Destroyers vs Battleships

[miccofl]

I've actually built a defensive navy that stays by my coastlines and attacks anyone that approaches, and a strike force that goes out towards whatever victims I'm attacking. The defensive navy is all destroyers, since the idea is that my bombers will decimate any approaching ships down to 1 hit point and the destroyers just need to finish them off. I suppose subs would work for this purpose also, but I like the faster movement of destroyers. My offensive navy contains carriers, transports, and a ton of destroyers. The transports are carrying marines or other land units. Marines are pereferable since it saves a turn (you don't have to land first and expose yourself to a counterattack), but it's best to use your carrier-based bombers and naval bombardment to knock all the defenders down before launching the marine attack. Losing marines is a pain since typically you're fighting pretty far from home and reinforcements take a long time to arrive.

I can see it now: PTW Multi- Player Tournament; Jutland – Leyte…
Can't wait!

[The_Hawk]

I've got to say that I go exclusively with Battleships over Destroyers. My thing is quality of quantity. I also use my Battleships in stacks as well, so I don't have problems with ambushes at sea. Besides, what would you rather have protecting 10 Transports carrying your most loyal and bloodthirsty countrymen? 4 Destroyers, or 4 Battleships?

The key for me is to focus cities on developing Battleships. I always take care to develop border cities with the best possible production possibilities. That way, once they're up and running, I know I can kick out Battleships in 3-9 turns. Then, I dedicate most of my border cities to cranking them out exclusively, with 2-3 cities devoted to spitting out Nuclear Subs. That's for the entire game with few exceptions. I might take a couple of these cities and build some cruisers when I get to them for the visibility factor but that's it. I've had a battleship take a head-on ambush from multiple subs and have personally talked to the mess hall soldiers in my nation who lived to talk about it! Battleships for sure!

[albiedamned]

Of course you would prefer 4 battleships to 4 destroyers. There is no question about that. The question is, given the production costs, would you prefer 4 battleships or 6 destroyers?

[alexman]

The ratio is actually 3 Battleships (200 shields each) to 5 Destroyers (120 shields each).

And if this is of any help, an army of three regular Battleships (if there were such a thing) attacking an army of five regular Destroyers, would win 67% of the time. But the Destroyer army attacking the Battleship army wins 85% of the time.

I would go with the Destroyers.

[albiedamned]

And those odds are using straight attacks, I assume. In reality, with greater numbers, you would probably use bombard attacks first (with no chance of taking damage yourself), and then sink the weakened battleships with your remaining destroyers.

Your odds also clearly show that the key is being the attacker, not the defender. If you're the attacker, the odds are you will win regardless of which side you take in this battle.