/dcg/ Dropzone/Dropfleet Commander General

>>51436147
This isn't a direct response to the prompt, but I find it funny when PHR Wasp Drones do work. The 3+ lock all the way down to light cruisers is nice for fishing a crit or two in close combat from ships that mostly throw fistfuls of 5+ dice.

>>51436147
It seems like math wise the particle weapons will always be outperformed by standard weapons. The only exceptions is something with reinforced 3+ or shields. Since most ships don't have those it seems like they are never worth taking.

The only good one is the particle triad on teh battleship.

>tfw a Diamond is likely to outright delete a light cruiser and possibly a cruiser every single firing, excellent chance to cripple a heavy cruiser, and most likely able to cripple a battlecruiser if its crippling roll is unlucky
>tfw no other battleship in the game comes close to this power.

>>51437150
A minos in scan distance with its torpedos could potentially delete a battleship by the end of its next activation.

>>51437691
It wouldn't need to be in scan distance except against other PHR. Both torps plus one cannonade is 18 damage.

So, the standard point sizes for DFC are 750, 999, 1250, 1500, 1999, 2000, and 2500, right?

File: Oppressor underside.jpg (136KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 960x640px

>you will never drop a sticky bomb on the power feeds to an Oppressor's cannons
This machine was clearly designed to root out insurgents. What self-respecting Resistance grenadier could possibly resist such a thick pair of targets?

>>51438134
The crab is not for lewd, anon.

That being said, I'd love to see more variants of the GIANT ENEMY CRAB and SMALL ENEMY CRAB with things other than electrowebs.

>>51438194
Do you have a crab handy? If so, could you post it next to a base of infantry? I need to put a scale on my mental image of the model so I can decide if I want to order and paint one.

>>51438207
Unfortunately not, but I'm sure another anon does.

Ogre, Gorgon, and Siren class ships when?

>>51437865
just wanted to ensure the kill with the addition of some CAW you konw

>>51437150
I think the avalon is the UCMs answer to the point and click deletion battleships of the other factions. fairly reliable 8 damage as 4 dice btl, heavy not superheavy so can act before battleships, or rtake 2 and murder anything you point them at.

>>51440218
Thing is, only the Diamond is point and click deletion; The DMC is actually a far inferior weapon, both damage wise and probability to cripple wise.

http://anydice.com/program/a88c

Really, only the UCM and Shaltari have singular weapon systems that can really burst down huge targets like battlecruisers and battleships.

>>51440269
I still like the phr battleships, even if the diamond is probably the best bb in game just because of the stupid power of the triad.

I guess the heracles gets a bit more survivability and brawl capability when compared to the hog to make up for the dmc being a bit lacking. The particle triad does seem really stronk now I think about, wonder how balanced it'll be in play compared to papercrafting. As yeah, I did a bit of thinking and couldn't think of any situation in which the cannon had an advantage compared to the triad. "Hmm, dmc has higher sdamage per shot so less chance of saves soaking it on a non crit no wait particle" etc etc.

>>51440402
Really, all you need to do is look at the statistics.

Triad has a higher average damage than the DMC against any armor value.
Triad has a better probability to do at least 2, 4 or 6 damage by a non-insignificant margin compared to the DMC against any armor value.
Triad has a nearly 60% chance to do 6 damage per firing, while DMC has a 35% chance at best.
Triad (depending on how crippling interacts with particle) has either an 87.5% or 99.54% chance to do at least one critical, inflicting crippling, while the DMC only has a 75% chance (which isn't bad, mind you)

The Triad is legitimately the best weapon in the game, bar none. I doubt even the Viper is more damaging than it.

>>51440471
Also, all lances should be made 2+ lock.
http://anydice.com/program/a8b1

Granite could possibly be given linked, but only if it were up-priced to the Amber's cost.

File: You know its true.jpg (79KB, 539x499px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 539x499px

>>51440483

I think all lances should be made 4+ and the DMC should lose crippling.

If you look at the math you will see that it is clear THAT UCM IS THE BEST YOU FUCKING XENO SHITS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>51436147

I dunno, but there's noises being made about PHR Heavy broadsides being very not good. Thinking about a 4 Achilles list to see if there's something amazing past the wall of awful.

>>51441672
As soon as we get dreads or heavy+ ships with reinforced armor, the heavy broadsides will find their place as the only semi-reliable (non particle) means of critting the hard targets. Until then they're not awful, but they don't really stand out as particularly good either. They're just kinda there.

>>51441672
They're not terrible. They're slightly fancier 6400 turrets, and I've been on both the giving and receiving end of enough of those to know that they're not to be underestimated.

That said, mediums are generally better. Even against heavies the heavy guns only put out a little more damage on average, and not being able to focus the broadsides on one target is more of an issue when hunting the rarer and tougher heavy ships.

The main reason to take an Achilles is for the torpedo anyway. The guns are just there to clean up.

>>51441911

Part of the problem is that torps aren't very effective. Too many points of failure on them right now. It makes the Achilles not really worth while because of it

File: Green scourge WIP.jpg (391KB, 1328x747px) Image search: [Google]

391KB, 1328x747px

Started work on the BB and my other Strix class. slowest part is waiting for the washes to dry. At least two more coats before I can flip them over and work on the underside.

File: shittily lit trilobyte bits.jpg (374KB, 1328x747px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 1328x747px

>>51442060

>>51442060
>>51442065

Since it's resin, how strong is the release agent on those Battleship parts? I remember with Spartan Games stuff how you basically had to scrub all of their resin parts with a brush in a bowl of soapy water just to get undercoat or superglue to stick.

>>51442086
Wasn't particularly bad for me. A quick rinse was all it needed, everything has stuck to the resin just fine. Haven't tried the glue yet, but since it'll be adhering to the paint it shouldn't be an issue so long as I'm not manhandling her.

>>51442049
They're plenty effective if you use them properly. They're no DMC, but torps are bad news for any ship and can stop that Beijing from going weapons free to dodge, probably multiple times if it even works at all.

Bells are a generally better investment, but Bells are pretty much the perfect equipment combo anyway, and Achilles has its merits against big ships.

>>51442138

Because they don't autocrit and takes multiple turns to hit, they are a paper tiger. It just 6 damage. 2 volleys from a rio main gun will do the same. And you can keep firing that all game.

>>51442209
You'd likely need 3 volleys from a Rio, probably 4 against a well armoured or shielded ship. But considering the torp only has a 50/50 chance to deal 6 damage itself, fair point. It may be that the only reason I've found them so effective is that people are scared of them here and fuck up their own plans trying to avoid or delay the things.

It has now been over a year since the last time Hawk's website was updated.

>>51442646
Happy inactivity birthday I guess.

