# CA 4-4-2-11 (or 12) & BB 5-5-2-18 (or 19)? Is there a customizable AA Dice Sim?

• All, if there’s anything we’ve done a few times, it’s mess with Cruisers and Battleships, but I couldn’t find this exact combination or discussion elsewhere.

Here’s a chart I can’t post links with some initial data that I will clarify via edit below when I have time. My initial analysis seems to show that a CA @ 4-4-2-11 and a 2-hit BB @ 5-5-2-18 [A-D-M-C] compare well, efficiency-wise, with DDs.

A less aggressive tweak would be 4-4-2-12 and 5-5-2-19; but then you lose the very near 1-1 efficiency ratio with DDs. Anyone have a customizable (as in, tweak the A/D/C/hit values) battle calculator they want to lend me to test out some equal-TUV scenarios?

• Ca 3-3-3-10 with permanent 3 move ( no naval port required)
BB is balanced OBO

• All, if there’s anything we’ve done a few times, it’s mess with Cruisers and Battleships, but I couldn’t find this exact combination or discussion elsewhere.

Here’s a chart I can’t post links with some initial data that I will clarify via edit below when I have time. My initial analysis seems to show that a CA @ 4-4-2-11 and a 2-hit BB @ 5-5-2-18 [A-D-M-C] compare well, efficiency-wise, with DDs.

A less aggressive tweak would be 4-4-2-12 and 5-5-2-19; but then you lose the very near 1-1 efficiency ratio with DDs. Anyone have a customizable (as in, tweak the A/D/C/hit values) battle calculator they want to lend me to test out some equal-TUV scenarios?

You are probably right: Cruiser A4 D4 M2 C12 gives similar combat results against an A2 D2 M2 C8 Destroyer based on the same IPC basis.
Here is how I made the calculations with AACalc.
it takes 44 Destroyers A2 D2 M2 Cx vs 31 Cruiser A4 D4 M2 Cy to get near 50%-50% survival:

If x (cost of DD)= 8 IPCs
y (cost of Cruiser) 44*8 /31= 11,35 IPCs

If y (cost of Cruiser)= 12 IPCs
x (cost of DD) 31*12/44 = 8.45 IPCs

Unfortunately, it is not possible to do it with A5 D5 units.

It can also work with a Cruiser A3 D3 C10 and a 2 hits BB A4 D4 C18:
98 DDs vs 80 Cruiser:
A. survives: 50.6% D. survives: 49.3% No one survives: 0.1%

Meanings if DD worth 8 IPCs, then Cruiser worth 9.8 IPCs to be even in pure combat situation.

Meanings if DD worth 8 IPCs, then Battleship worth 18.4 IPCs to be near even in pure combat situation.

So, if you want to keep 50% (1 DD C8+ 1 Cruiser C12) vs 50% 1 BB 2 hits, C20
It can be 1 DD A2 D2 C8 + 1 Cruiser A3 D3 C10 vs 1 BB A4 D4 C18

But the OOB cost structure and combat values is built in a way that fodder are more powerful than higher values unit.

It is possible to tweak a lot of combat possibilities with the actual AACalc, as you can see.

If you want to play with a Cruiser A4 D4 C12, you can make 2 hits Battleship A5 D5 C20 to keep the 50%-50% when 1 Cruiser and 1 DD against 1 BB.

That way, you will keep OOB cost (simpler for memory) and makes all your warships more cost efficient in Naval Combat.

Thanks for that idea. I will add it as another way to balance both Cruiser C12 and Battleship C20.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=32165.msg1202619#msg1202619

I know, it is not a customizable Calc.
If you want to test A5 values, you have to find a Triple A game which somehow have such units (maybe via Techs?), then edit to get the tech.
Then you can use the Battle simulator and then trying all of your simulations.
You can easily get A4 1 hit with StB or Damaged BB.

• @Imperious:

Ca 3-3-3-10 with permanent 3 move ( no naval port required)
BB is balanced OBO

OOB cost structure and combat values is built in a way that fodder are more powerful than higher values unit.

