/dcg/ Dropzone/Dropfleet Commander General

>>51638921
im concerned that there was no UCM represented, and what that potentially implies, also the top 2 were shaltari, and were both sporting Diamonds, and spamming voidgates which is also concerning.

>>51639078
To be fair, there were only 10 entrants. After Adepticon and UKGX we can make a better judgement on how popular UCM are. I think the former has something around 24 entrants.

It's no surprise how powerful Diamonds are, and I personally think they should stay as they are, but possibly be bumped up to a PHR BB's cost, maybe even more, maybe even up to a full 300 points.

It's little wonder why voidgate spam was so effective, as no one brought any corvettes! Once they hit shelves and people start involving them in their lists, I imagine that massed gate spam won't be as much of an issue.
Alternately, it's possibly that gates might even have their cost bumped up to 16 or 17 even.

>>51638921
A reminder of the lists, 1st place was a Shaltari with 4 motherships and 12 voidgates, with some obsidians, opals and a Diamond.

Second place had more voidgates, less motherships, and 3 turquoises instead of the obsidians.

third place was a double Basilisk, double hydra list with a few djinns and decent strike capacity in a Chimera and 4 gargoyles. only list to bring corvettes, with 3 nickars.

4th place was phr with 3 bellephrons, 2 orpheus cruisers, 6 medeas, 1 ganymede.

I will say I think the heavy voidgate spam for Shaltari was pretty well rectified in the FAQ that came out. those things are gonna die in droves to corvettes. I do think corvettes will need to come out and give those that don't want to kitbash their options though.

UCM not showing up happens. I think we need someone to actually bring a UCM list before we start worrying, considering how small the tourney was. We'll have to get another tourney or two's results.

Just managed to pick up a Tokyo/NewYork Kit, which should I build? I know out bombers arnt the best but I love the flavor of carriers. But the tokyo has the jack of all trades vibe going on.

>>51639314
You want to let xenos have cities or something, son?

>>51639078
Diamond could do with a price increase, that weapon system is bonkers. Kicks the shit out of the DMC, that's for sure.

Voidgates got nerfed which was very much needed, but I'm not sure it's enough. I think the main problem with spam is that lenient 18" max distance. I'm sure Hawk are looking very closely into possible changes though, considering how much they love spam in their games.

It was a small tourney and an early one at that, I wouldn't base too much on it. The meta will continue to develop as counters are found and some of those things everyone thought were shit turn out to actually be good.

>>51639314
The NY isn't that good. The strike craft are respectable but the torpedoes are meant to be the main appeal, and those just aren't good enough to justify the price.

Besides blowing up cities is great, especially when you can also shoot lasers at hostile ships.

>>51639314
Tokyo or Beijing in all honesty; probably Tokyo for utterly dominating critical locations while bombing clusters.

>>51639314
NY really needed the full strength CAW. And Torps in general to be 24 inch range instead of 18.

I'd also take those secondary turrets being linked too.

>>51641301
Giving the Nork Swordfish CAW is probably the best idea, along with a general torpedo buff.

I wish the San Fran has Shark CAW rather than 'Cuda like the light cruisers and frigates.

I personally think torpedoes shouldn't have a range, then they're a counter to stealth/cloak. A torpedo should be a lot longer range than a bomber at least

>>51643544

I think they should be crippling. Other changes to follow from that to rebalance (maybe a "running the hell away works" option), but to start off I think torpedoes ought to be crippling.

>BASED Andrew ships my rewards early Wednesday morning (my time)
>scheduled to be delivered tomorrow
By god

File: 1434154274691.gif (804KB, 330x300px) Image search: [Google]

804KB, 330x300px

>Get my ships in December
>Get some DZC as well
>Finally get everything to at least tabletop standard
>DZC scene is gone from the only store in town
>No interest in DFC

WHAT HAPPENED IN A MONTH AND A HALF
WHERE DID EVERYONE GO

>>51638921
One thing to note is 1,2, and 4th place are we're practicing weekly in a highly competitive meta with each other. Another thing I noticed is that the other metas that sent people seemed to play like this is a ship combat game, not a troop landing game like our meta plays. ( I'm from the 1,2 and 4th place guys group)

>>51645278
I apologize for that first sentence. The warp took hold

>>51645278
Lots of people seem to be making that mistake, and focusing on shooting ships over landing troops.

>>51645357
My target priority tends to go bulk landers>carriers>everything else

>>51645212
man I feel your pain although we never had a scene to begin with.

>>51645278
I'm betting this'll all change once Corvettes become easily available; lol8medea or lol4mothership12gate is a bitch to deal with, but two full squadrons of corvettes cost, respectively:
132 (UCM)
132 (Scourge)
180 (PHR)
216 (Shaltari)

6 Santiagos, Nickar, or Echo are enough to tear through 2-3 strike carriers per turn (depending on how ballsy you are), and lol12glass can shred through 3-4, maybe even 5 if you play the dice. The glass also have the bonus of being a rather cheap and efficient source of extra damage to plink away at ships, and to a lesser extent the Echo as well.

>>51644787
>sent email to Andrew last week, have not heard back.

Why does it keep happening....

>>51646798
>tfw he responded to me within a day
Send another email, anon

Double battlecruiser anon here. You guys helped me out majorly at the LVO. Based off what I learned and saw there, I've revamped my 1250 list. What do you guys think?

--------------------------------------
Battlecruiser Meme - 1248pts
Scourge - 10 launch assets

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup (205pts)
1 x Akuma - 205pts - H

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup (205pts)
1 x Akuma - 205pts - H

SR10 Line battlegroup (298pts)
1 x Chimera - 105pts - M
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L
3 x Djinn - 129pts - L

SR10 Line battlegroup (280pts)
1 x Hydra - 140pts - M
1 x Hydra - 140pts - M

SR5 Pathfinder battlegroup (130pts)
3 x Nickar - 66pts - L
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L

SR5 Pathfinder battlegroup (130pts)
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L
3 x Nickar - 66pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

>>51648727
That looks utterly terrifying, anon.

Personally, I'd move the Chimera in with the Hydras, just to reduce the SR on your Djinn.

Theory: What are the downsides of cramming all your landers in one battlegroup? They rarely have productive effects as far as initiative is concerned, and can allow better initiative (and more alpha strikes) for your combat groups.

I'm of the opinion specializing your battlegroups will get better output in general due to both activation priority and orders synnergy.

Ie, 'Combat'
Beam cruiser + Gun frigates
ie 'No Initiative'
Landing ships + Carriers, or Carriers
ie 'Heavy'
If you're going over 16 strategy rating, may as well go over 20-25 so you can assure a brutal activation
ie 'Suckerpunch'
4x or 6x CAW Frigates.

>>51648790
I would if I could. Sadly, max of 2 Pathfinder groups means I can't. Idea is that they're going to have to come get the lander, then I can just use the Djinns to sucker punch anything that comes after it.

>>51649472
ah, yeah, totally forgot about that. RIP.

Also, I made a variant of that winning Shaltari list.
I can't decide what's more important; Glass, or Opals.

--------------------------------------
Shaltari 1250 #4 - 1250pts
Shaltari - 0 launch assets

SR20 Flag battlegroup (360pts)
1 x Diamond - 270pts - S
+ Star Elder (40pts, 3AV)
5 x Glass - 90pts - L

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup (200pts)
1 x Ruby - 200pts - H

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup (200pts)
1 x Ruby - 200pts - H

SR15 Line battlegroup (300pts)
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M

SR5 Pathfinder battlegroup (75pts)
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L
2 x Voidgate - 30pts - L

SR5 Pathfinder battlegroup (75pts)
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L
2 x Voidgate - 30pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

so here's a question- How strong would an 90 point destroyer be with the ability to launch multiple dropships instead of a bulk lander? Say it has a single array of 4200 cannons on its center instead of the undergunned frigates. Would that be worth running? For the purposes of rules say it could drop to atmosphere, just so there isn't any weirdness with dropship rules and low orbit.

>>51652893
Pretty strong, being larger than a strike carrier it'd have at least 6 hill points and a 4+ armor would be really tough to get rid of and would be able to push a point with double armor deployment.

>>51652893
>2 new orleans: 32 points
>1 of this thing: 90
New Orleans would have the same landing capability, the same armor save, more flexibility, lower cost, while they'd be more vulnerable to damage (crippling at 2 instead of whatever) it doesn't seem like it'd be a 26 point difference.

>>51653967
>>51654041
>/tg/ the responses
now we just need someone to say they have no idea how balanced that would be and we have it perfect.

>>51654395
I mean, fine.

>3 new orleans; 96 points
>3x2HP (then crippled, for a 2/3rds chance of an additional 2 damage?)
>land THREE dropships
>at three different sites, or all the same, whatever you want
>three 4200s

vs
>1 thingy; 90 points
>3 hp before crippling (which has 2/3rds chance to deal 2/3s more, potentially enough to kill it at 3) followed by potentially 3 more
>can only drop 2
>same armor save
>less shots
I mean... that seems like an awful lot for 6 points.

>>51655639
Ackchyually Norleans only get 2200s. They'd still get more shots since a single 4200 is only equal to 2 2200s, but I like correcting people.

>>51655703
Oh, I go them confused, mb

>>51655639
Plus the ability to be able to get crippling is a big deal.

Also, anyone have any idea what corruptors hit on? As in the dropship. The entry says 3+, and can only target buildings, but buildings are always hit on a 2+?

>>51655639
very fair points. So we can either reduce the points cost or add a bit to its frame to sweeten the deal for 90 points. Would air to air CAW be out of the question? Or maybe 2 4200s, which would give you one more shot than a new orleans in a combat scenario. Or just give it one more drop capacity, so that its a little more durable but less flexible than its new orleans cousins.

Or is this the entirely wrong approach to destroyers? I know there have been a lot of suggestions on the topic.

>>51655889
Air to air CAW would be pretty tits. Give it something to make it more offensive in atmosphere, and able to defend itself from corvettes.
Maybe 1-higher scan too.

