 
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 4 posts ] |
|
Commonness of Battlecruisers |
|
Xavi
|
Post subject: Commonness of Battlecruisers  Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2003 10:55 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 12:30 am
Posts: 939
Location: University of Essex, Colchester, UK (soon to be Brighton, Sussex, UK)
|
Hello all,
In a recent post about my 1500 pts fleet (that already contains an Emperor BB) I have been advised in an other forum to also take an Armageddon BC. While the advise is definitively sound advise from a gaming perspective I don't know if it is a good move from a background point of view.
I see BB and BC to be something rare but I don?t know if it is true or not. I am quite sure BB *are* rare but what about BCs? Are they really a weird sighting or are they relatively common? I know they are supposed to be created out of regular cruisers (at least some of them) but they are still defined with a mix of respect and rareness in them in the fluff. Yeah, granted, some other stuff in the fluff is more than debatable, but you get the point. If I upgrade a tyrant to be an Armageddon battle cruiser I would be getting a BB, a BC and 3 line cruisers in the fleet (apart from 2 escort squadrons). Do that seem an average fleet to you or is it to ?big ship? heavy?
I am more than likely to test this fleet because more or less has everything that I wanted to test on the battlefield (mainly NC x2, torps and attack craft) but I don?t know if I should fix the fleet to be that way even if it works. I am quite a fluffer when it comes to the GW games 
So, how common are the BCs?
Cheers,
Xavi
_________________
Commanding legions forward while sitting in a nice armchair.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
stormseer
|
Post subject: Commonness of Battlecruisers Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2003 1:06 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 9:52 pm
Posts: 4598
Location: Suffolk, UK.
|
|
..I'd go for it mate- one BC out of 4 cruisers is not over the top...
They are rarer than cruisers in the fluff, but not particually exeptional- I wouldn't go extreme with too many in a fleet (I only have three in almost 5000pts) but one per four or five normals is fine- my first built cruiser was a Mars- nice ship....
The Armageddon is also great, and I find I use these two more than my Overlord...
_________________
www.darkrealmminiatures.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Chris
|
Post subject: Commonness of Battlecruisers Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2003 6:52 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 6:42 pm
Posts: 2412
|
|
Let see, I have 9 cruisers. 3 are Dauntless, 4 are normal and 2 are battlecruisers. I personally love the BC models, as they are armed to the teeth!
Xavi, with your fleet one BC would not seem out of place, in fact it would help it, so go for it!
Cheers
Chris
_________________
Chris
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Xavi
|
Post subject: Commonness of Battlecruisers Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2003 7:36 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 12:30 am
Posts: 939
Location: University of Essex, Colchester, UK (soon to be Brighton, Sussex, UK)
|
Chris, remember I ended up adding an Emperor BB as well there, and this is why I had doubts. Well given the replies here and in the BFG yahoo list I have ended up with the following fleet (more or less fixed, even if I accept suggestions):
TASK FORCE BELUS
FLEET ADMIRAL LYNCEUS: 1 extra reroll
HERACLES: Emperor BB
HYPERION: Armageddon BC
THANATOS: Gothic
EOS: Lunar with NC
PEGASUS: Lunar with NC
ARGOS SQDN: 3 swords, 1 firestorm
HALO SQDN: 4 Cobras
All names after greek mythlogy as you might have noticed Pegasus and Eos (the lunars) are squadroned for a maximum effecto f the weapon bateries they carry around.
Cheers,
Xavi
_________________
Commanding legions forward while sitting in a nice armchair.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 4 posts ] |
|
