Ah, Diplomacy.

Haven’t played that in ages. GREAT game.

2 destroyers are NOT 50% more powerful than a Battleship.

They only have less than a 9% higher change of getting 1 hit than a battleship does.

Battleship: 66.6%
2 Destroyers: 75%

We’ve always played the original as having limited numbers of groups of units, such as only 3 bomber groups.

But there is a clarification of this rule in A&A : P. It says that if you run out of a piece, just use a small slip of paper with the unit type written on it.

I personally find A&A:E to be the most balanced. The axis might have a slight advantage, but all the advantages/disadvantages are realistic. There’s a reason the axis never won the second world war.

Hold up. I need some clarification here.

Unlimited builds? In Hawaii? I thought the USA could only build 2 units per turn there, including navy….

Okay, I’m gonna do my own little analysis of Battleships versus destroyers. :D No doubt there are advantages of both, such as having 2 ships means you can can cover more territory.

First off, Battleships are expensive, but they need to be. They’re just too damn good. That’s why as Japan you must treat them as gold. Cuz you won’t be buying any future ones most likely.

Now, many of you are comparing 2 destroyers to 1 battleship during a combat situation, and saying that the two are equal because you get 2 rolls. BUT, this theory is flawed in that you have to look at the attack strangths over a number of turns, not just one. Attack strength combined with casualty number is the important thing. Obviously 1 Battleship is better than 1 destroyer, but it’s in many ways better.

Let’s use the following comparison and assume 1 casualty per round.: 2 destroyers and 1 transport defending versus 1 Battleship and 1 transport defending.

ROUND 1

Each group has an more or less equal probability of scoring hits. So no difference there.

ROUND 2

Now, the transport is gone for the destroyer group, but the battleship’s transport remains(casualty assigned to BS).

ROUND 3

Now it’s one destroyer left and one BS left. Obviously each group can no longer afford a casualty. BUT, the BS has a better chance of dishing out one. Now assume both survive this round. The BS is then repaired and is FAR superior to the remaining destroyer in both offensive and defensive situations.

Don’t get me wrong, the destroyer is a great ship. But IMHO, Japan has the biggest reason to use them: low income and the ability for Japanese destroyers to transport 1 infantry. The USA makes too much not to gain the advantage of long term fighting and amphibious advantages. Also, I prefer to invest in fighters, rather than destroyers. If you have carrier space, there’s not point to destroyers. Fighters are WAY more useful, and defend better.