>>51655889
>Or is this the entirely wrong approach to destroyers?
Probably. 90 points is a lot, more than a light cruiser. There isn't really much need for something between frigates and light cruisers anyway, so they'd have to do something interesting to be worth putting into the game. However anything that added extra troop landing would need to be very carefully considered, as that's an easy way to upset the game balance.

>>51646864
...I got a shipping notification.
Is.... is it really happening?

>>51655956
no its all a dream

ships will never come

chinese boat with your order sank and molds are hostage

>tfw your rewards are literally less than 25 miles away from you, but you won't get them until tomorrow.
AAAAH

Wasn't DFC supposed to ship in June?

>>51658060
That was the original estimate for the KS, yes.

>>51655639
Why not just lower the point cost of the San Fran at this point to make it less shitty. Or am I alone in thinking taking a lot of New Orleans is significantly better than taking a San Fran?

>>51658288
3 New Orleans:
>96 points
>don't need to care about coherency
>can split up to attack different locations
>can drop armour tokens
>less impacted by defence batteries
>very well defended against most weapons while in atmos
>slightly faster and has a smaller sig

1 Sanfran:
>111 points
>harder to kill while in orbit
>slightly better guns that will be used far more often
>can drop 6 troops a turn, twice as many as all the strike carriers combined
>can drop a defence battery
>can drop troops from further away
>doesn't get its asshole reamed by corvettes

They both have their uses. With only Norleans you're liable to be bombarded or simply overwhelmed by the numbers a troopship can provide. Losing 1/3 of your troops to a defence battery before they hit the ground also fucking sucks.

File: excited.gif (489KB, 500x254px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 500x254px

>tfw shipping notification after all this time!
May the white sphere bless Andrew in all his endevors!

>>51660581
>Andrew
>a filthy abandonist
He's a UCMF Quatermaster

File: BASELINE SCREACHING.jpg (100KB, 1000x618px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 1000x618px

>>51660687
>Implying that the efficient, compassionate, delicate work of Andrew could be anything but the providence of the sphere.

>>51661012
>screaching

File: baseline scrEEching.jpg (99KB, 1000x618px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1000x618px

>>51661055
There, are you happy?

>>51661122
>supposedly "superior" posthuman can't even spell
Yes

>>51661139
>Inferior primitives can't even create content
Good.

>>51661162
>implying I haven't created half the memes in this general
NOSE GOGGLES PRIDE GALAXY WIDE

>>51661181
>dumb hosts can't even put aside their differences
Everybody should stop arguing all the time and just get along. Let's all be friends together, host people. Brain hugs all around.

>>51638921
>Wrath
>Joy
>Apathy
>Disgust
U C M
C
M

>>51658631
You know I forgot the Sanfran drops 2 bulk landers and was having a tough time justifying them to myself. that does that pretty damn well.

The more I think about the Chimera, the more I think Ive been using it wrong. Previously I've let it just waddle in turn 3 and it hasn't done much. I think if I abuse it's high speed more, I could get to clusters early and drop defense batteries and troops alongside my strike carriers. Basically make them all arrive at a zone at once and overwhelm my opponent.

>>51649335
So the problem I'm seeing with that is groups can only be so big and placing all your ground assault forces in one group does not let you easily change gears as the battle progresses. Once you commit that group, your opponent knows exactly where all your landers are going to be.

>>51658631

Oh, I thought the bulk drop was the set of 3 infantry. Never mind it seems ok.

Anyone have any experience with the Yokai? Was thinking about having a group of 3 as a fast reaction force that I can hold off the table until I really need them. 15 damage 2 shots and 3d6+6 close actions on a fast platform for 285 points seems killer.

>tfw got my pledge
>tfw nearly 18 pounds of plastic and resin
The 2-up Beijing is HUGE

>>51665556
It's primarily a flanker like Osaka. You can go weapons free but don't expect to be able to do it more than once.

File: Hawk-shaltari-Adamant.jpg (88KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 960x640px

>Adamant has tons o' guns but lacks the autistically precise damage output of the Obsidian or Diamond
>Palladium has neat tricks but is split between two jobs (line up gravity coils, rush into CA for ion aura) while costing precisely as much as a Turquoise and Aquamarine would separately

I think it might be magnet time for mister battlecruiser hull here.

File: IMAG1183.jpg (881KB, 2688x1520px) Image search: [Google]

881KB, 2688x1520px

Baseline Removal Comin' Through!

So, Phobos... I've been fielding individual ones as walk-ons for backfield defense, since Helios are so good. But they're damned expensive for no firepower improvement over a humble Rapier (just range increase). Haven't air dropped one in forever.

Perhaps we need some means in the future for limited 'fire after drop' or more 'drop after full speed instead of half' type actions to make dropship mobility better?

>>51670205
They're walk-on backfield defence to fill out the mandatory standard slot. There is nothing else for them. Helios are cheaper, faster, more survivable, better at AA, can engage armour, can shoot backwards, can split their fire, and probably more stuff I'm forgetting. Phobos are a lot like Scourge heavy cruisers and battleships in DFC: Not bad, but the alternative is so obviously imbalanced that they're not really worth much. Though Phobos at least have the saving grace of being able to cover a wider area with that 24" range.

File: hellodarkness.png (483KB, 1109x623px) Image search: [Google]

483KB, 1109x623px

>>51645212
Man I still don't even have squat from my order. No word about it even.

File: e3caf1b812[1].jpg (520KB, 1300x881px) Image search: [Google]

520KB, 1300x881px

EIGHTEEN POUNDS OF STERN AND KEEL

File: e57342c475[1].jpg (253KB, 1382x753px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 1382x753px

>>51671399
The detail on this resin is amazing; full 2-up DFC range when?

File: 1443087813152.gif (474KB, 188x174px) Image search: [Google]

474KB, 188x174px

>>51671408
post Ajax

>>51671399
You will NEVER paint it.

File: this will be our finest hour.gif (3MB, 360x202px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 360x202px

>>51671399
That shirt looks like it's got some lore on it. Gimme that lore, anon. Even if it's just a bit, I need the good stuff.

File: tZwDm0R[1].jpg (477KB, 4128x2322px) Image search: [Google]

477KB, 4128x2322px

>>51671635
Sure thing fampai

>>51671729
Watch me, fuccboi

>>51671757
Sure thing anon, gimme a sec.

File: Untitled.png (2MB, 1131x1271px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1131x1271px

>>51671757
>>51671851

File: IMAG0413.jpg (721KB, 2688x1520px) Image search: [Google]

721KB, 2688x1520px

>[BBRRRRT Intensifies]
Hawk needs to give ground attack planes or SEAD type planes more power in DZC. Currently, fast movers are all but extinct in favor of gunships because they're just--- not as good.

Why not give a unit type more readily countered by Interceptors, to provide more of a role besides popping light dropships in a suicide run?

Has anyone had success with the Seraphim variants these days for example? It's the only other bomber in the game, and the only A7 aircraft.

Two questions /DCG/
1) got a second UMC starter, obviously I need a troopship, but what should I do with the rest
2) does it say in any of the books what the prefix for PHR naval ships is?

>>51672024
1) UCM cruisers are all pretty reliable and competitively costed (aside from the St. Pete which is a touch situational), so it depends on how you want to play. Rios/Osakas for pure cannon fire at an affordable price, a laser boat if you're a straight-shooter gambling man, or a pair of Seattles if you want a mix of guns and squadron tokens to throw at people.

2) only that their spaceborne military force is officially known as the Grand Fleet, which lends itself to GFV or GFS as a simple prefix. Sphere knows the PHR probably found a way to make their own prefixes extra smug though.

>>51672024
I assume you did make your first pack into the normal Moscow, Seattle, Berlin? If so then you have options

>another Berlin
More laser is good, I would recommend this one very much. You should have 2 lasers available, they are strong.

>another Seattle
Maybe, I find 6 bombers much better than 3 and they make decent part of brick with Moscow.

>Rio
Like Seattle, but cheaper and 4+ guns instead of space planes. Decent to go with Moscow and punch people in the face up close.

>Madrid
Sure, Madrids are good for denying territory.

>2 Osakas
Good flanker. Decent choice, but maybe not best for so early in fleet making unless you will get a battleship.

>2 New Cairos
No, maybe later. You already have Berlin, you should use one or other for now.

>St Petersburg
Maybe, a bit expensive but 2 lasers can do lots of damage if you line it up.

I would say Berlin and Madrid for strongest recommendations.

Interesting fact I noticed from looking at the UCM battlecruisers up close; the battlecruiser nacelles, both Atlantis and Avalon, have additional thrusters on them; no other nacelle top has thrusters.

>>51673464
>expecting anything but the most autistically fluff-accurate ship designs from our lord and saviour Dave
Gotta have those extra engines to make all that extra mass go at thrust 8

>>51672362
>>51672572
yes I built the standard starter fleet initially, I'm kinda swayed away from doubling up quite so early just because I'm somewhat of a collector as much as a gamer

>>51673820
Shame, I found 2 Berlin 2 Lima battlegroup very good, it is like Avalon without Avalon. Maybe a St Pete?

>>51672024
>2) does it say in any of the books what the prefix for PHR naval ships is?

Related post, different anon- does anyone know a prefix for a cruiser-transport? I know the destroyer one, and even a battleship one.

>>51672572
>No, maybe later. You already have Berlin, you should use one or other for now.

Otherside argument for a New Cairo group- how you gonna take out those PHR troopships in a timely way, anon? Keep them off the table and I'll thank you.

>>51675043
Other lasers do well, like Berlin. They are first targets for Lima scan so much of the fleet can shoot if required. There are always other ways to effectively kill a target, except maybe strike carriers in atmosphere. They need corvettes otherwise many shots are wasted.

As well as say the same about the Bejing. It's the volume, reach, and at cost that does it. A pair of two attack-burnthrough 6's at 3+ may as well be guaranteed crippling damage. They ought to be saturating you (at least, that's what I do. Why take one troopship when you can take three? Why take two when you can take four?) What the New Cairo group does is burn down the one that was meant to benefit from normal events monopolizing a turn's worth of enemy resources- cheaply and with certainty.

