/dcg/ Dropzone/Dropfleet Commander General

File: EuropaPandoraRules.jpg (109KB, 1245x934px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1245x934px

>>49611587
>Except frigates will tend to get shot less due to their much smaller signature and can hide in atmosphere when appropriate.
They're not atmospheric, bruv.

>>49611468

I feel in a single bombing run your gonna get 4-6 damage out of a bellerophon, 2 crits and 2 normals PD + armour should clear out 1-2 of those bombers.

The thing to remember is that these carrier heavy lists will really struggle against frigate heavy forces as launch assets cannot enter atmo. Also hugging debree will also help negate bombers

>>49611635
all of scourges are

>>49611635
>the Scylla Charybdis Gargoyle atmos hugging scourge frigate list grows stronger

File: UCM bs Tokyo.jpg (103KB, 701x934px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 701x934px

Reminder that the Tokyo is cheap enough that UCM can have 2 battleships in a 1500 point game. (The magic cutoff is 500 points for a battlegroup - with the Tokyo being well under half that you can get a second battleship (of any of the three classes) in the single flag battlegroup you're allowed in a Clash.)

>>49611727
>pic rotated again
ARGH. WHY.

>>49611727

You wont have any space for supporting Frigates if you do that though, but yeah a Tokyo is 220 and a New York is 260 and a Beijin 250something means you can field two for a total of 480 points.

>>49611759
Use Windows Previewer to rotate it, Irfan View doesn't save the image rotation.

>>49611706
First off, you sound pretty mad, anon.
Secondly,
>stopping bombers
No one is expecting to stop bombers, what's important is to minimize the amount of crits. Just reducing it down from those statistical 4 hits is more than enough to neuter the Bellerophon for how expensive it is.

>FROM RANGES MORE THAN 12 AND EVEN THEN WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU GOING TO DO?
Score victory points while your bombers are en route.

>>49611727
I wonder if those bombardment guns are stronger than the madrid's.

>>49611659
Bombers stack though, so 2 Bellerophons 8 bombers attack together against 1 set of PD rolls and most frigates can't enter atmosphere.

>>49611689
Ships in atmosphere can only target things in scan range and only move 2 inches, so that is a short ranged force.

>>49611683
>>49611635

This.

That said, speed in Atmos is down to 2", so at some point you're going to have to come up for air.

Well, maybe not, the Charybdis can just sit there and murder your carriers with escape velocity weapons and you can't go too far from them or else they can pop up, zoom away and pop down... wait how many times can you change altitude in a turn?

UCM definitely need to ping those PHR Carriers before they get into bomber range (24") and give them THE LAZOR though.
Not sure what Scourge counters are, short of using their speed to get into close combat before they can be engaged, or spamming their own fighters to counter.
I suspect PHR are going to want (if I'm right about how this works) the highest ranked commander they can to win the Launch Assets phase as much as possible.

any video tutorials of assembling/magnetizing/painting the minis yet?

>>49611850
>Ships in atmosphere can only target things in scan range and only move 2 inches, so that is a short ranged force.

Yeah, but as >>49611859 said, so are 12" range bombers.

>>49611847
I've been wondering that too. I'm assuming the lock is the same, but the Madrid fires fewer shots. Just because, generally with Dave, weapons that look the same have the same lock/damage/special rules.

>>49611885

Maybe just the one bank of 5 shots?

>>49611904
That would make sense, yeah.

>>49611659
>>49611612

So as a note I would emphasize you can just combine bomber waves and they're pretty obviously better at focusing one target down.

This also isn't a love letter to PHR carrier spam so don't worry.

But anyway, 4 PHR bombers will be 4 crits and 2.66 hits (which against a 3+ save will be a little less than 1 damage). A pretty decent PD of 10 will get 3.33 PD hits, and so can nullify around 1 and a half of those crits.

It'll still do around 3.5 damage total which is less than a moscow going weapons free but also happens to be F/S/R at a reliable range.


a PD of 10 either has a jakarta, fighters or its a BB. A typical cruiser will have less even at full health.

I feel that normal bombers are much easier to handle with PD just considering that you're going to get 2/3 crits and 2/3 hits rather than 1 crit and 2/3rd hits. That sounds trivial but graphed against PD its a pretty significant difference.

For example, 4 normal bombers will be doing 2.66 crits and 2.66 hits, where 10 PD can clear 1.5 of those crits and those 2.66 hits will be saved down to .88 damage, leading to about 2 overall damage on average. That's a loss of 43%.

I think the main fleet that may have trouble against heavy carriers will be scourge, UCM should have enough PD and hull points around to survive 3-4 turns of constant bombers to take the fight to the fairly undefended carriers and Shaltari shields can save against crits from the PHR bombers.

PHR themselves have a rough time against bombers, their point defence is pretty bad, the scald of scourge bombers can do some work to PHR ships

I think the Scourge can field a decent launch force. 3 Hydras are 420 points, hit the launch cap for a clash and can all be in one line battlegroup. Their bombers hit on 3's but they do have scald.

>>49611885
One bank of 6, same lock value, but the Madrid is only 79 points.

>>49612013
Are Hydras launch 4 or launch 5?

>>49611830

As posted before, even with 10 PD you're going to be taking about as much as if I had just shot you with a good cruisers worth of guns. This is in addition to the cobra laser that the bellaphron has, making the actual projected damage of the heavy cruiser somewhere between 6-9 on average (because BTLs are wild as fuck) which handily out damages any other ship of its points cost.

>>49611985

I would be curious as to see how many jakartas people actually bring, as I'm not sure how much more points effective they are than just using fighters, considering that a carrier deploying fighters can be much further from harm than a jakarta hoping to tank bombers.

And speaking of fighters, PHR fighters are a nice little bonus and I think are understated since they're so easily proliferated by escort carriers.

>>49611985
>>49612013
Scourge bombers also have a little bit of extra range. And every inch counts when you're doubling/tripling it for attacks in future turns.

>>49611950

It's also worth pointing out that not only does PHR have the best bombers, but they also have the best spread of Launch capable ships as well.
Not just the Frigate (although those are nice auxiliary support) but also the Icarus and the Bellerophon and the Scipio.
On the other hand they're the only fleet to lack a Carrier variant Battleship.
So at Skirmisha and Battle (more the former than the latter), PHR have an advantage in being more easily able to hit that Launch Assets cap than their opponents, and they can make better use of it thanks to better bombers.
But at Battle then you start seeing multiple BB Carriers and enough tonnage on the board that not even all of the bombers will make a quick enough work of, and bunching all your carriers together certainly isn't going to be logistically feasible unless you embark on some very restrictive maneouvers that might end badly for you after an unlucky roll on the Catasrophic Damage chart... which as we pointed out last thread ALL OF YOUR FRIGATES ROLL ON.

But at Skirmish, you can fit a Scipio and a Bell into a single vanguard squadron for 390 points, then fill out the rest with a mothership and some strike carriers and maybe a pair of cruisers. You'll be relying on your Bombers to do the heavy lifting sure, but those bombers are going to be obnoxious for anything that can't go atmospheric to deal with.

>>49611985
PHR ship-side pd is the same or better than UCM though excepting light cruisers and while they don't have Jakartas their fighters add 4 pd each so I wouldn't call it bad.

>>49612062
Hydra's have 5.

Is everyone raving about the PHR bombers simply because they have a lock value of 2+ instead of 3+? Is it really that big of a difference?

>>49612144
>Is everyone raving about the PHR bombers simply because they have a lock value of 2+ instead of 3+? Is it really that big of a difference?
Very much so; They only have a 1/6 chance for each attack to miss, a 1/3 chance for each attack to hit, and a 1/2 chance for each chance to crit.
Statistically, each flight of bombers from a Bell will be doing 4 damage, since we're assuming that damage from normal hits will be less than 1 and negligible due to armor.

This is why PD is so important.

Here's a comparison that I think is appropriate

The ajax is your Phobos. Its mandatory to take and its pretty good at its job, a job that the game dictates is quite necessary.

The Scipio/Leonidas are your type 2 walkers. They hit like fucking trucks, they get in the brawl and they're pretty good at it.

The BB's are obviously Type 4 walkers. They're uniquely strong in the game.

Now the bellepheron is your Thor bombard. Its long range as fuck and has a gigantic damage capacity. Its a support ship pure and simple but if its allowed to just hang out in the back it'll fuck something up badly.

>>49612144

Yes, a 2+ vs a 3+ means a PHR bomber crits on a 4+ instead of a 5+ and criticals take 2 point defense hits to negate instead of 1. Its a deceptively small rules change that as I autistically demonstrated here >>49612064, can in some cases nearly double the amount of damage those bombers can do.

>>49612144
that (50% crit chance rather than 35%) and ease of access, they are great but I feel some ppl are panicking too much about them

>>49612144
has to do with crits, and so forth, so yes it is, every up or down 1 on a D6 is about 16% probability change

>>49612202
I don't think people are panicking, I think it's more PHR players getting all smug about how great their bombers are.

>>49612246
I just wish the bomberfags weren't so mean about the Orion/Hector, since I think they're actually some of the best looking ships in the PHR fleet

also I was too busy being a smug faggot about my bombers to see that Hector points cost: what a bunch of crap, bottom of the barrel. It's good in the starter fleet fights because I don't have to pay for it

>>49612269

Ajax, Odeus and Bellephron are pure sex to me

>>49612134
>Hydra's have 5.

Savage. That pretty much makes the UCM the worst by a country mile at Launch Assets. Since they're only just about the same in quality as the Scourge ones. I'm almost terrified to ask what the Demon gets.

>>49612283
Do not bully the Hector!

on a side note about bombers, if you are firing them over their range, they have to travel a turn or two. if you have assets chasing you in this way you can shake them off with a course change or max thrust special order, doing so you roll d6 for every asset chasing and on a 4+ it is removed, you can only do this on a 6+ to a torp but all it does is delay the torp 1 turn

>>49612320
you can also drive through debris if you want to clear them, you risk some damage but can shake a few of the bombers of your tail

>>49612320
>on a side note about bombers, if you are firing them over their range, they have to travel a turn or two.
Is their range the thrust value listed, or is it double the thrust value?

