With only two days left until the late backer option closes

File: PHR_Cruiser_Ajax0.jpg (55KB, 678x228px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 678x228px

The PHR's posterboy, the Ajax class cruiser from various angles, armed with a prow laser and two light cannon broadsides.

File: PHR_Cruiser_Orion.jpg (63KB, 637x424px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 637x424px

PHR Orion class cruiser, armed with a prow cannon turret and two medium cannon broadsides.

File: PHR_Cruiser_VanguardCarrier_Ikarus.jpg (50KB, 636x319px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 636x319px

PHR Ikarus class vanguard carrier, armed with a prow cannon, a light cannon broadside, and a hanger.

File: PHR_HeavyCruiser_AssaultTroopship_Orpheus.jpg (74KB, 637x393px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 637x393px

PHR Orpheus class troopship, armed with a prow laser, two light cannon broadsides, and a troop hanger.

File: PHR_HeavyCruiser_HeavyCarrier_Bellerophon.jpg (52KB, 636x270px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 636x270px

PHR Bellerophon class heavy carrier, armed with two prow lasers and two hangers.

File: PHR_HeavyCruiser_Hector.jpg (78KB, 637x424px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 637x424px

PHR Hector class heavy cruiser, armed with two prow lasers and two medium broadsides.

File: PHR_LightCruiser_Theseus.jpg (55KB, 636x345px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 636x345px

PHR Theseus class light cruiser, armed with light cannon and medium cannon broadsides.

(Only posting painted ships btw, not renders)

File: PHR_Frigate_Calypso.jpg (66KB, 637x424px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 637x424px

PHR Calypso class frigate, armed with ECM arrays.

File: PHR_Frigate_EscortCarrier_Andromeda.jpg (56KB, 636x424px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 636x424px

PHR Andromeda class escort carrier, with a small hangar.

File: PHR_Frigate_Europa.jpg (53KB, 637x349px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 637x349px

PHR Europa class frigate, armed with medium cannon broadsides.

File: PHR_Frigate_Pandora.jpg (56KB, 637x326px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 637x326px

PHR Pandora class frigate, armed with a prow laser.

File: PHR_Frigate_StrikeCarrier_Medea.jpg (51KB, 637x424px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 637x424px

PHR Medea class strike carrier, armed with ventral orbital bombardment cannons and a troop hangar.

>>46131494

This looks tempting, but I'm not quite kicked over the edge. If I had someone to go in with, I'd be jumping at this shit.

File: PHR_StarterFleet.jpg (84KB, 636x401px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 636x401px

PHR Starter Fleet, consisting of a Theseus light cruiser, a Bellerophon heavy cruiser, an Ikarus vanguard carrier, two Europa frigates, and two Medea strike carriers.

File: Scourge_BattleCruiser_Basilisk.jpg (89KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 960x640px

Scourge Basilisk class battlecruiser, armed with an extra large occulus array and a cloaking generator.

>>46131761
Same concerns here, but the models are personally what pushed me over the edge. Besides, the starter set comes with a UCM fleet an a Scouge fleet, so you can always try to convert someone.

File: Scourge_Cruiser_FleetCarrier_Hydra0.jpg (88KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 678x451px

Scourge Hydra class fleet carrier, armed with an occulus array and strike craft hangars.

File: Scourge_Cruiser_Ifrit0.jpg (96KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 678x451px

Scourge Ifrit class cruiser, armed with an occulus array and two prow lasers.

File: Scourge_Cruiser_Mothership_Chimera.jpg (102KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 678x451px

Scourge Chimera class mothership, armed with an occulus array and a troop hangar.

File: Scourge_Cruiser_Wyvern.jpg (113KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 678x451px

Scourge Wyvern class cruiser, armed with an occulus array and an unidentified weapon system; perhaps close action weapons?

File: Scourge_HeavyCruiser_Shenlong0.jpg (119KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 678x451px

Scourge Shenlong class heavy cruiser, armed with a large occulus array.

File: Scourge_LightCruiser_Strix.jpg (85KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 678x451px

Scourge Strix class light cruiser, armed with an occulus array and the same unidentified weapon as the Wyvern (if it is one).

File: Scourge_Cruisers.jpg (204KB, 678x833px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 678x833px

Side profiles of Scourge cruisers, both posted and not posted.

File: Scourge_Frigate_Charybdis.jpg (95KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 678x451px

Scourge Charybdis class frigate, armed with an occulus array and what appears to be orbital bombardment cannons.

File: Scourge_Frigate_Djinn.jpg (91KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 678x451px

Scourge Djinn class frigate, armed with an occulus array and the same weapon system as the Wyvern and Strix.

File: Scourge_Frigate_Harpy.jpg (99KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 678x451px

Scoure Harpy class frigate, armed with multiple occulus arrays.

File: Scourge_Frigate_Scylla.jpg (94KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 678x451px

Scourge Scylla class frigate, armed with an occulus array and an unidentified weapon system. Presumed to be a close action weapon, or one to hunt down larger ships.

File: Scourge_Frigate_StrikeCarrier_Gargoyle.jpg (103KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 678x451px

Scourge Gargoyle class strike carrier, armed with an occulus array and troop hangars.

File: Scourge_StarterFleet.jpg (121KB, 677x451px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 677x451px

Scourge Starter Fleet, consisting of an Ifrit class cruiser, a Shenlong class heavy carrier, a Wyvern class cruiser, two Harpy class frigates, and two Gargoyle class strike cruisers.

File: Shaltari_BattleCruiser_Adamant.jpg (88KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 960x640px

Shaltari Adamant class battlecruiser, armed with two particle lances and two ion cannon batteries.

File: Shaltari_Cruiser_Amber.jpg (101KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 678x451px

Shaltari Amber class cruiser, armed with two ion cannon batteries.

>>46132121
Funny enough I think these guys sold me on picking up the starter set during the kickstarter. Love weird alien ships like them.

File: Shaltari_Cruiser_FleetCarrier_Basalt.jpg (95KB, 637x424px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 637x424px

Shaltari Basalt class fleet carrier, armed with two disintegrator cannons (I believe that's what the devs called it) and strike craft hangars.

>>46132149
Yeah, I think Dave did a great job with the Scourge, all the factions in my opinion; something for everyone.

File: Shaltari_Cruiser_Granite.jpg (103KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 678x451px

Shaltari Granite class cruiser, armed with two particle lances.

File: Shaltari_Cruiser_Mothership_Emerald0.jpg (91KB, 637x424px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 637x424px

Shaltari Emerald class mothership, armed with two disintergrator cannons and a troop hangar.

File: Shaltari_Voidgate.jpg (137KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 678x451px

Shaltari Voidgate, used to teleport Shaltari forces from motherships to the planet's surface.

File: Shaltari_Cruiser_Turquoise0.jpg (66KB, 637x266px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 637x266px

Shaltari Turquoise class cruiser, armed with gravimetric distortion arrays used to destabilize the planet below in controlled locations.

File: Shaltari_HeavyCruiser_Jet.jpg (71KB, 677x204px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 677x204px

Shaltari Jet class heavy cruiser, armed with gravimetric distortion arrays and an ion cannon battery.

File: Shaltari_HeavyCruiser_Obsidian0.jpg (89KB, 637x424px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 637x424px

Shaltari Obsidian class heavy cruiser, armed with three particle lances.

File: Shaltari_HeavyCruiser_Onyx.jpg (87KB, 678x295px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 678x295px

Shaltari Onyx class heavy cruiser, armed with three ion cannon batteries.

File: Shaltari_LightCruiser_Aquamarine.jpg (108KB, 637x447px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 637x447px

Shaltari Aquamarine class light cruiser, armed with what appears to be two lasers, or something similar to one.

File: Shaltari_LightCruiser_Azurite.jpg (82KB, 637x424px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 637x424px

Shaltari Azurite class light cruiser, armed with two disintergrator cannons

(On a side note, I feel the Shaltari light cruisers would look better with the wings going overhead the core, like half of a battlecruiser. I still like their current shape, though)

File: Shaltari_Frigate_Amethyst.jpg (111KB, 637x424px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 637x424px

Shaltari Amethyst class frigate, armed with what appears to be either wide angle light disintergrator cannons, or (ship-based) microwave cannons.

File: Shaltari_Frigate_Opal.jpg (102KB, 637x424px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 637x424px

Shaltari Opal class frigate, armed with an unknown weapon system; possibly ECM?

File: Shaltari_Frigate_Jade.jpg (139KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 678x451px

Shaltari Jade class frigate, armed with a light particle lance.

File: Shaltari_Frigate_Topaz.jpg (132KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 678x451px

Shaltari Topaz class frigate, armed with an ion cannon battery and possibly a light disintergrator cannon.

File: Shaltari_Ships.jpg (279KB, 678x929px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 678x929px

Side profiles of Shaltari ships.