>and it's annoying as hell

How's DZC/DFC doing popularity wise?

I bought a whole bunch back when it was released but haven't kept up with it.

Is there anything exciting coming up in the near future?

>>51675234
Burnthroughs are never guaranteed. No weapons are, but especially burnthroughs. Whiffing is more common with fewer shots, crits effecting all follow ups helps but there is still a high chance for half the shots to fail.

And Berlins can do the same thing while being able to survive counterattack (assuming you actually shoot at your opponent's combat ships, or is the comp meta to never distract from objectives in any way? I am curious). New Cairos are slightly faster and slightly cheaper, but die more conveniently and suck in a brawl with no guns and shit CAW. They are not some super ships that Berlins could not possibly compare to, they are simply alternatives. Berlins are very similar really, they are not allergic to each other and can be taken in pairs. If you always manage to stop troopships with your thrust 10 but could never possibly hope to do so with thrust 8 then I question how you play your games, is there no change in tactics ever, no attempt to counter New Cairo strikes?

Beijing has a different role. It can crush troopships at close range with good arc guns and missiles while holding critical locations, the laser is important but only single element. Not the entire purpose of it like for the New Cairo or Berlin. They are different ships, a very different comparison.

>>51675503
>Burnthroughs are never guaranteed. No weapons are, but especially burnthroughs. Whiffing is more common with fewer shots, crits effecting all follow ups helps but there is still a high chance for half the shots to fail.

A pair 2 attack 3+ burnthrough 6's has the odds firmly in its favor.

>They are not some super ships that Berlins could not possibly compare to

No, they are a useful module that a Berlin cannot emulate.

>If you always manage to stop troopships with your thrust 10 but could never possibly hope to do so with thrust 8 then I question how you play your games, is there no change in tactics ever, no attempt to counter New Cairo strikes?

*I* am the PHR player, anon. I can shove enough troopships in your face to have one just waltz through if you think that normal resources normally applies will make it unrewarding. I'm skewing. A New Cairo group can counter the skew on the turn it's implemented, efficiently (with the "extra" troopship eating a concentrated laser strike, for about as cheaply as it can be done, with about as much certainty of positioning as it can be done), making all the sacrifice pointless.

>Beijing has a different role. It can crush troopships at close range with good arc guns and missiles while holding critical locations, the laser is important but only single element. Not the entire purpose of it like for the New Cairo or Berlin. They are different ships, a very different comparison.

A pretty good comparison if you say the presence of a Berlin makes adding a New Cairo group pointless. It the same example, relatively speaking.

So you've given me some food for thought on the cruisers, what should I do with my frigates? in my experience against UCM the PD frigs and scan frigs seem amazing but so do the close action ones (my other fleet is PHR so it's something I just can't do)

I'm strongly considering what it'd take to magnetize the cruisers effectively but I'm not sure I have the skills (or the magnets) for the frigs.

>>51678681
>UCM Frigates

Honestly, I'd say that the UCM have the overall best frigates in the game, in general.

>Toulon
I'd say this is probably the best gunfrigate in the game, or at the least it's the most efficient.
3 4+ attacks, F/S arcs, 4+ armor, and only 35 points.
The 3x 2200 are actually statistically equal to the Occulus Beam on the Harpy, and the Disintegrator Bank on the Topaz.
In specific, however, the Toulon has a slightly wider spread about its average, while the Topaz is more consistent. The Harpy is the same as the topaz, but a more weird "W" shaped distribution.

>Taipei
Not quite as good as the Djinn or Amethyst, but it's respectable for its price. Not a bad pick as a small wolfpack, they're quite able of making back their points by going after normal cruisers.

>Jakarta
Excellent support ship, it's almost a necessity against launch asset heavy factions like the PHR or CAW heavy factions like the Scourge. The fact that AEGIS stacks makes them even more powerful, a pack of just two able to give anything battleship levels of PD. They also protect themselves too, so there's that.

>Lima
Pretty much an auto-take in every fleet, especially ones with beams, but only because they're so damn good. 37 points for an easy spike on anything, and even more importantly, for taking off silent running on cheeky Scourge ships.

>>51678681
Build a Jakarta or two if you might run a deathball of multiple gun cruisers, they're best used alongside Seattle support to cover a group of multiple high priority targets. Just watch out for local players with a ton of Shaltari CA ships, because they don't give a shit about PD.

Limas are something you'll want to take as a pair so you can toss a Major Spike on somebody - or at least have better odds of knocking a ship out of Silent Running with that 4+ check. If you plan on using big laser ships like the Berlin, St. Pete, or Avalon, you'll want that extra spotting range.

The Taipei is no Djinn, but it does have a bunch of dice. Just be aware that you'll want to build a group of four minimum for the sake of doing double digit damage to a medium or heavy target.

Polls, coming through.
Favorite race per specific ship type.

http://www.strawpoll.me/12319778
http://www.strawpoll.me/12319780
http://www.strawpoll.me/12319782
http://www.strawpoll.me/12319785
http://www.strawpoll.me/12319787
http://www.strawpoll.me/12319791
http://www.strawpoll.me/12319794

>>51676300
>A pretty good comparison if you say the presence of a Berlin makes adding a New Cairo group pointless. It the same example, relatively speaking.
They are similar enough that I would not recommend building both so early. I am not saying that they are completely interchangeable, but they are not wildly different like a Beijing either. I have both New Cairos and Berlins, but I have much more than 6 cruisers.

>>51679397
>>51679298
sounds like two lima and two jakarta for this box with either experimentation with magnets or a third box in my near future.

So far, I've got the following for the factions.

>UCM
Moscow
Berlin
Seattle
2 Toulon
2 Nawlins

>Scourge
Shenlong
Ifrit
Wyvern
2 Harpy
2 Gargoyle

>PHR
Hector
Theseus
Orion (misbuilt by accident, was going to be an Ikarus)
2 Europa
2 Medea

>Shaltari
Obsidian
Amber
Emerald
2 Topaz
2 Jade

After getting my pledge, I'm planning on the following:

>UCM
2 New Cairo
Seattle (or a second Berlin, or a Rio)
San Fran
4 Nawlins
4 Lima
2 Jakarta
2 Taipei

>Scourge
Ifrit
2 Hydra
Chimera
4 Gargoyle
6 Djinn
2 Charybdis

>PHR
2 Bellerophon
Theseus
Orpheus
4 Medea
2 Calypso
2 Andromeda
4 Pandora

>Shaltari
Turquoise
Basalt
2 Emerald
4 Opal
4 Amethyst
4 Topaz

File: Gargoyle Class - Black Deliverance.jpg (174KB, 605x654px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 605x654px

Pics incoming. Couple threads back I promised I'd drop shots of my scourge in progress. I've got a second Strix class painted up, and I'm working on my battleship. Still leaning Dragon despite how much torpedos blow, if only because it partners with the hydra for bomber rape pretty handily.

Still using a phone for photos, so the quality ain't the best.

File: Strix Class - Strigoi.jpg (248KB, 745x622px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 745x622px

>>51682843

File: Strigoi Belly.jpg (86KB, 463x305px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 463x305px

>>51682863

File: Battleship in progress.jpg (344KB, 1243x496px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 1243x496px

>>51682877

>>51682693
If you're only going to make 2 Chars then don't bother. They only work properly in groups of 3-4.

>>51682922
Hmm; I'd probably just go with 2 more Harpies then.

>>51682931
Honestly you could stick to 4 Djinns. I find that 6 is usually excessive and unnecessary.

>>51683030
Yeah, but who doesn't want >6djinn sitting on their shelf? Even if I only every use 3 or 4, it'll be worth it.

>>51682922
I generally avoid them in favor of proxying another flock of nicar. I'm the only one at my store that's really thrown in on using corvettes, and they've been punishing enemy strike carrier groups wonderfully.

>>51683090
Wait for a bit, then get more frigates so you can have 8 Djinns. Don't be a pussy.

>>51683124
>8Djinn
My next goal is 12Djinn and finally 18Djinn, respectively.

>>51683220
>someone speaking the kind of language I love
Someday during an apocalypse style format I'm just gonna bring about 30 djinn, and 30 gargoyles. Just hope between the tables wolfpacking motherfuckers.

File: AV5-Admiral.jpg (8KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 480x360px

>>51683220
>The key to Djinns is that they have a pre-set kill limit
>I sent wave after wave of my Taipeis at them until they reached their limit and shut down.

>>51685600
switch the Taipeis to New Orleans and its a genuine zapp brannigan story.

>>51685635
>New Orleans
>not San Fransiscos for maximum casualties

>>51685652
hell that even makes a sort of horrifying sense. with San Frans you get more people per ship, for way less points per man. You could probably run 2 san frans in and shut down a djinn or maybe even 2 if they both participate.

>>51682843
>>51682863
>>51682877
>>51682894

Pretty nice man, looking forward to the battleship assembled

File: memes.jpg (104KB, 621x585px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 621x585px

>A racket of banshees
>A legion of demons
>A chimney of djinn
>A storm of ifrits
>An audacity of gargoyles
>A clamor of harpies
>A warfare of hydra
>A tackle of basilisks
>A braid of chimera
>A dignity of dragons
>A dastardly of manticores
>A finery of sphinxes
>A poachment of wyverns

What are the collective nouns for Akuma, Shenlong, Raiju, Strix, Yokai, Charybdis, Scylla, and Nickar?

>>51686063
>a meme list of akumas
>a thunderstorm of shenlong
>an island thunderstorm of raiju
>a parliament of strix
>a dilemma of charybdis and scylla
>a twist of nickars

I can't think of any for Yokai.

File: 100%purekek.jpg (282KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 1920x1200px

>>51686469
>>a thunderstorm of shenlong
>>an island thunderstorm of raiju

I've got a better idea for Akuma.

>A rage of akumas

So, apparently there's the slight possibility that using course change to shake launch assets may be erratad away.

