BC or BB?

[menic]

is it worth to build a BC instead of a BB? In battle with "large" or "Fleet", BB and BC fight in line so they are engaged in the same way. But aBC has not the same armour of a BB and it is easy that a BC suffers mostly respect a BB. I have had not a battle with a BC (my BC) against a CA o CL (bt I have had my CL against a B). So, this let me think tha it is better to spend my money for a BB than a BC ... am I wrong?

[bcoopactual]

Welcome to the forum.

My short answer is I think you need both.

Battlecruisers are usually split into the scouting force (once you've researched the tech) so even in Admiral's mode you can keep your distance from battleships if you want.

Battlecruisers are also eligible for all cruiser and battleship missions so you will probably get more value from them than you will for battleships which are more restricted in which missions they will get used in.  You may not see them used a lot if the enemy has battlecruisers in the same area because the game tends to keep your battlecruisers on standby if the enemy battlecruisers are not selected for the mission.  Just like in real life if you know that the enemy battlecruisers are in the area, you are not going to send your own battlecruisers after a protected cruiser merchant raider and let the enemy battlecruiser go on a rampage unmolested.  

Now I can't speak for others of course but I prefer the German style battlecruiser over the Anglo-American. I sacrifice firepower rather than armor to get the necessary speed and my battlecruisers tend to survive quite well. I am conscious to not get into straight slug fests against battleships though so you need to micromanage battlecruisers more than battleships.

[Airy W]

I dont think there is a one size fits all battlecruiser. I have a bunch of different concepts that I have used successfully

German style battlecruisers: Take a battleship and sacrifice gun caliber in order to have speed
Fast Battleship: If my dockyards are big enough to afford good guns and excellent deck armor while still having room for high speed engines, I'll just start building fast battleships instead of dreadnoughts. The game will classify them BCs but they are designed to be used as battleships. Excellent for chasing enemy battleships if the conditions are right but don't force this concept if guns are advancing too quickly and engines and armor too slowly.
Cruiser-Hunters: Relatively light guns, small displacement, sacrifice belt to get deck armor. Keep this thing at long ranges and hunt enemy cruisers during the daytime. Keep it on active duty always to train it's crew up to elite levels. Dont force engagements during night. In fleet battles keep it in reserve to exploit vulnerabilities.
Rangers: On the rare chance that it's technologically possible to make a big gun battlecruiser with strong armor before it's possible to put more then 4 guns on a battleship, go for it. It gives you a brief period of overwhelming advantage until dreadnoughts come out. Once they do, you have a decent if unconventional and inefficient but effective cruiser-hunter (appropriate given that historically USS Ranger was an unconventional and inefficient but effective aircraft carrier.)

Battlecruisers are probably the class with the most room for variety and experimentation in the game. Try out different things!

[boomboomf22]

I've gotten good use out of BCs, but I favor the German method because it allows for effective, but not ruinously expensive ships like Fast Battleships are. I find I always build less BCs than BBs, but that is largely preference. The wonderful part of this game is that basically every approach is valid.

[rimbecano]

May 4, 2017 10:46:09 GMT -6 Airy W said:

I dont think there is a one size fits all battlecruiser. I have a bunch of different concepts that I have used successfully

German style battlecruisers: Take a battleship and sacrifice gun caliber in order to have speed
Fast Battleship: If my dockyards are big enough to afford good guns and excellent deck armor while still having room for high speed engines, I'll just start building fast battleships instead of dreadnoughts. The game will classify them BCs but they are designed to be used as battleships. Excellent for chasing enemy battleships if the conditions are right but don't force this concept if guns are advancing too quickly and engines and armor too slowly.
Cruiser-Hunters: Relatively light guns, small displacement, sacrifice belt to get deck armor. Keep this thing at long ranges and hunt enemy cruisers during the daytime. Keep it on active duty always to train it's crew up to elite levels. Dont force engagements during night. In fleet battles keep it in reserve to exploit vulnerabilities.

My mainline BCs tend to be somewhere between German-style BCs and fast battleships. I keep full calibre and sacrifice gun count for speed, or else (mostly in the endgame) build a behemoth 10,000 tons+ over what everyone else is building and use the extra tonnage for speed.

For the quasi-German variant, I do tend to make some sacrifices in armor: my BCs tend to have lightish belts (but still enough to give the ship some immunity zone) and impregnable turrets, and BE and DE tend to thin out or disappear entirely well before I have AON. CT armor is either non-existent or belt-grade. Once I'm far enough into the game for deck penetration to be a concern, decks tend to be the number two priority in my armor scheme, right after turrets, as I tend to favor long range engagements.

I don't tend to build cruiser hunters normally: mostly I'll build a one-ship class in the late game,  either a BC or a CA, to outclass a late game CA built by another nation,  which is usually also a one-ship class,  without having to budget for a full capital ship. Such ships aren't built with hunting the enemy CA in mind so much as providing firepower and performance parity at something like budget parity.

