Utility of battlecruisers

[Quickdraw]

I'm curious how people feel about the battlecruisers in DW? I have yet to purchase one or see one on the table. I really like the idea of battlecruisers and they seem to have relatively high utility compared to points.
I will use the Russian Azov as an example beig that I play Russians.
At range band 2 it is putting out 15 dice from primaries, nothing to scoff at when compared to the 16 dice of a cruiser squadron for 100 points less.
It seems across the board all factions battlecruiser has the Combat Patrol MAR which has useful applications in this new era of beefy SAW.
The downside is that they only come in a single model squadron and could be focused apart pretty easily.
It seems like a nasty surprise to put out in advance deployment or to come on from the flank.

What kind of strategies do you think would be prudent for battlecruisers?

[Ruckdog]

Good question! Thanks for re-starting this conversation, too.

So, from my limited experience (I've only run my Prussian BC in one game), it seems like DW BCs will do just about what they did in real life; tear up ships of their size and smaller, but generally get smashed by anything larger. As was pointed out in the PE tactics thread, there is also quite a range between the different BCs for the different nations, as far as weapons, generators, and the like. This means that they are going to work quite a bit differently from fleet to fleet, it seems.

[Quickdraw]

That's what I was wondering as far as the nations go.
They all seem to be relatively similar though, in that they put out roughly the same firepower as a cruiser squadron for a steep decrease in points.

I'm thinking they might be best suited for a reserve type position; where they'll be able to come in mid-game and put the final nail in the coffin on some damaged mediums or a listing large.

Do you feel that the combat patrol is a useful investment for them? I would be worried about a dive bomber squadron coming in and putting the hurt on it.

(BTW, I did a rudimentary search and didn't find any big discussion on battlecruisers. Was that in a different thread perhaps?)

[DarkKnight]

I have always pictured the battlecruiser being a great ship to support a weaker flank, the flank that doesn't have your large, backing up some cruisers or smalls. Another thought would be close support for a high value target like a carrier being able to deal with anything that gets close enough to threaten the carrier. Saying all that I have never played with one as KoD (they can use the Prussian one) as they would fit between the pocket battleship and the gunships while not offering anything new. In other factions however they offer more and in a crunch can be a poor man's battleship. Tying in the last forum I posted on about carrier based fleets something like a battle cruiser would almost seem mandatory to provide enough direct firepower

[Quickdraw]

DarkKnight: I do agree with you. The battlecruiser could function in a very good carrier support role. I think that is a tactic that has been used historically and would fit in nicely on the tabletop.

[CDR-G]

I think of Battlecruisers as having several roles as mentioned, another being as a raider, or as a the lead ship assigned to areas where you must commit fewer resources due to priority restraints, (the poor man's Battleship). Standard DW BG centric fleets don't address these, but certainly scenarios can. The difference between the BC and the Pocket Battleship, blur here, but the BC's will usually be faster. I would like to see some scenarios using the BC as the top end ship. It would make for interesting play.

[Quickdraw]

I think of Battlecruisers as having several roles as mentioned, another being as a raider, or as a the lead ship assigned to areas where you must commit fewer resources due to priority restraints, (the poor man's Battleship). Standard DW BG centric fleets don't address these, but certainly scenarios can. The difference between the BC and the Pocket Battleship, blur here, but the BC's will usually be faster. I would like to see some scenarios using the BC as the top end ship. It would make for interesting play.

I was thinking about this type of scenario this past weekend. It would absolutely change the pace of the game. DW seems to be geared towards large ships pummeling each other and everything around them. If anything I think the game would become even more brutal as the cruisers and gunships could really get stuck in and tear each other up rather then focusing fire on something large. The tactical decisions of deployment would probably become far more important.

[CDR-G]

I did a test scenario with two 1,000 point fleets with one BC each and the rest mediums and smalls. I limited the smalls to 40% after finding they can truly dominate if at 60%.
No SAS. Only because didn't take any Apolos or have any medium carriers.
It made for a fast game. Like four moves in an hour. It was brutal.
But interesting, a lot of blocking of inactivated units, etc. It had mixes of mediums not usually seen.
Russian vs. RoF.
Azov got too close and died early.
The French had more depth of good units.

[Quickdraw]

So would you say in that scenario that the supporting medium capital ships were more effective? In other words, had more room to shine?

I imagine that would be the case as they aren't being significantly outclassed by anything.

[CDR-G]

Most definitely! They were the destroyers! The smalls, if they did not have a lot of numbers, had to hide and the mediums drove the battle. The BCs shaped the battle, where you went or didn't go, covering from their long range deadly fire.

[Ruckdog]

Centering a game around BCs is a great idea! This happened on several occasions during WWI, when the Germans were using their BCs as raiders to try and bait the British into sending a part of their fleet out to be smashed by their main fleet. I wonder how your 1,000 point match would play with 2-3 BCs per side?

[Quickdraw]

I was wondering about multiple battle cruisers as well. It sounds like a pair of battlecruisers could really deny area I imagine.