File: Shaltari_StarterFleet.jpg (152KB, 677x450px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 677x450px

Shaltari Starter Fleet, consisting of an Amber class cruiser, an Emerald class mothership, an Obsidian class heavy cruiser, two Topaz class frigates, two Jade class frigates, and three Voidgates.

File: UCM_BattleCruiser_Atlantis0.jpg (83KB, 678x450px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 678x450px

UCM Atlantis class battlecruiser, armed with a ventral heavy railgun double battery, two railgun turrets, and strike craft hangars.

File: UCM_BattleCruiser_Avalon.jpg (57KB, 960x512px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 960x512px

UCM Avalon class battlecruiser, armed with a ventral superheavy laser and four railgun turrets.

File: UCM_Battleship_Beijing.jpg (111KB, 637x424px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 637x424px

UCM Beijing class battleship, armed with a prow laser, a triple heavy railgun battery, and four railguns.

File: UCM_Cruiser_Berlin.jpg (88KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 678x451px

UCM Berlin class cruiser, armed with a ventral laser and two railgun turrets.

File: UCM_Cruiser_FleetCarrier_Seattle0.jpg (78KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 678x451px

UCM Seattle class fleet carrier, armed with a heavy railgun battery and strike craft hangars.

File: UCM_Cruiser_FleetCarrier_Seattle1.jpg (102KB, 637x442px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 637x442px

UCM Seattle class fleet carrier, surrounded by a strike craft complement.

File: UCM_Cruiser_Madrid0.jpg (85KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 678x451px

UCM Madrid class cruiser, armed with an orbital bombardment cannon battery and two railgun turrets.

File: UCM_Cruiser_Rio.jpg (71KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 678x451px

UCM Rio class cruiser, armed with a heavy railgun battery and two railgun turrets.

File: UCM_Cruiser_Troopship_SanFrancisco.jpg (87KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 678x451px

UCM San Francisco class troop carrier, armed with two railgun turrets and a troop hangar.

File: UCM_HeavyCruiser_Moscow.jpg (80KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 678x451px

UCM Moscow class heavy cruiser, armed with two heavy railgun batteries and two railgun turrets.

File: UCM_HeavyCruiser_SaintPertersburg.jpg (86KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 678x451px

UCM Saint Petersburg class heavy cruiser, armed with two lasers and two railgun turrets.

File: fantasy sword.jpg (54KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 700x700px

You know how folks design "fantasy" swords and try to make them look really fancy and cool, but just they just end up looking tacky and nonfunctional? I feel like most of these ships are just a bit too far on that side of the midpoint between inventive and bland. They're crafted with a lot of artistry and I can see what they were going for, but I just want to say: "Whoa, dude. Dial it back a bit." And that's too bad, because I really want to like them.

File: UCM_LightCruiser_NewCairo.jpg (90KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 678x451px

UCM New Cario class light cruiser, armed with a ventral laser.

>>46132801
I can see where you're coming from (even if I don't necessarily agree), but I do agree that Dave goes really heavy on the detail, for better or for worse.

File: UCM_LightCruiser_Osaka0.jpg (79KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 678x451px

UCM Osaka class light cruiser, armed with a heavy railgun battery.

>>46132801
I kinda getcha.
I don't want to ruin anyone's fun, I've heard some decent things about drop/fleet commander, but the ship designs... just don't WORK for me. They feel kind of bland and samey between ships in the same faction, like Full Thrust. And that's really confusing, because the main space game I know that doesn't feel that way is Battlefleet Gothic, where ships literally ARE pretty much the same barring weapon swaps in a class... but that somehow just works for me, and I have no idea why.

File: UCM_Cruisers.jpg (181KB, 678x694px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 678x694px

Side profiles of UCM cruisers.

>>46132870
>Full Thrust
blegh, firestorm armada. I need to sleep.

File: UCM_Frigate_Jakarta.jpg (97KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 678x451px

UCM Jakarta class frigate, armed with a railgun and extra point defense.

File: UCM_Frigate_Lima.jpg (94KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 678x451px

UCM Lima class frigate, armed with a railgun and ECM modules.

>>46132870
I can also understand that to a degree, but I personally love (to an absurd degree) standardized, modular fleets. Ships just feel so more "related" if there's no difference between them besides loadout to me; plus, magnetization will be piss easy.

File: UCM_Frigate_StrikeCarrier_NewOrleans.jpg (95KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 678x451px

UCM New Orleans class strike carrier, armed with a railgun and troop hangars.

File: UCM_Frigate_Taipei.jpg (99KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 678x451px

UCM Taipei class frigate, armed with a railgun and close action weapon batteries.

File: UCM_Frigate_Toulon.jpg (100KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 678x451px

UCM Toulon class frigate, armed with three railguns.

File: UCM_StarterFleet0.jpg (115KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 678x451px

UCM Starter Fleet, consisting of a Seattle class fleet carrier, a Moscow class heavy cruiser, a Berlin class cruiser, two Toulon class frigates, and two New Orleans class strike carriers.

File: UCM_StarterFleet1.jpg (102KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 678x451px

And that is all I have, /tg/.

Has anyone else here bought into the kickstarter or late backer thing? Any admirals here who were part of the admiral days who could tell us whatever Hawk is letting you tell us?

File: firestorm-group-photo-2.jpg (134KB, 580x350px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 580x350px

>>46132894
>>46132909
>>46132917
>>46132932

Alright, full redaction; these frigates I'm rather liking, but just them. They seem like they're small enough that they got designed well and cool, but without being large enough for whoever did it to cram too much shit on there. Similar profiles, distinctly different, readily apparent from the top or side.

And yeah, standardized, sort of theme or design-consistent fleets are pretty cool; In BFG it makes sense 'cause 90% of Imperial cruisers are the same freakin' hull with slightly different configurations. Unified aesthetic vision, weapons are distinct enough that the different configurations are palpably different in visuals and use, and so on.

Yet if I look at a Firestorm Armada fleet (eg, sorry for taking up one of your image limit, OP) it looks like them red ships have maybe three configurations there? But they're all... the same thing, slightly elongated, no pleasing aesthetic difference.
Fuck, I don't even know how to describe it. I'm not even sure if it's real. They might be more distinct than a Mars, a Dictator, and an Emperor in BFG, yet it doesn't click for me.

Fuck it, I should be in bed.

>>46133000
>Alright... side.
Agreed, the UCM frigates are one of the best designs out of the bunch. However, I may just have good eyesight or pattern recognition, but I can also easily pick out the different variations of any of the ships I posted.

>And... and so on
That's what I like, and I love the BFG ships, I just prefer a little bit more detail on ships (since they often end up looking bland unless you give them an excellent paint job), and the manufacturing capability of the time is probably why the BFG ships are rather simple.

>(eg,... OP)
It's alright, I'm done posting my gallery.

>Yet... for me.
I'm going to be honest with you, I can't see any differences between the ships in the image you posted.
For the grey ships I see what looks to be a cruiser, two identical frigates, and four corvettes(?).
For the red ships I see a carrier, a cruiser, four identical frigates, and four identical corvettes.

Don't get me wrong, it's probably a fun game, but ALL of these ships look like ass

>>46133154
Why so? Saying that their aesthetics aren't to your taste is one thing, but saying that they're shit is rather unfair in my opinion.

>>46133000
>these frigates I'm rather liking, but just them.
I agree. They aren't nearly as over-the-top / cluttered as some of the other ships.

>>46131494
This genuinely helps. As a BFG player I needed help being able to see the different weapon systems, and your explanations make them easy to see.

>>46133353
That's great to hear, anon! Are you considering picking up DFC, or are you just looking at the ships?

>>46133402
I'm trying to choose sides... liking UCM, I think. PHR too, though. The Shaltari don't work for me - the designs just don't make sense to me, and that goes for their landbased stuff too. Scourge - don't like their land based stuff either, but love their ships. I wonder what I could accomplish without an airbrush though.

>>46131494
are there any links to the rules/fluff?

>>46133455
In regards to the Shaltari, keep in mind that they're this setting's hyper-advanced aliens, like the Eldar or Necrons (although not quite to the same degree).

As for the Scourge ships, you could probably get away with just a metallical basecoat/primer, washing the entire ship, and then brushing on colored ink directly to different areas.
It wouldn't be a smooth gradient, but you could easily do an interesting striped, spotted, or some other patterned scheme.

>>46133458
No rules yet besides what's shown in the kickstarter, although there were recent a few beta-test days for certain backers.

As for the fluff, here is the rulebook for the ground-based game in the same setting.
>fluff
http://www.mediafire.com/download/i8wqi8486bbcme4/DZC-norules.pdf
>rules
http://www.mediafire.com/download/ib1d4982ykh79b3/DZC-nofluff.pdf

>>46133067
For the red ones (ryushi, which are a minor sub-faction in the "allies" faction- think independant races in B5) it's a battlecarrier, carrier, 4 cruisers and 4 corvette-drones.

