/dcg/ Dropzone/Dropfleet Commander General

File: image.jpg (102KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 600x600px

>>49525526

One of the greatest tenants of strategic naval warfare is having to fight the war with the navy you have, not the navy you wish you had.

So I will be committing to my ship choices fully with zero magnets and ship names given to each individual fleet member.

It is the bravest method

>>49525589
Tbh, I agree with non-magnetization now. Except for turrets, I want to magnetize my turrets.
This will also give a good excuse to buy more ships than I need.
Online downside is all those perfectly good bits going to waste.

>>49525691
>Online downside
Wew, only*

>>49525691
>Not kitbashing space stations out of spare bits
Admittedly you'll get space stations that are 90% gun, but still.

>>49525589
>>49525691

I have to say. I was going to be all magnet, but someone said naming your ships so they all tell a story. So I think I am in your camp now.


>>49525793
You could attach them to rocks to make asteroid bases.

Or just have smaller things that serve as orbital platforms.

File: Shattered-Void-Ships-Wrecks.jpg (147KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 960x640px

>>49525691
Maybe if you're clever about it you could make them look like drifting wreckage.

>>49525896
That's my plan, especially with UCM cruisers as there will be lots of leftover hull/tail sections

>>49525896
This would be great for starter set APCs

>>49525896
Wouldn't the wreckage disperse among the orbit in a cloud of destruction? Like in Gravity, more or less intense as you please.

Since Asteroid fields aren't realistic nor do they make sense, the game DOES have debris fields (as your multi-kilometer long ships shattering into radioactive bits flying around at 4000km/hour seem like they'd be hazardous), making UCM cruiser wrecks all over would totally work for that.

File: UCM_SprueCruiser1.jpg (92KB, 797x499px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 797x499px

>>49525896
Unfortunately, you'll have to be pretty damn clever about the light cruiser and regular cruise tails, due to their smooth bottoms; I presume you could make that the burned/destroyed part, though.

>>49526082
Well yeah but that wouldn't look nearly as cool now would it.

>>49526082
>Like in Gravity,
Any time you say this, the answer is no

File: UCM_SprueFrigate1.jpg (99KB, 796x513px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 796x513px

>>49526106
The frigate sprues should be pretty easy to convert into debris, thankfully

File: Scourge_SprueCruiser1.jpg (96KB, 798x530px)

96KB, 798x530px

Scourge will definitely work, for the most part, as the only piece that would give you any trouble is the top of the ship, which is required for every cruiser anyways. Everything else lacks big attachment surfaces.

File: Scourge_SprueFrigate1.jpg (107KB, 795x511px)

107KB, 795x511px

Scourge frigates will also be exceptionally easy to turn the bits into debris.

Turning all these spare bits into debris is going to leave you with a fuckload of debris.

File: PHR_SprueCruiser0.jpg (117KB, 798x457px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 798x457px

PHR cruisers don't look to be that hard either

File: PHR_SprueFrigate1.jpg (142KB, 797x606px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 797x606px

Nor their frigates, as well.

File: Shaltari_SprueCruiser0.jpg (110KB, 797x520px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 797x520px

Shaltari will probably be the outright easiest

File: Shaltari_SprueFrigate1.jpg (127KB, 797x510px)

127KB, 797x510px

As well as their frigates

>>49526224
There's going to be a lot of floating wrecked mothership cores, alright.

>>49526224
So with the bonanza bonus I was thinking my one cruiser should be the mothership for Shaltari, just for folks to mess with all their unique mechanics at once. Sensible?

>From the update:
>“...We are able to confirm that we have just received our delivery of printed material. This means that we have begun to pack specific rewards, and will begin to dispatch very soon...”
>“...The dispatch process should take an estimated 3 weeks due to the quantity of shipments and collections...”
>Read casually this implies that all rewards will have been dispatched three weeks after the update, looking at it again it's clear that isn't actually what's being said.
>I should avoid reading updates casually in future.

>To paraphrase the update:
>"The rule books have arrived, we have some packing to do, once that is finished we'll start dispatch, dispatching everything will take three weeks"
>Therefore time until dispatch = packing time + 3 weeks.
>I assume the 'packing' is jamming rule books into the 2 player starter boxes so they can be sent to us and the retailers since they say 'specific rewards', which is entirely fair.
>The "and will begin dispatch very soon" is the key part, what does 'very soon' mean? A day? A week? A month?
>Hawk's recent updates are full of such comments that don't mean anything, a sort of advertisingese that boils down to nothing, it's part of why people have justifiably complained about them.

Say it ain't so, /dcg/

File: postman.jpg (51KB, 480x272px)

51KB, 480x272px

>>49526678
I think Dave is learning a lot about preferred vendors. He's not dumb, just inexperienced.

Things are getting better all the time.

>>49525526
I came here expecting a game about ship girls and minis for such, I feel partially betrayed. (moreso since that Moscow bote design looks really cool)

These models are rather expensive. What kind of scale is this? (I ask since the Ferrum Class Drone Base costs more than a GW Space Marine Rhino)

File: UCM_Battleship_Beijing0.jpg (106KB, 797x532px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 797x532px

>>49526906
>I came here expecting a game about ship girls and minis for such, I feel partially betrayed.
Sorry anon, have a battleship as recompense.

>These models are rather expensive. What kind of scale is this?
Dropzone Commander is 1:183 scale (10mm) and Dropfleet Commander is 1:9150 scale (0.2 mm).

(all of these prices are before discounts, which run between 10% to 20%)

As for the ship models themselves, ships as of now come in 3 hulls; frigates, cruisers (light cruisers, cruisers, and heavy cruisers), and battleships.
Frigates come in a set of 8 frigates for about 38 dollars, cruisers come in a set of 2 for about 30 dollars, and battleships come by themselves for 45 dollars (unlike cruisers and frigates, they're resin, not plastic).
In addition, there are fleet bundles of 4 frigates and 3 cruisers for
60 dollars.
An "average" sized fleet will be comprised of (depending on how much you take of each) 12-20 frigates, 8-12 cruisers (of the three sizes), and 0-2 battleships, and should run a total of around 200 dollars.

For Dropzone Commander you can expect the same price point for an "average" army, being 1500 points, at 200 dollars.

The Ferrum is a rather expensive unit and you generally won't be taking more than one (maybe two) in an army.

>>49526906

The models are a little pricey. They are made in the UK vs China and the base dropzone stuff is mostly resin and metal.

Dropfleet is mostly plastic. You can see prices here for a starter fleet:

http://www.thewarstore.com/product110027.html

>>49526990
>>49527232
Thanks for the answers.

I don't know if I'll properly get into the games, but I might indulge in some of the models for hobby reasons.

If I'm rough-measuring correctly, the turrets on the UCM cruisers (such as the Moscow) are about 20mm from barrel tip to turret back. A bit on the small size if I were to try making a boatgirl at heroic scale. Oh well, guess that idea gets shelved until I get sculpting skills.

File: UCM_CruiserHeavy_Moscow2.jpg (63KB, 798x290px)

63KB, 798x290px

>>49527655
Yep, that's about the same length I got as well.

>>49527655
20 mm is very nearly an inch. More than big enough for 28 mm scale.

File: Scourge_Battleship_Daemon5.jpg (123KB, 796x532px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 796x532px

>>49527655
Oh, and just so you can see the aesthetics of the other factions, here are the other three battleships.

>>49527777
20mm is close to the size of a Spacemarine's boltgun, which is rather small if the intention is to make a heavy gear rig for a lady such as in the OP image. (And even worse should I try to use 30mm figures for her)

>>49527830
The Scourge ships kind of remind me of Dark Falz and related minions from PSO.

Thanks for the dump. Unfortunately the other fleets' designs aren't quite my cup of tea, though they do look nifty.

File: UCM_BattleCruiser_Avalon0.jpg (57KB, 960x512px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 960x512px

>>49528014
>Thanks for the dump. Unfortunately the other fleets' designs aren't quite my cup of tea, though they do look nifty.
Fair enough, the UCM are a great choice regardless

>>49528014
>2/3 a person's height is awfully small for a weapon that you're going to have several of
People like you are ridiculous

>>49528152
People like you are weebs.