>>51442968
It has actually been about 13 months. I only checked just now. No mention of dropfleet being available. This can't be good for business.

>>51443017
Happy belated inactivity birthday.

>>51441096
We'll give your 4200's three attacks if you give us 2+ lance lock :^)

anyone got invasion pics of the new units? Apparently the resistance Osprey looks sick

>>51445851
HOLY SHIT WHAT
SAUCE

File: FB_IMG_1485640170316.jpg (49KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 960x540px

This is Col Idris Elbas air transport. Vigilo Confido, Earth Resistance.

File: 16265821_10154760762080225_463177097400158586_n[1].jpg (56KB, 528x960px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 528x960px

Painted corvettes

>>51446204

Its fucking beautiful.

What are some of the 'best' units for PHR in DzC, other than the Hades style ones.

>>51446638
More Hades..

>>51446638
Valkyries, Apollo and Helios.

>>51446638
Let me rephrase that, which units are the 'worst' from the PHR?

>>51447036
sir you are confusing do you mean actually bad, or are considered bad but sorta are just meh, or are bad as in no one likes fighting them?

Are Bad:
Taranis, Janus, Juno, Menchit

Sorta Bad:
Hyperion, Ares

People dont like fighting:
Hades, pre nerf Medusa, Odin Brick, Zeus.

>>51447540
I mean ones that are terrible to bring in a list and could even lose you the game just by bringing them at the utter worst.

>>51447540

Ares spam is actually amazing, but that is situational. It will never roll worse than 3+; that makes some lists stop working.

>>51447540
and why are they so bad would also be nice.

File: c00b6eeffd7a4e552f5cf47ce50b71c5.jpg (55KB, 403x521px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 403x521px

>>51447036
From what I hear around the internets:
-Menchit A1s are strictly anti-personnel but aren't good at getting at said infantry
-Hyperions are sad because the Odin kinda does their job better without being pidgeonholed
-the Janus is a slow scout that pays for two guns, neither of which can really kill anything in practice
-Taranis is inaccurate, pillowfisted, and reliant on spotters
-Juno can't really get anywhere by itself, and after factoring in the cost of a Neptune you might as well just put your guys in a Triton and get there twice as fast

>Shaltari dreadnought has either have:
>super particle lance pentad
>or
>some cheeky distortion fuckery
Which is it, thread?

So, apparently the standard tournament sized list for DFC is going to be 1250; what do you guys think of this?

>>51449349
at that point level something tells me that there won't be many battleships....

>>51449369
why, its a lower value so something with a decent amount of hitpoints will be pretty survivable, and several of the battleships can put out serious firepower for their point cost without going weapons free, I think well see fewer UCM/Scourge battleships, but still PHR and Shaltari.

>>51449349
>>51449369
>>51449412
This also makes the maximum group size 416 points, meaning not even the UCM can do double battleships in tourney lists.
Which means there's no reason to keep the Beijing at 252 now, and it can go down to 250 :^)

>>51449412
hmm, that's a good point. I just thought about it as in they'd be able to lead on a merry chase while the important objectives were taken by the frigates and cruisers.

>>51449479
wait and see what we get with the first Errata/Faq i know you just want this cause your autism demands round numbers

>>51449558
>wait and see what we get with the first Errata/Faq i know you just want this cause your autism demands round numbers
That's not true at all, and I'm insulted that you'd think so!

My autism only demands round numbers for heavy and superheavy ships, so long as most heavy and superheavy ships have round prices

Speaking of new tourney limit, how does this look?

--------------------------------------
UCM 1250 - 1241pts
UCM - 6 launch assets

SR12 Vanguard battlegroup (269pts)
1 x Avalon - 195pts - H
+ UCM Vice-Admiral (80pts, 4AV)
2 x Lima - 74pts - L

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup (205pts)
1 x Atlantis - 205pts - H

SR7 Line battlegroup (175pts)
1 x Berlin - 105pts - M
2 x Toulon - 70pts - L

SR9 Line battlegroup (240pts)
2 x New Orleans - 64pts - L
2 x Santiago - 44pts - L
1 x Seattle - 132pts - M

SR5 Pathfinder battlegroup (130pts)
2 x New Orleans - 64pts - L
3 x Santiago - 66pts - L

SR4 Pathfinder battlegroup (142pts)
2 x Taipei - 78pts - L
2 x Jakarta - 64pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

File: 1477121195321.jpg (291KB, 1234x1460px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 1234x1460px

>>51449301
Giant aura of "fuck space-time."

>All shots against the dread originating outside a 6" bubble receive +1 Lock

>Once per turn, a ship within a 6" of the dread and on the same orbital layer (this can be itself) can target all incoming fire with PD and succeeds PD on 4+ for the rest of the turn. ZA WARUDO

>Harmonic Grav-Oscillator (primary weapon profile):
>[Lock 2+ | Attack 3 | Dam * | Distortion, Impel-2, Alt-1]
>2x lines of [Lock (Target's Armour) | Attack d3+2 | Dam * | Close Action, Distortion, Impel-2, Alt-2]

>Plus a pair of Grav Coils and token Harpoons

I think this would go a long way towards solving the problem of Shaltari vessels being too fragile.

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

63KB, 419x427px

>>51450097
Holy shit

>>51446577
>>51446591
>>51446631
>>51446659
Nice.

I think the Echo and Glass actually look the best once painted.

>>51450097
>the problem of Shaltari vessels being too fragile.
That has literally never been a problem. Unshielded Shaltari ships have a tiny sig and 4+ shields perform better than 3+ armour against almost all weapons.

>>51446577
Nickar looks a whole lot better painted, I'm starting to warm up to it. I still don't like it as much as the ones I made out of heavy cruiser hats, but I don't think it looks like shit anymore.

>>51446204
Oh fuck that looks good. I might have to start a Resistance army just for this guy.

>>51449635
maybe swap the jakarta to another group and put the 2 new orleans from the line group in there, remember the jakarta have to be within 4" to confer their ageis rule, and the taipeis are going to be up in that shit.

>>51451620
That's actually the point to have them with the Taipei's; since they'll be in CAW range, they'll need all the defense they can get to not fucking die.

>>51451680
But that's what Taipeis are supposed to do and it will probably happen anyway. I guess it could be useful against bombers while you're approaching.

File: Graham_Chapman_Colonel.jpg (138KB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 540x540px

>>51451176
It was sarcastic.

>>51451831
Yeah, but I'd like for them to be able to facetank return CAW from shit like Djinns; +12 PD to the entire group is huge.

>>51451895
Is PD totaled among ships in a group?

Because unless I misunderstand, it will just turn out as +4 PD to whatever is being shot at, which equates to 1.33 more saves.