Special order to boost PD/defense in general when?

>Brace for impact
>can't turn, can't use weapon, move between half and full, no extra spike
>gain a 6+ passive save until the beginning of next activation
>reroll failed armor saves at a +1 penalty
>increase PD by 50%, rounded down.

File: __isshun_sengeki___by_rog1234.jpg (230KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1280x1024px

>>51686469
>>51686517
A DIE ONE THOUSAND DEATHS of Akuma?

Okay thread, post your ideas for possible DFC famous admirals, or even just your own fleet's officers.

>>51685693

Yeah, but that's a bit too much thought and competency for Zapp isn't it?

>>51686801

I dunno, Brace was one of the more wibblier rules from BFG and I'm not sure I'd like to see it here.
It was basically completely essential that you could go on Brace orders when you needed it, it was frankly TOO important, which meant it was once again ANOTHER nerf to Orks and their low lD.

>>51688188

UCM:

Horatio "Traffic" James

-Ships in James fleet succeed ramming attempts on a 2+,

-Ships with starting hull points of 8 or more may ram with 3 remaining hull points.

-Ships which undertake a ramming action roll a D6 on a 6+ the ship has managed to somehow survive the attempt, inflict damage on the target, and leave the ramming ship in place with 1 hull point, it also automatically suffers the armor cracked crippling effect.

>>51688188
>Prime Starchief Nedakhamet; AV6; 500 points

>mounted in a modified Diamond class battleship, which has the following weapons profile:
>"Singularity Coil": 2+ lock; 3 attack; * damage; F(N); Distortion, Impel(2)
>"Ion Corona": 3+ lock; D6+6 attack; 1 damage; F/S/R; Close Action (Beam), Alt-1
>"Ion Maelstrom": 2+ lock; 6 attack; 1 damage; F/S/R; Bombardment, Alt-1
>"Harpoon Torrent": 4+ lock; 6 attack; 1 damage; F/S/R; Close Action

>Load
>Gates: 3 Launch

>Ancient Mind: The SR rating of all battle groups in this fleet is reduced by 1.

File: ConsiderTheFollowing.jpg (59KB, 433x754px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 433x754px

Are torpedoes really that bad, or is just more baseless reaction?

>>51690010
They're not useless trash and can still dish out serious damage, but the slow speed, short range, various methods to delay/avoid them and most importantly the very limited number of uses mean that they just aren't worth the price and emphasis that is put upon them in ship design.
I'd say Banshee and probably Minos are still worth using since they don't rely on their torpedoes too much, but some like Achilles rely on a torp to carry the whole ship, and they're just not capable of doing that.

Torpedoes will cause the downfall of the west and actively ruin any fleet that so much as looks at them. Truly, the worst weapon in any game, ever. I got ultra cancer because I touched a torpedo, now I can never play competently again and all my dice roll 1s forever. RIP balance, what a load of shit total bad game models didn't even come prepainted. 0/10

>>51690010
Scourge torpedoes really are that bad. Corruptor is gimped as fuck and the 4 damage makes it mediocre against anything bigger than a cruiser, which is both a waste of corruptor and much better handled with just straight up shooting.

>>51690010

There are two schools of thought to be brought to bear in employing torpedoes in naval wargames, both representing a historic popular consensus (and historical events too, I suppose).

1) Torpedoes are ship-killers
2) Torpedoes force capital ships operate in sub-optimal ways during crucial moments

DFC is doing a bit of both, but more "2" than "1". It's a legitimate thing.

>>51686063
I could have sworn 'tyranny' was better for dragons.

Shenlong are basically dragons, can probably get away with using the same. Alternately, they're auspicious mythological creatures, so something positive, say, 'A fortune of shenlong' might be appropriate. You certainly would be fortunate that they aren't akumas.

Storm of Raiju works too I think. Not only are raiju ifrits+stealth, but iirc Raiju is lightning/thunder related.

IDK about the rest. Maybe a spout of Nickar.

>>51691215
iirc raiju are dogs or wolves made of lightning that bark to make thunder, which is pretty fucking hardcore. They don't seem to be very well represented in fiction despite being extremely cool on a conceptual level.

File: Marcus Salutus.jpg (55KB, 800x447px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 800x447px

>page 10
Not so fast

>>51690010
as other people have said they are not total useless trash, but they could probably use a slight tweak or more damage to make them more of a threat, someone suggested crippling.

>>51691215
>A rage of akuma
>A fortune of shenlong
>A hunt of raiju
>A parliament of strix
>A tradition of yokai
>A fall of charybdis
>A strike of scylla
>A capsize of nickar

>>51694081
Actually, a sinking of nickar sounds better.

>>51694341
>Tide, perhaps.

File: Zinogre_Art_001.jpg (563KB, 2000x2400px) Image search: [Google]

563KB, 2000x2400px

>>51691335
Just by your description, I can think of one pretty good representation.

Time to paint one of my factions in Brachydios colors.

>looking at the resin detail on the BC pieces and comparing them to the plastic stuff
>almost, almost, almost wish for a line of resin ships
full 2x collectors line W H E N

>>51697853
Aren't we getting the wave of standard BCs in full resin?

>>51698061
Yeah, but I want super high detail frigates too.

I also need a 2x Diamond, Azurite, and possibly Adamant.

File: You're a big scorpion.jpg (68KB, 820x576px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 820x576px

Is it just me, or has /tg/ been getting faster.

>tfw you will never help Taipei-chan beat the shit out of a Chimera and engage in other assorted thuggery

File: 1468717356105.jpg (92KB, 716x494px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 716x494px

>>51700888
>headband
>short shorts
>handwraps and various bandages
>baseball bat
>has like a dozen sisters
>tfw no art skills to make it so

>>51700793
definitely speeding up for sure

>>51698061
more than likely, although at this point Im more concerned with when the printed battle map stuff is shipping out, like the radar map and so forth. Has anyone heard anything?

File: PHR_Frigate_Calypso0.jpg (84KB, 797x530px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 797x530px

Early morning bump; How useful are Calypsos?

>>51703806
Quite useful. Just don't expect them to take on all comers, they're good at defanging supercapitals and burnthroughs but are easily overwhelmed by multiple weapons systems. Think of them like Jakartas rather than Opals: Very effective in their niche, but completely worthless out of it.

>>51703806
They basically say 'No' to burnthrough weapons, which live or die based on their accuracy numbers and rolling any crits.

They also dunk on the Dark Matter Cannon.

Scourge stealth/cloak granting frigate when?

>>51707106

Don't you mean:

>Atmospheric Stealth Light Cruisers with A2A and Escape Velocity Weapons when

?

>>51707117
I really hope Escape Velocity will get more stuff as the game goes on, it's such a cool rule for a game with Z-levels.

Additionally, I'd pay 43 or 44 for a Scylla with 3 shots instead of 2.
A Charybdis bumped up to 6 attacks at 4+, 38-40 points or so would also be nice, but I don't know if a frigate would warrant that kind of weight of fire.

>>51707670
With Chars it's just a case of taking a bunch of them. 3 are equal to a Madrid in firepower on a more agile and atmos capable frame. With your proposal 2 would have equal firepower to a Madrid for the same price.

Shooting up from atmosphere is damned powerful even in a post-corvette world. 44 wouldn't be enough for a full gun frigate's worth of firepower with a gimmick that good.

File: SPACESHIP.gif (513KB, 499x205px) Image search: [Google]

513KB, 499x205px

>Take day off to receive spaceships
>Spaceships come early and now have all day to play with them
>Box weighs nearly 40 pounds

So is there anything weird-wrong about just playing your BGs out of coherency and talking the penalties?

>>51707854
>With Chars it's just a case of taking a bunch of them. 3 are equal to a Madrid in firepower on a more agile and atmos capable frame. With your proposal 2 would have equal firepower to a Madrid for the same price.
Fair point, I suppose that does sound about right. 105 points for a Madrid split among three ships, each able to target different sectors, is pretty damn good.

>Shooting up from atmosphere is damned powerful even in a post-corvette world. 44 wouldn't be enough for a full gun frigate's worth of firepower with a gimmick that good.
I rally don't think so; I feel its the same issue as the Jade; they're both respectively useful and consistent, but the overall damage is just lacking. The Topaz (and Harpy, to a lesser extent) can get away with only 2 damage as combat frigates because they're 3+ (and have great scan, for the Topaz), but the Scylla is still a fairly expensive frigate that's ultimately little more than a deterrent. A peashooter that can hit you where you can't hit it is still, ultimately, a peashooter.
Bumping it up to 45 or even 47 points would be worth the three attacks.

>>51708246
>40 pounds
Jesus Christ.

>>51708355
Not really, it's a tactical decision like any other.

>>51708355
It puts certain risks into the gameplan but if you feel its necessary go for it.

>>51703806
They're most useful if your opponent brings lots of burnthroughs or a Diamond.

One Calypso will make burnthroughs and other low-shot, high damage weapons whiff more often than not - especially the high-damage potential Scourge stuff with Lock 4. Two Calypsos on a battleship or battlecruiser will turn the Diamond's main gun into a joke.

Does anyone have the statistics and damage distributions for the various beam weapons? I know they've been done before, but can't find them and can't be assed to work it out myself.

I'm trying to compare the efficiency of the beam cruisers compared to various stat versions of the granite; most notably, as is now, 2+ lock, 3+ lock linked, and 2+ lock linked.

I'm 95% positive that the Shaltari scan and sig fuckery would make a 2+ lock granite, no link, worth it for a slightly increased price, but I'm curious how two linked lances (2+ and 3+) stack up compared to a Berlin or Ifrit.

