From the country of bears on bicycles, balalaika and matrioshka.

Hello everyone. Am I the only one who thinks that Battlecruisers are too "small" to be a true warships? I mean that with those Space parameters that was given them in BFK you can't even create canonical Battlecruisers from TT game. Lets, say, create Armageddon class warship: It has one 2-point long range Lance (dorsal), two 2-point medium range Lances (port & starboard), two medium range broadside macrocannons and 6-point torpedo tubes. In addition it has Armored Prow (giving it 6+ forward armor). Now try to make it on paper. Even if we take every Essential Component with minimal Power/Space requirements, then putting in torpedoes, Strength 2 lances and cheapest broadside macrocannons we have no more Space for Armored Prow. And all because Armageddon hull have even less Space than Lunar class cruiser, from which it was originally constructed.
The same thing if you will try to create canonical Mars class battlecruiser.

Yes, I can put in it lesser Lances and don't use Broadside types of macrocannons and still will have a better-than-cruiser ship. And it's name will be a "Sh*tbox". So my question is: were those Hull tested during playtest or not? Or maybe I missed something?

Allow me to join your rant. (Its late enough here to do that)

Its probably written by the same person who allowed macrocannons to salvo and thus ignore armour like lances.

Same thing goes for the amount of transport available to ships without hangar bays. Try to create a transport ship with around 3+ barracks and still have a logical amount of hangar space which might just have none of the necessary mass lifters needed for the Imperial Guard. Halo Barges at 1 per 5 hull space +4 for the main cargo hold, Thats ~13 Halo barges to ferry a few divisions of troops down onto the ground.

On the topic of divisions, who wrote those troop numbers? 40000 troops or more are correctly calssified as a corps or an army. sheesh. Divisions are around 10k troops to maybe double that. Why call it something that we actually have and then going haywire with the numbers.

Crew numbers are also off scale. But that is an inherited problem. Still doesnt make it that much better.

Rant off .

OP- There's actually a note in Battlefleet Koronus to the effect that many of the ship classes from Battlefleet Gothic cannot be built with Common-quality components. You can construct them by using Good or Best quality components (being smaller). That said, anyone fitting a Modified Saturnine class-4A Ultra (for example) in a battlecruiser frame will find themselves running out of space long before they run out of power- so Augmented Retro-thrusters are the best additional structures (0 space requirements).

On the upside, this makes battlecruisers the most maneuverable thing in space, particularly when you fit it with high volume, low drain components like launch bays.

This does make things a little weird when you have something massing 29-33 megatonnes with the capability to thread a needle with their prow rams, but it's awesome if you're lucky enough to have one...

Well, If the only solution is to use Good/Best quality components then would not it be too pricey for the Navy to build such an expensive and at the same time not so much powerful ships?

And that don't explains why the Space parameters of Battlecruisers are lower than those of standard Cruisers.

For the Navy, price is no object. That's not the case for Rogue Traders.

How about a little common sense here? Compare the Overlord class to the Armageddon class. The Overlord has five more space, does not suffer from the "cramped" rule, and is otherwise identical... except it costs one more ship point. One. If cost is no object to the Imperial Navy, then why doesn't it replace all the Armageddons with Overlords?

Yeah, hopefully there will be a few changes to one or both of these entries once the errata come out. In my opinion, the Overlord class should be significantly more expensive than the other battlecruisers. It's a better ship.

In the interest of ending on a positive note, kudos for creating the Calixis-only Chalice class battlecruiser. That ship is interesting and different enough to be worth its own entry.

Cheers,

- V.

Erm... Not to sound cheeky or something. But since when exactly has the Human Empire of the Warhammer 40K universe been entirely logical?

Plus of course, even if the ship designs in Rogue Trader are less so than those of BFG, they still are abstractions. Not to forget that usually no two ships of the same class but different origins are exactly the same.

And quite a many ship designs can only be produced in certain areas or by certain shipyards. A fact that, thanks to the nature of the Empire and its outlook on technology, usually does not change. It may be that a certain design is better than another. But if the closest manufacturer of it is half a galaxy away, that isn't exactly of help to you, so you'll just have to make due with what you get here.

And then you must not forget, that every single cruiser is a mighty warmachine with hardly anything that can stand in its way. Able to destroy a whole planetary civilisation if need be. And battlecruisers are even more powerful. Even if some of them seem subpar in comparison to other designs, they are still incredibely mighty instruments of power. So much for "Are they worth the price?" Why, yes. Yes they are!

It's also worth bearing in mind that the Armageddon was not a class designed and built from the keel up (or spine down, as the case may be); it was a stop-gap measure to rapidly increase the number of available battlecruisers by converting Lunar-class cruisers.

When the Navy can afford to take the time and build a new battlecruiser, they would do so, and build it in a proper battlecruiser hull (Overlord, Mars, Chalice, whatever), but if it is running low on time, it may well decide to either do without or make a bastardised upgraded cruiser, like the Armageddon

Why should you choose a battlecruiser(outside Overlord and a dorsal weapon port) it has worse stats than a tyrant class cruiser(in space,sp,armour,and other defects like greater chance of multiple critical hits) or the same stats(speed,detection,hull,manuvrability) to be not worth it?

And the Overlord has a piddling 1 to Space over the tyrant class cruiser.

Lukkai & Alasseo, you both raise good points. The Imperium is in a dark age, losing knowledge faster than the Explorators can acquire it. So, availability of a specific hull type is by no means guaranteed.

