# Battlecruiser place in a naval doctrine **URL:** \ **Category:** Player Questions\ **Created:** [October 4, 2026, 1:28pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167 "2026-10-04T13:28:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Abdoola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Abdoola](https://aurora4x.com/u/Abdoola)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 1:28pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/1 "2026-10-04T13:28:13Z")
Hi all. In my current campaign, I reached a point where it’s time to advance to capital combatants. And I noticed, that what I designed was in fact a Battleship that was just classified as a “Battlecruiser” because the word sound fancier. Checked my designs from previous campaigns, and they all fit the same box. Then, I did a quick sweep across the Forum and noticed, other players did basically the same. So, the question is: did someone crack a tough nut of a Battlecruiser in Aurora? Because, I don’t see how to adapt that concept to our realities. Let’s check typical BC tasks. - reconnaissance: in-system, better performed by smaller craft like recon frigates, or even recon fighters; in enemy rear, is impossible due to JP mechanics (ok, may be somewhat possible if enemy rear JPs were surveyed beforehand, but ends with the 1st JP ambush encountered) - counter-reconnaissance: better performed by a JP ambush or a JP minefield, no need for an extremely expensive, huge ship chasing enemy scouts, which tend to be small and lightly armed, see p.1 - commerce raiding: doesn’t work because of JP mechanics. Again, may be semi-viable for enemy rear systems surveyed beforehand, but only until your BC runs out of fuel/MSPs/luck on jumps. IRL that worked because BCs could refuel and restock in a sea, and sea was already mapped, which is not a case in Aurora. Tanker just won’t be able to get to the rendezvous point, and your scouts definitely won’t be doing grav survey under fire. - commerce protection: doesn’t work because commerce raiding doesn’t work. Yes, there is a certain spoiler race that does commerce raiding, but if you’re throwing something bigger than a corvette, or maybe a frigate/destroyer at most at that problem, what are you doing? - Battle fleet screen/fast wing: doesn’t work because how both combat and scouting in Aurora work. It is much better to clump all your principal combatants together, with all the PD ships and whatnot, into a single point than to allow enemy to pick your capital ships one-by-one by missile walleys. And there are no independent enemy scouts that warrant a big ship chasing after them, because of p.1 & 2. Will be grateful for poking holes in my logic, and even more grateful for a realistic(ish) BC doctrine that checks at least several points. ---
**Author:** ![HitTheMan](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/aurora4x.com/hittheman/32/473_2.png) [@HitTheMan](https://aurora4x.com/u/HitTheMan)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 2:02pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/2 "2026-10-04T14:02:33Z")
I mean that depends entirely on what you as the player want to use the vessel for, and who you ask as per usual the term “Battlecruiser” especially in sci-fi or fantasy has been stretched quite wide & thin in contrary to it’s IRL usage. In our Aurora game that me and my 2 friends run (5 years per person), we’re all military autists and one particularly is a heavy navy autist. Our navy is using similar tonnage as 1940 ish period, using this array ```auto Hull Classes - V3 70k - 100k = BS 50k - 70k = DN 30k - 50k = BB 20k - 30k = BC 15k - 20k = CA 10k - 15k = CL 5K - 10k = DD 0.5k - 5k = FAC,FF, Corv, etc 0k - 0.5k = Fighter, Bomber, etc ``` We put the classification