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.

I've heard and read a lot of conflicting things over the years about the sizes of ships in 40k - particularly imperial (and ex-imperial) waships. Now, you'd think the logical place to get canon information would be the BFG book, right? Thing is, it never gave that kind of data for anything.

I've seen a few fan-made size charts, but these tend to conflict pretty wildly. I'm wondering, then, if there actually is a canon source (or several) for how big these things are. I just finished Cadian Blood, in which ADB puts a Dominator at just over 4km long, but that's the closest I can find to anything concrete (and that downsizes it considerably from the ~7km some of the fan charts clock imperial cruisers at)

e; Do Fantasy Flight weigh in on this matter at all? I've never been able to get my hands on a rogue trader book, but given their love for fleshing out background, I'd be surprised if they hadn't published something.

Fantasy Flight released "official" figures for smaller ships. You can find them on Lexicanum.

Fantasy Flight's figures for frigates and light cruisers line up approximately with the Warp Rift fan magazine figures I always used; I'd guess that means estimates of 8-10km for cruisers and 12-20km for battlecruisers/battleships are reasonable.

Except that all of FFG's cruisers are listed as 4-6km and grand cruisers are 7-8km long, with battle cruisers in between the two. The only example of a battleship I can remember is an Ork battleship that was 11km long. So I'd say the fan figures you're using are a bit off.

The BFG mailing list consensus was approximately 6km length for Imperial battleships. Andy Chambers (designer of BFG) used to be on this mailing list.

The size is also consistent with that of a Retribution class battleship, as given in the BL book Dark Disciple.

Admiral Rutger Augustine look out over the vast length of his flagship vessel, the mighty Retribution-class battleship, Hammer of Righteousness...Six kilometres from stern to prow...

p. 31, Dark Disciple

Crew complement given by:

http://www.wolfedengames.com/battlefleetgothic/crew.htm

From Andy Chambers' post to the mailing list, this scale of 1500-2000 crew per damage point yields a crew size of 18,000-24,000.

The BFG color images in that size chart floating around out there were made by a member of the BFG list per the BFG list consensus:. Some of those numbers also seem slightly off, such as the Dictator class which should be 3km, and the picture for the "Inquisition blackship" is actually that of a Repulsive class grand cruiser which is larger than a cruiser.

The original scale is on his DeviantArt page:

http://the-first-magelord.deviantart.com/gallery/8686311#/d1cy8r5

There are some other versions out there but the size scale for those was edited up out of a desire for increased size, without the original person's permission.

This scale is actually remarkably consistent in GW and BL publications by multiple authors over multiple years. In Shadow Point, an average Dictator class cruiser is given a crew size, though it is unclear if attack craft crew are included:

Now, six years later, he was one of the most senior non-commissioned officers amongst a crew of almost thirteen thousand...
p. 62, Shadow Point , by Gordon Rennie

The size of a Retribution as already mentioned is in Dark Disciple:

Admiral Rutger Augustine look out over the vast length of his flagship vessel, the mighty Retribution-class battleship, Hammer of Righteousness...Six kilometres from stern to prow...
p. 31, Dark Disciple

The relatively recent Soul Hunter describes a crew for a grand cruiser, which is larger than a cruiser, more in keeping with Andy Chambers' scale:

Over 25,000 crew called the warship home, even though a sizable chunk of those were slave labourers and servitor wretches...
p. 95-96, Soul Hunter

As shown by these quotes, the scale has been remarkably consistent over many years of BL publications. It wasn't until FFG came along that then people started trying to inflate the size for no apparent reason. It smacks of "It's 40K so things have to be stupidly big...just because". No different really from those that insist Warlord Titans are as tall as mountain ranges based on exaggerated artwork.

The figures I've heard most often werearound 5- 6km for cruisers, 8 for grand cruisers and as much as 11 for full-size battleships but I've never seen a source for any of those.

Soul Hunter puts a retribution at only 6km? That's still a huge ship, but less daunting than I imagined.