File: SPAAAACESHIPS.jpg (2MB, 3984x2241px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3984x2241px

>>51708246
YAAAAASSSS

Totals:
6x UCM frigate sprue
6x PHR frigate sprue
6x Scourge frigate sprue
6x Shaltari frigate sprue
8x UCM cruiser sprue
8x PHR cruiser sprue
8x Scourge cruiser sprue
8x Shaltari cruiser sprue
2x UCM kickstarter BS (BS parts + cruiser sprue)
2x UCM BS (BS parts + cruiser sprue)
2x PHR BS (BS parts + cruiser sprue)
2x Scourge BS (BS parts + cruiser sprue)
2x Shaltari BS (BS parts + 2 cruiser sprues?)
3x Civ Cruiseliner
1x Launch Assets
1x Ground Assets

And all the fucktonnery of assorted stuff with the books, dogtags, credits, etc.

>>51711405
>double Commodore
M A D M A N

But
>no 2x Beijing

>>51711405

That may be more stuff than is strictly useful, anon.

>it took me a week to get my lieutenant stuff sorted out and in shape, and I was passably diligent about it.

>>51711405
>24 frigates per race
I honestly think you'll never need any more frigates ever again, at least not until you possibly hit 2500 point games

>UCM
8x of nawlins
4x of everything else

>Scourge
8x of gargoyle
4x of everything else

>PHR
8x of medea
4x of everything else

>Shaltari
6x opal
6x amethyst
12x of more amethyst or topaz, maybe some jades since they're likely to be fixed.

>>51711683
>>51711745
The idea was to get enough for multiple games to be played at once. Going to try to run events and stuff at my LGS.

>>51708355
Certain BGs work better than others.

If you are UCM and have two Limas and a heavy cruiser or battlecruiser for example, is being SR13 that much worse than being SR12? See your oppponent's initiatives and figure that out.

>>51712185
That example doesn't work, though. Limas have the outlier rule, meaning they don't impose penalties for being off on their own anyways

>>51712185

More Leonidas and Bellerophon, I think. Skirmish construction means if you want both, they need to be in the same BG- but they don't exactly play the same zone.

>>51709615
Nothing?

>>51711405
>Civilian cruise liner
That reminds me, escort scenario with mobile critical location rules when?

>>51715715
Given how utterly lethal combat is in here, I don't see how you'd have an escort mission where the VIP doesn't get utterly wasted, even without considering burnthroughs or shaltari battleships.

>>51716348
'
Make it atmosphere capable.

Or you know, come on turn 5 after everything is dead.

>>51709615
Anydice does not appear to have an if function, so unless someone is willing to make actual code to find out you're out of luck. BTL are an order of magnitude more complicated than any other weapons.

>>51716348
Make it a capture mission, not a destroy.

You must board it with troop landing ships. Enemy ships within a certain range grant it the benefit of a defense battery.

>>51717065
if its a destroy mission youd have to make it so the thing has a small sig, or is either resistant or immune to spikes for some reason otherwise its gonna get pinged and ended.

>>51718700
Why not make it a destroy-AND mission.

Destroy X and do Y; if you suicide for X, you'll win but miss out on Y?

It might lead to X being used as bait, but at least that's more interactive than target shooting.

>>51718744
Im just saying even if you do that its not really breaking the bank for a shaltari player to active ping first turn to put a major spike on it and shoot it from across the map. So limiting engagement range at least gives each faction a more viable option of defending it

>>51718816
Debris, orbital layers, and maybe being allowed to start in atmosphere, for the civilian liners.

File: Heracles dent and flash.jpg (395KB, 1222x948px) Image search: [Google]

395KB, 1222x948px

>assembling Heracles
>thick flash on the midship greebles ate about half of the fine detail, cleaning it leaves flat surfaces
>open bubble on the back edge of the DMC housing, comparable in size and shape to the nail on my little finger being dug in and scraped away

I feel like asking for a new Heracles chin is justified, but I'm not sure about the hull. Does anyone have any experience with asking Hawk for replacement parts and their response?

>>51719875
Hawk is usually pretty damn generous when it comes to replacements, but I'm not sure about stuff the size of a battleship. Possibly, but not quite sure.

Go ahead and ask them with a few good pics, but I'd also start practicing your greenstuff sculpting on the offchance that they don't replace it.

They probably will, but again, not sure on something the size of a BB.

Hallelujah. Thank based Andrew for delivering unto me the fruits of my patience. Commodore pledge with add ons delivered to Seattle area today.

>>51719875
>>51720082
They've replaced entire starters before based on what honestly are moderate flaws.

You'll be fine.

In DFC, is there a rough proportional guide as to how much troop capacity, bombardment, etc etc to take like in DZC in regards to scoring units and AA?

>>51722942
Bombardment is largely optional.

>>51723007
Oh, but if you want advice on how much bombardment to take if you actually want to take it and have it be effective, I can help.

>UCM
One Madrid is helpful, but if you want to destroy clusters you need 2 or a Tokyo. Very focused bombardment ships.

>Scourge
Take 4 Chars. 3 is iffy, 2 is next to useless. But in groups of 4 they can dish out heavy damage fast. Get in early to do your work.

>PHR
Eeeeeh. Take Medeas for occasional collateral damage, but Ganymedes aren't that great. You need 2 to quickly take out a sector, but there's no other bombardment ship and generally troopships don't hang out in big groups. Medeas are barely a help since their bombardment is so bad.

>Shaltari
Take at least 2 blue ball ships. That's all you need, there's a bunch of them and they're long ranged and versatile. Put them in a position where they can help each other out and they'll do good damage.

>>51722942
I'd say for troopships 4 strike carriers and a troopship would be pretty reasonable. Cutting the troopship for another 2 strike carriers also works if you're strapped for points. That said the winner of our first tourney had 4 emeralds and something like 12 voidgates, so more troops don't hurt much.

>>51724028

At 1500 or 1250? I would rather consider 6 Strike Carriers the minimum and 8 the average for 1250P with PHR being able to trade 2 Strike Carriers for a troopship.

>>51724503
Strike carrier only lists need to be carefully considered. They can easily be overwhelmed with no way to set up defence batteries and a very low number of troops. Remember that a single troopship can drop 6 infantry per turn, and armour is not a reliable way of beating that.

>>51724503
6 can work, but only if you bring along corvettes and make sure to pop big troopships. You need ways to disrupt your opponents landing operations if your own won't just win the day for you. Its a big challenge of spending enough points to beat your opponent in the ground game, and the number really should be reasonably high just to deal with your opponent's own carriers and troopships. I personally think 8 is a little heavy on their own (if your opponent brought a good amount of corvettes your carriers are fucked and will maybe get 2 rounds of landing off if they're lucky) and bringing a troopship or two helps mitigate losses from corvette attacks.

Alternately if you do bring 8 strike carriers you can also bring a shit ton of corvettes and maybe you'd be good.

Speaking of octuple strike carriers, how does this look?

--------------------------------------
Scourge 1250 #2 - 1238pts
Scourge - 10 launch assets

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup (205pts)
1 x Akuma - 205pts - H
+ Fleet Champion (40pts, 3AV)

SR12 Line battlegroup (344pts)
1 x Hydra - 140pts - M
1 x Hydra - 140pts - M
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L

SR10 Line battlegroup (220pts)
2 x Ifrit - 220pts - M

SR8 Line battlegroup (171pts)
1 x Wyvern - 105pts - M
3 x Nickar - 66pts - L

SR6 Pathfinder battlegroup (192pts)
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L

SR3 Pathfinder battlegroup (66pts)
3 x Nickar - 66pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

I'd still always go with a combo of Strike Carriers and at least one troopship. The ability to dispatch garrison troops while moving is very big, as well as them also contributing to the low orbit control game.

A strike carrier trying to secure the 'home area' objectives near you is not going to be in the battle until way later. While troopships can just choo-choo forward while dumping creates of men and defense batteries.

>>51725819
I'm not too sure about what I'd expect from a token wyvern. You could probably get more bang for your buck if you replaced it with a flock of Djinn. They tend to live longer while retaining the firepower of their big brother. Definitely loving the double nickar groups, though; the same setup worked miracles hunting voidgates last game i played.

File: 1481662390372.gif (2MB, 300x174px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x174px

>email Andrew about missing/miscast pledge parts
>response in less than an hour
>passes my email on to the replacement parts team, who email me two hours after that for confirmation

Based Andrew. It's good to see Hawk has a good tempo going now that we've cleared the worst of the salt storm.

Oh hey, KS update

http://www.hawkwargames.com/blogs/hobby/downloads-for-dropfleet-commander

That's handy.

>>51727842
>Ship Construction Options

My goodness. Rules for custom ships in non-tournament games? That's potentially very cool.

>one of the usual suspects bitching on KS after update
>they post a block quote, saying Hawk hasn't taken responsibility and is just using excuses
>the sentence after their quote is literally Hawk taking responsibility
I HAVEN'T FELT THIS PAIN IN MONTHS
I ALMOST MISSED IT

>>51728886
not quite that awesome. just pdfs on how to build battleships and battlecruisers.

That said, seeing them build the avenger is cool as shit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97pDBGIz93o

Are there any options for playing the game without using the ground objectives around? The rules themselves handle it fine, but I'm not sure what to do about actual objectives, since the game is based around that, and my group finds fiddling with the troop tokens annoying.

>>51730044
I was actually thinking of a scenario for this, here's what I've got so far

VPs for bombarding and destroying enemy clusters and sectors, as well as kill points.
Critical locations in orbit over non-destroyed clusters.
Clusters are defined as being occupied by a specific player at the beginning of the game, as well as throughout the game, allowing them to benefit from any ground weapons and sensor sectors.

Bump with the fact that the Minos torpedoes aren't actually a part of the Minos chin, and are in fact seperate pieces.

Meaning there are hard points for more stuff.

>>51732294

Intriguing.

>but the feck you building a Minos for?

File: PHR_Battleship_Instructions[1].jpg (4MB, 4961x3508px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4961x3508px

>>51732403
Nah senpai, from this.

In any case, the Minos is far more reliable and flexible for the purposes of putting crippling on stuff; two out of three firings for the neutron missiles will do three or more attacks, which means its far more likely to get at least one crit for the purpose of crippling.

>>51732592

Wow, that would be an easy magnetization.

