Thanks for telling me. I’ll try it sometime.
Cruisers
-
I noticed an old topic in the Pacific 1940 forum about Cruisers being too weak for their cost. Now, a year and a half later, how do people feel about them?
I for one, just don’t see them built because they are so inefficient cost wise. Even at 11 points they would be less cost-efficient than DDs and BBs, but at least it would be close enough to consider if you didn’t have the 20 points to burn on a BB and needed a little more capability immediately. Right now its not even close.
-
I play that a cruiser combined with a BB act an AA Gun on defense vs up to 5 planes.
Also Cruisers Convoy at -2 like Subs.
This makes them worth the 12.
(BBs were also a tad too expensive so it helps for bot of them – and rewards folks for building true naval task forces)
-
I often spice up my fleet with cruisers. They’re no battleships sure, and they lack the anti-sub of the DD, but I do find their value to be worth it.
They shouldn’t stand alone, but when mixing your Battleships with crusiers and your Battleships can take double hit, you effectively have a very solid attack/defense with the 3 value.
Also remember, cruisers can also shore bombard in amphibious assaults. And then 5 3’s can do more than 3 4s.Sending out cruisers on their own I wouldn’t do unless as a delaying tactic. And for that DD are properly a better use.
But Cruisers helps adding more power, fast, in your navy when coupled with double hit capital ships. So for that, they do good IMO. -
Sometimes you have 12 to spend on fleet. Would you rather have a destroyer or a cruiser?
Cruisers are the most cost-efficient unit for bombarding.
Sometimes you have limited production, so in those cases higher quality units may be appropriate. For example, you are building at South Africa and you want 2 ground units and a boat. Or what about when your factory is damaged? Then a cruiser basically costs 13 and destroyer costs 9, so the percentage increase for a cruiser is not as great. (4/9 instead of 50%)
Yes, they are probably the least purchased unit. Their best application is narrow. 95% of the time they are not the best buy.
What about when you have established naval dominance in an area and your opponent cannot possibly airstrike you? Destroyers are then worthless. Cruisers are still very useful, and project a threat. Actually, even when you don’t yet have dominance, the cruisers project a threat on the coastlines in addition to naval offense and defense, and destroyers do not.
Bombardment is immune to AA fire and is zero risk.
There are more arguments for cruisers, but they’ve all been stated before.
-
A lot of times when I am buying naval units, usually as USA or Japan since they are the major fleet buyers, I will often get a cruiser at the end when I have 12-15 IPCs left to spend. They make a decent addition to a fleet with a fair firepower value.
I often like to use cruisers as escorts for single transports. The 3 defense is better to defend your transport against an attacking fighter or tac than a destroyer’s 2. One downfall is that a sub can sneak attack them. However, if the sub’s first shot misses, the cruiser is more likely to hit the sub back with a 3.
Overall, I think they are a good mid-range purchase for the price. I don’t think they should be lowered.
Also, I like the AA idea of Darby. However, I don’t think cruisers should convoy raid at 2. -
I never build cruisers myself. Rather build a DD and save money for next turn.
-
I also don’t buy CA’s at all, if I want fleet defense I pay another 4ipcs for a carrier. If I want a blocking ship I go dd and if I want a bombard I go bb. Gamermans’ point about them being the most cost effective bombardment vessel makes me think they may be valuable to a country like UK who is trying to crack the Atlantic wall with reduced income(less than US at least)
Like ed factor I buy a dd or 2 subs and save the remainder.
-
the bombardment isnt very valuable, i’d rather spend 1 extra IPC and build a transport and 2 infantry or a transport and an artillery and save 1 ipc. For cracking the continent its better to buy troops. If cruisers cost 11 i still wouldnt build them, probably not even at 10, but i’d sure think about it at 10.
-
I agree, the troops and transport are much more useful. And if I need to go a distance, those 12 points buy a bomber.
I’d really like to be able to buy cruisers, but it never makes any sense to do so.
-
I’m sensing a change in Alpha rules. That AA one maybe
-
@Zallomallo:
I’m sensing a change in Alpha rules. That AA one maybe
I’m sure there will be as many changes as there were between OOB and Alpha2.
Cruisers are a luxury unit with very narrow application, but I would definitely stop short of saying I would never buy them.
-
I agree, the troops and transport are much more useful. And if I need to go a distance, those 12 points buy a bomber.
I’d really like to be able to buy cruisers, but it never makes any sense to do so.
Well - I’ll continue to put them into the mix of my double hit fleet where they do quite well. It has so far helped me when I needed to either create naval dominance or upset a naval balance.