more on tonnage & speed rather than purpose, as Aurora makes it difficult in that manner. So a Battlecruiser design we have is this, 75years into our game. Oh also, we’ve made a rule to NOT use shields, so it’s Armour or nothing. Gotta pay good for good armour 😆 ```auto Spatha Block 4 class Battlecruiser 27,926 tons 797 Crew 5,251.2 BP TCS 559 TH 3,938 EM 0 7049 km/s Armour 12-81 Shields 0-0 HTK 155 Sensors 1/1/0/0 DCR 22-7 PPV 129.92 Maint Life 1.35 Years MSP 2,410 AFR 520% IFR 7.2% 1YR 1,423 5YR 21,345 Max Repair 656.3 MSP Troop Capacity 300 tons Boarding Capable Magazine 200 / 150 Cryogenic Berths 800 Captain Control Rating 5 BRG AUX ENG CIC FLG Intended Deployment Time: 6 months Morale Check Required ID-3000/175-1312EP (3) Power 3937.5 Fuel Use 115.78% Signature 1312.5 Explosion 17% Fuel Capacity 1,500,000 Litres Range 8.3 billion km (13 days at full power) 250mm(UL)-640k/ROF30 (1) Range 256,000km TS: 7,049 km/s Power 16-3 RM 40,000 km ROF 30 Single 200mm(UL)-400k/ROF30 Turret (1x1) Range 256,000km TS: 20000 km/s Power 10-3 RM 40,000 km ROF 20 PB-4/200k (10) Range 200,000km TS: 7,049 km/s Power 10-3 ROF 20 Quad Turret - GC-30k/50-(17%) (4x12) Range 30,000km TS: 20000 km/s Power 0-0 RM 30,000 km ROF 5 BFC(MW)-300/256k-9Kps (1) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 9,000 km/s ECCM-1 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61 BFC(MW-PD)-300/192k-12Kps (1) Max Range: 192,000 km TS: 12,000 km/s ECCM-1 95 90 84 79 74 69 64 58 53 48 SFR-95/16.76 (3) Total Power Output 50.3 Exp 5% DML-10 (15) Decoy Size: 10 Hangar Reload 158 minutes MF Reload 26 hours BL-02 (100) Missile Size: 2 Hangar Reload 70 minutes MF Reload 11 hours MFC-300/MSL-3.2M (1) Range 35.8m km Resolution 1 ECCM-1 M10 Decoy Missile (15) Signature: 2000 tons ECM-0 Size: 10 M2A3 "Space Cobra" AMM (100) Speed: 37,500 km/s End: 0.8m Range: 1.8m km WH: 1 Size: 2 TH: 125/75/37 AS-25/10kT-30M (1) GPS 2100 Range 30.2m km Resolution 200 AS-100/MSL-930K (1) GPS 42 Range 10.3m km MCR 930.8k km Resolution 1 EM-10/8 (1) Sensitivity 1.6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 10m km TH-10/8 (1) Sensitivity 1.6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 10m km Electronic Warfare Jammers: Sensor 1 Fire Control 2 Missile 2 Ground Forces 1x Space H.Marines - 2348 2x Space Marines - 2348 Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes This design is classed as a Warship for auto-assignment purposes ``` For comparison, this is out Battleship. ```auto We Came. We Stomped. We Laughed. III class Battleship 49,941 tons 1,072 Crew 8,822.5 BP TCS 999 TH 4,500 EM 0 4505 km/s Armour 25-120 Shields 0-0 HTK 285 Sensors 1/1/0/0 DCR 38-7 PPV 267.8 Maint Life 1.88 Years MSP 4,591 AFR 713% IFR 9.9% 1YR 1,658 5YR 24,870 Max Repair 750 MSP Troop Capacity 500 tons Boarding Capable Magazine 200 / 250 Cryogenic Berths 1,000 Captain Control Rating 5 BRG AUX ENG CIC FLG Intended Deployment Time: 6 months Morale Check Required ID-3000/200-1500EP (3) Power 4500 Fuel Use 161.66% Signature 1500 Explosion 20% Fuel Capacity 4,000,000 Litres Range 8.9 billion km (22 days at full power) 250mm(UL)-640k/ROF30 (1) Range 256,000km TS: 4,505 km/s Power 16-3 RM 40,000 km ROF 30 Triple 200mm(UL)-400k/ROF30 Turret (5x3) Range 256,000km TS: 12000 km/s Power 30-9 RM 40,000 km ROF 20 Quad Turret - GC-30k/50-(17%) (20x12) Range 30,000km TS: 20000 km/s Power 0-0 RM 30,000 km ROF 5 BFC(MW-PD)-300/192k-12Kps (1) Max Range: 192,000 km TS: 12,000 km/s ECCM-1 95 90 84 79 74 69 64 58 53 48 BFC(MW)-300/256k-9Kps (1) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 9,000 km/s ECCM-1 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61 SFR-95/16.76 (4) Total Power Output 67 Exp 5% DML-10 (25) Decoy Size: 10 Hangar Reload 158 minutes MF Reload 26 hours