There is a ship class that was laid down to answer the question, "If the Imperium can no longer make Battleships or Grand Cruisers, what is the heaviest, biggest, most heavily armed, shielded, and armored ship, built along modern tactical lines, that the Imperium can make?"

The Ifrit-class Heavy Battlecruiser, or affectionately designated "Pocket Battleship" is the answer to this question. Based on the Overlord's design, this ship is slightly larger, and trades the speed, relative low price and relatively rapid construction time of the Overlord, and also the manoeuvrability of a Battlecruiser to have some of the heaviest shielding and armour the Imperium can put together in a new ship. Primarily designed to field Battlecruiser-scale components, it can also handle void shields that are 'Grand Cruiser Only', and place heavier weapons than would be expected in a mere Battlecruiser in the Dorsal slot. Of course, it can mount a Nova Cannon.

Speed: 4
Turret Rating: 2
Space: 80
Detection: 10
Armor: 22
Maneuverability: 8
Hull: 72
Weapon Slots:
Dorsal 1
Prow 1
Port 2
Starboard 2
Ship Points: 68

Heavy Battlecruiser: A Battlecruiser class ship that can field Grand Cruiser scale Void Shields and treats the Dorsal slot as being Grand Cruiser scale as well for purposes of heavy weaponry. It can not mount Grand Cruiser scale drives, only Battlecruiser scale drives and smaller.

---------------

So what do you all think? A little overpowered? In need of some more drawbacks? Needs to cost more ship points? Change the name (I couldn't find the name in use elsewhere in 40k, but I am not aware of all canon ship names...)?

I do not see how it could use grad cruiser parts, Its a smaller ship class. That has to be nixed off the bat. Your concept just is not working here if that is all you are trying to do. If the goal is a lighter grand cruiser make it a grand cruiser hull but "light" or weaker.

It looks like an overlord with too much armor, more space and more Hull points. I would drop the space back to the overlords 78 ditched the thing about grand cruiser parts as it makes no sense and keep the other changes.

I can see where he's going with grand cruiser parts personally. I'd allow that to remain but find some way to penalize it further because of them. Like manuverability should take a bigger hit.

I don't see size or spaces.

This looks like... maybe an Overlord with the Excess Void Armour from Lure, and about +4 spaces?

I can see where he's going with grand cruiser parts personally. I'd allow that to remain but find some way to penalize it further because of them. Like manuverability should take a bigger hit.

I see what he is trying to do but ,I disagree. If he wants grand cruiser parts it needs to be a grand cruiser, Make it a grand crusier hull, hit the manuverablity and speed hard to make up for the armor beef up and call it a day.

Well, it has to have SOMETHING more than be an Overlord with excess void armor. Otherwise you would just add armor to an Overlord and be done with it! Hence the Secutor-style 'reaching one class up' void shield thing, and the same with the Dorsal slot. And there IS precedence for doing that; see the aforementioned Secutor. And I didn't list mass/crew/dimensions/accel because that's irrelevant to play. Maybe put it down to 6 maneuver? Or 5? Or even 4?

And the idea is that the Imperium cannot make grand cruisers any more. Full stop!

Its not that they can not make them, they simply have no desire to do so. They are an old style of fighting the fleet no longer uses. Something is to be said for the designs as well as many fell to chaos so often most do not recall those ships ever being from the IoM.

They sill have plenty of them, but do not use them in front line fleets.

So, again this idea is 'the heaviest, most heavily armored, most heavily armed ship that can do the modern style of fighting, if a little bit slower than an up-engined battlecruiser'. Which is why it isn't, you know. Port 3 / Starboard 3 in the weaponry, like most old style Heavy Cruisers.

I simply do not see it as being able to carry grand crusier parts. That is my issue, I also do not buy the Secutor argument. The Secutor is an admech design built around that concept and as a light cruiser its not a big deal really at add crusier void sheilds. If sheilds were all you were adding it would not be that big a deal, I still would not allow it myself.

