van Riebeeck said:

Hopefully the OP doesn't mind the /threadjack...

I've read the Mathammer thread and the Capitol ships not so Capitol thread (and others). My play experience and my own number crunching don't jive with those threads. But I'm loathe to jump into a "house rule" thread and tell people that the way they like to play a game is wrong : )

"Its duck, duck, goose!" "No, its duck, duck, grey duck!" -- probably only funny to midwest Americans, but best analogy I have.

Van Riebeeck said "Considering both their BFG background and mass/manpower"

I've never played BFG, but from what I gather you can get 12 Frigates for the cost of a Cruiser in that game? If RT allowed you to pick up a 12 pack of Frigates for the cost of a Cruiser given the ships capacities in RT I'd have tossed the book out a window. But in RT a Cruiser costs about 150% of a Frigate, and I'm not coming from a BFG background so I don't picture a Cruiser wiping out 6 Frigates a turn taking little to no damage in return.

Mass/Manpower, sadly the mechanics do not reflect the fluff. I 100% agree. But from the perspective of a PC group, buying a ship on an SP budget a Cruiser is roughly 150% more expensive, but much more effective.

A turbulent frigate v. a Lunnar Cruiser 42 SP v 60 SP, and Sunsears all around 44 SP to 65 SP. (I think we both agree that Sunsears are generally the best option for a Frigate?). Not quite 150% SP, close enough for government work. Frigate has 8 power, 4 space left for whatever else it needs. Lunnar Cruiser will have 12 power and 13 space. 50% more power, 300% more space for more PF boosters or more Dakka. (Miloslav Warp engines on both, otherwise standard essential components). Cruiser wins by more than 50%.

FFG got single target damage output close to straight line growth, if not for the fact that Cruisers get bigger guns. Frigate 2 guns, Cruiser can put 3 guns on one target. Frigate has better arcs, but I've never had a problem getting the broadsides to bear on the light cruiser we run with, and I've had a pack of Eldar show up in our rear arc at knife range. In the hands of a PC group getting the cruiser broadsides on a target is rarely an issue, at most they'll need to perform a Come to a New Heading once in a while. A one turn -20 to shooting that happens in ambush scenarios. But 2 of the 3 Cruiser guns can be Broadsides, and the chase armament for a Cruiser can be Nova Cannons or Hecutor, or Bombardment Cannons. On a PC ship the STR 6 Broadsides matter. Those slacker NPC ships with a crew quality of 30 or 40? Not so much, but a PC ship after the extended actions is typically sitting at 80% to hit or more by rank 3 or 4. The two gun Frigate is at most 8 hits at d10+2. The Cruiser is at 12 hits max just from the Broadsides, the chase armament puts the Cruiser way over. Again, Cruiser by more than 50%, lots more.

In terms of damage taken that second void shield really cuts down on the amount of damage you would expect to take from typical NPC ships. Our Secutor Light Cruiser has been attacked by three our four escort sized ships and rarely takes any damage. Vs. a NPC gunnery of 30 to 40 a Cruiser is all but immune to the two macrocannon armed escort classes. Even an NPC Cruiser with 2 broadsides and chase armament is only leaking damage through on a couple of good rolls. Ironically the best armament v. a PC with two shields are lances. They're terrible for PCs, but for the lower skilled NPCs that don't care about the SP, Power, or space, lances are the best chance at leaking a bit of damage through.

Now if your GM is being particularly cruel and has a BattleCruiser with two broadsides and two chasers bearing down on you and rolls 16 hits the expanding ball of gas that was a Frigate can gloat "ha! I blew up at 9 hits, that cruiser went up at 12! Only 33% more hits..." So I'll call damage taken a draw. Spike damage goes to Frigate (with the caveat that the Frigate is going to die before the cruiser in any case), and multiple damage sources goes to Cruiser.

Things I 100% agree with: Lances are a mechanical trap. PCs should never, ever, take them RAW. Also, SP/PF isn't a straight line trade off, however, once a PC group has decided on the split the bigger hull is mechanically a better choice. Yes the 70 point Frigate would be "fully kitted out". But the most common and effective PF boosters a ship can equip are hull and hold components and are a straight up test. It will not take long for the cruiser to catch up, and then pass the frigate. Its the standard RPG choice of slow start / strong finish vs. fast start/ weak finish. The longer the campaign the further ahead the cruiser gets.

Apologies to the OP. /end threadjack

Well, I must admit that you make some valid points there, and I might be thinking too much from my 'How should a battlefleet behave' point of view. Two things are absolutely certain: A cruiser has far more growth potential, and on the long run that pays off and the extra space in a cruiser allows for far more nice extra's.

