much like my game. I am posting this only for prosperity so nobody can say who had the idea first.
@Imperious:
I am only protecting the fact that or when somebody says in our game: “did you get this idea from Larry?” i want to be sure who had this idea first so its not me looking like I just got this from Larry. Our game is original.
Protip: When you can’t keep track of what you say, it’s probably a good idea to say a lot less.
LOL, no kidding Oz. I wonder how far he’ll cause the line-up to stack.
In my opinion (and within our group) players prefer purchasing cruisers vs. battleships. We prefer to pay the few extra IPCs to have 2 cruisers as opposed to a single battleship. I like the statistical odds of 2 rolls each turn at a 50% vs. 1 roll at 66.6%. Plus a damaged battleship drops your odds below 50%. It also allows to spread the cost over turns rather than one large chunk of cash all at once. This allows me to do more with my money each turn. This tactic alows you to divide your forces more effectively too. Don’t get me wrong I love battleships, but can never bring myself to purchasing them. I’m sure not everyone shares my view on this, but that’s my two cents. :-)
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=11992.msg322170#msg322170
(reference to cruisers getting AA shot at 1)
Even back in 2008.
2007 Cruisers moving 3 with 1 AA shot
I think giving Cruisers AA capabilities is a pretty good idea. Treat each cruiser like a sea-going AA gun: each defending cruiser gets up to 3 shots at attacking aircraft (or 1 per plane if less than 3) before combat starts. This way each ship has it’s own special abilities. Subs have surprise strike, Destroyers have ASW capabilities, Cruisers have AA capabilities, Battleships take 2 hits and Carriers carry planes.
We house ruled this but we keep forgetting to use it in games. I bet it will make Germany’s sinking of the Royal Navy a little different round 1. Also, the British attack of Taranto (SZ 97) might not go so well.
Not sure how I feel about this, but I do like it better then giving cruisers +1 when paired with Battleships.
I am just not convinced every unit needs a special power.
Like knp pointed out, AA cruisers would badly mess up balance of the game in the first round because there are some important potential airstrikes on sea zones with cruisers in them at setup (z110, z111, z93, z97, pearl harbor?).
YGs cruisers that attack @4 with a battleship obviously has no impact on these except maybe a J1 pearl harbour which is pretty uncommon.
If you allow cruisers to take an extra hit when paired with a destroyer, z111 would be a little tougher so maybe UK scrambles or perhaps Germany diverts 1 more attacker to z111 instead of z110. Germany less likely to airstrike z93. No impact at all on z97 Taranto raid. So a small edge toward the allies in the opening round.
So what are the cons of the paring rule?
You have to buy battleships to get the bonus.