>>46133201
Since aesthetics are only subjective, he just said that. Also, they are pure arse. I'd rather have the decade-old GZG stuff than those gun on top of gun and powered by gun designs. Except the shaltari, the shaltari are hawt.

>>46133723
Yes, aesthetics are subjective, but calling the designs "shit" is just wrong; they are wonderfully designed and sculpted with an abundance of technical skill, even if you don't like the aesthetic.

>gun on top of gun and powered by gun
the UCM? the guns aren't any more disproportional to the hull than weapons on WW2 era battleships, or even modern warships.

>The Shaltari are hawt
Really? That's strange, because the Shaltari are generally the most hated faction, aesthetics wise, when it comes to these thread.

>>46133814
UCM and PHR both suffer from the 40k syndrome of "stack five guns on top of each other". Scourge suffer from the goofy as fuck huge spider eyes, which barely made sense in DZC and don't at all in space, and general aesthetic of a rejected Aliens prop. Shaltari are unique, with interesting shapes and do actually evoke the feeling that the race can manipulate energy in advanced ways. Again, all subjective.

>>46134033
Fair enough, I find the UCM guns to be not that big and the PHR to be relatively well proprtioned. I actually like the Scourge eyes, as it makes them feel more alive, organic. And grown like they're said to be.
I completely agree with you for the Shaltari, they remind me of the Eldar turned up to 11.

>>46134116
See, my issue with scourge is that they are not organic. It's stated in the DZC rulebook they're built, even if parts of them are grown, they're still not alive. They're not tyranids. The "eyes" are so grossly out of proportion to the vehicles and ships it just looks comical.

>>46134155
i thought the "eyes" where the weapon mounts.

File: mgun1.jpg (924KB, 5151x2778px) Image search: [Google]

924KB, 5151x2778px

>>46132877

You missed one.

>>46134282
No, the eyes are optics and other sensors. which means that the scourge ships can probably peer into the bing bang, given their size, but also that their sensors can be knocked out by tossing bags of sand in the general direction of the ship.

File: Martian tripod.jpg (397KB, 962x1205px) Image search: [Google]

397KB, 962x1205px

>>46134381
I think the first thing EVERYONE noticed about the UCM cruisers was their similarity to Halo and ME's human military hardware.

>>46134155
>>46134447
The eyes are "oculus weapons", which are probably some sort of old-timey heat ray given the Scourge's affinity for melting things.

I backed twice. Got 2 commodore levels and a bunch of bolt ons. I will have all the ships. Plenty extra to get people into it with starter armies of any faction.

>>46131740
>Frigate
>Burn-Through Laser

The absolute posthuman madmen!

>>46134381
I could never figure out what that upper portion of the gun is for. It doesn't seem to serve a purpose. Is the whole thing a huge optic or what?

File: AmberClad.jpg (277KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 1920x1080px

>>46135384
Artists who do design work for video games - and like those who sculpt for DFC evidently - usually haven't the first clue how things work and only care about how things LOOK. This is why DFC boats look like Halo pistols or motors with guns stuck on (leaving no room for fuel, ammo or crew) or a flimsy collection of seashells with none of the shoring and gusseting used [in places with Newtonian physics] to keep large, moving things from falling apart at the first nudge. Similarly, "space guns" frequently have no provision for magazines or belt feeds or power packs or other methods of providing the energy needed to make artfully colored plastic sticks marginally more useful in a firefight. tl;dr:

Space Magic does all of the heavy lifting, so artists can get on with the self-expression part of the gaming business and - remember! - mechanically unsound designs are simply not to your personal tastes! Don't go round
>implying
that they're objectively poorly engineered simply because they are!

That's unfair ...

>>46134155
I'm fairly certain the Scourge eyes on their ships are the occulus weapons, at least the huge eyes are, with the smaller eyes being actual sensors.

>>46135974
>guns stuck on guns with no room for fuel ammo or crew
Seriously dude? The UCM guns have the same damn proportions to the ships as naval battleships, they're not as huge as you think they are.

There's certainly space magic at work here, especially with the Shaltari and Scourge, but the Human factions aren't that poorly designed. Keep in mind that all of these weapons are rail/magnetic/gauss weapons as well, though, so the projectile doesn't necessarily get much bigger as the barrel gets bigger.

>>46134924
>2 commodores
Jesus Christ dude, that's what, 24 frigates and 8 cruisers per faction?
That's 120 ships, not even counting the BC's and stuff. How are going to find time to paint all that?

The models are really, really awful.

Also no rules.

>>46136742
>the models are awful
Subjective

>no rules
They've shown plenty of the demo rules and mechanics in the Beast of War videos, if you can get past the horrendously annoying BoW guy.

To be fair these models look a hell of a lot better than anything GW ever did for Battle Fleet Gothic.

>>46136742
Your taste is what's awful.

>Shaltari frigates have 1 prong
>light cruisers have 2
>cruisers have 2
>heavy cruisers have 3
>battlecruisers have 4
>sweating just thinking of their battleship
>all the broadsides on a PHR battleship

>>46131494
Oh, I didn't saw PHR ships. They look awesome!

Shame, I don't have any people to play Dropzone/Dropfleet in my place

>>46132801
Those first three factions all look too similar. I'm not saying all space navies need to conform to classic cliches, but three factions that have goofy unnecessary organic ship designs?!

Maybe if the lore backs it up and they are splinter factions that branched off from each other and their designs are still similar or FTL travel in the universe requires your ship to look like a Geiger/Dali fever dream, but without know if either of those is the case it just doesn't look good to me.

>>46139207
>Those first three factions all look too similar.
Unless you mean ships of the same type, how?

>three factions
>organic ship designs
I don't see how you could make a case for more than two.

I'm hype for the game myself. Bought in at basic starter fleet level, PHR as it's what I main in dropzone, but also added shaltari as I've seen the painted models at the UK admiral day and I gotta say they're pretty stunning.

Game plays really tight as well, I've not played many space combat games admittedly but I think I got the 'feel' the creators are going for.

>>46135974
You're the one that complained during school plays that the blood in McBeth is totally fake, innit?

>>46139207
What? The PHR, Scourge, and Shaltari ate all very different. Smooth and simple, angular and geometric, and curvy and Geigerian.

>>46139404
Did you play at an admiral day? We're you an admiral's plus one? Give us the details (as much as you can, anyways), anon!

>>46139611
Err, Shaltari and Scourge*

>>46139611
Was a +1, and yeah we got to play the standard Scourge vs. UCM, as well as proxying a couple other factions with the time we had. UCM are as they appear, bristling with guns, their bigger stuff has lots of seperate weapon profiles and are really about weight of fire.

That and burn-through lasers, which (dice gods permitting) can be seriously nasty.

UCM have a lot of wide firing arc weapons and are able to go weapons free very efficiently as a result.

Scourge have narrower arcs, lots of eye laser beams facing forwards. A little trickier to bring weapons to bare, but hit hard as almost all their weapons has a rule that inhibits enemy armour saves somewhat.

>>46139715
Did you get to do anything with strike craft and the like? How do the more esoteric frigates, like the UCM point defense frigate, play in relation to helping bigger ships?
How smoothly does orbital insertion and territory control go? Does the game work well as a pure annihilation scenario?

Any word on the Shaltari and PHR, or were you only able to play the UCM and Scourge in earnest?

>>46139815
We used the basic strike carriers for deploying ground troops, though due to the way we played we never got into ground confrontations. Point defence is something most ships have, and is used to defending against close actions and launch assets like fighters or torpedoes. Think of it like active countermeasures. you basically get to throw a bunch of dice, usually needing fairly high results. successes are used to cancel hits scored. Crits can also be removed by using two point defense successes.

Getting troops on the ground works pretty well, a big part of the game is racing to get your troop carriers down to atmospheric level whilst keeping them covered etc.

Shaltari were a bit... well, involved. I need to reread how they work a bit as as usual, shaltari are bullshit and fuck around with the established conventions. PHR are broadsidey, and have plentiful access to launchable drones.

>>46140058
I heard that's how PD worked, but I assumed that the only point to sticking so much PD on a little frigate was so that it could "attach to" and assist larger ships, or groups of ships, in PD rolls. Are there any rules for that in place, or no?

How do the PHR turn, and how does turning work in general? Are they able to turn fast enough to bring their guns to bear, or do they struggle with that?

It's been mentioned before in the thread but god damn these ship designs are stupid.

>>46140215
Agreed.
They are some of the worst space ship designs I've ever seen to be honest.

>>46140215
Anon, pls no bully. They're no more ridiculous than 40k designs.

>>46140272
Now you're just being a goof.

