Clarification Cruisers/Destroyers

I believe you are correct.  The “bonus” 30 the US gets when it’s attacked early is to compensate for not having extra money while “at war during collect income”, for example:

The US is attacked turn 2, gets 30 IPCs immediately so they have that to spend when it becomes their turn.  If this were NOT the case, then the US would only have their initial 30 IPCs to spend during “war time” which wouldn’t make sense.

This is how I understand it.

@finnman:

If your spending 20 ipcs ships I prefer to go with three destroyers.
It costs 4 more but you get three ships.

Unless you have only 20 IPCs

Or unless your enemy has 2 or more bbs more than you … then you’ll regret not having more BBs soon or later

You should have at least 1 cruiser in your fleet (and one pathetic tactical bomber, for that matters), you never know when are you going to need it

right, so he can destroy the xport, or bombard, but not both.

That’s what I was assuming but for some reason it seemed odd. Compared to the old AAP, it gives the Brits/ANZAC a bit of an advantage over the Japanese.

Record response time BTW! Thank you.

Okay good, that’s what I thought.

@critmonster:

Another way to reflect their speed and relative firepower would be to give them first strike. Every round might be a bit much, but initial round would still be nasty!

I like this! Fire like a sub, still needs a destroyer to negate a sub strike, and the ability could be negated 1:1 by enemy cruisers.

If US decides to build up in HAW seazone, your aircraft are useless for a complete round (or more). Because you can’t fight that seazone (6 spaces). As US player I would just sit tight, build up and move to Japan via a northern route. Or go to Indies via southern route (Australia). Or build up TR with loads of cargo to take out Carolines. For every fighter it costs Japan it costs an inf for US.

And I think it will be a very dull way to play, or am I mistaken?