>>51451895
how are you going to face tank oculus beams out the wazzoo? Or a full light PHR broadside

>that moment when the next resistance hero is gonna add a fucking old human walker used to hunt and kill large game animals

How can other factions even compete with the resistance?

>>51451929
Aegis add is its Aegis value as extra PD to all ships within 4" since jakarta is aegis (6) each ship gets +6 PD dice for each jakarta in 4"

>>51451975
Well, I guess two saves is still a little bit of an improvement vs a CAW counter attack.

Again though, I'm not sure a bunch of frigates will survive long enough to really make use of the Jarkarta's presence.

>>51451929
What >>51451975 said; every Taipei and Jakarta in that group will have 15 PD.

>>51451931
I can't, I'd deal with them in same way you're suppose to; abusing inter-layer accuracy penalties and being sneeki breeki about it. Just because I can't face-tank guns doesn't mean face tanking CAW isn't a good idea.

>>51451895
If you're worried about Djinns then you'd be better off just getting another Taipei, maybe making room for 2 if you can. Djinns can't shoot you if they're dead, and a Taipei pair is a lot less effective than a group of 4. All that Djinn group needs is 2 survivors to gang up and suddenly that PD is a lot less significant. Only 2 shots actually need to get through.

>>51452115
True; ergo, 3 Taipei +1 Jakarta is the superior ratio.

I feel like this is a particularly elegant list, but I'm not sure how I feel about just three combat ships (even if they're excellent ship in general). Shaltari lists are pretty damn weird; I may just replace the Rubys with Onyxs or Obsidians and maybe slot an Amber in somewhere.
--------------------------------------
Shaltari 1250 - 1240pts
Shaltari - 4 launch assets

SR17 Flag battlegroup (350pts)
1 x Diamond - 270pts - S
+ Star Elder (40pts, 3AV)
2 x Opal - 80pts - L

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup (200pts)
1 x Ruby - 200pts - H

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup (200pts)
1 x Ruby - 200pts - H

SR6 Line battlegroup (160pts)
1 x Basalt - 145pts - M
1 x Voidgate - 15pts - L

SR8 Pathfinder battlegroup (145pts)
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L

SR8 Pathfinder battlegroup (145pts)
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

>>51452293
Alternately, I have just enough points for an Amber or a Turquoise if I do that, and drop a single voidgate.
More guns, or Caw/Bombardment?

>>51452293
feel like you're going to have to be very very careful how you use your ships, the combat ones that is, because the loss of any one of them is a huge chunk of firepower, but still they can put the hurt on for sure. Interesting list would try.

Anyone happen to know how many points the recommended build for the starter fleets are?

>>51453561
PHR, Scourge, and UCM are about 532-534 pts

Shaltari are 590

Thats if you build and field everything in the starter fleets.

File: 97483da7e0[1].jpg (41KB, 341x414px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 341x414px

>tfw you realize that Hawk cut out the vertical "spine" running through the Manticore's jaw to make room for the Torpedo
Clever

>>51447618
Agreed with all points except the Hyperion: It's a specialist unit. Unlimited range lane lockdown is still very valuable.

You can also take on a singleton or pair walk-on and fire down major roads for a very low price. They serve a different and reasonably useful role than Odins.

All of the others on that list are, as you say, complete trash. I do take Junos, but just for the sake of having one drive on 3 inches and drop Valkyries into a building for even cheaper than a Triton, then letting the APC rot.

File: Kronk oh yeah.png (129KB, 665x378px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 665x378px

>>51453712
>thought the Basilisk looked kind of silly in photos
>primed, assembled, and in formation with its fellow ships it actually looks downright intimidating

I am become Death, destroyer of butts.

>>51454024
>Literally sticking a battleship's worth of guns on a stealth platform without peer
>all for 205 points
A B S O L U T E
M A D J E L L I E S

File: 6117db4c5a[1].png (43KB, 610x773px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 610x773px

I thought you guys might enjoy this; there are some pretty interesting patterns to be seen when everything is all stacked up like this.

Random fix time for battleships?

UCM: Reinforced Armor
Scourge: ...Beast? Not sure here.
PHR: Fine.. except perhaps increase Minos speed.

>>51454033
>got into Scourge for the battleships, really like the heavy cruisers as well
>neutral towards the Manticore but think that the Basilisk looks like the worst dogshit in the game
Well damn. The worst part is that they aren't even bad ships, they're just overshadowed by the full cloak 16 damage bullshit.

>>51454133
The battleships are fine in all honesty, the Diamond is just an absolute BEAST compared to them.

If anything, I'd leave the UCM as is, except possibly a point reduction, with them being the vanilla ships.
Scourge battleships could probably get some flavor of stealth/cloaking to match with the HC/BCs.
PHR are perfectly fine, and the Minos is a total monster. Also, arbitrary changes in ship statistics based on loadout rather than hull class is a nogo.

>>51454157
Here's to hoping that the Akuma and Banshee look good.
I honestly like the super wizard hat of the BC's, in all honesty

>>51454133
UCM: Not needed
Scourge: Fix the battlecruisers
PHR: Not needed
Shaltari: Not needed

Maybe a minor signature downgrade could work, or otherwise have a more gradual increase with the different cruisers and battlecruisers. Just doubling the signature of all cruisers is a bit excessive.

>>51454177
I don't mind the hat on the Manticore since that ship is tall and thin from top to bottom, it kind of reminds me of a knife which is appropriate. It's those stupid guns on the Basilisk that don't fit with the hat at all and have half the oculus dots replaced with ugly bars.

File: MEMES.jpg (299KB, 1215x1102px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 1215x1102px

I'm sorry

>>51454223
>I don't mind the hat on the Manticore since that ship is tall and thin from top to bottom, it kind of reminds me of a knife which is appropriate. It's those stupid guns on the Basilisk that don't fit with the hat at all and have half the oculus dots replaced with ugly bars.

Agreed; it could have been something like a double or even triple grouping of the fin-like things you see on the Shenlong, Sphinx, and Yokai.

>>51454232
>no Sphinx and Yokai for 2 extra generations of son
What is this low effort memery? If people tell you to stop that just means that you haven't gone nearly far enough.

>>51454270
But anon, the Daemon, Sphinx, and Yokai don't have wizard hats!

>>51454277
Oh, so that's how it is then. You hattists make me sick. I've had enough of this hat-based discrimination. Just because a ship was built without a hat doesn't make it inferior.

>>51454306
>Just because a ship was built without a hat doesn't make it inferior.
Yes it does :^)

>>51454277
>>51454306
>Scourge Dreadnought
>the hat to end all hats
>Full Cloak, Stealth, Beast
>enough firepower to make the Basilisk look like a Harpy
>straight up 400 points
What would it be called, thread?