Ork ships look like fish instead of clusters of fins like those lame alien doodads.
Eldar ships have sails and look delicate and not like discarded orange peels.
Even imperial ships have the distinguishable front prow and baroque style.

PHR looks like UCM with the details filed off and smoothed down. You have the stick bug orange peel ships and you have the fish fin fleet. All of them are pretty uggo.

>Amber
>Basalt
>Emerald
>Granite
>Voidgate
>Turquoise
>Jet
>Obsidian
>Onyx
>Aquamarine
>Azurite
>Amethyst
>Opal
>Jade
>Topaz

Really scraped the bottom of the barrel when naming these things didn't they.

>>46140358
>PHR looks like UCM with the details filed off and smoothed down.

Not sure if troll or complete retard.

>>46140511
They both have a half "shell" and lil sweep back wings.

You can practically see where the base is used for both designs you underage banana farmer.

>>46140548
>They both have a half "shell"
Oh noes, both ships ahve armor plating! How fucking nowell on a battleship. Except the texture, curvature and amount of coverage are different.

>lil sweep back wings.
Try looking at the minis for once. What you call "fins" on the UCM ships is the middle part hull continuously narrowing before terminating, whereas on the PHR ships there are clearly distinguishable and posable maneuvering engine fins.

You half-blind imbecile.

>>46140772
>How fucking nowell on a battleship.
>nowell
>Calling anyone an imbecile.
>Talking dumb about what the parts are while ignoring their similar design which is the point of the comment.
Well at least there's no surprise why a smart intellectual guy like yourself loves these abortions.

>>46140399
How is an overarching theme in a faction's naming conventions scraping the barrel?

>>46140358
Ork ships are literal piles of garbage with faces slapped on the front, Scourge are squidlike.

Eldar are space elf space ships, Shaltari are hula hoops with triangles everywhere.

>PHR looks like the UCM let wut?
UCM are two interlocking horseshoes, PHR are a brick with some fins at the back. Totally different.

>>46140548
What? The UCM very obviously has 5 parts, central hull, dorsal prow, ventral prow, and engine nacelles. PHR have the central hull and rear fins.

They're "similar" only in that they have recognizably human guns and machinery.

>>46140215
>>46140358
>>46140826
Tell me something: did DFC piss off the BFG fans by challenging their corpse of game's antiquated claim to being king of naval space fights, or do we just have a couple arbitrary and particularly vehement haters doing the rounds?

Futuristic settings are allowed to be stylized without imitating 40K's style, you know.

>>46140358
>PHR looks like UCM with the details filed off and smoothed down.
Looking at the front and side silhouettes of the ships, I don't see it. Unless you want use a level of vague similarity where you equate a square with a circle because they kind of look the same. From a distance, in poor lighting, if you're really nearsighted.

>>46141980
You would think BFG players would love DFC, considering how it's being written by Andy Chambers.

>>46131789
>Bellerophon heavy cruiser
Woops, just noticed that's actually a Hector.

>>46142063
The models just don't do it for me.

>>46142738
Fair enough; I think they're gorgeous and busy enough to be proper display pieces, rather than glorified game tokens.

>>46141980
Firestorm Armada is much better and you guys shit on it in this thread, so it seems fair really.

Plus this game has the worst looking miniatures ever.

>>46142945
Where did we shit on FA?

>the worst looking minis
Nice meme

>>46143033
Try reading retard.

>>46133000
>>46133067
>>46133258
The best part is you guys whine about aesthetics when your ships look like literal shit. I mean help even the BFG homebrew ships look better.

>>46143103
None of those posts are 'shitting' on it, do you get offended whenever someone does not think the game you like is perfect?

>>46143103
>Try reading retard.
It was talked about in one post. One.

>literal shit
Anon, you've gone beyond proper discussion and are just baiting now.

>>46143159
Can you not read the english language? Or are you just stupid.

They're complaining about the aesthetics, meanwhile you're playing Shit Ships; the game.

The irony is amusing.

>>46143103
All of those discuss aesthetics in a reserved manner, understanding that their tastes are not universal.

Things you seem to be incapable of.

>>46143220
>playing
It's not even out yet, anon.

>shit ships
Subjective :^)

>>46143264
Nah, they're pretty objectively bad.

>>46132870
>>46133154
>>46133723
>>46134155
>>46134381
>>46135974
>>46136742
>>46140215
>>46140259
>>46142738
>>46142945
>Why are these models so shitty?
Seems to be a pretty common theme among the pop-ins.

>>46143220
Can you? There is a difference between saying you dislike something in a reasonable way and 'shitting on it'. I do not even like the DFC designs, you are just acting like a child.

>>46143354
I'm fairly certain a few of those posts are yours.

>>46143354
>quoting yourself

>>46143367
>There is a difference between saying you dislike something in a reasonable way and 'shitting on it'
Semantics tbqh buds.

>>46143394
Only a couple actually. That's the sad part.

They're objectively shit.

>>46143430
I don't know, I think they're far more technically impressive than BFF ships, and far more interesting than FA.

maybe you just have objectively shit taste :^)

>>46143480
>There's at least a dozen people who took the time to call them bad.
>A few even said they were interested in the game until they saw the models.
:^)

>>46143354
>third of those are (You)
>one is a joke without any input concerning the poster's opinion
>the very first admits that the complain he has about designs also stands in BFG's case, yet it doesn't bother him there for some reason
>not even all of them dislike all the designs

>>46143539
>11 quoted replies
>at least 3 of them are you
>12 unique posters
Wew
Considering that they got nearly a million USD out of the kickstarter, out of over three thousand backers, I'd say plenty of people like the models.

>>46143706
'Nearly' a million is actually pretty bad for an established IP.

>3k
>lots
More people bought kingdom death and it's one of the most niche and rare games ever.

>>46143782
>established IP
>relatively unknown war game owned by a private studio
>Kickstarter doubled their value overnight.

>>46143706
>over three thousand backers
Wasn't it like 40-50 short of 4k at the end?

>>46143846
Don't worry, they'll crash and burn within three years.

>>46143851
Ah yeah, you're right.

>>46143860
I'll put money on the opposite, anon.

>>46143860
I'll file that one away with "GW will die by the end of the year!" and "Infinity will never establish itself in the US if they don't cut down on the well sculpted asses."

>>46143936
>"GW will die by the end of the year!"
No one ever said that, it was always 5-10 years buds. But they're certainly not doing better than they were that's for sure.

Infinity is still largely a European thing, most Americans still play WHM and I don't really blame them considering CB rule translations are like reading a kebab menu.

Anyway, 3 years.

>>46143860
If companies that mismanage their IPs as terribly as DP9 are still limping along after all this time, I don't see why Hawk would go tits up. Unless you're planning to hate them out of business through sheer will.

>>46143992
>it was always 5-10 years
For the last 5-10 years.

>>46144014
Oh man DP9 is a classic example of zombie company.

I feel bad for the lemmings that got on board that ship.

Hawk make pretty bad business decisions. These are the same guys who thought a lead starter was a primo business move.

There's a reason these companies get people to up front their capital and don't seek out investors.

File: FSE 7.jpg (71KB, 642x481px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 642x481px

>>46132887
Well, you're not wrong even with the typo.

>>46144083
>These are the same guys who thought a lead starter was a primo business move.
What? I don't think Hawk has ever used lead.

>>46144083
I don't know what I should be hoping for. DP9 dying so there's a hope someone who'd make better use of the HG IP picks it up. Or them getting their shit together.
Both are equally unlikely.

File: The_End_is_Near_50th_Anniversary_Edition.png (240KB, 504x360px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 504x360px

>>46143992
>No one ever said that, it was always 5-10 years buds.

>>46144128
Before they switched to plastic they used metal with high lead content.

It's why their old starters are stupid expensive. Also they have pretty bad quality control.

>>46144395
I thought they used resin for everything till they started getting plastics?

>>46144608
Well you'd be wrong.

It was metal and resin.

>>46144608
Metal and resin starters. Though I can't find anything on the lead content of the white metal they used.

>>46144395
I know they used metal for infantry, but I don't think it had a lot of lead in it.

>>46144738
>>46144689
White metal always contains lead.

Hawk wargames were pretty notorious for it because it was 'cheap' to produce but their shit was still expensive anyway.

>>46144608
Much of the original starter sets were in white metal (not lead ffs). They were therefore pretty expensive. The starters sets have been mostly replaced, but some of the old metal models are still kicking around, as you can see here if you scroll to the bottom:

http://www.hawkwargames.com/products/ucm-starter-army

>>46144797
>White metal always contains lead.
Wrong, but that also wasn't the question.

>>46144872
In terms of miniatures, yes it does and has been a thing since the first days of miniature casting.

Get a clue.

>>46144942
I'm still not seeing the sources on your claims.

These minis look good, but are they prepainted?

>>46145306
No. They come in sprues, unpainted and unassembled.

