Cruiser add on

[Young Grasshopper]

I agree with BM, his is a much more productive boost because a cruiser moving 3 by it self is not much of a boost in gameplay, but if they can escort one ship… that’s more intresting.

[barney]

Thanks for the clarification CWO. I would a gree with your assesment that cruisers were more fuel effecient. Also with the fact their were a lot of engaements that just had destroyers and cruisers or DEs. The guadalcanal campaign comes to mind along with a early war engagement with the US, Dutch and Brits in the DEIs. I don’t recall the name. When BBs did fight alone, idk for sure, but it seems like they didn’t fare well. At least Prince of Wales and Bismark didn’t.

That’s an interesting idea Baron. I’m trying to think of situations where you would use it. Maybe allow it to boost 2 ships out of subs, DDs and trprts.

[CWO Marc]

@Baron:

Gives +1 Move to any surface vessel (TP, DD, CVE, CV, BB) paired 1:1 with

This is an interesting idea.  One adjustment I’d make, however, is to limit the accompanying surface ship +1 movement boost to just destroyers.  A cruiser shouldn’t be able be able to boost the movement of a ship that’s bigger than a cruiser, so that leaves out carriers and battleships.  Cruisers don’t need to boost cruisers because cruisers have the boost already built into them.  A cruiser boosting a destroyer sounds fine: destroyers are smaller, and the “boost” could represent the cruiser and the accompanying destroyer operating as a small task force or task group, with the cruiser as the lead ship and with the cruiser topping up the fuel tanks of the destroyer from time to time (as was indeed done during the war).  A cruiser shouldn’t be able to boost a transport ship’s movement: many transport ships are quite large – some larger than a cruiser – and most transport ships are relatively slow, so they have no speed to gain from operating alongside a cruiser.  (It’s actually the cruiser that would be slowed by the transport ship.)  And transport ships would typically have a long range already, in part because in WWII they tended to use old-fashioned, low-powered triple-expansion steam engines rather than turbines.

Except for the destroyer, the only ship that could realistically gain a movement boost from operating in tandem with a cruiser would be a submarine, owing to its small size.  In practice, though, I don’t think that subs in WWII operated in tandem with cruisers very much, if at all.

[Young Grasshopper]

@CWO:

@Baron:

Gives +1 Move to any surface vessel (TP, DD, CVE, CV, BB) paired 1:1 with

Except for the destroyer, the only ship that could realistically gain a movement boost from operating in tandem with a cruiser would be a submarine, owing to its small size.  In practice, though, I don’t think that subs in WWII operated in tandem with cruisers very much, if at all.Â

Plus you would have complications when it comes to the stealth movement of subs if Cruisers are with it.

[General Veers]

I like the towing idea, and it makes sense to limit it to destroyers. It would make sub hunting easier or they could be paired with air for more muscle.

[Young Grasshopper]

@General:

I like the towing idea, and it makes sense to limit it to destroyers. It would make sub hunting easier or they could be paired with air for more muscle.

Unfortunately, Sub hunting is far to easy even without this house rule.

[General 6 Stars]

I like the +1 on movement.

Help destroyers get out to block or support faster.

Be nice if Cruisers had only AA towards ST Bombers.

Cruiser -  A3 D3 SH3 M3 SM+1 for Destroyers only  AA@1 First round only C12

[CWO Marc]

@SS:

Be nice if Cruisers had only AA towards ST Bombers.

In addition to the point mentioned earlier about cruiser AAA fire (the point that it makes little logical sense for cruisers to have AAA fire but for battleships not to have it too, and that battleships are a superior buy if both ship types have AAA capability), there’s the problem that battleship and cruiser AAA fire wasn’t designed to deal with high-flying strategic bombers, it was designed to deal with against aircraft flying at low and medium altitudes…in other words, with fighters and tactical bombers.

[General 6 Stars]

Give the AA shots for Battleships and Cruisers. But can’t hit ST bombers. I meant to give Batt. AA shots to.

[Young Grasshopper]

@SS:

I like the +1 on movement.

Help destroyers get out to block or support faster.

It should be noted that movement where a cruiser is combined with a destryer should work the same way mech infantry can blitz with tanks. what I mean is that they should all end their turn in the same sea zone if combined during any movement phase.

[Young Grasshopper]

All of CWO Marc’s posts should come with an automatic +1 tagged to them.

[General 6 Stars]

Thats what I meant. They end in same sea zone. It was meant also to be on the next turn they would only move 2 if the Dest. were alone.

[baron Münchhausen]

@Young:

@CWO:

@Baron:

Gives +1 Move to any surface vessel (TP, DD, CVE, CV, BB) paired 1:1 with

Except for the destroyer, the only ship that could realistically gain a movement boost from operating in tandem with a cruiser would be a submarine, owing to its small size.�  In practice, though, I don’t think that subs in WWII operated in tandem with cruisers very much, if at all.�

Plus you would have complications when it comes to the stealth movement of subs if Cruisers are with it.