>>51454389
The Grand Wizard

>>51454232
Now do "I put on my robe and wizard hat"

>>51454423
>Lich class superdreadnought

File: 1326916558574.png (46KB, 836x369px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 836x369px

>>51454389

...probably Behemoth, Leviathan or Kraken or maybe Dagon

>>51454389
Only way I see to move up from dragons and demons is to go for the ancient, one of a kind big critters
>Behemoth
>Leviathan
>Sirrush
>Dagon
>Typhon
>Echidna

>>51454519
>>51454524
Kraken and Leviathan are already taken by the Resistance, senpaitachi.

I prefer Demiurge, honestly.

>>51454536
>demiurge
>divine artisan of reality
Hardly a fitting title for the flagship of a race with a patent on Zerg rushing and stealing other people's stuff.

>>51454564
>Demiurge
>not the evil being which imprisoned humanity away from the godhead

>2017
>not being Gnostic

File: unofficial scourge cruisers.jpg (694KB, 1720x2100px) Image search: [Google]

694KB, 1720x2100px

Well, we've still got all the names from this thing to pick from.

I'm still not doing one of these for PHR

>>51454600
Aw come on, it's only 88 combinations if you take advantage of the fact that a sprue can't double up on bombardment guns!

>>51454600
What would even be the point of the Snark, Cerastes, Mayura, and Bakezori?

>>51454849

Scout ships? Observation ships?

>>51436147
Buyers' remorse thread? I really wish I did not buy two starters in hope the game catches on...

>>51455412
You have two starters man, make some demo games happen and start the community yourself.

Nobody is gonna do it for ya

>>51454389
Tiamat.

File: yessssssss.gif (681KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

681KB, 800x800px

>that feel when every time a Dark Matter Cannon fires everyone in the store crowds round the table to see what''ll happen

The DMC has brought more people into the game than all my shilling could ever accomplish.

Every salvo fired is an adventure in Crippling Tables.

>>51453712
Huh.

I never noticed how different the Manticore looks from all other Scourge stuff. Neat.

New question for everyone, is there any way to magnetize the cruisers, frigates, and battleships for the PHR?

>Jakartas accompanying a Moscow unfortunately aren't enough and the big ship dies to a pack of dirty Djinns
>they're in range of the Jakartas' shitty guns, so I open fire expecting nothing
>roll a 6 and a 4, armour save fails
>first Djinn rolls badly on the crippling table and violently explodes all over its friends
>all the others die to crippling
>glorious Jakarta heroes go on to survive the game and defend a Sanfran
JUSTICE
How should I decorate these vengeful little fuckers? I feel like a white panel wouldn't be enough.

>>51457382
Gold panel, duh.

Alternately, emblem/star.

>>51457382
Djin Silhouettes, if your freehand is good enough.

>>51443017
Sadly a few people on Facebook have been selling out of Dropfleet because they haven't liked how the game plays. Sadly I get the feeling we may have a ded gaem on our hands here.

Does anyone have any experience with UCM vs Shaltari? Been playing with my group any I have no idea how to win as UCM. Half my fleet gets nuked on turn two. That extra scan is killer.

>>51458082
Hide behind terrain, utilise silent running and remember to use your Limas. What kind of fleet compositions are we talking?

>>51458082
I've run into similar issues with scourge vs shaltari. At least with muh jellies my frigates can dive for atmosphere. Djinn stronk

>>51455657
>DMC
>only 75% chance to cripple
>not GRORIOUS TRIAD that is near guranteed to do so
Where's all your Shaltari players, senpai?

>>51454389
>Jörmungandr/Midgarsormr
>The serpent coiled around the Earth
How's that for deep lore?

>>51456740
It's been done, but it's not a quick and easy project. I can take a look for a link to a blog where a guy magnetized a cruiser.

>>51459655
If you could that'd be awesome!

File: phrweaponplatesinplace.jpg (98KB, 1005x668px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1005x668px

>>51459994
Found it.
http://thereluctantadmiral.blogspot.com/2016/10/magnetising-phr-cruisers-part-1.html

>>51457834
Facebook is an awful gauge of public perception. All you're going to find there is an echo chamber of the most vocal opinion, and the Dropfleet group was 80% Khell-grade "DED GAEM" shitposting the last time I checked.

What are your guy's favorite scenarios so far?

>Station Assault
>Grid Control
>Power Grab
>Defense Relay (Variant)

>>51457382
Red Panels

>>51454124
So, in general it seems:

Scan:
>UCM and Scourge are equal
>PHR have +2" scan
>Shaltari are flat 12" scan, except for corvettes where they are equal to PHR

Sig:
>UCM and PHR are equal
>Scourge have +2" sig, except on frigates and corvettes where they are equal
>Shaltari have their weird thing going on

Thrust:
>UCM and PHR are equal, except for corvettes
>Shaltari and Scourge both have +2" thrust
>PHR are on part with the Shaltari and Scourge in regards to battlecruisers

Hull:
>UCM and Scourge are equal
>PHR in general have +1 hull, except on battleships where they have +4
>Shaltari in general have -1 hull, except on battleships and frigates with no modifier

Armor:
>UCM have 3+ armor for cruisers and up, 4+ for light cruisers and frigates, and 5+ for corvettes
>Scourge in general have +1 armor compared to the UCM, except on battleships with no modifier; their corvette is the only ship in the game with a 6+ armor save
>PHR have 3+ armor universally, except on corvettes
>Shaltari universally have 5+ armor and 4+ passive save, except on battleships and corvettes

PD:
>UCM and PHR have equivalent PD in general
>Scourge and Shaltari have the best PD, with the Shaltari generally being better
>PHR and Scourge light cruisers have the worst PD

Are there any scenarios with only one side making landings?

>>51464638
not currently no

Guys, I'm thinking of introducing a house rule where +1 is added to a catastrophic roll if a ship would be reduced to less than 0 hull from damage.
What do you all think?

A possible other variant would be +1 to the catastrophic roll for every X points of hull the ship is reduced to under 0.

>>51465507
>distortion bubbles for everybody
>the nastier explosions are even more common
I mean, it might be interesting but I'm not sure that's a good thing.

>>51465788
Fair point, so maybe some threshold more than "under 0" would be better, perhaps at least 2 under as an overkill?

File: Dusty Attemborough pirate.jpg (57KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 960x720px

My pledge finally came in a few weeks ago and I finally have the UCM starter assembled (along with my Avalon). What is a good direction to expand the UCM starter fleet. I've got one Cruiser and one Frigate sprew from my plege. I was thinking of two Lima's and two Taipei's with maybe a San Fran. What would you guys do?

>>51466673
I'd honestly go for two Nawlins, two Lima, and possibly another Berlin or Seattle. Troopships might not be worth it until you hit 1250 or 1500 point games.