>>46145326
That's too bad. I'm not willing to buy into this if they aren't prepainted.

>>46145306
>prepainted

Jesus, this meme again?

>>46145350
I like the modeling part of wargaming, so I can't say I understand your sentiment. Well, whatever floats your boat.

>>46145380
It's been too long.

>>46145306
>THAT guy is back
Pls go

>>46145326
>>46145401
Anon, this is an old meme, he's baiting you.

>>46145401
Is there really any modelling possible on these ships?

>>46145417
What's worse; People saying the models are bad, or people asking if they're prepainted?

File: bait.webm (3MB, 1075x600px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1075x600px

>>46145444
Well shit.

>>46145446
While I'm fine with both, prepainted meme is a little worse because it doesn't foster discussion. Both give the thread a bump, which is what dropcommander threads need during their quiet times.

>>46145446
No, the meme are
>the ships are objectively bad
And
>do they come prepainted?
The latter is less infuriating.

>>46145554
Let's talk tactics, then.

>>46145446
>Is there really any modelling possible on these ships?
Magnetization and rigging?

>>46145446
>modelling

The sprues are extremely modular and allow for more combinations than there are ships with actual rules, so you might use that to give your fleet some custom bits, maybe?
Other than that, modelling battle damage might be possible, but it'd probably look like shit...

The if you're really talented, you could do your own sculpts for your faction's launch assets, and of course the tokens for the drop sites and deployed troops etc

>>46145554
>Implying there would be a thread without me.
You know you love it.

>>46145555
So you'd rather they be objectively bad to being prepainted?

>>46145579
>No rules.

>>46145595
I'm genuinely surprised Dave's autism let him only make an universal set of strike craft.

I just want to read the rules. The models look cool but I don't have the time or resources to invest into minis.

>>46145595
If it was possible to have fighter launching from a ship that'd be a cool project but the scale would probably make that impossible.

>>46145654
Yeah, maybe they'll release some later?
I'd love to see the shaltari versions!

For the time being, I'll wait till I have the actual sprues in hand and then try and see if I can kitbash something from leftover bits

>>46145638
>needing rules to talk about tactics

How tedious.

>>46145579
alright then, Natfka just posted a 1500 point list of UCM and Shaltari that he and a buddy played.
http://natfka.blogspot.com/2016/03/battlefleet-gothic-1500pts-battle-brief.html

He talks a bit about what the game was like, but I'd like to focus on how big those lists seem to be. The UCM list was running something like 15 frigates, which is way more than I was expecting. By constrast, the Shaltari only had 4 and a lot more cruisers. any guesses on whether that'll be standard differences between the faction, or does anyone think someone built their list a little off what they're supposed to?

>>46145674
Best you can do currently is either track down and interrogate an admiral day participant or watch their demo game videos.

>>46145638
>So you'd rather they be objectively bad to being prepainted?
Yes, because with enough skill and technique I could make them objectively decent.

>>46145654
I'm surprised too, I bet that'll be part of the next release after the rest of Hawk caves in.

>>46145709
How are you supposed to discuss the rules for a game that doesn't have any yet?

Are you a wizard?

>>46145715
>20+ ships per side.
>4x4 table
>We needed a coffee break!
>They played six turns.
Now THAT sounds tedious.

>>46145788
>rules are tactics

Open your mind, man.

>>46145788
>20+ ships per side.
>4x4 table
>They played six turns.
Nothing extraordinary.

>We needed a coffee break!
>it was a crazy hair raising battle, that we had to take a coffee/tea break from, just to discuss how tense it felt on the table.

Don't you have some other thread to be in? Shitposting DnD and 40k too mainstream for you?

>>46145828
>Doesn't know the parameters of operation.
>Wants to discuss the intricacies of said operational mechanics.
Use a FLANK and lots of FIGHTERS don't forget to change ELEVATIONS.

Is that what you wanted? Cause there's no clue on what scanning does or signatures, or detectors or whatever the hell else is going on without a book to look at.

>>46145694
Yeah, I'd like that too, but I'm afraid you're right on the scale. Maybe the 2up collectors edition ships would support something like that (not that I have the kind of money for that. Was hard enough on the wallet to support the commodore pledge)

>>46145715
From what he said about the shield boosting frigates, I'd say it's now confirmed that ships like the point defenge specialists (from UCM I think) can and actually are supposed to suppoort your larger vessels. I like that.

>>46146016
Go watch the videos again, grasshopper. There are plenty of operational principles revealed in the discussions and tutorials -- including "spikes".

>>46145715
>New York Class Battleship
I swear to God, there better be a Houston class SOMETHING.
I wonder what the NY's loadout is.

>Lima Class Detector Frigate
Ok, so I was right; it is some kind of EW ship; perhaps it boosts enemy signatures, rather than reducing enemy accuracy like the Calypso does?

>Jakarta Class Frigates
I was right, looks like ships can share or assist PD with other ships.

>Diamond Class Battleship
Ohshit

>Jade class frigates
>Jade class cruisers
That can't be right, they must have misnamed the cruisers.

>Onyx class battlecruiser
Again with the misnaming, the Onyx is a heavy cruiser iirc.

>>46146161
>perhaps it boosts enemy signatures
Maybe, though you already have burnthrough lasers for spiking enemies.

>>46146248
Maybe it can spike multiple enemies per go (if it goes weapons free), or automatically boosts them up to a major spike?

Or maybe it doesn't even do that, and just boosts the sensor range of a ship(s).

File: 1426633030984.gif (3MB, 280x154px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 280x154px

>>46145715
>Shaltari ECM frigates boost shields instead of reducing accuracy
That's kinda cute, since it plays with the extra layer of cost-benefit management the Shaltari seem to have going on.

>>46146347
So far it looks like the ECM frigates for the factions are:

UCM: Lima; boosts accuracy of a friendly ship or lights up enemy ships.
PHR: Calypso; reduces accuracy of enemy ships targeting a friendly ship.
Shaltari: Opal(?); boosts shields of a friendly ship.

What about the Scourge? I would say the Scylla, but I think it's already been confirmed by Hawk that it's some sort of dedicated "bigger-ship hunter"

>>46146430
it'd be funny if the scourge don't have an ECM system. Play up their balls to the wall close in and dice up the enemy. Maybe a frigate that boosts allied units speed?

>>46146550
Yeah, that seems like it would fit in with their philosophy.

I just REALLY want to see what the New York and diamond look like.

>>46146430
Well, it would complete the obvious cycle if the Scource "ECM" frigate debuffed saves, but Scourge main batteries (at the least) get that standard at short range already.

If things are the way I hear and the Scourge really do have strong close-action attack pools, maybe they could debuff point defenses. That way they're more reliable against Shaltari, since I seem to remember something about shields not applying to close action.

>>46146550
Something that fiddles with movement on either side could be interesting as well.

>>46146656
Yeah, I bet that the Scourge ECM frigate (if there is one) generates some kind of chaff that nullifies X successful PD rolls when it's attached to a ship making a CAW attack.

Actually, for the New York class, we can already sort of guess what its loadout is.

The base battleship looks to have a heavy prow spinal weapon, three ventral turret mounts, and four dorsal turret mounts, two on each side.

Assuming that the normal, tri-barreled railguns are universal across all classes, that means that the burn through laser on the Beijing is possibly replace with a torpedo (or something else), and/or the ventral heavy railguns have orbital bombardment cannons like the Madrid, or perhaps a second, heavy burn through (bigger than a cruiser burn through, but not as big as the Avalon)

>>46144942
"white metal" is a fucking alloy, and back in the early 90's lead was almost eliminated from it because of health regs in the UK and US. No one who wants to have mass market appeal will use high lead contents from fear of triggering said regulations.

Since this is a Dropcommander thread, how's my planned Scourge list?

Standard Army
Clash: 1489/1500 points
Standard Army
Standard Roster [1489/1500 pts]

Scourge Oppressors [316 pts]
Desolator: Desolator(Overlord) [260 pts]
Minder Swarm: 4x Minder, Intruder Beta [56 pts]

Scourge Vanguard [399 pts]
Hunter MGT Squadron: 6x Hunter, Despoiler [282 pts]
^ Sharing ^ Reaper AAGT Squadron: 3x Reaper [117 pts]

Scourge Warrior Cabal [237 pts]
Warrior Horde: 3x Warriors, Marauder, 2x Invader [156 pts]
^ Sharing ^ Warrior Horde: 3x Warriors [81 pts]

Scourge Invasion Host [191 pts]
Slayer HGT Squadron: 2x Slayer(+Razorworms), Marauder [191 pts]

Scourge Occupation Patrol [346 pts]
Destroyer Pack: 2x Destroyers, Intruder Alpha [140 pts]
Annihilator: Annihilator [150 pts]
Minder Swarm: 4x Minder, Intruder Beta [56 pts]

>>46141154
Well I don't know the lore here, so are the red skeleton ships human or alien? I'm guessing alien, so are the names what they call the ships or what humans call the ships? If the aliens named them why give them human names like that, or if the names are translated for our benefit...why?

