@taamvan Good point. The defender would have to scramble two fighters to kill the carrier and transports.

@orodeh said in Aircraft carrier defense value vs. scrambling fighter:

Playing a game with my kids, I ran into a scenario where the rules are not well defined; I think.
Assume an aircraft carrier has launched its planes into an amphibious landing. Now, the defender scrambles a fighter against the landing fleeting. The combat value of the fighter is 4. But what is the combat value of the aircraft carrier?

Interpretation A: zero, because the aircraft carrier is attacking. It can take hits, but its combat value is zero.

Interpretation B: two. It is being attacked, and so, it should use its defense value.

So which is it? zero or two?

It seems to me that, in this scenario, the “defenseless transports” rule would apply to the aircraft carrier. Quite a price to pay for a failed amphibious assault. As @Caesar-Seriona said, always send an escort with your carrier.

Missed it by a few days, but: 75 years ago last week, my uncle, Bud Piper (a U.S. Army combat engineer), visited Paris…which wasn’t liberated until 24 AUG 44. His story, which I have no reason to doubt, is remarkable.

At the time, American engineer units were “free agents,” for lack of a better term - they would be temporarily attached to this brigade to build a bridge for them, then reassigned to that battalion to clear a path through a minefield for them, and so on. In between assignments, they had down time. My uncle compared it to firefighters at their station house, waiting for a call.

During one of these periods of down time, Bud said, word reached his unit that Paris had been liberated. They were only about 30 miles from the City of Light, so my uncle and a handful of his buddies hopped in a truck and headed down the road.

As Bud explained, “unlike WWI, the front line was riddled with gaps, and some of them were pretty large. We didn’t see any live Germans along the way.” Upon reaching Paris, they drove straight to the Eiffel Tower, parked the truck, got out and started taking pictures, like any other tourists. They got a few strange looks from the locals, Bud said, but they were used to strange looks from the French. While snapping photos, they saw a squad of Germans - still armed - marching a few hundred yards away. “We assumed they were marching off to surrender,” stated Bud.

One of Bud’s squad mates wanted to get his wife some “real Parisian lingerie,” so they set out to find a shop. “We didn’t speak French and couldn’t find anyone who would admit to speaking English, but we managed to find a lingerie shop nearby,” said Bud. “While we were inside, we saw another squad of Germans march right down the street, past the store. At that point, we figured the story about Paris being liberated was just a bullsh*t rumor and high-tailed it out of there. A week later, Paris was liberated for real.”

Hard to believe? Yes. Crazy enough to be true? Yes. My uncle has never been prone to embellishment, exaggeration, etc., so I have no choice but to accept it as true.

@SS-GEN Those cards look great! Thanks for the idea.

I just thought I’d keep the rule as basic as possible and let others modify as desired. There’s definitely room for improvement, though, and if you already use rail movement in your game, I’d definitely incorporate that.

I really like the Event Card idea. Besides the Blue Division, there are a lot of other possibilities, such as:

• Indian National Army - When Malaya falls to the Axis, the capturing power immediately gains 1 INF, placed in Malaya.

• Aztec Eagles - The turn following any convoy disruption in sea zones 10, 89 or 101, place 1 US fighter in Mexico.

• Fu-Go Balloon Bombs - Roll 1 die for damage to the Western US IC.

Hmm…I might have to make some Event Cards of my own. Thanks for the suggestion.

I recently learned about Division Azul (Blue Division), Spain’s contribution to the fight against Communism. Long story short, after Germany invaded the USSR, Spain sent a division of volunteers (initially, conscripts later) to the Eastern Front. Their uniforms featured blue shirts, hence the name, though they wore Wehrmacht uniforms outside Spain. Division Azul, which included a fighter squadron, was designated 250th Infantry Division by the Germans. The unit served with distinction against the Soviets, but was withdrawn by Spain when the tide of the war turned in 1943.

Not that the Germans need more help against the Russian bear, but I thought a house rule to inject a bit of historical flavor might be fun. Here’s my initial idea, though I’m open to suggestions:

During the non-combat move phase of the German turn in which they declare war on the USSR (or the first German turn following a Soviet DoW on Germany), one infantry unit may begin moving from Spain to the Eastern Front. Movement must be as direct as possible. When the infantry unit reaches any territory bordering an original Soviet territory, it is joined by one fighter. Both units are treated as annexed pro-Axis neutrals and immediately come under German control.

Spanish units may only engage in battle against Russian units. When any non-Soviet Allied powers capture or liberate a territory on the European continent (the area bordered by Denmark to the north, Normandy to the west and Greece to the south, not including islands in the Med), the Spanish units are immediately withdrawn from battle. The infantry unit is returned to Spain, while the fighter is removed from the board.

@weddingsinger said in Maximizing Cruiser Value?:

Which is more useful depends on what you want it for, I suppose.

The battleship’s ability to get healed is very useful when you’re the potential defender near your naval bases (Japan garrisoning Philippines, for example)

If you only have 20 IPC to spend on your navy, I think DD+CA vs. BB is a very close call. As you said, the battleship’s no-cost repair (versus a minimum of 8 IPC to replace a DD) is a significant advantage. However, DD+CA offers a slightly greater chance of scoring one hit in the first round of combat and a .17 chance of two hits, not to mention an anti-sub capability the BB lacks.

For me, I think it comes down to this: If the enemy has subs, go with CA+DD. If no subs, distance from a friendly port vs. distance from my nearest IC will guide my decision.

Either I’m not understanding these responses, or I didn’t clearly articulate my original question (or both, which is most likely). Let me try again:

Sticking strictly to OOB 2nd Ed. Global rules (no changes to unit cost or capabilities), does the purchase of one destroyer and one cruiser (assuming you plan to move and fight them as a pair, in effect making them a single unit) offer better value than one battleship?

Many players seem to have a problem with the cruiser, with most considering it overpriced. I know there’s been quite a bit of tinkering with that unit over in the House Rules section, from lowering the cost to adding anti-aircraft ability, and so on. Is it possible, though, that we’re simply not maximizing the value of cruisers within the OOB rules?

As I see it, the cruiser is overpriced if purchased and used in combat alone. When paired with a destroyer, however, it’s value increases considerably. Consider this:

Cruiser + Destroyer = Cost: 20 Attack/Defense Value: 5 Hits to kill: 2
Battleship = Cost: 20 Attack/Defense Value: 4 Hits to kill: 2

I know the BB still has an advantage, in that one hit doesn’t change the A/D value and it can be repaired. On the other hand, the CA+DD combo has a slightly greater chance of scoring one hit (and can potentially score two hits) per combat round.

With all the above in mind, if you’re buying units in anticipation of naval combat (as opposed to naval combat + amphibious assault), wouldn’t the CA+DD combo offer slightly better value than one BB?

@The-Lone-Wolf Those are the Karimata Islands. Value: .25 IPC (representing the birds nests harvested there for birds nest soup). Congrats on your cool custom map!

Seriously, though…maybe use some liquid paper, let it dry, then use a colored pencil to try to blend it with the ocean?