So, newbie question.

I've seen that Shaltari seem to have a shitload of gunship style aircraft. Is it possible to run an army centered primarily around them?

Like, some infantry, of course, but a shitload of aircraft to support them.

>>49528173
>Disliking anime-style bad proportions makes you a weeb

>>49528234
In all honesty, they only have three gunships; don't get me wrong, they're great gunships: the firedrake is excellent at melting tank bricks and the firebird is great at popping big stuff, they're not really the "gunship" faction.

However, if you can fit two firedrakes in a list and maybe two or three squadrons of firebirds, you'll be second only to the UCM in terms of aircav.

>>49528234
You could do those and skimmers, which would seriously oversaturate enemy AA weapons while leaving their AT with few to no good targets.

File: Gunships.jpg (283KB, 1280x630px)

283KB, 1280x630px

>>49528234
UCM is Gunship Land Bruh

File: Ferrum_Starsprite_drone_4_1024x1024.jpg (63KB, 960x640px)

63KB, 960x640px

>>49528356
Forgetting something?

>>49528234
I tossed this together based on what you said, maybe some other anons can give some critiques.

Rapid Response
Clash: 1496/1500 points
Standard Army
Standard Roster [1496/1500 pts]

Gate Group [126 pts]
Spirit Gates: Spirit [43 pts]
Spirit Gates: Spirit [43 pts]
Haven: Haven [20 pts]
Haven: Haven [20 pts]

Court of Elders [286 pts]
Gharial: Gharial(Warchief) [210 pts]
Yari Squad: 2x Yari(+Light Ion Cannon), Yari(+Microwave Gun) [76 pts]

Swordpoint [194 pts]
Tomahawk Squad: 3x Tomahawk [114 pts]
Firebird Squad: 2x Firebird [80 pts]

Swordpoint [194 pts]
Tomahawk Squad: 3x Tomahawk [114 pts]
Firebird Squad: 2x Firebird [80 pts]

Warrior Clan [214 pts]
Firedrake: Firedrake [130 pts]
Pungari: 4x Pungari Auxiliaries [84 pts]

Warrior Clan [214 pts]
Firedrake: Firedrake [130 pts]
Pungari: 4x Pungari Auxiliaries [84 pts]

Speartip [268 pts]
Yari Squad: 2x Yari(+Light Ion Cannon), Yari(+Microwave Gun) [76 pts]
Firstborns: 2x Firstborns [96 pts]
Firstborns: 2x Firstborns [96 pts]

>>49528481
>No kukris
Absolutely not
Disgusting

>>49528592
Drop a squadron of firebirds, drop 1 yuri from each squad, and replace a pungari with a brave.
There's you're Kukri

>>49528152
When the turret housing is half the length of the piece, a 10cm turret barrel is indeed a bit small side for the intended ridiculous context.

>>49528613
Is there even any reason to have yaris?>>49528719
No, that puts it at pretty much the size seen in the OP image, which is great

>>49528901
>Is there even any reason to have yaris?
Fast as ALL FUCK, cheap rapid response AA, and command radius.

File: ScourgeInRuins.jpg (206KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 900x600px

>you'll never have a map this cool

File: Peanutbutterandjealous.jpg (166KB, 594x590px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 594x590px

>>49529280

This guy in new jersey has one. You just have to believe in yourself anon.

>>49529482
But I can barely make things look not-bad with a clean scheme, how can I make things look dirty and ruined without it being bad? Where do I even start?

>>49530237
>guy casually walks out of a building with his hands in his pockets after you brutally killed most of his unit
>better blindly charge forward and crush him like you did his friends, this couldn't be a trap at all
PHR technology is wasted on PHR personnel.

>>49530432
He was two splatter kills from a new perk unlock, cut him some slack.

>>49530237
>>49530432
>>49530622
I've never actually read this story, where do I find it?

>>49530432
>>49530622
>Menchit pilot gets him and his AI melted by plasmafire because he was trying for a new highscore and toying with destroyers
>Siren literally playing with a Shaltari firstborn, letting her own hand get cut off just so she could set up an epic trickshot
>Hades pilot letting legionaries think they had brought it down, because flaying them alive in a whirling cloud of nanomachines and methodically stomping on the survivors; got itself killed because it wanted to get one more point in

I'm not sure if I love or hate the PHR, but I'm fully expecting this attitude to be present in their fleet as well.

File: gungamesh.png (235KB, 512x724px)

235KB, 512x724px

>>49530754
>"Admiral, that bombing run took out the last of the primary maneuvering thrusters on that Abandonist battlecruiser."
>"All ships, converge on that ship and finish the job!"
>Leo casually drifts through the gauntlet for two minutes before popping out its secondary fins and initiating rotational freefire

>>49530867
>Gilgamesh
>just finished watching fate/zero because I'm a pleb and a weeb friend forced me to
>tfw Alexander
;_;7

>>49530930
You missed out on some good threads back when it was airing. So much OC and insightful metaposting.

Fun facts: the episode where Iskander gets skewered aired within 24 hours of when the real Alexander died in Iraq, and THAT episode with the airliner and the rocket launcher aired on Mother's Day. UFOtable does good work.

File: 1465162123358.png (28KB, 302x250px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 302x250px

>>49531076
>Thunderhawks
Those poor Shaltari.

Are there any collections of printable 10mm terrain files around? I recently came into possession of a great deal of cardstock.

>>49531272
Hawk should have some on their website, check at the top of downloads and they have a choice of roads or buildings. should have some stuff there.

>>49528613
>1 yuri

>[lesbian spine rustling intensifies]

File: 1413718487991.jpg (273KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 800x450px

Looking over the Apollo - newbie that I am - I'm not sure what purpose the Manslayer Cannon option serves.

I have the impression infantry typically won't be hoofing it around out of cover unless your opponent is already in a poor game state, and there don't seem to be many ground vehicles greatly threatened by E6.

Is it an option meant entirely for bullying other light flankers and scouts?

>>49531649
It's good for taking out light vehicles, but ignoring soft cover is pretty nice against infantry too.

>>49531913
The thing I always worry about with Through Cover weapons vs infantry is you need them to come to the walls in order to be able to shoot them. Sniper has a similar problem, exacerbated by normally having a MF of 0". It's why Flame seems so much better than Through Cover, you can go after infantry even if they're hiding in the depths of a building.

>>49532474
True, but the mobility of the Apollo allows you to hunt down and molest any infantry at the walls or outside a building, even if they're far away. Flame is better but flame weapons tend to come with their own weaknesses.

>>49530699

It was in one of the news letters a while back.

File: Mangslayer update.png (24KB, 863x238px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 863x238px

>>49531649
Are you looking over the current rules? They got updated to be less shitty. Now they can fire off more rounds, take out groups of light vehicles and glare threateningly at infantry in buildings.

File: straya.jpg (29KB, 218x219px)

29KB, 218x219px

What's that Skippy? Anon's made another strawpoll?
http://www.strawpoll.me/11313416
(Multiple answers allowed, as there could well be overlap.)

File: Tokyo-class joins the fight.jpg (711KB, 1280x1706px) Image search: [Google]

711KB, 1280x1706px

>>49533439
>no option for all the cannons
I can tell that they're probably going to be subpar compared to the more specialized BTLs and bees, but I still love guns on ships.

That said, anti-ground guns are also rad.

>>49533577
Have we seen rules on bombardment yet? I would be interested to see how effective they are and how they will work in nodes that have both friendly and enemy troops

File: dropfleet-commander-core-rulebook phr.jpg (304KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 800x800px

>>49533619
Not entirely, but looking at the ganymede's stats it seems to be just another weapon system, so it presumably shoots using the normal rules just at ground targets. (cont.)

So, I plan to start PHR in DFC if when the scene starts to form, the game proves itself. There are couple of kickstart backers in local meta, but one of them seems to have a hard one for PHR and plans to buy the freebies from others. So starting from scratch, what is the current view of what you need for a full fleet? One starter with extras? Two starters and battleship? Something other?

