/dcg/ Dropzone/Dropfleet Commander General

>>49984966

Oh totally, Orions are in a good spot right now

Daily reminder that the Shaltari did nothing wrong.

File: 1476782705271.jpg (2MB, 3000x2778px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3000x2778px

Posting obligatory ship-girls.

>>49984975

So I'm sure I've missed something massively important here, but from a VP perspective isn't it viable to abandon the space battle altogether and just take objectives?
As in your list is literally nothing besides Strike Carriers, enough Corvettes to remove the enemies, and whatever M-ton ships you need to unlock the L classes.

For example, at 1000pts:
Pathfinder- 6 Strike Carriers
Pathfinder- 6 Strike Carriers
Line- Dropship, 2 Strike Carriers, 5 Corvettes
Line- Dropship, 2 Strike Carriers, 5 Corvettes

Turn 1&2, rush down to atmospheric and GG.
What is your opponent going to do? He literally will not be able to throw enough shots down to kill you. He has no CAW, can't go WF without overshooting you next turn, and you'll have more Corvettes than he does because he wasn't expecting to fight this level of bullshit.

Unless I've completely misunderstood how Scoring works here.
> No fun allowed

>>49985266
This is Donald Trump level bullshit inaccuracy.

>>49985470
> "That really linked my broadsides"

>>49985498
"I'd put my mass driver into her foldspace"

>>49985266
Shaltari did quite a lot wrong. They just don't give a fuck though, their attitude is "yeah, so what?" rather than "dindu nuffin".

>>49985563
Leonidas-Chan > Moscow-Trash-Dess

>>49985538
If they bring any level of bombardment whatsoever, and you have no combat ships to take them out, that's GG for you.

>>49985601
Ball lickers need to go home. Don't you have a rock to be hiding the under?

>>49985538

You also score in the void. Frigates have very low tonnage, so you will lose all void VP making it a draw and if it's the same as in DZC, killopoints decide the victor. Good luck winning this.
Also i'm pretty sure that in a 6 turn game, you would be able to kill most of this fleet going weapons free or station keeping all the time.

>>49985538
What about critical location scoring? Can't remember how many VPs you get for that compared to landing troops, but it's a factor. And there are scenarios will kill point scoring too.

Also, how will you stop the enemy bombarding your troops, with no ships that can kill his bombardment cruisers?

>>49985670
> Ball lickers

Heh, good one.

>>49985698
>>49985666

Would you take a bombardment ship at 1000pts? Genuinely curious as to how important they are, I've always glossed over them.

>>49985752
>Would you take a bombardment ship at 1000pts?
Scourge could fit in a squadron of Charybdis reasonably well.
PHR can always take a Ganymede
Shaltari could take a Jet as their HC, but a turquoise is too specialized for 1000 pts.
Only the UCM would have a problem, as the Madrid is too specialized as well to be taken unless you KNOW your opponent is going for ground spam.

>>49985752
I would, although I'll admit I like the madrid's model. I think they'll be handy because if nothing else it's a threat that needs to be dealt with. And as has been mentioned before, it may be useful for stopping shaltari tidal wave bullshit.

>>49985538

Strike carriers are pretty vulnerable. Something like an Ajax will pick them off pretty easily even in atmo. Your troop ships will die right away.

You only score on turn 4 and 6. In many missions you also gain points for tonnage of ships in low orbit. So right away he is matching you in points.

Then he just needs to keep bombarding to deny a few zones.

I recon your cheese tactic might work once or twice, but soon would fail.

>>49985789
Madrids are also dirt cheap for their tonnage, which offsets that a little.

>>49985752

It's definitely possible but more importantly if your opponents have nothing to shoot at in orbit they may as well fish for 6's bombarding or shooting strike carriers.

>>49985752
>>49985789
Nice thing about the PHR is every Strike Cruiser functions as a partial one. I'd also take the Bombardment Troop Ship over the L Caliber one most every time.

So, whenever I'm taking troop deployment, I'm covered on that end.

I have a hard time choosing between the Ganymede and the Orpheus for 1000pt games.

>>49986545
Are you taking an Ajax?
If yes, Ganymede.
If no, Orpheus.

>>49986581

I like the Orpheus but it loses out on linked, which is a big deal for the Ajax.

Still a great ship, I think your equation there is correct

>>49986581
THank you for clearing that up.
I see now the simillarities of role the Orpheus and the Ajax do.
You should post more of these flowcharts.

Ships have been discussed to death. What about mission types and matchups?

Noob here, sans rulebook: How does ground combat work in droopfleet? Can ground units move between sectors? Clusters? When are infantry more important than armor?

You know, the works.

>>49987578
you drop tokens that can be armor or infantry from strike carriers they go down in a dropship.

Troop ships drop 3 infantry or a battery in a lander. Batteries defend against landing units. They hit landers on 3+ and dropships on 5+.

on the ground you move units first then, you fight if one exists. Armor attacks 3 times has a 3+ save on the ground. Infantry attacks once and has a 5+ save.

If you are bombarded it hits a sector and causes it damage. It can die if it loses to much health and everyone inside dies. Infantry have a 3+ save verse bombardment and armor has a 5+.

You can also nuke a place if you are near by and there are no enemy ships within 12 inches. Nuking succeeds on a 2+ and immediately ruins teh sector killing everyone instead. You can't nuke your own dudes. If you nuke something you lose a victory point.

File: Ground assets 1.jpg (574KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

574KB, 2048x1152px

>>49987578

File: Ground assets 2.jpg (633KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

633KB, 2048x1152px

>>49987578
Fucking duplicate reply bullshit.

File: Ground combat 1.jpg (600KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

600KB, 2048x1152px

>>49987775
Despite the filename, I don't actually have any subsequent pages, I don't think.

File: 1475372350751.jpg (543KB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

543KB, 3264x2448px

>>49987791
Tum te tum.

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

564KB, 528x960px

>>49987808
And a clearer pic.

File: Ground assets 3.jpg (589KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

589KB, 2048x1152px

>>49987819
Think this is the last page about ground combat I've got saved, hopefully it's been enough to give an idea. The first 2/3 are really what it's about.

>>49987743
>>49987754
>>49987775
>>49987791
>>49987808

Thanks, all. I'll digest this.

Space!Navy games aren't new to me, but a Space!Navy game with a robust dirt-side system would be. We'll see if this is the case...

File: Launch assets 5 (troop landers).jpg (996KB, 2832x2173px) Image search: [Google]

996KB, 2832x2173px

>>49987837
Oh yeah, this is probably important too.

>>49987743
>>49987578

Motherships launch Bulk Landers, which let you place large groups of infantry or defensive batteries.
Strike Carriers launch Dropships, which let you place small groups of infantry or armour.

Armour is great at killing ground assets, with lots of attacks and high saves against them. However they are easily destroyed from orbit.
Infantry is awful for ground fights, with few attacks and low armour. However they are harder to dislodge from bombardment.
Defensive batteries shoot down incoming ships and hence prevent the enemy from retaking your territory.

> Sieze ground with armour or orbital guns
> Once you have the upper hand, deploy infantry to hold it
> Fortify with defensive guns

File: Shaltari special rules 1.jpg (634KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

634KB, 2048x1152px

>>49987853
And the shaltari rules, as they do things a bit different like.

This Drop Commander stuff seems cool, but 10mm is an odd scale innit?

File: Shaltari special rules 2.jpg (667KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

667KB, 2048x1152px

>>49987867
Last one, I'll stop spamming up the thread now I promise.

>>49987843
No worries, hope it's been helpful, sorry that I probably didn't post them all in the best order, and am missing some pages (I think).

>>49987874

10mm is big enough to have nice models and small enough to have really massive battles.

File: 14900522_10154322253136773_8628769690593307928_n.jpg (24KB, 500x509px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 500x509px

>>49984975

Which faction is right for me?

- I want units to work together and rely on mutual support. Flash, Active Scans, Support Frigs and Launch Assets are all great.
- I would rather stay mobile than go WF all the time. High speed and reliane on single guns or assets are preferred.
- I prefer smaller ship classes, and expect to go heavy on Frigates, Corvettes and Light Cruisers. Flagship is likely to be a Battlecruiser at most.
- I want a strong ground game with lots of Strike Carriers, Motherships and bombard capability.

- I do not care for resilience at all. I want to dump out damage, but am happy to get that through lots of smaller guns rather than a WF heavy.
- I am a special snowflake and don't want to be on the bandwagon.

Picture unrelated.

>>49988501
UCM is probably your best bet.

Scourge focus on being dead killy
PHR focus on being dead 'ard and dead killy, but they have great frigates
Shaltari are highly mobile and have simple guns, but they don't have flash; launch assets and Opal are great, though

UCM is probably the most "combined arms" out of the four, though.

>>49988501
PHR loves frigates both specialist and multi role and don't have to go WF constantly, but they're durable and slow.

Scourge are fast and frail, but eschew hard support ships in favor of a wider range of ways to land a 3d6+12 sucker punch.

As the jack of all trades brigade, UCM is probably your only Goldilocks zone option.

>>49987390
Okay, bold prediction time then. I think once we get into 1500 point games more, ship lists that have a ton of troop ships and a few strike carriers are going to end up winning way more games then people are expecting. I also expect Scourge to do better because they can at least try to play the atmospheric game with their frigates, even if they're not ideal for it. Shaltari will be the leaders in the ground games thanks to void gate shenanigans, and PHR with their bombardment/troopship frigates will do okay as long as they play carefully. UCM are gonna be interesting because Madrids could be very scary to the ground game, and they have the only bombardment BB, so they might be able to deny the ground game to their opponent and still have a strong space fighting force.

Of course, this might be all for naught if people just fall into corvette spam (Though that could lead to an interesting scenario where scourge spam firgates, corvettes, and the minimum number of cruisers needed and just sweep the atmospheric game, considering how good they are at scan range fighting shenanigans)

File: 11836929_10153483711808498_5437897952991153157_n.jpg (98KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 960x540px

>>49988562
>>49988657

I was leaning towards UCM so that is reassuring to hear.
Looking through the book, UCM seem to have fucking awful launch assets. They seem to have low Launch values, high Carrier costs, launch assets manage to be both slow and weak, and they only have a minimal number of Carrier options.

In contrast, PHR are shitting out 2+ Bombers as backup weapons and on their Frigates.
Scourge are toting a L5 Carrier with Scald, high speed and Corruptor torps.
Shaltari get a supercarrier, fast bombers and an L4 middleweight.

I recognise that Jakartas remove the need for fighters and so I can go all-bomber-all-day, but my launch assets just seem so expensive for something without any polish on it.

Rate muh planned fleets, lads.

>UCM
>Flag (332)
Beijing (252)
Admiral AV4 (80)

>Vanguard (348)
Perth (195)
Madrid (79)
2x Lima (74)

>Line (307)
Seattle (132)
San Francisco (111)
2x Jakarta (64)

>Line (172)
2x Osaka (172)

>Pathfinder (204)
4x Toulon (140)
2x New Orleans (64)

>Pathfinder (130)
2x New Orleans (64)
3x Santiago (66)

1493/1500

>Scourge
>Flag (370)
Daemon (260)
Admiral AV3 (40)
2x Charybdis (70)

>Vanguard (269)
Akuma (205)
2x Gargoyle (64)

>Line (194)
Ifrit (110)
2x Harpy (84)

>Line (277)
Wyvern (105)
4x Djinn (172)

>Line (245)
Chimera (105)
Hydra (140)

>Pathfinder (130)
2x Gargoyle (64)
3x Nickar (66)

1485/1500

>>49988928
>worst launch assets represent!
You shouldn't consider the UCM's "carriers" to be actual carriers.
Seattle is a Rio with bombers/fighters while the Atlantis is an New Moscow with bombers/fighters.
I suppose the New York could be considered a full on carrier, but it still got decent firepower. But mostly the launch assets should be seen as an adaptive boost.

>>49988928

UCM launch assets are only slightly worse than the others. None of the other factions have a Jakarta, which offsets the fighter weakness.

The bombers are slightly weaker, but the platforms are actually pretty awesome as well. The Seattle has the Rios heavy guns with 3 launch. That is fucking great. Every turn it fires 4 3+ shots for no extra cost in addition to its 3 bombers or fighters. Then there is the beefed up version in the atlantis. Something that is fast enough to get into a flank and start attacking back field with bombers while murdering with its shit ton of weapons.

The New York is pretty great as well, launch 5 and a torpedo? Yes please!

>>49987754
>>49987775
>>49987791
I don't think these are in the dropbox.
This shoud be fixed if that is the case.

>>49988501

Let's get these points in order.
>- I want units to work together and rely on mutual support. Flash, Active Scans, Support
Frigs and Launch Assets are all great.
This is UCM theme, with their Limas and their Jakrata.

>- I would rather stay mobile than go WF all the time. High speed and reliane on single guns or assets are preferred.
This point goes to scourge or Shaltari for their furnace cannons or their Tri-gauss array respectivly.

>- I prefer smaller ship classes, and expect to go heavy on Frigates, Corvettes and Light Cruisers. Flagship is likely to be a Battlecruiser at most.
PHR wins the frigate-game. Unless you want spam-cheese. Scourge have their Djin shenanigans.

>- I want a strong ground game with lots of Strike Carriers, Motherships and bombard capability.
Shaltari will probs have the de facto strongest ground game, what with their teleportations, inbuildt defense batteries and whatnot. Also the only one with an actual mothership. (Unless the scrouge things birth ships.)

>- I do not care for resilience at all. I want to dump out damage, but am happy to get that through lots of smaller guns rather than a WF heavy.
Shaltari is the most fragile of the factions, getting better defensive options and range in lieu of toughness. So far Scourge has the most readily available damage-2 weapons which multiplies the amount of hits you score into twice the damage.

>- I am a special snowflake and don't want to be on the bandwagon.
-UCM is winning on the facebook lists.
-PHR is a strong second, and is the suspected true winner of the most popular contest.
-Shaltari and scourge are the least popular due to patriotism
>Remove hedgehog
>nuke jelly.

File: Ad Vindictam.jpg (59KB, 526x296px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 526x296px

>>49989419
>Remove hedgehog
>nuke jelly.

Wisdom

It's real interesting to see how the different "tiers" of weapons stack up.

>UCM
>Guns (per turret)
UF-2200: 4+ lock; 1 attack; 1 damage
UF-4200: 4+ lock; 2 attack; 1 damage
UF-6400: 3+ lock; 2 attack; 1 damage
>CAW
Barracuda Missiles: 4+ lock; 2 attack; 1 damage
Stingray: 4+ lock; 3 attack; 1 damage
Piranha: 4+ lock; d6+4 attack; 1 damage
Shark: 4+ lock; d6+1 attack; 1 damage
Swordfish: 3+ lock; d6+4 attack; 1 damage

>Scourge
>Guns
Occulus Rays 3+ lock; 1 attack; 1 damage; Scald
Occulus Beams: 3+ lock; 1 attack; 2 damage; ~
Occulus Beam Array: 3+ lock; 2 attack; 2 damage; ~
Occulus Beam Phalanx: 3+ lock; 3 attack; 2 damage; ~
>CAW
Plasma Cloud: 3+ lock; 2 attack; 1 damage; Scald
Squall: 4+ lock; d6 attack; 1 damage; ~
Storm: 3+ lock; d6+2 attack; 1 damage; ~
Tempest: 3+ lock; 2d6+4 attack; 1 damage; ~
Cyclone: 2+ lock; d6+2 attack; 1 damage; ~

>PHR
>Guns
Light Calibre Battery: 5+ lock; 6 attack; 1 damage; Calibre(L)
Light Calibre Broadside: 5+ lock; 12 attack; 1 damage; ~
Medium Calibre Turret: 4+ lock; 2 attack; 1 damage
Medium Calibre Bank: 4+ lock; 3 attack; 1 damage
Medium Calibre Battery: 4+ lock; 4 attack; 1 damage
Medium Calibre Broadside: 4+ lock; 8 attack; 1 damage
Heavy Calibre Battery: 3+ lock; 2 attack; 1 damage; Calibre(H/S)
Heavy Calibre Broadside: 3+ lock; 4 attack; 1 damage; ~
Heavy Calibre Cannonade: 3+ lock; 6 attack; 1 damage; ~
>CAW
Mosquito Drones: 4+ lock; 2 attack; 1 damage
Vespa: 4+ lock; 3 attack; 1 damage
Wasp: 3+ lock; d3+1 attack; 1 damage
Hornet: 3+ lock; d3+3 attack; 1 damage

>Shaltari
>Guns
Disintegrator Battery: 3+ lock; 4 attack; 1 damage
Disintegrator Bank: 3+ lock; 2 attack; 1 damage
Ion Lances: 5+ lock; 5 attack; 1 damage
>CAW
Harpoon Volley: 4+ lock; 2 attack; 1 damage
Cascade: 4+ lock; 3 attack; 1 damage
Torrent: 4+ lock; 6 attack; 1 damage
Microwave Array: 3+ lock; d3+2 attack; 1 damage; beam
Ion Storm: 3+ lock; d6+3 attack; 1 damage; beam

>>49989573
I do like the neatness of the scourge ones.

>>49989573
Not including the Diamond's guns? or the impel gun?

>>49990376
Beams aren't really "guns" imo; but you're right, they should still be included

>UCM
>Beams
Cobra: 3+ lock; 2 attack; 1 damage; BTL(6) Flash
Viper: 3+ lock; 4 attack; 1 damage; BTL(8) Flash Bloom

>Scourge
>Beams
Furnace Cannons (multibeam): 4+ lock; 4 attack; 1 damage; BTL(8) Scald
Furnace Cannons (focused beam): 2+ lock; 1 attack; 1 damage; BTL(4) Scald Flash

>PHR
>Beams
Supernova: 3+ lock; 1 attack; 1 damage; BTL(3) Flash
Twin Supernova: 3+ lock; 2 attack; 1 damage; BTL(6) Flash
Dark Matter Cannon: 2+ lock; 2 attack; 3 damage; Crippling Bloom
>extra CAW
Neutron Missiles: 2+ lock; D3+1 attack; 2 damage; Crippling

>Shaltari
>Beams
(Light) Particle Lance: 3+ lock; 1 attack; 1 damage; Particle
Particle Lance: 3+ lock; 1 attack; 2 damage; Particle
(Super) Particle Lance Triad: 2+ lock; 3 attack; 2 damage; Particle Bloom Crippling

>>49990517
>forgot other Shaltari beams
>hurrr

Disruptors: 4+ lock; 6 attack; 1 damage
Gravity Coils: 2+ lock; 2 attack; 1 damage; Impel(2)

>>49990517

The Furnace Cannon n the scourge are pretty good. A lucky roll with first turn 6 was pretty nice in the BOW video.

>>49991575
I wonder if the Scourge BTL cruisers are gonna turn out to be fucking ridiculous and the only reason they aren't spammed is because of scald. They're cheap enough, and have some nice utility.

>>49989108
No criticisms?

File: IMG_0545.jpg (362KB, 1632x1224px) Image search: [Google]

362KB, 1632x1224px

Success!

File: IMG_0546.jpg (778KB, 1632x1224px) Image search: [Google]

778KB, 1632x1224px

>>49993504

File: IMG_0547.jpg (355KB, 1632x1224px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 1632x1224px

>>49993519

File: IMG_0548.jpg (393KB, 1632x1224px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 1632x1224px

>>49993529

>>49993504
whatchu doin with that ship there anon?

>>49993504
>holds in by magnets on the opposite piece, not magnets inset into the hull
clever girl

>>49989108
I think you might want a few more Jakartas, and maybe cut an Osaka and turn the other into a Rio for it. 4 jakartas give you a bit more counterplay against bomber lists and CA assault lists, which might be the biggest weakness for a Beijing Perth list.

For the Scourge list, I'm really a big supporter of cutting the harpies and running Djinns. Harpy just seems so underwhelming in terms of damage compared to a Djinn, and you're going to end up at similar distances anyway. You might also replace the Wyvern with a Sphinx. That'll use up 12 of your 15 points, and give you better damage at CA and at distance, imo. Its really your call on that one.

>>49993783
Good points, I'll definitely think about it, especially for the UCM. Thanks anon!

>>49993538
looking good, there. Question, I've been having some trouble with the fit on the top piece with the rest of the body, i tried shaving it down to get a better fit but i'm still left with a noticeable gap between the pieces on the top near the base of the wings. How'd you fix this?

File: 1431574100297.png (199KB, 1200x1332px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 1200x1332px

>already built an Orpheus
>halfway through what could be either a Theseus or an Orion
>really want to build the basic starter fleet for demo balance purposes, but not really feeling the Hector
>REALLY want a Bellerophon or two, which would be redundant with the starter lineup's Ikarus
>love the feel of the Achilles regardless of its value post-torpedo
>my pledge isn't even here yet
I wish these PHR weapon bays and extremities weren't so intimidating to magnetize, I'm running out of my first wave of cruiser sprues fast.

File: 0b1d9727b0[1].png (75KB, 1250x722px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1250x722px

Quick ref sheet for all you nerds to help with list building

>>49994383
Uhhhh... I didn't. It's just not very noticeable if you're not looking at the seam straight on.

Haha, maximum carrier!

>Shaltari 1500/1500
>Flag (370)
Platinum (270)
AV5 (100)

>Line (290)
Basalt (145)
Basalt (145)

>Line (200)
2x Granite (200)

>Line (370)
2x Emerald (200)
2x Azurite (170)

>Pathfinder (135)
2x Topaz (90)
3x Voidgate (45)

>Pathfinder (135)
2x Topaz (90)
3x Voidgate (45)

On a related note, Shaltari are the absolute best for list building; their costs fit together oh so nicely.

>>49994559
That is useful anon, thanks!

>>49994709
Actually, on second thought, I should probably swap out those Azurites for more frigates, as well as dropping down to AV4. That gives me 190 points, allowing for a squadron of 2 Topaz in the Granite Line battlegroup, and a squadron of 2 topaz in the Emerald line battlegroup.

With those 10 remaining points, I could swap out a Granite for an Amber, as well as being able to replace any of the Topaz groups with a Jade group.

What do you anons think?

>>49994806
Jades aren't very good, against everything but shields a Topaz is just mathematically superior. Maybe consider Amethysts instead, they're pretty good.

>>49994898
Ah, yes, I forgot about the Amethysts; I could stick a squadron of Topaz into the Granite group, move one Topaz squadron from a pathfinder to the Emerald group, and replace it with a squadron of Amethysts.

>Shaltari 1490/1500
>Flag (350)
Platinum (270)
AV4 (80)

>Line (290)
Basalt (145)
Basalt (145)

>Line (290)
2x Granite (200)
2x Topaz (90)

>Line (290)
Emerald (100)
Emerald (100)
2x Topaz (90)

>Pathfinder (135)
2x Topaz (90)
3x Voidgate (45)

>Pathfinder (135)
2x Topaz (90)
3x Voidgate (45)

Alternately, I could just always keep them as all Topaz and replace a Granite with an Amber, but I'm not sure how I feel about having only one particle ship. Another option would be the following if I wanted some bombardment (and non frigate CAW), along with some extra protection.

>Shaltari 1495/1500
>Flag (390)
Platinum (270)
AV4 (80)
Opal (40)

>Line (290)
Basalt (145)
Basalt (145)

>Line (305)
Granite (100)
Turquoise (115)
2x Topaz (90)

>Line (240)
Emerald (100)
Emerald (100)
Opal (40)

>Pathfinder (135)
2x Topaz (90)
3x Voidgate (45)

>Pathfinder (135)
2x Topaz (90)
3x Voidgate (45)

>>49994460
WHat do you mean by the Bell being redundant in front of an Ikarus?

>>49995368
Since any demo games I can get going are to be limited to starter fleet + freebies on non-PHR factions, I don't want to skew towards launch assets too much.

Meanwhile my inner min-maxer thinks that the Bell's sniping laser works better for holding at the edge of bomber thrust range, while the Ikarus feels a bit riskier its lower hull and wide spread of medium batteries. So I'm not sure if I'd use the Ikarus enough to justify committing a cruiser build to it over something common like the Orion or fun like an Achilles.

Does people get to armor-save against torpedoes?
Can torpedoes crit?

>>49995629
Yes.
Yes.

>>49995663
Thanks.

Guys. I am really lost on wether to build a Minos or a Heraceles when the time comes.

In which situation is one better than the other?
The Darm Matter Penis Enlarger is incredibly sexy though.

>>49996078
Heracles wants to hang back and snipe with the big gun. Minos wants to fire torpedoes and then get stuck in with its cannonades and CAW.

>>49996146
Getting stuck in is just 'roight and proppa orkin' it is.

File: __gunbuster_top_wo_nerae_drawn_by_babamba__704ea700fe6694f8d7be46153ffd8e6b.png (717KB, 600x900px) Image search: [Google]

717KB, 600x900px

Anon here who started the "giant robot surfing a Minos" idea

A quick consultation with anime fans and some arithmetic reveals my giant robot of choice is 7.3mm tall in DFC scale.

To this end I can use a single PHR infantry as a base...

File: Rolls-Royce-Hood-Ornament.jpg (82KB, 815x543px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 815x543px

>>49996648
I vote for a valkyrie.

>>49996648
That pic looks eerily like that one alien from one-punch man.

>>49996707
Next question, how the FUCK do I sculpt a cape on a 7mm-ish tall model

>>49996715
Dude, that's the Gunbuster. If you have a passing interest in giant robots, or anime, go look it up right now!

>>49996707
But anon. It's physical excellence, kicking ass and drones that are for women.
Mechs are for men.
>Valkyries never really was an option.
I vote for a Longreach sniper. Because a long-reach mech-sniper would be the BEST weaponsplatform for the Dark Matter Cannon.

File: gunbuster.jpg (185KB, 525x358px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 525x358px

>>49996733
Another pic of it surfing a spaceship.

>>49996733
I assume it was sort of a tribute by OPM.
The resemblance is too good to be a coincidence.

>>49996729
The Longreach has a cape. File the rifle off, mod the helmet and redo the arms with paperclip wire and boom, the PHR Exelion now has its mech...

File: SDF 1 in city.jpg (558KB, 638x854px) Image search: [Google]

558KB, 638x854px

>>49996726
>>49996738
Hmm, what the hell happened here.

Also
>>49996648
Why surf the spaceship, when you could BE the spaceship?

>>49996744
Good point!

>>49996742
That was the look I wanted for my battleship, the Heracles/Minos looks pretty similar


also

>highly efficient ayylmao removal
https://youtu.be/l0vCY3I5yxo

>>49996233
Why must GW be injected into absolutely everything?

>>49995566

Both are great ships but for a starter set fight, the default set up isn't bad since you don't have to pay any extra points for the Hector.

If you can magnetize just the front BTL with a medium turret you can switch between a Hector and an Orion any time

>>49997190
Because 40k Orks are god damn funny regardless of GW's jewish tendensies and policies.

>>49997190

Because a long time ago, table top wargaming was all 40k . And there was a time where 40k wasn't complete shit.

my current planned fleet set up


Orion
Orion
Bellephron
Ikarus
Ajax
Ganymede
Theseus
Leonidas
Scipio

4x Europa
2x Pandora
2x calypsos
4x Medea

Skipped out on andromedas for now as well as any heavy cruisers. I might get another starter box just to get a few andromedas, another Ajax and Theseus plus an Orpheus

>>49998079
I count 3 separate starting sets for PHR.

>>49998180

Well almost, it's two starter sets, the extra cruiser, the extra 4 frigates and my two PHR BCs

>Beijing
>"The design has proven so reliable and versatile that the basic hull forms the base of most of the UCM's enormous battleships."
Alternate battleship sculpts confirmed.

>>49998465
I think it's referring to the two other battleships they already have...

>Vanguard (272)
Perth (195)
AV3 (40)
Lima (37)
>Vanguard (232)
Perth (195)
Lima (37)
>Line (316)
2x New Cairo (176)
4x Toulon (140)
>Line (274)
2x Rio (210)
2x Jakarta (64)
>Line (207)
Madrid (79)
2x New Orleans (64)
2x New Orleans (64)
>Pathfinder (194)
2x New Orleans (64)
2x New Orleans (64)
3x Santiago (66)

>1495/1500

What do you think, /tg/?

>>49998671

Now with the confirmation that normal orders clears spikes at the beginning of your activation instead of at the end, the Avalon is back to being an iffy choice. If it fires even on normal orders it's scan bait

Anyone have a link to the DFC battlescribe repository?


Can't download the .rar on my phone sadly

>>49994568
Damn, that sucks. I love the ships but that seam is bugging me. Probably going to pick up some liquid GS.

>>49998805
Still brutally effective though. And it's not like the thing is a frigate, the opponent will probably need to take considerable resources away from other duties if they want to take down a Perth on the first turn. Not to mention that there are several ships that are only worthwhile if they regularly put major spikes on themselves.

Thinking of going Scourge in DFC, have some questions
1) My intial response on looking of the unit pics in OP is "fuck BBs, go BC/CA for maximum stealth". Would this work or would I be fucked against enemy BBs?
2) I was under the impression that each of the factions got a support frigate (UCM has Point Defense, PHR has ECM, etc). What is the scourge's? I heard that the scourge get a ship that can dive into atmosphere and shoot up at ships in orbit with low/no penalty, is that it and if so what is it called?

>>49999711
>I was under the impression that each of the factions got a support frigate (UCM has Point Defense, PHR has ECM, etc). What is the scourge's? I heard that the scourge get a ship that can dive into atmosphere and shoot up at ships in orbit with low/no penalty, is that it and if so what is it called?
Scourge don't get a "utility" support frigate (like the Jakarta, Lima, Calypso, and Opal); rather, they get a bombardment frigate, Charybdis, and the "missile sub" frigate, Scylla.

All of their frigates are atmosphere capable.

>>49999711
Scourge don't have a support ship per say, but they do have the scylla as you've described. Gets 2 4+ shots, and its probably going to be a ship that either turns out to be secretly amazing and no one realized or its gonna be a bit of a dud but okay to have in lists.

>>49999684

As the demo game with Dave showed, it really only takes one decent weapons free with a cruiser to do 6-7 damage to a 3+ hull. Even BCs are quite fragile in this game, PHRs included.

Avalons still a mean ship don't get me wrong

>>49999711

Scourge BCs look fun as fuck and they hit almost as hard as their BBs so don't worry about that.

>>49999849
Don't like that.
Maybe it's just false assumptions or not possible to really model in games, by I get prefer ships to have an average life expectancy greater than one engagement.

>>49999849

Scourge have the advantage of high damage and scald so it is a little skewed, but your are still correct.

>>50000273

Granted this was a slaughter of a game where scourge just bum rushed UCM and knocked a Moscow down to 1 HP in a single shooting action in scald range

Scourge games seem to become mutual destruction very quickly

Anyway, getting back to our original topic, 2 rio 2 Perth 2 Cairo might be a bit light on the orbital combat side of things for 1500 points but it's not bad.

8 New Orleans is a lot but who knows, it might work

>>50000341
>Anyway, getting back to our original topic, 2 rio 2 Perth 2 Cairo might be a bit light on the orbital combat side of things for 1500 points but it's not bad.
>8 New Orleans is a lot but who knows, it might work
Possibly, but do keep in mind that I've also got 4 Toulons stuck in there as well.

Do you think 4 groups of Nawlins is too much? It's rougly equivalent to 2 groups + a troopship, right?

>>49999849
I think the main lesson to take from that demo game is that the dice gods are fickle and will do what they wish. Statistically iirc it takes a decent bit more than that.

Range is also an important factor, especially with Scourge. CAW can bring in a lot of damage and Scald is really nasty.

>>49996078
Heracles.

It turns the game into a point and click adventure of fun.

File: phr pilot.gif (2MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 480x270px

This strikes me as your average rookie PHR Pilot, laughing it up as she completes a bombing run on Moscow-sama :(

>>49998072
>Because a long time ago, table top wargaming was all 40k
This was never the case

>>50000273
I don't think that's possible. If I tried to design a game where all factions' ships have a high chance of surviving engangements, I would have either created a game where most conflicts end in stalemates as ships retreat, or a game where attrition decides the winner.

Here, the game is about picking apart the war machine your enemy has built while protecting the vulnerable parts of yours. The fragility of the ships, relative to other games, gives a sense of stakes to every skirmish within a given battle, and if you homebrewed some campaign rules, committing ships to a battle becomes that much more of a strategic concern.

>>50000430

It's expensive for putting down infantry and if the enemy has good bombardment capability your armor is going to evaporate.

but that's not an unworkable problem, I would probably proxy it before committing to building 8 strike carriers. If you like it after, do it

>>50000463

Range was very important in that game but it also showed how fast ships are, even 7" thrust ships didn't go their full amount usually

>>50000498
While true, 40ks market share was such that the competition might as well not have existed.

>>50000492
>Immortals are the last bastion of professionalism in the shitshow that is the PHR military, stoic soldiers who go about their duty with efficiency
>they're the basic infantry and die in droves while the retarded monkeys waste their advanced mechs, jets and nanobots on killstreaks and showboating
Justice is a myth.

>>50000731
>the command crew of PHR vessels collectively control the ship via communal neural uplink
>they actually treat commanding the ship like a video game, and are actually more focused on watching movies while linked in.

>>50000806
I've been wondering about that.

If these ships are controlled by about twelve dudes going all GitS, what's the rest of the crew doing? I guess they need engineers and security staff around, but who else?

>>50000911
Gunners, Engineers, damage control guys (even if they're backed up by worker drones and automation), medical staff, someone to maintain the food dispenser and toilet-cleaning drones...

>>50000911
Their crews are supposed to be very small, so I suppose that marines, engineers, and supplementary officers are pretty much all they need to help out the command crew.

The Scourge command system is pretty fucking awesome too.

>a few dozen pure scourge floating in a vat, mind-melded together, to form the "soul" of the ship, an organic computer
>synthetic computers to supplement the gestalt ship mind
>bridge crew are specially chosen hosts from specific species that go GitS with the ship mind

>>50000911
Medbay, weapons operators, a supply department, and a whole lot of maintenance. There's probably more I can't think of.

File: image.jpg (93KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 720x960px

>PHR use their advantage in tiny crew requirements to have more ships rather than fewer more expensive ships
>UCM speculates the PHR can match them in numbers ship for ship if not exceed them

I like it


I like it

>tfw maximal swarm

>Flag (370)
Daemon (260)
AV3 (40)
2x Charybdis (70)
>Line (420)
Hydra (140)
Hydra (140)
Hydra (140)
>Line (215)
Chimera (105)
Ifrit (110)
>Line (230)
2x Sphinx (230)
>Pathfinder (130)
2x Gargoyle (64)
3x Nickar (66)
>Pathfinder (130)
2x Gargoyle (64)
3x Nickar (66)

1495/1500

>>50000731
dont buy into that professionalism horsecrap, we all know squads of immortals are linked together via a short range wireless network so they dont need to verbally communicate (hence why they appear stoic) But in reality they are treating the whole thing like its a CS Go match, or COD 56 Ancient Warfare 3 with sick kill streaks, hiding behind cover to regen their health, and teabagging any UCM they kill.

Daily reminder that the Raiju is far superior to the Shenlong, since the former can fire the majority of its firepower while in silent running, while the latter can only fire a third.

>>50001325
Having less guns isn't a bragging right friendo. Although I will note I think the BTL is the best single shot weapon that isn't stapled to a scourge BB available. something about potentially getting 8 damage from one gun is very drawing, plus the potential utility in switching to its hyper accuracy mode.

How do we make the Jade on par with the Topaz?

I would say give it D2 damage for its particle lance, but that goes against the Shaltari's "low but consistent damage" design philosophy.

>>50001456
Just 2 damage, straight up. Then make it a bit more expensive to stop it from being too good.

>>50001549
Nah, its particle lance is very obviously smaller than the full sized ones on cruisers.

Maybe just drop it to 40 points instead?

Alright lads, I'm gonna start scanning the book.

What would you like first? Fluff, rules, or ships? I'll be scanning it in three sections, since fuck spending three hours doing it all in one go.

>>50001588
2+ lock, then. Smaller, but they can aim it more accurately.

>>50001599
Rules please.

>>50001655
>2+ lock, then. Smaller, but they can aim it more accurately.
Honestly, if you did that, then regular particle lances should be 2+ as well, since the Diamond's super particle lances are 2+ too.
Basically, the progression would end up being.
>1 attack, 1 damage
>1 attack, 2 damage
>1 attack, 2 damage, crippling

>>50001599
I'd like all the rules back-to-back, followed by Ship-stats without folds, shades, skips and half-text blocks (Like the god damn Calypso) and lastly the fluff.

And I need to state that you're the god damn hero Tennisball needs.

>>50001655
>>50001763
Gotcha senpaitachi, should have rules and ships done tonight, followed by fluff tomorrow.

>>50001773
>senpaitachi
That's a new one

senpai
senpaitachi
famalam
famalams

>>50001773
You gonna put it all together into a PDF when you're done?

Do ships need to be in coherency of the other ships in their battlegroup (line, pathfinder, etc) or just other ships in their unit (aka frigates)?

>>50001784
Nah, three separate PDFs like I did for phase 2.
I'm also too lazy to pirate adobe, so I just use the editor that comes with my scanner.

>>50001795
Ships need to be within 3" or 6" of ships in their group (if the ships have hull of 6 or less, or if they have 7 or more)
Groups need to be within 12" of another group in their BG, otherwise that BG takes +1 to its SR for every group out of coherency.

Outlier makes the BG coherency not apply, and Open makes both not apply.

>>50001773
You're the real senpai here. We are your mere kohaitachi

File: I HAVE NO SHIPS AND I MUST SCREAM.jpg (206KB, 1300x866px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 1300x866px

DAVE PLEASE

>>50001836
I can't seem to download them onto my phone.

>>50001975
Strange; no idea what to tell you, anon.

>>50002065
It says to download the link then open the link- rather than just clicking it but it then opens a pdf to then say I need to download it.

First try with making a Scourge List, how much did I fuck up?

Clash 1500
Pathfinder: Nickar x2, Gargoyle x2, Scylla x3 (234)
Pathfinder: Djinn x3, Gargoyle x2, Yokai x2 (383)
Line: Hydra (140)
Line: Ifrit, Sphinx x2 (340)
Vanguard: Wyvern, Fleet Overlord Banshee (395)
1492pts
>tfw no jelly shipgirl

So, have we figured out any rough guidelines for fleet building yet?

>for 1500 points
>at least 2 groups worth of scoring units
>of that, between 6-7 infantry capacity
>at least 1 group of bombardment is heavily recommended, but optional
>at least 1 group of carrier capacity is heavily recommended, but optional
>utilize a wide spread of average weapon damage among the fleet; it's just as important not to overkill as it is to not underkill
>have, at the very least, a number of frigates equal to three-fourths of the number of cruisers, and have at the very most two times as many frigates as cruisers; too many big ships and you'll lose lots of firepower every engagement, as there are less targets; too many small ships, and your overall damage capacity is reduced

Anything else, or anything that needs to be changed?

>>50002514

balanced approach looks best desu, I'm not sure any skew list (besides mmmaybe maxing launch cap) will be great, so far anyway.

I love PHR currently because their fleet selection makes it so easy to cover all bases while still being Killy as fuck.

Same noob from earlier here. I'm poking through what's been shared about the ships, and I've noticed these "paired" ship classes, an older and a newer one with equivalent performance.

Do they only have different names? Do they also look different? Is any mechanical difference at all, or are they actually identical as far as the abstraction of the rules is concerned?

>>50002960
Are you talking about the battlecruisers?

The only reason for that is that there are KS-exclusive hulls for them, but Dave will be sculpting general release hulls with different names, but otherwise identical.

>>50003057
Oh, okay. That explains a lot, actually

>>50002514

You shouldn't look at your scoring units as groups.

You need a troop carrier maybe 2. Your strike carriers all have open so put some in a battlegroup you want to go first and some in a battle group you expect to go last.

A carrier or two is probably required. It is a good way to reach out and threating units especially silent running assholes like the scourge BCs.

Bombardment comes in most ships dual and scourge. Both those are cheap enough you can throw a ship in. In most cases, your bombardment is just to try to move a cheeky deployment that you can contest.

Weapons depend on faction, but you should understand what they are force. Gun ships are for shaving wounds and for lower armor lower health units. BTL are single target killers. Go for your factions strength first and then a small mix of generals and specialists.

There isn't seem to be a hard an fast rule for number of ship type or totals. Frigates are useful because they are fast not because of their firepower which is most case isn't that strong. CA frigates and BTL/PL are the exception. You need enough of them to keep being annoying and not to let your opponents concentrate fire one large ships that has gone WF. Those number don't fit. Build your battlegroups to do specific jobs don't follow an some made up ratio system.

>>50003154

For bombardment, that should say most ships dual and then one UCM and Scourge ship.

>>50002958
zombie goasts leave this place

>>50003165
That's one way to look at it, another is that half the factions in the game have to take specialist ships for bombardment.

So has there been any word on whether the FFoR guy is going to make a similar program for DFC?

>>50005540

He said no, but there are several other people making webapps.

Hawk is supposed to be developing their own.

>>50005555
>He said no, but there are several other people making webapps.
He's actually revised his position, and should be making one

File: IMG_0551.jpg (557KB, 1632x1224px) Image search: [Google]

557KB, 1632x1224px

Magnet Party Continues!
Strix -

File: IMG_0550.jpg (555KB, 1632x1224px) Image search: [Google]

555KB, 1632x1224px

>>50005972
<Transformer Noises>

File: IMG_0549.jpg (451KB, 1632x1224px) Image search: [Google]

451KB, 1632x1224px

>>50005988
Ifrit

>>50001931
>Laughing_Lieutenant.jpg

File: 1a08b40ad7295095c177efdd895c9985123a8d68_hq.gif (112KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 320x180px

>>50001773
>>50001780
>sempagliachi?

DFC rules; landscape is definitely a tad easier to scan than portrait.
http://www.mediafire.com/file/li17bl14bute5ee/DFC_RulesScenarios.pdf

Except rules either tonight or tommorow, and fluff tommorow.

>>50007312
Thank you based anon. Looking forward to the other two parts!

>>50007312
>Except rules either tonight or tommorow
Wew, ship stats*

>>50007330
No prob breh; gonna try and get it done before next thread so I can update the OP.

>>50006006
>>50005988
>>50005972
Nice.

Whats your opinions on magnetizing? Is it worth it?

It seems only some ships are capable?

Also, can you make a video of that transformation? I'd like to see how seamless it is, and how hard the magnets grip.

Thanks anon!

Keep the thread bumped, guys.

>Flag (402)
Heracles (285)
AV4 (80)
Calypso (37)
>Vanguard (180)
Bellerophon (180)
>Line (287)
Orion (107)
2x Europa (80)
2x Pandora (100)
>Line (235)
Ajax (100)
Ganymede (135)
>Line (178)
2x Theseus (178)
>Pathfinder (216)
2x Medea (78)
2x Medea (78)

1498/1500

>>50009444
Wew, I fucked up the pathfinder group.

>Flag (465)
Heracles (285)
AV4 (80)
2x Pandora (100)
>Vanguard (180)
Bellerophon (180)
>Line (267)
Orion (107)
4x Europa (160)
>Line (235)
Ajax (100)
Ganymede (135)
>Line (178)
2x Theseus (178)
>Pathfinder (156)
2x Medea (78)
2x Medea (78)

1485/1500

>>50009464
>no Achilles
Do you even launch, bro?

>>50008190
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BzNsPcQR-pkCa2lWWC1TRlZwQTA

The video is a little awkward since I'm using my offhand to manipulate the parts, but swapping out is really fast normally. I plan to add another magnet on the bottom for the Bulk Landers and put together some blank prow plates to cover up the hole when using Chimeras or Hydras.

Magnetizing seems pretty legit for Scourge. The only thing out is the heavy cruiser crown, so you'll have to assign a couple hulls to be heavy cruisers (I plan on two) and just glue it on straight

>>50010381
thanks anon. That actually looks pretty good.

How hard was it to do?

>>50010381
Thanks anon!
Also WOW. Did not know ramming was a thing. :|

>>50009444

My concept list for 1500pts is:

>Flag
Demon
2x Harpy

>Vanguard
Basilisk

>Line
3x Stryx
2x Djinn

>Line
2x Hydra's

>Pathfinder
Chimera
4x Gargoyles

>Admiral
Fleet Master (4)

If it transpires that I don't need a level 4 Admiral I can drop down to the level 3 one, but I don't know what I'd be spending those 40 points on. It'd actually be suboptimal to upgrade the third Stryx to a Wyvern because then it wouldn't be attacking as a single group with the Stryx's.
Maybe a lone Ifrit for flash mechanics.

>>50007312
Awesome! Thanks dude.

>>50010699
I'm not sure about putting frigates in the Flag battlegroup for scourge. A battleship battlegroup without frigates will have a lower strategy rating than one with, so leaving frigates out to make sure your battleship shoots first (if your opponent has taken frigates). And while other races have support frigates that'll help keep the battleship alive (opal, calypso, jakarta) scourge don't.

Just my two cents. And a cheeky excuse to bump the thread.

>>50007312
Thanks! Two pages of the shaltari special rules were at the end of the PDF for some reason.

>>50011710

It's a good point, though I don't really know where else I'd put them.

>>50011858
Yeah, I put them there; they're rules, aren't they?

>>50010633
Yeah but from what's understood you can only do it when you're at 1 health. Considering the myraid crits in the game, its gonna be hard to end up on 1 health in ramming range and not just finished off with a volley into you. Shouldn't happen very often if at all.

>>50013519
1 or 2 actually.

>nobody's posted a fuck off cuh-ray-zee 3000 point list yet

>Flag (652)
Beijing (252)
New York (260)
AV6 (140)
>Vanguard (432)
Perth (195)
Moscow (163)
2x Lima (74)
>Line (424)
2x Berlin (210)
4x Toulon (140)
2x Lima (74)
>Line (514)
Seattle (132)
2x Rio (210)
2x Osaka (172)
>Line (370)
2x Madrid (178)
4x Jakarta (128)
2x New Orleans (64)
>Pathfinder (331)
San Francisco (111)
2x New Orleans (64)
4x Taipei (156)
>Pathfinder (241)
San Franciso (111)
2x New Orleans (64)
3x Santiago (66)

2964/3000

>>50014171
There's points for another Santiago right there, anon. And I feel like Osakas might be better suited to frigate-heavy battlegroups rather than big line ones.

>>50014259
No room; max of three groups per BG (except for flag), and my Santiago and Nawlins groups are maxed out.

>>50014327
Oh right, forgot that corvettes get weird group limits.

>>50014171
Not enough troop capacity for 3000pts. Those are of New Orleans and SanFran numbers for 2000 pts.
Well at least says someone that has never played the game. stillwaitingformyships

>>50015654
Eh; if a troopship and two groups of strike carriers are enough for 1500, then two troopships and three groups of strike carriers should be enough for 3000.

>>50012874
>>50007312

How goes the scan, man?

>>50016287
Ships soon(tm), fluff tonight; some stuff came up earlier today.

>>50012874
Then where are the other faction special rules?

>>50016669

Shaltari are rulebreaking dicks and get a special callout. Everyone else gets universal rules.

>>50016669
There aren't any others; just the Shaltari

File: Hartman.jpg (420KB, 1282x818px) Image search: [Google]

420KB, 1282x818px

>>49987867
>>49987880
So Gates (effectively Ground Assets mid-deployment) can be shot down normally by defense batteries, but Voidgate-to-Voidgate relocation only gets hit on a 6+?

Looks to me like Shaltari mass asset shunt in a scenario with dispersed clusters is going to be a pain in the ass if you can't reliably blast the Voidgates.

>>50016779

It's not a huge deal since clusters tend to be in the middle of the table, making the shunt more of a neat bonus rather than a central strategy

>>50016779
>>50016977
What I like fluffwise about the voidgates is that it makes perfect sense for mass relocation; they're just conduits, but they can actually only remotely teleport in so many gates at once planetside.

>>50010520
Wasn't that hard. I destroyed one of my Chimera hangar bays for experimenting but I'll have a bunch of extras so no worries there. The only equipment I have is a hobby knife and a 2mm hand drill.

By the way, make sure your drill bit is the same diameter as the magnets your going to use. I have 3mm magnets and widening the hole is probably where most of the work occurs.

Keep it bumped

So boys, I'm thinking about putting together an online DFC/DZC campaign. One week have DFC players kick off a battle, at the end of the game, use whatever ground assests are still in clusters to form the points cap for a DZC game, then guys with DZC can play based off that. Depending on how many people sign up, we can either have dedicated partners i.e. "This Fleet always dictates the results for this Commander" or average it out. From there, maybe have the ground combat secure an orbital laser sector for a DFC game later, or just shift to another side of the planet, etc and see how things go. Thoughts? Suggestions?

File: 1433460423484.jpg (30KB, 694x530px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 694x530px

>PHR close action uses drones
>we could overcome missile halos with a barrage of munitions at short range
>but we'd rather launch a cloud of autonomous, fragile weapon platforms that a barrage a of munitions before having to turn around to rearm and refuel
I wonder what sort of formative trauma instilled the PHR with their deep-seated aversion to efficiency.

>>50018657
>he didn't read the fluff.

PHR "Drones" are actually just bigger missiles with more maneuvering engines and larger warheads, but also equipped with AI to dodge PD fire and impact enemy ships at their weakest points.
This is why they fire less overall, but their CAW has etter lock.

>>50018328
They have rules for combined play on the rule book

>>50018681
Oh cool. That makes a lot more sense, and fits well with their tech-laden stealth missiles on the ground scale.

Really wish I had my rulebook so I could appreciate Dave's nice fluff instead of inadvertently shitposting using incomplete information.

>>50001255

>At first, when tactical intercept decrpytion teams started blowing their brains out, I thought we had a PHR mole.

>Then I read their work.

>Well, time to eat my gun. Ad Vindictam, men. It's LAN-party trolls all the way down.

File: 14081492_10209570164598195_55490176_n.jpg (156KB, 708x826px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 708x826px

>>50019015
le born to own :^)
Only now do I discover that the infamous Lennyface is filtered on 4chan, go figure

>>50018762
Yes, but I mean having multiple people playing and submitting their results online. That way you can take part if the scene around is non-existent.

I want to start painting so badly...

i am, however, a lowly commodore and must continue to wait.

>>50019222

When will the nightmare end anon?

File: 13866704_1056782987709391_1958396379_n.jpg (16KB, 540x487px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 540x487px

>>50019222
I broke down and bought a starter fleet to hold me over. I've built it, but only one ship even has paint on it.

Painting my pledge is going to be a part-time job all to itself this winter.

>>50019222
>>50019534
>Commodore
>250 pounds worth of commodore shit
>broke down and bought a 2p starter set, a Shaltari fleet, and a PHR fleet in the meantime
I was going to play all 4 factions equally anyways, I swear :,^)

File: Spiral Clock.jpg (1MB, 6400x3820px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 6400x3820px

AAAH WAITING ON DAVE
AAAH WAITING ON KICKSTARTER
AAAH WAITING ON ANON TO SCAN RULEBOOK

WAITCEPTION

>>50019534
I hear you. I really need to quit my job if I ever want all of this painted well.

Speaking of which... Is there any painting guides for the official colour schemes?

>>49984975

Hey guys I'm struggling with a scourge purchase. I have two starter kits, destroyers, minders and monitors.

What HQ should I be looking into? They all seem pretty cool, but I could use a nudge.

The Overseer is surely the most fun and probably also most powerful. But also the most difficult to use. You really have to know your and your oponents army and be somewhat experianced at the game to fully utilze its potential. But nothing you can't learn by playing the game anyway. :D

>>50021499
Depends on what you like. Overseer is making big splashes as a force multiplier, Oppressor is a tried and tried ground killer, and the Desolator looks fucking bitching. I will say I'd pick overseer since it neatly guides your next purchases.

>>50021499
Oppressor probably has the most survivability of the three, its got a good amount of fire power but is a bit less mobile, works well on its own or with other units.

The Overseer is the new hotness, but its a support unit it is no good without other units to upgrade, and the effects it puts out will make your opponent target it asap, so expect it to get hunted down, especially by fast movers.

The desolator is very hit or miss, some people love it, others hate it. It has a hard time working with other scourge units, its got tremendous building demo potential, and a weapon which has a huge attack radius and can hit a number of targets, the problem is its fragile, has to be very close to be effective, and can cause friendly fire. Because of this it has a hard time surviving, and is tricky to use.

>>50021499
Overseer is ridiculously good with both great AA and the ability to significantly buff other units. Just keep in mind that it's not that hard to kill and your opponent will very much want it dead.

Oppressor is a tough and unsubtle anti-ground beatstick. A solid choice and probably what I'd put the commander in, since it's quite good at not dying.

Desolator has the potential to be devastating, with the key word here being potential. It's slow for an aircraft while having a very short ranged weapon, and while it's fairly tough by aircraft standards that's still not tough at all. Its main weapon damages nearby friendly units as well, so have fun trying to support it while it advances. However, it can put out some fantastic demo and if you manage to get within range of a bunch of enemy units then you can deal incredible damage to all of them. Still very hard to use and I wouldn't suggest that a new player use it.

I'd probably recommend the Oppressor first, then the Overseer later. Relying too much on a gimmick unit when you're learning is unhealthy imo, and Overseer is exactly the kind of gimmick unit that encourages over-reliance. Choose it if you like, though.

>>50021625
I'd say the Desolator is more difficult to use. Overseers require setup and list synergy to achieve their true potential, while Desolators require setup to function at all and actively fight any attempts to force synergy upon them.

Sorry for the late upload my dudes; unplanned normie shit pulled me away for the most of the day!

http://www.mediafire.com/file/oa35v9pq7gfe1fs/DFC_Units.pdf

>tfw you accidentally ripped one of the pages on the shitty plastic lip of the scanner
:^(

>>50022869
sankyuu anon-sama

File: 1476899327794.png (447KB, 875x629px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 875x629px

>>50022869
>Madrid Bombard Cannons
>2 turrets, one profile
>Tokyo Bombard Cannons
>3 turrets, two profiles
Pic related.

Great scan so far, anon. Thanks for your efforts!

>>50022600
I slightly disagree. Desolators provide much needed heavy demo in an army that, while it has some, is lacking in something that can be dedicated to it. The Desolator can drop down, at max, 14 damage on a building. Considering most buildings are only 20 DP, that's almost 3/4s of their DP in a single round. You combine that with a hunter or slayer squad pumping shots into the same building and you've got a good shot of dropping a building per turn in an army that really doesn't have any serious demo options aside from shooting it with their MBTs or heavies or arty option. The 12" fuck you bubble is nice, but being able to put the hurt down on an occupied building is better and more reliable.

>>50022869
Your sacrifice shall be remembered, kind and noble anon.

>>50023231
Clearly one of the turrets is a decoy so as to confound the enemy.

>>50022869
This guy right here.

He is what makes a community great.

Who here would actually be bothered enough to scan their brand new book for some random people on the internet? I know I wouldn't. But this guy did.

Thats why I'm taking the time to say thanks guy. You're a good dude.

>>50018821
then buy the rulebook, it's only £16 at something like Wayland.
That's like half the price of a GW army book for the complete rules.

File: Traffic James.png (405KB, 341x534px) Image search: [Google]

405KB, 341x534px

>>50007312
Is "Traffic James" an officially licensed DFC meme yet?

File: naruhodo.jpg (53KB, 900x675px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 900x675px

>>50023736
I've got a Commodore pledge on the way sometime this orbital period, and I've heard discouraging things about Wayland's shipping to the States.

Though I suppose a second rulebook would help the logistics of running demo games...

>>50023763
If you don't trust Waylands shipping to the US, then don't use them, simple. No need to risk wasting your money.
It's $24 dollars at Thewarstore.com too.

>>50022869
Sorry it broke your book, anon. You have our sincere thanks.

>>50023742
Oh Dave. Bless his little cotton socks.

File: Dive.jpg (57KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 960x960px

>>50023742

From the Facebook group:
>OK NEW GAME!
I call it #Typotitups i.e. Unintentionally funny Hawk typos with an image to go with it.
Post your best examples here.
I hereby present my first example.

Woah. The PHR's Calypso's advanced ECM suite looks baller.
Now we need errata on how it stacks, and if it targets a specific weapon on a ship, a specific weapon in a group, or all duplicates of a single weapon on the board.

File: IMG-20161030-WA0005.jpg (277KB, 1600x901px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 1600x901px

Quick job but chuffed with them

File: IMG-20161029-WA0013.jpg (154KB, 1600x901px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1600x901px

Closer view of Berlin

I'm sure magnets are better but it's worth noting that for the frigates they just snap fit, and for the cruisers if you don't glue the top wings on you can just snap change a lot.
Seattle there will change to a Rio or Osaka, Berlin to a New Cairo if wanted, without any use of magnets just don't glue those top bits

>>50024417
>>50024423
Simple but effective, I like it.

>>50024438
I actually decided against snapfitting the wings for my cruisers. It's a bit of a tight fit and the lower wing has to be bent outwards and downwards when you pushthe upper wing into place.

>>50019534
My group and I have been playing so many 'practice' games, we doubt we'll have even one painted model finished before Christmas.

>>50023231
Better yet, two turrets=five shots.

>>50024417
>>50024423
Question.

Have you found that a black standpole looks better on the table than a clear one?

>>50022869
Based.

Think you could scan some of the pretty ship art? I'm running a modified game of Only War set on the Shangri-La front soon and some reference images would be super helpful.

>>50025715
Wouldn't Eclipse Phase be better for players that want to be aesthetic?

>>50022957
>>50023231
>>50023240
>>50023624
>>50023833
You guys flatter me; win a game or two for that torn Medea/Pandora, alright?

>>50025715
No prob anon, I'm just about to start scanning the rest of the book as soon as I finish waking up.

>>50026102
You're the hero we need but don't deserve, scanon. If you ever need someone to suck your e-peen, you know where to find me.

>>50025573
Mostly habit from me, I did it in x wing and preferred it there. These guys haven't seen the table since they've been finished so difficult to say when on the mat.

Basically, dunno!

>>50025715
>I'm running a modified game of Only War set on the Shangri-La front soon and some reference images would be super helpful.
Anon, you best be giving us an after action report when that happens.

What do your players think of the D*C universe fluff?

Anyone know the cheapest place to get the two-player starter from in the US? I'm thinking The Warstore since MM is sold out.

>>50007312
Does this mean there're no 4 player scenarios? I was hoping to use 4 ways to demo the game at my FLGS.

File: 602f54bbba[1].png (27KB, 847x785px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 847x785px

>>50027229
I'm sure you could easily convert some of them to a four player, but I'd say you'd need to increase the size of the table to at least a 6x6.

Something like pic related, maybe?

Players: 4
Fleet List: Standard
Duration: 6 Turns.
Suggested Approach: Battle Line or Column
Orbital Debris: Debris Fields (4-8 fine, 4-8 dense); equally space in all quadrants
Victory Conditions: Clusters (Standard Scoring, Critical Locations), Space Stations (Critical Locations).

>>50027526
I tried a 4 player DZC game once.
It took WAY too much time.

2v2 is way better than All vs All

>>50027526
Hmm, seems a little much, gonna be playing with the starter fleets for obvious reasons. With just 1 or 2 strike carriers/mothership per side that may be a few too many clusters.

>>50027964
Ah, I thought you meant full sized fleets.

A normal 4x4 with a 4-cluster, 2 3-clusters, and 2 2-clusters in an X shape would probably be enough then.

>>50027526
Has anyone found that when you have the biggest objective cluster in dead center things become a tightly-packed scrum?

I feel like it's better to have two nice points near the middle but spaced a fair bit apart.

So I know that PHR ships are tougher than the equivalents of other factions (more hull and/or better armor), but how does that work out on the tabletop? (e.g. they can take X more hits, or survive Y more turns of fire, etc)

>>50028355

They have 1 more HP than other race equivalents and everyone has Armour 3+
Apart from the Battleships, which have FOUR more HP than anyone else.

>>50028355
Everything is 3+ armor saves, so you only get damaged by rolling 1,2 or being crit. That extra point of hull can mean the difference between functioning normally or suffering crippling damage, which for frigates is pretty much a death sentence. PHR frigates are roughly as durable as UCM light cruisers.

>>50028355

They typically have 1 HP more and everyone except the corvette has a 3+ armor save (the corvette still has a 4+)

The battleships have 4 more HP than other battleships.

All of this doesn't sound like much but think of it this way

A UCM frigate takes 2 HP to cripple
A PHR frigate takes 3 HP to cripple with a better armor save

a UCM cruiser takes 5 HP to cripple
A PHR cruiser takes 6 HP to cripple

UCM heavy cruiser takes 6 to cripple
PHR heavy cruiser takes 7 to cripple

UCM battlecruiser takes 7 to cripple
PHR battlecruiser takes 8 to cripple

UCM battleship takes 9 to cripple
PHR battleship takes 11 to cripple

So compare the survivability of a PHR ship to a UCM ship one size higher with the exception of the PHR BB and the frigate

It makes a substantial difference

>PHR fleet at 1,415/1,500

I have 4 Strike Carriers and a Troopship. I am at 8 Launch Capacity. What do I spend my last 85 points on

>2 Strike Carriers
>2 Andromedas
>2 Europas
>1 Calypso and an Admiral

Also I don't currently have an Admiral because they don't seem to do anything without Command Cards, are they compulsory?

>>50028733

I think they come into play with ties in initiative

>>50027978
Yeah, thank you for the suggestion. Wasn't sure if 4 x 4 might be too small, guess I'm over thinking things. Just want to make a good impression, I usually find group games to be better to get people hooked.

Admirals gives bonus to ground combat initiative

>>50028934
Now that just doesn't make sense. Surely a general would do that?

>>50029161
I don't make the rules. I just repost them on public forums.

The admiral initiative bonus also applies to the launch phase.

That feel when you want to develop all 4 fleets equally, but are getting impatient and can only afford 1 more starter set for now.

>2 player starter
+Kills 2 birds with one stone
+Extra rulebook is always useful when demoing.
+Best value
-Of the 4, Scourge and UCM leave me the most cold.

>PHR
+Were my favourite until...
-Found out they were hands down the most popular faction

>Shaltari
+Nicest looking
+Hedgehogs in space
+Probably most excited for them now, but...
- Very limited tactics, not sure if having to hang back and snipe all the time will be fun in the long term.
- Not sure if they'll actually be effective; weapons seem very unreliable, with few attack rolls and with very fragile ships that seems like you're basically gambling

>reading through DFC pdfs anon uploaded
>like half of the special rules given aren't found on any of the ships
well, at least they're future proofing.

So, now that we know more about everything.
What is everyones opinion on Best Battleship?

Has it changed at all since we last discussed things?

Knowing what I do now about how CAW and PD I've revising my position on the Minos back up to "Just as good as the Heracles, but it different ways".

>>50029606

It is debateable who is the most popular faction. A lot of the early polls had UCM as the biggest.

Shaltari are ships with shenanigans, with the speed durability and burst firepower some of the other factions have they will probably not be very noob friendly and require advanced tactics to get their victories in.

Shaltari weapons have consistent damage.

File: MFW FUCKING XENOS.png (63KB, 419x427px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 419x427px

It is done, my dudes.
http://www.mediafire.com/file/oysd2f64iytbd69/DFC_Fluff.pdf

>>50029633
Given the thing about identical classes grouping up there's an interesting question for the bigger games involving two battleships. If you take two of the same type in a flag battlegroup then they have to sail around together, but they can combine their CA attacks.

File: 1476289614607.png (910KB, 739x718px) Image search: [Google]

910KB, 739x718px

>>50029838
Thanks anon!

>>50029856
>2xminos
motherofgod.jpg

>there's artwork of unique launch assets for each race
It's going to happen, isn't it? There's no way Dave will be able to resist, surely?

>>50029940
I'm still crossing my fingers for Dropsquadron Commander.

Also, I have to say, I love ALL of the launch assets and bulk landers for the factions.
Except for the Shaltari bomber.
Seriously, it's just a frigate hull with a cockpit and some weapons slapped on; it shares no similarities with the starblade, and does not look like a proper Shaltari combat craft.

>>50029856
>>50029900

At 570 points though you'd need to be playing at 2000pts at least to even field them.

That said

>2D3+2 double damage crippling CAW attacks
>4 Torpedoes

But on the subject of "best Battleship" I think it's either going to be one of the PHR or Shaltari ones.
The PHR have HP and better brawling abilities (especially in the case of the Minos which is out and out one of the best in the game) but the Shaltari have better range and shields.

File: the little bulk lander that could.png (51KB, 214x132px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 214x132px

>>50029964
Yeah, that shaltari bomber is lovely, a model of that wound be great.

I also can't get over how happy the PHR bulk lander is. Look at its little face.

>>50030028
>Yeah, that shaltari bomber is lovely, a model of that wound be great.
See, I disagree; it just looks lazy and out of place compared to all the other designs.

>>50030028
>I gotta get this grand walker planetside! The Supreme Vizier is counting on me!

>>50030000
No point, really. You can't stack multiple crippling rolls on a single target. Minos wouldn't want to be in squads.

>>50029838
Based scanon making lowly commodore lives better

>>50030028


One of the most respectable qualities I can find in someone is the ability to find joy in their work

>>50029838
Updated the file, one of the PHR pages was upside down.

File: 1427136036398.jpg (79KB, 657x768px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 657x768px

>>50030028
IT'S ADORABLE

File: 1461602494629.png (119KB, 500x434px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 500x434px

The DFC fagbook group is so terrible. Nothing but bitching about pledges not being shipped and mods causing drama by deleting posts.

>>50030621
>normies
>not being shit
We're here forever, anon.
It's better than the alternatives.

File: 1431449397412.jpg (53KB, 611x481px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 611x481px

>>50029838
>PHR gank Shangri-La in the middle of a UCM Scourge hunt
>delete everybody from particular dropsites but otherwise avoid engaging UCM
>"somebody" obliterates a battlegroup of troopships deploying next door to a PHR held zone
>UCM follows their usual MO by going apeshit and throwing their ENTIRE fleet at the PHR taskforce
>PHR swear innocence even as their admiral's BB gets chaos dunked into atmosphere
>major losses on both sides, PHR mission presumably failed
Race X pls

>>50030621
>Shown calculations that the Persues is shit
>Comes up with migating circumstances where it might be less shit
You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig

>>50030028
Not as happy as the escort carrier, though all the PHR stuff looks like it's thrilled to be there

>scourge get no escape pods whatsoever
Brutal. Not that those bonded to the ship could bail out anyway, but still, brutal.

guys. Its November. Wheres my commodore pledge ;_;

File: portal__panels.jpg (595KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

595KB, 1920x1080px

>PHR point defenses composed of pop-up laser panels
So that's where they were hiding.

>>50031258
I got mine a week ago so I guess they're sending them still.

Models are brilliant though so it was worth the wait. Sprues are OK but a little thick and into recessed surfaces on the components so clipping them is tricky

>>50031394
hows the mold lines?

File: I asked for this.jpg (23KB, 500x311px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 500x311px

Sweet baby Jesus, the Minos is packing neutronium tipped missiles. Somebody get Werner Heisenberg on the phone pronto

>>50031418
Impressive, minimal flash, no serious lines and it's easy to clean up what's there. As I say I damaged a few parts clipping them off at first but the kit quality is very good.

>>50031427
>they're not even actually missiles
>they're kinetic kill vehicles

>>50031484

...as in, those hilarious weapons from SotS where you could quite easily have a cruiser loaded with Kinetic Kill Missiles bowl other cruiser clean into the planet they were trying to protect?

>>50031592
Bingo, but less "knocking ships into gravity wells" and more "punching holes through battleships until they look like swiss cheese"

>>50031608
Now I want a fluff inset telling the tale of a UCM officer, watching in bewilderment as a neutron "missile" ejects its launch stage and sends the ball bearing-sized warhead on its mission to *CLANG*

It's been eight years since that meme's heyday. I feel REALLY old now.

File: Gnomish Tinkers.jpg (224KB, 685x571px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 685x571px

>>50031773
>*CLANG*
It has gone through many incarnations, anon.

>Shaltari have grav manipulation like the Scourge and PHR
>no moving parts, so their ships just *turn*
>sublight engines as well
>but they're internal, and produce no exhaust
On a scale of Caveman to Culture, how advanced are the Shaltari?