@SuperbattleshipYamato I have played a few games and though the Axis can initially worry the Allies , (I thought I would lose ), I have always been able to keep the income gap and , as the game progresses, it opens up much more .
I don’t believe , The Allies don’t need help in this game, if the players are equal ability.
[1942.2 & G40] Destroyers able to get a Shore Bombardment?
-
I just learned that on many occasions during WWII (on D-Day) destroyers had made coastal bombardment.
Is their some ways to implement this possibility?For instance, giving 2 destroyers a 1@2 on the first round of an amphibious assault.
Or giving a +1 on attack/DD to 1 Inf (like Art) for only the first round of a debarkment.
Same limitation on the number of bombarding ships, 1 ship/ground unit being offloaded from transport.The idea is to keep it far less effective than cruiser and battleship bombardment without neglecting this historical capacity.
Any opinion on this topic?
-
Destroyers could bombard 1 for 1 in the old 1999 A&A Europe. They were 12 IPCs to purchase though and were 3/3 units (bombard at 2 though). At 8 IPCs in the newer games, they may be too cheap to also be able to bombard.
-
I think the introduction of cruisers into the game was partly meant to take away some of the special abilities of destroyers. In the original Europe, destroyers could bombard and cancel submarine abilities. Now destroyers have the ASW abilities and cruisers can bombard.
I do agree that it’s a little frustrating when all you have to escort transports is destroyers so you get no bombarding at all. I know that you are right that destroyers often shelled Japanese positions in support of landings. Perhaps a house rule where destroyers can bombard @ 1 would work? Then again, like BJCard said, even that may make them a little too overpowered for their cost. -
I do agree that it’s a little frustrating when all you have to escort transports is destroyers so you get no bombarding at all. I know that you are right that destroyers often shelled Japanese positions in support of landings. Perhaps a house rule where destroyers can bombard @ 1 would work? Then again, like BJCard said, even that may make them a little too overpowered for their cost.
Maybe, the only way to balance this is to require at least 2 destroyers (cost 16) to be able to bombard @1. A third one makes 2@1, a fourth one makes 3@1, and so forth.
-
On many occasions during WWII on ETO and PTO destroyers had made coastal bombardments.
Is their some ways to implement this possibility?Giving a +1 on Attack/DD to 1 Inf or Mech Inf paired with (like Art), coming from a transport of the same SZ, for only the first round of a debarkment.
Same limitation on the number of bombarding ships:
1 ship/ground unit being offloaded from transport. And
not having any combat in the SZ before the amphibious assault.And if the Inf or Mech Inf is already paired to an Art unit, it doesn’t get additional bonus.
Artillery and Armor don’t get this bonus.
The idea is to keep it far less effective than Cruiser and Battleship Shore Bombardment without neglecting this historically accurate point.
For now, it seems to me that it is the simplest and more balance way to do it.
DD is acting as a 1 round +1A support for Infantry like an Artillery unit but without having the capacity to roll for itself as the Artillery unit does (or even SB of Cruiser or BB).
This HR for DD increase the odds of having a same number of casualty without having more of them.If you have any other ideas to get a similar results or a simplest way, or have develop a totally different Shore B. which includes DD, I will gladly read it.
-
Yes it’s accurate but in our game, destroyer cannot make shore bombardment because we already have cruiser and heavy cruiser to do so.
Destroyer at 1, it’s ok. -
Yes it’s accurate but in our game, destroyer cannot make shore bombardment because we already have cruiser and heavy cruiser to do so.
Destroyer at 1, it’s ok.You mean the same rule of Shore Bombardment as Cruiser and Battleship, except it is not @3 or @4 but only @1?
Is it right?If, yes. Does it mean you don’t see DD’s Shore Bombardment as Knp:
@knp7765:Perhaps a house rule where destroyers can bombard @ 1 would work? Then again, like BJCard said, even that may make them a little too overpowered for their cost.
-
You mean the same rule of Shore Bombardment as Cruiser and Battleship, except it is not @3 or @4 but only @1?
Is it right?Yes, in our game, the shore bombardment is: Battleship at 3, heavy cruiser at 2, cruiser at 1.
The casualty can defend before to be remove from the gameboard. -
You mean the same rule of Shore Bombardment as Cruiser and Battleship, except it is not @3 or @4 but only @1?
Is it right?Yes, in our game, the shore bombardment is: Battleship at 3, heavy cruiser at 2, cruiser at 1.
The casualty can defend before to be remove from the gameboard.I like that you have cruisers and heavy cruisers. Do you have different pieces for them?
