If you could make a Chaos ship legal, which one(s) would it be?

[Sigoroth]

As for the Despoiler variants there's just so much wrong with the Despoiler profile that these will inevitably be broken, no matter what you do. I would strongly recommend fixing the base Despoiler as well as all its variants (VS, CoL, TE).

[horizon]

Hi,
first of all nice to see all kind of background stories.

Sigoroth covered the cruiser parts pretty good I'd say so I am nothing going to dilute the thread at this point with my ramblings.

One note of principle: Does Chaos really need two carrier variants included?
I'd say no.

On the Despoiler variants: Sigoroth is correct, you are working from a bad design and thus creating designs that don't work to start with.

Okay, again, Despoiler as should:

Prow = a very large hangar: thus should have highest launch bay capacity.
We have 1 launch bay piece on each side = 1 launch bay piece is strength 2 capacity.
With that in mind and we want a str.8 launch bay ship the prow should be strenght 4 capacity.

Easy, huh?

Now, the ship has on its sides two weapon battery slots.
With the Murder that means: str10 @ 45cm. Same to the Carnage which pushes some (4) to 60cm as well.

So that means the Despoiler should have strength 10 batteries per side. With a step up from cruiser to battleship they should be all at 60cm.

Then the ship has dorsal lances, str3 @60cm is sufficient enough for a battleship.

Having the prow launch bays means we drop the (daft) prow lances.

The torpedo option (str8) can be taken at expense of the str4 prow launch bay.

Thus we end with:

hits 12
turns 45*
speed 20cm
armour 5+
shields 4
turrets 4

port weapons battery strength 10 @ 60cm
starboard weapons battery strength 10 @ 60cm
port launch bays strength 2   (fighters/bombers/assault boats)
starboard launch bays strength 2   (fighters/bombers/assault boats)
prow launch bays strength 4   (fighters/bombers/assault boats)
dorsal lances strength 3 @ 60cm LFR

optional: 8 torps for 4 prow launch bays

That is the base.

[horizon]

By the way, I really hate the new Chaos oppositional powers. I hated it when they brought it out in one of the 3rd (4th?) ed 40k Chaos codices and I hate it now. Khorne and Tzeentch are traditional rivals, and it makes sense that Slaanesh and Nurgle would be enemies (Nurgle is fugly). Slaaneshi love battle, for the pleasure it derives, and Khorne live for it. Nurgle is all about decay and entropy and Tzeentch is the Lord of Change. So Khorne/Slaanesh are natural allies as are Tzeentch/Nurgle.

So Sigoroth, this is a thing you raised in the past as well. However, even in the sacred tome of Slaves to Darkness it was Khorne vs Slaanesh.  Nurgle/Tzeentch rarely noted in that book as rivals.

The Armies of Chaos book I had (early 90's) had Khorne vs Slaanesh, Tzeentch vs Nurgle. That was before 4th edition. During 2nd edition of 40k.

[lastspartacus]

Agreed that the new cruiser isn't anything new.  Also, which heavy cruiser is based on the Slaughter?  Neither feels like it.

On semantics, Massacre or Annihilation is the way to go.  Stick with the theme.

Still would like character VBB's that arent one of the two battleships.
And I notice the decreased bay strength, do any of the ships use thunderhawks?

[horizon]

The Cerberus is like a heavy Slaughter.... quite obvious.

Exactly same port/starboard/prow weapons and strength as the Slaughter.

added:
range of port/starboard batteries 30cm --> 45cm
added dorsal lance str2 @ 45cm LFR

Dropping of the speed bonus is a pity though. I'd rather see all weapons at 30cm (perhaps lance @ 45cm if people insist) and 5d6 on AAF, and 30cm speed.

[lastspartacus]

Indeed, if it doesnt have a scartix coil, its not an upgraded slaughter, just some other thing

Edit:  Also, its laughably pricey.  80 points more for a speed redux and some upgrades (!?)

And I wish the 'Inferno' wasnt so similar to the Dev.  I'd be more excited with more of a gunship that had 2 bays rather than 4.  Now thats different.

And I actually love the Conqueror profile, very Khornate.