>if you have assets chasing you in this way you can shake them off with a course change or max thrust special order, doing so you roll d6 for every asset chasing and on a 4+ it is removed
Nice, glad to see there's a third layer of defense against bombers.

File: 1281379.jpg (41KB, 640x480px)

41KB, 640x480px

>>49612298

You misspelt Achilles there somewhere. That tiny torpedo, just sitting there, not doing anything, you know it's going to be good!

I mean sure, statwise it's MONSTROUSLY overspecialised, but it looks cool!

File: Shaltari bs Platinum.jpg (576KB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

576KB, 3264x2448px

>>49612304
Previously Dave said the Platinum had the highest launch capacity in the game at 9. That's obviously changed, but I think we can be confident the Dragon has a capacity of less that 9, for whatever reassurance that is.

I also keep thinking the Demon is the carrier one and the Dragon is the guns one. I really don't know why.

>>49612345
the thrust value is their range
so 12" for UCM and PHR 15 for scourge and shaltari

>>49612357
I'm guessing the Daemon is going to be a launch value of 6, since that's the only place it can fit between the New York and the Platinum.

>>49612376
Neat, for some reason I thought their range was double their thrust for the first turn.

So if a PHR bomber wants to get something sitting 36" inches away (and somehow staying in position), it'll have to take 3 turns to get there?

>>49612246
They're not really getting smug. It's more that broadsides are underwhelming so bombers are the clear build.

I would much prefer to be shooting lots of guns, but... the broadsides simply aren't very good.

>>49612283
I know, it's complete crap. Overpriced as fuck.

Which is a shame because it's one of the coolest looking ships in the fleet.

File: 9dede0911c009157eacf7f7da370810d_original.jpg (226KB, 680x835px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 680x835px

>>49612378

Yeah, so looking at the model it doesn't seem to have any "jaw" guns at all, so I'm thinking that the Hydra literally just has that 5 Launch capacity and a single 2 shot Occulus Array as it's entire loadout. It's a pure carrier.
Compared to say the UCM's carriers which are really multirole vessels that just happen to have launch capacity as an afterthought.
Which, now that I think about it, is very UCM isn't it? They don't have the manpower to waste them on attrition based fighter tactics like the Scourge can.

File: Mothman.gif (17KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 320x240px

Our new meme is the Moth signal

>>49612448
>Overpriced as fuck
It's about as expensive as any other heavy gun cruiser with comparable weaponry; it's exactly the same cost as the Shenlong (assuming that Wayland is correct), and has equivalent damage output just from its broadsides outside of scald range. It's burnthrough puts it on parity with the stealth.

>>49612493
Occulus beams are actually single shot, 2 damage, but otherwise everything else is totally correct.

>>49612493
I think the hydra is even more of a pure carrier than that, if I remember correctly the scourge ships outside the yokai/sphinx/shenlong triad are just 1 single shot with 2 damage. A single harpy frigate puts out the same shooting as a hydra carrier or chimera mothership or whatever.

I assume the raiju has the 2 shot array though, given its got the same crest as the shenlong. But you're taking the raiju for its burnthroughs, the guns are a bonus.

>>49612283
Wait, does the starter fleet only come with the sprues to build the exact ships shown?

File: unnamed (1).jpg (52KB, 603x804px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 603x804px

>>49612556

>>49612621

Ugh. I'm now really torn with what to make my fifth Scourge cruiser into. I was going to go with a Ifrit because I really like how multi functional the Furnace Cannons are, and I can upgrade to a Raiju when needed, but 5 Launch capacity sounds really good as well.

Plus, unlike the Manticore-Basilisk, it's not just a simple jaw component swap, it's a jaw and wing swap.

>>49612626

No you can build whatever you want, there's just a recommended starter ship pamphlet and people are playing those against each other

>>49612658

That's not bad at all really. It's firepower is no worse than a Moscow in broadsides, whilst from the front and weapons free it's actually a fair bit more deadly.

>>49612612

The issue is that it's weaponry is pretty evenly split in three seperate arcs with zero overlap and it's fucking expensive on top of it. An Orion and two pandoras would cost a little more but at least you could aim all the guns at one ship

>49612346

It's not really that bad, H+S are looking to be making up quite a few ships in the average fleet and it'll be nice to be able to reliably plink those heavy ships. They thankfully seem to have given heavy and light guns quite the discount, considering the Ajax is 70 less points than a Hector for having one less BTL.

And yes the super cheap torpedo helps a lot.

>>49612725
That's kind of the point of broadsides, anon. Complaining that you can't hit one target with both broadsides, and that you have to maneuver to get maximum overall damage, is like complaining that BTLs are a narrow arc and that they can't shoot at anything you want them to.

I am fully expecting PHR broadsides to be excellent if admirals can actually pull off the maneuvering needed.

>>49612677
I feel like I'm going to run a scourge cruiser into that thing thinking I'll eat it in CA attacks, only to get fucking rocked by the Aura, harpoon cascade and disintegrator battery. That's what, a minimum of 11 shots close in, and you don't even need to go weapons free since they're all CA weapons except for one?

>>49612771
>>49612677

Now that I think of it, with a scan range of 12" that effectively makes Shaltari CAW double the range of most other CAW's doesn't it?

The Basalt for instance has a potential threat range of 22" with those CAWs, that's pretty damn nasty, and that's all round coverage as well.

>>49612797

Except it's broadsides are equivalent to a normal cruisers. They're not better in any way. It costs 70% more than its identical ship for having a few more hull and a BTL.

The Leonidas on the other hand is a ravenous beast of a broadsides ship and will be excellent at what it does for less than a corvette more in price.

>>49612725
I think a group of Orions is actually a good idea.

Don't even go for the big weapons free at first. Circle around the edges, using your superior range and ability to fire 8 shots per ship without going weapons free to focus down ships without taking much appreciable return fire.

>>49612859
>They're not better in any way. It costs 70% more than its identical ship for having a few more hull and a BTL.

>each Pandora is about 40 points, each with a single supernova laser
>Hector gets two of these for 63 points, along with two more hull points
Seems fair to me.

>>49612859
Yeah, this is my problem with it. The difference between a Moscow and a Rio is huge, but the Hector is barely better than am Orion despite its cost. I don't think Orions are that bad in teams, but an Orion + 1 extra hull and a better forward gun is NOT worth like 70 extra points.

I'm hoping Hawk notice how defunct a lot of PHR stuff seems to be and release an early errata.

>>49612845
>>49612918
so for 15 points you get
>2 hull
>3 PD
all the launch capacity for troops you will probably need
>lose 2 inches of thrust
I'm not sure how often I'd want to bring Azurites unless I really want to group them up.

>>49612959
Instead of comparing a Hector to the Orion, you should instead be thinking about how the Orion has heavy cruiser level firepower.
Instead of thinking of the Hector in terms of PHR cruisers, you should be comparing it to other faction's heavy cruisers.

For example, on the average, the Hector's (and Orion's) combined broadsides are equivalent to all of the Moscow's turrets doing weapons free, and the Hector in addition gets a prow burnthrough laser.

>>49612911

You know what, feel free to try it. Be the guy who runs Ares, menchits and Hyperions. Just own it and don't complain.

>>49612959

Orion pairs are growing on me (which is to say I don't think they're unplayable garbage anymore) but man, Ajax are sweet. Nice and specialized and with a little kick on the closing vector.

And if the Perseus ends up being like 80 points I'll eat my hat and take one. Considering how cheap light and heavy broadsides ended up being, that's not ridiculous.

Do PHR really only have one LC though? I would love a supernova equipped LC

>>49612911
Pandoras aren't just paying for the laser. They're a whole ship. Five HP, a bunch of PD, frigate thrust, etc.

Okay, maths. Against Armor 3+ various BTL's average the following amount of damage :

Supernova Laser : 1.086

Cobra Heavy Laser : 2.716

Viper Super-Heavy Laser : 5.18

>>49613021
>You know what, feel free to try it. Be the guy who runs Ares, menchits and Hyperions. Just own it and don't complain.
You know it, baby; I'll be sure to report how well or poorly I do here.
If they do end up being utter shit, kudos to you.

>>49613078
How'd you do the math for it?

>>49612959

The Hector went up points so it is doubtful.

On paper its weapons seem to stack up with the Avalon. It is the only way to get a UCM power level laser, which has the advantage of being able to generate more critical hits than a Pandora combo.

I don't think it is that overpriced. Especially if the broadside stuff turns out to be better than it looks.

>>49613012
I am comparing it to other faction's heavies. The Hector is far less effective than the Moscow or the Petersburg. It gets way less out of the bulk up to a heavy chassis.

The Hector will almost never be in a position to fire its BLT and broadsides, no matter how good you are at positioning. On approach it's a less effective Berlin. Once lines meet it's an overpriced Orion. The huge point cost is not worth that.

It's garbage, dude.

>>49613027

That can be both a plus and minus. A frigate is easy to eat with a single BTL.

A few shots in and your weapons start disappearing where as the hector could be at standoff and just plink away at spiked ships with its laser.

>>49613103
Uh, the Bell has a UCM level laser.

Really, the Hector is just in an awkward place.

It wants to get close to fire its broadsides, but once it gets really close the chances of it shooting its BLT are super low. It seems like it will almost always be running at half efficiency.

On the other hand, the Bellerophon can sit back and zap shit while sending horrible rapist bombers to ruin people's day.

>>49613128
>The Hector is far less effective than the Moscow or the Petersburg
If you're only taking one of its arcs, maybe.

>The Hector will almost never be in a position to fire its BLT and broadsides
And when it is, it will make up for its points cost.

>On approach it's a less effective Berlin
It's EXACTLY as effective as the Cairo, Berlin, or St. Pete on approach.

>Once lines meet it's an overpriced Orion
With the opportunity to fire its BTL into the backfield if the opportunity presents itself, along with it being available as it swings around in the middle.

>The huge point cost is not worth that.
Maybe if you're insistent on using it ineffectually.

>It's garbage, dude.
We'll see, but I adamantly disagree.

>>49613012

>a Hector can do cruisers damage across in three arcs while a Moscow can just do two cruisers worth of damage in one arc on one ship

You're not making a convincing argument here. Especially when you can just take a Leonidas instead or two Ajax for way more firepower at a very modest price increase.

The Hector at 150 would be viable I think.