Slice (yeah, just slice) off a but if that square protrusion that the Prow/Chin attaches to, cap it with a magnet, do the same thing for the Prow/Chin contact point, and there you are. No extra Small Fins, but I'm thinking people would have some extra Calypso bits on hand that would go *really well* with the Heracles.

>finally trying to paint detail on scourge cruisers
>the little millimeter dots on the prow
DAAAAAAAVE

File: wip2.jpg (114KB, 744x563px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 744x563px

>>51638921

went on vacation, DFC sitting un built and I havent even finished the damn city

>>51732651
Ehh, the Calypso arrays don't really fit in the chin ports physically or visually. They have a very defensive aesthetic to them, right down to the angles of the paneling.

It's like strapping a buckler to the side of a howitzer barrel.

>>51728886
>>51729805
Not quite.
>We are finalising the details for the New Scenarios that we will be sharing, along with some new ship construction options that can be used in friendly games of Dropfleet Commander. These will be available to backers in a near future Kickstarter Update.

Seems like 'ship construction options for friendly games' sounds like a unit construction system.

>>51732915
>Pointbuy ships
yessss

File: For the love of God, Montressor.jpg (65KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 480x270px

>>51732592
But how often is that crit going to end up cockblocked by PD successes? Particularly against the PD of the sort of ship you'd want to use Crippling weapons on in the first place...

>>51732915
ah shit, my bad. thought he meant the link he put up.

So, kitbashed corvettes won't be useless after the official ones come out. that's exciting!

>>51735135
That entirely depends on whether PD saves are made against CAW attacks, or CAW damage.

>>51736277
>Hits can be prevented by PD
>When damage is done by Close Action weapons, [roll and resolve PD]
That's odd. Per RAW under the Point Defense sidebar you cancel damage, not hits. Doesn't really make sense to me lorewise, but the Minos is suddenly looking a lot less wimpy.

>>51736738
In that case, the Minos is superior at spitting out crippling hits at every attack amount (2, 3, and 4), with some variability.

DMC is less consistent, but more reliable, if that makes sense.

>>51736738
>>51736277
If you even with support from RAW think that a successful PD roll does not completely negate the CAW attack you are probably an idiot, any interpertation otherwise is likely due to badly written rules or poor reading comprehension. It is clear that Point Defense rolls represent the point defenses destroying the incoming CAW projectiles before they reach the target. If they do reach the target then they have to also bypass the armor, which is automatic if they are a critical, or randomized if they are not based on how good the armor of the target is.

It makes zero logical sense for a critical Minos hit that is negated by PD to still inflict a crippling effect, I dont care if RAW supports it, clearly that is against the spirit of the rules, and I guarantee Dave would say the same.

>>51739675
disregard this post I cant read

>>51736738
you could think about the damage thing as the projectile Hits, but does say 2 damage, the PD succeeds in removing one of those damage, so they have succeeded in doing enough damage to the projectile to soften the blow, but not stop it from hitting completely.

>>51739804

It's a neutronium cap with it's own propulsive rocket. You'd figure after a contact with a tungsten-slug, the cap goes through the tungsten like it was cloud vapor and keeps its vector.

>I am interested in how this actually plays on table, though

>>51739908
Well since most PD is energy based, consider it part of the drone rocket is burned away due to ablation making it slightly less punchy than it would otherwise be.

On the table top, you roll a D6, get a 4, so you have 2 (D3) +1 or 3 total neutron CAW attacks. You then roll your 3 attacks and get a 2, 3, and a 5, each attack does 2 damage so you now have 4 regular damage, and 2 critical damage inflicted, your opponent then rolls their pd, in order to negate all the damage with PD they would need 8 total successful rolls. Any regular hits that pass through have armor saves taken against them, any critical of course do immediate damage, if at least one critical gets past PD, and passive saves, then the ship immediately rolls on the crippling damage table, they would roll on the table additionally if the damage resulted in them becoming crippled 50% or less.

>>51740168
>Well since most PD is energy based, consider it part of the drone rocket is burned away due to ablation making it slightly less punchy than it would otherwise be.
The thing with neutron missiles is that they're super dense RKVs, though. They have no warheads, only that they're accelerated from a near relative-stop towards the target ship until they punch straight through, like throwing metal through a sheet of paper.

File: 1436299402334.jpg (85KB, 596x538px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 596x538px

>>51732403
>Not trying out the Minos

I know the DMC is sex on wheels, but the Minos is super fun to play aggressively - the crippling CAW isn't exactly numerous, but it hits like truck-san against the average female manga protagonist, and the heavy guns are reliable, if unimpressive. The torpedoes are a nice bonus.

>>51741495
IMO the Minos needs to make it's approach aggressively. Full thrust up through Debris as cover and burst through it to get into range, then turn broadside and attack. Otherwise, it's too slow.

On any deployment that makes big ships appear later, it suffers.

>>51741577
Agreed. Plus there's the psychological effect of a giant beefy battleship going towards you as fast as it possibly can, and knowing that you absolutely have to deal with it before it murders someone.

It's a bit like a distraction carnifex, but more killy.

File: IMG_1111.png (246KB, 465x316px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 465x316px

>>51741495
>Neutron missiles were invented by studying the molecular properties responsible for Truck-kun's unstoppable inertia

>>51741706
>Distraction Minos
I kind of want to use this as a list tbqh.

File: CFAvM_oUEAAbV4J.jpg (11KB, 404x291px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 404x291px

>>51742159
>New PHR Cruiser preview released

>>51743479
It's just a frigate sized neutron missile being carried by a stripped down cruiser

File: 1462921865805.gif (607KB, 300x169px) Image search: [Google]

607KB, 300x169px

>>51744089
>Distortion, Crippling, Bloom, L-1 Torpedo
>Punches through one target into the next
>Keeps attacking until the plot moves forward

>>51724654
Armor is a very reliable way of beating that, you will just lose the armor in the process.

File: 16722779_10155080642222146_4139997659753026052_o[1].jpg (212KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 2048x1536px

Thanks

File: 16722400_10155080642217146_5531594390373716749_o[1].jpg (315KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 2048x1536px

Doc

>>51746629
>>51746642
Your commitment to the art is commendable.

>>51745102
is it? Gonna do some quick mathwork.

Lets say a san francisco and their equivalent in strike carriers (3 new orleans, gargoyles or medeas) are both dropping troops onto a single sector. we're going to suggest 2 possible scenarios, then dovetail off of that.

in the first scenario, the san fran driver watched too much Saving Private Ryan and wants to reenact Omaha beach. He's going to just be shoveling troop tokens until there are too many for the armor to gun down, is his tactically masterful plan.

6 troops versus 3 armor gives the 6 troops 3 hits, one of which goes through statistically. 3 armor get 4.5 hits, which gets 3 kills through. this leaves 3 troops and 2 armor. second round gets each side 3 reinforcements, with 9 troops versus 5 armor. this leads to 4.5 hits on the infantry side getting 1.5 damage through, while the tanks score 7.5 hits in and kill 2.5 infantry. if we round up for both we're left with 3 armor columns and 6 infantry columns. third round leaves us with 12 infantry and 6 armor duking it out, which leads to 2 armor kills from 6 hits and 9 hits from armor leading to 6 infantry kills, setting the numbers to 6 infantry and 4 armor. At this point armor is going to start winning out because they'll be sticking more and more armor down and eventually overwhelm the infantry.

what does it look like if the San Francisco player feels like a clever dick and sets down a defense battery in the first round though? Lets not be charitable and assume it isn't present in time to shoot down the first wave of dropships. we've got 3 infantry and a defence battery against the 3 armor, which is nasty and tough for the san fran player. we'll get 1.5 hits from the infantry and .5 damage, which we're going to assume ain't enough. armor shoots back, rolling 4.5 damage. now this is the tricky bit, the armor has to assign 1 point of damage to each enemy token before it can start doubling up. defense battery probably doesn't die, 1 infantry survives.
con't.

>>51748755
after that first round with the San fran being clever he does the smart thing and starts dropping 6 infantry since the defense battery won't fight for itself. strike carriers drop 3 armor, 1 dies usually. now its 5 armor versus 7 infantry. 3.5 hits from infantry, 1.16 something damage, armor dead. 15 shots, 7.5 hits, and now the strike carrier either assigns 1 damage to the defense battery in hopes of killing it or goes all on the infantry. if he assigns the one damage its once again a 1/3 chance it dies, and of the 6 infantry taking hits 4 die. that leaves 3 infantry, maybe one defense battery (we're starting to get into weird possibilities here of course) and 4 tanks. next round makes it 6 tanks and 9 infantry with the defense battery. we get 9 hits from the tanks, if they assign damage to the battery at this point I assume after 3 1/3rds chance the battery dies for the sake of the simulation and of the 5 on the infantry about 4 die, while the infantry only hit 3.5 times and kill 1.16 or so tanks.

Basically, the mathhammering done by my dumb ass suggests troopships will lose to 3 strike carriers in terms of pure dumpage unless something interferes. might be the san fran wins if it gets a round unmolested dropping, but that ain't math work.

>>51748628
I wish that were mine.

IMO there should be a 'troop cap' per point level (like the launch asset cap), and non-PHR, non-Shaltari troopships should be cheaper.

>>51749249
I honestly agree; in fact, it could be something fairly simple. Every dropship/bulklander/gate counts as a single point towards the cap.

>Skirmish
8
>Clash
12
>Battle
16

These are just rough numbers, but I feel they work well enough.

In particular, the cap of 12 means Shaltari players can't take four motherships and a battleship in a 1250 point game.

>>51748755
>>51748871
The thing is, if you look at that scenario it takes what 4-5 combats before the armor start winning in the average rolling. The game is only 6 turns, and you control a sector by having the most tokens it in, which means in the scenario you propose the san fran player would control the sector at all points in time.

>>51748755
>second round gets each side 3 reinforcements, with 9 troops versus 5 armor.
Wrong; infantry get 6 more, not 3.

>>51749674
you're right! thankfully I noted that in the actual numbers, even if I was a filthy liar in what the reinforcements are.