BL-02 (100) Missile Size: 2 Hangar Reload 70 minutes MF Reload 11 hours MFC-50/MSL-1.3M (1) Range 14.6m km Resolution 1 ECCM-1 M10 Decoy Missile (25) Signature: 2000 tons ECM-0 Size: 10 M2A3 "Space Cobra" AMM (100) Speed: 37,500 km/s End: 0.8m Range: 1.8m km WH: 1 Size: 2 TH: 125/75/37 AS-300/MSL-1.6M (1) GPS 126 Range 17.9m km MCR 1.6m km Resolution 1 AS-300/10kT-104M (1) GPS 25200 Range 104.8m km Resolution 200 TH-10/8 (1) Sensitivity 1.6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 10m km EM-10/8 (1) Sensitivity 1.6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 10m km Electronic Warfare Jammers: Sensor 1 Fire Control 2 Missile 2 Ground Forces 5x Space H.Marines - 2348 Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes This design is classed as a Warship for auto-assignment purposes ``` As you can notice, our Battlecruiser is smaller by 20k tons, but has heavy armaments in terms of a interchangeable Fixed Laser OR Particle Lance, along with fixed Particlebeams & AA, less armour but speedy. While the Battleship is s heavy uparmoured ship with large turrets, heavy AA and a fixed Laser. Both also have a wide array of missiles mostly AMMs. - Task we use the BC for is escorting the BB along with a large complement of DDs, CLs & CAs. When encountering threats, if a DD, CL or particularly CAs can’t be used the BC is sent in to recon and chase. When in a fleet battle, when or if the enemy fleet starts fleeing, the BC is sent to chase with a large escort force (consisting of DDs and CLs), to catch up to either send boarding marines, completely wreck the fleeing ships or chase them until they encounter the JP. In contrary to BCs, the BB’s main purpose is to be a anchor of threat, particularly against missile heavy opponents, OR guarding JPs with their very heavy armour able to slug it out for hours against any hostile threat. - Is this a game optimal playstyle? Hell no, we enjoy recreating IRL navy standards from 1910 → 1990, with large supplement of Destroyers, Light Cruisers and more. But it is certainly one example of a navy doctrine me and my friends use 😃 ---
**Author:** ![HitTheMan](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/aurora4x.com/hittheman/32/473_2.png) [@HitTheMan](https://aurora4x.com/u/HitTheMan)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 2:07pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/3 "2026-10-04T14:07:17Z")
![image](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/uploads/aurora4x/original/2X/2/2eb267d9fafbd2059307051033de07ab30d6ba8f.png) Also this being how our fleet is lay’d out, so far we got 4 of these fleets in various sectors of space as their operating theatre with their own patrols, refueling, rearming and army complements. ---
**Author:** ![miey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@miey](https://aurora4x.com/u/miey)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 2:09pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/4 "2026-10-04T14:09:08Z")
Speaking from my limited experience: - recon - agree - counter-recon - agree - commerce raiding - though there might be classes better suited, I think this can work. Especially if paired with fast tanker and maybe 1-2 recon craft that carry only sensors. - commerce protection - agree - battle screen - agree I think one way to make beam BCs work (in raiding), are 3 things, though I’ve yet to test this design myself: 1. Treat them as anti-beam ships, equipped with particle lances (or mayybe most long-range lasers) and shoot from the furtherst possible range 2. high speed to dictate distance (fuel usage can be mitigated by presence of fast tanker) 3. Armor them quite less than battleships, as in this way they won’t _need_ to tank damage, even if dishing out will take a while. Looking at it by role, not tonnage - Beam BB and CA close in and need to tank, BC (in this way) not that much. EDIT: Also, boarding craft w/marines might be useful to capture crippled ships. ---