Unfortunately, that leads to a direct conflict between the fluff and the rules. With the rules as written, there is simply no reason at all to buy maybe 1/2 to 2/3 of the ships in BFK. Some of the ships are clearly a better value than others - given the choice, an Overlord costs only 1 point more than an Armaggedon, so that's a no-brainer. And, if you don't want the dorsal weapon, the Tyrant is clearly better than most of the battlecruisers.

If I may be so bold, the simplest fix is to make significant changes to the ship point cost.

Just my 2 thrones, and cheers,

- V.

guys, why even go for the Armageddon, the overlord has more free gun space and you have the Mars pattern with a nova cannon and 2 hanger bays and still room for decent guns and components. In my opinion these rants are coming from new players who haven't learned to plan out the purpose of their vessels to begin with. A vessel, regardless of class must have a clear purpose and function that suits the needs and or play still of the Rogue trader. You will never be able to fit every thing you want, but you can still build a ship that will more than fill the role intended. If you have selected a Battlecrusier as your starting ship, you have chosen to be a militant Rogue trader. The ship must be fitted depending on class to get the most out of its function as a war ship as possible even if it mean sacrificing components you may have wanted in addition to the core components.

Myself, I would have just thought it'd be a bad idea to work from the basis that a shipt's BFG weapon stats transfer 1-for-1 in to Rogue Trader (though admitedly, they do look pretty close in some areas).

Voronesh said:

When they want to unload an army from a transport, they land the transport.

Not only that, but there are more types of small craft than the piddling few already statted out. Just because they havent been made 'official', that dosent mean there arent dedicated shuttles capable of more lift than a halo barge.

first of all if you haven't noticed, the 40k universe up scales everything. a ship is a hive city within it's self and a generally half a kilometer in length or longer. The imperial guard as another example has no fixed number other that it contains billions of soldiers and entire worlds are developed for the sol purpose of maintaining them. The wars that the imperium fights are grand in scale and can involve millions on both sides. 40,000 might be considered and army to us, but then again at times that is all that is protecting one planet. If you are going to be involved in Rogue trader you have to be able to comprehend and compensate for the sheer size and complexity that comes with the setting, remember you have the entire expanse for the taking and you will fail if you expect to do it with a hand full of men and just your starting ship.

Well Vandegraffe, if you go by numbers alone, some of the ship designs are clearly superior to the others. Yet most of the inferior designs will suddenly shine in the right circumstances. And there is one other thing that one should keep in mind when playing a game like Rogue Trader.

This is one of these games that allows not only to play the munchkin, but to play with style and not even lose too much efficiency while doing so.

It is of course right, that safe if you go for the martial campaign, a battlecruiser will usually not be the best choice for a Rogue Trader. Still be a good choice, naturally, if you want to back up your words every now and then when dealing with others.

Vandegraffe said:

Theres a 'fluff' reason - it takes a long time to build a new ship and a LOT LESS TIME to refit a banged up LUNAR Class into an ARMAGEDDON.

I have beef with the Armageddon even being in this as, the Orion, the very first Lunar to be altered to an Armageddon class, was shortly before the Third War for Armageddon.

Which Hasn't Happened Yet.

BaronIveagh said:

Retcon.

Retcon.

Nothing to see here, keep moving on. By decree of the corpse-god.

BaronIveagh said:

Do you have a source for this? According to Armada, the Orion was refitted into an Armageddon class following a battle with chaos raiders over Pyran...but there's nothing in the book about this happening shortly before the Third Armageddon War?

I mean, Lexicanum refers to this 3rd war for Armageddon timing thing...but its only source seems to be Armada, p17...which doesn't actually say this...

BTW Space issues.

The Gothic class cruiser is already hard to build; starting with the Tyrant base, it should barely work out. You are basically left without space and power.

BUT:

Try to do an Adeptus Mechanicus Gothic class cruiser. You need to up turrets by one (for free maybe), and fit a Godhammer lance in a dorsal (or prow slot) oin top of it. While no space and power is left over. This is done using the Adeptus Mechanicus pdf that has these changes for AdMech ships.

Oh well. The AdMech builds ships so well, it isnt even covered by the rules.

The battlecruisers that are refits should be easier to obtain in game than the purpose built models. The acquisition rules point out that GMs can and should adjust the difficulty of finding and completing acquisitions depending on location and circumstances. This certainly counts.

In any case, by the book even cruisers are not that easy to come by in the Koronus Expanse. Obtaining *any* battlecruiser (or Emperor willing, a grand cruiser) may well be better suited to an endeavour than a simple acquisition.

Lightbringer said:

Codex Armageddon has a map in it to cover the various worlds of the conflict. Pyran and Mongolor were the Chaos/IoM/Eldar front. Since the previous Chaos attack on Pyran took place 2k years before the Lunar was created(Armageddon website), let alone the Armageddon...

BaronIveagh said:

Well... I can find the map in Codex Armageddon...which shows where Pyran is...but I can't find this reference on the Armageddon website. Do you have a link by any chance?

Lightbringer said:

http://web.archive.org/web/20070202083531/http://www.armageddon3.com/English/Campaign/Troops/pyran.html

Speaking of changes in FFG versions, it seems the sizes of warships has almost doubled from previous sources (I am however unsure if the previous sources were official or not.)

And an Armageddon is pretty much an aweful hull as it is currently written, the Chalice for the same points is more interesting, and the Overlord for 1 point more is much better. The plus point a battlecruiser has over a cruiser is really mainly the +1 dorsal weapon.