>>49613079

You could have stopped this

>>49613103

>only way to get a UCM laser

Bellephron

>stacks up with the Avalon

I'll spoil you on the math, the broadsides will do 2.5 damage in each arc and the BTL will do around 2.7 for around 7.7 damage total if there's a target in each arc.

Also keep in mind you can't turn when you go weapons free, so it has to have its F(N) lined up ahead of time plus have a target already in its left and right arcs.
The Avalon can do 5.18 + 2.5 = 7.68 in its front arc on one ship. It doesn't stack up at all, the Avalon will win the fight every time.


Im not even shitting on broadsides here, the Leonidas is a wonderful ship for doing the gameplay you're thinking of. It puts out fucking 3.83 damage per arc for a total of 7.68 and it's much better at getting close to do it

>>49613138

So the sig 3" frigates are getting popped at long range but the sig 6" heavy cruiser is going to be unmolested.

>>49613092
Bleh. The long way. I couldn't find a way to formula it out for more than one shot. So I just sucked it up and made a spreadsheet.

>>49613205

I feel like you're afraid of having specialized ships that are good at their jobs which sadly is PHRs entire design philosophy

>>49613215
>A hector can do a (PHR) cruisers worth of damage + a beam in three arcs, while a Moscow is a cruiser and a light cruiser worth of damage
You're comparing apples to oranges, anon.

>The Hector at 150 would be viable I think.
I wouldn't go that low, having it sit at 160 or 165 with the Achilles would be better.

>You could have stopped this
Het, I won't admit that I'm wrong until RNGesus himself forces the truth into my head.

>>49613241
No, I just really like the design of the Hector, want it to be viable, and don't think that it's as bad as everyone is saying it is. Broadsides also look more fun than carrier spam.

>>49613194

It's sad because an Orion + two Europas will absolutely shit on things with their broadsides for about the same cost as a Hector or an Ajax plus a few pandoras can poke pretty efficiently for around the same cost.

People need to get away from thinking about ships and think more of battlegroups.

I actually think the Orion is fine, it's just that the Ikarus is better in every way.

It's even better at broadsiding. Going weapons free an Orion will be shooting 8 lock 4 shots on either side. Cool. The Ikarus will spit out 4 lock 4 shots and effectively 4 lock 2 shots on each side, and the lock 2 can be focused either way for maximum efficiency. Plus they can hit things out of scan range in the early turns, even if they're silent running.

File: btl.pdf (1B, 486x500px)

1B, 486x500px

>>49613078
if you wanted to save some time, ive got a table with all the numbers

>>49613304

I think it's a slick looking ship but it's unspecialized enough to not be all that hot for its points cost.

It's why the Perseus isn't a super great looking pick either (unless it turns out to be super cheap)

The Achilles on the other hand I think is a perfectly viable ship for its point cost.

>>49613313

They laughed until I did 14 medium shots per broadside into their unsculpted baseline asses. 3.83 damage per broadside altogether for less than a Leonidas.

>>49613381
What kind of formulas do you have going there? I couldn't figure anything out for the 2-4 shot BTL's. The damage cap's influence on the final value kept throwing me off.

>>49613506
I actually wrote a c++ console application to run everything -- its a little over-complicated the way it does things since I had it originally setup to calculate individual "dice-lines" the way BTL's used to work
If you want I can post my code up and you can see how my formulas work -- hell ill prolly through it on github and that way anyone who wants to can run the program for any given BTL they want (real or imaginary)

>>49611727
>clearly has three bombardment guns
>only two shots
dave...

>>49614210
whatcha mean anon? It's got 10 shots!

>>49614264
Was looking at the damage column.
Still, the number of profiles and the number of shots are multiples of 2, not 3. Seems weird.

I suppose it's just so that you can spread bombardment over multiple sectors?

>>49614404
based on posting in the thread and guesswork, its supposed to be 2 madrids glued together. Lets you hit 2 sectors, as you noted.

Where is a good place to buy DZC/DFC models in the US?

>>49614498
The War Store and Miniature Market usually have pretty good deals, if stuff is in stock.

>>49612311
>>49613012
>>49613205
>>49613304
Your shipfu a shit, much like your slutty waifu.

>>49614773
>>49614917
Wow m8 fuck you.

>>49614917
>>49614773

I don't get it, is Orion or Hector Indian?

>>49615175
No, he's just a memelord friend who I was talking to about the game and he somehow found his way to this thread.

File: bully all day erry day.jpg (54KB, 762x613px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 762x613px

>>49615175
He's a steam friend who was telling me about the Hector, so I checked /tg/ (knowing that he's a fa/tg/uy), found his thread, and mocked his shipfu and his waifu (Kida, from Atlantis).

Polite sage for off-topic.

>>49615270

He at least said it was shit right

>>49615322
Stop bullying and go to sleep, fgt.

>>49615322

>hector lovers are dumb hillary voters too

you have to go back.

File: MFW FUKKEN CHINA.png (455KB, 403x521px) Image search: [Google]

455KB, 403x521px

>>49615515
>Implying I'm not 100% in support of the God Emperor

File: (((god-emperor))).jpg (220KB, 3000x1688px)

220KB, 3000x1688px

>>49615660
>implying your (((god-emperor))) is the same as ours
Try harder, buddy :3

File: trunp.png (557KB, 1239x857px) Image search: [Google]

557KB, 1239x857px

>>49615322
>>49615515
>>49615660
>>>/pol/

so, we got shaltari cruisers this thread. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only stats we're missing are UCM frigates, UCM cruisers (for the most part), scourge cruisers and frigates, the Demon for scourge and shaltari frigates along with the shaltari Diamond. Once we get those, we should have just about everything.

>>49615888
Pretty much.

File: Oppressor.jpg (126KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 960x640px

We're all in agreement that the Oppressor is one of the best looking Scourge units, right?

>>49616306
only thing that fights it for me is the desolator, because that thing is goddamn sex in the sky. Oppressor definitely looks good though.

Can someone tell me what is the 'impaler' trait in some shaltari weapon?

File: desolator_8_1024x1024[1].jpg (89KB, 900x600px)

89KB, 900x600px

>>49616322
Agreed; such a shame that the Desolator is rather sub par rules-wise.

>>49616329
We don't have the exact rules yet, but supposedly "Impel" allows you to turn the heading of the target ship some amount if the hit is successful.

In what order are they shipping? Where's my shit? REEEEEEEEEE

File: 1455561875230.gif (8MB, 641x360px)

8MB, 641x360px

>>49616376
>mfw there will be no changes to original DZC units
>mfw the desulator will never be fixed
>mfw things will only get worse with power creep

>>49616473
>In what order are they shipping? Where's my shit? REEEEEEEEEE
Based on where shit is in the warehouse, weighted towards Lieutenants and britbongs.

I'm expecting a lot of shit to be shipped out come Monday.

I always thought that a ship can fire its weapon before or after its movement, is that correct?

>>49616487
I bet they're just waiting for DZC 2.0 to rebalance all the core units, along with all the added units in the phases.

r-right?

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ci1w3beqaeu5nca/AADismn1gX0dYWShk45csdRca?dl=0

Collection of ship stat images. Might be some new here, can't remember seeing Taipei or Toulon for instance.

>>49616597
>Diamond has crippling on the Particle Lance
Not the face!

did that one anon ever finish that jungle devil X ucm trooper fic?

>>49616597
So Hydra has launch 5, and is 140 points. that means you can add +15 PD to something getting harassed by bombers. That gives the heavy cruisers for Scourge 21 PD against a bombing run, which seems like a decent amount of protection. Not amazing but it can mitigate a bombing run for a turn or two until your boys get in close. Additionally the Dragon has 3 launch, meaning it can give itself 9 extra PD, meaning it also can have 21 PD if it needs it.

>>49616665
Nope, and I curse the world for its unfinished state.

>>49616753
>Nope, and I curse the world for its unfinished state.
>4chan might be shutting down and that high quality smut might never see the light of day in a finished form
Obama, if you see this, please hit my apartment with a hellfire missile from a drone, i dont want to exist anymore

>>49616826
>implying Shkreli isn't the hero 4chan needs
If push comes to shove, there's always 8/tg/

>>49616597
Excellent, thank you anon!

>>49616753

Never mind the Demon having 21pd potentially, LOOK AT IT'S MOTHERFUCKING LOCK 2+ D6+2 CAW ATTACKS!
HOLY SHIT!

That Thrust of 8 means that it's actually pretty speedy in general terms. It can't chase down faster stuff like light cruisers or frigates, but with only 2 weapons systems aside from the CAW's and one of them obviously superior to the other you could abuse Come About orders to make a 90 degree turn with your Battleship and catch someone out with a Furnace Cannon + Plasma Cyclone combo to the face from an angle they aren't expecting.
Sure that ups your sig to 24, but fuck it, you're an Armour 3+ Battleship, what are they gonna do? Shoot you?

Also, is it me or is that 8" scan range better than all other Scourge vessels?

>>49618158
All battleships apart from Shaltari ones have an extra 2" of scan range compared to the rest of the fleet.

>>49616597

>The Alt mode of the Daemon and Dragons Furnace Cannons trade a point of Lock for an extra attack dice.

Hmmm, I'm not sure that extra attack dice is worth it. That said, those Furnace Cannons of the BB's are really secondary weapons to either compound Occulus banks or terrifying CAW arrays + Torpedoes.

>>49618191

Huh neat. Giving the Demon a really nasty CAW probably makes the best use of that extra range though.

>>49616597

Can anyone explain the Yokai is 95 points? The Stryx got upped to 90 because you can't have something at 75 be THAT potentially dangerous up close with a speed of 12". But why does the Yokai need the points bump. Yes that's a decent weapons array it's got, but it's on a pretty fragile weapons platform all ready, it won't take much to punch that thing out, and it needs to go weapons free to get the best effect.
So why is it 5 points more than the Stryx?
Also, it looks like Scourge get the worst Orbital Bombardment weapon, but also the cheapest, so I guess it's the old Quantity over Quality method for them.

>The Obsidian Particle Lances are all individual weapons profiles

Dissappoi...

>...two of them are linked-1

NEVER MIND! ALL IS FORGIVEN! PRESIDENTIAL PARDONS FOR ALL!