**Author:** ![Walter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/85e7bf/32.png) [@Walter](https://aurora4x.com/u/Walter)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 2:28pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/5 "2026-10-04T14:28:53Z")
World War 2 in space. 🙂 Some traditional designations and the attached roles just don’t translate into Aurora’s world model very well (I am looking at you, Galleon. Self-escorting merchantman, my a\*\*). It does have a fancy ring to it though and so, if you are ready to take artistic license in the name of the “rule of cool” go right ahead. I know I do. One justification I can think of, off the top of my hat, would be a differentiation between short-ranged, short deployment Battleships (which in Aurora can be just as fast as any “Destroyer” you can design) and longer ranged, longer deployment Battlecruisers, that either sacrifice some armament or have to be a fraction bigger. Caveat: The difference would be specific to your campaign and the next game your doctrine might not even use ship types like this. That warning applies regardless. As an example I like to have (from magneto-plasma onward) 30kton combatants, with a pair of 300% engines that are labelled “Interceptor” - because that is what they are supposed to do. They are carrier-based for strategic mobility and have to be, because of their abysmal fuel efficiency. ---
**Author:** ![Abdoola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Abdoola](https://aurora4x.com/u/Abdoola)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 2:44pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/6 "2026-10-04T14:44:38Z")
> [@HitTheMan](#): > > Task we use the BC for is escorting the BB along with a large complement of DDs, CLs & CAs. When encountering threats, if a DD, CL or particularly CAs can’t be used the BC is sent in to recon and chase. > > When in a fleet battle, when or if the enemy fleet starts fleeing, the BC is sent to chase Hm, agree, the fast wing thingie might work if paired with a heavy RP. I just throw missiles at fleeing enemy. But, in a “no missiles / short-ranged torpedoes only” game, that task may require a fast and big combatant. Still, a single checkpoint only though. > [@miey](#): > > - commerce raiding - though there might be classes better suited, I think this can work. Especially if paired with fast tanker and maybe 1-2 recon craft that carry only sensors. That tanker will need speed higher than enemy beam combatants, and PD & armor beefy enough to withstand the missiles. It will require a tanker of its own 🙂 But agree, it may be viable at end-game tech levels, will test that if campaign gets to that point. > [@Walter](#): > > One justification I can think of, off the top of my hat, would be a differentiation between short-ranged, short deployment Battleships (which in Aurora can be just as fast as any “Destroyer” you can design) and longer ranged, longer deployment Battlecruisers, that either sacrifice some armament or have to be a fraction bigger. Yeah missed potential to differentiate BBs and BCs by range and not purpose. I tend to build all principal combatants to the same speed, range and deployment time standards, to avoid need to send half of the fleet back home if a tanker wasn’t in a position. But still, we’re talking about just a reclassified BB that happened to be a bit longer-legged here, not a “true” BC. ---