[Sigoroth]

So Sigoroth, this is a thing you raised in the past as well. However, even in the sacred tome of Slaves to Darkness it was Khorne vs Slaanesh.  Nurgle/Tzeentch rarely noted in that book as rivals.

The Armies of Chaos book I had (early 90's) had Khorne vs Slaanesh, Tzeentch vs Nurgle. That was before 4th edition. During 2nd edition of 40k.

All the fluff I have read describing the relationship between the 4 major powers, most of which is from fantasy, espouses the Khorne/Tzeentch divide. Tzeentch is the changer of ways and doesn't much like the up front and in your face manner of Khorne. In turn Khorne hates Tzeentch and his devious dishonourable ways.

Nurgle overcomes their enemy by spreading disease and attendant despair. This would seem dishonourable to Khorne and the ugliness and disfigurement involved would be undesirable to Slaanesh. The only one of the 3 other powers that this would appeal to would be Tzeentch, as the changer of ways.

Khorne is described as bloodthirsty and so lusts after battle. Slaanesh is described as "sensation-thirsty" and so lusts after battle. These two are quite similar.

So just from the description of the modus operandi and attitudes of the 4 major powers we can see that Khorne would never ally with Tzeentch and that Slaanesh would never ally with Nurgle. The most natural allies of the 4 are Khorne/Slaanesh and Tzeentch/Nurgle.

It seems anathema to suggest that Khorne would ever ally with Tzeentch. Only slightly less so to suggest that Slaanesh and Nurgle might do so. Historical incidents don't even enter into it. These are the Chaos powers, not dwarves, of course there's going to be a bunch of infighting between them. No reason to hold a grudge just because of that. The fact is that they're prototypical archetypes. Experiences with an enemy power would have less of an effect on attitude towards them than the attributes of that power.

[Masque]

The Battle Barges all need to lose their Chaos Lords for the reasons Sigoroth mentioned.  As far as I know, Thousand Sons don't really have terminators so City of Light should lose that upgrade.  I'm not going to really comment on statlines as overall I'm disappointed with the lack of flavor compared to the Terminus Est.  Oh, and the Conqueror obviously needs boarding torpedoes.

Sigoroth says the Cerberus is expensive for what you get and that is probably true.  I also think you simply get too much.  Except for the just introduced Conqueror the Cerberus can concentrate more firepower at sub 30cm ranges than any other Imperial or Chaos ship.  At 30cm to 45cm only the Vengeance and some battleships can out gun it.  This seems a little much.  I'd like to see all it's weapons drop down to 30cm and have it lose 2 weapon batteries per broadside.  If it's speed went to 30cm to make it a bit more like the Slaughter that'd be great.  The name is totally acceptable but I'd still prefer Charon.

As it stands I'm not a fan of the Hecate.  It's just a bit too good.  I liked the version with the 2 front only prow lances better.

This Inferno incarnation is just pointless in my opinion.  You won't play it any differently than a standard Devastation and it costs exactly the same.  It's better in just about every situation except when you have an enemy within 30cm of your broadside.  Sigoroth, you said all the existing cruiser names are adjectives.  They're actually all nouns.  I prefer Inferno to Annihilation, but only barely.  Also, please stop giving credit for the original Pillager design to Lastspartacus.  It was my idea.

[lastspartacus]

All chaos ships can use boarding torps, its a chaos rule.

Also, thousand sons do have Terminators, very cool terminators, very scary rubric terminators.

[Sigoroth]

Sigoroth says the Cerberus is expensive for what you get and that is probably true.  I also think you simply get too much.  Except for the just introduced Conqueror the Cerberus can concentrate more firepower at sub 30cm ranges than any other Imperial or Chaos ship.

While this is true, I think that this stems from a design fault that was not corrected until the introduction of the Armageddon class. When we're talking about a heavy cruiser or battle cruiser what we mean is a cruiser hull with added dorsal lances and potentially longer ranges on its broadsides. Before the Armageddon we had the Styx and Mars, both overpriced and both carriers. So we don't see the preponderance of guns we might otherwise. We also had the Acheron and Overlord. Both these ships sacrificed significant firepower to get extra range on their broadsides and the Acheron even broke the general CB rule about having 60cm dorsal lances.