THAT... is a really nice mechanic. You can fire two, but to go three you have to funnel all power to the guns and go weapons free. I really like the theme of that.

>>49618203
You gain go from max damage 4 to 8 as well though

>>49618262
I'm slightly surprised by all the scourge cruisers' points values. Like, look at the the middle-of-the-line gun cruisers for scourge and shaltari:
>sphinx: 115
>amber: 110
...and BTL equivalents:
>ifrit: 110
>granite: 100
I had though scourge would have some of the cheaper ships in the game, but they seem to have some things that are more expensive than the shaltari.

>>49618386
You've got mode 1 and mode 2 mixed up. Mode 2 is max damage 4 for both cruiser and BB versions. Mode 1 is actually identical for both the Cruiser and Battleships as 4 4+ attacks with a max BT limit of 8. Also, no flash rule, so no spikes.

Statistically, I'm not sure I can think of a single time going mode 1 would ever be a good idea. Since on average you're only doing 3 hits, none of which have good odds of being critical, whilst mode two (for the cruiser) is much more reliably going to be 4 damage with at least a couple of crits.
The Battleship should be able to get it up to 4 as well, although it's a bit less reliable, but with slightly better odds of getting a crit earlier.

>>49618417

I feel like comparing anything to the Shaltari is a fools game given how different they are, we should wait for full UCM ship disclosure and compare them with those.

>I had though scourge would have some of the cheaper ships in the game, but they seem to have some things that are more expensive than the shaltari.

To be fair they have a lot going for them, speed to offset their poor armour and sig, insanely good CAW, the cruiser carrier with the most launch capacity, no really these CAW's are insane, inarguably at least the second best BTL's in the game, maybe even THE best if you want reliable damage and crits over higher BTL limits, I'm not kidding about those Close Action Weapons guys, especially you Demon Battleship with your goddamn 2+ lock CAWs.

Shaltari are probably cheaper on the grounds of having poorer armour or poor sig and PD's that only work half the time. Or that they're just so weird it's hard to cost them properly.

>>49618600
About the only thing I can think of for mode 1 is shooting at stuff in atmosphere. Apart from their corvette, the scourge have a real problem with this - their low rate of fire means they can't really throw dice at the problem and hope for 6s. I think the furnace cannon's 4 shot more is actually the highest rate of fire weapon the scourge have, so arguably is best suited to this role.

I'd still rather use it to try to crit some hullpoints off an enemy cruiser though.

>>49618671
Yeah that makes sense, you need to be scan range to attack things in atmosphere though, so... scourge DO actually have a weapon with more shots at that range, it's their CAW's.
Sure, up until now they've been used to hitting on 3's, but fuck it, let's throw those 2D6+4 attacks downstairs and see how that New Orleans likes having to deal with 11 attacks, all with scald for extra surety. I only need a two luck sixes to cripple!

Oh, and let's fire our normal guns as well why not.

>>49618600
There are a few things that fuck with your lock values, like atmo and Calypsos. In those cases the raw weight of fire can be very nice.

File: 1475442831731.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>49618692
Sadly, you can't fire CA into atmosphere (unless you have the A2A rule) otherwise that'd be perfect.

>>49618695

Yeah, I do keep forgetting about that +1 to Lock Values thing differing layers have going for them.

The Calypsos only work for one weapon system per turn though, and are rare as well. Scourge I think get more out of throwing cheaper smaller combatants at bigger targets, using their bigger ships to deal with smaller vessels. Well, the Demon is the exception since it's all around mean to everyone and everything but generally you want a battlegroup to deal with a Battleship, and a Battlecruiser to deal with a frigate squadron or isolated cruisers.

>>49618710

Well shit. Although it probably did have to happen for balance purposes. Corvettes seem more vital than ever for each race now.
Well, maybe not PHR, the Light Broadsides sheer weight of fire looks like it'd actually be pretty good for this.
Echo's are statwise the best 'vettes though so it's swings and roundabouts.

>>49618287
Really good spot. That is a big bonus for the Obsidian, it can put two big nasty particle shots downrange on standard orders. The ability to manoeuvre to line up your F(N) guns is probably more valuable than avoiding the spike.

Anyone else starting to play with possible lists? Maybe I'm too keen on my big ships, but I'm having to make compromises to fit a starter fleet (3 cruisers & 4 frigates) into 500 points, and also to fit 2 starter fleets into 999 points, some models are going to have to stay on the shelf. And that's without paying points for an admiral. Or leaving points spare for when we get corvette models.

>>49618781

With the increase in ship costs across the board, I think it's entirely possible now to get upto 1000pts if you went for a Battlecruiser as well as your 4 starting cruisers and 2 frigate sprues. They'd be a little top heavy though.

when will we get rulebook scan ?

>>49618836
Well, not a backer, so getting into this in units of starter fleets.

>>49618877

Then no. Starter fleet boxes will be around 500 to 600 points depending on what race you pick and what ships you choose. Each box of Frigates is about 300pts and each box of Cruisers (although variable depending on what you pick of course) should be around 250, unless you go double heavy cruisers or something.

File: tumblr_nx5gs4bYU21sesp2ko1_1280.png (238KB, 562x324px)

238KB, 562x324px

>I don't even have all the rules and the ship stats
>I've already started making lists as well as my terrible homebrew faction
Is there a cure?

>>49619220
Tell us about your homebrew.

>>49616487
>>49616551

People keep saying Dave said this, but I don't think that is what he meant. He was talking about the Menchit v1. The design was flawed and he was stating that he wasn't go to drasticaly change the load out or anything.

There have already been balance fixes for a lot of the 1st phase units. If there is ever a DZ 2.0 you bet there will be across the board unit changes.

>>49619260
I named them the Nashan but I'm open to alternatives if someone is actually good at naming things. They're an alien race of funny looking peacock-lizard guys who have slightly better tech than the UCM. Similarly to humanity's story, Shaltari picked them up, helped them expand and then told them to fight against another tribe. The difference is that these guys didn't back out and spent several decades sending their troops into a meat grinder before getting fed up and betraying their masters (with the help of their former enemies, of course). After that they fucked around for a while and eventually came into contact with the UCM. Diplomacy is taking place, but both species are heavily militarized and were fucked over by aliens in the past, so there are occasional hostilities.

An important note gameplay-wise is that their military is gender segregated and males are in totally different roles to females. The men are more aggressive and focus on speed and sometimes stealth, while the women do defensive work and just make their ships/vehicles as well-protected as possible. For that reason the female ships (medium/heavy cruisers and battleships) are very slow and tough while the male ships (corvettes, frigates, light cruisers and battlecruisers) are much faster and more fragile. They also fucking love missiles and have non-CA missile weapons that put out a huge number of shots with the drawback that a target can use half its PD against them. That rule is in its early stages though and will end up being adjusted. I haven't thought of a naming convention for the different ships, so if anybody has some suggestions I'd be happy to receive them.

File: Beast_mothership.jpg (42KB, 600x538px)

42KB, 600x538px

>>49619220
Are you me? Pic related is what I've been toying with.

File: Ricky-Gervais-Putting-Head-Back-and-Laughing.gif (429KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

429KB, 500x281px

>>49619526
>Males go out and bring home the bacon
>Women stay at home to keep the kitchen tidy

>>49611727
>Linked bombardment profiles
Bombardment targeting sectors rather than clusters confirmed?

>>49619338
Hopefully you're right, anon; Some of the core units are too awesome looking to not be updated.

>>49619782
I'd assumed so. Thought that was why the PHR had built ships with both bombing and landing capability, so they can bombard one sector while landing troops on another.
>yo dawg etc. etc.

>>49612394
I think you're not allowed to launch at all unless they're inside thrustx2, which is good to avoid having three waves of bombers hit you at the same time on turn 3.

Also last thread someone asked why you would use fighters as bomber escorts when you could just use more bombers. The answer is because the carrier launching the fighters is outside of bomber range and wants to support another carrier.

File: WW1 tank.jpg (187KB, 798x413px)

187KB, 798x413px

>>49619526
Give the male ships high rate of fire weapons and the female ships single shot, powerful weapons. Watch as you accumulate nerd-cred for your military history knowledge.

>>49612677
>Shaltari bombardment ships double as close action monsters
Seems pretty good for multirole, and nice job Dave on making the choice of which to do interesting since you need to be placed forward for both

File: Proudpepe.png (244KB, 400x400px)

244KB, 400x400px

>tfw Taipei: Piranha Missile Bay D6+4

Not as killy as the Djinn, but a pair of these guys is likely to throw down 16 4+ shots. Avg 8 hits for 78 points. Neat!

>>49612725
>pretty evenly split in three seperate arcs
>everything can fire into the front arc

>>49619877

>Thought that was why the PHR had built ships with both bombing and landing capability, so they can bombard one sector while landing troops on another.

Well, not necersarily, shooting happens before the troop phase after all, so you could soften a zone before your troops make the drop.

>>49619934

Also, don't forget Shaltari CAW benefits from them having that huge Scan range.

So, you can hit people with your beam CAW's from 12" away whilst your opponent with his scan of 6" and your sig of 3 or so means he'd STILL have to get closer to you JUST to fire normal weapons, and if this is a Palladium we're talking about then you could impel them so they can even turn to face you to get close in the first place.

>>49612959
>I'm hoping Hawk notice how defunct a lot of PHR stuff seems to be and release an early errata.
I'm hoping Hawk bases their decisions on actual gameplay where the objectives, interplay, and "terrain" matter

>>49612993
The vectored rule is actually really good. You get to turn twice per turn, and can turn mid-movement.

>>49613128
>The Hector will almost never be in a position to fire its BLT and broadsides
Consider this scenario:
Your PHR opponent is doing some objective-oriented play. Doesn't matter what in particular. Simultaneously is Hector is barreling forward into the ultimate firing position. Now obviously you could scrap that Hector, but then you'll have way less firepower to stop his other plans.

The power of broadsides is that a ship can *demand* your attention, and punish you heavily if you choose to ignore it.

>>49619997

Yup, we don't know how useful broadsides are going to be. Everyone seems to be pointing at lasers and turrets and thinking those are the only things that are going to get shots.

A lot of this stuff survive multiple rounds of beta tests so we may be completely wrong in our theory crafting so far.

>>49620013
Not quite; vectored only allows you the normal one turn, but you can do it at any time.