**Author:** ![Walter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/85e7bf/32.png) [@Walter](https://aurora4x.com/u/Walter)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 2:51pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/7 "2026-10-04T14:51:12Z")
We are not kinkshaming here. 🙂 What is and isn’t a big enough difference to be considered “true” is up to individual players in their individual games. ---
**Author:** ![Abdoola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Abdoola](https://aurora4x.com/u/Abdoola)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 2:55pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/8 "2026-10-04T14:55:53Z")
True, sorry if my answer was rude. Definitely didn’t intend it to be so. ---
**Author:** ![Walter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/85e7bf/32.png) [@Walter](https://aurora4x.com/u/Walter)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 3:06pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/9 "2026-10-04T15:06:17Z")
No worries, all in good sport. I see now, that my post was slightly off-topic anyway, because OP wanted assistance in the creation of a wet-navy Battlecruiser equivalent and I tried to encourage them to build whatever the (rude word) they wanted and call it a Battlecruiser. ---
**Author:** ![Abdoola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Abdoola](https://aurora4x.com/u/Abdoola)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 3:20pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/10 "2026-10-04T15:20:39Z")
> [@Walter](#): > > I tried to encourage them to build whatever the (rude word) they wanted and call it a Battlecruiser That’s exactly what I was doing all my previous campaigns 😃 ---
**Author:** ![miey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@miey](https://aurora4x.com/u/miey)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 3:21pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/11 "2026-10-04T15:21:01Z")
> [@Abdoola](#): > > That tanker will need speed higher than enemy beam combatants, and PD & armor beefy enough to withstand the missiles. It will require a tanker of its own 🙂 Not necessarily - one could have a tanker in a subfleet, that when a contact is made (or before suspected contact), it detaches and scoots away a bit, while warships close in. ---
**Author:** ![Abdoola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Abdoola](https://aurora4x.com/u/Abdoola)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 3:49pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/12 "2026-10-04T15:49:54Z")
A bit of context I omitted: my sacrificial goat (crossed out) JP scout fighter got smoked by a sizeable ambush. Knowing some of the ships encountered, I estimated their combined salvo well in hundreds, both ASMs and AMMs, plus a ton of beams. So, I started to wonder, how to deal damage to their rear without losing half of my fleet before battle even begins. And that led to that “true BC” rabbit hole. ---
**Author:** ![serger](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/aurora4x.com/serger/32/961_2.png) [@serger](https://aurora4x.com/u/serger)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 4:21pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/13 "2026-10-04T16:21:01Z")
I don’t like the terms mush-up emerged in XXc with cruisers. In my games cruisers are designed for cruising (long-term operations with limited logistical support). Light cruisers provide the ability by themselves with a minimal combat power, battlecruisers are either much larger then battleships (the same combat ability + authonomy) or they are squadron ships the same size as battleships, yet with the primary role of providing jumping abilities and/or authonomy to the battleships, heavy cruisers are somewhere between (and I rarely build them). JP mechanics makes cruisers nearly useless for raiding operations and it’s an ineffective concept against spoiler raiders, so I usually build them to cover survey fleets and the newst colonies and patrol uninhabited systems inside the settled space where and when I still have no station with a destroyer or two to intercept raiders and generally enforce interstellar law locally (a bit of roleplay). ---
