/dcg/ Dropzone/Dropfleet Commander General

Dropfleet Fleet Builder:
http://dflist.com/#/

shaltari are extremely strong when they are played by the theoretical perfect player who can always judge the perfect distance and the perfect time for when to go shields up

Their weakness is that if you misjudge when to pop shields or get scanned with your shields down you're absolutely fucked

>>50168360
Damn, forgot to include that in the OP
Thanks anon.

>>50168375
>the theoretical perfect player who can always judge the perfect distance and the perfect time for when to go shields up

Isn't Pre-Measuring an integral part of the game though?

>>50168460

Yes it is but what I mean is more situational positioning towards the enemy fleet than just raw distance

Note that "best overall" refers to the ship as a whole, not just to it's primary purpose (especially in the case of the Ajax)

http://www.strawpoll.me/11609367
http://www.strawpoll.me/11609371
http://www.strawpoll.me/11609376
http://www.strawpoll.me/11609380

>>50169243

The amber is amazing but will prove a little fragile if it goes weapons free on front arc as it'll have to go at least 5" forward and have to decide on shields or potentially getting fucked without them


Good ship regardless but it's thankfully not a no brainer

>>50168271
feels a bit right now like the shaltari at least on paper are just better, havent gotten to play an actual game but the low sig combined with the speed, and the auto defense battery from voidgates just seems tough. I feel like were getting a slight repeat of DZC here desu

File: 0009.png (9KB, 447x53px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 447x53px

>>50170465
>dfc becomes dzc 2 electric boogaloo
>heavy choices become obsolete for the most part
>many old units are made completely worthless by new ones thanks to power creep
>shaltari are always strongest, the only question is how far ahead they are at the moment

>>50170556
>All according to keikaku
>[muffled spine rustling]

Tbh tho, I really don't see a 1500 point fleet ever taking any more than 2 heavy choices, especially if it's taking a super. It's okay if they're obsolete for the most part, since you don't take all that many anyways.

>>50170576
There's a difference between not taking much of something because it's a big point investment and never taking any of it because it's shit.

>>50170624
It really depends on how they go from here, I don't think they can really fuck up the balance unless they add in some really fucking weird variants later on.

Quick, post the most MAGA list you can in celebration of President Trump's victory.

>>50170867
fuck off, /pol/

>>50170867
Kill yourself.

Attention: This is a Hawk-restricted meme zone
Drop[___] Commander memes only beyond this point

>>50170867
Please leave. Rich lying politician #1 triumphing over rich lying politician #2 isn't even slightly relevant to wargaming. Politics belongs on /pol/.

To try to keep us on track, it seems like Scourge light cruisers and their medium cruiser equivalents (Yokai/Sphinx and Strix/Wyvern) are similar enough that one may overshadow the other in most situations, similar to how the Akuma overshadows the Shenlong. Any speculation there? I'm not sure the Strix has what it takes to be a good CA ship since all its defensive values are awful but it's still a big target that can't hide in atmos.

>>50170867
I imagine this would include a number of Moscows

>>50170886
>>50170941

Low energy. Sad!

>>50170965

Also low energy, but something to talk about. All a CAW focused ship needs is to live long enough to close. A Strix is a speedy glass cannon. A Wyvern actually doesn't provide enough of a survival boost to justify it's cost.

>>50170965
Even if ships share similar properties, the differences might mean they excel in different fleet compositions.

>>50171064
Fuck off already.

>>50171064
I dunno, +1 armour is pretty significant and the extra hull amplifies that. CA ships deal a lot of damage for their toughness, so that means they're going to be a priority target. Wyverns and Strix are both meant to run in and gut punch someone before being torn to pieces, but the Wyvern seems like it will take a fair bit more investment to destroy while it approaches.

>>50171140
Strixes come in groups of 2-3 and pack the same firepower as a Wyvern. Being able to fit 3 into a single slot is pretty fantastic considering what you're getting. Plus that extra 2" of thrust can make all the difference. DFC Scourge is like DZC Scourge: you're troops are expected to die to some extent, but they make it up when they close. And if you're really, really clever, you can close without being shot at all.

>>50171072

I'm here for 4 years, baby.

>>50171140
I agree with this. A lot of the time you'll use your PD against the crits, so in close the extra armour really is important. And that's not going into the wyvern having triple the strix's PD.

>>50171271
But it's not just about slots in the fleet, you pay battleship points for those 3 strixes.

>>50169243
Poor scourge. They're my 2nd choice for three of those.

For strategy ratings I figure there are a few significant demarkations.

>fast
Can reliably beat enemy SRs

>fast-average
Can reliably beat all but the enemy's specifically 'fast' battlegroups

>Good medium
A bit better than average, but not good enough to be fast-average.

>medium
So baseline Dirk Hardpeck offered to let it surrender

>slow
Unless it's a no contest....

>don't even worry anymore, you're not going first
Wait for admiral cards, I guess.

Where would you place the SRs here?

I'd go:
Fast: <7
Fast-Average: 7-8
Good Medium: 9-13
Slow: 14-15
dewayngf: 16+

Thoughts?

>>50172112

VF: <5 (largest group of frigates)
F: 5-7 (cruiser +some frigates, or lots of frigates)
FA: 7-9 (cruiser +lots of frigates, or many frigates)
A: 10-14 (two cruisers +some frigates, heavy cruiser +some frigates, etc)
SA: 15-19 (superheavy +frigate escorts, large line group)
S: 20-25 (two heavies, very large line group, etc)
VS: >25 (large vanguard group, double super)

>>50172112
The difference between a battleship on its own and a battleship plus a support frigate seems like the really big one, as it decides which battleship shoots first.

https://fullsd.blogspot.com/2016/10/dropfleet.html

What colors do you think this guy used?

>>50172149
Huh, I never considered painting the Lima's little doughnuts a different colour. That's a neat idea.

>>50170556
I wouldnt say Shaltari are ahead in DZC right now, frankly id plant that flag on the PHR atm, they have some crazy good choices for things that almost dont make sense for them.

I also wouldnt say heavy choices are totally useless, the only ones that are subpar are the standard original heavy choices, but then alot of the original units have been left behind and some need a slight tweak to make them more appealing.

>>50172527
I'd say they're about equal. And really it's not just that some old stuff needs buffing, some new stuff needs dialing back as well. Valks, Panthers, Ferrums and Helios spring to mind.

Io class frigate when?

I feel the Saint Petersburg is growing on me as a denial piece

Just point it on approach towards a critical location in orbit and dare your opponent to try and score it

>>50172948
Possibly never, the Io isn't a combat vessel. It's a small labour ship, doing tasks like mining, clearing wreckage and construction of orbital stations. Fun fact: PHR crews regularly sing the class's name as they go off to work.

File: image.jpg (63KB, 640x479px)

63KB, 640x479px

>guy asks for PHR battlecruiser suggestions
>first reply is to make two Perseus

>>50173015
Wut

>>50173030

Normies on Facebook are just enthralled by the Perseus, I have no idea

>>50173015
I've got a better idea for a jack-of-all-trades ship:
>Noah Class Battlecruiser, armed with two of every weapon:
>2 light broadsides (one on each side)
>2 medium broadsides (one on each side)
>2 heavy broadsides (one on each side)
>2 bombardment batteries (one on each side)

>>50172949
Brother.

I know it will be tricky but I just love it to megawatt-induced death.

>>50173047
I like two heavies and two bombardment per side more tbqh

>ROW ROW ROW YOUR BOAT

>>50173176
>Argonaut Class Battlecruiser
Fund it.

>>50173186
Wasn't Argo the boat, with the Argonauts being the crew?

>>50172881
what would you do to dial back those units without making them mostly useless

>>50172949
>>50173077
>12 max damage
>good chance to hit max damage
>capable of outright blowing up anything smaller than a BC, capable of bringing a BC to near-catastrophic, and will cripple any battleship
U C M
U C M
U C M

>>50173241
Ferrums shouldn't have scout and their focus could be toned down. Right now they're the best scouts as well as great AA and AT, with the added bonus of being able to skullfuck skimmers with ease. They're too good at too many things.

Panthers need a shorter range of around 30" and possibly lower accuracy. The range is the big one.

Helios need something. Haven't thought as much about them, but fucking up one of their capabilities should do it. Make them worse AT maybe, or just lower the shot number.