File: Toulon whiff.jpg (984KB, 2049x1537px) Image search: [Google]

984KB, 2049x1537px

>play another game with UCM buddy, this time running Scourge
>his counter-flanking Toulons burn hard into rear arc and get a free attack run on my Basilisk at the top of the next turn
>he rolls this
I don't know how he manages to roll like this every game, all I know is that it keeps happening.

>>51468538
Rip your friend.

>meanwhile, four out of five times I manage to go max damage with my beams, all critical except for maybe one hit

So, I'm interested in using standard square acrylic stands for my ships rather than the round ones provided by Hawk; thankfully, the large flight stands Hawk sells on their site are perfectly sized with the small bases for DFC. That still leaves the problem of medium and large bases, however.

Anyone know where I can find 50mm x 50mm and 60mm x 60mm acryllic bases that are compatible with Hawk's stems/widgets?

>>51469558
I'm sure you can source them from third party manufacturers, but maybe Spartan Games? They use some pretty big flight stands for their Firestorm stuff

>>51469584
Thanks, and I've been able to find plenty of 40 and 50mm bases from third parties (Litko in particular), but I have not yet found any 60mm square bases.
Anybody know any game that uses bases that size?

>>51469558
>>51469584
>>51469744
In particular, this is what I found so far:
http://www.litko.net/products/Flight-Bases%2C-Square-40mm%2C-Center-Peg-Hole.html
http://www.litko.net/products/Flight-Bases%2C-Square-50mm%2C-Center-Peg-Hole.html

I cannot find anything like this at 60x60mm that's not some proprietary system.

Hey all, newfag here. had a dropfleet question. A few friends of mine are starting up and I am considering joining them but have a few questions. What role do fighters and bombers play in the game? I know its a game about big ships but I've always liked the imagery of hundreds of fighters launching from a carrier. And which, if any, faction would be considered to have the carriers?

>>51470313
How much sense the following will make depends on if you've skimmed through the rules scans in the OP, so I recommend you do so if you have not

>Fighters
Are primarily defensive things; they augment the point defense capacity of friendly ships to help defend against bombers or capital ships with LOTS of close range missiles and the like.

>Bombers
Are fairly powerful with an extremely long effective range; not quite as effective against big ships like battleships and battlecruisers, but they can absolutely tear through frigates and the like if they're not countered by fighters.

>And which, if any, faction would be considered to have the carriers?
Well, that really depends:
In general, the UCM have the baseline (worst) fighters and bombers.
The Scourge have longer-ranged fighters and bombers, and their bombers are slightly better than the UCM.
The PHR have slightly better fighters than the UCM, and have THE best bombers in the game.
The Shaltari have fighters and bombers as long ranged as the Scourge, but their bomber is equal to the UCM. Their fighters are the best in the game.

Carrier wise, it depends on the faction again, but you can easily see what's up with that in the scans.

In any case, fighters and bombers play a massive roll in the game if either list includes them, and have the potential to totally fuck over lots of shit.

>>51470313
Squadrons in this game aren't independent units so much as tokens that you place to indicate their target. Once their "mission" is over, they disappear. A carrier has a Launch value that determines how many fighters and bombers total that it can distribute each and every turn.

Bombers perform attacks against ships. Instead of following the dynamic scan+signature+spike range formula for ships, they can target anything within the "short" (their Thrust value) or "long" (up to 2*Thrust) range bands of their carriers. While their attack power varies by faction they're always handy for throwing at ships under Silent Running orders, which reduces the range at which ships can shoot you but does nothing to a bomber's set range.

Fighters can be deployed as escorts and spent to improve the point defenses of their target against a single set of bomber or Close Action attacks. They follow the same short/long rules as bombers but have longer range.

Each faction has its own pair of Thrust values for its fighters and bombers, as well their own fighter PD boost value and bomber attack profile.

Faction carriers generally fall into these archetypes:
-United Colonies of Mankind have carriers with middling capacity and squadron quality, but have a lot of ship guns for conventional combat.

-Post-Human Republic carriers have low capacity, but you have the choice of three carriers ranging from "tiny unarmed hangar with engines" to "beefy beehive laser sniper" and their bombers are better than a lot of ship-based guns.

-Shaltari and Scourge carriers both have great launch capacity and amazing squadron range, but aren't well armed otherwise. Shaltari may tend to use more fighters for defense because of the way their shields work.

All fighters/bombers are spacebound and cannot affect ships in atmosphere - a.k.a. troop-dropping strike carriers that take objectives and win the game - but they can play a serious role in winning the space game.

>>51470313
Bombers are an attack method with several pros and cons when compared to guns. They're slower and can be weakened or sometimes stopped entirely by manoeuvring and point defence, but they are also quite potent, can be used alongside a gun and have a long range that cannot be modified.

Fighters exist to put point defence on ships to protect them against bombers and close action weapons.

UCM has the worst strike craft but they're still worthwhile. Their carriers tend to be gunships with some strike craft on the side rather than specialists.

Scourge have long ranged craft and slightly superior bombers, as well as a very nice dedicated carrier that can launch 5 bases of strike craft a turn.

PHR are as short ranged as the UCM but they make up for it with slightly improved fighters and the best bombers in the game. For carriers they tend to have generalists with relatively low launch numbers, most likely to compensate for the power of their bombers.

Shaltari are fast and have good fighters, which they need since activating their shields turns off their normal point defence. Their carriers are specialists with good launch numbers, not much else to say there.

>>51470551
>but you have the choice of three carriers
Four. The Priam/Scipio counts.

What is the range on bombardment for ships?

>>51472098
Scan

File: SimpsonsSpit-Take.jpg (12KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 300x225px

>>51472134

>Shaltari Bombardment Cruisers can do so from a full foot away.

>>51472809
Yup. That's what makes their bombardment good. UCM have raw power at a cheap price, Scourge have the speed/atmospheric of frigates and can deal heavy damage in groups, PHR can plink safely with their strike carriers but otherwise kind of suck, and Shaltari have insane range which lets them combine fire from multiple blue ball ships easily.

File: I have balled for 7000 years, primitive, and I shall for 7000 more.jpg (59KB, 610x400px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 610x400px

>>51472930
>when you vaporize enemy ground forces and then vaporize some cruisers in orbit
#BALLED

>>51472134

Is it the same for nukes?

>>51473231
Yup

A suggestion for people trying to start up the local community.

Do not play against new players as the shaltari, I feel that with their ship advantages, they out of all the factions allow the easiest exploiting of a new players lack of knowledge and experience. and may seem very cheap and not fun to play against.