In a double hit fleet, the battleships take the first hit, the cruisers 3 dice would survive multiple rounds anyway. Usually works quite well. -
a cruiser or 2 make a large fleet look good :mrgreen:
-
I see the cruiser’s aa gun as a idea for tech, not a default ability
I don’t like cruisers at 10 IPCs. It would make them better blockers than dd, even counting the submarine strikes. One has to count the multiple targets tactic (very useful in Pacific Ocean): one could mix dds and cruisers (at different SZs) as blockers, probably making impossible for the attacker to kill all of them. You have to send more punch to kill a 3/3 blocker than to kill a 2/2 blocker, and the attaker usually will lose more units in the trade
I still think that many people continue thinking with a Classic (or Annyv.) mentality. Cost is only one factor when buying a unit
-
I see the cruiser’s aa gun as a idea for tech, not a default ability
I don’t like cruisers at 10 IPCs. It would make them better blockers than dd, even counting the submarine strikes. One has to count the multiple targets tactic (very useful in Pacific Ocean): one could mix dds and cruisers (at different SZs) as blockers, probably making impossible for the attacker to kill all of them. You have to send more punch to kill a 3/3 blocker than to kill a 2/2 blocker, and the attaker usually will lose more units in the trade
I still think that many people continue thinking with a Classic (or Annyv.) mentality. Cost is only one factor when buying a unit
Amen to that.
If you don’t think you should ever buy a cruiser for 12, then don’t buy them.
-
The application is too narrow imo. If they were brought down to 11, I bet more people would actually think between a destroyer and a cruiser. Right now they are only a filler when you have 9-19 left over for ships.
-
@Zallomallo:
The application is too narrow imo. If they were brought down to 11, I bet more people would actually think between a destroyer and a cruiser. Right now they are only a filler when you have 9-19 left over for ships.
Exactly.
-
@Zallomallo:
The application is too narrow imo. If they were brought down to 11, I bet more people would actually think between a destroyer and a cruiser. Right now they are only a filler when you have 9-19 left over for ships.
Can’t say I agree. I think they are a great supremacy unit with their 3/3. As said they do not stand alone, but I think they belong in any naval force if wanting to create naval dominace
-
But you’re not providing any reason.
For 24 IPCs I can buy 2 cruisers or 3 destroyers. Both of these options provide a total of 6 points on offense and 6 points on defense. But three destroyers gives me 3 hits instead of the 2 that the cruisers give. And after one hit, 2 destroyers are superior to 1 cruiser.
So simply by the numbers, destoyers are superior. I am disregarding their bombard capabilities, obviously. But cruisers do not nullify subs’ abilities, so take that as you will.I did earlier in the thread.
When coupled with 2 hit capital ships the 3 value of the cruiser is IMO superior to a 2 value of a destroyer for a cost/effective ratio. As said (many times) - the cruiser does not stand alone, it is part of a fleet. If looking at just one cruiser versus a destroyer - sure - but then a ship is mainly fodder/blocker as well. But as part of a fleet (with double hit capital ships) then the stack-ability of a 3 attack value comes to light when packing a punch on the first 1 or 2 rounds of combat and will help you weed out the enemy fast(er).Plus the anti-sub ability is solved with 1 destroyer per stack, but the bombing ability is enhanced with multiple cruisers (if having enough troops of course).
-
But you’re not providing any reason.
For 24 IPCs I can buy 2 cruisers or 3 destroyers. Both of these options provide a total of 6 points on offense and 6 points on defense. But three destroyers gives me 3 hits instead of the 2 that the cruisers give. And after one hit, 2 destroyers are superior to 1 cruiser.
So simply by the numbers, destoyers are superior. I am disregarding their bombard capabilities, obviously. But cruisers do not nullify subs’ abilities, so take that as you will.I did earlier in the thread.
When coupled with 2 hit capital ships the 3 value of the cruiser is IMO superior to a 2 value of a destroyer for a cost/effective ratio. As said (many times) - the cruiser does not stand alone, it is part of a fleet. If looking at just one cruiser versus a destroyer - sure - but then a ship is mainly fodder/blocker as well. But as part of a fleet (with double hit capital ships) then the stack-ability of a 3 attack value comes to light when packing a punch on the first 1 or 2 rounds of combat and will help you weed out the enemy fast(er).Plus the anti-sub ability is solved with 1 destroyer per stack, but the bombing ability is enhanced with multiple cruisers (if having enough troops of course).
Well I think they’re about the same in cost/attack/defence ratios as destroyers, but they take less hits.
Suggested Topics