Valks can go wherever they like with impunity right now, enabling reaction fire against them when they building hop is an idea I've heard that I quite like.

>>50173251
>12 max damage
>not 16
>forgetting the noble medium mass driver
You should be ashamed.

>>50173354
>Panthers need a shorter range of around 30" and possibly lower accuracy. The range is the big one.
>getting rid of particle weaponry's main trait
Wew

>>50173394
It's damage control for a conceptually broken unit that should never have left the drawing board, things are going to get messy.

>>50173394

This unit is pretty op right now and the range is the biggest problem.

Something must be done about it.

>>50173077
I'm also a fan of the St Peter, looks cool and hits like a truck. As people have said, it is great for area denial. I don't want to put my orpheus above a cluster the Moscow is lined up on

>>50173200
Yes.

Battleriders. Parasite warships. Gunboats. Whatever you want to call them.

File: problems everything.jpg (15KB, 365x363px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 365x363px

>>50173043
>Facebook
well that explains it

>>50173043
>>50173617


Its the heavy cal guns. I think people see 3+ save and thing space marines. They think they will need it as a budget Achilles.

>>50173824

Why oh why couldn't the Perseus have been mediums+heavies

I would take one

>>50173872
Mediums+heavies would have been absolutely perfect, possibly even as a second light cruiser type.

>>50173926

As a CL it'd have been amazing but even as a regular cruiser with a nose gun I would still have taken that loadout

So, we currently have for the PHR:

MM: Orion, Hector
MH: N/A
ML: Theseus, Leonidas/Agamemnon
MC: Ikarus
MB: Ganymede
HH: Achilles
HL: Perseus
HC: N/A
HB: N/A
LL: Ajax, Orpheus
LC: Scipio/Priam
LB: N/A
CC: Bellerophon
CB: N/A

Medium/Heavy, Heavy/Carrier, Heavy/Bombard, Light/Bombard, and Carrier/Bombard for the PHR when?

>>50174312
While I still hope we get the rowboat (Heavy/Bombard) it wouldn't surprise me if they stick with only PHR troopships having bombardment as a thematic thing.

>>50174312

Medium heavy and light bombard are the only useful combos we're missing

Everything else would be either Perseus tier crap or redundant

>>50174558
Carrier bombard might be pretty interesting.

What's a better combat brick?

2theseus 2europa
Or
1orion 2europa

>>50175494
I'm building my fleet around 2 groups of 2 Orion and 1 Orpheus each with a shitkicker group up front running 1 Theseus, 4 Europa. Out back I've got a headhunter of 1 Bellerophon, 2 Pandora.

I'm not sure about the Theseus but the Orion will slow the Europas down enough that they can't play intercept so well. I think given your choices I'd pack the Theseus, over the game they'll go a foot further across the board and scrag a few other scoring units.

>>50175494

Either

Europas with Orions go slower but they're not going to be using their full thrust most of the time anyway

File: c2.jpg (466KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

466KB, 2048x1536px

One day we may reclaim Earth

File: neat-spiderman.gif (89KB, 300x243px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 300x243px

>>50177072

File: ucm_poster_scourgeface.png (818KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

818KB, 800x533px

>>50178526

File: image.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

finally got my "lack of patience" starter box and put it all together while still waiting for my commodore

A few observations

1)I'm appreciating how big these ships are. For how much bigger they are than DZC models, they're nice and detailed while being cheaper.

2)holy fucking shit you have to sand the fuck out of PHR cruisers to even make them fit together

3) I gave in and built a Hector just so I could play starter set games and I think I'll have spare cruiser hulls anyway, I can afford one mediocre choice

File: ucm_poster_scourgeface2.png (817KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

817KB, 800x533px

>>50178526
>>50178677

File: hawkWIP.jpg (270KB, 961x527px)

270KB, 961x527px

Taking a little break from hedgehog spaceships to start a dropzone army.
I think i'll probably paint over the skull, I wanted a sort of feral look but it just looks a bit too comical

>>50179201
Give the skull a moustache and a hat

when do we figure its ok to start getting mad? December, January?

>>50179713
Once its been one year since the campaign ended, so December 3rd.

>>50179739
I'd say after thanksgiving weekend, but yeah around one year. I can't imagine its much longer though, that's another 3 weeks away.

>>50179798
well the last update specified by the middle of this week, but no dice so far

File: PB100036.jpg (3MB, 3968x2976px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3968x2976px

My first painted Ships.

Shiryu - Obsidian Class Heavy Cruiser

File: PB100042.jpg (2MB, 3968x2976px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3968x2976px

Aphrodite and Capella - Amethyst Class Frigates

>>50171051
KeK

File: image.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px)

1MB, 3264x2448px

Basecoats are a go!
Now I need to double-time their compatriots on the ground for a DZC demo this weekend. Who needs sleep?

Fun game last night with the following at 999pts :

Vanguard (SV 20)
- Atlantis
- Moscow

Line (SV11)
- Lima
- 2 x New Cairo

Line (SV10)
- 2 x Osaka

Pathfinder (SV9)
- San Francisco
- 2 New Orleans
- 2 New Orleans

New Cairo's performed really well and Osaka's felt solid too. I'm a big fan of the light cruisers now!

>>50180416
>>50180428
That looks pretty good, anon!
How'd you get the fluorescent effects on the core?

Why are Toulons so cute?

>>50182714
Did you play against Scourge?

File: IMG_0004.jpg (638KB, 2362x2188px) Image search: [Google]

638KB, 2362x2188px

>>50184164
They try really hard to achieve their dream of being like Moscow-sama someday

>>50184292
Who wouldn't want to be like her?

Leonidas-chan a best, but spunky redhead 2gud.

>>50184164
How many Toulons is too many?

>>50184977
if you cant see the board anymore through the toulans you still dont quite have enough

>>50185062
>>50184977

http://dflist.com/s/#/share/373a478804447

>>50185222
10/10

Hmm- how would 2x moscow work as a battleship substitute?

>>50182836
Painted the core white and then used a glaze over it. (waywatcher green with a tiny bit of the yellow GW glaze)You need to apply it 3-4 times, but wait each time untill it's dry. I used waywatcher green

>>50186063

No, I think a moscow and a Avalon or Atlantis will though.

It will cost more but there will be benefits to having that layout over a BB. Moscows will struggle against PHR without a laser and they are only 6 damage of concentrated fire away from crippletown which could mean their doom. The BC have speed and extra hull to keep them up.

One important thing in DZC is that nearly every 'big' attack requires some form of setup. Limited arcs, weapons free, etc.
Are you out of a 90 degree turn from a burnthrough ship? Congrats, they'll never bring the main weapon on you.

Able to get more than 45 degrees out from a scourge or Shaltari heavy, they won't be able to weapons free you. Same with dodging arc on PHR.

Course Change is secretly the best order. It's how you win passing engagements by arc dodging, particularly if you're UCM.

>>50186588
I have an atlantis and was planning on a moscow, I'd just been thinking a heavy heavy setup where avalon + lima snipegroup and then 2x moscow + jakarta brawler group.

>>50186707
Avalon fuck me.

Also I think I've settled on a naming scheme for my fleet. Homeworld themed shit.

Fucking hell this thread is dead. Did the jellies get us?

>>50187818
I dunno.
I've asked a lot of questions the past weeks, and I've gotten a lot of sensible replies and a handfull of retarded ones.

I now have no more questions to ask and models to paint and assemble.
There is few memes getting shitposted and even less loreposting.

We have the occasional list-builder whom wants feedback on their latest attempts at fleetbuilding but nothing that can really keep a thread alive.

Do you have anything you want to contribute to this thread?

>>50187818

Not many games being played yet, everything has been theoried out. Lot of guys still waiting for their stuff

>>50187984
Exactly, this is the problem. We are still just waiting around. Many players still don't have their sets. Those that do are probably busy painting and assembling.

It is sad, around 2 months ago I was hoping to be buying up a new york class BB to join up with my Battlecruiser pair. Instead, here I am with no fucking models.

>>50187818
Picked up Infinity. Will assemble Ariadna, ALEPH, and Combined Army to simulate Drop Squad Commander.

>>50188565
LOL, almost fits!

How will you model a razor worm?

>>50188627
I think the best I could hope for is the gakis/pretas as babby razor worms.

>>50188872
New idea for tiny adorable wormy death: I could get a bunch of slave drones and glue little knives to them and have them proxy for the gakis.

File: really good.png (290KB, 532x496px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 532x496px

>>50179201
It looks fucking great resbro.
>>50177072
fucking great

>>50188565
Concievably where would we fit a dropsquad game in the universe, whlist justifying the exclusion of larger units like hades and so forth, in order to keep the scale down?

>>50189152
interiors of vessels, forward recon forces moving forward without larger weapons moving with them, the very upper edges of forces moving forward meeting, secret missions running into each other.

>>50189183
>Beijing gets torpedoed by a Manticore
>instead of rolling for residual damage, halt the game and bust out your copy of not-Space Hulk with hazard suits and razorworms
>repeat every time you would make a repair roll for the worm"fires"

>>50189183
See I was thinking interior of a building to replace cqb/looking for Intel or objectives.

This Drop Commander stuff seems pretty cool, but how expensive is it? It's not like I couldn't afford to play Zone and/or Fleet, I just want to know how much the two games cost.

>>50189369
Bruh you are talking about two seperate games.

He is talking about Dropship Commander
You are talk about Dropbuilding Commander

>>50189446

For drop zone you are looking at around 150-200 USD for a tourney ready army at 1500 points.

For Dropfleet, it is a little smaller. 2 starter sets, plus a battleship will probably do it so like 125-150 USD.

Dropfleet requires less terrain and other stuff.

>>50189473
Please. Dropsquad Commandos

http://dflist.com/s/#/share/e9ae478830447
>tfw skew without skew
Go, my Toulon-chans.

So what is this game, is it a fleet combat kind of thing?

File: UCM_Battleship_Beijing0.jpg (106KB, 797x532px)

106KB, 797x532px

>>50190063
Yep; Dropfleet Commander is an orbital fleet combat game based around planetary invasion and orbital superiority. Feel free to pick our brains if you have any questions!

>>50190156
Well that sounds pretty neat. How does ship combat shape up, is it modeled after naval tradition with frigates, destroyers, cruiser and battleships?

>>50190063
Dropfleet commander is an orbital combat game. Its focused on the idea of 2 orbital forces battling to gain access to cities and sectors of the planet below. Thanks to the focus on securing cities and sectors, the game is much more objective focused which adds new ideas to the game that help it out a ton in standing out against other fleet combat games, as well as encouraging list building that can be more diverse than just building for the best kind of combat fleet.

In addition to all of that, the game has a somewhat unique style of combat. Instead of weapons having defined ranges, a ship will have a scan radius that indicates its range. If that bubble touches an opponent's signature bubble, they are targetable and you can fire. Larger ships have larger scan radii, but also larger signatures. Doing certain things like firing big guns, activating all the weapons on a ship, increasing power to the engine, or activating station keeping thrusters causes your signature to expand, in minor or major spikes, causing you to glow like a christmas tree.

These two mechanics combine to cause a lot of interesting gameplay (trying to hold a battleship over a major cluster of objectives lights it up for every gun in the game as long as they can bring that battleship in firing arc, but trying to skirt around the edge and only pick a fight you're sure to win can cause you to lose the objective game hard and lose even if you demolish most of the enemy's fleet.) that combined with the lore involved, and the very varied factions add a lot to the game. Makes the whole thing pretty interesting.

File: PHR_Cruiser_Ajax1.jpg (69KB, 796x264px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 796x264px

>>50190181
It's more a cross between traditional naval combat and submarine combat; the field is divided into three layers, High Orbit, Low Orbit, and Atmosphere, with most ships being able to move freely between the first two and some being atmospheric.

Ships do come in those classes, and as of now we have: Corvettes, Frigates, Light Cruisers, Cruisers, Heavy Cruisers, Battlecruisers, and Battleships.
Dreadnoughts are confirmed.
Destroyers are a possibility.

Weapons are, for the most part, have fairly large arcs. Range is dynamic and is determined by the scan value of the attacking vessel and the signature of the target vessel (range being the sum of the two), and as such absolute distance is less important than relative size (bigger ships have larger signatures)

The exceptions are the PHR which are broadside focuses, and beam weapons across all factions which are spinal and have a very narrow cone of fire.

>>50190211
>>50190240
I think Im sold, where do I start?

>>50187818
There's not a lot of news. Waiting on deliveries. The novelty of fuckheads is worn off. People are actually playing games and getting in experience.

I for one, remain flabbergasted at the practical effectiveness of two things: PHR Troopships (cruisers that ALSO drop troops at a slight cost increase!), and Light Gun Frigates (Toulons are goddamn amazing).

Surprisingly, the Scourge CAW isn't as terrifying as it'd seem. Averaging about 10 attacks isn't that far off from a heavy cruiser weapons free, but much more limited.

File: shaltari-starter-fleet.jpg (157KB, 458x458px)

157KB, 458x458px

>>50190264
First thing I'd suggest is looking through some of the fleets. Figure out if you like the well rounded UCM, the knife fighting scourge, the broadsiding damage soaking PHR or the glass cannon Shaltari. Check your local LGS, ask if they're gonna be selling it or if they've even heard of it.

Starter fleets are great, they come with 3 'sprues' of cruisers that can be built into any cruiser of the game, and a sprue for frigates which gives you 4 frigates, which can be built into any frigate your want. the price is pretty reasonable too, about 60 dollars for 7 models. Picking one up isn't a bad idea in the least.

If you think you'll need to start building the scene, or just want a big amount of bang for your buck, the 2 player starter set gives you the scourge and UCM starter set along with the rulebook and some fun tokens to help track playing the game. Its a great buy, especially if you're like me and planning to play UCM and Scourge.

After that you do all the things you do when you're starting a new wargame. You read the rules, figure out what you like and what you don't, play when you can, all that fun stuff.

File: Lifthawkwip.jpg (343KB, 965x636px) Image search: [Google]

343KB, 965x636px

>>50179201
worked on the lifthawk a bit more, I like the skull now more than before.

>>50190266
>novelty of fuckheads
What is fuckheads?

>>50190719
Presumably that anon is referring to the kickstarter comments. Bemoaning Hawk's lateness and the lack of shiny cardboard boxes is all well and good, but some of those clowns threatened legal action over it. Personally I still find the fuckheads entertaining, though. That one idiot wrote a song.

>>50190266

What is so great about Toulons?

They look okay. There low crit score make me a bit wary. Wouldn't a pair of osakas be better than 4 toulons?

>>50190843
problem is as it drags on with no show on product and no email in sight they fuckheads seem to be less and less actual fuckheads, and unfortunately start to have the backing of actual rightness.

>>50191274
Smaller sigs, more targets, loads of dice. Toulons are some good shit.

>>50191332
Hawk has hardly done a perfect job. There's been poor communication and various fuck ups along the way. Some of the complaining is definitely warranted. But by kickstarter standards this is actually pretty decent. They made and are delivering the products that they promised, the game and models both look to be good quality, and iirc they're less than 6 months late at this point, which for a small company that has never attempted anything like this before isn't bad. Could it have been better? Definitely. But it's not worth this level of constant bitching. Kickstarters never have been and never will be reliable, so if that's something you require then don't back them.

>>50191274
A pair of Osakas cost more than Toulons, and are a bit slower. Toulons then have more freedom in skipping Orbital Layers, which acts as a further survival mechanism.

Also two Osakas is more tonnage than their points of Toulons, and probably actually has less firepower. 8 heavy mass drivers vs what... like, 15 medium attacks? Not bad.

>>50191536

Two Osakas very slightly out damage four Toulons but in practicality they're about equal damage

>Osakas are a bit slower

? They're both 10" thrust

>toulons have more freedom skipping orbital layers

I don't follow

>>50191274
4 Toulons:
>32 points cheaper
>lower signature
>lower strategy rating
>4 more attacks
>can split attacks between 4 targets rather than 2
>more targets means more resistant to scans and big overkill weapons

2 Osakas:
>more accurate weapons with better crit rates
>can still crit at +1 lock
>can take double the damage before losing firepower
>less prone to explosion chain reactions and crippled instakilling
>slightly better PD
>more resistant to debris fields and the like since they hit all ships

And finally, last but not least:
>different tonnages, so this comparison is mostly pointless. Take both you hacks, and make Moscow-senpai proud with your many fast guns

>>50191536
Osakas are only slower than Toulons in terms of strategy rating. They're both thrust 10.

>>50191517
i wasnt expecting super reliable, i was just hoping that by now id have an email indicating my stuff was on the way since they said it should all be shipped by now, getting harder to stay optimistic at this point.

How are the name stickers supposed to fit on the base? Am I retarded? They fold up when I try to put them where the instructions indicate.

>>50184285
Sorry for the late reply, yes it was against Scourge, I can find the list somewhere if you're interested

>>50192417
Cruiser ones are fine, working as intended although a little tight.

Frigate ones I ended up pulling back off, I just can't figure out how they can go on within the rear arc.

I figure only my Cruisers and up are worthy of naming!

>>50192668
How could you

Frigates are people too

File: goodie-two-sleeves-mens-that-s-how-i-roll-t-shirt-black-p1816-4153_image.jpg (57KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 600x600px

>>50192676
It's how I roll

>>50192689
Do not bully the frigate

>>50192712
Correct, only bully the voidgate

>DFC Facebook page
>"I think it's probably better to take an equivalent value in Frigates than a Battleship
>The Minos is bad

Which would you prefer? 7 Europas or a Heracles

>>50193215
I think the answer is "It depends"

What do you want?

If you're controlling a cluster the BS is obviously far superior (15 tonnage to 7), if you're looking to gun down something then yea, the frigates are likely to be punchier.

For me that's where the Tokyo comes into it's own for the UCM, it comes and sits over a cluster turn 4 making it very difficult for your opponent to score that cluster whilst bombarding any ground troops they may have there to win you the ground war.

People haven't played enough games yet and seem to be going on math hammer based on damage output rather than looking at how you're goign to win the game by scoring points from Clusters and Critical Locations.

Speaking of which Critical Locations are another reason I'm a big fan of the Osaka over the Toulon as they can scan on Standard Orders and/or add 5 tonnage each to a Critical Location whilst throwing a decent attack around.

>>50193215
Heracles is a much better heavy killer and critical location holder, though I'd think the Minos would be better for the latter task since the Heracles likes being far away. Being able to crit half the time and fuck with an enemy ship's functionality using crippling is very nice. It doesn't lose firepower at any point until it dies, unlike the frigates that two times out of three lose 6 shots for every 3 damage they receive, and a dead frigate can potentially damage its friends as well. Also 2" extra scan is cool.

On the other hand Europas are much lower sig, faster both in thrust and strat rating, put out an order of magnitude more shots and can aim for many more targets. They're more prone to being overkilled as well, which puts a cap on the amount of damage one enemy weapon can do to them. It's really just different roles. I wouldn't send Europas to kill big things or hold a critical location (at least without cruiser help), just like I wouldn't send a Heracles to kill small things or support a broadside BG.

So i just played my first game of dropfleet and I must say, it was nothing like I was expecting. It seems like Dave took a turn from dropzone where it is more tactical and more towards ships killing each other.

Everything seemed to die really quickly, even heavy cruisers were very fragile it seemed. Ground combat didn't really happen because all our carriers got blown up pretty quickly. It seems like your ships wont survive very long at all. Maybe we just didn't play correctly but it was very bloody.

My list was Scourge
-Shenlong
-Gargoyles (x2)

-Ifrite
-Charybdus (x2)

-Hydra

His list was PHR (some torpedo cruiser, some basic cruiser that i dont know, and a troopship along with carriers and the support frigate).

Are you supposed to loose half your army by turn 2? because that's where we both were at by then.

>>50194016
Sounds like you probably played it a bit too aggressively?

If stuff gains major spikes early on it's likely to end in a blood bath.

We've tended to get to a winner around turn 4-5 in our early Starter Fleet games

>>50194016
Scourge v PHR is by far the bloodiest matchup. Though I've yet to play a game that accumulated casualties so quickly.

Both fleets usually want to get midway along he board quickly and, once properly positioned, can put out horrific firepower. They shred each other to shit. The key to avoiding this as PHR is not to fight Scourge like you fight everyone else. Go silent or remain at standard orders as much as possible. Swing around them and use your longer ranges + high standard orders damage potential to punish them. Get around them to make their front arcs awkward.

>>50194016
>>50194069

Like the other anon said, you really shouldn't be getting so many spikes first turn to get in range.

That said burn through and torpedo units are ultra killy.

>>50194016
We barely lost 1/3 of our fleet during our last game (800 points).
Shaltari vs. PHR we where both really careful not to get spikes and maneuvred around the board to dodge arcs.
Very fun game. It came to the very end to decide the victor.

I have to say that 4x4 is the minimal board size to play this game. Else it's just a big brawl. Also space out the mission objectives and use dense and fine fields as cover.

>>50194016

As low points scourge?

Yes

You went balls deep really fast with the glass cannon faction, what did you expect?

>>50194069
>>50194246
That's>>50194352
the thing though, we didn't really have any spikes first couple turns, we both made heavy use of silent running. we played a 600 point game using the starter mission and the board from the starter box. Things just started dying quickly once we got into range to drop troops. then the clusterfuck from dropping those troops blew up and caused chain reactions that destroyed multiple frigates.

>>50194587

Yeah if either side is playing scourge and everyone just bum rushes objectives that's precisely what happens. Ships in a scourge game are going to feel really fragile for both sides, especially if your opponent is willing to try and put brawl you.

This dynamic decreases in bigger point games as the amount of active scans and activations goes up

So who has used the LT Crusiers? Do they perform better than expected?

>>50195389
That depends on what your expectations are. We didn't exactly establish a consensus on the usefulness of light cruisers.

>>50195708
I quite like the new cairo, due to the pair of them being 20~ points more than a st pete for equiv firepower and +8 hull points but spread over 2 bodies, with better manoeuvrability- should hopefully be a nice anti cruiser group. Throw in a few toulons as an escort to either finish off anything they dont bring down with the lasers or to just guard the cairos against frigate packs.

Although the question then is just cairos or berlins.- I think cairos might be a bit nastier than berlins, but I'd take rios over osakas for the grun cruiser /LC split.

>>50195389
In general, light cruisers are to cruisers as battlecruisers are to battleships. Same firepower, faster, but softer.

This holds especially true for the scourge and PHR

>>50195797
New Cairos are cheaper but easier to kill Berlins, which may be important since lasers are likely to be quite high on your opponent's shit list. I've not seen enough of either to make any judgements.

Osakas are flankers, they can keep up with frigates and can hit a side target without putting spikes on themselves. I see a more pronounced difference in role between them and Rios than between New Cairos and Berlins. Rios go through and Osakas go around, while both laser cruisers hang back.

>>50195821
As a scourge player, speed makes a big difference because you want to be able to control your ability to get into scald range. The number of times I've been out by less than two inches... I'll deffo be giving light cruisers a go

I think it's also important to note that light cruisers come in 2s, so if you're opponent has a snipe heavy list where it's got lots of damage but can't spread the damage out much, you'll be more likely to have a LC left compared to one cruiser getting taken out- the pairs make them better vs shaltari impel bullshit as well.

>>50196222
Some normal cruisers can come in pairs as well, they're just more expensive about it.

I see all UCM Ships as entirely viable, except St. Pete
All Scourge Ships are viable. Maybe not the weird shoots up frigate, but I can see uses for it.
PHR... poor Perseus. I can see the Hector's use, even if other ships plus frigate may be better.
Wouldnt field about a third of the Shaltari lineup though.

>>50196303
>Wouldnt field about a third of the Shaltari lineup though.
Which ships do you not like? Really, the only ships I feel need a buff on their end are the Granite and the Jade.

>>50196303
St Pete may be decent defensively. I dunno, I'll try it out. I'm not expecting much, but I can see a few niche applications for it.

Shenlong is a good ship, but I'm having a really hard time justifying its existence when Akuma is there and significantly better in every way.

The only hedgehog ships I see a problem with are Jade, Granite and maybe Sapphire. Everything else seems alright.

>>50196415

I think the St Petes will really shine in larger games. In smaller game it is too tempting of a target. However, when there are already a lot of ships to deal with in a big battle it can just sit back deathstar-ing everything.

>>50197563
Especially if the field is small enough you can't help but have a target in view.

Are there any scanbros around? I was looking to print out copies of the DFC token and cluster pages at the back of the rulebook, but it looks like they didn't end up in any of the PDF files.

>>50193215
Mathammer... Then you play the game. First enemy ship shoots one frigate. Frigate crippled and goes critical. frigate dies and explodes 3". Every other frigate gets 2 damage. They all cripple and explode... Happened in my very first game.

>>50198617
Been hearing about this a fair bit. It's a little bit concerning, especially as who ends up controlling critical locations etc. could come down to who the dice favour when the chain reactions go off. I remember some anon had a story about chain reactions wiping all his opponent's ships from over a cluster, allowing him to nuke the now-clear cluster, winning him the game. I'd be pretty salty if I'd played well (as anon's opponent apparently had) only to have something like that hand the game to my opponent.

>>50198917
That's just part of the game, anon; best way for that to not happen is to not clump your shit together.

>>50198990
Yeah, but you have to put tonnage over clusters/critical locations to score. How do you do that without bringing ships close to other ships?

I'm looking to get into DZC, would anyone be willing to give me their impression of the different factions? I've read the descriptions on the website, but I was looking for something more colorful to help explain the differences between the factions.

>>50198917

You can be max 6" away from the cluster to score. That's up to 12" range between ships. Frigates explode d3" cruisers and up d6". Positioning is your friend and also part of skill and "playing a good game"

>>50199236
Frigates have to be within 3" if they're dropping troops m8.

>>50199018
>How do you do that without bringing ships close to other ships?
Use bigger ships; a single heavy cruiser can sit on a point while two other cruisers fuck off.

File: 1474260981654.png (867KB, 540x960px) Image search: [Google]

867KB, 540x960px

>>50199132
Have a fellow new guy's perspective
>UCM
Pretty much average in all fields aside from the absence of skimmers, but with a edge in headcounts and nasty amounts of air support.

>Scourge
Haven't seen them played, but they sound like any well-balanced glass cannon faction should be: everything is good at killing something or else makes your other things even more kill-happy. High speeds, short ranges, and fragility presumably mean you have to know when and where to commit units to a charge.

>PHR
Hold ground so hard they're practically playing a tower defense game. Their armor is a nightmare to kill and can dish out serious firepower in return, but it won't be going anywhere without hopping in and out of a transport first. Several flying and skimming units in their newer stuff, now they get combat-ready units to midfield before turn 3.

>Shaltari
Zippy and sneaky, semi-reliable firepower but capped on sheer damage output. Teleport shenanigans and shield-boosted bricks were their claim to fame, now infinite range AA and hordes of cheap grunts have joined the roster of things Shaltari get that people complain about on the internet.

>Resistance
All I really know is that they come in huge swarms of near-disposable dudes and make everything explode. I'm sure someone here will tell you to paint Mad Max memes all over their attack buses and go nuts .

>>50199877
Sorta.
UCM's a conventional faction with very efficient basic units, and a heavy air superiority and gunship presence.

Scourge is about close range ambushes and attacks where they have superior close firepower, and fragile vehicles. Their troops are devastatingly strong in buildings. Poor air presence though.

PHR can be played either as a brick of doom, or mobile skirmishers. Good infantry, but virtually no gunship or capable air-to-ground attack.

Shaltari are fragile, of moderate firepower, but ultra maneuverable thanks to teleportation. Good air assets, and very capable at their missions.

Resistance is about asymetrical engagements, with weird units and lots of short term burst damage. Capable troops at taking out armor, poorer inside close combat. Surprisingly powerful air-to ground. Few tanks.

>>50199989
>>50199877
Okay, thanks guys, that's good to know. I'll look some more into it, but that's a good basis to go from it seems.

File: 1445481590051.png (390KB, 560x383px)

390KB, 560x383px

>painting PHR cruiser
>realize I'm holding it by the smooth jaw piece
>move finger to reveal a perfectly transferred thumb print across the entire port surface

>>50201066
Ow

>tfw still no shipping notice

So how's the game guys? How about those minis? Heh...

File: Andromedurr.jpg (65KB, 725x426px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 725x426px

>>50201608
The minis are great. But it's going to be a nightmare trying to paint another three fleets worth when my pledge gets here.

>>50201691
Anyone figured out how to paint this phr scheme?

I can't tell if the hulls are one flat color with natural light playing tricks (with white edge highloghting) or if it's an airbrush blend

File: PHR paints.jpg (66KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 960x720px

>>50202570
The studio painter posts frequently on Facebook, including this lineup of all the paints used on the studio model range.
My personal guess is that it's an airbrushed buildup of Golden Brown to Aged White with Matt White edge highlights.

>>50202570
Photoshopped

File: PHR_Cruiser_Perseus1.jpg (66KB, 798x309px)

66KB, 798x309px

Bumping with the best ship in the game.

>>50199331
Yeah but to drop it's in 3" of sectors not clusters. The sectors are spread apart on the cluster. That's again a potential 10-12" apart from other ships. It's hard, but clever positioning can save you.

>>50204348
>not Voidgate, prettiest and most valuable of ships

>>50204729
Even the shittiest and most worthless of ships is more valuable than a low-class voidgate.

File: big_thumb_535041361fdab63be1c1c7a08f0ab181.png (565KB, 736x516px) Image search: [Google]

565KB, 736x516px

>>50205034

>>50204737
N-no, Voidgate-chan is very important a-and valued by all her friends.

>>50205152
t. voidgate

Joking aside, voidgates are extremely good for 15 points.
-as or more than strike carriers.
-Air to air rule
-Shoots down landing enemy transports.

I will buy more than i need in any list i make.

This may well be an idiotic question, but how important are guns - or rather, how many guns do you need (on average)?

I'm planning out my share of a 4way split commodore pledge, that'll hopefully arrive soon. For my scourge I was thinking about a Hydra and a Chimera, the former for playing arlund with launch assets, the latter for proper jelly saturation on the ground (and batteries of course).

They both only have single shot weapons though, and while the Hydra can at least send out some bombers (if it survives that long) I'm worried my Fleet will be undergunned. I'll have the Basilisk Battlecruiser of course, and two more cruiser sprues to build into something more killy, but is that enough?

Compare to, say, PHR, where the Orpheus troopship can dish out some pain AND still launch its bulk landers.

>>50205846
I would definitely build your other two cruisers as shooty ships, if only so your opponent has something else to worry about & you don't have all your eggs in one basket. I'd go with a sphinx and an ifrit myself.

It is a disadvantage of the scourge that their specialist cruisers are, well, specialists. But, it's kind of a PHR thing that their troopships are shooty, and if it's any consolation the san francisco and emerald don't have spectacular firepower either.

I'm naming all my UCM ships after rock songs. Give me the best you got.

>>50206127
> Hell's Bells
> Fortunate Son
> Rebel Yell
> Bad Moon Rising
> Stone Free
> Voodoo Child
> Black Dog
> Comfortably Numb (maybe)
> November Rain
> Holiday in Cambodia (maybe too long)
> Psycho Killer

>>50206223
I've already named one Hazy Shade of Winter, so length isn't really an issue.

>>50206127
>It Doesn't Matter
>If You Smelllllllll

huehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehue

>>50206127
Rammstein:
Feuer Frei
Links 2 3 4 (troop ship)

Rhapsody of Fire:
Reign of Terror
Raging Starfire
Triumph or Agony
Son of Pain

AC/DC:
Borrowed Time
Big Gun
Shot Down in Flames
Back in Black
Let There Be Rock
Guns for Hire
Highway To Hell

Astrosoniq
Faustian Bargain
Play it Straight
Fistkick
Ego Booster
Doomrider
Godeater!

Bolt Thrower:
Return From Chaos
Powder Burns
No Guts, No Glory
Eternal War
All That Remains
World-Eater
Drowned in Torment
Prophet of Hatred

DragonForce:
Cry Thunder
Give Me The Night
Wings of Liberty
Heart of the Storm
Die By The Sword
Last Man Stands
Invocation of Apocalyptic Evil
Valley of The Damned
Black Fire
Starfire
Disciples of Babylon
Evening Star
Heart of a Dragon

Electric Six:
Dance Commander
Danger! High Voltage
Gay Bar
Nuclear War (On the Dance Floor)
Vengeance and Fashion
I'm the Bomb
Your Heat Is Rising
Heavy Woman
Watchin Evil Empires Fall Apart
Making Progress

Halestorm:
It's Not You
Bet U Wish U Had Me Back
Familiar Taste of Poison
I'm Not an Angel
What Were You Expecting?
Better Sorry Than Safe
Dirty Work
Freak like Me
Rock Show
You Call Me a Bitch Like It's A Bad Thing

Metallica:
Master of Puppets
The Thing That Should Not Be
Hero of the Day
For Whom the Bell Tolls
Wherever I May Roam
Battery

Muse:
Apocalypse Please
Sing for Absolution
Unnatural Selection

Sabaton:
Smoking Snakes
To Hell and Back
Hearts of Iron

Within Temptation:
Final Destination
Deceiver of Fools
Shot In The Dark
A Demon's Fate

Where do the fast movers of the offensive force operate from?

>>50206844
Strike carriers.

>>50206127
RUSH
Eisbrecher
(along with everything else recommended)

>>50206913
How long do strike carriers loiter in atmosphere? In a longer term ground campaign what are the strike carriers occupied with? Are there really so few fast movers compared to ground forces (I don't remember the numbers given for the UCM but it wasn't many)?

>>50207009
I might be wrong here; But isn't strike carriers the ones who carry Bombers and Fighters?
They can't really operate in atmo, as you can't launch fighters nor bombers from it.

>login required for listbuilder
>enforces 6+ character passwords

Why?

>>50207086
Fast movers are dropzone units, senpai

>>50207099
Yes. But are Strike Carriers the vessel that carries Fighters/Bombers?

>>50207009
In a long term campaign you set up airbases or maybe oceanic aircraft carriers, and your strike carriers are off doing something else.

>>50207086
Strike carriers are the ones that launch dropships, and they also (based on the New Orleans specs) carry DZC fast movers, which are different to DFC fighters and bombers.

You're thinking of fleet carriers.

>>50207142

Sometimes yeah. There's a launch strip on the fore ventral section.

>>50207159
Right. That might be it yes.
>Don't hate on the Ares. He tries the best he can.

>>50207177
The Ares is actually a really solid unit.

>>50207255
>A E S T H E T I C

>>50207159
>In a long term campaign you set up airbases
And are all the aircraft in those bases delivered by strike carriers?

>>50207384
Nah, at that point they'd be delivered as cargo and would be put on cargo ships. It would be an inefficient use of strike carriers since they can't carry many fast movers.

>>50207009
The fluff says the UCM grav nullifiers only work for a few days before they overheat, forcing ships to pull away into a proper orbit or head for deep space.

>>50207457
I'm trying to imagine a heat rejection system that can run continuously at full load for days and *then* is stressed too far. Maybe high performance coolant pumps wear out and need to be replaced?

>>50207559
Could have the mass effect explanation where heat builds up in the heatsinks to such a point where efficiency rapidly drops off and the crew will be cooked in a matter of hours past that point.

>>50207753
That explanation really doesn't work on that timescale.

>>50207559
>>50207796
>why aren't my spacemagic anti-grav devices realistic with their heat buildup?
Because they're anti-grav devices that work on spacemagic.

>>50208065
Or coolant pump failure tends to take them out of service

>>50207796
why not you dont know what spacemagic they use to nullify gravity you dont know how fast it accumulates heat.

>>50208959
I know that if it takes days then you shouldn't have much trouble dumping it with radiators *without* spacemagic.

So. The Scourge anti-gravity Frigate.

I think it's better after a game than people give it credit for. It's basically a basic Scourge gun Frigate, that trades some main gun firepower for about it's equal in 'weird shoots-up' gun firepower.

That's not bad. Since a trio of them shooting out of atmos equals a pair of most factions' gun frigates, while still having their forward gun. That's reliable damage the enemy can't dig out without corvettes.

Even in low orbit, they kinda out-firepower their standard gun frigate comparason: One gun for same-orbit plane attacks, and the two reverse-grav weapons to engage high orbit.

People should give a squadron of them (3-4) a chance.

How do fold drives work? I am assuming it is like a jump drive not a warp from teh descriptions I have read. So the drive finds a spot and bridges those two points together allowing for near instantaneous travel.

The DFC implies the scourge had to jump in some distance away and then travel via conventional engines to reach a planet. (though much more powerful fusion based or something) This means you have to keep a certain distance from planets before the fold drive is active so you dont fold into an object or something.

Presumably, their standard engines let them move from somewhere between .25-1 AU per hour.

All races use fold tech correct? It just appears PHR and Shaltari can fold without a node. Scourge sends out scouts to find places and then uses the data to jump without a node or via the local existing node.

Does this all sound right?

>>50209641

I think they are a gem that will be great for pairing with strike carriers. You use them to harass ships hovering over critical locations.

>>50206092
Ok, as things are looking now, I'll have the PHR to myself as well, so probably won't have to face them on the battlefield all that often.

Thanks for the feedback, Ifrit is a go - I love those Furnace Cannons! Sphinx is the Scourge average worhorse kinda cruiser, I take it?

>>50209641
Hmmm... I love the concept of the Skylla, so if they actually pull their weight, that'd be great. Probably better to proxy them for my first couple of games though...

>>50210160

The furnace cannon is interesting. You can risk a roll of 6 and turn it into a baby Avalon if you get lucky.

I really like how different the factions feel. PHR frigate spam kind of scares me with the space marine save everywhere.

File: 1474613412936.jpg (62KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 640x360px

>>50210115
Yeah, foldspace is an instant point-to-point transit. BSG's jump drives are an easy analogue.

From the limitations the UCM assumes the Scourge have, their seed ships probably carry built-in foldspace nodes that they turn on if they find a suitable target world. They already have a clear affinity for one-way tech given their slowfall dropships and the like.

>>50209235
How bout this then: the space magic antvgravity drive builds up resistance as it operates so thstvthe rate of heat buildup will eventually overwhelm the radiators if the system is not taken off-line and allowed to "cool" down to remove the resistance buildup in the grav nullifier, and this resistance can only bleed off at a relatively fixed rate and only with the system either off of not in close proximity to a grav well.

File: UCM_Fleet1.jpg (106KB, 960x638px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 960x638px

>letting thread get to page 10
Lads, please.

Anyone have a good batrep?

>>50214158
You want dzc, or dfc?

>>50214301
Either or

>>50211981
But that would be worse than current technology

>>50210989
so how does the UCM reach the other cradle worlds? I thought only one had a reactivated beacon.

>>50214919
Nope, most of them have beacons that the Scourge don't know about. Right now only Asgard doesn't have a functioning beacon, because PHR filth turned them all off. Tlalocan used to have no beacon, but the UCM managed to set one up after an agent snuck on board a PHR ship that was heading there.

>>50214301
Play my first game with my resistance last night.

Brought lots of tanks a hell hog and some Marines. Zhukov's made his Phoenix hide all game. Shot down his objective drop ship and picked it up with some free riders. He needed to capture to win. He hid it with everything including a retaliator. Fine cut them down just in time for a gun technical to drive up grab and peel out. He killed the one two but the Alexander made sure nothing could grab it.

Hello slaughter a ferrum and killed a broadsword with some cyclones. Ended up winning by one point thanks to the biker grab. Close one

>>50214158
I would, but I'm lazy and inept and I can't remember half of what happened in the game. I guess I could do highlights or whatever.

>Toulons are great ships, they performed very well until a Sphinx went weapons free on them. The jelly botched most of its rolls, only hitting twice and killing one ship. But 3 Toulons still died that day, because explosion chain reactions are real and terrifying

>Note to disgusting parasite players: If you have an incredibly scary CA cruiser that also happens to be made of paper, don't go full thrust into enemy weapon range. If the fluff says 'this ship flanks with silent running', then you should probably flank with silent running.

>Lasers are phenomenal for placing spikes and very potent when luck is on your side, but they are not to be relied upon for damage. They are a gamble, more so than other weapons. My Berlin whiffed entirely once, only did 1 damage the second time and put out max damage the third

>I wondered for a while if atmos would be worth the extra cost on jelly frigates, and you dirty space eels will be happy to know that it is, at least against UCM. They're a bunch of annoying shits and I can't wait for corvettes to be released so I can kill them without wasting my Toulons on atmos fishing. I didn't face any Scyllas but I think they're going to be a bit better than I first thought

>Space terrain is important. Remember that hiding like a little bitch is always a viable tactic, and I think it's going to be even better against PHR due to the large number of 4+ guns that you can scrape the crits off of with a +1 lock penalty

>Scourge are not allowed within 6". Anything within 6" of a Scourge cruiser is in big trouble. RIP Berlin-chan, you died too young.

>I don't think anybody will be surprised by this, but strike carriers are important. Keep them safe. Activating them last in one turn and then first in the next works well

>Also unsurprising: Moscow-chan is a beast

>>50214859
How is that worse than current technology, what current technology do we possess that allows us to nullify planetary gravity to an extent where we can essentially orbit geosynchronously at any elevation and at lower speeds?

File: looks like you're a born looser.jpg (7KB, 255x191px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 255x191px

>>50205152
>made by space heghog ocs
>spike donut
LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE A BORN LOSER VOIDGATE

>>50205152
That would require her to have friends in the first place. She doesn't.

>>50216603
The figments of her imagination value her very much. But not really, they're just hanging around in the hope that they can one day become the imaginary friends of someone less pathetic.

>>50214919
The Resistance over several years had started activating beacons, which is why the Reconquest is even a thing. The Eden one's the only one we've heard about.

Given that invasion plans were drawn up after the beacons came back on, it's probably been on-off for about 10 years.

So regarding battleships, the Berlin seems disappointing: Her primary battery is worse than the Moscow's, and the laser while powerful, requires careful aim.

Seems to me like her main strategy is to go Silent Running for probably 2 turns in a row, at a key area. Then to go weapons free and maybe hope for a laser shot. Then try to get to CAW range as fast as possible to use her heavy missile armament.

Otherwise, if that's not your goal, better use Moscows instead.

>>50217477
how is 6 3+ shots F/S worse than 4 ?

>>50217477
You mean the Beijing? Berlin is the laser cruiser.

Those big guns on Moscow aren't linked. She can only fire 4 shots on standard orders while the Beijing can let off 6.

>>50217602
>>50217576
>>50217477
I meant 'Beijing' battleship, not Berlin.
6 3+ shots with 4 4+s is weaker than 8 3+ shots with 2 4+s for a broadside attack between the battleship and heavy cruiser.

Even head on, the battleship is marginally better only, unless the laser is usable.

The standard orders is a difference indeed, but the enlarged signature is a liability. I feel inclined to mostly run silent as a Battleship.

>>50217717
This might change once people get better at the game and a meta is established, but so far I've never had much trouble finding targets for all guns when I go weapons free in the thick of it (where brawlers like Moscow and Beijing belong).

Besides, the Moscow is based entirely around its guns while the Beijing isn't. You mention the laser, but you don't seem to really be considering how incredibly useful lasers are for the spikes alone, and that's without going into damage potential. Most ships are best off going silent running for the first turn, but once the enemy is well within range then you can just open fire with your BB. Half the point of a battleship is the toughness, if enemy ships are shooting at your Beijing then they're not scanning/shooting your more supportive stuff like Madrids and troop carriers, and the BB is significantly harder to bring down. Also that 3+ CA is golden, it's like our very own plasma storm.

>>50209641
Dont forget that, at least how i read it, you ignore the only scan range restriction from shooting in atmo with escape velocity.

Had my first Dropzone tournament yesterday, after playing for a couple of months.
Played a UCM list that was entirely out of the core book, aside from a single Broadsword.

Things went pretty well; I ended up fourth out of 12 players with one big win and two close losses against the guys who ended up first and third.
Opposition was PHR, Scourge and PHR.

The last round in particular could have gone either way, with both of us making some pretty serious mistakes.
I forgot my opponent still had some flamer-carrying skimmers (PHR) hanging around when I deposited some heavily damaged infantry bases in a building near a focal point at the end of the game. Had I dropped them behind the building instead, I would have won that focal point, getting me from losing by 2 points to winning by 1 plus >500 points more killed.
Can't complain too much, though, since my opponent forgot he was holding a Weapons Hack when my Broadsword opened up on his commander and oneshotted him.

If anyone wants to know things about list compositions, the specifics of certain matches etc, just ask.

>>50215242
How does one guy set up a beacon?

And how do you pretend to be full of nanites?

>>50216421
Currently we have materials that can conduct heat for more than a few days at a time. It's called matter.

>>50219890
Man-portable version.
It was one of the most advanced pieces of UCM tech and it was shut down nigh instantly.

Thankfully, a UCM battlegroup capable of dropping new stealth beacons was on nonstop standby for if the infiltration mission succeeded, so the brief timeframe was enough for them to jump in.

>>50219890
And for the second question: you don't RIP infiltrator.

>>50219890
sneak infiltrator on board during abortive boarding action
wait until ship jumps (apparently you can tell, or have a doodad which will tell you)
flick switch on backpack device
~5 seconds of BEACON
scout fleet on standby jumps
nanites murder you dead, beacon self destructs

>>50219924
I dont think you understood what I posted in that explanation.

While the gravity nullifier is on it generates heat, and the radiators bleed that off. However the longer the gravity nullifier is on the FASTER it builds up heat, until after several days of use they have to turn off the gravity nullifier because the rate of heat build up becomes so fast it overwhelms the radiators. The only way to reset the gravity nullifiers heat buildup rate is to rest the system for a certain amount of time.

That make sense to you.

>>50221798
>However the longer the gravity nullifier is on the FASTER it builds up heat
That's complete nonsense though

>>50221851
Not him, but it's space magic dude. That may very well be the case, and D*C has never attempted to be properly hard scifi either.

>>50221851
how is it complete nonsense, do you know how to nullify gravity, if so please tell us how it should work?

>>50221932
>If new principles comes into play to explain something then everything else is thrown out the window
No
Why is your bullshit better than coolant pump failure as an explanation?

>>50221992
because coolant pump failure isnt mentioned anywhere in the tiny 2 paragraph description of the system in the fluff description, all it mentions is that it has "considerable heat buildup" and that the system has to be rested after a few days.

so you do the math

>>50222269
Coolant pump failure will cause heat buildup.

It says nothing about increasing rates of heat generation.

>>50222439
coolant pump failure would put the whole ship at risk because there is other shit making heat besides the gravity nullifier, also doesnt explain why they need a few days to rest the system, when from what your saying the whole coolant system needs a refit because it has mechanically failed.

File: 1473909651546.jpg (31KB, 745x834px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 745x834px

>>50221851
>>50222439
>system builds up GRAVITON STATIC/[insert mass interaction metaphysics here] as it operates, gradually reducing efficiency
>feed it more energy to compensate for the diminishing output
>eventually the system is taking in several extra magnitudes of power and putting out excessive waste heat just to offset the ship's initial mass
>only way to "clear out" the build-up of [stuff] in the system is to switch it off and let it disperse

You know that external conditions (like any hypothetical consequences of nullifying gravity, a constant and fundamental force of the universe as we understand it) can alter the efficiency of mechanical systems, right?

>>50222609
You clearly don't know much about thermodynamics or spacecraft architecture if you think major systems with different operating temperatures are going to share coolant loops.

>>50222628
How exactly do massless particles 'build up'?

Altered efficiencies don't change fundamental operating principles.

>>50222750
I wouldn't know, ask a gravity nullifier technician if you want the details.

And I would think that decreasing efficiency over time in a system that must "offset" a static gravitational mass to be useful is, by definition, going to result in heat buildup.

The fundamental concept of "system produces heat at an accelerating rate" is easily laid out with basic GenPhys shit, so I'm not sure why you're making a fuss over a fluff mechanism in a sci-fi setting.

>>50222941
Massless particles travel at c. They cannot build up.

>The fundamental concept of "system produces heat at an accelerating rate" is easily laid out with basic GenPhys shit

It will be easy for you to do so then.

>>50222974
you know how superconductive materials only function at fairly low temperatures and as they heat up the effectiveness of their superconductivity decreases resulting in increased resistance and and so forth, probably a similiar process in whatever circuit nullifies the gravity.

>>50222727
look man the only way to get rid of heat on he space ship is to conduct it to some sort of external surface and radiate it away into space, if the utilization of some core function of your ship causes part of that conductive system to break every single time you use it, thats not a matter of hey just wait a few days and we can use it again, thats going to need repair, ie the ship is going to have to leave the system and return to a dock. Since the fluff does not indicate this is the case its not coolant pump failure.

>>50223311
Did you know that the resistance in a light bulb filament increases as it heats up? Naturally this causes light bulbs to inevitably destroy themselves if left on too long because the Stefan-Boltzmann doesn't exist.

Did you know that seagoing vessels carry spare parts and sometimes shut down for routine maintenance without returning to dock?

>>50223459
did you know that seagoing vessels dont need any mechanical devises to not you know sink into the ocean or have oxygen so they can just you know hang out. Things breaking on a space ship especially really important stuff like heat dissipation something that is non trivial in space.

what does the lightbulb have to do with a fictional system that nullfies gravity and via this process somehow gets increasingly hotter the longer it does it to the point where thermal conductivity cannot keep up with the process?

>>50222974
I already laid it out. A system's efficiency can change, change in efficiency required more power input to achieve the same output, and combining efficiency decline with increasing input gives you exponential waste heat.

>Yeah but this fictional engine is acting on hypothetical particles we made up for the purpose of this discussion, and those imaginary particles have to behave how I say they do
Not when I shoot them with my give-gravity-particles-mass lasers, anon :^)

>>50223459
actually lightbulbs do destroy themselves if left on for too long, they you know burn out, and the filament breaks due to being hot all the time.

>this argument again
For goodness sake, it's spacemagic that runs on who-the-fuck-knows, it's not going to be realistic. If they can make spaceships go faster than light, they can ignore the fucking laws of thermodynamics.

these threads are deeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaadddddd

File: 1436472732834.jpg (97KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1280x720px

>>50223747
Ships soon, fellow colonist

>>50223816
the emails were supposed to be here by now man

>>50223513
The fuck are you talking about? Spacecraft don't need mechanical systems to not sink either.

>>50223513
>what does the lightbulb have to do with a fictional system that nullfies gravity and via this process somehow gets increasingly hotter the longer it does it to the point where thermal conductivity cannot keep up with the process?

The Stefan-Boltzmann law is highly applicable in both cases

>>50223902
they do if they are going to maintain orbit, and you know a breathable atmosphere for the crew

>>50223520
Higher temperature means more efficient heat rejection, providing a natural feedback system leaading to an equilibrium condition. If something other than temperature is affecting system efficiency I would love to hear about it.

>>50223929
Why would problems with the cooling system for the grav nullifier affect life support systems? And it's already established that they use engines to establish a big boy orbit when the grav nullifier fails.

>>50223990
im saying that if the grav nullifier cooling system breaks every time they use it after a couple of days, they are going to need to go back to base and repair at some point due to lack of spare parts and or the damage being to severe to repair on hand, since the fluff doesnt mention anything about this being a thing its not what happens.

>>50223961
that's what were saying the magical bullshit they do to nullify gravity is effecting the efficiency of the materials involved

>>50224032
Or they could have an onboard machine shop, especially since there's no reason to use nullifiers out of combat.

File: LYJBciq.jpg (15KB, 500x482px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 500x482px

I've solved it. You know how pure anger is the thing that drives the UCM? Well, their anti-grav systems work on the same principle as pic related, with the intense rage of the crew keeping the ships up in orbit. However, after a while heads start to get too hot, so the ship has to go off station for a while so everyone can cool off a bit. 1000% trufax.

File: laughter.gif (2MB, 390x277px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 390x277px

>>50224032
>that's what were saying the magical bullshit they do to nullify gravity is effecting the efficiency of the materials involved
In a non-permanent fashion not related to temperature but which goes away when it cools off? And this explanation is supposed to be more plausible than pump failure?

File: I came here for a good argument.jpg (11KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 480x360px

>>50223902
Actual quote from the rulebook:
>these systems allow geosynchronous orbit regardless of speed or altitude
...so long as they remain active. Destruction of gravity nullifiers by enemy action is noted as the primary cause of losing ships to orbital decay, presumably followed by losing main power and thus the gravity nullifiers because what kind of spaceman just falls into atmo in the absence of catastrophic system failure?
Go play Kerbal and see what happens when you try to orbit low and slow.

>>50223961
>muh Stefan-Boltzmann
Objects in space lack the convenient built-in coolant system plus heat sink we typically call "a planet's atmosphere", and thus an exponentially increasing rate of radiation doesn't stop the energized object from building up heat much faster than a terrestrial object on account of losing heat slower in the first place. And shit, S-B law doesn't stop shit for melting down just fine on Earth's surface. Look at Chernobyl for a really good example of energy building up faster than it can be bled off.

File: 1469499469222.jpg (18KB, 490x253px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 490x253px

>>50223847
>Oh, a delay? That's fine, as long as it gets here before the usual winter depression sets in I'll be content
>Two months of winter later
I should really invest in a sun lamp.

>>50224161
Yeah, so orbit fast. The big difference is that when you lose that system to enemy fire your ship is full of holes that also affect other systems.

File: Northern-Shrike.jpg (80KB, 800x601px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 800x601px

>>50224109
Shrike is best bird. Where's my Shrike gunship, Dave?

>>50224161
Chernobyl melted down really fast. Taking days means that just a little bit more mass dedicated to the cooling system would let you go indefinitely.

>>50224312
We are getting an Osprey soon. Eventually he will run out of birds to use.

>>50224312
Ophanim, Cherubim, and Elohim class FMs when?

File: TheExpanse_Moroni.jpg (71KB, 900x506px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 900x506px

>>50225302
>Elohim
Solid gold bunker busters when?
Can one of you armchair physicists run the penetration value of a trumpeting angel statue for me

>>50225563

Why not just use tungsten and save a Fuck ton of money

>>50226451
Because the UCM's saving their all tungsten just in case they need to delete a continent from orbit.

>tungsten, also known as wolfram
Oh, hey.

>>50225563
I would if I knew what you meant by penetration value.

and wasn't drunk.

>>50225563
>Can one of you armchair physicists run the penetration value of a trumpeting angel statue for me
Whatever you want it to be, given sufficiently velocity.

>>50225563
Sure, but I'll need a 3D model of the statue, a temperature map, a kinematic description, and a full armor model for the target.

Also, I'm a real physicist.

>>50227099
>>50226559
>Also, I'm a real physicist.

Me too, that's why I'm pissed.

>real physicists inna thread
Get back to making FTL real you nerds

>>50227228
Jokes on you, all the funding is in dark matter and neutrino research.

>>50227247
Physicists have successfully gone, "Hey, we want to research this thing you can't see, you can't tell exists except by inference, and probably won't have any results for years at least, can you fund us?" and gotten people to say yes.

"We can infer it exists from, among other things, people's willingness to bankroll research of it. Who would sign these checks if it didn't exist?"

Living the dream.

>>50227247
Fuck off with that gay ass hocus pocus bullshit, I want to sip martinis on Gliese 581 c within the next twenty years.

File: PHR_Battleship_Heracles0.jpg (65KB, 793x527px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 793x527px

>>50227356
Actually, on second thought, keep working on the first one.

>>50227356
Tough tits, you'll take your Quantum Flavourdynamics and you'll damned well like it.

File: latest[1].png (858KB, 800x1065px) Image search: [Google]

858KB, 800x1065px

>>50227379
>Quantum Flavourdynamics

>google it
>it's a real thing
Sounds like something Guy Fieri would say

>>50227247
>Not working in the defense industry

Kek

I want to fuck a Toulon

>>50229193
I want to fuck a squadron of Toulons.

>>50229210
I want a squadron of Toulons to gang up and fuck baka voidgate-chan.

>>50230190
That's just cruel. Frigates deserve better than that, gangbanging voidgate is a job fit only for dirty atmos-dwelling corvettes.

hawk!!!!!!! where is my shipsssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

>>50231046
Stolen by pirates.

Can someone else make the next thread? Gotta get to sleep right now, senpaitachi.

Thanks in advamce.

>>50231247

I would if I knew how to photoshop or link older threads

We need a sexy space upskirt Toulon image. She is really popular right now.

Is it just me or are Voidgates ludicrously hard to kill once they're in atmosphere?

Every Shaltari battle report I've seen seems to end with the Shalari having an overwhelming victory due to an unstoppable ground assault completely regardless of how many ships they have remaining.

>>50231532
New thread, bromanders.

File: toulon.jpg (110KB, 680x453px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 680x453px

>>50231491
I dunno, those engines look pretty exposed. I'm not sure UCM frigates wear skirts at all.