Secondly if you are going to play Shaltari in a starter set environment I recommend this alteration to their starter set line up:
--------------------------------------
Shaltari Alt Starter - 525pts
Shaltari - 0 launch assets

SR11 Vanguard battlegroup (195pts)
1 x Obsidian - 155pts - H
1 x Opal - 40pts - L

SR7 Line battlegroup (130pts)
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
2 x Voidgate - 30pts - L

SR7 Pathfinder battlegroup (200pts)
1 x Amber - 110pts - M
2 x Topaz - 90pts - L

The original starter set confers a number of unfair advantages to the shaltari player which this list fixes. The first being that the original list is 590 points, compared to the 530ish points of each other factions starter. Secondly having 3 voidgates while making the most sense given a mothership's launch capacity effectively gives the shaltari player the equivalent of 3 strike carriers to each other starter sets 2 this allows for easier contesting of the clusters, either by attempting to take all 3, or doubling up on the middle.

>>51473439

Shaltari vs. Shaltari is cool though.

>and appropriate for all eras and locations for the setting
>I suppose when my fluff-addiction actually costs me money (can't PHR vs. PHR), it actually IS an addiction

>>51473528
We don't know what those fuckers get up to in their spare time. Blast Hardcheese and Bicep McTricep might have a serious feud going on.

>>51473528
>>51473576
>all PHR vs PHR engagements are actual virtual reality sims generated by their mech's AI
>basically turns their railguns into lasertag

>>51473613
>All PHR AI's have a copy of Call of Duty 405: Modern Warfare 54 installed
>They always play as UCM anyways

>>51469893
Update: I've found links related but still no proper 60mm square or circular bases.

https://warsen.al/products/acrylic-circular-miniature-bases?variant=302447105
https://warsen.al/products/square-flight-bases?variant=302452575

If anyone here has a battleship, could you measure the base provided in mm? I want to say it's 60mm, but 55mm can work as well hopefully.

>>51474819
Battleships use the exact same bases as cruisers, they dont have a special base.

>>51476511
Really? I could have sworn they used a larger base!
This makes it a lot easier on me, thanks anon.

Anyone have the links to those faction-specific cases someone was making?

>>51478766
https://www.feldherr.net/for/dropfleet-commander/

>>51478793

Damn that looks really nice. Too bad about that shipping to the US.

>>51478793
Do they have a date for when these hit release?

>http://www.hawkforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=9445

All these suggestions and not one 'Orion but slightly more expensive and it has either a burnthrough or a heavy cannon on the front.'

Seriously, that would be perfect. Call it the Pollux or the Sarpedon or something.

>>51481022
I'd like to see a specialized type of bomber for the PHR with EMP missiles or something.

Like a Launch 2 light cruiser, or something along those lines, whose bombers have Disruption: Should a weapon with this special rule score a critical hit, its target is affected as though by the Scanners Offline crippling damage until the end of its next activation.

Any suggestions for dealing with shaltari with PHR?

Their insane mobility vs lack of mobility makes for objective based missions really difficult to accomplish successfully. If I overextend even slightly I get punished, and if I don't overextend, I lost objectives that teleport wherever they want.

halp

>>51484979
DZC or DFC?

>>51485278
Dropzone, we're having an upcoming tournament and I'll be playing part of the ground forces being supported by fleets

I can't seem to get my AA in a good position where shaltari can't just blast them from a distance while I can't get good LoS with anything because we do typical urban maps for our learning games, and if I try to move my phobos/skimmers up they get charged

File: 1471369016205.jpg (68KB, 507x810px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 507x810px

>>51436147
Okay so now that the dust has settled....

How is the game?

Is it alive in your neighborhood?

Who do you like best, and who do you play?

>>51446204
>>51446204
Wait so

How did they cast this? I kinda want to get into miniature sculpting, but I've never even put a single thought into how to do things lik evehicles and ships.

>tfw you have found the most elegant solution to the heavy battery's woes for the PHR

Precision: On an attack's to-hit roll, if a 1 is rolled, re-roll.

http://anydice.com/program/a919

It doesn't increase the average damage by much for either preferred or non-preferred, but make them much, much more likely to do two damage per firing.

What does /dcg/ think?

File: ss+(2017-01-30+at+11.38.19).jpg (373KB, 1720x711px) Image search: [Google]

373KB, 1720x711px

>>51485346
We have a big DZ/F group that plays fairly often, but the skill differences vary pretty widely so it's usually a stomp on one side unless they go easy on purpose. We newer players are learning so hopefully we can get there. Shaltari are just bs against new players.

Minis are hard to find and the best ones are always out of stock in domestic stores.

I play PHR because I like railguns and they are my fetish, resistance would be cool but there are a few models of theirs that I think are kinda lame, UCM are boring as heck and shaltari are cool but there aren't enough railguns.

I haven't tried fleet at all.

>>51485303
Im not sure how you are being outgunned or out ranged by shaltari, most of your units have either the same range, or longer, and put out far more hurt. What are you running? What does the shaltari player run? Generally the best strategy is to disregard targets and destroy all gates, that being said odin bricks/Hades tend to work well at nullifying their ground forces. I wouldnt recommend using walk on phobos against them, also unless he has a panther or a warspear you can be fairly aggressive with your dropships because shaltari base AA is shit against PHR.

File: firefox_2017-01-24_22-32-37.png (727KB, 522x560px) Image search: [Google]

727KB, 522x560px

>>51485600
We were using kind of random lists since they were learner games. I have no idea what he will bring in the tournament matches. I'm also really inexperienced.

He pulled out a firedrake against me today and that's why I was getting outgunned. There wasn't much I could do.

In this particular match I ran four phobos, two hyperions with my commander, 4 bases of infantry, two bases of valkyries, tritons and neptunes to go along with them, plus two enyos.

He ran a firedrake, plus those spidery guys, and a lot of braves. His commander was a big tank guy I don't remember the name of. He got lucky on his objective roll and got it before I could destroy the building with my enyos.

I tried to position my phobos in area denial for gates but they rolled like COMPLETE shit and only managed to take down a single fast flyer on a reaction shot.

Bad play on my part mostly, but I was trying to memorize my units and learn new rules. My hyperions did work but he got REALLY lucky on his passive saves, so most of my instakills were nullified. I am convinced hyperions are my favorite unit because they have consistently done work in every match I've been in.

Mind you, he's the best player in our group, and I'm brand new, so it was a learning match, but I still felt like I should have had better denial than I did. His lucky objective roll determined the match.

>>51485742
also have to mention it was a 999 skirmish match, not a 1500 clash

>>51485742
I feel like swapping out the enyos for or 1 odin, sticking that with your commander and putting the hyperions by themselves might work better, then you can drop your commander centrally and start pasting all his ground units, which you can double out really easily with E11 shots. I think you might want to be more aggressive with your deployment, you may want to go with a turn 3 drop with some units, if you are going to go building demo you need to go big or go home, so your gonna want like 4 enyos and you are going to want to walk them on so you can start working over his board end objectives before he gets there. Also an Athena might be great against the firedrake. I would avoid trying to reaction fire his gates unless you cant get a shot any other way, if you can fire normally you are basically guaranteed to kill them

File: firefox_2017-01-22_10-01-04.png (945KB, 535x649px) Image search: [Google]

945KB, 535x649px

>>51485847
I'll need to read the reserve rules more carefully then. How does that work? Similar to 40k?

