Battleships are useful for protecting transports from subs. If you get a few casualties, just damage the battleship(s). With destroyers, you’d be losing transports.

Ture. If you do the match numbers you risk losing either 11-14 IPCs if you get hits from subs on a destroyer or transport. However you can also interpret half a battleship as being worth 12 IPCs…

Buying battleships is really quite pointless, the only country that can really even think about doing it is the US, and in my opinion they have to get in the war too quickly to be buying battleships.
Maybe this is strange, but I’ve never played a game in which japan had’nt won or lost by the end of J4. If Japan is going after India, which is often the case, the only hope with an American Navy is to invade mainland Japan, even that is hard to do by the fourth turn, and even this can usually be stopped with sub stalling.
So if I know Japan is going after India, I’ll usually build four bobmbers to harass the Japanese with the only unit that can possibly get there in time, often the japs will leave transports unguarded, thinking them safe.

I just started playing Axis& Allies Pacific 2 days ago. What is Cameron talking about with the 2 hits thing? And I prefer destroyers by the way. Mostly because I use 5 carriers per game and destroyers are necessary to prevent first strikes that would destroy my carriers and possibly both fighters they are carrying. On the other hand, I prefer battleships for amphibious assaults.

:oops: (CORRECTED)

OK,
to clarify a few things -

The bb may be played as a 2 hit to sink it in the same turn(damage repaired at the end of the battles if did not receive 2 hits).

A)bb cost 24 IPCs hits on def/off @ 4 or less(66% chance to hit, 33% chance to miss),
B)can assist in amfib. :P ass. with one shot @ 4 or less(66% chance to hit, 33% chance to miss), and
C)can absorb 1 first shot attack from ss and still shoot back,

COMPARED TO

A) des cost 12 IPCs hits on def/off @ 3 or less(50% chance to hit, 50% chance to miss),
B) can assist in amfib. :P ass. with one shot @ 3 or less(50% chance to hit, 50% chance to miss),
C)cancels all first shot attacks from subs each round the des starts, and
D)enables ftrs to assist in attacks v subs in the same sz in each round of battle the des starts.

So the idea is for 24 IPCs you can get 1 bb that will hit on 4 or less and survive if only takes one hit,

OR

for 24 IPCs you can get 2 des that will hit on 3 or less(def) and lose one if it only takes one hit.
–---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Did I get it right or confuse my games? - Xi(CORRECTED)
P.S. - The 1999 rules state that the destroyer gets a 3 or less to hit on def/off/amf. ass. :P

At last! someone is paying attention.

arms, b_k
–---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not omniscient, omnipresent, nor omnipotent. - Xi

So, Xi, what is your final verdict? Which one is better? I’m sort of biased since I believe in a BIG ship navy. 8)

Destroyers as Japan,
Battleships as US,
May the best planes win,
or was it plans?
–---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All’s fair in war and kickin’ ass! - Xi

Sure thing. No subs?

My bb v des post of Aug 25 is corrected

and my opinion of bbs is henceforth changed to

DESs for everyone,
and a few SSs,
US CAs and FTRs, then
BMRs, TRNs and INF.

Eew-kay?

–---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think I hear my mommy calling. :P - Xi

Awww… no BB’s :x

Protect what you got and use them to save a ship if you think the other nut will quit after this round.
–-------------------------------
I’m sure the decadent US will build plenty of BBs just to flaunt them!
Evil Imperialists! - Xi

Good. Those Iowa Class battleships will be the death of Imperial Japan yet! :)

Oh, yee-aah! Or better yet, YEEEE-HAW! - Xi
–--------------------------------------------------
BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! BOM! BOOM!

“Let’s not talk about Communism.
Communism was just an idea,
just pie in the sky.”

• Boris Yeltsin, Russian President.
  Remark during a visit to the U.S.,
  quoted in Independent (London, Sept. 13, 1989).

BB’s should be able to shell during amphibious assualts each turn.

“Let’s not talk about Communism.
Communism was just an idea,
just pie in the sky.”

• Boris Yeltsin, Russian President.

Oh Please, don’t start me with Boris. He was nothing more than a Menshevik in guise.

:D :P :lol: - Xi

“The resemblance between the two movements covers far more than the
speed and extent of their conquests. It can be argued that in some
measure both are great Christian heresies. And like Communism, the
Moslem faith in its relations with Europe has tended to follow the
pattern of relentless pressure on all weak points and undefended
frontiers and to advance its banners wherever there were found to
be no defenders at the gate…Islam derived its power to attract
educated and intellectual groups from the use it made of ideas
deeply congenial to the Oriental mind. Its rejection of the Greek
and Christian heritage of humanism and incarnation in favor of a
purely transcendent deity accorded well with the other-worldly
tradition of Oriental religious thought. At the same time, the
Moslem appeal to the people at large lay in the social evils
which it promised to redress. Mohammedanism was in part a harking
back to traditional intellectual and religious ideas, in part an
outburst of social protest against an unjust and unstable social
order. Modern Communism has something of the same character.”

• Barbara Ward, author. Faith and Freedom, ch. 15, Norton (1954).

I gotta find this book, 8) - Xi

T_6,
your gonna havta up your post rate. You are slippin’(Just above 18.0% of all posts). The last time I looked you were at 12.11 or 12.12 ppd. Now you are down to 12.10! Get on it! :wink: - Xi

“Russian Communism is the illegitimate
child of Karl Marx and Catherine the Great.”

• Clement Attlee, British Prime Minister. Speech, April 11, 1956.
  –------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Hmm! I gotta think on this. Russian
  Communism is not True Communism. :cry: - Xi

Nah, I’m quite happy where I’m at. Before (about a month ago), I couldn’t break 18%, but now I’m cruising at 18.12% I try to work hard at the beginning but now that I’ve accomplished what I set out to achieve (unless there’s something higher than “Super Mega” 8)), I can start to relax like a communist.

“Russian Communism is the illegitimate
child of Karl Marx and Catherine the Great.”

The Russians Tsars should’ve continued on the path of Peter and Catherine the great. They didn’t and you could see where Russia ended up. Karl Marx probably never predicted a communist uprising in Russia of all places – it was the Lenins and the Trotskys that saw through it.

Hmm! I gotta think on this. Russian
Communism is not True Communism

More like Stalinist “Communism.” At least you are smarter than some of the authors of your quotes - I’ll give you that.

@TG:

I can start to relax like a communist.

YOU, relax! I believe it when I see it. :roll:
@TG:

. . . At least you are smarter than some of the authors of your quotes - I’ll give you that.

I’d take that as a compliment, but I read what you wrote about those poor misguided and misinformed (mostly deceased) people.

Hey! It just dawned on me . They learned by example
(communist Russia), just like most folks learn to play A&A(learn by errors). . . too many mistakes. Communism was probably set back 100 years by what Lenin and Mao did. My apologies, T_6!
An epiphany! I peruse the writings of statesmen, mistaken in that they look through a broken prism, thus, encouraged to embark on my on journey . . . to create Xiasm :P . . . the ultimate governmental goal of mankind! :wink:
Am I your first convert?
The good student must surpass the teacher. :P - Xi
–--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“It is only the wisest and the stupidest
that cannot change.” - Confucius