Thanks for telling me. I’ll try it sometime.
Broken cruisers let's fix it
-
thank you for sharing the links that gave me a plethora of ideas :-D
-
thank you for sharing the links that gave me a plethora of ideas
My pleasure. Don’t be surprised if you find that many of these proposals take vastly different positions on the issue. It’s probably fair to say that cruisers have been involved in more battles in the house rules section of the forum than has ever been the case on the actual A&A game board.
-
Put a special forces unit on it and go kick some butts. :lol:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkbTDATv1bI -
How about having both Heavy ( CA), light (CL) Cruisers. CL could be the default unit, Heavy with some additional cost.
You can even have pocket battleships for Germany, or Fast Battleships for Japan and USA. ALL these types indicated by tokens placed underneath or actual units HBG units.
-
@Imperious:
How about having both Heavy ( CA), light (CL) Cruisers. CL could be the default unit, Heavy with some additional cost.
You can even have pocket battleships for Germany, or Fast Battleships for Japan and USA. ALL these types indicated by tokens placed underneath or actual units HBG units.
Heavy Cruiser A3 D3 Shore Bombard @3 is really fine around 15 or 16 IPCs with 2 hits like Battleship.
But default Cruiser unit, for a Light Cruiser, needs something.
What can this be?
A lot of threads contains many different inputs to choose amongst.I can say that Fast Battleship or Light Cruiser seems to imply by their name a kind of 3 SZs Move unit.
Pocket Battleships, as far as I can remember this topic, have a name which imply similarities with BB performance, but they have lighter guns and armor but speed and range.
Maybe A4 D4 M3, 1 hit for 14 IPCs can be a good compromise between unit performance and the name which call for high combat values.Still, what can make a 12 IPCs Cruiser appealing?
-
Iv been thinking of this for a day or so now what about for the cruiser we drop the price to 9 ipc’s but we add a variable to it you can on that turn or any turn the cruuser is in a naval base zone you can spend 2 ipc’s to get an aa capability that acts like aaa only for a cruiser
Let me know about this if this is good or not iv been thinking about the cruiser issue for a while now :-D :-D
From my POV, reducing Cruiser cost to 9 IPCs requires a similar cost redux for 1 BB, to keep OOB combat balance vs DD+Cruiser.
Otherwise, noone will buy BB when able to buy two Cruisers and gets 2 IPCs left for the price of 1 BB.
AAA abilities for 2 IPCs is fine.
It can quite figures the warships conversion from guns against naval to more AA guns due to an increased awareness of Air Supremacy factor over warships in battle. -
Cruiser
Cost: 10
A:3, D:3, Shore bombard 3
AA defense ability (roll one die for each incoming plane) Roll one bonus die for each additional cruiser defending in zone.We’ve been doing it this way for a long time.
-
I’d accept Cruisers costing 10, but no AAA ability. At that cost however, it might then be better to buy 2 cruisers versus than 1 battleship. 2 dice @3 (cruisers) have a better chance of getting a hit than 1 dice @4 (battleship).
Or cruisers costing 12, but getting to throw a max 3 dice AAA ability whether defending or attacking to make it more useful.
This has been debated a lot in the forum with some agreement here and there. But when you play an actual table top game, no one seems willing to accept a change like this. Makes for a fun “what-if we changed this” discussion thread.
-
Pocket Battleships, as far as I can remember this topic, have a name which imply similarities with BB performance, but they have lighter guns and armor but speed and range.
Maybe A4 D4 M3, 1 hit for 14 IPCs can be a good compromise between unit performance and the name which call for high combat values.These would be cheaper cost than BB, but have same attack @4, but with poor defense 1 hit wonder @3.
Light Cruiser 2/3 unit ( better defense due to speed) 1 AA roll not sure cost
fast BB yes move 3, but poor armor so a 4/3 unit 2 hits ( trades speed for armor plating)
Heavy CA 3-3 OOB cruiser, but with 1 AA roll if planes involved first round.
CVLBB Hybrid Japanese carrier 3-4, 2 hits 1 plane (can only move 2 spaces from it)
-
I’d accept Cruisers costing 10, but no AAA ability. At that cost however, it might then be better to buy 2 cruisers versus than 1 battleship. 2 dice @3 (cruisers) have a better chance of getting a hit than 1 dice @4 (battleship).