**Author:** ![nuclearslurpee](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/aurora4x.com/nuclearslurpee/32/368_2.png) [@nuclearslurpee](https://aurora4x.com/u/nuclearslurpee)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 4:22pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/14 "2026-10-04T16:22:27Z")
This topic comes up enough that I can link an old Reddit post [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/aurora/comments/12en2qj/what_do_you_consider_a_battlecruiser_to_be/jfbuyqa/) and augment it below. In my own settings, a battlecruiser typically looks like one of the following: - Intermediate class between Cruiser and Battleship to backfill a gap in fleet capabilities (e.g., to use a shipyard in that intermediate tonnage range or to provide a smaller “capital” combatant for small frontier fleets). - Classical battlecruisers with battleship-size guns and displacement but thin armor in exchange for higher speed (e.g., pre-WWI Fisher-type, WW2 Alaska-type). - WWI German-style battlecruisers with battleship-size displacement and armor/defenses but weaker guns in exchange for higher speed. - Capital cruisers in a two-fleet doctrine where the cruiser fleet has long endurance (e.g., factor of 3-4x longer fuel range, deployment time, maintenance life) and the battle fleet has short endurance in exchange for better combat punch and/or survivability. In this doctrine, the cruiser fleet would have BCs as capitals and CAs/CLs as screens, while the battle fleet would have BBs or CVs as capitals and DDs as screens. As listed in the linked post, there’s a lot of other possibilities, but I think these hew closest to how a traditional wet navy would think of battlecruisers historically. ---
**Author:** ![Walter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/85e7bf/32.png) [@Walter](https://aurora4x.com/u/Walter)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 6:58pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/15 "2026-10-04T18:58:17Z")
Well, that depends (doesn’t it always in Aurora?). If you can get further intelligence on them that would always help you decide what to do. I’d also think about the thing that obsoleted wet navy battleships and battlecruisers both: Carriers. And multi stage cruise missiles. Good hunting. ---
**Author:** ![Abdoola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Abdoola](https://aurora4x.com/u/Abdoola)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 7:33pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/16 "2026-10-04T19:33:13Z")
Yup carriers could solve that problem. But, this campaign I decided to try without them. Not a strict “no hangars” rule, more like “no dedicated carriers” rule. And now I’m suffering as a consequence lol. Did a bit of theory-crafting and end up with this ducking thing: ```auto Oskil class Battlecruiser (P) 32,000 tons 1,087 Crew 32,238.1 BP TCS 640 TH 2,458 EM 20,580 32000 km/s JR 3-1500 Armour 4-89 Shields 686-535 HTK 141 Sensors 120/120/0/0 DCR 43-13 PPV 12.6 Maint Life 1.34 Years MSP 27,278 AFR 248% IFR 3.4% 1YR 16,322 5YR 244,823 Max Repair 12,800 MSP Hangar Deck Capacity 3,000 tons Troop Capacity 100 tons Magazine 278 / 0 Captain Control Rating 4 BRG AUX ENG FLG Intended Deployment Time: 6 months Flight Crew Berths 60 CDE 75% Morale Check Required J32000(3-1500) Military Jump Drive (JDE 21) Max Ship Size 32000 tons Distance 1500k km Squadron Size 3 Solid Core AM Drive