Is this a culture based around common igneous rocks and common gemstones? Are they rock people or their religion is rock based? When choosing these names why settle for some of the most mundane and common examples? I know we've named submarines after some lame fish but...basalt...really? Also why the weird mix of igneous rocks, gemstones, and proper minerals? Stick to one fucking system if that's the system you are going to go with. Finally, this might be moot as you don't have to paint them red, why pick rock/minerals/gemstones that aren't red? Does rhodochrosite class carrier not have the same ring? If they are aliens naming them they wouldn't take our translation into account but naming your bright red ship after bright red mineral makes more sense then...turquoise unless these aliens are from New Mexico and have some turquoise obsession.

>>46147349
The Orangish-Red ships are the Shaltari, which are aliens.

The names are what the humans have designated them, not what the aliens call them (translated or not)

Likewise, the Scourge (squiddy alien looking ships) are also given designations by humans; we don't know what either the Shaltari call their ships, or what the Scourge call theirs (if they call them anything)

>>46147263
pretty solid list. I'm not sure if you have quite enough AA (I imagine a list with a ferrum and some gunships might give you trouble) but it seems very decently balanced. I especially like the razorworms and destroyers to make up for your somewhat small number of infantry.

The only real thing I can think of suggesting is maybe cutting the annihilator for a corsair swarm, since that will give you better AA protection while also letting you shoot up a few tanks idling where they shouldn't be, but the Annihilator does just fine.


>>46147349
Humans nickname the ships, with the general idea being that since the culture is very reminiscent of Native American culture the ships by extension appear to be beautiful jewelry made by the exotic aliens. that's actually supposed to be one of the themes of the Shaltari, that everything they have is so advanced they can make them look spindly and gaudy and they'll still kill the hell out of their enemies.

>>46147477
>I especially like the razorworms and destroyers to make up for your somewhat small number of infantry.
I actually could have two more squads of Warriors, but I'd have to drop the Destroyers and the Annihilator, and that'd make the list kind of boring in my opinion.

>Cut the Annihilator for Corsairs
I thought Corsairs were pretty bad for their points cost, as far as interceptors go? I may swap the annihilator out for something else; maybe some of the gunships.

>>46147566
In my personal experience, corsairs are best in groups of 3 or 4 where they get to pound a target with a lot of shots. Their aim isn't great as its a 4+ to start with and intercepting adds some challenges, but their special rules keeping at as a 5+ instead of going into 6+ helps them out a bit and if you manage to land a hit you're hitting an aircraft with energy 11. That's not something anything in the sky will take lightly, and it gives you a decent skill buzzing ground units if you really need to hit some ground targets.

>>46147838
Fair point, I don't really like the Annihilator model that much anyways (at least compared to the other Scourge models.)

I can drop the Annihilator and the Despoiler double-plas cannon for three Corsairs, would that work?

How's this look for a PHR army? Are 4 phobos enough for AA, or should I drop the janus' for some helios?

Standard Army
Clash: 1491/1500 points
Standard Army
PHR Standard Roster [1491/1500 pts]

Hand of the Sphere [438 pts]
Nemesis Command Walker: Nemesis(Grand Vizier) [310 pts]
Janus Scout Walker Squadron: 2x Janus, Triton A2 [64 pts]
Janus Scout Walker Squadron: 2x Janus, Triton A2 [64 pts]

Battle Pantheon [332 pts]
Type 1 Walker Squadron: 2x Phobos, Neptune [166 pts]
Type 1 Walker Squadron: 2x Phobos, Neptune [166 pts]

Immortals Phalanx [303 pts]
Immortals: 2x Immortals, Triton A1 [101 pts]
Immortals: 2x Immortals, Triton A1 [101 pts]
Immortals: 2x Immortals, Triton A1 [101 pts]

Heavy Pantheon [170 pts]
Type 2 Walker Squadron: 2x Odin, Neptune [170 pts]

Heavy Pantheon [248 pts]
Type 2 Walker Squadron: Hyperion, Enyo [124 pts]
Type 2 Walker Squadron: Hyperion, Enyo [124 pts]

>>46148426
That's a good way to do it, hits that sweet spot where the corsairs will statistically hit something once. A few bits of advice for them as a scourge player, their shots really fuck up dropships and that can fuck up your opponents plans royally. If you're ever at a loss at what to shoot, go for one of those.
Demolisher 2 and e 11 ona fast mover means knocking down buildings in a round or two of shooting becomes much more reliable. 3 e 11 demolisher 2 shots on any building removes that mediocre accuracy I've mentioned and can really save your bacon if the enemy brought a lot more infantry to the party than you did.
Most important bit is the corsair's ability to draw reaction fire from a critical aa unit and allow your desolator to move in spots it wouldn't have been safe to fly past with those guns sitting around. Nothing funnier than losing a corsair to a unit of rapiers, than having your desolator eat all the rapiers and a saber or two they were guarding.

>>46149001
Thanks for the advice man, I can't wait to finally start getting the army built. I was also thinking that I could drop the Destroyers entirely, add a squad of two Warriors in an Intruder, and bump up to four Corsairs.
I don't know if having that few infantry (2 by 3 and 1 by 2, plus two razorworm squads) is such a good idea, though.

>>46149168
I'd say that its not a terrible idea, but its one you'll want to experiment. I like the idea of having 4 corsairs (hitting twice statistically on dropships and tanks is a nice option) but those destroyers are really fun to play with. That's a big personal preference call to you.

>>46148764
I'm not sure what the Janus walkers are here for. Any particular reason you're bringing them along?

>>46149353
>I'm not sure what the Janus walkers are here for. Any particular reason you're bringing them along?
Mostly just to expand the command radius, seeing as how the nemesis is walk on, as well as some extra AA and light AV.

A squad of helios would likely be a better choice, but they lack the scout trait.

>>46149353
>>46149418
Oh, and I was trying to keep it as walker-only for the sake of autism.

>>46149472
>>46149418
fair enough, the Janus should be just fine for command expansion. Honestly 4 Phobos should prove plenty, they're damn good AA units.

>>46149512
Do I have enough heavy AV, with the nemesis, 2Odiod (LOL 2ODIN) and hyperions? With my low amount of infantry, could I do with dropping a hyperion for another enyo?

>>46149551
I'd say you have more then enough AV. Between 2 odins, a nemesis walker and 2 Hyperions you'll be beating out anyone else in the tank game. Just remember that the PHR like to castle up and blow up the buildings the enemy is trying to take and you don't want to fight for and you'll be fine.

>>46149642
Alright, awesome. So basically I just guard whatever I'm trying to take, and blow up everything else with the enyos, and three immortal squads should be more than enough to take what I need.
I'm still debating on whether it's better for the hyperions and enyos to be in their own squads, to better focus on their targets, or to mix them together so that the hyperions can cover multiple lanes.

>>46149706
I actually like them split so you can distribute bits of anti building and long ranged anti vehicle. That's your own call though, and I'll leave that to you.

>>46147477
Well okay then. Like I said I didn't know the lore. If that's how they want to sell it that's fine with me. Native American inspired is about the only way to explain that hodgepodge selection of names, it is a link and that's all I ask for.

>>46151751
Happy to explain. I'll admit its a weird naming convention but its grown on me. Really starting to enjoy jade frigates and the like.

>>46136599
The same as with my other hobbys. Letas it pile up and lose all motivation. My idea was to build enough of each for a solid game then sell or trade or even give the rest off to get people into the game.

>>46151751
Some more lore for you then to further cement why these names make sense when humans named the ships.

So take your basic grey ayy lmao. Now cover it in crystaline hairs and some colorful robes. Now let them live for thousand years, organized into various tribes and love murdering each other in glorious honorable combat. From spaceship jousting all the way to powered armor sword fights.

Its also a really easy way to differentiate all the faction ship names.

Shaltari-gemstones/minerals

PHR-Mythological hero figures(they were all a bunch of superhuman massive dicks, just like the PHR!)

UCM-This one doesnt even need explaining, even if you didnt know humanity is launching a massive fleet to retake earth and the cradle worlds

Scourge-mythical monsters, cause they stole our planets and Goa'uold'ed like 90% of the population 200 years ago

>>46144184
Their boss is hopeless, he's just an admin guy who ended up in charge. All the actual talent left long ago.

File: HAH.png (1KB, 125x125px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 125x125px

>>46153869
>PHR-Mythological hero figures(they were all a bunch of superhuman massive dicks, just like the PHR!)
>(they were all a bunch of superhuman massive dicks, just like the PHR!)
Oy, the UCM really are some sneaky cheeky bastards.