It is an overlord with extra armor, more hull points and too much space. A battlecrusier is designed to straddle the line between heavy cursiers and battleships. They are the replacement for the old grand cursiers using tech the IoM can still mass produce. You are trying to fill a role already filled by modifiying a ship filling it.

I'd read somewhere before that the Imperium couldn't easily make grand cruisers anymore, either. I don't remember if it was the keel-to-length ratio balance or the engines required, but it was something like that.

I have to say, the ideas of battlecruiser this and grand cruiser that don't sit well with me (grand cruiser shields but not engines, battlecruiser engines but not shields.) My reason is that battlecruiser engines are a relatively new development (as I recall, don't remember if through STC retrieval or what). That means that your hull is new. Then again, it also seems to me that most battlecruiser hulls are just cruiser hulls with large engines and more weapons. I don't know.

The Imperium has quite a lot of cruiser classes, but they are mostly doable with the hulls already in existence.

Some of the ships just haven't been done (e.g. Silurian cruisers).

While it's always tempting to throw a unique hull into some ship graveyard for the players to find, I've so far resisted and tried to make hulls for ships that are more commonplace, since there are many commonplace hulls that have not yet been statted. Hence, Ive stuck to smaller ship hulls, mostly merchant types.

I'm not trying to denigrate your attempt here, Gavinfoxx. I'm just putting forth reasons it's hard to come up with some types of ship hulls.

I'd read somewhere before that the Imperium couldn't easily make grand cruisers anymore, either. I don't remember if it was the keel-to-length ratio balance or the engines required, but it was something like that.

BFK says "revolutionary and highly sophisticated warp and realspace engine designs are now poorly understood, leading to many well publicised disasters and warp calamities.Indeed"

It also says they are still constructed, but rarely and the fleet looks at them as " dangerous,temperamental,and constructed

using dubious and possibly heretical technologies". They are simply not trusted and not replaced. Moist still in the navy are placed in reserve fleets because of how officers see them. It also says many Rogue traders end up with them as many Lord admiralsare willing "to divest themselves of what they regard as expensive and hazardous anachronisms."

Battlecruisers are what replaced them as Grand cruisers were seen as having failed by the navy. You are correct in that Battlecruisers are really upgunned cruisers with larger drives. They are cheaper to make, faster to build and regaurded as all around better and safer by the navy than grand cruisers.

Which is why this isn't a battlecruiser? It is designed to be a modern heavy cruiser built along battlecruiser lines?

IE, rather than 'lots of guns, good speed, some armor', it's 'lots of guns, lots of armor, bad speed'? IE, the closest they can get to a battleship, but smaller? So a modern pocket battleship?

Heavy cruiser is under battlecruiser. The battle cruiser fills the role you are talking about. Heaviest armor outside of a grand cruiser. You are trying to replace the battle cruiser, the IoM tends to be very happy with the battlecruiser.

Are you sure heavy cruiser is smaller than battlecruiser?

I thought they were roughly the same size, with battlecruiser being GUNS/ENGINES, and Heavy Cruiser being GUNS/ARMOR.

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/images/spacewarship/shipgrid1.png

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/images/spacewarship/trianglepercent.png

I don't think 40k does this exactly, but the idea is that battlecruiser is guns/engines, and battleship is guns/armor, and smaller than battleship with lots of armor = pocket battleship, and in some parts of 40k lore, I believe that's heavy cruiser, since grand cruisers are just big, under-armored for their size, cruisers

Well, in Terrestrial navy parlance, battleships (BB) are the epitome of warship in their time. Battlecruisers (BC) are lightly armored by comparison, but with large armaments. Off-hand, I can only think of a few that actually carried battleship armament (Repulse, Renown, Hood, and a few more WWI models), and they were all British ships. The German ones carried the next size down (both Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, and the pocket battleship all carried 11" guns compared to the 15" guns of the Bismark). Others slated as BCs were actually laid down as BBs (Japanese Kongo-class comes to mind), but not finished in good speed and repurposed with upgraded engines. The US laid down some BCs near the end of WWII (Alaska and Guam).

Heavy cruisers (CA) were a capital ship of the line, but nothing that could stand up to a BB. Originally, they were just cruisers, and these were limited in number to each country under the Washington Treaty. Cruisers carried 8" guns, no larger, or they'd be considered BBs, so pretty much everyone built them with 8" guns. The British, however, needed more ships of a similar build to defend the trade routes of their far-flung possessions. Thus was born the light cruiser (CL). They had 5.5" or 6" guns, so they didn't violate the terms of the Washington Treaty. They were made large, like cruisers, because they needed to be able to carry large amounts of fuel for cruising while looking for pirates and commerce raiders. They didn't need much armor because they weren't expected to stand in line of battle and pirates didn't carry large caliber weapons.

And while you may not have wanted a nautical lesson, FFG did (or should have) based their designations on these guidelines. Other types of cruisers have existed though time (armor cruisers, or AC), but FFG doesn't seem to have used them. FFG didn't follow naval terminology were it comes to destroyers and frigates, so who knows? I could be wrong, and giving FFG more credit than is due.

Your chart, however, definitely shows the order of BC/CA/(ambiguous cruiser)/CL.

WH40k does have battlecruisers, heavy cruisers, cruisers, and light cruisers. The only heavy cruiser statted out by FFG is the Optimus Nemesis. Note that it is in all ways a battlecruiser, except slightly faster, which might mean nothing since all Chaos vessels seem to be slightly faster. It has slightly more hull integrity and detection capability, too, but the same general size (doesn't say exactly), the same weapon slots, same maneuverability, turret rating ( plus micro defense lasers), etc.

When asking about size of Heavy Cruisers vs Grand Cruisers, since there were no official dimensions it's hard to say. However Battlefleet Gothic notes that in order to take a Grand Cruiser you need a total of three Cruisers, whereas to take a Heavy Cruiser you only need a minimum of two Cruisers. In addition, Heavy Cruisers count as Cruisers when checking if you can take a Grand Cruiser. To me, this is implying that Heavy Cruisers are more on the order of a souped-up Cruiser than a scaled-down Grand Cruiser.

This is consistent with some ship backgrounds also. The Hellfire Heavy Cruiser was an attempt to mount more powerful lances on a Cruiser hull. The Cardinal was a Cruiser with Xenos technology implanted (it went hilariously wrong!). The Styx Heavy Cruiser was phased out in favour of newer Cruisers, causing their captains to go Renegade.

The only measurements given for a Heavy Cruiser are the Hades-class in BFK, which gives it as 5.2 kilometers by .8 kilometers with a mass of 33.5 megatonnes. The smallest Grand Cruiser is the Retaliator which is 6.2 kilometers by 1.4 kilometers with a mass of 38 megatonnes. It's clear there is meant to be a difference in size and armaments between the two classes I feel.

As an interesting note (to me), the Armageddon Battlecruiser is an armoued-up Lunar cruiser, and is 5 kilometers by .8 kilometers, meaning that's more what a Heavy Cruiser should be. For my group's Heavy Cruisers I base it off of a Cruiser with a lot of armour, slightly more hull space, but as a compromise they're not allowed to make any advanced turning option ever. Fly straight, you stupid piece of scrap.

Are you sure heavy cruiser is smaller than battlecruiser?

I never said smaller, I said under. I am going off only the Rogue trader books. BFK outright says that is what a Battle cruiser is, the replacement for the grand crusier. A "heavy" anything is still the hull type it uses in Rogue trader as far as I can tell. A "Heavy" cruiser is a cruiser, just as a Heavy frigate is a frigate. As far as the game cares its just means it has more armor and often more HP than is common for its hull type.

