Cruiser add on

@CWO:

@Baron:

Gives +1 Move to any surface vessel (TP, DD, CVE, CV, BB) paired 1:1 with

Except for the destroyer, the only ship that could realistically gain a movement boost from operating in tandem with a cruiser would be a submarine, owing to its small size.  In practice, though, I don’t think that subs in WWII operated in tandem with cruisers very much, if at all.Â

Plus you would have complications when it comes to the stealth movement of subs if Cruisers are with it.

I like the towing idea, and it makes sense to limit it to destroyers. It would make sub hunting easier or they could be paired with air for more muscle.

@General:

I like the towing idea, and it makes sense to limit it to destroyers. It would make sub hunting easier or they could be paired with air for more muscle.

Unfortunately, Sub hunting is far to easy even without this house rule.

I like the +1 on movement.

Help destroyers get out to block or support faster.

Be nice if Cruisers had only AA towards ST Bombers.

Cruiser -  A3 D3 SH3 M3 SM+1 for Destroyers only  AA@1 First round only C12

@SS:

Be nice if Cruisers had only AA towards ST Bombers.

In addition to the point mentioned earlier about cruiser AAA fire (the point that it makes little logical sense for cruisers to have AAA fire but for battleships not to have it too, and that battleships are a superior buy if both ship types have AAA capability), there’s the problem that battleship and cruiser AAA fire wasn’t designed to deal with high-flying strategic bombers, it was designed to deal with against aircraft flying at low and medium altitudes…in other words, with fighters and tactical bombers.

Give the AA shots for Battleships and Cruisers. But can’t hit ST bombers. I meant to give Batt. AA shots to.

@SS:

I like the +1 on movement.

Help destroyers get out to block or support faster.

It should be noted that movement where a cruiser is combined with a destryer should work the same way mech infantry can blitz with tanks. what I mean is that they should all end their turn in the same sea zone if combined during any movement phase.

All of CWO Marc’s posts should come with an automatic +1 tagged to them.

Thats what I meant. They end in same sea zone. It was meant also to be on the next turn they would only move 2 if the Dest. were alone.

@Young:

@CWO:

@Baron:

Gives +1 Move to any surface vessel (TP, DD, CVE, CV, BB) paired 1:1 with

Except for the destroyer, the only ship that could realistically gain a movement boost from operating in tandem with a cruiser would be a submarine, owing to its small size.�  In practice, though, I don’t think that subs in WWII operated in tandem with cruisers very much, if at all.�

Plus you would have complications when it comes to the stealth movement of subs if Cruisers are with it.

@Young:

@SS:

I like the +1 on movement.

Help destroyers get out to block or support faster.

It should be noted that movement where a cruiser is combined with a destryer should work the same way mech infantry can blitz with tanks. what I mean is that they should all end their turn in the same sea zone if combined during any movement phase.

From a game perspective, if you cannot increase transport move to +1 (which naval base already provide), it cuts a lot of tactical possibilities for launching small invading parties where there is no naval base.
Example, suppose there is a naval base at starting point, both Cruiser and TP can reach the isolated island group 3 spaces away, but TP can not follow the Cruiser after. Sad perspective.

I just made a fast overview of cruisers range compared to liberty ship.
Funny,  I found that Liberty have a range of 20 000 nautic miles.
But Cruiser, at 15 knots have still smaller range than Liberty ships running at 11 knots.

Maybe there is a different way to rationalize a +1 bonus move when paired with cruiser.
Not just refueling the thirsty little ones around.
IDK.
Game movement is not only pure speed, because at this, Destroyer seems the fastest warship.

@aequitas:

Playing W@W world at war on triple and having the ability to carry one Inf on a CR is much of a help.
Any planes can also hit a sub, but it will submerge after one Round of combat.

I’m saying that a minor add on onto CR will def. spice up and upgrade a global 40 game.
Thank you for your input so far.

I find that 1 regular Infantry at 3 IPCs put on Cruiser is a bit unbalanced compared to TP needing escorting warships.

I play Subs as in G40 but planes can hit unsubmerged Submarines anytime, with/wo DD.
DD is still required to block submerging Sub before, so attacking plane can hit them.

@General:

I like the towing idea, and it makes sense to limit it to destroyers. It would make sub hunting easier or they could be paired with air for more muscle.

I can live with both world Cruiser kind of:

CRUISER
Attack 3
Defense 3
Move 3 (no NB boost)
Cost 12
Shore bombardment @3
Gives +1 Move to smaller surface vessel (Transport and Destroyer only) paired 1:1 with
Gets 1 preemptive Anti-Aircraft defense @1 against up to 1 plane, whichever the lesser.

And Battleship can also use such 1 preemptive AA shot @1.

If Cruisers are so great at movement, why don’t we just give them the same stealth movement ability subs have only they can’t be blocked by other vessels the way subs can?

@Young:

If Cruisers are so great at movement, why don’t we just give them the same stealth movement ability subs have only they can’t be blocked by other vessels the way subs can?

I wonder why such Cruiser cannot be blocked by another Cruiser.
It is still a surface warship.

@Baron:

I just made a fast overview of cruisers range compared to liberty ship.
Funny,  I found that Liberty have a range of 20 000 nautic miles.
But Cruiser, at 15 knots have still smaller range than Liberty ships running at 11 knots.

Maybe there is a different way to rationalize a +1 bonus move when paired with cruiser.
Not just refueling the thirsty little ones around.
IDK.
Game movement is not only pure speed, because at this, Destroyer seems the fastest warship.