File: 1474235746974.png (564KB, 528x960px) Image search: [Google]

564KB, 528x960px

>>49533619
As for the targets, the different sector types seem to have hull and armour values just like ships. What I don't think has leaked yet is how troops take damage, whether the different types have different resistances to the "falling masonry" (for want of a better term) or if they just take direct damage from the bombardment.

>>49533667
>Two starters and battleship?
I'd say three starters and a battleship; 12 frigates, 9 cruisers, and 1 BB looks like it sits right in the middle of the projected ranges.
We'll just have to see how it works out when the rules and points costs come out.

>>49533667
I feel two starters is a solid way to go to begin with, it allows you to build a variety of ships, learn the game and see what sort of things work for you. One starter is a bit too limited, you won't be able to try out most options.

You can't use a battleship until you're playing the middle tier of games (Clash) so I'd be cautious about buying one right at the start. But that's just me.

>>49533664
Yes, but what does a hit do? Does the Ganymede just roll 6 dice, and remove one enemy token for each 3+? Who chooses which tokens to remove? Are there crits for orbital bombardment? Must all of the shots be fired into the same sector or just the same cluster? What if friendly troops are present? Can the cluster or sector itself be destroyed to deny it to the enemy? Are enemy armor and troop tokens treated the same way? What about orbital defense tokens (the ones delivered by bulk landers)? How close does it need to be for orbital bombardment?

>>49533694
How does this moon work? I presume it's in high orbit. Are space stations in low orbit? Do moons and space stations move? If they are low enough to be on the map then they should move quite quickly.

>>49533710
I wouldn't do it that way. I would get two starters and a battleship, then wait on corvettes and battlecruisers. Maybe pick up some destroyers later when those get released. And of course dreadnoughts will be coming at some point. That should be fun.

>>49533820
>Yes, but what does a hit do?

My bet is it's something like shooting at buildings with infantry inside in DzC.

>>49533820
>I wouldn't do it that way. I would get two starters and a battleship, then wait on corvettes and battlecruisers. Maybe pick up some destroyers later when those get released. And of course dreadnoughts will be coming at some point. That should be fun.
True, but you'll probably be missing out on full sized 1500 point games until then if you do that.

I'm honestly expecting 1500 point games to be about 2.5 SS +BB, so getting 3 and a BB will give you some room to play around with.
Besides, it's an excuse to have MORE ships than you need.

>>49533853
Having a few extra cruisers should also let you get more of those sweet, sweet light cruisers that make poorfags cry.

>>49533820
>How does this moon work? I presume it's in high orbit. Are space stations in low orbit? Do moons and space stations move? If they are low enough to be on the map then they should move quite quickly.
Note that it's followed by (LSO), which I would guess means "Large Satellite Object".
It's probably actually a phobos/deimos tier asteroid or "moon" in high orbit.

As for the stations, it's presumptive that they have the same gravity nullifiers as ships and are as such able to hold position.

>>49533882
This as well.
>tfw you're vaguely thinking about how to add on to the fleet if doing so without magnets and names
>considering just buying and building entire groups of frigates as I need more.

>>49533853
Is it best to jump is straight to 1500 points? Especially if you're not magnetising. I kind of feel it's better to play a bit at lower points, trying out some different compositions and ships, than make a 1500 point fleet and then start wishing you'd built that cruiser as a bombardment ship rather than another BTL, or whatever.

>>49533885
>It's probably actually a phobos/deimos tier asteroid or "moon" in high orbit.
Well it clearly needs to be much smaller than Earth's moon or it would be a whole map on its own. Luna is exceptionally large though.

It wouldn't even need to be as small as Phobos. Phobos is only a little over 20 km in diameter compared to something like 700-1000 km for the length of a map edge

>>49525589
>One of the greatest tenants of strategic naval warfare is having to fight the war with the navy you have, not the navy you wish you had.
It's a bit different when you're making your navy to order as you go and the ships are clearly quite modular.

>>49533948
Fair point, but I don't think you can really go "wrong" with more general fleet compositions.
But yeah, it is implied that you'd play a few 750 or 1000 point games before taking the jump to 1500.

>>49533955
We'll just have to see how big the moon is (or whether it comes in multiple sizes) on scenarios to be sure.

So, to that one anon who was wondering how to make energy fields, I found this post.

http://www.hawkforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=5162&start=40#p71015

>>49534005
My guess would be that it's shown to scale with the clusters in that image, as that seems to be pushing the limits of reasonable size for gameplay purposes and I can think of no reason for it to be shown bigger than that.

>>49534215
I'd have done a hex pattern on the shield, the flaming PHR logo is a bit corny.

Not to say it doesn't still look rad as fuck, though.

>>49534274
You aren't thinking technochad enough

>>49534215

He couldn't use his impressive technique for something better than shitty orange/red with a blue shield?

>>49534479
To be fair, they're supposed to be lava themed.
http://imgur.com/a/vqxeF

>>49534531

I figured and it's...not super appealing to me.

Technically impressive but the actual scheme is odd

>>49534274

I agree. I think a hex pattern would have been better. Also if there was some way to make the rest of the shield be more transparent. Still it is quality work.

>>49525589
I'm with you, each ship is getting a name and a record of their achievements. If that means I end up owning way more ships then I every need then so be it.

Related note, what are people doing for naming schemes? I put together a list of cities and famous people from the country the ships class name is from. Makes it tricky that there are four US cities in there but ah well.

>>49535009
>Related note, what are people doing for naming schemes?
I have half of an idea for each of the factions, but I want to see the famous/infamous/known/encountered names for each class before thinking up lists and lists

File: Alter_Echo.jpg (37KB, 351x500px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 351x500px

>>49534215
>>49534531
>That paint scheme

Thanks for reviving my nostalgia goggles.
Now to replay the game to see if it still holds up.

Facebook group is saying that the dispatches have begun. Looks like it's happening

>>49535096

Anon

You best not be fibbing....

File: adfsfds.jpg (473KB, 1607x1080px)

473KB, 1607x1080px

My smaller order is shipping

>>49535174
Its for just phr starter and is uk based, bigger order has not shipped yet

Its happening!

File: 99 percent of the RAF.gif (6KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 200x200px

>>49535174
[excitement intensifies]

>>49535096
>>49535174
[HAPPENING INTENSIFIES]

>>49535184

I'm guessing the orders without big rulebooks will be going out first since they can just pack those into the truck as is, whereas they're probably still stuffing the books into starter sets as we speak.

>>49535047
Considered that but my warship autism demands a consistent naming convention based on the class and it doesn't seem like the famous ships follow that at all.

>>49535457
>Considered that but my warship autism demands a consistent naming convention based on the class
Where's the fun in that? So long as they're relatively connected to the class' perdonality, go wild!

>>49535511
Okay, lesse.
Different countries use different class naming mechanisms.
The USA's named her warship classes after the lead ship of the class, with a scheme per 'type' that changes. IE, WW2 Battleships were States, Cruisers were cities, Destroyers were people.
Brits named them often after themes. 'Tribal' class had tribes be the name. 'R-class' had names that started with R.

For the UCM, everything's a goddamn Earth city. Though generally, the more powerful a ship, the more significant it's city. Battlecruisers may or may not be of fictional cities, because Avalon could be a real place. Naturally, this'll be confusing as fuck since you don't know if the UCMS East Compton is a garbage tug or a fleet battleship.

Solution: Class names are honorary ones that don't necessarily correspond to anything except perhaps lead ship. Every other one follows some sort of naming pattern.

Frigates are abstractish things feelings (revenge, avenger). Corvettes are pirate or adventure themed. Cruisers are history themed. Battleships are great military leader themed?

>>49525589
>not almost entirely using canonically out-of-date gear to simulate the "war with what you have" experience

>>49535672

>PHR ships as a rule are a few years old at best

Fug

>>49535665
Conceivably, you could name ships after streets in their cities.


But that would be dumb.

>>49535665
>Solution: Class names are honorary ones that don't necessarily correspond to anything except perhaps lead ship. Every other one follows some sort of naming pattern.

Or the fleets just have excellent identification systems and the ships (initial) captains are given free reign to name their ships however they please.

>>49535665

>not naming your UCM cruisers after cities nearby the ship class in question

>the Seattle class UCMS Bellevue or Shoreline

>the UCMS Tokyo class Akihabara

>>49535665
>For the UCM, everything's a goddamn Earth city. Though generally, the more powerful a ship, the more significant it's city. Battlecruisers may or may not be of fictional cities, because Avalon could be a real place. Naturally, this'll be confusing as fuck since you don't know if the UCMS East Compton is a garbage tug or a fleet battleship.
But as far as we know, there are no UCMF ships actually names after cities; only the classes are named after cities.

>>49535665
>Solution: Class names are honorary ones that don't necessarily correspond to anything except perhaps lead ship. Every other one follows some sort of naming pattern

Can't do it, it would bug the hell out of me. I just got the Wikipedia list of largest cities in the same country/region as the class name and used those, plus some famous people for frigates since I may have a lot of those.

>>49534215

>those lava themed apollos

Oh Jesus I'm going to be sick

>>49536034
Yeah... this is one of those sad cases of a person with a ton of technical skill but the worst possible taste.

File: readiness intensifies.gif (281KB, 352x400px)

281KB, 352x400px

>Dispatches have started
>Wondering how long my two 'one of everything' orders are going to take
>Checking email every two minutes at this point

File: Neptune trio in formation02(713).jpg (244KB, 714x586px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 714x586px

>>49536034
>>49536217

Yea it is not to my taste either.

The Tron PHR guy is fucking sweet though.

>>49536445
muh cyber dick

post schemes, lads

>UCM
>dark tan primary with orange and grey secondary

>Scourge
>blue-purple pearlescence

>PHR
>red gloss, dark-grey undermetal, gold/bronze radiators, green hexagons and engines

>Shaltari
>icy blue hull with sea-green cores and copper weaponry

>>49536445
God damn, how do you even do that? Black with a light blue wash? Or is it only really achievable by airbrush?

>>49536445
>light lines don't match up with the panel lines
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>49536492
He had one job.

>>49536445

Now that's A E S T H E T I C

>>49536480

>that PHR scheme

You'll get through exactly one ship before you realize it's shit on non mechanicus models

>>49536534
>gloss red
>mechanicus

>>49536483

Multiple thin layers

The technique is easier than you'd think but he did an exemplary application of if

>>49536546

Won't change it enough. I invite you to find out for yourself once they arrive, just remember I told you so

>>49536483
There likely is no true black anywhere on the model Maybe in the darkest spots, but I doubt it.

>>49536562
Don't worry, I'll be testing out all my shit on frigates before I commit to anything.
I still can't choose between those and the studio schemes

>>49536624

I'm just going with gloss white but studio color scheme otherwise. PHR want to look clean unless you have great freehand

File: 1423772077284.gif (2MB, 592x496px)

2MB, 592x496px

>>49535174
ITS HAPPENING!!!

File: gaha.jpg (134KB, 413x395px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 413x395px

>kickstarter comment trolls bitch and whine that the recent updates mean nothing will be shipped for 3+ weeks
>people start getting shipping emails and texts

J Durrant and OldNick BTFO.

If the shipping has started can we post more smut?

>>49536756
THE FAITHLESS HAVE BEEN ETERNALLY
B T F O
T
F
O

File: twenty years later.gif (2MB, 360x199px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 360x199px

>>49535854

>>49536753
Mofette a better

File: IMG_5241.jpg (436KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

436KB, 1600x1200px

>>49536480
>UCM
Like, the studio scheme. I guess.

>Scourge
Either pic related but on spaceships, or black with gold ridges. Will do a test ship in each and decide.

>PHR
Really don't know what I'd do with them. One of the (well, possibly the only) advantages of being a non-backer is I get to let other people's models be test dummies for schemes. Something red though.

>Shaltari
Similar to you, blue with gold/copper weapons, but probably a more royal blue than an ice blue, and white cores.

File: oldnick.png (14KB, 395x98px)

14KB, 395x98px

Oh dear god, please do.

>>49537120
K E K

File: tumblr_mpdojfI6hO1rjj387o4_1280.jpg (101KB, 1280x720px)

101KB, 1280x720px

>>49537077
Mofette UCM commander when?

File: Homeworld-Deserts-of-Kharak-Soban-Battlecruiser-Render-Stephen-Mokrytzki-Compressed.jpg (190KB, 1920x1080px)

190KB, 1920x1080px

>>49536480
>UCM
Pic related or the Gaalsien from HW:SB
>Scourge
>PHR
Probably like the Amarr from EVE
>Shaltari
IDK maybe like the Bentusi from HW.

>>49537371
The biggest problem I've had with the PHR ships is just how smooth they are- I'm just not sure where to vary the colour, as opposed to the UCM where there's enough lining to break it up.

File: iCIswc0jFuXOF.gif (1MB, 360x181px)

1MB, 360x181px

>>49535934
>>49535854
>>49535665
MFW you have already bought 500 magnets for hot swapping to do demos (and also because modular design gets me hard), but also want to name my ships at the same time.

>>49536480
>UCM
No idea, studio is cool I guess, but some of the homeworld schemes look good, could also go for a NASA ISS style bright white, but could be too similar to PHR. Probably Grey and orange, my favourite colours. Blue engine glow.

>Scourge
Alien Juggernaut, black/grey granite, maybe a light wash of brown/red or green, similar to the bone wash effect I've seen posted before. Engine glow subdued and similar to the wash colour.

>Shaltari
Shiny and chrome, with bright white/xenon blue tint generators and icy/glass scheme on the weapons systems (no idea how to pull that off). No engine glow/visible engines.

>PHR
Ancient greek, bronze broadsides and weapons systems. Either white or black shell with a grid of dots for PD. Warm white engine glow.

>>49537120
>@Phil - fine by me pal... yours hasn't arrived yet. Lot can happen in transit...
Jej

I propose that from now on, in all /dcg/ threads, the terms BTFO and rekt are replaced by OldNick and JDurrant, respectively.

>>49537371
>Probably like the Amarr from EVE

...So, studio scheme, basically?

I guess there's the gold trim, but I'm not sure where you'd put that.

>Want to have ships with names and stories
>run the numbers for the amount of ships I'd need for maximum versatility
>I'd need a lot of ships
>can't choose between unique ships, fully magnetized inter-class ships, or just ships with their weapons magnetized

>>49533694
>>49533847
you've got it right, with an interesting note -- infantry have a 5+ save against combat and a 3+ save vs bombardment (taking cover and all that), whereas armor has a 3+ save vs ground combat and a 5+ save vs bombardment

>>49538639

And Armour can only be dropped by Strike Carriers right?

Whilst Bulk Landers can drop Defence Lasers and I'm guessing x amount of Infantry?

>>49538556
After some thought, I've decided to go for infamy over utility. Having ships with personal stories and great feats is something you can't really put a pricetag on.

>>49538851

Personally I like the somewhat unintentional implication that PHR commanders/captains are showboating grand standers, so having a personal touch to every ship with a big name and a big personality at the helm would be pretty neat

>>49538851
You know what, you're right. I'm going to have a roster of ships, each with their own names, along with the date that each was christened.


I'll also be keeping a log of all the kills, achievements, and great maneuvers that each ship pulls off. If it gets destroyed in game, I'll start a new log for that ship.

>>49538639
Neat, so infantry are good at holding territory, and armor is good at taking it.
Could you run us through a simple ground combat between opposing forces, with or without bombardment?

>>49538556
>>49538851
>>49538978
>>49539077

I'm planning on having a 'flagship' or two that's permanently built, but most of the fleet is going to be magnetized. I'd rather have one big name for everyone to rally around.

File: UCM_BattleCruiser_Atlantis0.jpg (83KB, 678x450px)

83KB, 678x450px

>tfw ships SOON

>>49539898

So, what are the standard Battlecruisers going to be? Are they going to be hybrids like the Kickstarter ones where you have a plastic cruiser sprue to which resin parts are added (some of them quite large in the Leo's case) or are they going to be entirely in resin?

File: Shaltari_BattleCruiser_Adamant.jpg (88KB, 960x640px)

88KB, 960x640px

>>49539947
Nah, Dave is scultping entirely new hulls for the non-KS battlecruisers.

>>49540007

Now that we know that this things stats are, can somebody remind me, don't the Shaltari get a triple Particle Lance Heavy Cruiser?
Would that mean that it get's 3 attack dice in a single 2 damage ignoring armour attack?

>>49540007
Although we did learn the non ks exclusive bcs have different names. Non KS Adamant bcs are called Rubies. We can assume that the naming structure for the non ks battlecruisers will be conventional names (Who knows, that fluff leak about Johannesburg battlecruisers might be the non ks Avalon)

>>49538457
I was probably going to put it on the fins and some on the weapons. Though I might just use a stencil.

I really wanted to paint the UCM up like Amarr because of the curved topsides on their ships. Plus it would've been easier to figure out where to paint the gold trim.

File: FacebookAdamantRubyRules.png (734KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

734KB, 960x720px

>>49540030
It's said in the flavor text that "unlike cruisers, the Adamant can produce enough energy to fire both lances during standard maneuvers"[sic]. Presumably this means that only one lance can be fired by the granite or onyx on standard orders, and that their full power only comes out during weapons free.

File: PHR_SprueFrigate0.jpg (130KB, 798x609px)

130KB, 798x609px

I just noticed something; there are four Calypso underhousings on the PHR frigate sprue, but only enough ECM arrays to build two.

So, I just finished some shitty napkin math, and I've approximated the number of magnets it'll take to fully magnetizes the various sprues to allow for every possible combinaton (meaning you could turn a heavy cruiser into a light cruiser, for example).

>UCM
Cruiser Sprue: 27
Frigate Sprue 46

>Scourge
Cruiser Sprue: 26
Frigate Sprue: 28

>PHR
Best-case Cruiser Sprue: 52
Worst-case Cruiser Sprue: 76
Frigate Sprue: 22

>Shaltari
Cruiser Sprue: 31
Frigate Sprue: 12

Conclusion: Pity the PHR player who wishes to magnetize his fleet.

File: Marcus Barros.jpg (106KB, 1143x1600px)

106KB, 1143x1600px

>>49540497
If you wanna make the gains, you gotta feel the burn.

>>49540497
Do keep in mind, these calculations don't take advantage of using magnetic metals as one point of contact, rather than using magnets for both contacts.

>>49540516
Who would have thought that models of PHR ships would have more metal in them than an actual citizen of the PHR.

File: 1468733620169.jpg (68KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 250x250px

>>49540547
>Do keep in mind, these calculations don't take advantage of using magnetic metals as one point of contact, rather than using magnets for both contacts.

Don't talk to me or my fleet ever again.

>>49540738
Although, a strip of metal on the fins would allow for fully poseable engines.

>>49540738
That's still 25-32 magnets per PHR cruiser, senpai.

Also, it may be necesary to use magnets for both contacts, depending on the size of the piece you're magnetizing.

>>49535174
> Thursday 29th

That's my birthday.

>>49540497
Sure but in practice can use far fewer than that and still always be able to make all of the things you want.

For instance, since you're never going to configure all of your cruisers with heavy mass drivers, there's no reason to magnetize all of the heavy mass drivers.

>>49541236

>implying I'm not going to run a St Petersburg, two seattles, two Rios and three Osakas

BTL you'll never need on literally everyone

>>49541353
>two Rios
>no Berlins

That's not very FAZOOOOM! at all.

An occulus beam array and heavy mass driver bank are functionally identical, correct?

Does the former being 2 attacks, 2 damage and the latter being 4 attacks, 1 damage change the average damage? How does it affect damage distribution?

You're going to get more even distribution with the mass drivers (4 shots, 4 chances of crit) than the occulus (2 shots, 2 chances of crit). If the Occulus beams have scald, they bank even more on crits. You're thus more likely to do zero/low damage with occulus beams, or max damage, than with mass drivers.

Also, with more shots from mass drivers, you're substantially more likely to score hits across orbital layers and especially atmos as well as getting average-r results.

Note: This is a strength of the crappy light broadsides. 12 5+ shots going at atmos targets is way better than any number of fewer, better shots.

>>49541519

If you do just plain dice averages they'll be identical but the occulus will be spikier

>>49541574
Light broadsides are good at what they do mate.

It's heavies that need something to make them a little better.

>>49541673
>It's heavies that need something to make them a little better.
Reduce their accuracy to a base of 4+, and have them do 2 damage per attack when critting.

They're not as good against heavy targets as light cannons are against light targets with this change, but they're better against heavy targets than medium cannons are, AND they're not any worse against non-heavy targets than they already were.

>>49542189

>to a base of 4+

Then they're strictly inferior than heavy mass drivers or occulus arrays

>>49542231
Actually, they're precisely as bad (average damage wise) as they were against non-heavy targets with a base lock of 3+.

However, with two damage on all crits, they're now unequivocally better than medium guns against heavy targets.

>>49542259
Another alternative is to keep their accuracy as is, but to only give them their bonus two damage on crits against heavy targets.

This makes them better than even light guns against light targets, with the latter having the following average damage against 3+, 4+, and 5+ armor:
1.667, 2, 2.333
And the heavy guns doing:
2.222, 2.333, 2.444

>>49542302
Say they're prone to overpenetrating lighter targets or something.

>>49542302
>>49542385
Sorry, I was ambiguous there; with this change, keeping accuracy as is and giving them the two damage boost against crits on heavies, makes them better against heavies than light guns are against lights.*

>>49542189
>>49542231
>>49542259
>>49542302
>>49542385
They just just have 6 shots base, 8 for the battleships.

Yes, this makes them better than medium batteries. But you know they're going to be expensive and fleet composition will prevent you from taking a ton of them.

>>49542632
That completely flies against the design philosophy of the PHR guns though, in that no gun should be strictly better (irrespective of cost) than the others, except against its preferred targets.

In any case, I've found a satisfactory solution to this problem; have the heavy guns do an additional damage when critting against non-heavy targets (2 damage), and do an additional 1d2 damage when critting against heavy targets (2-3 damage, average 2.5), while nerfing their lock value to 4+ (same as the medium guns).
This centers the range of average damage against heavy targets the same as light guns against light targets, 2 average damage against 4+ armor.

The overall range is smaller, with 1.889 average damage against 3+ and 2.111 damage against 5+, but it's now equivalent to the light cannons in strength against preferred targets.

In addition, this new version is exactly as powerful against non-heavy targets as the original, non-tampered heavy guns are.

>>49542768
Or you could just have them deal 2 damage on crits to heavy ships.

>>49542987
Without the lock nerf? It's too powerful, it gives them average damages of 2.222, 2.333, and 2.444 against 3+, 4+, and 5+ armor respectively. Their relative efficiencies agains heavy targets compared to medium guns are 200%, 175%, and 160%, which is extremely powerful when compared to the relative efficiencies of light guns vs light targets against medium guns of 150%, 150%, and 150%.

The measure I proposed has relative efficiencies of 170%, 150%, and 135%.

>>49542987
Honestly if you leave the base stats of Heavy Broadsides the same and replace the caliber bonus with "+1 damage vs. H&SH" then the math evens out pretty well. They end up about as strong against heavy targets as Light Broadsides are against light targets.

>>49543099
Well damn, you're right; it's almost perfectly even except that they're slightly better against 3+, and slightly worse against 5+.

Unfortunately, I doubt Hawk is going to remove Caliber from the heavy guns, as that's their main gimmick.

Lock+1, +1 damage on crits against non-heavies, and +1d2 damage on crits against heavies is as of now the only way I can see to preserve caliber while maintaining parity with light cannons.

Unfortunately, it's a clusterfuck of special rules.

holy shit guys, how long has this been out? this looks great!
I'm just looking through the links, and these prices are incredible Whats the general sum up of how these play?

>>49543166
You never know, they might alter the base Caliber rule. Light Caliber is more accurate against small targets, Heavy Caliber is more damaging against large targets (and it makes sense in context as well).

File: Beijing1.jpg (309KB, 1500x960px) Image search: [Google]

309KB, 1500x960px

>>49543329
Possibly, but I would expect them to split that into two different rules instead. Maybe something like "Gauge-T" or something, idk; +1 damage against that ship tonnage.

>>49543324
Dropzone Commander, or Dropfleet Commander?
The former has been out since 2012/2013, and although I myself don't really play it, I hear that the rules are excellent and all the factions are fairly balanced against each other.

For the latter, Dropfleet Commander, it's not released yet (but very, VERY soon) but we have had some leaks and disclosed mechanics to work with, and it looks like it's shaping up to be an excellent game, perhaps even a successor to BFG.
I would expect as much, since Andy Chambers co-wrote DFC and has, allegedly, used it to fix mistakes that he made in BFG.

File: New Orleans.jpg (304KB, 1500x956px)

304KB, 1500x956px

>>49543388
On an unrelated note, I don't know about all you dudes, but all those slate grey dots on the Beijing look to be escape pods like the ones on the New Orleans

File: Berlin.jpg (288KB, 1500x972px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 1500x972px

>>49543449
You can see them on the cruisers too; I never noticed that before.

>>49543449
Are they on the Avenger?

File: Salute_Hawk_Wargames_4[1].jpg (177KB, 1000x667px)

177KB, 1000x667px

It seems like it; those dots along the bridge look like the droppod/escapepod model.

File: IMG_8227[1].jpg (288KB, 1600x1200px)

288KB, 1600x1200px

>>49543948
>>49543995
Yep, definitely escape pods.

I'm also going to go ahead and say that all the little white dots, rather than the grey dots, are the minor PD.

>>49544017
I'll accept that. They look like something a laser would come out of.

>>49544085
Nah, if they were laser defences, why would they be sunk into the flanks of the engine pods as you can see in >>49543449?

File: UCM_CruiserTroop_SanFrancisco1.jpg (115KB, 798x529px)

115KB, 798x529px

>>49544107
The sheer amount of them on the San Fran also makes me think this is the case.

>>49543464
>>49543449
I was thinking it pretty odd that the New Orleans seems to have the same order of escape pods that the Berlin there has I also thought I was looking at a Beijing but I guess it makes sense if that main line aft on the New Orleans is about where all the groundpounder quarters are. Escape pods for like a million men, right?

>>49544138

Like ten thousand tops in a New Orleans

>>49544151
I thought it was supposed to carry a whole legion?

>>49544017
Do they specify how many they're supposed to hold?

File: 1bf974a919[2].jpg (82KB, 445x436px)

82KB, 445x436px

>>49544138
>>49544151
Far, far too much; strike carriers have only a Cohort (about a thousand men) plus supporting staff and armored corps.

The troopships carry somewhere between ten thousand and a hundred thousand men, so a few dozen or so cohorts until we get hard figures.

>>49544182
>I thought it was supposed to carry a whole legion?
Nope

>>49544194
Well divide the number of crew under load by the number of escape pods on the New Orleans.
Unless they're the kind of beancounters who only equip ships with the statistically-likely number of necessary escape pods to save on expenses and to discourage premature abandonment.

>>49544224
The UCM is nothing if not capable bean-counters.
Each of those pods is about the size of a three story small apartment building. Probably could cram in perhaps 50-100 people, depending. Possibly less. Let's say it's the lower end, and we're talking 50 for something with the habitable volume of a 2500 square foot home. That gives a lot of space for storage and machinery.

New Orleans has something like 28 of them. That's approx 1400 saved then max on the escape deck if we can cram 50 per pod. More if it's higher.
With a crew and soldier compliment of 1723, that's pretty close...

Damnit, Dave.

File: UCM_Frigate_Jakarta2.jpg (105KB, 797x530px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 797x530px

>>49544303
The detail keeps getting finer and finer.

>the non strike-carrier bridges have less drop pods
DAVE
PLEASE

>>49544303
Correction! The New Orleans has 14 pods per row on the escape deck (28 total), then 3 in the forward torpedo area each flank (6 total) and 4 in the engineering sections each flank (8 total) for a grand total of 42 escape pods. If each held only 36 people, that's 1728 escapee slots out of a crew of 1723.

>>49544353
>1728
42*36 is 1512, anon. It's fair to assume our original estimate of 50 per pod. since admiralty likely assumes that some will have been destroyed in combat if they're abandoning ship.

Looks like the UCM takes the lives of their men pretty seriously.

File: JC.png (268KB, 432x454px)

268KB, 432x454px

>>49544224
>premature abandonment
You meant to say "prudent", right?

File: UCM_Battleship_NewYork3.jpg (121KB, 796x531px)

121KB, 796x531px

Oh cool, look at all the pods for the hangar.

File: UCM_CruiserCarrier_Seattle0.jpg (105KB, 796x533px)

105KB, 796x533px

Looks like the Seattle doesn't get any extra pods compared to the rest of the cruisers, however.

If we're to assume each pod is 50 crew or passengers, then we can start to estimate crews. Fun.

Seattle's got 44 pods visible. That's ~2200 crew.

Jakarta Frigate's got 22 pods. For ~1100 crew.

New York's got approx 93 pods per side, for a total of 186 pods. That's ~9300 crew

Contrast to a New Orleans needing only about 200 naval pukes to run the ship itself.

>>49544586
Nerdy cross reference:

WW2 LSM Medium Landing Ship: 50 crew
WW2 Fletcher Destroyer: 329 crew
WW2 Baltimore-class Cruiser: ~1150 crew
WW2 Essex-class Carrier: ~3000 crew, flag and air wing.

Pretty similar ratios for our ficticious space ships...

>>49544107
The smaller white one, not the grey ones.

>>49544586
The New Orleans has got about 20% more escape space than it has crew, so lets assume the same for other ships.

That brings the Seattle down to about 1833 crew.
Jakarta down to 917
New York down to 7750.

Actually, I think you got the Seattle count wrong; there's a few on the underside of the engine nacelles that we can see in the San Fran.

>12 on dorsal prow
>3 on top of nacelle, 5 on bottom
>10 on ventral prow
That brings the number of pods for the Seattle up to 50, meaning its escape capacity is 2500 and its crew is around 2083.

The San Fran has an additional 86 pods (per side; 2 rows of 13, 1 row of 17) bringing its total to 136 pods, which is an escape capacity of 8600, and a presumptive crew of 7165.
HOWEVER, we know that the troopships carry at least ten thousand troops, meaning that admiralty probably presumes that a good portion of the onboard troops will be deployed planetside before they have to abandon ship, since troopships are generally only used when orbital superiority has been established over an area.

>>49544670
Ah, sorry, I read your post wrong.

File: UCM_CruiserHeavy_Moscow0.jpg (103KB, 796x531px)

103KB, 796x531px

It also appears that all cruisers, regardless of if they're light, normal, or heavy, have the same number of escape pods with the exception of the troopship. We can expect similar crew for the lot of them, or them just having the same number of pods for ease of production.

>>49544692
>meaning that admiralty probably presumes that a good portion of the onboard troops will be deployed planetside before they have to abandon ship
Or they could just use the landers as lifeboats

>>49544745
I feel like using bulk landers as lifeboats is easier said than done, since the UCM doesn't have the luxury of keeping their hangar bays pressurized and ready to launch at the same time.

I suppose they could always carry a garage door opener in the case of an evacuation, though.

>>49544745
>>49544772
I mean, they might possibly have time to get a single wave of bulk landers out in an emergency, but I don't think the troopships are geared towards rapid and complete deployment like strike carriers are, which can release their entire force complement in one go.

>>49544808
Let's suppose for a moment that you absolutely need to get out NOW and sitting inside the lander with working life support is not an option.

In this highly unlikely scenario, it would be a simple matter to have the entire lander compartment crack open at the press of a button. Why not do that all the time? Armor is nice and making it all go back together again is much more difficult.

>>49544838
Sorry anon, but I don't quite get what you're proposing. What purpose would destroying landers get you, if there aren't enough escape pods for the entire force anyways?

I think the real lesson here is that ground pounders are considered much less valuable to the UCM than flyboys.

File: UCM_Cruiser_Rio1.jpg (59KB, 794x269px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 794x269px

Actually, looks like 52 pods for cruisers, in fact.

>>49544883
At least when they're in the bulk landers; elsewhere, admiralty seems to have enough life boats for everyone.

File: 1456074508171.jpg (90KB, 300x190px)

90KB, 300x190px

>>49545128
"Sir, the Phoenix isn't rated for orbital act-"
"My boot's about to be rated for your ass if you don't get those hangar doors open, son"

>>49545216
"Sir, we literally do not have munitions capable of affecting current orbital operations in a meanin-"
"My boot is capable of affecting your ass in a meaningful manner, now finish loading those missiles."

Reading through recent articles on Orbital Bombardment, they seem to imply that walkers are out of fashion in PHR tournament lists. Am I to take it that their competitive listbuilding boils down to "more Helios"?

On a side note, I'm impressed by the equal amounts of excitement and rage over the Overseer and Panther.

>>49545356
Pretty much, sonic fast PHR is the name of the game; Helios, Apollo, and Valks.

Honestly, the panther isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be. On paper it should be an absolute terror, but it never seems to be except in those few instances where it manages to blow up a dropship of exotics.

The overseer is definitely going to be either made more expensive, or have its AA toned down.

File: Dropzone Diplomacy.jpg (63KB, 960x720px)

63KB, 960x720px

>>49545405
I take it the balancing factor on the Panther is the hard limit of one vaporized flier per turn?

>>49545518
Pretty much; it's likely to fuck your shit up if you're a retard and leave your dropships in the open, but there's almost never an exposed firing lane long enough for it to capitalize on its long range.
People just had a kneejerk reaction to the thought of an infinite range, E8, highly accurate triple shot AA, without pausing to ask themselves if it would really be able to capitalize on those strengths (it doesn't, since it's almost always a walk on in the backfield).
Like I said; absolute monster on paper, but slightly neutered in actual battlefield conditions.

>>49545356
Type-3 walkers still see use. Other than that it's all skimmers and Valkyries though.

The Overseer just makes me sad. It's a constant reminder that the much cooler looking Desolator will always be dogshit.

Hey all, i recently painted up two scourge starter sets, how should i go about expanding? There have been a lot of releases that arent in the core book, and a lot of blogs and articles seem to have been written a long while ago.

>>49546209
Overseer is the current hotness for Scourge because of its aura that gives you your choice of two massive buffs to plasma weapons, as well as its "fuck fliers" AA barrage. Apparently it's a big deal for Hunter tanks, which you already have a bunch of from the starters.

The Corruptor is a funny addition that lets you interrupt your opponent's search for objectives by blasting Razorworms right into the building.

Both variants of the barrage balloons (Minders or Monitors) provide cheap utility and seem to get taken a lot.

File: Scourge Oppressor.jpg (139KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 960x640px

>>49546209
GIANT ENEMY CRAB

>>49544873
>Illiteracy

>>49545356
Yes, and it's all my fault. I made some forum posts on how versatile the Helios is and it took off.

>>49546209
Destroyers/Eviscerators seem really popular.

>>49546780
Don't feel bad, somebody else would have discovered it anyway. It's a pair of Sh3 shaped charge AA guns on a survivable and mobile platform, most people aren't going to just write that off.

Nerf when

>>49546912
Everyone was writing it off as only good for AA

>>49546752
Then explain what was meant, anon.

>>49544303
>Each of those pods is about the size of a three story small apartment building. P
Bullshit, they're about the size of a dropship, tops.

>>49544449
Go polish your tennisball, nobody was talking to you.

>>49547342
They're about half the length of a Condor making them around 30+ feet long.

>>49544303
>>49544353
>>49544395
Jesus, this level of detail.

>>49544017
So how do you get in and out?

Does anyone know off-hand what a 4x4 table scales to in Dropzone? Thinking of making a scale board based off Boston cause that city is a clusterfuck and also nearby.

>>49547580
about 733 feet by 733 feet, so about a single city block in the center and portions of its adjacent blocks.

>>49547580
10mm is about 1:182 (although I'm convinced DzC is more like 8mm really)

So 4 feet translates to 728 feet so a 4x4 board is about 5 hectares/12 acres/0.02 square miles

>>49547559

This is what happens when the CEO and Company Head is also your chief CAD modeller.

>>49547610
>CEO
But Hawk isn't a corp.

>>49547619
Wait, shit, I'm retarded; they are a corp, just not publicly traded.

>>49547619

My mistake!

But you get what I mean.

Beasts of War just put up one of their tactics videos.

I have no idea how good it is, watch it yourself if you can put up with the Norn Ironisms

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwnuXqn7lXE

>>49547705
>"Simon from Hawk"
;_;7

>>49547600
>>49547609
Thanks anons

File: chest high walls.jpg (366KB, 1600x895px) Image search: [Google]

366KB, 1600x895px

>>49547705
Gee, is that terrain clogging up the streets, preventing clear lines of sight across the length of the table, that I see? What an idea.

>wake up
>check email
>no shipping notice
Fellow Amerifags with a commodore pledge, sound off.

>>49547705
>vomiting rocket technicals out of a hovercraft and using focus to fuck up heavier units
>vomiting gun wagons out of a hovercraft to fuck up dropships
>vomiting party vans out of a hovercraft and firing from the windows to fuck up whoever's nearby
>putting expendable dudes between enemy alpha strikes and your valuable dudes
It's pretty much just basic Resistance stuff. Unloading and firing on the same turn, being aggressive, that sort of thing.

>>49547793
This is also true. I'd run Sabres on that table, maybe even a Gladius if I was feeling frisky.

>>49547947
>It's pretty much just basic Resistance stuff.
I mean, ask yourself anon, what kind of player is going to be watching tactics videos from BoW, and how much of the game will they know?

>>49547961
I'm not saying basic is bad, just that it probably won't offer much to those posting here. It should be reasonably useful for brand new people.

>>49547941
Yeah, I got really excited when I saw orders were shipping. Then I saw that it was smallest orders first, and likely UK at that.
<:O

>>49548006
on plus side someone uploaded this to the facebook group, seems to have the beta points costs (Im not an admiral so cant confirm them) been messing around with lists on it all morning

http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=05272134387113028631

File: raichu rubbing face.gif (197KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 500x400px

>Dropfleet shipping
>Warpath shipping soon
>Reapers Bones almost there as well

Hngghhhh so much plastic!

>>49548062
I may just be bad at this, but the dropdown menus for the squadrons don't seem to be working, only the faction select drop down. Any idea how to unbork this?

>>49548155
I dont know either I just clicked sheet 1 and looked at the raw numbers, I dont think it has info on stuff like rare ships though

>>49548122
lol yeah, got an email from kickstarter ^^
it was warpath saying they're pre-packing but waiting on components...

>>49548194
Ah, that works too; it looks like I can just type in the names and it works just fine. Thanks for linking it!

>>49548122
>>49548258
> Soon both my space rats and space hedgehogs will be in my space hands

Bueno

>>49548414
I think you mean space bueno, space hombre.

>>49548441
Sorry, I space forgot

>>49546077
Literally impossible since the Type-1 is the only standard choice

>>49548062
Interesting, although we know stuff has changed since then from rulebook leaks:
>Heracles is now 285 not 245
>Basalt is 140 not 120
>Adamant 200 not 190
>Ajax 100 not 90
>Strix 90 not 75
>Wyvern 105 not 100
>Harpy and Djin 42 and 43 not 40
>Ganymede 175 not 135
>Shenlong 170 not 160
>Voidgate 15 not 10
>Topaz 45 no 38
>New York 260 not 255

I'm not saying this in a pathetic attempt to win Internet Argument Points, I'm saying it because it seems everything's more expensive across the board, so it's worth making people aware that they won't be able to use as many ships as they might think using those beta numbers (seems all fleets on release will be smaller than beta fleets were). Still useful for getting a ballpark idea of what stuff might cost relative to other stuff though.

>>49547340
Blow open the bay containing the landers so they can all leave at once.

>>49547600
The map is not to scale with the ships

A 4' map edge is something like 700 or 1000 kilometers based on comments that the map is the size of Spain.