>>51749619
that's a fair point. Up until armor starts winning as well, if we get to a scoring turn you'll have more infantry then they'll have armor and you'll score the point. Hell, in most scenarios I'd just start dropping armor in other sectors to have a majority control of the cluster and get points if they're intent on taking a single sector.

>>51749876
yeah but if you shift to other sectors the san fran player can over drop and overwhelm you quickly

DISTRACTION MINOS

--------------------------------------
DISTRACTION MINOS - 1246pts
PHR - 10 launch assets

SR15 Flag battlegroup (285pts)
1 x Minos - 285pts - S
+ Vice Director (40pts, 3AV)

SR20 Vanguard battlegroup (360pts)
1 x Bellerophon - 180pts - H
1 x Bellerophon - 180pts - H

SR5 Line battlegroup (107pts)
1 x Orion - 107pts - M

SR5 Line battlegroup (130pts)
1 x Orpheus - 130pts - M

SR6 Pathfinder battlegroup (234pts)
2 x Medea - 78pts - L
2 x Medea - 78pts - L
2 x Medea - 78pts - L

SR3 Pathfinder battlegroup (90pts)
3 x Echo - 90pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

>>51750957
Not sure that lone Orion is going to be a big help, generally you want a few ships for a proper broadside team. I'd switch it out for a pair of Calypsos and another Echo.

>>51751053
Possibly, although I would prefer to have at least one line ship to throw dice. I could drop down to four Medea instead and take two Theseus.

--------------------------------------
DISTRACTION MINOS - 1243pts
PHR - 10 launch assets

SR17 Flag battlegroup (359pts)
1 x Minos - 285pts - S
+ Vice Director (40pts, 3AV)
2 x Calypso - 74pts - L

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup (180pts)
1 x Bellerophon - 180pts - H

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup (180pts)
1 x Bellerophon - 180pts - H

SR5 Line battlegroup (130pts)
1 x Orpheus - 130pts - M

SR6 Pathfinder battlegroup (234pts)
2 x Medea - 78pts - L
2 x Medea - 78pts - L
2 x Medea - 78pts - L

SR4 Pathfinder battlegroup (120pts)
2 x Echo - 60pts - L
2 x Echo - 60pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

>>51751097
Minos can throw dice pretty well. 6 3+ dice per side is mean.

>>51751530
This is why I'm actually still debating which BB to build a month after I bought it. The Heracles being a lot less belligerent is a pro AND a con, since I can't see it ever using the DMC and the broadsides at the same time unless your opponent deliberately lines up to eat a Weapons Free, while the Minos can blast away at point-blank range on Course Change.

>tfw want to take Platinum for all those bombers
>but the Diamond is just so utterly insane
Help

File: Jotaro Josuke.png (243KB, 563x588px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 563x588px

>>51752028
>Platinum or Diamond
Only one way to decide.

>>51752043
Which one is the fucking strong, anon?
Is Dave an anime dork, or is this just a coincidence?

File: UCM_Cruiser_Rio0.jpg (94KB, 798x530px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 798x530px

>Page 10
Thread, please.

What are the merits of taking just regular gun cruisers in a list? Rios, Sphinxes, Orions, and Ambers?

>>51754281
Rios are cheap brawlers. Often overlooked in favour of the Seattle and not without reason, but they have merits.

Sphinxes are similar, but not overshadowed in the same way. They exist to go weapons free all over the place and unlike Yokai they may actually survive the experience.

Orions are the bread and butter of broadside teams. They exist to shoot broadsides and they're good at what they do.

Ambers can shoot people from very far away and do good damage with weapons free. They're also cheap and don't need to worry about shit arcs like most Shaltari ships.

That's for normal lists. For hypercompetitive scumbag lists Rios are immediately replaced with Seattles, anything in Scourge that does not directly contribute to the performance of your battlecruisers is not to be taken, PHR is for Bellepherons and troopships only (though that may change, the "broadsides are shit" rhetoric was decided before anyone even touched the game), and Ambers may be viable to support your Diamond and many Emeralds.

File: 1384983024367.png (408KB, 664x480px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 664x480px

>>51754840
Shit, even for hypercompetitive, I'd still take a pair of Orions - they make a solid line breaker group, especially when paired with a Leonidas. That trio is going where it fucking wants, and WILL murder something when it gets there.

It just needs fighter cover, which I get via Andromeda's. I always toss a pair into every list, as that PD bonus is beautiful, which leaves my other launch bays open for bombers (dependent on enemy launch, of course).

>tfw your autism will never be this powerful
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Weq4pbemInw
Hawk Wargames not!forgeworld selling 5up models and 10mm scale Avengers when?

>>51756336
this is what happens when you reach Peak Wargamming

>>51756490
>when you need a football field to play 10mm scale dropfleet

>>51756336
>inb4 they make a full scale functioning Sabre to get hype for DZC 2.0

>>51756664
>Dave invents a working sabre with a working railgun, out of resin.

I for one welcome our new Hawk Wargames overlords

>>51756664
>Sabre
>not half-scale Ares

File: Bloody Backers.png (867KB, 540x960px) Image search: [Google]

867KB, 540x960px

>>51756780

>>51756796
You can't drive a half-scale mech.

>>51756664
I honestly really, really hope that Dave does entirely new models when/if they do DZC 2.0. The UCM, Scourge, and Shaltari could all do with some updating, as well as the PHR to a lesser extent.

>>51756951
Type 1 mechs are pretty ugly, that off-centre cockpit ruins the whole thing. I think the Janus sucks too, but that's probably just because I despise backwards legs on mechs. Other stuff is good though.
UCM infantry is objectively fucking hideous but otherwise their vanilla stuff seems fine.
Shaltari stuff was fine for the time but after seeing how much better the heavy grav-tanks look the smaller ones could use a makeover.
Half of the vanilla Scourge range looks like absolute dogshit, and this is coming from someone who likes their aesthetic. Holy fuck that Despoiler needs to be redesigned from the ground up.

>>51757440
Nah, type 1's look pretty good, there's nothing wrong with asymmetry.
I actually like the Janus, but its legs could be a bit more beefy.
I really think the UCM tanks should be redone; the idea is solid, but I feel their armature is too spindly. To a lesser degree on their gladius, too.
Agreed on the Shaltari, their smaller tanks definitely need an update. I'd say their gates and warstriders could use a touchup as well.
I think most of the Scourge stuff looks pretty good, especially their crabs and flyers, but their tanks seriously need to be redone a bit.

>hating on the Despoiler
Fuck you, it's the Marauder which looks like shit.
What REALLY needs to be scrapped and redone from square one is that fucking flying minivan, the Raider.

>>51754281
Rios are like a 15 point upgrade over an Osaka. You lose some movement, gain 3+ armor, gain 2 HP, some PD, and those secondary turrets.

It's pretty worth it sometimes, depending on your points. That's just reliable firepower that does NOT always close range, unlike a laser ship.

Berlin's still more a workhorse, but Rios aren't bad Seattles do cost a bit more for an even better ship of course, but launching planes does give up your ability to stealth due to spikes.

I just got my stuff and put stuff together without any real idea what I'm doing. I now have two Osakas and a Saint Pete, but reading the rules a little more I feel like two New Cairos and a Moscow would have been a better first build.
What are people's opinions on Toulons? From what I've read, everyine seems to consider the New Orleans an auto-take.

>>51756336
>finish big, simple sub-projects first, it's good for morale and reduces the sheer mass of components in your workspace
>do all iterations of the same thing at once so you don't have multiple assembly lines stopping and going

Dave the hobby prophet has some nice tidbits of wisdom

>>51760959
>What are people's opinions on Toulons?
Probably the most points efficient gun frigates in the game; same average damage as the Harpy and Topaz, better arcs, much cheaper, it's just a solid source of extra damage.

>From what I've read, everyine seems to consider the New Orleans an auto-take.
Well, yeah? They're your strike carriers; without them, you don't win games.
I mean, you COULD try to do something silly like taking three or four San Franciscos, but that's just a waste of cruiser sprues.

Toulons are amazing.
3 shots of 4+ACC is a very decent weapon, especially for their price. They still take a dedicated round of firing from a cruiser, possibly two, two take out.

Compare the volley from 3 Toulons with their speed and stealth, vs say, a broadside from an Orion. The Toulons are quite capable in this sense, and great for chasing enemies trying to evade through orbit layers, or to respond to another section of battle.

I haven't played a list without two to four of them to cover holes and provide supplementary firepower against targets too unworthy (such as orbiting corvettes) for cruiser fire. Or to finish off those 2-3 HP crippled enemy cruisers.

>>51760959
Toulons are good, their only problem is their in a fleet that has really strong frigates. I don't think a single UCM frigate would qualify as bad.

I would suggest building up a Seattle and a Rio from your next cruiser box if you do get one. That would let you have nice variety available to you.

Toulon is best gun frigate
Djinn is best CAW frigate
Pandora is best alternate frigate
Opal is best defense frigate
Lima is best support frigate.

Prove me wrong
protip, you can't

>>51764509
I've got to ask how you suggest the difference between a defense and support frigate. There's only the lima if you mean a frigate that doesn't actively contribute to the defense of allied ships while also not being a combat frigate.

I'd argue defense and support should be combined, and I'd posit that Opal wins the fight between it and Lima-chan.

>>51764509
Well yeah. The only ones with any real competition there are Toulon with the Europa and maybe Djinn with the Amethyst.

>>51764864
Nah, they're actually official terms iirc, or at least were used for internal design.

>Combat 1 /Gun Frigate
Toulon
Harpy
Europa
Topaz

>Combat 2/Alt Combat Frigate
(none)
Scylla
Pandora
Jade

>CAW Frigate
Taipei
Djinn
(none)
Amethyst

>Defense/ Guardian Frigate
Jakarta
(none)
Calypso
Opal

>Support /Auxiliary Frigate
Lima
Charybdis
Andromeda
(none)

>>51764914
huh. in that case I pretty well agree with your list. No way does the Andromeda or Charybdis beat a freaking Lima, and how can either of the defense frigates hope to fucking compete with an Opal?