When ship performances are compared, one has to take all the relevant factors into account.  There are lots of WWII ship types that had long ranges; little dinky corvettes, for example, could cross the entire Atlantic without refueling.  That doesn’t mean that you can put every long-ranged ship into the same basket and consider them equivalent.  Cruisers had long ranges, and so did transport ships and so did corvettes…but they were vastly different in their capabilities.  Cruisers had powerful turbine engines and could reach high speeds when they needed it.  Transport ships and corvettes didn’t: they had low-powered engines and they were slow.  The reason they had such long ranges was because they were slow: low-powered, slow vessels are much more fuel-economical than high-powered fast vessels, for the same reason that a little commuter car gets better gas mileage than an Indy 500 race car.  Plus the fact that transport ships and corvettes don’t have any heavy armour to lug around.  If you pair a cruiser with a transport ship, it’s logically not the transport ship that would get a +1 movement boost, it would logically be the cruiser that gets a -1 movement penalty because groups of ships have to travel at the speed of their slowest unit.

@Baron:

@General:

I like the towing idea, and it makes sense to limit it to destroyers. It would make sub hunting easier or they could be paired with air for more muscle.

I can live with both world Cruiser kind of:

CRUISER
Attack 3
Defense 3
Move 3 (no NB boost)
Cost 12
Shore bombardment @3
Gives +1 Move to smaller surface vessel (Transport and Destroyer only) paired 1:1 with
Gets 1 preemptive Anti-Aircraft defense @1 against up to 1 plane, whichever the lesser.

And Battleship can also use such 1 preemptive AA shot @1.

Agree but no Transport if its to over powering.

@Baron:

@Young:

If Cruisers are so great at movement, why don’t we just give them the same stealth movement ability subs have only they can’t be blocked by other vessels the way subs can?

I wonder why such Cruiser cannot be blocked by another Cruiser.
It is still a surface warship.

Agree with Baron.

@CWO:

@Baron:

I just made a fast overview of cruisers range compared to liberty ship.
Funny, � I found that Liberty have a range of 20 000 nautic miles.
But Cruiser, at 15 knots have still smaller range than Liberty ships running at 11 knots.

Maybe there is a different way to rationalize a +1 bonus move when paired with cruiser.
Not just refueling the thirsty little ones around.
IDK.
Game movement is not only pure speed, because at this, Destroyer seems the fastest warship.

When ship performances are compared, one has to take all the relevant factors into account.  There are lots of WWII ship types that had long ranges; little dinky corvettes, for example, could cross the entire Atlantic without refueling.  That doesn’t mean that you can put every long-ranged ship into the same basket and consider them equivalent.  Cruisers had long ranges, and so did transport ships and so did corvettes…but they were vastly different in their capabilities.  Cruisers had powerful turbine engines and could reach high speeds when they needed it.  Transport ships and corvettes didn’t: they had low-powered engines and they were slow.  The reason they had such long ranges was because they were slow: low-powered, slow vessels are much more fuel-economical than high-powered fast vessels, for the same reason that a little commuter car gets better gas mileage than an Indy 500 race car.  Plus the fact that transport ships and corvettes don’t have any heavy armour to lug around.  If you pair a cruiser with a transport ship, it’s logically not the transport ship that would get a +1 movement boost, it would logically be the cruiser that gets a -1 movement penalty because groups of ships have to travel at the speed of their slowest unit.

I understand Marc.
What I’m looking for is different ways to explain this +1M boost coming first from Naval Base.
All ships received the bonus OOB.
Refueling facilities on NB can hardly explained it from a realistic POV. Neither NB can increase speed of TPs.

So, is there other kind of explanation about why Cruiser paired to another ship gain the +1M boost?
Here is an alternate explanation, by far incomplete:

From what I understand, Destroyers (and Subs to some extent) were the main warships with lesser range which need to be refueled at sea. The other ships have better autonomy.
So, can it be the opposite, for instance, Cruiser have no need to slowdown to refuel and share fuel between Carriers, Battleships and Transports?
That way, Cruiser can travel M3 with others BB, CV and TPs?

@Baron:

So, is there other kind of explanation about why Cruiser paired to another ship gain the +1M boost?

No.  At least not if you want to be realistic.  A cruiser boosting a destroyer makes realistic sense (for reasons that I’ve already explained).  A cruiser boosting a carrier, a battleship or a transport ship is unrealistic (for reasons that I’ve already explained).  A cruiser boosting a cruiser is unnecessary.  A cruiser boosting a submarine would arguably be possible, but in practice I don’t think it was done, and the concept is problematic because it would imply a sub operating in tandem with a cruiser.

The fact that the A&A rules provide a naval base movement boost to various ship typess isn’t (in my opinion) a valid reason for arguing that cruisers should be able to boost anything except a destroyer because (in my opinion) the whole concept of movement boosts from naval bases (and air bases) is one of those A&A rules that I find unrealistic and baffling.  I have trouble visualizing what this “base boost” is supposed to represent in real life.  It can’t be a speed increase, because the speed of a ship or a plane is a function of its design, not a function of the facility from which it operates.  And it can’t be a range increase because, regardless of whether a unit travels to Point B from a Point A that contains a base or from a Point A that contains no base, the distance from A to B is still the same.  Bases aren’t hyperspace tunnels that shrink the physical distance between a point of departure and a point of arrival.