An example of this being useful is an Azurite going straight ahead, turning 45 degrees to hit a ship to its side at the end of its movement, and then turning 45 degrees at the beginning of its next activation in order to continue going straight, or go some other direction.

Effectively, Vectored makes the Shaltari's light cruisers have a F(N) arc the size of their front arc, +/- 11 degrees.

>>49620091

But you can do that equally well if not better with numerous other battlegroups and ships.
You CAN ignore that Hector because it's a Hector and ultimately it doesn't really matter. It's gonna average 2 or 3 damage on a target a turn, the BTL might do a bit better but that's F(n) so it's arc is pretty restricted.

You want a fucking distraction that will punish you heavily for ignoring it? Try a Bellerophon, or a Scipio, or fuck even a pair of Theseus's will do better on account of having double the average hits and the same amount of crits on the broadside AND they can split their fire to hammer frigate squadrons more easily.

File: IMG_7775.jpg (143KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 600x400px

>>49616487
>miss me yet?

>>49619945
Don't you mean 15? 4+3.5?

>>49618600
>Statistically, I'm not sure I can think of a single time going mode 1 would ever be a good idea.
When you're worried about whiffing it.

>>49620188
Always. But you hurt to many people. You're dead in my area.

>>49620153

In fact, double Theseus's (Theseusese? Theseusi?) are REALLY good when you compare with a Hector. More than 5 total HP than a Hector, the combined firepower of a Leonidas, thrust 10" instead of 7" and they take up a M slot instead of a H slot so you don't have to waste a vanguard squadron on them. All for only 10 points more than a single Hector.

The only weakness they have is a heavily reduced PD score, so if you need to keep them alive then they're gonna need to be paired up with an Ikarus. Which is another 6 Light Caliber shots.
That squadron is going to be murder on Strike Carriers and fellow light cruisers.

I kind of want to throw some dice and see how well they'd stack up to a 2x Stryx 3x Djinn Battlegroup in a firefight.
I'm imagining a lot of death on each side.

>>49620153
>You CAN ignore that Hector because it's a Hector and ultimately it doesn't really matter.
Ok, I know the Bellerophon is an (arguably) superior choice for heavy slot, and definitely so for the Leo, but where is this fresh new meme coming from that the Hector is useless?

>>49620227

I play Blood Bowl. I know full well that as long as I don't utter the phrase "anything but a 1" as I roll it will be fine. Plus whilst you should get SOME hits in with mode 1, those hits are far less likely to be crits, so unless you're spamming it against a badly crippled cruiser with broken armour at scan range, then mode 2 is still probably gonna net you more damage.

>>49620153
>Hectors in optimum position don't do great damage
Simply false, in such a position it will considerably out-damage a Bellerophon, which cannot throw itself into the fray to achieve the same effect.

>>49620188
Not really. 40k as a game is like 40k as a setting: It's great fun until you try to take it at all seriously. Hawk doesn't do perfect balance but at least they try.

>>49620257
The Theseus lacks the super handy BTLs to use in the approach phase though

>>49618386
yeah, over all the average damage is better on 4-shot mode for things with 5 armor, 4+armor in scald range, and shaltari shields.
You ALSO have to consider the possibilities of a chance for the much higher damage cap possibly crippling the target that 4 damage wouldn't

>>49620352
Haaaaa... no.

The Bellerophon's bombers work just as well at close range as at a distance. Its twin supernova is identical to the Hector's, whereas its bomber capacity will on average do more damage than even a weapons free Hector.

This is eight hits a 2+ lock we're talking here, that can target F/S/B, and have a longer-than-scan range. It takes a PD of like 25 to reliably be making a dent in the average damage a bomber wave from the Bellerophon will do.

>>49620352

Are you high. A full Bomber strike from a Bell is clocking in 3h4crits at 12" for a straight away strike or 24" if you can endure giving your opponent a turn to try and evade them, which has tactical considerations all of itself.

>muh PD

Will account, and I'm being polite here, about 1 or 2 crits, which leaves he with 3 or 4 damage a turn and what's more the Bell can toss that out from any direction even behind him.

Even then, even if somehow despite two whole threads of explaining this to you you still aren't getting it, even if you somehow can't see the Bell being a better choice, there's STILL the JUST AS BETTER option of a pair of Theseus Light Cruisers which are faster, hittier and only take up a medium slot.

>>49620283
again, mode 2 gives more damage against targets with 3+ saves or 4+ saves outside scald range (see the pdf above)

>>49620376

So does the Leo though, and were talking the same sort of firepower here but in a Line Squadron which is super good.

>>49620432
>ven then, even if somehow despite two whole threads of explaining this to you you still aren't getting it

>there can't be more than one person that disagrees with me, no siree

>>49620442

Okay, I can kind of see the uses now, I'd forgotten that Shaltari shields kind of balances things out.

>>49620467

Maybe he's clinging to the vague assumption that there can't be more than one person so bereft of basic mental arithmatic or pattern recognition.

Naive of him for sure.

>>49620475
yup, now the weird thing is that in most games, you will likely use one mode or the other -- against phr you will always use mode 2, against ucm, you'll pretty much always use mode 2, against shaltari you will always use mode 1, against scourge depends on range

>>49620518
Rude, and in any case, you're only comparing the bombers vs. PD and armor.
Remember that assets which go through fine debris are destroyed on a 3+, ones that go through coarse debris are destroyed on a 5+ (albeit they also give lock penalties to ships shooting through them), and that ships can shake launch assets on a 4+ when doing course change or max thrust.
Even without terrain, the maneuvering defense still reduces a flight from the Bellerophon to only 2 bombers, and it works against ALL launch assets going after that ship, although with the cost of a minor spike.

In an empty battlefield, no one is denying that the Bellerophon is superior to the Hector. In an actual game however, with terrain and maneuvering, I have a feeling that the Bellerophon isn't going to be as flat-out powerful as you're presuming it to be, along with carriers in general.

Do bombers have to return to the carrier after an attack? Are they assumed to teleport back?

>>49620624
It's abstracted away so that a carrier has functionally infinite launch assets, with assets launching and returning all the time, and that the tokens are just removed after they complete their mission.

>>49620624

Yeah, same as in BFG.

>>49620598

Valid, but forcing your opponent to do all of those things has tactical uses as well. Don't forget going through fine debris fields aren't exactly painless for the ship in question either. Heck a pair of 2+ lock on attacks might actually be more damaging than the bombers he's trying to shake off.

Or that the Hector won't suffer from terrain either, it's already needing 4+ to hit in standard conditions anyway, debris fields make that even worse. So were back to where we started.

So, consider the following

Atalanta Class Battleship

Usual PHR BB stats but is armed with:

Light Calibre Cannonade 5+/18/1 L
Light Calibre Cannonade 5+/18/1 R
Medium Calibre Turret Battery 4+/8/1 F/L/R

Would you use it?

>>49620651
>Valid, but forcing your opponent to do all of those things has tactical uses as well.
Both for you, and for them as well. While it may not be their preferred action, a course change can still be useful for the opponent, at least as a secondary measure; the save against launch assets is just an added bonus.

>Don't forget going through fine debris fields aren't exactly painless for the ship in question either. Heck a pair of 2+ lock on attacks might actually be more damaging than the bombers he's trying to shake off.
Fair point, but this just brings up a major question:
How do launch assets travel to their target? Are they allowed to turn and move in curves, or do they go straight from their current position towards the enemy ship?
If the latter is the case, it's entirely possible for an enemy ship maneuver around and behind a debris field, in such a way that the bomber's movement will bring them through it without damaging the ship itself.

This becomes even more important on a field with a planetary ring, which effectively cuts off an entire half of the table for carriers on the other side.

>Or that the Hector won't suffer from terrain either, it's already needing 4+ to hit in standard conditions anyway, debris fields make that even worse. So were back to where we started.
It depends on how the debris fields are positioned; if we presume them to be like a box around the center field, one in northeast, one in northwest, etc, with enough space between them in the center for ships to duke it out, then it's entirely possible for the Hector to still be useful while a Bellerophon on the outside will likely lose a lot of its assets.

Ultimately, it depends on the map layout and how many lines of approach the launch assets have.

>>49620655

Atlanta should probably be a UCM ship class. What about Callisto, has that been used yet? Or Helena? We've got literally everybody else from the siege of Troy as ship classes.
I'm suprised we don't have more from Iason and the Argonauts myself.

As for stats, it looks good, but that F/S isn't really very PHR.

What about we borrow even more heavily from the Imperial navy and go with this?

>Medium Caliber Broadsides 4+ /8/1 L
>Medium Caliber Broadsides 4+ /8/1 R
>Socketed Laser Array 3+ /2/1 L BTL(6) Flash
>Socketed Laser Array 3+ /2/1 R BTL(6) Flash
>Launch Capacity 2

Who here remembers the Oberon BB with fondness? Just me?

Did anyone see how brutal terrain is against launch assets?

3+ to wipe out each individual base that traverses a fine debris field or planet ring. That's horrifying. Any ship with mass bombers zeroing in is totally worth shunting through a debris field to wipe out 2/3rds of them. Or a Torpedo.

>>49620755
Not Atlanta, Atalanta, the legendary Greek huntress raised by bears

>>49620765

It is PRETTY similar to Atlanta and Atlantis though you gotta admit.

>>49620769
>not deliberately naming your ships obnoxiously

not very aesthetic desu

>>49620790

Oh right, PHR. My mistake!

Still, there SHOULD be more Argonaut ships in there. Maybe it's just future proofing for additional ships and variants? There ARE something like 100 different variations you can make with their cruiser sprue after all. That's not even counting the Battlecruiser parts.

Calling it now, the Jason will be the PHR dreadnought.

>>49620761

Torps ignore it

>>49620825

So with Medea as the Strike Carrier and Herakles the Battleship that leaves us with:

>Castor & Pollux
>Orpheus (that isn't in use already is it?)
>Argus
>Talos

and that's just the more familiar stuff off the top of my head.

Speaking of Obnoxious names...
I love naval naming. Very inspirational.
UCM's pretty good usually.
>UCMS Drake
>UCMS Surprise
>UCMS Constellation
>UCMS Avenger
>UCMS Admiral Togo
>UCMS Warspite
>UCMS Victory
>UCMS Assassin's Blade
Wait what?
>UCMS Assassin's Blade
Guess edgelord timmy, age 14, won a 'Name a Warship' contest on the Ferrum Internet.