[archelaos]

The game really supports BC building. As they are able to appear in cruiser battles, those in fact turn into BC battles once both sides get them. And if you catch actual cruiser squadron? It turns into a slaughter, though very early your success rate is lowered by main battery that is not efficient enough, as rof and FC is not good enough.

I prefer the same style as rimbecano - my typical early BC has same period BB grade armor and 3x2 centerline main battery, preferably in A-V-Y setup. Throwing away two turrets with assorted magazines (as you need two wing turrets to get 8 gun broadside) I get 3-4000 tonns to put into engines.
If you can get 0 quality 13in guns somehow, such ship will decimate not only cruisers but also enemy Bs and will stay effective to game's end.

[babylon218]

I tend to build two BC types in my games: Fleet Battlecruisers and 'Light' or 'Colonial' Battlecruisers.

Fleet Battlecruisers: Intended for home waters, either interdicting enemy Raiders, Cruiser Battles or as Fleet Scouts. Decent Armour on Belts and Decks with heavier armour over the turrets. Sacrifice number of main guns for speed and armour.

Light/Colonial Battlecruisers: This is a concept I'm still experimenting with. Essentially, these are smaller battlecruisers with fewer and smaller guns (usually 10-12 inches depending on gun quality) designed to fight enemy colonial forces, hunt down raiders or operate as raiders themselves.

Depending on the situation, I would build at least 2 Fleet Battlecruisers (regardless of design philosophy) to give yourself the capability to fight enemy BCs - otherwise, it becomes difficult to contest cruiser battles because of the risk you may encounter enemy BCs which completely outmatch your CLs/CAs. The Colonial Battlecruisers, as I said, are still a concept I'm experimenting with, but I'd say you'd only want as many as needed to contest enemy colonies in your sea zones (with the provision that this obviously isn't as feasible for Britain). Maybe 2 as France, 2-4 as Germany, 1 as Japan, 4 as US and GB. But those are purely speculative numbers, and I suspect many of those nations wouldn't even need such ships.

[JagdFlanker]

May 4, 2017 14:28:33 GMT -6 archelaos said:

The game really supports BC building. As they are able to appear in cruiser battles, those in fact turn into BC battles once both sides get them. And if you catch actual cruiser squadron? It turns into a slaughter, though very early your success rate is lowered by main battery that is not efficient enough, as rof and FC is not good enough.

I prefer the same style as rimbecano - my typical early BC has same period BB grade armor and 3x2 centerline main battery, preferably in A-V-Y setup. Throwing away two turrets with assorted magazines (as you need two wing turrets to get 8 gun broadside) I get 3-4000 tonns to put into engines.
If you can get 0 quality 13in guns somehow, such ship will decimate not only cruisers but also enemy Bs and will stay effective to game's end.

exactly.  i only build BCs once i'm allowed to build them since they cover both CA/BB battles, and if things get too hot i can speed out of danger

[JagdFlanker]

May 4, 2017 15:57:07 GMT -6 babylon218 said:

I tend to build two BC types in my games: Fleet Battlecruisers and 'Light' or 'Colonial' Battlecruisers.

Fleet Battlecruisers: Intended for home waters, either interdicting enemy Raiders, Cruiser Battles or as Fleet Scouts. Decent Armour on Belts and Decks with heavier armour over the turrets. Sacrifice number of main guns for speed and armour.

Light/Colonial Battlecruisers: This is a concept I'm still experimenting with. Essentially, these are smaller battlecruisers with fewer and smaller guns (usually 10-12 inches depending on gun quality) designed to fight enemy colonial forces, hunt down raiders or operate as raiders themselves.

Depending on the situation, I would build at least 2 Fleet Battlecruisers (regardless of design philosophy) to give yourself the capability to fight enemy BCs - otherwise, it becomes difficult to contest cruiser battles because of the risk you may encounter enemy BCs which completely outmatch your CLs/CAs. The Colonial Battlecruisers, as I said, are still a concept I'm experimenting with, but I'd say you'd only want as many as needed to contest enemy colonies in your sea zones (with the provision that this obviously isn't as feasible for Britain). Maybe 2 as France, 2-4 as Germany, 1 as Japan, 4 as US and GB. But those are purely speculative numbers, and I suspect many of those nations wouldn't even need such ships.

my colonial BC is my oldest BC(s) about to retire after the end of the current/next war

[Noname117]

I do really like BCs in Rule The Waves, when I'm playing normally (I have played an all BC game before) I typically maybe have about a third to a fourth of my fleet be BCs. Personally I build my BCs a bit larger than my BBs so I can get the extra speed without sacrificing too much in terms of armament and armor, although I do typically find those both a bit decreased in comparison to my BBs.

But I'd say that building BCs is a very good idea in RTW.