Can't wait to get my UCM, managed to get five people into the Kickstarter so I know I'll have opponents.

In the meantime, anyone know hoe to deal with a double Type 4 list ad UCM? My buddy runs a Hades, a Nemesis, and two squads of Helios in all his lists and I cant figure out what to do about them. One railgun strafe kills half a squad of tanks and none of my aircraft or drones can get past 12 shots of AA on a multiwound skimmer platform

File: shaltari grey.png (447KB, 679x452px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 679x452px

Shaltari are almost nice but not quite there in most cases. This >>46132423 >>46132462 one looks great, because it's got a core to it that makes it look like a spaceship. By comparison I'm not sure what the balls on the likes of >>46132498 >>46132515 >>46132530 >>46132546 are supposed to be, they just ruin the look of the things and make them look like random parts thrown together.

The rest of the ships, I think the bright green isn't helping them - pic related was shopped by someone and makes the capital ships look much better, IMO.

So gonna hold off on this one, see what everything looks like when it's all up on hawk's website in the future. They seem to be going modular so will see how much of a fleet can be built off the chassis's that I like.

>>46156405
Maybe an eagle heavy gunship to snipe the helios before they close in?

>>46145715
Holy fuck is he bad at writing. His report is mostly
>In this round I shot at his ships and he shot at my ships and these things blew up
There's a few titbits but it's primarily incoherent waffle.

Anyone actually wanting to get an idea of how shooting (including signatures and ranges) works in DFC, try this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92GeJ5uf6Hc

>>46156846
>have to choose between bad writing and misnamed ships and that annoying BoW guy
fuck me

>>46156901
Apart from his weird thing of arranging the dice in the shape of the ship's guns I didn't find him too bad.

>>46156564
For the frigates, I have to agree with you; they could have done away with the "command core" entirely, or they should have made it look more "cockpit" styled like the rest of the ships.

As for the colors, the Shaltari really look their best in bright, flashy livery; grey and purple looks too drab for them.

>tfw want to do custom schemes for the Scourge and Shaltari
>but can't think of custom schemes that are better than the normal UCM and PHR schemes
I really hope they have alternate schemes in the rulebook, like they do in DZC.

Also, pic related is the scheme I'm going with for my Scourge, hopefully; gunmetal base with 2:1 gold:gunmetal mechanical/engine bits, and green eyes and weapons (sorry for the shit quality).

Is there anything I can do to make this scheme kind of "pop" more?

File: Scourge2_0.png (390KB, 888x499px) Image search: [Google]

390KB, 888x499px

>>46157226
>forgot pic

File: eac877ce88eae5b5f845cb94a606c95b.jpg (146KB, 736x904px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 736x904px

>>46157226

I kind of want to try and paint one of those hellenic eye's that greek ships had on the side of their ships onto my one free PHR cruiser.

But my freehand is woeful.

>>46157354
You could always make a stencil out of bluetape for it, but I'm more concerned about the actual coloration. It's pretty much guranteed that the non-armor bits are going to be some kind of metallic, but I'm wondering what a good alternative to the tan/cream/white is for the armor, and an alternative to the blue engines/hexes.

>>46140358

PHR aren't even that awful. They're a skeletal hull system with smooth armored plates over the top and some maneuvering find. Fairly distinct looking, I just don't like the tan in space. Mine are going to be white, Emperor Reinhard style

>>46158211
Besides white, tan, and grey, what else would look good on the PHR plating? I was thinkin darkish red, but that's a bit too mechanicus.

>>46158929
A strong, royal blue might work.

>>46159246
Like ultrasmurf blue, or a bit deeper?
I want to say that a Shaltari-ish orange, like the color of the Shuttle's fuel tank, could work.

>>46158929

I think dark red would look great (mechanicus ships are mostly black anyway)

Because they're gentle sloping and have pretty smooth curved armor sections, they're going to be pretty easy to make look decent with just about any color scheme. It's the same idea with space marines.

My easy way out would be to use a P3 Arcane blue scheme since it'd be super easy and very bright. Already did that with my Firestorm fleet however.

That being said, PHR themselves tend to favor those colors you mentioned. I think even bright silver would look good if it contrasted with a darker silver on the inner structure. Anything that would look good on an Empire ship from LoGH will work on a PHR ship. They even have tons of room for freehand

How's this for a basic UCM army? I don't know if the sabers, wolverines, and falcons are going to be enough for dedicated AV, but I could squeeze in a gladius squad if I drop a praetorian squad.

Standard Army
Clash: 1500/1500 points
Standard Army
Standard Roster [1500/1500 pts]

Field Command [283 pts]
Kodiak ACV: Kodiak(Captain) [203 pts]
Falcon Gunship Squadron: 2x Falcon [80 pts]

Colonial Armored Formation [423 pts]
Sabre MBT Section: 6x Sabre, Albatross [288 pts]
^ Sharing ^ Rapier AA Tank Section: 3x Rapier [135 pts]

Colonial Legionnaire Corps [385 pts]
Colonial Legionnaire Squad: 3x Legionnaires, Condor, 2x Bear [141 pts]
^ Sharing ^ Colonial Legionnaire Squad: 3x Legionnaires [78 pts]
Rapier AA Tank Section: 3x Rapier, Condor [166 pts]

Expeditionary Group [342 pts]
Praetorian Team: 2x Praetorians, Raven A [124 pts]
Praetorian Team: 2x Praetorians, Raven A [124 pts]
Wolverine LAV Team: 4x Wolverine B, 2x Raven B [94 pts]

Colonial Fleet Air Wing [67 pts]
Archangel Interceptor Squadron: Archangel [67 pts]

>>46159352
>they're going to be pretty easy to make look decent with just about any color scheme. It's the same idea with space marines.
True, but the PHR themselves tend to be more conservative with their schemes somewhat like the UCM, so I don't want to go balls-to-the-wall space hedgehog tier.

I think a very, very light grey would probably be my best bet; not as harsh as pure white, but a little bit more mechanical then the tan-cream the standard color has going on.

as a random crossboarder that is impressed with the alieness of the ships and bedazzled by your repulsive reactions, then what are some of best looking miniature spaceships accoding to /tg/'s hot opinions?

>>46159528
>not knowing that /tg/ has shit taste
>always
The two responses you're going to get are either "flying catholic space cathedrals with guns" or "hard-scifi cigar shaped ships with fusion torches"

>>46143354
>objectively bad

Objectively, they're great.

They conform to a standardized model while remaining distinct enough purely via armament to be easily discerned from one another. They look coherent, consistent, and well-conceived. The detail on the models themselves is incredible, without being like the newer GW stuff that just draws the eye in so many different directions that the viewer ends up with a confused impression.

These are the only objective measurements. Everything else is subjective.

>Why are these models so shitty?
>Seems to be a pretty common theme among the pop-ins.

Same goes for Full Thrust, Firestorm, etc. People have varying tastes in spaceships. Make a spaceship game thread and half the posters will be people pointing out how shit they think Dindrenzi or Terran models look.

>>46159462

Honestly I'm a little annoyed they even went with tan, PHR in Dropzone has that as a default scheme because their homeworld is a desert planet. There's no reason to have it that way in space.

That being said, a soft Hiigaran blue with white stripes and some orange details would look great. I'm waiting for the PHR battleship to come out so I can pay someone way too much money to put a mural of Hercules or Achilles on it

>>46159317
Might do. I think with the PHR ships you're going to have to be bold with them, don't think a muted scheme will work.

>>46159770

To be fair the only fleet I like in Firestorm is the Sorylians. Dystopian wars on the other hand has everyone looking at least neat.

>>46159922
>not writing the entirety of the Odyssey on your flagship, in Greek, in microscript.
Plebe

>>46131494
how is the gameplay?

also the really important question, how much money do i save going into the kickstarter now instead of in a few months.

>>46159951

At the helm is captain Apollo Diomedes

Of the UH...PHS saga of fury


You know I'm appreciating that Hawk did not make the cybernetic superhumans into space marines

>>46159983
Looks to be fairly solid, someone not on a phone can post the videos


>how much money do you save
Very little, considering how the Kickstarter has been over for three months and the only thing you can get by being a late backer is the exclusive ships and shit.

Do keep in mind, I don't think late backers get the free bonus frigates and cruiser.

>>46159937
More than that, PHR has to be boldly neutral. I don't think an overly warm or cold scheme will work.

>>46156097
I wonder if the PHR ships are actually named that way or if they're just codenames used bu UCM commanders.

The known PHR characters have sort of Greco-Roman ish names, don't they? I remember that one is called Marcus, and another is Jocasta IIRC?

>>46160132
Either-or works, with the PHR being pretentious and full of themselves and the UCM considering them to be dickass demigods.

>>46160042
y i dont think il be baited in then, i am a sucker for super cheap. its why i kickstarted kings of war yet never played it.