>>51764864
Charybdis was classed as support iirc. Andromeda contributes to PD but also gets bombers, and Calypso is closer to a pure defence frigate for PHR.

But even combined I'd say Lima-chan wins out of pure necessity. A Shaltari fleet can function properly without Opals, but Limas are autoinclude every time.

>check weather report idly
>realize that the weather is actually decent for priming compared to usual, and I haven't built any of my extra sprues yet
I've got a cruiser and frigate sprue for each faction, I've built the starter sets. The UCM one is going to be a San Fran, 2 limas and 2 toulons. Scourge will be Hydra and 4 Djinns. Give me suggestions for the scourge and shaltari
>inb4 bellerophon

>>51765068
>PHR
Orpheus or Bellerophon :^)
2x Pandora
2x Calypso

>Shaltari
Basalt
2x Opal
2x Amethyst

>>51765120
san fran is built, if I don't see any other suggestions as decent as this I'll just go for this one once the UCM and scourge are done being built. Ya got an hour /dcg/ dazzle me with suggestions here.

>>51765288
Two Madrids.

>>51765346
Four Madrids and a Tokyo.

>>51765456
anon I wanted meme suggestions, not the standard UCM reconquest care package.

>>51765575
St. Petersburg. Headlights of doom.

>>51765068
Perseus and 4 Andromeda

Granite and 4 Jade

>>51765700
That would probably work better if Andromedas weren't good.

>>51765820
Problem is that none of the PHR frigates are bad.

thanks for the suggestions. Gonna go for the first one, but I will remember the suggestions for when I've got a few more models to splurge with. those 4 Madrids and Tokyo sounds like a good way to get around all the 'troopship versus strike carriers' worry.

>people back to bitching about wanting free models as compensation in the KS again
It feels like December all over again :^)

>>51764914
Reminds me of when the thread tried to design the missing frigate for each faction, and then my autism took over and I actually designed those ships.

>Kano-class Frigate: 36pts
>Scan6" Sig3" Thrust10" H4 A4+ PD3 G2-4 T:L
>UF-6400 Mass Drivers: Lock3+ At2 Dam1 F(N) Fusillade(2)
>Barracuda Missile Bays: Lock4+ At2 Dam1 F/S/R Close Action

>Nausicaa-class Drone Frigate: 44pts
>Scan8" Sig3" Thrust10" H5 A3+ PD3 G2-6 T:L
>Locust Drones: Lock3+ AtD3+3 Dam1 F/S/R Close Action(Swarmer)

>Gold-class Frigate: 37pts
>Scan12" Sig2"/12" Thrust12" H4 A5+/4+ PD6 G1-2 T:L
>Gravity Sling: Lock3+ At1 Dam1 F Close Action(Beam), Impel-1
>*Special Rule - Gravity Array: Once per turn select a single group within 4" of the Gold to gain the Vectored rule. It may choose to target its own group.

Can't find the Scourge one though. I think it was meant to be some sort of defence battery ship using arc weapons or something?

>>51767060
I like the Kano.
Nausicaa looks interesting.

Gold has two major problems; one, Gold is way too rich a name for a frigate.
Two, the gravity sling is actually far more likely to proc impel than the gravity coil, even if it is only a close action.
I'd make the gravity sling a full range weapon, but with 4+ lock, 1 attack, and 1 damage.

>>51767128
I picked gold because it had such a high specific gravity, but I guess gold and silver are probably going to be the dreadnoughts. There's not exactly a shortage of mineral names to choose from.

The sling has gone through a bunch of revisions and I've never been satisfied with it, so I guess I'll just go with your suggestion. I have little experience with vectored ships so I don't know how powerful the main gimmick actually is.

>>51767060
I think the Scourge one if I remember the dumb Idea I had was to be able to act as a defense battery while in proximity to a cluster, and be otherwise armed with a weak CAW weapon Id imagine it to be like a giant version of what the Desolator has or something

>you will never comfort Perseus-chan and reassure her that one day she will be fixed and made into a powerful and valuable member of the fleet
>you will never help jealous Shenlong-chan plot the morally questionable downfall of that bitch Akuma for always overshadowing her

>>51769106

>you will never look at the Achilles-chans as they sit despondently on the team bench thinking you hate them when you are only quietly waiting for the other team to unveil their SUPER-SEKRET all-battleline lineup that they'll blast out of the park.

Bump with question; is the Ganymede's bombardment worth taking over the Orpheus?

>>51771736
Not really. It might be in the future if PHR get another decent bombardment platform, but right now unless you send 2 Ganymedes to the same cluster you can't even average one industrial sector per turn. They're in a bad spot since they have neither the raw power of a Madrid nor the teamwork of Chars and Shaltari b-ballers.

>>51771736
And it's pretty handy for atmosphere fishing strike carriers. You're going to average two hits a turn, which isn't too bad considering its just sitting there doing nothing dumping troops out

>>51771896

It does kind of help your infantry when they're about to drop onto some armor that got there first.

>>51772366
True enough, but you're trading some pretty significant frigate-murdering power and a nice laser for that, and killing off enemy ground forces is a secondary use of bombardment that is only really viable for one turn while you approach. Ganymede isn't terrible and does have some abilities that Orph lacks, but imo it just worth what you lose.

Hey buddies, got my kickstarter and just now getting round to assembling it. I'm happy with my Shaltari list (i think) but what do you think of my PHR?

PHR Starter Fleet - 599pts
PHR - 6 launch assets

SR12 Vanguard battlegroup (264pts)
1 x Bellerophon - 180pts - H
+ Fleet Vizier (20pts, 2AV)
2 x Andromeda - 84pts - L

SR5 Line battlegroup (130pts)
1 x Orpheus - 130pts - M

SR5 Line battlegroup (107pts)
1 x Orion - 107pts - M

SR2 Pathfinder battlegroup (78pts)
2 x Medea - 78pts - L

>>51774948
Forgot to mention cos I'm building this to compete with other players starting out. 600 pts is fair for the recommended starter fleet.

>>51774948
Looks pretty damn solid to be, in all honesty.
Plenty of bombers
Plenty of beams
Two solid line ships
Enough troops
8/10, pretty nice.

File: [Bombers Intensify].png (407KB, 798x528px) Image search: [Google]

407KB, 798x528px

Bump

File: Conversion.png (639KB, 680x693px) Image search: [Google]

639KB, 680x693px

Holy shit thread, post something

>>51778427
>>51780402
>page ten in the span of less than an hour and a half
I wish /tg/ was slow again.

>>51780562
I'm sad that giving quests the boot did absolutely nothing to slow down the mad rush.

With 40K dropping all those big flashy expansions, I suppose high post volume is inevitable.

So. Theseus vs Ajax vs Orion.
What's your fave of this trio? They do the same rough thing, give a rough broadside at stuff.

>>51780920
Theseus, mostly for the speed. Having lower PD than frigates is a bit off-putting, though.

File: dfc-phr-theseus-cruiser-side-view.jpg (322KB, 1932x1074px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 1932x1074px

>>51780920
Theseus is the only one I've used so far.

Extra thrust and light batteries are amazing for hunting Limas and/or drawing an entire fleet's worth of firepower to prevent them from reaching said Limas. I'm curious to try them out paired with my Leonidas for an honest brawling team.

>>51780920
If you use Orions you should also use an Ikarus. They go very well together. Theseus is best with Europas. Both go well with Leo. Ajax is a solo operative in my experience, if you aren't going to actively hunt frigates you might as well use an Orpheus.

>>51780920
Theseus is nice for just a bit more varied firepower, but Orion is pretty much the only "standard" gun cruiser in the game I'd consider taking on its own merits.

Ajax is bretty good for its price, but I'd almost always spend the extra 30 for an Orpheus. Troop capacity, more hull, what's not to like?

>>51780920
The Theseus is better at the Ajax's job than the Ajax is.

>>51785232
I see no laser for target marking. Ajax is not a pure broadside ship. Unless you mean specifically for killing frigates, in which case I will agree that the mandatory overkill is a bit annoying for Ajax.

File: YamaSho 1.jpg (6MB, 4608x3456px) Image search: [Google]

6MB, 4608x3456px

UCM newbieanon here. I built Seattle/SanFran/Berlin/Nawlins from my side of the starter set, and left the combat frigates swappable. Any ideas on what to add with another starter? General consensus seems to be Moscow-chan and New Cairos with Limas.

>>51786549
Moscow and Limas are a smart choice. I'd be hesitant to add New Cairos so early when you already have Berlins, they're something to reinforce the fleet later and give you more options. There's a lot of overlap in roles there. Maybe another Berlin and a Madrid instead?

Battlegroup coherency penalties- if there are only two groups in a battlegroup that is out of coherency, you get a penalty for each group?

>>51787535
i believe so

Say I wanna start dropfleet but wanna start as PHR or shaltari and avoid the starter set, what are the essential purchases? Rulebook, starter fleet, what then?

>>51787030
Going that way I'd end up with a Seattle, a SanFran, a Berlin, Moscow-chan, a Madrid, 4 Nawlins, 4 swappable combat frigates, and a spare Cruiser frame to make another Berlin/Seattle/SanFran. Sounds good?

>>51788505
Rulebook and two starter fleets are pretty much the basics.

After that, another starter fleet, a battleship, or maybe a cruiser pack (if you want to get frigate light) should be enough to get you up to 1250 or so.

>>51788505
If you're shaltari buy more cruiser boxes, as shaltari frigates are shit.

Phr two starter fleets should be enough, plus a battleship.

>>51789162

You're doing the Sphere's work, keeping Amethysts off the table, anon. Bless you.

>>51789162
This pretty much; Shaltari will never need more than two starter boxes of frigates anyway. 4 Opals and 4 Amethysts are all you'll ever need unless you get to 2500 point sized games.

Next thread, commanders

>>51790178
>>51790178
>>51790178