Cruisers?

They are fine as they are. Aircraft aren't as deadly against ships as you seem to think.

As they are, there's no real point in building them. Cruisers could have an attack radius against air, firing at any aircraft that wander too near, even.

No, we have talked about this before. They can lock down the Med on temp terms and I have taken out BB with them. They have their uses.

You "Can" take out BB with (enough) destroyers, too. That does not mean that is what their use is.

No. Cruisers are for ship v ship combat and bombardments. You should use them for this. BB and DD can defend themselves from aircraft just fine.

BB are for ship vs ship and bombardment. BB, sub, destroyer are a rock, paper, scissors situation. Cruisers do not fit into their proper place because they were not historically "baby battleships," they were AA ships. Being a baby BB is useless and a majority of the community agrees.

Where is your proof of the majority? If we are lying, CA are great, I wiped out 50k units in Berlin with just one!!!!1!!1!!

They are good. If you can't use them, I would recommend learning how or just building something else instead.

Czar's guide even points out that they are absolutely useless. As it stands, researching them is a waste of time, when you can just research BB's and not their baby brothers.

Czar also points out that you should develop your own strategy and not base everything off of his guide.

So him saying to form your own strategy negates that he pointed out cruisers are useless? I'm not sure where you are going with this, besides for severely off topic.

You were the one who brought it OT, talking about the guide. Also, yes, it does negate that fact. Trust me, I know a lot about this game. I am the enlightened one for a reason.

*Ahem*

comrade dave wrote:

3. Don't. Try and win an argument with ButterBallBill, even if you have a clearer and better point of view, he's too stubborn to listen.

Czar's guide was used to point out cruiser's uselessness. Your only point is to agree that they are baby versions of the BB, and a complete waste of research time. Now you're enlightened.

No, I never said that. You are twisting my words. I said they bombard land units and engage in ship v ship successfully. I said they are useful. You just completely misunderstood that. Obviously you know that ships are meant to be used together, with CA coming in close while BB provides support from afar.

They do two things and compared to BB's, they do both poorly.

They are both quicker and cheaper to build. Good for countries that don't need a big navy, like SU and Germany.

WiseOdin wrote:

Shouldn't cruisers have a much higher AA rating, as they were the AA ships of WWII?

Cruisers are workhorses. Big, fast, serious armor and serious guns. Allround, multi-role ships.

NOT just for AA. At the end of the war, some specialised AA cruisers were build. Thats an exeption, not the majority.

Battleships are better in an anti-ship role, or for land bombardment. They are also a lot more expensive to build and to maintain.

In ww2, the US build 8 BBs and 48 CCs; the UK 5 BBs and 32 CCs. If a CC was just a 'useless baby BB' they wouldnt have.

i can agree

BlackPrince2 wrote:

WiseOdin wrote:

Shouldn't cruisers have a much higher AA rating, as they were the AA ships of WWII?

Cruisers are workhorses. Big, fast, serious armor and serious guns. Allround, multi-role ships.

NOT just for AA. At the end of the war, some specialised AA cruisers were build. Thats an exeption, not the majority.

Battleships are better in an anti-ship role, or for land bombardment. They are also a lot more expensive to build and to maintain.

In ww2, the US build 8 BBs and 48 CCs; the UK 5 BBs and 32 CCs. If a CC was just a 'useless baby BB' they wouldnt have.

destroyers to defend againts subs and planes, while battleships are for ship combat and bombardment.

cruisers are all rounded, flexible ship in the navy they can do both jobs but not as much as the two in specifics roles, they will mostly form the core of your navy.

Don't base anything in the guide, to seasoned commanders like ourselves (at least some of us) the guide is basicly reference and nothing more, if it's up to us the guide is worthless againts those who know the game.

Your first flaw is placing the guide in high regard and the base of your argument, you already lost the moment you speak.