[Deleted]

a big factor here is if the primary theater of ops is overseas. if fighting overseas, there needs to have BCs protecting homewaters due to them being multirole - they can stand in for BBs, they are cruisers to fight cruiser battles, they also intercept raiders. this way the majority of the fleet can be freed up to move to the opponent's homewaters. if you leave BBs home who's gonna intercept CA raiders, who's gonna fight cruiser battles, who's gonna do coastal raids.

also if there're substantial overseas colonies, in case of an invasion BCs are the best to take part in those for the same reason.

so in a very interesting case - Austria Hungary. No overseas colonies. initially there's really no need for many BCs, 4 is quite sufficient. BBs have higher blockade points operational wise and are sturdier tactical wise, especially when fighting big powers like Britain, more BBs are better. but as A-H wins wars, getting bigger budgets (AH has rapid budget expansion pre '16), taking foreign colonies, the need for BCs becomes more and more important. typically in the case of moving the fleet to northern europe to fight the european powers, leaves at least 2 BCs home. if an invasion is triggered, it might be a requirement to spare more BCs to that seazone to up the invasion points and fight the land combat support battles.

the big nations like Japan/USA/Britain either have no opponents at home, or have mega colonies and BCs are simply a must. i'd say it's either 7 minimum or at least match the BB count. in a way BCs pretty well represent its role realistically in this game.

big drawbacks are pretty much tactical, to get speed it's either sacrifice firepower or protection. but then again the higher speed is also good. for me i just avoided night battles. close range gunnery wise it just can't win against BBs and that small DD flotilla in the scout force really isn't worth much torpedo attack wise.

[rimbecano]

May 4, 2017 16:53:14 GMT -6 skwabie said:

big drawbacks are pretty much tactical, to get speed it's either sacrifice firepower or protection. but then again the higher speed is also good. for me i just avoided night battles. close range gunnery wise it just can't win against BBs and that small DD flotilla in the scout force really isn't worth much torpedo attack wise.

Capital ships should generally avoid night combat anyways: CLs and DDs rule the night. Anything bigger ends up being just as vulnerable, if not more, to torpedo attack,  and is far more expensive to lose. The reason BCs should not engage in night combat isn't that they can't beat BBs in that scenario, it's that not even BBs should engage in night combat if they can help it. 

[Deleted]

May 5, 2017 9:42:12 GMT -6 rimbecano said:

Capital ships should generally avoid night combat anyways: CLs and DDs rule the night. Anything bigger ends up being just as vulnerable, if not more, to torpedo attack,  and is far more expensive to lose. The reason BCs should not engage in night combat isn't that they can't beat BBs in that scenario, it's that not even BBs should engage in night combat if they can help it. 

aha! i was led to believe this as well.
however nowadayz i could routinely do it with good result.
it was very intense. and situational, once sighting range drops below 3000 yds (night + rain, or heavy rain) i disengage, otherwise it's press press.

the most important rule was to cross the enemy's T upon contact, be it fleet formation wise or individual ship to ship gunnery wise. if the initial contact position is ideal even BC vs BB can produce good results. if the position is bad i.e. stern chase it's either face full of torps or riddled with holes, in a single turn brutally. but the opposite also goes true to the enemy.
fleet composition wise just make sure there are enough DDs and CLs to be deployed, when they do set the CLs all to screen/scout, DDs all to screen or support the scouting/screen CL divs - make sure the light ships are placed as forward as possible.

however it does takes patience and it needs some good situational awareness (bare basic torpedo avoidance, how is enemy gonna maneuver next turn, where is he gonna be 1 hour later, etc), i saw some vids played only in continuous mode (vs turn by turn normal speed) then definitely no good.

[beastro]

You will get more use out of BCs than BBs. In my experience you're able to have slightly less BBs than other powers given the battle mechanics of the game where it's very rare to encounter the full brunt of the enemies battlefleet (typically restricted to battles titled Fleet Action or something, IIRC), and even if you do, it's fairly simply to play defensively and withdraw your fleet as you inflict damage on the dumb AI.

Before moving on, in that last bit BCs in the independent scouting squadron play a huge role as you can withdraw your fleet, then go snooping around picking off wounded as the AI mulls about.

I'll add my support for more German style BCs though. Especially in the later part of the game where even well armoured ones can take a beating in their speed from even a bit of damage.

With that said I wouldn't sacrifice too much firepower to make them more survivable, go for a cap on speed of around 27kt. It's enough to be fast and scout around and works fine until the game forces you to increase it to make them keep counting as BCs (it also plays well into a common motif in "what ifs" on forums where WWI era BCs remain usable up until the end of the game being a nice colonial cruiser for hunting raiders.

In the late 1910s theres a short window depending on your tech, where you can make turret farm BCs in the high 20kts that is decently armoured with 13-14in belt and 3-4in deck but can mount anywhere from 18-24 12-13in main guns in six triple or quad turrets. I love them because BC vs BC combat is very different from Fleet Actions and putting the most guns onto the enemy quickly knocks their BCs out and the difference between 12in guns and 16in ones is trivial compared to BB vs BB. They simply don't add enough armour on to make heavier guns worthwhile and BCs with 15in+ guns are more suited for supporting the Battlefleet than fighting enemy BCs.

Later on you can make 18-20 gun ones with 32kt if you missed the sweet spot.

Here's a couple:

[brucesim2003]

Try and springsharp those and you will probably get a cramped working environment result. Where the bejezus are you going to put directors and other fittings? Certainly not above the weather deck, lol.