Or cruisers costing 12, but getting to throw a max 3 dice AAA ability whether defending or attacking to make it more useful.
This has been debated a lot in the forum with some agreement here and there. But when you play an actual table top game, no one seems willing to accept a change like this. Makes for a fun “what-if we changed this” discussion thread.
I tried these two houseruled Cruisers.
A ten IPCs Cruiser is simpler and more affordable for UK, in 1942.2 games I played, to protect TPs instead of DDs.12 IPCs Cruiser with defensive AA guns same as AAA unit is less interesting by itself but was mostly bought to rounded up a fleet with Carriers and DDs to increase the overall defense.
-
12 bucks for A3 D3 M2 2 AA shots for Heavy CA seemed to work pretty good. Think I’ll try 9 bucks for a A3 D2 M2 for a light CA.
As Baron mentioned AA helps an already superior defense so maybe a 3 dollar hitter will help on offense.
-
Similar to one of the posters above, simpler is better for me. Add a small anti-air defense and drop the price to 10IPCs. Now they’re as valuable as any naval unit.
House rules:
Each cruiser rolls an anti-air shot before combat against attacking planes, hits at 1. Radar tech makes them hit at 2. Each cruiser has only one anti-air roll no matter how many planes are attacking. If one plane is attacking two cruisers, both cruisers roll for anti-air. If anti-air hits, attacker chooses which unit(s) to remove before combat begins. Anti-air rolls do not stop cruisers from defending that round.
-
giving them AAA (esp more than 1 dice, are you crazy?) and lowering the price isn’t balanced it needs to be one or the other.
There is too little differentiation between the units already, to need new versions of the transport, warship, etc., but that won’t stop me/us from proposing some new, insufficiently differentiated units.
-
I’ve been looking at keeping the cruiser at 12 IPCs, but it moves 3 spaces (4 from NB). The extra movement comes in handy. Also looking a 12 IPC 1 hit support carrier that holds 1 plane.
Been doing this along with capital ships take 2 turns to build (pay half down) so these 12 IPC ships are getting built. Thinking about reducing BB’s to 18 IPCs, and allowing a damaged carrier to hold 1 plane to help offset the 2 turn build.
-
Well if you allow BB and CV to take 2 turns to build and pay half each turn, it makes alot of sense to buy cruisers. The 3 move is great, but not sure to give it a 4 MOVE if from a naval port.
-
@WILD:
I’ve been looking at keeping the cruiser at 12 IPCs, but it moves 3 spaces (4 from NB). The extra movement comes in handy. Also looking a 12 IPC 1 hit support carrier that holds 1 plane.
Been doing this along with capital ships take 2 turns to build (pay half down) so these 12 IPC ships are getting built. Thinking about reducing BB’s to 18 IPCs, and allowing a damaged carrier to hold 1 plane to help offset the 2 turn build.
I play with small Casablanca Escort Carrier A0 D1 M2 1 hit , sculpt from HBG.
It costs 10 IPCs and I always give her an Anti-Sub Vessel capacity.
When playing with a 16 IPCs Fleet Carrier, 12 IPCs is too high.
However, if all Capital Ships take 2 turns to built, then at 12 IPCs and 1 turn built, it remains interesting.I see two ways to figure this Half Carrier.
Since it is the same cost as a Cruiser, then make it as Light Carrier (US built 9 of them on a Cruiser hull):
I’m thinking of something like A0 D1 M3-4 C12, 1 hit, carry 1 plane.
If Cruiser gets M3-4.These were limited-capability ships, whose principal virtue was near-term availability. Their limited size made for seakeeping difficulties in the many typhoons of the Pacific, and their small flight decks led to a relatively high aircraft accident rate. However, being based on a light cruiser, they were fast ships, much faster than the Casablanca-class escort carriers. The cruiser hull and engineering allowed them the speed necessary to operate with the main fleet carrier task groups.