@Young:

@SS:

I like the +1 on movement.

Help destroyers get out to block or support faster.

It should be noted that movement where a cruiser is combined with a destryer should work the same way mech infantry can blitz with tanks. what I mean is that they should all end their turn in the same sea zone if combined during any movement phase.

From a game perspective, if you cannot increase transport move to +1 (which naval base already provide), it cuts a lot of tactical possibilities for launching small invading parties where there is no naval base.
Example, suppose there is a naval base at starting point, both Cruiser and TP can reach the isolated island group 3 spaces away, but TP can not follow the Cruiser after. Sad perspective.

[baron Münchhausen]

I just made a fast overview of cruisers range compared to liberty ship.
Funny,  I found that Liberty have a range of 20 000 nautic miles.
But Cruiser, at 15 knots have still smaller range than Liberty ships running at 11 knots.

Maybe there is a different way to rationalize a +1 bonus move when paired with cruiser.
Not just refueling the thirsty little ones around.
IDK.
Game movement is not only pure speed, because at this, Destroyer seems the fastest warship.

[baron Münchhausen]

@aequitas:

Playing W@W world at war on triple and having the ability to carry one Inf on a CR is much of a help.
Any planes can also hit a sub, but it will submerge after one Round of combat.

I’m saying that a minor add on onto CR will def. spice up and upgrade a global 40 game.
Thank you for your input so far.

I find that 1 regular Infantry at 3 IPCs put on Cruiser is a bit unbalanced compared to TP needing escorting warships.

I play Subs as in G40 but planes can hit unsubmerged Submarines anytime, with/wo DD.
DD is still required to block submerging Sub before, so attacking plane can hit them.

[baron Münchhausen]

@General:

I like the towing idea, and it makes sense to limit it to destroyers. It would make sub hunting easier or they could be paired with air for more muscle.

I can live with both world Cruiser kind of:

CRUISER
Attack 3
Defense 3
Move 3 (no NB boost)
Cost 12
Shore bombardment @3
Gives +1 Move to smaller surface vessel (Transport and Destroyer only) paired 1:1 with
Gets 1 preemptive Anti-Aircraft defense @1 against up to 1 plane, whichever the lesser.

And Battleship can also use such 1 preemptive AA shot @1.

[Young Grasshopper]

If Cruisers are so great at movement, why don’t we just give them the same stealth movement ability subs have only they can’t be blocked by other vessels the way subs can?

[aequitas-et-veritas]

@Baron:

@aequitas:

Playing W@W world at war on triple and having the ability to carry one Inf on a CR is much of a help.
Any planes can also hit a sub, but it will submerge after one Round of combat.

I’m saying that a minor add on onto CR will def. spice up and upgrade a global 40 game.
Thank you for your input so far.

I find that 1 regular Infantry at 3 IPCs put on Cruiser is a bit unbalanced compared to TP needing escorting warships.

I play Subs as in G40 but planes can hit unsubmerged Submarines anytime, with/wo DD.
DD is still required to block submerging Sub before, so attacking plane can hit them.

The ipc value of an Inf makes it indeed a little bit unbalanced.
(W@W inf cost is 2ipc)
But it is not like we would build up CR’s like crazy because of that, right?
I get your point  :-D

[baron Münchhausen]

@Young:

If Cruisers are so great at movement, why don’t we just give them the same stealth movement ability subs have only they can’t be blocked by other vessels the way subs can?

I wonder why such Cruiser cannot be blocked by another Cruiser.
It is still a surface warship.

[CWO Marc]

@Baron:

I just made a fast overview of cruisers range compared to liberty ship.
Funny,  I found that Liberty have a range of 20 000 nautic miles.
But Cruiser, at 15 knots have still smaller range than Liberty ships running at 11 knots.

Maybe there is a different way to rationalize a +1 bonus move when paired with cruiser.
Not just refueling the thirsty little ones around.
IDK.
Game movement is not only pure speed, because at this, Destroyer seems the fastest warship.

When ship performances are compared, one has to take all the relevant factors into account.  There are lots of WWII ship types that had long ranges; little dinky corvettes, for example, could cross the entire Atlantic without refueling.  That doesn’t mean that you can put every long-ranged ship into the same basket and consider them equivalent.  Cruisers had long ranges, and so did transport ships and so did corvettes…but they were vastly different in their capabilities.  Cruisers had powerful turbine engines and could reach high speeds when they needed it.  Transport ships and corvettes didn’t: they had low-powered engines and they were slow.  The reason they had such long ranges was because they were slow: low-powered, slow vessels are much more fuel-economical than high-powered fast vessels, for the same reason that a little commuter car gets better gas mileage than an Indy 500 race car.  Plus the fact that transport ships and corvettes don’t have any heavy armour to lug around.  If you pair a cruiser with a transport ship, it’s logically not the transport ship that would get a +1 movement boost, it would logically be the cruiser that gets a -1 movement penalty because groups of ships have to travel at the speed of their slowest unit.