In the end, there is a second reason why I, well, always doubt a bit on the cruiser as a starting ship, but that is more a background reason, that is of course every parties right to decide on. But cruisers are quite valuable units and the Imperial Navy considers each of them a real asset. As such, they do not 'feel' as the normal ship a starting Rogue Trader is kitted out with. Of course, there are many exceptions and the same case could be made for an over the top frigate with golden trimmings. It is not the subject of this thread, but I am pondering if the availiability rules should not reflect production capability rather then 'power', with some weapons being comparatively pentiful (like torpedoes, with which so many Imperial Warships are by default armed and of which the basic versions are turned out by the dozen) and other quite rare (like plasma weapons). And following that logic, equipping a modest frigate with a supercharged plasma armament will really ask for a real good reason. But that is another story.

FvR

Admiral Cain said:

I'm not sure how you got these numbers:

Lunar Cruiser : 75 Space

Essential Components : Jovian 4 Drive (14 S, +75Pow), Miloslav 2 Warp (12 S 10P), Gellar (0S 1P), Multiple Void (2S 7P), Combat Bridge (2S 2P), M1rLife (2S 4P), Pressed Crew (3S 2P), M100 Auger (0S 3P)

Total: 35Space taken, 40 left; 29Power taken; 46 left

Now the macrobatteries, if you take 4 Broadside Sunsear + 1 normal Prow sunsear thus 4x(6S 9P)+1x(4S 6P), total 30S 42P.

Thus only 5S 4P left, not much more than the standard frigate?

Well, if you equip a Lunar fully for ship to ship fighting, it will be quite filled to the brim. After all, it is a warship, and those craft seldom have loads of unused space, both in the real world as in WH40k.

FvR

True.

I was just trying to get the same numbers (made a mistake 10S 4P left is correct) as Cain which seemed very attractive with lots of shooting power and lots of space left...

There is nonsense in this thread.

Battlefleet Gothic :

Sword Class frigate - 35points

speed 25cm

turns 90*

shields 1

turrets 2

armour 5+

hitpoints: 1

weaponry :

strength 4 weapon battery - 30cm range - Left/Front/Right

Lunar Class Cruiser - 180 points

speed 20cm

turns 45*

shields 2

turrets 2

armour 5+ / 6+ prow

hitpoints: 8

weaponry:

port strength 6 weapon battery - 30cm range - Left

starboard strength 6 weapon battery - 30cm range - Right

port lance strength 2 - 30cm range - Left

starboard lance strength 2 - 30cm - Right

prow torpedoes strength 6 - 30cmspeed - Front

consider that in BFG at 30cm 1 lance equals 3 batteries.

So for one Lunar you could buy 5 Sword Class Frigates (5*35-175).

5 Swords is 5 single hitpoints and strength 20 weapon battery

1 Lunar is 8 massed hitpoints and strength 24 weapon battery (lance equalized as wb) + 6 torpedoes.

So nothing of this 12 frigates per cruiser.

Firestorm Frigate with a Titanforge and any damned macrocannons you want. Crack crew.

Is it the most efficient use oif your points? Nah. It is freaking cool? **** straight it is! Also, the default ship character sheet from the corebook has a Firestorm on it, making it look like FFG custom built the sheet for your Dynasty (which is clearly more loved that the other scum who claim to have a warrant of trade). All components pumped up in quality, archeotech wherever allowed. Kickass.

For the OP, an interesting point is to have the PC get have a loyalist "chaos" ship. By cannon and fluff this is legit and figuring out the stats is simple, just put in a normal drive and give it a space point that fits with all the other vessels in its size range. If you feel the need to give it its book armament there are very few that cannot have their space and power costs reverse engineered by comparing them to imperial components. For instance banefire lances are strait up godsbane lances and phased plasma batteries are just good quality hecutor plasma batteries.

For the sidetracked frigates vs capital ships.

Admiral Cane you might not have taken into account the effect of criticals and other actions.

By using 2 ships they can pull out 2x the critical hits, 2x the hit and runs, etc.

llsoth said:

What? No. 90% of Chaos craft are manufactured by Dark Mechanicus shipyards, the remainder are relics from the Heresy, each with hundreds of loyalist ship-kills to their name, each with a name and history to put fear into the bravest fleet admiral.

Pretty much all of the chaos fleet lists are old imperial designs, for instance the iconoclast and repulsive are both examples of "chaos" ships. Many of the chaos ships that are still in imperial control have been relegated to reserve fleets.

Yes the forces of chaos are making new ships, but a RT could get one of the same class out of mothballs, space hulk, ancient heirloom, etc.