Completed in the course of 1943, and coming into service with the first eight of the Essex-class carriers, the nine Independence-class ships made up a vital component of the Fast Carrier Task Force, which carried the Navy’s offensive through the central and western Pacific from November 1943 through August 1945. Eight of these carriers participated in the Battle of the Philippine Sea in June 1944, which effectively ended Japan’s carrier air power. The light carriers provided 40 percent of the Fast Carrier Task Force’s fighters and 36 percent of the torpedo bombers.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence-class_aircraft_carrier
Or make her an Escort Carrier, A0 D1 M2-3 C12, 1 hit, 1 plane, ASV same as DD.
-
@Imperious:
Well if you allow BB and CV to take 2 turns to build and pay half each turn, it makes alot of sense to buy cruisers. The 3 move is great, but not sure to give it a 4 MOVE if from a naval port.
I’m also experimenting with many more convoy zones (UK convoy routes) mostly in the Atlantic, around Africa, and the Med. I’m hoping that giving the cruiser 3 moves (4 from nb) allows the axis to use it as a convoy raider at times because it can out run (or keep pace) with the allies ships. Adding more convoy zones is also making German subs more viable as commerce raiders.
To Baron Munchhausen, yea escort or light carrier would probably be a better terms then support carrier. I’ve been using A0, D1, M2-3, C12-carries 1 plane. You bring up a good point about many of these light carriers were built on cruiser hulls though. Being this is a new ship for me at a relatively low cost (12 IPCs) I think I will keep it with the standard move of 2-3 for now (to warrant the cruiser at 12 IPC as the only fast ship), but will probably take a 3-4 move light carrier for a spin at some point.
PS: I’m really liking the 2 turn capital ship builds, and it is making ship building pretty interesting.
I’m also thinking about limiting 2 turn capital ship builds to major ICs (exception of USA who’s minors will be majors at some point). You can drop a capital ship at one of your minor ICs, but it takes an extra turn for delivery (3 turns to build). This is basically to stop the US or Japan from building capital ships in remote places. I would allow the UK Pac, Anz, Canada etc to build capital ships at their minor ICs, but theoretically they pay for the ship, it is built in England and delivered to the minor IC over 3 turns (same concept for the other powers building at their minor ICs). I realize that you could make a point that any ship built at a minor IC should be +1 turn because most ship yards would be at in the home territory where the major IC is (looking at that too lol).
-
@WILD:
@Imperious:
Well if you allow BB and CV to take 2 turns to build and pay half each turn, it makes alot of sense to buy cruisers. The 3 move is great, but not sure to give it a 4 MOVE if from a naval port.
I’m also experimenting with many more convoy zones (UK convoy routes) mostly in the Atlantic, around Africa, and the Med. I’m hoping that giving the cruiser 3 moves (4 from nb) allows the axis to use it as a convoy raider at times because it can out run (or keep pace) with the allies ships. Adding more convoy zones is also making German subs more viable as commerce raiders.
To Baron Munchhausen, yea escort or light carrier would probably be a better terms then support carrier. I’ve been using A0, D1, M2-3, C12-carries 1 plane. You bring up a good point about many of these light carriers were built on cruiser hulls though. Being this is a new ship for me at a relatively low cost (12 IPCs) I think I will keep it with the standard move of 2-3 for now (to warrant the cruiser at 12 IPC as the only fast ship), but will probably take a 3-4 move light carrier for a spin at some point.
PS: I’m really liking the 2 turn capital ship builds, and it is making ship building pretty interesting.
I’m also thinking about limiting 2 turn capital ship builds to major ICs (exception of USA who’s minors will be majors at some point). You can drop a capital ship at one of your minor ICs, but it takes an extra turn for delivery (3 turns to build). This is basically to stop the US or Japan from building capital ships in remote places. I would allow the UK Pac, Anz, Canada etc to build capital ships at their minor ICs, but theoretically they pay for the ship, it is built in England and delivered to the minor IC over 3 turns (same concept for the other powers building at their minor ICs). I realize that you could make a point that any ship built at a minor IC should be +1 turn because most ship yards would be at in the home territory where the major IC is (looking at that too lol).
Adding CVL to Cruiser, both at M3-4, makes a way to depict the historical US Fast Task Force fleet in PTO.
I made a house rule for Convoy Raid. It works well with 1942.2 and AA50.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35687.msg1467061#msg1467061
Suggested Topics