A battle crusier however is a whole other hull type. They are the same size as a crusier hull but carry more weapons, meaning one more weapon slot. hey are simply up gunned cruisers.

FFG did not base its ships off the navy. "heavy" is just a word.

FFG based their ships off BFG, and BFG definitely based their ships off the navy. They didn't call them light, medium, heavy, and super-heavy tanks, but destroyers, frigates, cruisers, and battleships. It goes deeper than that, and it's explicit.

And since when is the Imperium not making battleships anymore? I've read that certain classes aren't built anymore, but not the whole spectrum called battleships.

FFG based their ships off BFG, and BFG definitely based their ships off the navy. They didn't call them light, medium, heavy, and super-heavy tanks, but destroyers, frigates, cruisers, and battleships. It goes deeper than that, and it's explicit.

And since when is the Imperium not making battleships anymore? I've read that certain classes aren't built anymore, but not the whole spectrum called battleships.

What I mean is FFG did not go into great details and design x class to do just what its class in the navy does. They throw the "Heavy" name around when they fill like it fits or to look cool. As far as I can tell the IoM does not have a heavy cruiser in Rt as of yet. Chaos "Heavy" cruisers seem to be simply battle cruisers.

Also As far as I know they still pump out battleships just as they still make grand cruisers.

Yeah, the big Battleships are still made; they're just still made sparingly, slowly, and the way the Imperium makes most things. Grand Cruisers and Battle Cruisers are/were to give you something LIKE a Battleship, but for when such an august ship, or squadron, is not available, or appropriate for the sortie in question (nothing you don't already know ) Grand Cruisers aren't made much, because Tzeentch inspired their manfacture, or some other, similarly-veiled in the motions of Chaos theme, and Battlecruisers are new enough that there aren't too many of them, yet, by comparison. If I've been reading the thread right (here's hoping) the goal was for a Battlecruiser, maybe approaching a Grand Cruiser, but with a slightly different stat spread, that can function LIKE a Grand Cruiser, but isn't cursed by virtue of its existence, demonstrating the best of the stuff the Imperium CAN still reliably make more than one of.

Battleships are still happily churned out, just churned out at a lesser rate than the battles the Imperium enters would like to chew them up, and GCs and BCs alleviate this "shortage" of superships needed to fight the Grand Cruisers of Chaos, the plethora of ships Tau build in weeks, and whatever else the galaxy spawns up. And then maybe that's supposed to lead to players having the next closest thing to a Battleship, since we can't have those ridiculous things.

The lack in numbers of battleships has more to do with how the IoM builds ships than anything. They can build one in what a decade, sometimes far longer? They simply build them too slowly to make up for combat loses. The battle cruiser is made with ease of construction in mind so are churned out faster and in far greater numbers.

The biggest issue with grand cruisers seems to be the Navy;s view of them. The navy simply does not want the things.

I read in one of the many books ( forget which one right now but remember it was an orbital dockyard above a stone age type imperial planet ) that once a year each year the mechanicum would collect the harvest of mined materials from the planet and bring it up to space...and in 100 years they got to watch the bright star moving off into the distance as a new battleship was leaving the dockyard..So 100 years to complete a Battleship sized ship according to that tidbit.

I read in one of the many books ( forget which one right now but remember it was an orbital dockyard above a stone age type imperial planet ) that once a year each year the mechanicum would collect the harvest of mined materials from the planet and bring it up to space...and in 100 years they got to watch the bright star moving off into the distance as a new battleship was leaving the dockyard..So 100 years to complete a Battleship sized ship according to that tidbit.

Huh ... I thought that one was 10 years for a Lunar-class cruiser.

Either way, it's wildly inconsistent with the 'everything takes forever' meme, especially since it's being done with no real infrastructure support, and if they can do it that fast there , they should be able to pump ships out a whole lot faster in proper yards with proper support infrastructure.