It still seems really odd to me that the sizes were never mentioned in the BFG book itself, it really woul have cleared everything up

The problem is that it's nothing written down in stone. I would go for what Ghost wrote as they are the most common numbers in general, but you will never find anything written in stone and should make up your own mind if that suits you. I at least wouldn't lambast you for that.

Ship sizes vary in fluff and nobody can agree on how big they really are.

In the end I form my own view on this: 5- 6km for cruisers, 8 - 10km for grand cruisers and 15 - 20km for Battleships.

The largest Imperial ship I can recall mentioned is the Honor of Macragge from Know No Fear, which was 22 kilometers long, and is by far the biggest ship in the book.

Of course, if not restricted to Imperial ships, the Necrons have the largest listed ships, namely, the World Engine and Iori Delta Tove. Both being the size of planets.

The only official thing you have is the FFg stuff. BL does have ship sizes but they never match up with other BL sources. The writer of each BL book more or less makes up or uses the scale he likes. As others have pointed out Andy chambers did make a post on a forum but more to pity it is not official and was never in print. Even as GW uses canon its non canon, it is a good guide and well like however.

It comes down to two most used scales. The Andy chamber one and the FFG Rogue trader scale. I would use one of those two as BL stuff is just a mess.

Hunterindarkness wrote:The only official thing you have is the FFg stuff. BL does have ship sizes but they never match up with other BL sources. The writer of each BL book more or less makes up or uses the scale he likes.

So same as FFG, then. Their RPGs are no more or less official than any Black Library novel or GW's own books and magazines, it just has the "advantage" that unlike most novels the FFG stuff tends to keep the same stuff over several publications rather than everything being a one-off.

On a sidemark, it's interesting how Andy's text differs from FFG's Rogue Trader books on which he himself had worked as well, but I suppose that only goes to show that the interpretations of individual authors do not equal the interpretations (compromises?) of an entire team.

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?209477-Rogue-Trader-drastically-changes-Imperial-ship-crew-sizes

Just pick whatever number you're most happy with. This (sadly, imho) isn't Star Trek or Star Wars where there is some official rule dictating which source you have to follow.

 Lynata wrote:


Just pick whatever number you're most happy with. This (sadly, imho) isn't Star Trek or Star Wars where there is some official rule dictating which source you have to follow.

I'm a pretty big rules in fantasy sort of person (the fiction becomes nonsensical without it) but in this case I have to agree with this statement because it makes sense in the rules of the 40k universe. Take for example the Lunar class cruiser entry in BFG, it explains how different every Lunar class is from on another, with varying weapon banks, and indeed one even being constructed by a stone age society. This means that even the same type of ship is likely to vary in size, much less classifications like cruiser, battleship, etc. Thus if one source says a retribution is 6km, while another has is 20, they may both be correct given the sheer oddity of how manufacturing is conducted in the universe.

You sort of have the facts right there Buddha oddly enough. Today's Destroyers are larger than the Cruisers of WWII, so that can be a very likely thing to happen. And the IOM is nothing if not inconsistent. Finding real life examples for differences in fluff is often my preferred method for interpretating WH40k fluff.

 Lynata wrote:

Hunterindarkness wrote:The only official thing you have is the FFg stuff. BL does have ship sizes but they never match up with other BL sources. The writer of each BL book more or less makes up or uses the scale he likes.

So same as FFG, then. Their RPGs are no more or less official than any Black Library novel or GW's own books and magazines, it just has the "advantage" that unlike most novels the FFG stuff tends to keep the same stuff over several publications rather than everything being a one-off.

I did not say the FFG were 'More" official then BL. However Bl has no set scale, they tend to be all over the place( a failing of GW parts more then the writers). FFG did not change the scale, they picked one and stuck with it as before FFG there was no Official scale for ships. The Andy chamber sizes are not official in any way as they never saw print in anything. And yes that does upset some folks who took His word as official and maybe it should have been, but it was not and still is not as even by GW half assed standards it is not canon. So there are two scales for the ships and honesty if you like Andy's numbers by all means use them, but do not call the BL stuff a scale as it simply isn't one.