>>49620817

The literal only thing they need is a BTL LC right now.

>>49620817
What about using Argonaut itself, then? I don't recall that being a class.

Although it does seem more suited to an individual ship name than a class.

>>49620909

Sure, but I'm saying that the guy who did the other variation sheets worked it out, got something like 100 seperate variations from that sprue and went "fuck it, some other guy can do that, not even my autism is up to that task".

Shaltari might be more possible.

>>49620903

Orpheus is the troopship that's just an Ajax with more HP and troop landing capacity

My friend got his order.

Didn't we unlock activation cards? I don't see them.

>>49620936

Because there's really only so many variations of "has this kind of broadsides mixed with this other kind of broadsides and either a torpedo or a BTL on the front"

We have one of those ships already, it's called the Perseus. It's garbage

>>49620956

I never said anything about "good" variations. Just possible ones.
But yes, the more I try to think of a variant we haven't seen yet that would be good, the less I can come up with one.

>>49620992

Light cruiser with medium broadsides and no prow weapon

medium cruiser with torpedo

Triple BTL battlecruiser

Double stacked heavy guns BC

>>49621037
>Light cruiser with medium broadsides and no prow weapon
Probably a good idea.

>medium cruiser with torpedo
Literally NEVER going to happen, even if it's rare.

>Triple BTL battlecruiser
Depends on how the non-KS battlecruisers are sculpted and what they can fit.

>Double stacked heavy guns BC
Y E S
But only if the heavy guns are improved

>>49621037

Oh yeah, if we're talking Battlecruisers then yes there are a few options we haven't seen. Like an 8 Launch Capacity Super Carrier WITH NOTHING ELSE. Or a BC with 4 Heavies and two further gundecks of something else. Or something completely unsubtle that's just 16 Medium Broadsides.

>>49621037
>Light cruiser with medium broadsides and no prow weapon
That's called 2 Europas.

>>49621069

8 heavy gun shots does 4.88 damage per broadside to enemy heavies or 3.55 to non heavies

That ship would do more than a full Moscow weapons free to heavies in each arc or slightly less than one in each arc to cruisers

>>49621085

16 medium shots would do a little less against heavies and a little more against anything else. But imagine how great that KS BC would look with 8 giant guns per side

>>49621087

I want 8 entire shots

>>49621121
Oh yeah, the changed it to 3 for the europa, didn't they. Whoops.

>>49620918
Isn't the ship just called the Argo? I thought the Argonauts were Jason's gang.

>>49621085
I want a BC with nothing but light guns for maximum frigate bullying potential.

>>49621162
2X banks of 12 shots per side with linking?

>>49621162
>battlecruiser with 24 light gun shots
>captained by technochad looking for higher kill-streak
>scumbag on voicechat towards UCM captains.

>>49621282
NERF THIS
DPS UP
ANNYONG

>>49621282

24 light gun shots still only do 4 hits against a strike carrier in atmosphere
>might kill a void gate I guess

>>49620825
>Jason
>the shittiest Greek hero
>dreadnought class

Nah.

It'll be Diomedes or Odysseus.

File: 4123412341234.jpg (86KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1024x768px

>>49621282
>24 shots

>>49621350
Come on, he's not Perseus.

Maybe an Iason class c3 ship.

>>49621343
Although, 6 of the 12 cripple results do 2 or more extra hull points of damage. Do 2 damage to a (non PHR) frigate and half the time it'll just go boom.

File: image.gif (6KB, 200x200px)

6KB, 200x200px

>>49621350

>Diomedes class dreadnought
>12 heavy guns per side
>black hole gun on the fore
>3 shots 2 lock 2 damage, blackhole
>if it kills a ship, the ship automatically has a reactor event and is replace by a small solid object in high/low orbit for the rest of the game.
>enemy ships are automatically destroyed if they touch the object

File: ReadingRainbow.jpg (333KB, 960x1440px)

333KB, 960x1440px

>>49620423
>The Bellerophon's bombers work just as well at close range as at a distance.
Right, instead of working better at close range (where you need to be to have targets for both broadsides) like the Hector. Hence barreling the Bellerophon forward doesn't create this threat for the opponent

>>49621379
Personally I think the Iason and the Atalanta should be light cruisers.

Iason is nothing but medium broadsides, Atalanta is just a slightly stronger (but not twin-tier) supernova laser. They could have Acastus as a light cruiser with launch capacity.

Does anyone have the exact rules for PD? I want to check something.

>>49621436
Psyops is nice but I'm not sure I'd want to spend 170 points and a heavy slot on it when I could have something more effective instead.

>>49621436
I'm saying that the Bellerophon is even more threatening when barrelling forward than the Hector. It's better at sitting just within 12" of things, sure, but it can perform the Hector's role better than the Hector can. Even when the Hector is in perfect position, it's still inferior to the Bellerophon.

I like the way the Hector looks, but there's no reason to take it. I'd rather grab a pair of Orions or Theseuses. Or a Leonidas.

>>49621436
But long range takes two turns.
Beleropon does more damage most of the time, I'm not going to argue that.
But the Hector does its damage NOW, potentially stopping other ships from even firing.

While I think the Belly will end up the superior ship, I'd prefer not to write the Hector off before anyone's even started playing.

Mathhammer is all well and good, but terrain, tactics and psychology all play a part as well.

>>49621522

I love the Theseus

For 178 points you get almost an entire Orion and Ajax that trades their meh fore firepower for speed and linked weapons. Throw in some Europas and maybe some andromedas and you have a very dangerous, very fast wolf pack

>>49621615

Barreling towards the enemy to unleash broadsides is great

Hanging back with a big BTL is great

Doing both on one ship is kind of weird. The Heracles gets away with it because it's uniquely good at its job. The Hector is just a strange amalgamation that doesn't fit any role very well at one time.

>>49621522
The suggestion of more light ships instead of one heavy is compelling.

This is not just a PHR issue though. I'd be tempted to take two New Cairo lights over a St Pete

>>49621668

New cairos are legit goty and why I want a PHR LC with double BTL, which can't happen Because PHR vessels all need broadside guns

But imagine a LC with full heavy broadsides in a pair. They're cheap as fuck and 8 heavy guns will fuck up a heavy ship very well

>>49621628
>>49621668


They're very much a first strike tool, if they lose initiative a light cruiser will crumple under fire very easy.
The NC vs St Pete debate has got a couple of layers too it, namely that the Cairos have more ability to aim their BTL's on account of not needing to go weapons free to fire both, but as I said, unless their HP is exactly the same as a normal cruiser then Light Cruisers ARE vulnerable to fast first strike attacks. Exactly the kind of thing that the Scourge specialise in. Whilst the heavy cruiser will be able to tank that damage without losing firepower.

I still think Light Cruisers are very useful, but they can't take frontline back and forth slugging matches. You need proper cruisers and heavies for that. So if you need to take and hold a large cluster in the middle of the board, those Light Cruisers aren't going to cut it.
But if you need a trailblazer to punch a hole through a line for some Strike Carriers and Motherships to assault clusters in the backfield, I think they'll show great performance.

>>49621740

Yeah that's what the Leonidas and scipio are for. They can 420blaze it up the trail at super speed and then assblast anything near the objective.

>>49621719
It gets interesting, because you're maximising damage, but will have less tonnage to stick over clusters and claim VP.

>>49621770

I'd legit like to see some scans for more of the UCM fleet at this point, just what are the stats on an UCM light cruiser?
How expensive is the Lima?
Or the Jakarta?
Has the Seattle gone up in price like everything else or has it stayed more or less where it is? How much are the utility cruisers (Mothership and Bombardment)?

>>49621740

A Hector needs 7 damage to cripple it, an Orion needs 6 and a Theseus needs 5. The deciding factor there being that you get two Theseus for every Hector.

Speed in PHR is valuable as PHR vessels are actually quite good if they can punch through an enemy line and turn 90*, forcing some enemy ships to either course correct or try and fight them in a broadsides fight. That's why I'm imagining the BCs being so brutal.

>>49621805
Happened to be asking about the Madrid earlier in the thread, it's 79 points, 6 shots by its bombardment guns. Don't know about the others though.

>>49621829

>79 points

Wow that is dirt cheap. Barely more than a pair of Scourge bombard frigates, but with cruiser hull and armour. Firepower wise, 6 shots at 2+ works out a fair bit better than their 8 combined shots.
That said, the Char can sit inside the atmosphere to do this, which has some definite benefits.

I do wonder what sort of ratio you want troop deploying ships to normal cobatants in a fleet. Is a mothership vital or can you get away with x amount of strike cruisers for instance? But I think that's something were only going to find out by playing.
Which makes life difficult for those that like to assemble all of their models before a game.

>>49621770
This will be fun.
Also, I love the fact that Leo and Skippy sound like characters out of a kids TV show

>>49621894

Dont forget Bell chan!

>>49621875

Strike cruisers deploy armor assets which are good at killing infantry but are easy to kill with orbital bombardment. They're also much better at getting through orbital defenses like defense lasers.

Troopships deploy infantry who are bad at killing armor but good at surviving orbital bombardment. They're bad at surviving orbital PD but deploy in large numbers usually

>>49621875
Yeah, how many troops you need is one of those big questions we just don't know yet. I'll be building two choices (probably a cruiser and pair of frigates) for my 999 point learning-the-game fleet just so I don't have all my eggs in one basket.

Also, I have to say I'm faintly underwhelmed by the scourge specialist frigates. The bombardment frigate seems fairly weak, and the scylla's reverse grav cannons (2 shots 4+ lock) seem more of an annoyance than something an opponent will feel they have to deal with.

>>49621976

I feel like the individual infantry/armor tokens are going to have slightly different stats per race kinda like launch assets. They appear to have the same kind of statline too complete with armor saves

>>49621976
>The bombardment frigate seems fairly weak, and the scylla's reverse grav cannons (2 shots 4+ lock) seem more of an annoyance than something an opponent will feel they have to deal with.