I'm not really sure how it works, or rather, how to use it effectively in DZ.

>>51485902
If you mean fast movers they start in reserve and come in on turn one on a 6+, turn 2: 4+, and turn 3+: 2+, then each time you want to use it you need to roll to see if comes onto the board, 2+ succeeds. If it comes on you can then place it on any board edge and make an attack run, your opponent can reaction fire at its attack line before it fires, and again after it fires, but if you aimj it right you can avoid some of that, and firedrakes dont have charged air so no worries there. A good Athena pass could easily put 2-3 damage on that firedrake, or knock out one of his gates, and its going to make him be more conservative with his AA because of the threat. Again maybe not a great tournament unit due to the randomness, but in more casual play can really be a game changer.

>>51485374
Unless there's any higher quality images that hsow otherwise, it looks like it was designed in a CAD (Computer Aided Design/Drafting/Drawing) program and then made via a prototyping machine of some sort, likely a laser/uv resin curing 3d printer. You can see what appears to be layer striations on the blades of the propellers, I'm talking about the stuff that looks like wood grain.

Sending the design out to a 3d print shop is going to be your best bet to getting a few things made without huge buy in (~$30k+ for minimum of 30k figures)

From there you can cast it in silicone to pour resin parts or whatever,

If you want to get into that type of miniature sculpting, start learning how to do 3d CAD sculpting. ZBrush and Blender are popular tools.

>>51485902
Not to criticize too much, but that barrel is just screaming for just a tiny touch of a wash to bring out the features. It just looks like a blobby gray tube. And the fins look like weird pale flesh.

File: 20170129_211209.jpg (5MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

5MB, 5312x2988px

>>51485902
Ah I mean the 'turn 3' drop. So would that mean holding my primaries back in their dropships until I know the opponent's battlelines and then set up my phalanx?

I like athenas but haven't gotten a chance to run them. I will be using them in my tournament list, though, just because I like them.

also seriously FUCK painting these tiny models

>>51486385
np, I was painting it for a friend and you're definitely correct. The fins look pinker irl and it looks very floral and I liked how it came out. I did more touchups after that pic before I gave it to him so a few things are fixed, but he's the type to run unpainted armies so I at least wanted his named commander painted to a minimum degree.

File: ss+(2017-01-22+at+11.15.03).jpg (373KB, 1480x887px) Image search: [Google]

373KB, 1480x887px

>>51486404
>>51485990
meant to quote this one
btw. my zeus looks like shit. I want to use red as my command color like I do in other armies but I'm not sure how to do it without it looking very #AMERICA, not sure what other colors to use

However I'll probably be using a jump walker as my hq anyway so it's a moot point, but the question stands what a nice color scheme would be considering my urbanish camo scheme

>>51486468
That color choice isnt too bad, might add another darker Grey color, and maybe use a Dark orange instead of red for command designation? Also Id suggest getting a wash. Otherwise I think you just need to work on the precision of your brush technique. The painting is a bit thick and blobby.

>>51486849
can't recall if this pic was taken before or after the wash. I've been using nuln oil for these guys since agrax is too dark. Orange sounds like a good idea I might try, I have a zeus unpainted.

I go for sketchy camo because I tend to paint while fucked up on sleeping pills and benzos. I have a really nice painted tau woodland camo army that I'm very proud of, but I'm not well warmed up for painting and kinda rushing for the tournament this saturday.

File: 20170130_195707.jpg (2MB, 1536x2560px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1536x2560px

Well, I finished my Scourge Battleship, I'm not 100% happy with the paintjob, I think some of the other scourge ships came out better, but I got the effect I was trying for, so overall I'm happy.

File: 20170131_113655.jpg (1MB, 2560x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1536px

>>51488743

A comparison shot.

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0159/4298/files/Dropfleet_FAQ_s_and_errata_1.1.pdf?10209811200625327151

Dropfleet Faq

Some changes:

Glass is 18 points
Hog Fighters are 4+
Voidgates are 2 Hull

Looks like scald effects shields

Interesting rule about groups

Do ships o
f the same type in the same battlegroup form a large group
, even if selected
in separate groups?
A: Yes, they form one large group of the same ship type. The restrictions on numbers of
ship per group are for fleet selection purposes. For example:
A pathfinde
r battlegroup is chosen. The player includes two Light groups in this; one with
4 Toulon
s (the maximum allowed in that group when selecting), and another also with 4
Toulon
s. While when selecting the fleet these are two separate groups, when playing
these
count as one group of 8 models, and conform to all of the group rules.

Also has a faq for command cards that are not release? Interesting

>>51490241

>Voidgate: bullying successful

>>51490167
>voidgate hull and defence battery nerf
Good.

>glass price is not divisible by 5
Ohohoho, someone's not going to like this. Still, the price seems reasonable.

>scald works on shields confirmed
That's cool.

>corruptor is shit and does nothing on a normal hit confirmed
That's significantly less cool.

>>51490167

Should I have known already that bombers can't attack targets in atmosphere?

Wait, does that mean that on a double-range launch, the target can dip into atmosphere to shake the strike?

>>51490680

There's also this:

>You may not usually deploy Launch assets when on silent running, as the rules state
that you must be able to fire one weapon to use Launch Assets, and you may not fire when
on Silent Running special orders. If a ship has the stealth special rule you may use launch
assets as it may fire at least one weapon on silent running.

So now your Manticore/Banshee can launch a torp whilst silent running. Whereas before you had to at least go to Standard Orders to do that.

>>51490326
We get a pretty good look at them too.

Espionage: Stops an opponent's command card from being used

Intensify point defence: PD gets a -1 bonus (activates on 4+ instead of 5+) against one attack. Applies to aegis and probably fighters as well.

Next-gen armour plating: Lets a ship reroll armour saves. Holy shit, you'd better hope for crits against this one.

Silent killer: Gives a ship stealth.

>>51490803
Yes on both accounts.

>>51490803

>Wait, does that mean that on a double-range launch, the target can dip into atmosphere to shake the strike?

Looks like:

>A. You keep rolling each turn until the Torpedo >hits. If the ship is destroyed, moves off the
>table or is removed for any other reason, the >Torpedo is removed. If the ship enters
>Atmosphere, the Torpedo is also removed.