That left just the Hades. The Hades is simply a Murder with the extra dorsal lances. If you contend that a Murder is balanced, and that the Hades is balanced and that the Slaughter is balanced, then it follows that a heavy cruiser based upon the Slaughter would also be balanced. As the Lunar is to the Slaughter, so too is the Armageddon to the Cerberus.

At 30cm to 45cm only the Vengeance and some battleships can out gun it.  This seems a little much.  I'd like to see all it's weapons drop down to 30cm and have it lose 2 weapon batteries per broadside.  If it's speed went to 30cm to make it a bit more like the Slaughter that'd be great.  The name is totally acceptable but I'd still prefer Charon.

The Cerberus that I originally posited had all 30cm ranges and the broadside WBs were dropped down to 6. I also dropped the speed down to normal Chaos speeds, but that was simply so that people didn't consider it overpowered (I know, it's much worse than an Armageddon).

As for Charon, I prefer that name too, just not for this class. When I posted my Cerberus class I also posted a Charon class ship. This was a Carnage with the addition of 6WB@60cmLFR dorsal weaponry at +30 pts.

As it stands I'm not a fan of the Hecate.  It's just a bit too good.  I liked the version with the 2 front only prow lances better.

I'm not a fan of the Murder. I'm not a fan of the Hades (the reason I wanted the Charon and Cerberus was to give non-Hades gun CB options). I like the original Hecate fluff, and the Hades design doesn't suit that. The Hades design is poor, and I see no reason to give Chaos 2 crap CB carriers.

This Inferno incarnation is just pointless in my opinion.  You won't play it any differently than a standard Devastation and it costs exactly the same.  It's better in just about every situation except when you have an enemy within 30cm of your broadside.  Sigoroth, you said all the existing cruiser names are adjectives.  They're actually all nouns.  I prefer Inferno to Annihilation, but only barely.  Also, please stop giving credit for the original Pillager design to Lastspartacus.  It was my idea.

Really? Was it? Sorry bout that. Don't know why I thought it was LS. Well, I prefer your original profile then, sans +1d6 AAF. The shorter weapon ranges give it a better fit in the fleet, and I'd cost it at 180 pts (the Dev is too strong, so it being a bit weak compared to the Dev is fine).

As for the cruiser names, well some of them are verbs too, but that's not the point. I said that they should be adjectives one might use to describe the aftermath of a battle. In which usage they are adjectives (referring to an absent noun, in this case the battle). However, as adjectives and nouns are often interchangeable we're obviously talking about the noun form of the word for the class names (so Murder instead of murderous for example) but the function of the word is to describe the battle, so an adjective in purpose, if not form. Obviously as ship class names the noun form should be used, but the main point I was getting at was that whatever those names should be, they should be a word that someone could use to describe a large scale act of wanton violence.

[lastspartacus]

How about this for a more different ordnance ship.
Well, firstly, a question.  Are torpedos of any amount absolutely forbidden on a chaos cruiser?

Assuming that, I suggest something like 25cm slaughter, losing the lances, and gaining bays.
A more close up and cheaper carrier.

[horizon]

Yes, torps are forbidden!!! Take the optional IN renegade cruiser option to add one.

[russ_c]

The Cerberus is like a heavy Slaughter....Dropping of the speed bonus is a pity though. I'd rather see all weapons at 30cm (perhaps lance @ 45cm if people insist) and 5d6 on AAF, and 30cm speed.

Darn, this was my first thought too when I saw the Cerberus profile.  I badly wanted to suggest the speed adjustment so it could run with Slaughters, but I thought the community would stone me for that! 

Russ

[Mazila]

So many carriers, why didn't any 1 make a pure gunboat BB variant:

Desolator hull with 3 sets of broadside WB's like on cargane and lance turrets on top hardpoints:

Port WB 12x60cm
Starboard WB 12x60cm
Dorsal WB 6x60cm
Prow torpedoes - 9

Would make a nice model

[lastspartacus]

I made one after Admiral's Desperation class idea.  Got it painted up and everything.