>>49548525
Anon asked about dropzone, bruv.
And yeah, the maps are 1k x 1k

>>49548472
Primarily skimmers and Valks, then. There are walkers, but they're not usually the mainstay of the force.

File: Soon.jpg (284KB, 1280x1009px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 1280x1009px

>>49547941
>Dave better get his shit together soon if he knows whats good for England

Just kidding, #BTFOOldNick

>>49548484
Im mainly using it to ballpark, been doing 1350 lists to account for point changes and adding admiral

File: image.gif (103KB, 250x241px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 250x241px

>>49548525

>1000 kilometers

Don't you mean 1 megameter?

>>49548762
.001 Gigametres*

>>49547941

two PHR starters, two PHR BCs, two UCM BCs master race reporting in

>>49548739
Good thinking, mothman.

>>49548762
I think you mean 1x10^16 Ångströms

File: image.png (66KB, 1000x1000px)

66KB, 1000x1000px

>originally thought the Ajax was going to be the shit Ares equivalent of Dropfleet, so I didn't get a 2-up version

>turns out that title belongs to the Orion and the Ajax is actually quite useful in its role

FUCK

>>49549079
>turns out that title belongs to the Orion
Do not bully Orion! It's going to be a useful line ship, just you wait!

>>49548790
>not PHR fleet, Shaltari fleet, one of each BC, 2up Ajax, and 2up Beijing master race

>>49549113

Anon, I...

>>49549164

Get out hedgehog scum

You are worst alien, you are midget smell. Shaltari we will get you! Remove hedgehog from the galaxy

>>49549195
>hedgehog scum
>implying I'm not playing all factions equally

File: image.jpg (93KB, 720x960px)

93KB, 720x960px

>going to have tons of spare PHR bits to convert space stations with

>going to have plenty of UCM and scourge bits to make debris out of


Who hype here

>>49526193
im slightly worried how tough magnetising the launch bays will be, though I may not magnetise my bellerophon and 2 vanguard carriers as I will take them 80% of the time

>Phase 3 extra rules
>the PHR finally reveal what they know about the shaltari and race X to the UCM, a temporary cease fire starts between the two as they agree to focus on their mutual enemies for a short period

the shaltari, finding that their game is up, in a completely insane move agree to a non aggression pact with the scourge

humanity versus Xenos book and rules for allying UCM + PHR and Shaltari + Scourge in very limited numbers

>>49547941
2x Commodore pledges(on two seperate KS accounts) + add ons giving me:
>2x 2player starter sets
>2x PHR starter fleet
>2x Shaltari start fleet
>2x UCM BS
>2x Scourge BS
>2x PHR BS
>2x Shaltari BS
>Launch Assets
>Space Station
>Scourge station add on
>Resin Cluster pack
>Civilian liner

I fully expect my stuff to be closer to the end than the beginning.

>>49549387
> my two played factions in dropzone are Scourge and Shaltari

Works for me, I guess.

>>49549282
Unable to decide between the two, so little hype.
no magnetization
>pros
>unique ships
>excuse to buy more ships
>it's the bravest option

>cons
>lots of wasted bits
>will have to buy many,many ships
>I have a dremel and want to use it

magnetization
>pros
>can swap between any variant I want
>no wasted bits
>I can always give them names anyways and fluff it out as them being refitted
>get to use my dremel

>cons
>the cowardly option
>don't have an excuse to buy more ships than I need
>is going to take a LOT of magnets

HELP

>>49549545

You're going to need 12+ cruisers for a clash anyway, nothing's going to prevent needing a ton of ships

>>49549387
>PHR
>human
You ball-kissing traitors already had your chance for redemption. I'd sooner ally with a Shaltari tribe.

>>49549599

not knowing that the shaltari are completely responsible for the scourge attacking humanity

>>49549591
Yeah, but there's a difference between having 12 ships able to hotswap, and having 24+ ships in order to have diversity.

Its not even so much the cost or number of ships, but the waste of modularity.

On the other hand, having fleets of ships with their own names and stories sounds AWESOME

>>49549618
>not considering that the Scourge were lying

>>49549683
You think someone would do that? Just go out to space and tell lies?

>>49549700
and tell space lies*

And yes, they would.

File: 1458457966536.jpg (86KB, 678x451px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 678x451px

>>49549599
>>49549618

I think that is the point. We don't need or want allies.

Fuck jellys, abadonists, and hedgehogs. Laser death for all.

>>49549660

I don't think you'll need 24+ ships the same way you don't need 6 menchits or Hyperions in DZC

>>49549618
>trusting the moustache twirlingly evil race not to try and sow dissent among its enemies
Besides, the best thing about the hedgehogs is that if you have beef with one tribe, there's almost certainly another tribe that fucking hates them and might even be willing to help you out.

What is the UCMs beef with the PHR as a faction? Is iust just "fuck you for not eating sit with the rest of us" or is there more?

>>49549799
I have a feeling that all the ships in DFC will be fairly equal compared to each other; the fact that everything is pretty much "kills other ships" means that they'll all be decently useful.

>>49549817
>abandonist filth swallows the tinfoil pill shoved in their faces by the magic space tennisball
>EAA tells them to stop being retarded, sends a fleet to stop them
>abandonist swine fires first shot
>a lot of them escape, EAA fleet is damaged and crippled
>Scourge show up and utterly roflstomp the fleet
>it's implied that humanity might have put up more of a fight, and more of them might have escaped to the colonies, if the fleet was in proper working condition

ABANDONISTS REEEEEEE

>>49549817
"Fuck you for destroying the fleet and running away. And fuck you for acting like dicks when we're trying to reconquest."

>>49549817
There's always been animosity since when the abandonists were originally leaving they opened fire on the fleet sent to stop them, but the PHR literally started attacking the UCM when they refused to call off the reconquest.

http://www.strawpoll.me/11321886

>>49549913
Abandonists took 2% of the core worlds' populations with them. Around 1% of the population made it to the colonies that would become the UCM following the scourge invasion. Choosing to abandon Earth saved literally twice as many people as staying and facing the scourge. The white sphere was right.

>>49549079
??? What's wrong with the Orion?

>>49549963
>Around 1% of the population made it to the colonies that would become the UCM following the scourge invasion.
What? No; about 10% ("9 in 10"[sic]) survived the invasion; if we even set 5% of that to be the precursors of the resistance, the evacuees were more than twice the abandonists.

>>49550022
There's a meme going around that the medium guns are subpar, despite a full broadside of them being slightly more efficient than UCM heavy mass drivers, Scourge arrays, and Shaltari disintegrator banks.

They're just supremely outclassed by light guns against light targets, as it should be.

>>49550022

It's exceedingly mediocre and outclassed by other ships in its own weight class and points value.

>>49550058

Slight correction: medium broadsides are underwhelming because they do less on a broadside than equivalent cruisers do on a full shot but do more when they can fire both broadsides.

This balance dichotomy comes together to make a few ships kinda mediocre, the Orion and Hector specifically.

The Orion has very weak fore firepower with just plain Jane mediums on the sides when it its own weight class there are dramatically more interesting ships. It's the sabre or Ares of the fleet: it's not necessarily bad, it's just not phenomenal.

The hectors issue is that it's a heavy cruiser that does the same thing as a Berlin class medium cruiser, but without being able to put its mediums on the same target as its primary target.

The Hector specifically is mediocre when you consider its alternative choice in the vanguard battlegroup is a Bellephron who also has a double BTL but also 4 launch which can focus on its primary target. It's not a hard choice to make.

So the Orion faces the same issue as the Sabre: why take it? It's not straight up bad like the Perseus but it doesn't have a strong argument to take it over its superior alternatives.

>>49549963
I'm pretty sure your numbers are wrong there. And it would have been more if cowardly scum hadn't crippled the human fleet and run off with a bunch of ships and gear.

>>49550031
I thought 1 in 10 was how many survived overall, including those on the frontier worlds already and that ended up in the resistances. For Earth at least, it's specifically stated at 1%, so the abandonist movement definitely saved more people from Earth.
>Shifting goalposts is easy with nanomachines in your muscles! Join the PHR kids!

>>49550233
Maybe the human fleet shouldn't have tried to stop civilians from evacuating