I am curious about your shore bombardment rules. Why did you cut them all down one from their normal combat values? Do you think warships’ shore bombardment abilities is less effective than their ship vs. ship combat abilities?
-
Good questions. Â :wink:
-
I am curious about your shore bombardment rules. Why did you cut them all down one from their normal combat values? Do you think warships’ shore bombardment abilities is less effective than their ship vs. ship combat abilities?
Because shore bombardment was too strong.
Battleship at 4 is way too much…I like that you have cruisers and heavy cruisers. Do you have different pieces for them?
Yes
heavy cruiser = attack and defend at 3. 2 hit to destroy.
Cruiser = attack and defend at 3 but 1 hit to destroy and shore capabilities is not the sae. -
I am curious about your shore bombardment rules. Why did you cut them all down one from their normal combat values? Do you think warships’ shore bombardment abilities is less effective than their ship vs. ship combat abilities?
Because shore bombardment was too strong.
Battleship at 4 is way too much…
I like that you have cruisers and heavy cruisers. Do you have different pieces for them?Yes
heavy cruiser = attack and defend at 3. 2 hit to destroy.
Cruiser = attack and defend at 3 but 1 hit to destroy and shore capabilities is not the sae.Because shore bombardment was too strong.
Battleship at 4 is way too much…It is really the short answer.
Don’t you have any proof or recall a specific game which show this?
Or a specific circumstances in ETO or PTO where it could be very unbalancing?Besides, what was the cost of your ships in your HR game:
Cruiser A3D3M2 , 1 hit, bombard @1, cost?
Heavy cruiser A3D3M2, 2 hits, bombard @2, cost?
Battleship, A4D4M2, 2 hits, bombard @3, cost? -
Cruiser = C10
HCruiser = C12
Battleship= C18
-
@SS:
Cruiser = C10
HCruiser = C12
Battleship= C18
Cool prices for cruiser and BB !!! :-D
Interesting… For how long are you playing with these costs?
Don’t you find that cruiser isn’t buy much because a 2 hits Heavy cruiser at 12 is quite a bargain?
Maybe cruiser have other capacity you didn’t mention?Maybe damaged heavy cruiser cannot be repaired the same way as BB?
I would have expected around 14-16 IPCs, not this low 12 IPCs.
Because as I see it, it is the deal amongst the ships:
Heavy cruiser 12 IPCs/ 2 hits = 6 IPCs/hit, as low as the Subs.
G40 Carrier 16 IPCs/ 2 hits= 8 IPCs/hit, as low as the Destroyers
BB 18 IPCs/ 2 hits = 9 IPCs/hit
Cruiser 10 IPCs/hitAlso, this heavy cruiser unit is a big winner all the way in a Battlecalc vs either Cruisers or BBs on a same IPCs basis.
In this way, it is clearly historical:
your main ship in any fleet is certainly heavy cruiser units, isn’t?Cruiser A3D3M2C10, 1 hit, bombard @1,???
Heavy cruiser A3D3M2C12, 2 hits, bombard @2 :evil:
Battleship, A4D4M2C18, 2 hits, bombard @3 -
Some countrys pay more for ships.
USSR - Cruiser = C16 USA - Cruiser = C10
Hcruiser = C18 Hcruiser = C11
No battleship Battleship = C18UK - Cruiser = C12 China - No Cruiser
Hcruiser = C13 Hcruiser = C13
Battleship = C17 No BattleshipGermany - Cruiser = C10 Japan - Cruiser = C11
Hcruiser = C12 Hcruiser = C13
Battleship = C18 Battleship = C18Italy - Cruiser = C11 France - Cruiser = C14
Hcruiser = C13 Hcruiser = C16
Battleship = C24 Battleship = C22Sorry I didn’t post all of them.These are the costs. Crus will have to tell you why they are different. I probably asked long time ago but don’t rememer what the answer was. Maybe do to time of war, navy strength and size, and availability. Some of these cost you may not agree with. But they do work for this game. SS AUS!
-
@SS:
Some countrys pay more for ships.
USSR - Cruiser = C16 USA - Cruiser = C10
Hcruiser = C18 Hcruiser = C11
No battleship Battleship = C18UK - Cruiser = C12 China - No Cruiser
Hcruiser = C13 Hcruiser = C13
Battleship = C17 No BattleshipGermany - Cruiser = C10 Japan - Cruiser = C11
Hcruiser = C12 Hcruiser = C13
Battleship = C18 Battleship = C18
Italy - Cruiser = C11 France - Cruiser = C14
Hcruiser = C13 Hcruiser = C16
Battleship = C24 Battleship = C22Sorry I didn’t post all of them.These are the costs. Crus will have to tell you why they are different. I probably asked long time ago but don’t rememer what the answer was. Maybe do to time of war, navy strength and size, and availability. Some of these cost you may not agree with. But they do work for this game. SS AUS!
Thanks for the detailed post.
I cannot disagree with your cost since it is clearly a customized game. However, you can help me better understand what’s underlying.
I still have the same question however: there is clearly some costs of the three units in the same country which clearly maximize the combat value vs IPC investment. Is it intentional? Just to reflect the historical bias of a country toward some warships vs others?
Clearly, if I’m US player, I never buy any cruiser (at 10) and it is all-in Heavy cruiser at 11 IPCs.
If I’m UK, I may think twice before bying Heavy (at 13) and go to BB at 17 IPCs.
Maybe if I was Japan, the cruiser at 10 would have been competitive but at 11 IPCs it is too much vs the heavy at 13.
So, in general, cruiser unit is never competitive or maximized (combat value/IPC) vs Heavy cruiser?
Does some country are so poor that they still buy cruiser or wait until they can offer Heavy?
I probably would have kept around a basic 4 IPCs difference between cruiser / heavy cruiser / BB.
Starting at 10 to 12 for Cruiser / 13 to 17 for Heavy/ 17 to 21 for BB.
And having some specific reduction or increase for some unit in each country.
But I would have probably kept a minimum of 3 IPCs between units (to tantalized about buy another Inf instead of buying the bigger class warship). -
Interesting… For how long are you playing with these costs?
32 games since 1995.
Don’t you find that cruiser isn’t buy much because a 2 hits Heavy cruiser at 12 is quite a bargain?
Maybe cruiser have other capacity you didn’t mention?Good bargain…yes.if you have the cash…
Maybe damaged heavy cruiser cannot be repaired the same way as BB?
No but it will be a good idea.Also, this heavy cruiser unit is a big winner all the way in a Battlecalc vs either Cruisers or BBs on a same IPCs basis.
In this way, it is clearly historical:
your main ship in any fleet is certainly heavy cruiser units, isn’t?
No, the carrier and escort carrier still the main ship. -
I cannot disagree with your cost since it is clearly a customized game. However, you can help me better understand what’s underlying.
I still have the same question however: there is clearly some costs of the three units in the same country which clearly maximize the combat value vs IPC investment. Is it intentional? Just to reflect the historical bias of a country toward some warships vs others?
Clearly, if I’m US player, I never buy any cruiser (at 10) and it is all-in Heavy cruiser at 11 IPCs.
If I’m UK, I may think twice before bying Heavy (at 13) and go to BB at 17 IPCs.
Maybe if I was Japan, the cruiser at 10 would have been competitive but at 11 IPCs it is too much vs the heavy at 13.
So, in general, cruiser unit is never competitive or maximized (combat value/IPC) vs Heavy cruiser?
Does some country are so poor that they still buy cruiser or wait until they can offer Heavy?The game begin september 1 1939.
All important units of WWII are represented on the game baord. But once the game start, it’s up to the player to buy what he needs. -
We finally gettin a break? :-D
-
Interesting… For how long are you playing with these costs?
32 games since 1995. _The accuracy is impressive. And all the 32 games were based on the previous cost?
Don’t you find that cruiser isn’t buy much because a 2 hits Heavy cruiser at 12 is quite a bargain?
Maybe cruiser have other capacity you didn’t mention?_Good bargain…yes.if you have the cash…
When you need only 1 or 2 IPCs, you manage to cut somewhere else…Maybe damaged heavy cruiser cannot be repaired the same way as BB?
No but it will be a good idea.
Just think about the difference between 1942.2 BB and G40 BB, it can open up something…Also, this heavy cruiser unit is a big winner all the way in a Battlecalc vs either Cruisers or BBs on a same IPCs basis.
In this way, it is clearly historical:
your main ship in any fleet is certainly heavy cruiser units, isn’t?
No, the carrier and escort carrier still the main ship.
I thought "… amongst warships with guns, I was excluding carriers (in my mind, 'cause the topics is about warships which can bombard somehow.)
So, besides carriers, the main gunships is surely Heavy cruiser, no?
And, very few, if no buying of little cruiser?
ÂIs your customized A&A G40 is based on an historical rules system, or something else we found on the forum?
Suggested Topics