With regards to the former, yeah, but right now they're the only game in town when it comes to bombardment. Plus being able to just park yourself in Atmosphere over the cluster is pretty useful.
As for the Scylla, I feel that they couldn't have made that too dangerous or it would unbalance the game, but yeah, I can't really see the appeal either myself.

>>49622047
How does sensor range and orbital layers interact?

>>49622106

You can't attack anything outside of your sensor range when it's in atmosphere.

>>49622127
Is it reduced in higher layers though? Or shaped like a cylinder?

>>49622237

No apparently high and low orbit are pretty close to each other in gameplay terms. You do suffer a -1 to lock penalty for shooting from high to low or low to high though

>>49621666
I'd say the Bellerophon vs. Hector debate kind of boils down to what you need. Just by looking at the math for Medium vs. Heavy broadsides we can tell that it's not really an issue of who does more damage.

Bell has greater tactical flexibility at the cost of giving your opponent ways to play around it : you can launch fighters or bombers, you have longer range, you can stack all your bombers on one target.

Hec has more reliable damage at the cost of raw power : you don't have to worry about PD or debris fields, you can destroy a target before it gets to act.

The Bellerophon is probably going to make its way into more lists, but we shouldn't write off the Hector as useless.

Important question:

Suppose you're rolling for your BTL and the number of dice you have remaining for it exceeds the number of remaining crits and hits you're allowed to get in total. What happens?

>>49622446
I suppose you'd ignore dice, removing non-crits first, until it was equal to your cap.

>>49622446
Roll them. If you end up over the limit, discard as many hits as is required.

>>49622446
Funnily enough, the text of the rule says it's a damage cap, not a hits cap. It doesn't say anything about capping hits, so by RAW you roll until you miss with all dice, then roll all armour saves, then cap the damage at whatever. But (a) that's silly and makes BTLs really powerful and (b) it's not what happens in the example, they stop rolling once they have 6 hits even though with 3 non-crits the total damage could be less than 6.

>>49622660
Good point, but do note that non-critical hits DO do damage to the enemy ship; its just that damage which can be saved against, however.

>>49622660
Yeah, the old method (each round of dice after the first gets a stacking -1 to hit) seems way better, since you don't get the big probability clump at the end of your distribution, even if a cap is applied.

>>49622380

The Hector is a suboptimal choice for reasons other than the Bellephron being more useful in most situations, although that doesn't help.

It's problem is that it isn't really good at anything in particular. It can broadside like a cruiser, it can fire forward like a (UCM) cruiser but it's exceedingly hard to do all of the above at the same time and impossible to do it to the same enemy ship.

That's why the Moscow is quite good: it's almost two Rios strapped together and can throw down 4.5-6 damage reliably on any target in its front arc. That's a wonderful tool to have.

The issue with the Hector is that barring your opponent being an idiot and leaving a ship directly in your F(N) to get BTL'd while you weapons free with your broadsides, it's just not going to do more in one turn than an equivalent cruiser. This is pretty difficult to justify when you can just take two ships that can do either role and do both every turn.

I don't disparage you for liking the ship but it's unfocused and pays a lot of points for it.

The Ajax does the same thing but it's so cheap that it's actually an asset. If the Hector was 150 points it would be a very viable choice over a bellephron, Leo or scipio and a nice budget heavy.

File: dropzone.jpg (224KB, 900x308px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 900x308px

>>49620188
I would love to see an apocalypse level DZC game.
>Combined arms taken to the extreme
>One player is Armor doctrine, another Air doctrine, a third infantry, fourth player runs support.
>Rapid redeployment from one side of the board to the other once one player has finished mopping up his opponent.
>Tactically placing your AA to prevent your foes from flying across the board to help his friends.
>Using your own FA craft to perform airstrikes on opponents on the other side of the table to help out your buddies.
>Kodiaks calling down orbital bombardments from the other side of the board.
>Energy weapons become high value targets since they can lock down entire sections of the board.

>>49622380

>you don't have to worry about PD or debris

Debris inflicts a penalty to hit and will neuter medium guns and BTLs really badly.

I suppose one silver lining to the burnthrough question is it's only a problem with weapons with more than 2 shots. (Pretty sure every 2 shot version has an even number as the cap, so if both dice are still hitting you can't go over.) I think it's only the Avalon and the scourge furnace cannons that this issue can come up, and the furnace cannons should mostly be firing on the other profile.

>>49622821
This; frankly, I feel like the turn limit and small size of the board really limits what DZC can be in terms of a combat game. When a good chunk of the weapons in the game already cover half the board, infinite range weapons aren't that impressive. Now; a 12 foot by 12 foot (or scale equivalent) board, with appropriately upsized army and objectives, THAT would be impressive.

>instead of adding a more powerful prow weapon, PHR heavy cruisers have a modified ventral attachment that adds a third halfside beneath the other two, while keeping the singular prow weapons
Yay or nay?

>>49622918

It would look funny and while mathematically efficient would be kinda boring.

My Orion heavy cruiser now does 12 medium shots instead of 8. Great.

>>49622938
>>49622918

What if it had that rule that gives it extra shots if it goes weapons free?

File: image.png (5KB, 640x480px)

5KB, 640x480px

>>49622952

...neat

>>49622969

Does anyone remember those rules that aren't currently used yet?

I remember Reinforced Armour where you need 3 above the To Hit to crit being one, and Beast where you get really dangerous upon getting crippled, but KEEP crippling yourself at the end of every turn after that being another.

I think that one where you get more shots is another, and I can't remember the rest.

>>49622938
>would be kinda boring.
>Moscow is just a Rio with more heavy turrets
>Onyx is just an Amber with more disintegrators
The other faction's heavy cruisers (with the exception of the Scourge) are already pretty boring.

It would also solidify the UCM as having the better straight up BTL's, as well as providing a clear half-step between cruisers and battlecruisers.

File: FacebookWeaponRules.png (638KB, 720x827px) Image search: [Google]

638KB, 720x827px

>>49623012
What I want to know is what Maulers are.

File: image.png (718KB, 838x911px)

718KB, 838x911px

>>49623012

>pure tank PHR heavy cruiser
>full mediums and a single super nova
>reinforced armor, 14 hull, 9 PD, thrust 6"

The tank, the lion. The legend.

>>49623059

More heavy turrets is a lot better than 4 more medium shots.

In fact it's directly equivalent to as if the Moscow instead just had two extra medium turrets and no extra heavy turrets

File: Hail_Eels.jpg (17KB, 300x200px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 300x200px

>>49623059
>(with the exception of the Scourge)

>[LAUGHING EEL NOISES]

>>49623094
>More heavy turrets is a lot better than 4 more medium shots.
>In fact it's directly equivalent to as if the Moscow instead just had two extra medium turrets and no extra heavy turrets
Fair point, but "design wise" it's equally as boring, in that it's just an additional weapon system of what it already has.

>>49622918
It would look pretty stupid. Maybe guns mounted on the bottom of the ship that can shoot in either direction? That would take some of the inefficiency out of broadsides.

>>49623094

Nah, PHR would get the Regen rule thanks to NANOMACHINES MY PROGENY! UCM would get Reinforced Armour for their Dreadnaughts.

>>49623092
Oh I think I remember this one, it's the one that does MORE damage the more it hits. I don't remember if we were told exactly how that worked though. Was it a geometric progression? So a 5 Attack Mauler that starts at damage 1 would actually be doing 1+2+3+4+5 for 15 damage if it hit with everything?

Other things we haven't seen yet:

>A BTL with a damage rating of 2
>Multiple Shot MIRV Torpedoes
>Anything with Armour 2+
>BTL Turrets... OH BUT WAIT WHAT'S THIS ON THE SPACE STATION SPRUE!?

>>49623149

I wouldn't call it boring because it skews the heavy turret amount available on a single ship by a ton. It's why I don't think the Leonidas is boring, it's does something very unique.

One extra half broadside of mediums is just a drop in the bucket, a full extra broadside is a whole extra bucket of awesome.

I like that absolutely no one is discussing the Perseus.

>>49623152
A row of those medium turrets along the bottom would be pretty cool; maybe three of them for a 6 attack 4+ lock 1 damage profile. Have them only be able to fire to the sides because PHR shipwrights put form over function, and you're golden.

>>49623191
>>Anything with Armour 2+
I remember someone once saying that nothing will ever be getting armor 2+, but I do want to see if that's true or not.

>>49623245
It does everything, which means it does nothing and isn't that aesthetic looking to boot. I would have liked it more, had it a laser rather than the medium turret.

>>49623245

It's crap

>>49623276
>I remember someone once saying that nothing will ever be getting armor 2+, but I do want to see if that's true or not.

I don't see why, with all the stuff we have floating about already that can crit straight through really easily.
Now 2+ with Reinforced THAT would be silly, or anything that get's a 3+ shield value thanks to the Shield buffing Shaltari Frigate.
But 2+ armour, especially when you keep in mind that there's a whole FACTION with the Scald rule and built around being able to get in close and use it who are ALSO egregious critseekers wouldn't be that bad.

>>49623328
Yep. Absolutely no idea why it was included.

>>49623416
They needed a cruiser with the heavy guns, they just made it a shit cruiser. Giving it mediums instead of lights, along with a supernova, would have made it pretty useful.

Armor 2+ isn't the same as a Warhammer 2+ save. It's simply armor that's going to be very resistant to low-caliber guns. But it's really not *that* much better than Armor 3 when engaged by Lock Value 2 or 3 guns, or stuff like PHR Bombers. BTLs in particular will still make a mess of it.

It'd be a neat feature of some battleship or dreadnought.

>>49623092
>>49623191
Maulers used to be basically CA BTL's that had a lock value equal to the enemy's armor

>>49623276
Hell, you could even go as far as to have 8 attacks. Just strap a broadside worth of guns to the bottom in order to double the firepower of each normal attack. It would solve the focus problems that the Hector has.

>>49623416
>>49623328

Yeah, it just doesn't specialise enough to work, and unlike the Theseus you can't take them in groups, and even if you could it's too expensive for it.
If it was a light cruiser with that loadout, it'd work better.

What about the Achilles? It's hyper-specialised, but I think it'll be useful in Skirmish and Battle tiers. Why? Because in Battle there's going to be enough Heavy and Superheavies floating about for it to find something to do all game, whilst at Skirmish, there will be less heavies, but those that ARE there will be bigger proportion of points and being able to insta-cripple a St Pete or a Raiju with your Torpedo and 2+ Heavy Guns or even the threat of that is going to help you control the board.
Heck in Blue on Blue you couldn't ask for a better ship to deal with your opponents Bellerophon.