Sometimes, I wonder if higher cost naval units should not be better than cheaper ones. If you purchase wise and invest a greater amount of money, usually you get more for your bucks. In this game, it is the contrary, with more cheaper units you can dispatch more on different missions and when grouped they are stronger than a single costlier unit.
Destroyers were nicknamed “tin can”, but in A&A it is far better to buy them around a fleet Carrier.
And 5 of them will beat 2 Battleships: 60% vs 35%.

Also, Submarines were almost unable to take any hits to be able to submerge but, if you can patch your fleet with C6 Subs rather than C8 Destroyers you will be more cost efficient to take hits.

So, just making warships even in combat situation against DD doesn’t make them better than DDs. Destroyers will always remove the Surprise strike from Subs.
Submarines will remains the optimal cannon fodder when you can pick this one as casualty. But strangely, Subs were not that easy target to find and were not following major fleet. They were more often on their own due to lower speed (around 9 to 12 knots compared to 30 knots for warships)

Someone suggested 1 full Carrier, 2 DDs and 5 Subs being optimal all around naval fleet.

Increasing Cruiser and Battleship combat values and attractiveness is an indirect way to increase fleet vulnerability against Submarines because you will built less Destroyers.

Of course, it doesn’t consider the effectiveness of Shorebombardment.
But it can be easily cancelled with a single blocker or having an interesting enemy target to get rid of (TP or Sub), so warships are engaged in a Naval Combat.

• or that the Battleship can be hit once infinite times, so a free soak in a combined fleet is a great value

• @Imperious:

or that the Battleship can be hit once infinite times, so a free soak in a combined fleet is a great value

In 1942.2, a free hit from which you can survive is pretty good. As the attacker, you may retreat without losing this big one and it is working like a new one. But, if the attacker is going to crush you, the additional hit point does not worth her combat values/cost ratio.

In G40, you have to return to a Naval Base to repair. So, if you attack a SZ which is not deserved or you cannot conquer the NB, your BBs need two turns to be repaired.
It is better in defense near NB because if you survive your BB can be working new on your turn. An attacker which cannot deliver the killing blow will probably be out of position in SZ where there is no NB. Again, in that situation, DD fodder units give more for its cost.

Also, in AACalc, when 184 DDs are against 80 BBs, it considers that the first 80 hits do nothing on BB group, but still 184 DDs have an even odds of winning. Imagine adding 16 more DDs per OOB cost.
20 DDs are way more able to do things than 8 BBs, even if they can soak hits. It is like you get 2 bonus DDs to fight for you and absorbing damage, acting as free buffer for the same cost of 8 BBs.
At a near actual fleet size, 4 BBs has same strength than 9 Destroyers, but you can get a free DDs as a bonus buffer.

Also, probably rolling more dice gets you more average results and less extremes.
That way, 10 DDs are also less affected by luck factor than 4 BBs.

• I think the question of ‘whether BBs are balanced or not’ is moot if they aren’t purchased in competitive play.

As a brief aside, I think IL is partially correct in that if Cruisers become truly viable, it takes a bit of pressure off of BBs needing to be less expensive. Why? With an affordable naval punch + amphibious support unit like a cruiser finally available, BBs are free, finally, to assume the one niche that their sculpts and stats indicate them to have: the ponderous King of the Seas (or, at least, of the surface). In this apex role, they should be expensive! Leave BBs at 20. Hell, make them MORE expensive; 22! But make them fearsome in their role: they should be unparalleled at providing raw naval dominance, and should, IPC for IPC, outslug the other surface vessels (when escorted).

I see three easy options for the Battleship, three less easy options, and one that is totally different:

EASY
1. Add dice (two attacks, or a one-time/recurring AA roll).
2. Make existing dice stronger: make it 5-5, or roll twice and take best result, etc.
3. Reduce the cost until they at least compete with a pure DD fleet of equal value.

LESS EASY
4. Require, if the BB’s owner declares such before rolling, that a BB’s hits on a given round be assigned to surface warships only
5. Allow them to give/receive a combined arms bonus to/from other warships
6. Do away with the 2-hit mechanic, and instead let them soak one hit every round- as in, ignore it completely.

SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT
7. Let them buff (+1/+1) the surface fleets they succor.

• Option A (strong): “All of a power’s non-BB surface ships (DDs, CAs, and CVs) in a Sea Zone attack and defend at +1/+1, as long as at least one of that power’s BBs is also present in that SZ.”

• Option B (weak): “For each of a power’s BBs present in a SZ, up to one of each type of that power’s other surface ships (i.e., 1 DD, 1 CA, and 1 CV) attacks and defends at +1/+1”

The more I think about it thematically, and the more scenarios I run, the more I like option 7 (let’s call it “Flagship” or “Command”).  Run some scenarios yourself: it is easy to model in calculators. Setup your fleets, then convert the desired number of BB-escorting DDs -> CAs, CAs -> damaged BBs, and CVs -> DD/CA (depending on atk/def). I think that this sort of command mechanic just perfectly corresponds to what a BB physically is in Axis and Allies: A huge hunk of lovely, menacing plastic that looks like a game-changing capital ship, if one can juuust afford to put it on the board; yet unwieldy and vulnerable when left alone or overrun.

I do also like option 4 (call it “Barrage”), not just for flavor but help a fleet with a BB reliably bypass at least one point of Submarine shielding each round, because subs are currently so strong.

• Here is two reports about Battleship with 2 hits and A5 D5 C20
Done on Classic Triple A with Jet Fighters D5 and Submarine on defense (first losses).
For Cruiser A4, I used Bomber and for Cruiser A3, I used Fighter.

Against Cruiser A4 D4 C12, 1 hit:
20 Cruisers vs 12 Battleship:
24% vs 73%, 3% draw

Against Cruiser A3 D3 C10, 1 hit:
20 Cruisers vs 10 Battleships:
36% vs 61%, 2% draw

To be even vs A3 D3 C10 Cruiser, Battleship A5 D5 needs to be 20.75 IPCs.
207 or 208 Cruisers vs 100 BBs = 47% vs 53% or 53% vs 47%
Or to be even with such C20 Battleship, Cruiser A3 D3 need to be 9.6 IPCs.
200 Cruiser vs 96 BBs (96 Fgs D5 + 96 Subs) = 53% vs 47%

To be even vs A4 D4 C12 Cruiser, Battleship A5 D5 needs to be 21.1 IPCs.
211 Cruisers vs 120 BBs = 50% vs 50%
Or to be even with such C20 Battleship, Cruiser A4 D4 need to be 11.4 IPCs.
200 Cruiser vs 114 BBs (114 Fgs D5 + 114 Subs) = 47% vs 52%

Unfortunately, I cannot find a way to compare such Battleship against a Destroyer A2 D2.

All I can tell about a 2 hits BB A4 D4 but rolling twice (like an Heavy bomber) against DD A2 D2, 1 hit is that it takes 16 such BBs against 37 DDs to be near even.
A. survives: 48.5% D. survives: 50.8% No one survives: 0.7%
This means that a C8 DD imply a 18.5 IPCs BBs to be even.

• It should be pretty easy to code BBs as “artillery” that can give +1 or +2 attack to up to 5 allied destroyers and/or cruisers. Not sure if that can be done for defense as well, but I think so.

I would like to see store bombardment be preemptive again; that would help make cruisers competitive with fighters as a ground support unit. Could also use DK’s amphibious assault penalties (defender absorbs up to two free hits unless attacker has a beachhead, bombardment, marines, or paratroopers).

The 3 move cruiser is also fun.

I have seen opponents use BB-heavy fleets to whittle away my more balanced fleets one turn at a time in the central Pacific in 1942.2, and I think under those conditions BBs are plenty balanced at 20 IPCs, but unlimited automatic repairs in the middle of the ocean feels gamey to me. I prefer for BBs to repair at naval base or not at all.

• “Store bombardment”,
that is what happens during Black Friday and Boxing Day.

• :lol:

### 20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.

73

10

252

17

20

2

20

5