Ah, a miscommunication then - the bit about the FFG stuff being "the only official thing" sounded a bit as if it were advertised to be the only true thing, and different from the "making up" that the BL authors do.

Black Library certainly doesn't have "a" scale on anything, simply because each book (or series of books) is its own little universe. The one advantage of the "bigger" origins such as FFG, FW and GW is at least that they are (usually) internally consistent within their respective visions, if only because it's largely the same authors again and again.

On a sidenote, I thought that Andy's text was printed in the BFG Magazine, but I could be mistaken. In any case, it would be no more or less "true" than any of the other interpretations out there.

I would go for Buddha's point, he has pointed out the facts Lynata. Classifications of ships changes. A Spruanance-destroyer is larger and heavier than a heavy cruiser of WWII. I dislike very much going up against you, but if facts found IRL can be found I set it before any regard of my personal feelings.

Well, theories are not rendered fact unless evidence is provided. Which is not possible, as the creators and administrators of this setting have never advertised any single source of fluff as gospel.
Also, what do you mean "goind up against me" - did you not notice Buddha was agreeing with me? I haven't even told you which of the many sizes I would favour!*

Buddha did raise the interesting point that the existing contradictions could actually be explained in-universe by referring to the low level of standardisation, though. Personally, it's a bit too far-fetched for me (and as exemplified in the "Imperium hates water" thread I too like to look for in-setting explanations first before simply dismissing something as groxgak), but I have to agree it's an elegant excuse.

I suppose that ever since my "epiphany", I have become somewhat quick to just ignore and dismiss non-GW sources because they often differ so much from one another as well as the studio material that it's just easier for me this way. Doesn't mean that I won't still adopt individual ideas that I feel would fit into my private "non-public" interpretation of the setting, though.

*: truth be told, I have not yet decided which of the many versions of sizes and crew compliments to follow

IRL Lynata things changes shape and size by time. The Destroyer-analogy was about that.

Also I tried to say I respect you enough to not bothering to double-check just to find the facts, you have transformed my view about the SOBs, and I trust you to not to fare with lies. It's just that, it was actually a compliment.

*blinks* I did? To the better, I hope! But really ... thanks, I guess. Such words are the biggest compliment I could hope for around here.

As for the destroyer-analogy, I was just saying that I've yet to find a reference within the fluff lending this theory more substance other than being, y'know, an opinion. I acknowledged it as a way to explain the contradictions, but at the same time just find it easier to dismiss the issue outright with a blanket statement like "different authors say different things".
Poor choice of words on my part, possibly.

 Lynata wrote:
Ah, a miscommunication then - the bit about the FFG stuff being "the only official thing" sounded a bit as if it were advertised to be the only true thing, and different from the "making up" that the BL authors do.

Black Library certainly doesn't have "a" scale on anything, simply because each book (or series of books) is its own little universe. The one advantage of the "bigger" origins such as FFG, FW and GW is at least that they are (usually) internally consistent within their respective visions, if only because it's largely the same authors again and again.

On a sidenote, I thought that Andy's text was printed in the BFG Magazine, but I could be mistaken. In any case, it would be no more or less "true" than any of the other interpretations out there.

Well as far as I know the FFG stuff is the only official scale. Andy's scale was never as far as I can tell in print, it was a response on a fan forum not even a company one. Andy's however was the only word on scale for many years and it was another failing on GW's part it never saw print in a book. I agree about each writer may have his own scale, but even those might change over time, its a sign of the sloppy setting control GW has not a strength of the setting at all. Now as Budda said, some stuff can be chalked up to the vast space and age, however 3-7 Km diffidence in size of the same class can not. A few meters here or there, extra gun row, shorter fins or the like can be...but two ships of the same class being double the size diff is a conflict, not a matter of setting variety.


So yes I ignore BL as it honestly has no scale. 40k has two ship scales, the FFG one and the Andy chambers one. If you can show me a third I would be interested in seeing it..

Here: