That’s an interesting idea. Indeed, the actual history justifies fighting for specific islands and this would help to reinforce that as well as promote action in the Pacific. Something to ponder….
1942.2 Damaged Battleships
Our new house rule for 1942.2 is that battleships damaged in combat will remain damaged until the repair damaged units phase of their next turn.
Battleship and Cruiser were not the optimized naval buy, and you want to make BB weaker?
There is not so much money in 1942.2, there won’t be any BB spam.
By allowing battleships to repair automatically after combat makes every other sea unit weak IMO. An attacking battleship with a destroyer against a defending submarine and the sub is lucky enough to roll a 1 on it’s way to the bottom of the sea… but no use, after battle it’s like you didn’t even roll the dice. Also, the oob rule helps the axis far more than the allies… so why not change it.
I feel you. I remember the old option from Classic, battleships repair at the beginning of the turn instead of the end, and it does feel as though “damaging” a battleship OOB is rather pointless with repair at the end of the turn in 1942.2. You have to damage and kill the battleship in one go, to give that first hit any real significance. I almost never buy battleships, so the rule could only have an effect on the starting battleships for me.
At 20 ipcs, the Battleship is just a pretty sorry unit in 1942.2. I can’t think of any reason to buy one, unless you’re dealing with a production limitation. 2 destroyers with 4 ipcs saved is superior/cheaper in most situations, even 1 cruiser and 1 destroyer for the same cost is better. The only time I consider a battleship purchase, is when production is down to a single unit and you need every possible pip for defense.
For example say you have an American factory at Borneo, and your fleet in sz 47 is under serious threat of Japanese attack. You need to back it up, but you only have 4 production on the sea zone. Say you have 44 ipcs to spend, and you already have carriers and fighters at the core of your fleet (no additional fighters at the ready/in range to make the purchase of a carrier worthwhile), but you still need as much fodder as possible to deter an attack by Japan. In this rare instance it might be advisable to buy 3 destroyers and 1 battleship. Because it gets you the max possible hitpoints to defense ratio for the money, into sz 47, where you can only place four units tops.
That’s 5 hitpoints. 3 fodder destroyers, the battleship absorption, and the battleship’s second hit. 10 cumulative defense points, but 5 total hitpoints! Way better than 4, when you’re in dire straits.
The alternative max buy for 44 ipcs, of 1 destroyer and 3 cruisers, would yield you 11 cumulative defense points (slightly better for the cost), but only 4 total hitpoints.
Aside from a situation like that, where you are under immediate threat of attack and need to max your hitpoints out of a factory with very limited production, there is no compelling reason to buy a battleship in my view. Unless you just want to showboat haha.
If production wasn’t a factor, then for 44 ipcs, you’re better off just buying 5 destroyers and saving 4 ipcs.
This gives you the exact same cumulative defense points at 10 and the same 5 hitpoints, but unlike the 3 dd 1 battleship buy, the 5 destroyer buy gets you 5 potential defensive hits in the first round of combat instead of just 4, for less total cost.
Or you could spend every IPC and get 4 destroyers and 1 cruiser. This nets you 11 cumulative defense points, and still gives you 5 hitpoints. But again unlike the battleship buy, all those units get to roll in the first round of combat.
So overall, the ability of the battleship to absorb hits its pretty weak, even as it stands OOB. The unit is just more expensive than its worth under most purchasing situations, unless production limitations are a factor. The battleship spam is a poor investment, it is usually outmatched by the enemy who buys 2 fighters to counter it. Or matched by the enemy who buys 2 destroyers for less total cost, the exact same defense (in the first round of combat) but more potential hits. I would see this HR as further discouraging the purchase of battleships, but that isn’t a huge problem for me. It still wouldn’t change the calculus, in those very rare instances where I would consider a BB purchase, because those instances only come up with restricted production, and only on defense, and typically with a focus only on the first round of combat. I think you could make the battleship cheaper if you wanted to see more of them. I think all ships could be made cheaper and the basic game would still work. But OOB, I don’t see a good reason to buy Battleships. Absent restricted production, destroyers are better for defense and hitpoints/fodder. If bombardment and amphibious trading is the plan, then the cruiser is better for the cost than the battleship.
The extra fodder hit in a restricted production situation is the only thing the battleship has going for it. Trying to squeeze an extra fodder hitpoint out of a space (usually for defense vs an airstrike), perhaps gives the battleship a rare advantage over the other naval or air units you could buy for the same cost, but beyond that the unit is pretty underpowered for 20 ipcs.
We just though two BB in the middle of a fleet can cancel the 2 very first hits and we felt that It often makes a big difference by the end of the battle!?
Our “house rule” is just that the 2 hits on the BB must still be taken when the defender wants but IN A ROW! Meaning that if a BB is damaged and the battle not over: The very next hit (if any) must be on him!
That’s a fun house rule, GGleize; maybe I’ll give it a try sometime.
I’m excited to finally disagree with Black_Elk about something: I think BBs can be a useful part of your fleet, especially in the Pacific! Under OOB rules, if you have a couple of BBs in your fleet, and your opponent has none, you can ‘strafe’ their fleet for one round and then withdraw. Even with evenly matched fleets (e.g. you both spent 100 IPCs on navy / naval air), their casualties will usually be dramatically larger / more expensive than yours. On the next round, you can strafe and retreat again, racking up an even bigger advantage. By round 3, you should be able to just move in for the kill and wipe out their fleet.
Granted, you don’t always have three rounds to wear down their fleet, but I’d rather have the option / threat of doing that than the one extra pip of punch you get from building a DD + CA.
I think you don’t see the huge power of the BB with the free damages: Two BB in the middle of a fleet can cancel the 2 very first hits and you know what? It often makes the big difference by the end of the battle!
Our “house rule” is just that the 2 hits on the BB must still be taken when the defender wants but IN A ROW! Meaning that if a BB is damaged and the battle not over: The very next hit must be on him!
That’s a great idea.
To be said: The point si not to weaken the beautiful BB and this house rule would even not be useful when facing a single BB. The point is to avoid the “strange shield” case of 2 or 3 BB cancelling the 2 or 3 first hits upon a full fleet with absolutely no losses. The point is to go back to the classical A&A and WWII way: The very first hits are better taken by the little units around them.
Let’s add this house rule would not change the situation that much by the end of the battle: 4 hits needed to kill 2xBB in both cases! They are just gonna shoot back a total of 3D4 before sinking instead of 4D4 … Thus rewarding the enemies for each round of hits instead of the frustrating “You finished rolling and hitting? OK nobody’s dead and I shoot back!”
A slightly modified rule from an old AA WWII Expansion can figure your rule a bit more historical-like.
You may allow to not sink the BB with a second hit by specifying that a Carrier can be sink instead.
Carriers were priority targets, BB were next.
About history I agree but my point is absolutely not to make many rule changes - In fact we hate house rules but sometime we “feel” obliged to introduce some very few. And we are really happy when some experienced players or our own experience shows us later that the official rules were better! Lesser and simpler the rules better the game!
If it were only about 2 hits against a fleet like 1xBB + 1xAC + 2xFighters > We wouldn’t need any house rule because 1xBB damage and 1xFighter destroyed stays a reasonable response … But …
When 2 hits against 2xBB + 1xAC + 2xFighters > We HATE the 1xBB + 1xBB damages for many reasons explained elsewhere. Worse with 3 BB (for ex. we experienced the 2 first Japan BBs surviving and regrouped with a third one) > That is a shield of 3 hits! And that’s what we want to change with a house rule as SIMPLE as possible …
Clarification for the vets like Elk: Total respect for your stats and very precise calculations - And if our house rule makes players buy less BB in the futur … Well … Let’s say it’s the historical decline of the BB that started in the middle of the WWII! (Remember we are in 42) … And be sure some newbies (like me) will keep on buying BBs sometime to time because we don’t play maths + to overawe our opponent and finally because WE JUST LOVE BBs lol!
To be said in the last example: With our rule the defender can choose 1xFighter destroyed + 1xBB damaged (because last hit) … But the next hit (if any) should be on the BB.