EP10240.00 (2) Power 20480 Fuel Use 28.28% Signature 1228.80 Exp 20% Fuel Capacity 2,046,000 Litres Range 40.7 billion km (14 days at full power) Omicron S343 / R535 Shields (2) Recharge 535 seconds (1.3 per second) Particle Beam-12 (400k, 15s) (2) Range 400,000km TS 32,000 km/s Power 30-10 ROF 15 Direct Fire Control R600-TS31250 (SW) (10%) (2) Range 600,000 km TS 31,250 km/s ECCM-4 Gas-core Anti-matter Power Plant R21 (1) Total Power Output 21 Exp 5% Size 1 Missile Launcher (150 s) (2) Missile Size: 1 ROF 150 PD Missile Fire Control FC13-R1 (20%) (1) Range 13.5m km RES 1 ECCM-4 EH-80 PD Radar Buoy (3.5 m) (39) Speed 0 km/s Range 0m km WH 0 Size 1 TH: 0 / 0 / 0 Neptune (55 k/s, 75m) (40) Speed 55,080 km/s Range 76m km WH 16 Size 5 TH: 7,711 / 15,422 / 30,845 Thermal Buoy (9.1 m) (39) Speed 0 km/s Range 0m km WH 0 Size 1 TH: 0 / 0 / 0 Active Search Sensor AS91-R20 (20%) (1) GPS 1800 Range 91.9m km RES 20 ECCM-4 EH-80 PD Radar AS21-R1 (20%) (1) GPS 36 Range 21.4m km MCR 1.9m km RES 1 ECCM-4 EH-80 Thermal Sensor TH3.00-120.00 (1) Sensitivity 120 Detect 1000: 86.6m km EM Sensor EM3.00-120.00 (1) Sensitivity 120 Detect 1000: 86.6m km Electronic Warfare Jammers: Sensor 4 Fire Control 5 Missile 5 Strike Group / Ground Forces 2x Vampire mk2 Bomber Speed: 10241 km/s Size: 10 2x Shark mk2 Buoy Deployment Craft Speed: 10241 km/s Size: 10 2x Gravsurvey Pod Fast Gravitational Survey Shuttle Speed: 10241 km/s Size: 10 1x Marine Squad - 2194 Missile to hit values are target speeds in km/s for 100% / 50% / 25% chance to hit This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes This design is classed as a Carrier for auto-assignment purposes ``` It should be accompanied by few parasites. Recon fighter: ```auto Shark mk2 class Buoy Deployment Craft (P) 500 tons 14 Crew 373 BP TCS 10 TH 12 EM 0 10241 km/s Armour 1-5 Shields 0-0 HTK 4 Sensors 40/20/0/0 DCR 0-0 PPV 0.6 Maint Life 11.31 Years MSP 223 AFR 6% IFR 0.1% 1YR 3 5YR 48 Max Repair 168 MSP Magazine 4 / 0 Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1 Intended Deployment Time: 3 months CDE 75% Morale Check Required Fighter Solid Core AM Drive EP102.40 (1) Power 102.4 Fuel Use 18.10% Signature 12.288 Exp 8% Fuel Capacity 20,200 Litres Range 40.2 billion km (45 days at full power) Size 1 Box Launcher (4) Missile Size: 1 Hangar Reload 50 minutes MF Reload 8 hours PD Missile Fire Control FC13-R1 (20%) (1) Range 13.5m km RES 1 ECCM-4 EH-80 PD Radar Buoy (3.5 m) (2) Speed 0 km/s Range 0m km WH 0 Size 1 TH: 0 / 0 / 0 Thermal Buoy (9.1 m) (2) Speed 0 km/s Range 0m km WH 0 Size 1 TH: 0 / 0 / 0 Active Search Sensor AS39-R1 (1) GPS 120 Range 39.1m km MCR 3.5m km RES 1 ECCM-4 Thermal Sensor TH1.0-40.0 (20%) (1) Sensitivity 40 Detect 1000: 50m km EM Sensor EM0.5-20.0 (1) Sensitivity 20.0 Detect 1000: 35.4m km ``` ```auto Vampire mk2 class Bomber (P) 500 tons 8 Crew 208.3 BP TCS 10 TH 12 EM 0 10241 km/s Armour 1-5 Shields 0-0 HTK 3 Sensors 4/0/0/0 DCR 0-0 PPV 3.75 Maint Life 12.15 Years MSP 136 AFR 6% IFR 0.1% 1YR 2 5YR 25 Max Repair 102.4 MSP Magazine 25 / 0 Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1 Intended Deployment Time: 3 months CDE 75% Morale Check Required Fighter Solid Core AM Drive EP102.40 (1) Power 102.4 Fuel Use 18.10% Signature 12.288 Exp 8% Fuel Capacity 20,200 Litres Range 40.2 billion km (45 days at full power) Size 5 Box Launcher (5) Missile Size: 5 Hangar Reload 111 minutes MF Reload 18 hours Missile Fire Control FC146-R40 (20%) (1) Range 146.4m km RES 40 ECCM-4 EH-80 Neptune (55 k/s, 75m) (5) Speed 55,080 km/s Range 76m km WH 16 Size 5 TH: 7,711 / 15,422 / 30,845 Eyeball Thermal Sensor TH0.1-4.0 (1) Sensitivity 4 Detect 1000: 15.8m km ``` ```auto Gravsurvey Pod Fast class Gravitational Survey Shuttle (P) 500 tons 13 Crew 416.5 BP TCS 10 TH 