>>49623537

The Achilles is a sweet ass torpedo with some discount guns for a good price. Totally viable.

>>49623526

That would unironically be wonderful

>>49623526
>Hell, you could even go as far as to have 8 attacks. Just strap a broadside worth of guns to the bottom in order to double the firepower of each normal attack. It would solve the focus problems that the Hector has.
I'd like that, very much so; 4 turrets lined up on the bottom would be awesome.

>>49623537

An 80 point Perseus LC with no fore weaponry and linked broadsides would unironically be superb.

>>49623526
The Achilles is a cheap cruise missile to beat heavy ships with until they go away. I can't complain.

>>49623791
Whoops, meant to link >>49623537

1400 PHR Fleet
Pathfinder – 2 Calypso
Pathfinder – 2 Pandora
Line – 1 Orion, 2 Europa, 2 Europa
Line – 1 Ganymede, 2 Medea
Vanguard - 1 Achilles, 1 Theseus
Vanguard – 1 Sipo, 1 Bellerophon, 1 Ikarus

With everything I am getting, I put together this list as an intro.

Pathfinder 1, hangs nearby the fight behind the Achilles and Theseus at low layer

Pathfinder 2, hangs at the flanks, using its lasers to pick off targets

Line 1, is kind of the go to suicide team. Their job is to charge in real close and try to make the most of their broadsides.

Line 2, these guys are focused on cluster securing

Vanguard 1, This is the second line, more gun ships that follow teh suicide orion team

Vanguard 2, these guys hang back and launch fighters, biggest group because launch assets happen last anyway.

So, fellow aestheticians, have we come to a consensus?

>God Tier
Heracles
Bellerophon
Minos
Scipio

>Good Tier
Leonidas
Theseus
Echo
all the frigates

>Mid Tier
Ikarus
Orion
Ajax
Achilles
Orpheus
Ganymede.

>Shit Tier
Hector

>Literally Not One Will Ever Be Assembled Tier
Perseus

>>49623870

Bump the Ajax and Orpheus up to good tier and it's about right

>>49623870
Move the Hector up into Mid Tier (it's not bad in general, just compared to the Bell) and rename the "literally" tier to "baseline" tier.

Also, we're all in agreement that replacing the light guns on the Perseus with mediums, and replacing its turrets with a burnthrough, would drastically improve it right?

>>49623940
Yeah, that would be much better.

Hector deserves to go no higher than shit tier.

>>49623245
I actually think It might be decent. It can fire at 2 targets from one side thanks to the linked weapons and the 6 light shots will cripple a non-PHR frigate on average leaving you with 2 heavy shots to plink a heavy or have a decent chance to cripple another frigate on an average roll. Taking 2-3 as a line battlegroup, those plinking shots add up.
Bear in mind that with a 45 degree turn 2 broadsides cover 360 degrees just like UCM forward turrets.

>>49623940

Mediums and a BTL would be god tier

>>49623940
>Also, we're all in agreement that replacing the light guns on the Perseus with mediums, and replacing its turrets with a burnthrough, would drastically improve it right?

As would dropping the prow turret completely dumping it's HP down to 9, it's PD to 2 and it's cost down to 90 but it's Speed up to 10 and G to 1-2.

In less cumbersome terms, make it a Light Cruiser. Theseus's actually get a lot mileage out of that extra HP in the dice tests I've been doing with them. Some of the dice have been pretty swingy, but still.

>>49624024

I think the Perseus looks pretty cool to me. It can engage a lot of targets well.

It looks like you are supposed to charge it up the center and use its the cal rules to burn wounds off big ships and murder little ones with weapons free. It can still take a beating with 3+ and 11 Hull and it

Why are people thinking its crap?

>>49624192

Because it costs too much and is trying to be two things at once. If it was a cheap fast light cruiser it'd be great. If it had a BTL on the advance it'd be good, if it had Mediums instead of Light Broadsides it's be good if it had both of those last two it'd be great.
If you want a multirole cruiser that can kill lights, go take multiple Theseus's. If you want something to kill lights take an Ajax, heavies? Look to your own heavies and pack an Achilles or Bellerophon or one of the Battlecruisers.

Perseus is trying to fill two roles and in the end fills none.

>>49623940
And change god tier to AESTHETIC.

>>49624359
I'm not sure it costs too much, it's less than an Orion, same price as a Rio.
The linked broadside means it can fill two roles in one standard order and a BTL would make it cost more and further spilt it's focus.
I really think that the PHR will be the faction that goes weapons free the least because they can make such good use of standard orders or course change. It's why I don't like the Hector, most of the time it's an overpriced Berlin or an overpriced Orion.

>>49624688
Have the UCM final points costs leaked somewhere? Do tell.

>>49624359

See I don't think the Theseus is that much better. For 16 points you lose 2 DP 3 PD and you get weaker guns. The whole point of ships like this seems to be diving into the fray and just bleeding a lot of ships verse out right killing them. The idea being the Perseus isn't the main push of your fleet, but it is too annoying to ignore.

I do like the Ajax. And I think the Achilles and Bellerophon are no brainers. However, the Perseus fills a knife fight role. It is not the best, but I feel like it will have a place.

>>49624688
>It's why I don't like the Hector, most of the time it's an overpriced Berlin or an overpriced Orion.
I think there's something to be said about the versatility of being either an overpriced Berlin or an overpriced Orion, with the possibility of being both at once if the stars are right.

>>49624748
Bejing 252 New York 260 Tokyo 220
Atlantis 205 Avalon 195
Moscow 163 Saint Petersburg 155
Rio, Berlin 105 Madrid 79 Seattle 132
Osaka 86 New Cairo 88
San Francisco 111
Toulon 35 Taipei 39 Jakarta 32 Lima 37

>>49624807

I think Ajax or Orion do whatever you think the Perseus is going to do better, for the same price cost.

>>49624872
New Orelans 32
Santiago 22

>>49624843
True, but it also takes up a heavy slot (Heavy cruisers and battlecruisers) which are in short supply.
>>49624910
Both of those are overkill against frigates most of the time though. Being able to shoot two targets from one broadside is why i think the Theseus/Perseus are good.

>>49624910

The Ajax no. (it can't crit big things) I think the Ajax is more for hanging back and sniping then moving in quick to deal with sneaky atmo or CA ships.

The Orion yes in general this is your go to. However, I don't know the math on it. I am guessing if you build your list a certain way you would want the more specialist Perseus over the complete middle of the road Orion.

>>49624910
The Perseus might have a role in larger games. It's really bad at killing things but really good at just distributing a ton of damage amongst everything around it. In a big game with lots of targets a pair of them will rack up a lot of damage really quickly.

The Ajax is really good as well but can't put out as much raw damage because it can't split fire and tends to overkill frigates.

Then again, maybe the Orion does just as much with less fuss. Time will tell.

>>49625085

Basically what I am saying is that the ship doesn't look like complete below shit tier. Maybe it isn't the best choice, but I feel like it has a role somewhere.

>>49625065
>True, but it also takes up a heavy slot (Heavy cruisers and battlecruisers) which are in short supply.
Eh, if you're short 10 points for a Bell and want another heavy, then it's fine.

That said, I do agree that it's be perfect if it were dropped down to 160 points, or maybe even 150.

>>49624910
My other issue with Ajax is that the Orpheus is a troopship with the same weapons, +2HP -1 inch thrust, for 30 points more. Other than cost the downside is that it can't shoot both broadsides without weapons free.

>>49624688

The Theseus does it better at almost 10 less points, full stop. If the Perseus cost 85 and was a LC with no fore gun it would be pretty good in squadrons. However, it's not.

>>49624807

The Theseus is good at its role of being a frigate killer (in pairs) and a cruiser annoyance. That thrust 10" is beautiful.

The Perseus does nothing. The caliber advantage of just 2 heavy shots versus 2 mediums even against heavy ships is just so minimal that you can actually go without seeing that advantage in one entire game. We're talking .11 of a die roll. That's ten turns of shooting before the Perseus heavy guns will actually score 1 extra damage than medium guns would have in the same interval.


The other issue is that PHRs weakness is having to spread its high damage due to its broadsides amongst the enemy fleet and the Perseus has to split even its broadsides apart to not be utterly suboptimal.

>>49625065

>overkill

It takes one entire Ajax broadside to reliably kill a 4+ save 4 HP frigate, it's exactly enough. Also the Ajax has both sides linked meaning it can maneuver to fire both broadsides without having to worry about weapons free

>>49625111

It has a place in the JUST fleet that our resident Kickstarter commentators are going to whine about when they get their shit pushed in after running 2x Hector Perseus Ganymede fleets. I have no idea why people love being contrarian about these things.

I have a feeling they either don't really play DFC or ran their menchit Hyperion Ares list once and then quit


>>49625205

That's quite the downside, since the Ajax can turn and still put out 24 light shots and the Orpheus never can.

>>49625205

Good point, but Ganymede is a better choice. Being able to bombard and drop bulk landers seems like a very useful ability you want on all your drop ships.

>>49625278
>It has a place in the JUST fleet that our resident Kickstarter commentators are going to whine about when they get their shit pushed in after running 2x Hector Perseus Ganymede fleets.
Hey now, there's no need to be rude. I'm going to run Hectors until the cold hard truth punches me in the face, but comparing us to KS commentators is just over the line.
Perseus is a shit, though,

>>49625111

Let's approach it the opposite way: if I wanted to make the absolute worst PHR fleet I could ever field, it would include multiple Perseus. What does that say about the ship in its role and slot?

>>49625382
>What does that say about the ship in its role and slot?
That it's niche is as a limited support vessel that acts as an auxiliary to other ships, rather than something that works well by itself?

>>49625297

Unless you pair them up with Medeas and think that they can handle that duty by themselves.

Ganymedes Vs Orpheus feels like a discussion that could run and run but ultimately fall a persons particular playstyle.

>>49625297
But the Ganymede has poor ship to ship firepower all round and the Medea fills a lot of the PHR's bombardment needs, especially as it's the only ship that can bombard normally in atmosphere.