>>46141980
It's one really asshurt GW shill and one really asshurt FSA fanboy.

Once you've been in this thread long enough you can actually tell their posting styles apart. One uses the word 'objectively' all the time, the other makes inane victim-complex claims about FSA being bullied by DFC fans.

>>46160181
Gonna be honest, I can't help but empathize more with the PHR than the UCM.

I'd rather live in GitS: Get Virtus Edition than Starship Troopers.

>>46160293
Do we even know what the PHR economy is like? I had assumed it was some kind of neo-traditionalist, communist meritocracy run in part by their AI buddies.

>>46160367
They seem to pride themselves in being ahead and beyond baseline humanity, so I doubt they're particularly traditionalist.

>>46160401
Traditionalist in the sense that they're likely to be somewhat hierarchical and socially bound, as opposed to everyone being perfectly equal.

>>46160367

I think they implied they're a true networked democracy where individuals actually do provide their input to the greater whole. Other then that it's pretty much unknown although it's apparently a nice place.

So what's the motivations of each faction in the setting? Especially PHR and Shaltari beyond defending against any Scourge shenanigans.
>Scourge - conquer everything, assimilate everything. Bad guys of the setting.
>UCM - kill Scourge for revenge, reclaim cradle worlds and Earth.
>Shaltari - fight because they like fighting?
>PHR - don't seem to care about taking the cradle worlds or UCM/Shaltari worlds, so?

>>46160621
Shaltari- typical meddling ayys.
PHR- sorta kinda feel bad for their unevolved siblings, want to stop the from killing themselves, sometimes kill their unevolved siblings because they're fucking retarded and annoying.

>>46159398
>only one Archangel
I personally feel Archangels always need to be taken in pairs. I know you only slotted in one because that is how much you could with out going over 1500.
You seem to be fine on AV though I personally think you may be a bit lacking on AA. You're running two Rapier squads and a single arch angel. The trick is to have one dedicated AA squad about every 500 pts.
I haven't played with falcons so I don't know how good they are and the same goes with Wolverines though I've heard those are pretty good.

Its seems like an alright list. Give it a whirl in a few games to find its flaws and improve it from there.

>>46160621
Scourge are a bit more complicated than that, because its implied that they might have pissed off something much bigger than them a long time ago and are now running from them. This would explain them sending out thousands of little scouter craft to the cosmos to find their next prey civilization, and not setting up more efficient human farms to give everyone of their people a body.
Shaltari are split into a bunch of tribes of groups, almost none of which agree on anything. At least one want to try and grab humanity as a cannon fodder race during their endless little fights, and a few might want to try something similar to the scourge.
PHR know something, possibly that there is a giant menace coming to wipe the Scourge off the map, and are doing their best to keep the UCM limited to taking the outer worlds. Either that or they're trying to stop the UCM from poking the scourge hornets nest and drawing a massive response from Scourgified Earth.

>>46160621
The Scourge's primary goal is survival. They conquer only to get warm bodies, and then they move on. The UCM and PHR have found them launching vast numbers of small, fast ships in random directions, so they're probably looking for a new victim species.

I think they may be cyclical. They hit the Cradle World systems without nodes, but they need nodes to get elsewhere. So they must have been there before. I'm guessing they have a select number of charted systems where life generally springs up or settles, and they move between them. They may have wiped other races off the Cradle Worlds before.

PHR seem to have some interest in the Cradle Worlds. They've established a massive fleet presence around one of them ahead of the UCM. Makes sense, since they need space if they ever want to expand.

More prominently, though, they seem to be privy to a lot of secrets about the Scourge via the White Sphere and have some agenda concerning them. Considering that the White Sphere appears designed to warn worlds about the Scourge, they're probably opposing them in a more informed, precise way.

>>46160787
They're not setting up human farms because they can't. They haven't perfected cloning. For every one human body they create they get a ton of useless rejects.

It's implied that Scourge, despite needing a host and having terrible lives without them, are incredibly fecund, producing tons of offspring. The only way to keep up is to find more species to consume.

>>46160741
I could probably swap the wolverines to their AA version for more AA, I was mostly just taking them as spotters for the Kodiak. Probably a good idea to drop a praetorian for another archangel, but I don't know if that few infantry will work; I'll definitely have to try it out.

>UCM dreadnought
>40k battleship dressed up like halo, turned up to 11
>Scourge dreadnought
>Cthulhu's dad, covered in so many occlusion arrays that it has the pox
>PHR dreadnought
>5 giant fuck-off lasers stacked on each other, each with a dozen broadside
>Shaltari dreadnought
>bastard child of the eifel tower and a sea urchin

>>46161074
>occlusion
Occulus*

File: my hovercraft is full of eels.jpg (13KB, 178x41px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 178x41px

Remember to paint this on the sides of all Scourge ships.

>>46161074

>PHR get two dreadnoughts

>One is just a gigantic fuck off laser with point defense

>other is quad rows of broadsides with an extra armored prow

>>46161384
>PHR dreadnought is actually a mobile, octagonal space station.
>all sides are broadsides.

>>46161384
>>46161408
>PHR dreadnought is just a handgun on a flightstand
No, wait, the designers are Brits aren't they?

>>46161456
>PHR dreadnought is just a knife on a flightstand
No, wait, that doesn't work either does it?

>>46161074
40K battleships are broadside monsters, though. UCM is turrets turrets turrets.

Do we know what famous commander vehicles are being pushed to general use during reconquest 2?

I'm hoping the Shaltari get that particle cannon Caiman, and that the Scourge get more Desolator variants.

A new Kodiak variant for the UCM would be neat, but I have no idea what they'd stick on it.

>>46161728

Well or they're support super carriers and I think one of the later ones was a lance whore.

UCM ships are a lot more like chaos. PHR do the whole heavily armored broadsides with gigantic prow weaponry schtick

>>46161787

Hmm, how about a networked PHR AI that works through infantry? You essentially choose an infantry stand and have the AI remain in them until they're destroyed or it decides to jump to a different stand. Could have a big bonus for finding objectives but obviously doesn't have much firepower

>>46161787

I didn't think anything has been mentioned about it yet. They have been a little quiet about R2 and the DZC App they are working on.

>>46161833
I like that; maybe a shitty Type 1 command walker that makes all infantry into scouts.

Also, type 5 support walkers when; four legs, two mounting points, one per squad and they come in Neptunes like the type 4s come in Poseidons; cool ass back mounted weapon like a dual hyperion laser or something.

File: wave-motion-gun-fireing-o.gif (4MB, 320x214px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 320x214px

>>46139715
>That and burn-through lasers, which (dice gods permitting) can be seriously nasty.
This is why I have been refering to the BT on the Avalon as The Wavemotion Gun.

>>46161947
>There's a guy on the ship whose sole job is to fire the main cannon by, of all things, pulling a trigger.

>>46162011
But he does it ever-so well!

>>46161892

Not even that, he can just be a marker on a squad of immortals/sirens that can transfer between squads. Run out of infantry and he's dead

>>46161839
There's a video floating around (that I can't find) where they show off some of the new units in phase 2, including:

PHR:
An Angelos/Helios frame with a nanodrone hive, a smaller version of the Hades/Medusa
A 4-slot Poseidon with the front slots replaced with heavy rocket turrets.
A Menchit with its double minigun arm replaced with L-2 rockets.
(and something else, I think)

Scourge:
A Minder variant, the Monitor; cheap ass and shitty with a shitty gun, able to self destruct for MASSIVE DAMAGE
A Reaver variant that shoots razorworms into buildings
A Desolator variant that boosts the damage of all units nearby using plasma weaponry
(I think that's it)

UCM:
A Falcon variant with rockets.
A Seraphim variant with no buster bunkers, but lots of wide-area cluster munitions
A Longbow variant, the Crossbow, that trades its artillery gun for a powerful laser; lane/street/area denial.
(I think that's it)

Shaltari:
A warstrider with an infinite range AA canon, effectively an AA particle cannon.
A Dreamsnare variant that trades its shields really for a double heavy super microwave gun, allowing it to shoot two concentrated energy shots at once, or one concentrated energy shot and two dragon cannon shots.
A Thunderbird variant, the Firebird, with two smaller (but faster firing) guns.
(I think that's it)

Resistance:
Some new helicopters and technicals with ICBMs/SCUDs strapped to them.

>>46162111
>(and something else, I think)
Oh, and a Taranis variant with barrage cannons.

>>46162111

I saw that video, I mean there hasn't been much mention of new commanders the other dude asked about.

>>46162011
>>46162064
IIRC the person doing the firing varies.

It's generally the tactical officer.

>>46162390
Not new commanders, but rather the commanders vehicles becoming standard command vehicles.

Added the Beijing 2-up to my bolt-ons, thanks tax returns.

>>46162482

Oh I must have missed or forgetten about that. My bad. Thanks anon