BB vs CA

[uneik]

Are heavy cruisers worth building over battleships? At the start of the game as UK I can make a CA that does 66% the damage of a BB but has no where near the survivability of a BB as it has 0 armor and has about half the HP. Production wise the BB costs 9944 and the CA costs 4988 making the CA roughly half the cost of the BB.

[mk11]

BC are generally better than BB or CA.

Decisions depend upon your nation. One issue with BB is the long repair times. If your goal is to get Naval Supremacy against the AI then being able to engage and repair quickly is useful.

[Bored Peon]

I always saw it this way. You get two Heavy Cruisers for the build time cost of one Battleship/Battlecruiser. Most of the time if you are a minor you are trying to fight against the higher naval supremacy values so you want more ships asap.

It also depends on the designers you have, if you even have one for the battleship hulls. Some countries only get the generic cruiser/destroyer/submarine design company.

Bear in mind the AI ignores naval supremacy for naval invasions. I have watched the German AI naval invade Canada from Germany and naval invade South Africa from Germany. So it does not matter if you got cruisers or battleship hulls defending naval supremacy wise.

[General WVPM]

Keep in mind that more capital ships means you need more screens to protect them. Also a BB can soak up more damage before going down. This means you can take damage, survive and repair. With CA you would probably lose some of them. (Recoverable losses vs irrecoverable losses)

[Bored Peon]

Originally posted by General WVPM:

Keep in mind that more capital ships means you need more screens to protect them. Also a BB can soak up more damage before going down. This means you can take damage, survive and repair. With CA you would probably lose some of them. (Recoverable losses vs irrecoverable losses)

It also depends upon the model year a 1944 Heavy cruiser is the equivalent of a 1936 battleship in terms of armor and health. The AI tends to take a LONG while before they build/replace ships with 1944 versions. As in it you would be in the mid 1950s or so before they even became somewhat common. By then your naval commanders should have so much skill to have an advantage.

The other thing to consider is heavy cruisers tend to be faster so when they retreat from a fight they can actually get away. While the slower battleships tend to get caught a second time before exiting the sea zone.

Which reminds me of another point that cruisers have more -visibility bonuses meaning they are harder to spot.

[00yiggdrasill00]

this ultimately comes down to why you are building them i think. if you are crossing deep ocean with no air support i would suggest the battleships under heavy escort because the armour will be important. with bigger patrols dragging out a battle the slower strike group can arrive and have its decisive battle or just plain scare them off. if its nearer the coast where nav bombers and fighters can fly go the heavy cruisers i think because they are cheaper and the overwhelming firepower their guns with bomber support can bring should be enough, though yes escort count could become an issue. you may even want to make the call on what to build now for what you expect in a few years down the war. this is all only my personal experience though so i accept it can be wrong.

[CaptainSpacetime]

A zero armor CA is a bad idea, would get smashed immediately.

The UK historically did go for a load of glass cannons but mostly because they needed a greater number of faster ships to cover their empire.

In the game I like to go max armor battleships because they'll rarely die and a long repair time is better than having to build a new ship. Plus buff battleships are cool.

[Bored Peon]

Originally posted by CaptainSpacetime:

In the game I like to go max armor battleships because they'll rarely die and a long repair time is better than having to build a new ship.

I think even with like max factory tech, naval production focus, and 100% stability it is still like 18 months.

I did a 1936 Heavy Cruiser as Iceland earlier today, each level of factory tech cut like a month off the production time. I think it was like 16 months originally in 1938 when I started it. I also noticed that with the generic design tree bonuses, the heavy cruiser only gets cruiser bonuses.

[00yiggdrasill00]

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

Originally posted by CaptainSpacetime:

In the game I like to go max armor battleships because they'll rarely die and a long repair time is better than having to build a new ship.

I think even with like max factory tech, naval production focus, and 100% stability it is still like 18 months.

I did a 1936 Heavy Cruiser as Iceland earlier today, each level of factory tech cut like a month off the production time. I think it was like 16 months originally in 1938 when I started it. I also noticed that with the generic design tree bonuses, the heavy cruiser only gets cruiser bonuses.

yeah the repair times are a bit extreme...though there is something to be said for not losing the manpower and eventually you end up with two ships over one.