Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So I'm working out some lists for a BFG game. Many of my opponents are prone to cry foul if they see an army list that they think is "cheesy." So I have to ask:

Does anyone here think that two battleships in a 2000 point Imperial fleet is "cheesy?"

My usual answer to "Why do you have two battleships?" is "Because Imperial Heavy Cruisers suck." My Chaos fleet only has 1 Battleship, but that's because it has two Heavy Cruisers. My Imperial list doesn't have any Heavy Cruisers, just two battleships and six regular cruisers.

What do you guys think?

What kind of battleships are they? It doesn't really matter, I don't think it's particularly cheesy, but if your opponents are already prone to view things in that light, they might feel differently.

I'm always of the opinion that you should play what you want. That said, you should massage your ideal list to compromise with your group if everyone else agrees on a particular style or if they're super fluff oriented (or super casual). Now, for Imperials, the Bakka Fleet List is actually very fluffy to use for multiple battleships, as they're not restricted by the number of cruisers you bring like in the other fleet lists. The Bakka Fleet list allows you to run a battleship for every 750pts in your list, which fits perfectly in a 2k list. Downside is the Battleship selections are different and limited; you can only take an Emperor if you run Rath as your admiral, and the other options are the Victory (a more reliable, but slightly weaker Apoc), the Retribution (weak if you're using official rules), and the Vanquisher (a budget battleship with weaker armaments).

If you're using the official rules, bringing a pair of Retributions isn't particularly terrifying. Two Emperors can be a pain simply due to overwhelming ordnance, and two Apocs can be pretty terrifying.

And minor quibble, IN doesn't have any heavy cruisers. They have Battlecruisers. And not all of them are terrible. The Armageddon is a really good ship, and the Dominion from the Bakka List is also quite good. The Mars is about ~20pts overcosted, and the Overlord is fine with a targeting matrix.

Eldar is cheese.

Necron is cheese.

The game of BFG is great when it's Chaos vs Imperials.

 feeder wrote:
Eldar is cheese.

Necron is cheese.

The game of BFG is great when it's Chaos vs Imperials.

Or when you use fan made fixes to balance the fleets better.

I'm not sure if Eldar are really cheese. Just tough to lock down.

Necrons are a level beyond cheese, lol.

Orks are tough to play as, but got some fun things beyond the main rulebook, like Hammer class battlecruisers. Tau (of either fleet) seemed fun, but I never got them when they were available.

Imperial battleships are a long way from cheesy.

The emperor class lacks heavy prow armour and cannot turn whilst under fire.

The Retribution has long range broadsides, but not massively more guns than a battlecruiser.


The closest Imperial fleets get to cheesy is when you see something like 6+ nova cannons in a fleet....

Torpedoes are better then nova cannon.

And there are more imperial battleships then those two...

It can't be that cheesy if you are following appropriate fleet building rules. If I remember right, you have to have three cruisers for every battleship, right?

So a little less than half your points are going to be tied up in your two battleships, meaning your 6 cruisers are going to SUCK.

And your escort ships are not going to be numerous, either.

13 strike cruisers give me all round 6+ armour and loads of thunderhawks and 115pts left for a commander and re-rolls

At least you have opponents... :(

BFG has some problems with certain matchups.

Eldar vs necrons is blatantly unfair, for the eldar.
Eldar vs orks is blatantly unfair, for the orks.
With those two matchups it is best to houserule

Other than that the game is more or less balanced. Though I cant speak for some of the later throw in factions like Dark Eldar. Necrons will always be a tough fight for any faction and should make sure they play fair with fleet selection other than that take what you want.

As for two Imperial battleships in 2000pts, why not. I have done this before on occasion. The main problem is not whether the fleet is overpowered (it isn't unless you take two Emperors) but whether it is legal and viable. To get two battleships you need six cruisers and to pay for that you really have no choice but to go long on Dauntless, which don't synergise with Imperial battleships as well as the line cruisers do.
Anyone who things two battleships is a win button for Imperial is either fielding two Emperors or is likely wrong.

In any event finding someone with two battleships from one faction to place on the tabletop is good enough it gets a pass. This awesome game needs more table time.

 Orlanth wrote:
BFG has some problems with certain matchups.

Eldar vs necrons is blatantly unfair, for the eldar.
Eldar vs orks is blatantly unfair, for the orks.
With those two matchups it is best to houserule

In both cases Eldar and in both cases it is the fault of the Eldar rules in the official rules. They break a core rule mechanic, get compensated with an approach and break the balance in the matchups you mention.

Eldar MMS unofficial rules exist for a reason, yes. House rules ftw as you mention.