12 EM 0 10241 km/s Armour 1-5 Shields 0-0 HTK 3 Sensors 4/0/5/0 DCR 0-0 PPV 0 Maint Life 4.54 Years MSP 130 AFR 8% IFR 0.1% 1YR 10 5YR 153 Max Repair 300 MSP Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1 Intended Deployment Time: 2.4 months CDE 75% Morale Check Required Fighter Solid Core AM Drive EP102.40 (1) Power 102.4 Fuel Use 18.10% Signature 12.288 Exp 8% Fuel Capacity 15,200 Litres Range 30.2 billion km (34 days at full power) Eyeball Thermal Sensor TH0.1-4.0 (1) Sensitivity 4 Detect 1000: 15.8m km Phased Gravitational Sensors (1) 5 Survey Points Per Hour ``` So the idea is: - do a squadron jump and pray to RNG gods to land outside of beam range - outrun ASMs (enemy has ASMs much faster than 32k but those seem to be deployed in limited numbers; vast majority are 32k) - shield-tank AMMs - run as fast and as far as it can - when well outside of active scanners range, shut down the shields and reduce speed to minimize heat signature, crawl into a hiding spot, while pooping buoys every now and then - deploy parasites: 1 strike group (2 Vampires + 1 Shark) to do commerce raiding, 1 survey group (2 Gravsurvey pods + 1 Shark) to map JPs - When another JP is found, repeat until low on fuel or missiles - Wreck havoc in their rear, force the blockading fleet to leave (not sure that will work as NPRs have simplified MSP usage AFAIK, and maybe even fuel too?) Obviously it is a guaranteed way to lose a very expensive ship and its crew, but heck - why not throw some theories at a wall and see what sticks?.. ---
**Author:** ![Walter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/85e7bf/32.png) [@Walter](https://aurora4x.com/u/Walter)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 9:53pm UTC](https://aurora4x.com/t/battlecruiser-place-in-a-naval-doctrine/1167/17 "2026-10-04T21:53:12Z")
Ooooh, I never yet reached the antimatter age. This looks fun. So how do you like this: ```auto Pohjola class Interceptor 28,800 tons 460 Crew 10,589.9 BP TCS 576 TH 11,520 EM 7,140 20000 km/s Armour 5-83 Shields 238-476 HTK 146 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 26-9 PPV 160 Maint Life 1.38 Years MSP 5,975 AFR 255% IFR 3.5% 1YR 3,398 5YR 50,964 Max Repair 2,880 MSP Captain of the List Control Rating 1 BRG Intended Deployment Time: 3 days CDE 50% Morale Check Required Magneto-plasma Drive EP5760.00 (2) Power 11520 Fuel Use 225.00% Signature 5760 Exp 30% Fuel Capacity 1,251,000 Litres Range 3.48 billion km (48 hours at full power) Epsilon S119 / R476 Shields (2) Recharge 476 seconds (0.5 per second) 25.0cm C5 Far Ultraviolet Laser (8) Range 320,000km TS 20,000 km/s Power 16-5 ROF 20 Particle Beam-6 (8) Range 240,000km TS 20,000 km/s Power 15-5 ROF 15 Gauss Cannon R400-100 (8x4) Range 40,000km TS 20,000 km/s Power 0-0 ROF 5 Direct Fire Control R320-TS20000 (20%) (1) Range 320,000 km TS 20,000 km/s ECCM-3 Direct Fire Control R160-TS20000 (20%) (2) Range 160,000 km TS 20,000 km/s ECCM-3 Stellarator Fusion Reactor R80 (1) Total Power Output 80.3 Exp 5% Active Search Sensor AS92-R200 (20%) (1) GPS 11200 Range 92.4m km RES 200 ECCM-3 EH-80 Electronic Warfare Jammers: Sensor 4 Fire Control 4 Missile 4 This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes This design is classed as a Warship for auto-assignment purposes ``` If you adopt the principle, yours obviously will go MUCH faster and be that much harder for missiles to hit. Color me envious. The whole combination is an interstellar tug to provide strategic mobility, a driveless hangar station to house and maintain the battle component and the Pohjola itself. That might even fit your no carrier doctrine, if sold right. For a jump point assault you might want to modify a few of those with jump engines and sensors to replace the beams. Have fun.