Cruisers, whats the point?

Of course, Uncrustable!
If there are two or more ships that have similar purposes - DD/CA/BB - then obviously one of them is going to be more optimal than the others in large numbers.  We don’t need to add fancy abilities to make them different.

If I have to defend Moscow, I’m going to buy only Infantry.  With no exceptions.  They are the superior purchase when I need to stand and defend.  Similar deal with Cruisers.  It’s simply less common to see cruisers.

If I have 12 IPCs and need to maximize how much I can defend my fleet, I’m going to buy a cruiser.  1 destroyer isn’t as good, and 2 subs are worse on defense.  BOOM.  A cruiser has become my optimal buy.

Mechs are situational.  AA guns are situational.  They don’t need to change for them to be purchased more often.

You don’t buy more destroyers if you have 1-2 already unless you really need more than 1 blocking DD and your fleet is running away and requires/should have 1 DD in the retreating fleet.

you will not be purchasing them on a regular basis

For the same money,  you won’t be building Minor Complexes on a regular basis.

Or for less money AA Guns, Or Mechanized inf.

So whats your point uncrustable?

“I win, stop arguing with me”
is hardly conducive to a thoughtful discussion.

@MrMalachiCrunch:

You don’t buy more destroyers if you have 1-2 already unless you really need more than 1 blocking DD and your fleet is running away and requires/should have 1 DD in the retreating fleet.

In '42, I would agree with you.
However, in '40, there are certain cases in which massing destroyers is very useful, and possibly necessary.
A good example is an Allied fleet in the Channel-
Often Germany will have very significant (upwards of 12 planes) land-based air power and subs massing behind the Denmark straight.
The allies can’t simply block in SZ 112, as the Italians can clear a blocker.
The fleet in the Channel, SZ 110, needs to be able to withstand a full naval and air assault on its fleet.
Losing that fleet is probably game over, assuming Germany is playing smart in the East.
Carriers are a very nice defense boost, but destroyers give the best bang for your buck.

Cruisers = best on bombard
Worst off in all other situations

If bombard is worth 3ipc to you, a cruiser should be bought instead of more destroyers.

Case closed!

I’m not sure how IPC spent on destroyers gets you better fleet defense then the same spent on carriers and fighters when you are defending against an all out attack on a fleet in a large scale scenario.  My point was after you have a few destroyers, the next 72 IPC shouldn’t be spent on 9 more destroyers.  I would think 2 fully loaded carriers would add more defense to the fleet already containing 1-2 destroyers than 9 more destroyers.

I see what you’re saying there, Malachi.
Looking only at defensive capability,

8 hits + 20 pips vs 9 hits + 18 pips is tough to evaluate.
The added ability of planes to attack land targets probably makes the carriers a better buy.

But when you’ve got a ~28 IPC UK that has to spend money on troops every turn to keep the Italians in check, 1 DD a turn becomes just about all you can afford in the Atlantic.
If I had that kind of paycheck as US, and wanted to put it all in the Atlantic, I’d probably get 1 loaded carrier, 3 DD, and 1 CA. � Or something like that, you get the idea.

@Uncrustable:

@ErwinRommel:

Cruisers = best on bombard
Worst off in all other situations

exactly.

I don’t see any sort of problem with that.  CAs are a niche buy, but they are still useful.  They’re not redundant at all.

@Uncrustable:

Cruisers should be more than niche buys

Why?

Ok well i was talking to some friend and this is what some of our “solutions” are:    ( we dont like the extra movement )

1. give cruisers 1, 2 or 3 AA gun shots. ( we couldnt decide what would be most balanced, we would need the forum to help )

or

2. change cruisers att/def and bombard to 4.  then to balance BBs allow them to either roll 2 dice per ship and choose best result ( heavy bombers ) or raise the att/def and bombard to 5. someone even said 6 lol that = a 100% hit which i dont agree with but w/e im posting everything their saying.

or

3. cruisers can take 2 hits and BBs can now take 3 hits.

or

4. cruisers can carry 1 fighter. ( no tacts )  or even an infantry? <– but then if they bombard would they be able to deploy that inf. ?? idk.

lemme know what you think. dont flame just throwing stuff out there. im going to personally try some of these.  I like #2 with BBs acting like heavy bombers.

I think cruisers and bbs are fine.

You get BBs to hit small fleets without losses and for bombardments.
If you feel you need a naval piece but also need more firepower to take over coastal territories… you buy a cruiser.
Subs are the infantry of the naval game, everyone buys a few to take casualties.
Destroyers are the artillery of the naval game, they roll 2 on defense instead of 1 that the sub brings and detect subs.

Each piece has a purpose, but yeah battleship buys tend to occur if you got a minor ic only. Cruiser buys tend to occur for bombardment needs.

@Alsch91:

If I have 12 IPCs and need to maximize how much I can defend my fleet, I’m going to buy a cruiser.  1 destroyer isn’t as good, and 2 subs are worse on defense.  BOOM.  A cruiser has become my optimal buy.

This is only in the situation where you have to defend against planes.

simulation a straight battle where only subs defend against only Cruisers, I get this result;
4 cruisers have about a 50/50 shot at winning against 6 subs. that means that 2 subs is better on defence in the situations where you don’t have alot of fodder in your fleet.

simming cruisers v DD, I get that for the cruisers to be worth it, the shorebomb has to be worth alittle more than 2 ipc.

I will personally buy a few cruisers with US, but rarely with any other countries. I will never buy a BB. I find that unit truly the worst of all the units in the game per ipc.

I buy Cruisers for bombardment.

When you need an extra little amount of defense for your fleet (because the enemy just bought another fighter or bomber, as an example), but you know buying a destroyer is useless because the enemy’s fleet is destroyed, and buying a BB is overkill and doesn’t give you same amount of bombardment per IPC, THEN you buy a cruiser.

I often buy cruisers when I am playing as UK, and also as USA in the atlantic.  When playing Low Luck, it is very very nice to have at least 6 points of bombardment available in your fleet [that is 2 cruisers/bb], that way you always get a ‘free kill’ during your amphibious assaults.

It is the same reason I buy Frigates in Napoleonic Empires.  They are the best pound-for-pound bombardment source, and they aren’t that bad at fleet defense.

At most, I could see their price come down by 1 ipc.
If their price came down by more than that, or other silly options like AA shots or extra movement, then they would be OP in my opinion.

If you really feel like it, you could always just rename your Cruisers into “Bombardment Boats”, that way you are very clear about the purpose and situation of when they will be purchased.

Kreuzfeld that doesn’t make any sense.  That’s not really how you run tests.

Replace 1 of those Cruisers with 1 Destroyer.
Now the subs lose, and I’ve actually made the attacking force smaller.

The reason your test has around a 50/50 result is because the subs are getting sneak shots on the cruisers.
In a real game that won’t really happen.

Interestingly enough… the AXIS combined set sail some 15 cruisers… in comparison to something like 1,300 submarines.

The allies as a whole only fielded 82 cruisers in WWII compared to some 800 destroyers…

So point of fact is, on a historical level, cruisers are integrated into the game perfectly.  They have thier purpose, and thier place, and it’s not along the lines of mass production.

What do you mean cruisers lose dds!?
Lets see:
1 Destroyer VS. 1 Cruiser

The Cruiser has a better chance of winning! It attacks @ 3, Destroyer Attacks @ 2!

@Alsch91:

Kreuzfeld that doesn’t make any sense.  That’s not really how you run tests.

The reason your test has around a 50/50 result is because the subs are getting sneak shots on the cruisers.
In a real game that won’t really happen.

forgot about the first shot

still, if you run it as an example;  20 CR + 3 DD v 32 sub + 3 DD you get about 50/50

if you make the attacking force a pure DD force of say  40 DD, then to defend you need about 57 subs to have a 50/50 (or 342 IPC worth of subs)

if defending with CRs you need about 32.5 CRs, (or 390 IPC worth)

this clearly shows that subs are more effective on defence that cruisers, assuming you have enough air defence.  better on defence ofc is DDs.