Let's Talk Pocket Battleships!

[Bardoly]

IL convinced me to join the fun.  8-)

My thought is that it’s stats would be the following:

4    Attack
4    Defense
2    Movement points
15  IPC cost
–    May shore bombard at a 4, but only takes 1 hit to sink

I put the cost at 15 (or maybe 14), but I would also put the regular battleship’s cost at 19 (or maybe 18).

What do y’all think?

[Imperious Leader]

IL convinced me to join the fun.  cool

My thought is that it’s stats would be the following:

4    Attack
4    Defense
2    Movement points
15  IPC cost
–    May shore bombard at a 4, but only takes 1 hit to sink

yes this must be it, but if you have heavy cruisers with 2 hits …this unit no longer fits

If you have the CA @ 3-3 and 2 hits moving 3 for 17 IPC, then i say this:

Only Germany can build these-Note: These were only created to bypass the treaty of Versailles.

4    Attack
3    Defense
2    Movement points
14  IPC cost
–    May shore bombard at a 4, but only takes 1 hit to sink

In all truth i would just have a NA for Germany making their Heavy Cruisers into Pocket BB’s with a 4-3 2 hit stat and costing 17. So the only difference is the Germans get an attack at 4, while all other nations attack at 3.

I also add that the PB can move and attack and if it has any Movement points left, it can move further ( to complete its 3 space movement)

This last point in very important as the PB was a hunter and moved very fast once it made its kill.

[Bardoly]

I like it.

So, you would give Pocket Battleships a movement value of 3?

[Imperious Leader]

yes the PB is just a twist on the heavy cruiser idea for Germany. Its exactly the same except it attacks at 4 rather than 3.

[Upside-down_Turtle]

If cruisers move at 3, then shouldn’t carriers move at 3 as well, since most early designs were built on cruiser hulls?

Also, what about “fast battleships” like the Iowa Class?  I have a US NA that lets its BB move 3 as well.

I agree w/ Bardoly on PBs, but they should move 3.

[Imperious Leader]

I think the OOB are now CL ( light cruisers) and these didn’t have the range that a CA ( Heavy Cruiser) has.

[Upside-down_Turtle]

For pricing, I think Pocket Battleships and heavy cruisers ought to be the same.  17 IPCs if BB are 20, 15 if BB are 18.

[Bardoly]

@Upside-down_Turtle:

For pricing, I think Pocket Battleships and heavy cruisers ought to be the same.  17 IPCs if BB are 20, 15 if BB are 18.

For 17, why not trade 1 infantry piece for the ability to soak a hit?  I think the cost difference must be at least 4 or more.

[Jennifer]

Uhm, yea, I guess I like the idea of a mega cruiser (you called a pocket battleship) but to be honest, I kinda viewed the cruisers to be pocket battleships.  Basically, WWI battleships being used in WWII.

Maybe I am just confused.

BTW:

If we needed a stronger cruiser, how about:

Pocket Battleship:
ATT-3
DEF-4
MOV-2
Shore Bombard: Yes (@3)
IPC-14

• Takes 1 hit to sink

And:

Battleship - Same as before, but also has AA Gun capabilities.  That justifies the 20 IPC cost I think, and makes them a much more valuable part of the fleet. Now yes, I do realize that it was the Aircraft Carrier that was the floating AA Nightmare for the enemy, not really the BB, but we don’t have a problem getting people to build ACs, so why not give that ability to the King of the Sea, the BB, instead of the Queen of the Sea, the AC?

[i rock]

well id say a PB should be a 4-3-3-17 and can bombard takes 2 hits to sink. i justife the attack because germanys PB had armour of a HC but had guns of a BB