>>51490167
>Hog fighters down to +4
PHR comfirmed for best launch assets in game

>>51490680
>glass price
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Just kidding, I figure most ships will eventually become non multiples :^)

>>51490952
>PHR comfirmed for best launch assets in game

I dunno, I still really like Scourge Bombers, extra range over their PHR counterparts and with Scald (that works on Shields now!) over the PHR's 2+.

I guess the PHR are better against unsheilded ships whilst the Scourge bombers are better at dealing with Shaltari.

>>51491082
>>51490952

The Scourge are the launch dudes. It is probably Scourge>PHR>UCM=Shaltari.
The factions are actually much closer when you consider their platforms though.

The bell is a nice ship and so is the Ik, but both of those ships have less assets than the hydra. The PHR assets have low range and the Bell isn't as well suited for close range fighting. The Ik fits the roll better, but it trades assets for guns.

The Scouge have more range and while they are only lock 3+ scald and numbers make them do more damage.

The UCM seems the weakest, until you look how awesome the Seattle is. Great standard weapon, good price, and a good number of assets that match its ideal fighting range. The Atlantis is just a discount double Seattle. Also UCM has Jakartas which means you can sometimes get away with using less assets because you need less fighters. The one downside is the New York, which suffers because the torpedoes in the game are subpar.

Shaltari ships have good fighters still, good range, and the Supercarrier. The Basalt is good, just not as good as the Seattle.

>>51491702
>The Scouge have more range and while they are only lock 3+ scald and numbers make them do more damage.
But that's wrong, except against Shaltari shields.

http://anydice.com/program/a928

>>51490297
Fuck yes, my jellies work on shields. That's glorious news.
>>51490803
Yup. If they dip to atmosphere the bombers are shaken. More than a few of my djinn have lived due to that.

>>51491702

UCM Carriers are cruisers with a slightly different secondary weapon though. That's the key thing, the UCM simply has Strike Craft as a secondary weapon, like their outrider guns.
In fact EXACTLY like the Outrider Guns since that is exactly where they put them.
The only exception is the New Yoik, where it has Fighters and a Torpedo as it's primaries.

Everyone else with the exception of the Ikarus as mentioned and the Dragon (which seems a bit odd thematically, I'd have loved it if that thing had Launch 5) has Carriers that are full on dedicated fleet carriers where Strike Craft are the primary weapon.

The reason that UCM Strike Craft are statwise the worst is because for everyone else they are replacing a primary weapon system with them, whilst for the UCM, they're secondaries.

>>51491766
That anon mentioned numbers, so I think they were comparing the 10 3+ scalding shots from a Hydra with the 8 2+ shots from a Bell.

>>51491886
PHR are a bit weird since they replace their broadsides with hangars but give their carriers other significant weapons as well (leftover broadside guns for the Ikarus and Priam, big laser for the Bell, Andromeda is the only exception)

>>51491892
While a valid comparison on a ship to ship basis, it's more effective to compare raw launch assets. Every faction has the same launch capacity and can take the same amount of assets (in general), so the actual launch value of an individual carrier vessel doesn't matter all that much.

But yes, on a 1v1 fight the Hydra will probably beat the Bell, if the latter can't bring its beam to bear.

>>51491892

Yeah if you compare prices, then the 140pt Hydra's 5 Strike Craft Vs the Bells 180pts for 4 is a great deal. The Bell compensates with a Cobra level BTL and better armour, scan, sig and HP though.

The Ikarus/Hydra comparison is interesting though. The Ikarus is a 115pts, making it 25pts cheaper, but with more Hull, better armour and some actual guns. Vastly less Strike Craft, but in a fight between the two I'd still not be 100% sure that the Hydra would win out.

>>51491989
Unless you deliberately go for a skew for every game you aren't reliably going to reach that limit, and even if you do those other carriers may die or otherwise be preoccupied. I'd argue that both are equally valid since splitting up assets and a carrier going all-out against one target are both things that happen in play.

>>51492012
The Hydra would almost certainly murder the Ikarus in a 1v1, but they're not fighting in a vacuum (well, not idiomatically anyway) so in gameplay it's more muddled. 4 4+ shots by themselves are meh but they're supposed to be used alongside other broadside ships like Orions anyway, and can also double their firepower if there is a ship on either side.

>>51492303
>>51492012
>>51491989
>>51491886

I posted Scourge>PHR>UCM=Shaltari

The argument I was trying to make is while the stats are different the platforms make more difference than the raw numbers.

When you think about how launch assets are employed, it becomes more clear that the raw numbers don't tell the whole story. Launch assets, even the PHR bombers, are just not as powerful because of time to target point, defense, and armor saves. There are a lot of points of failure for each individual point of damage to make it through even if you crit.

There is also the idea of how to best employ your assets. The carrier should function as a backfield ship in theory. You want to be far from the main line harassing deep targets and striking first turn against you enemies main line. This is to let you strike both units in your range first turn and sneaky assholes behind the main line. Both the scourge and the hogs fit this a little better. The scourge because you can just do a nice sweep and drop off your goodies while maintaining it. The hogs have the range, but not the same firepower.

The PHR and UCM both have the same range, but the PHR is a little heavier and has more assets that are stronger. These ships are second line ships that hide right behind the main. The issue here is the PHR has to move closer to make the most of its launch, but it has a nice laser or good broadsides on the Ikarus. Its launch has the most damage, but now it is vulnerable to return fire and ships die quick in this game. Still you can't deny 8 2+ bomber shots is devastating.

The UCM has a similar problem, but its ship is better suited towards existing in the second line because of the weapon arcs. Its strong weapons and the power of jakartas can really make their launch assets successful.

Overall, there is not really a faction that pulls far ahead in the launch race. I think its just Scourge and PHR by a little bit.

>>51490167
>Scourge torpedoes fishing for a 4+ to Corrupt
The wording was always there, that just confirms that they're hard to justify unless you're really worried about BC/BBs.

Voidgates needed the change. They still are more resillient to Corvette attack than usual due to that very high PD rating.

>>51493766

I think it is worth saying that all torps need a boost. If they ignored all saves that would make them pretty solid. Even the 4 damage scourge ones as it is would be a 50/50 chance to fully murder what ever you shot at.

So Shaltari was nerfed. Despite many previous beta tests, even though there was not a single tournament.

Just because most players are unable to understand how to play against them.

Because as if turns out that you do not need to learn the game, improve tactics but simply complain on FB and Hawk Forum to force NERF for the faction with which do not want to develop tactics to win

>>51494726
>So Shaltari was nerfed.
How? Their voidgates? Their fighters being normalized?

>>51494726
>shave a hull point from Voidgates
>make its weapon fit its own fluff
>confirm that you can chain Voidgates across the table
>fix the typos in Glass cost and fighter values
I'm seeing a nerf and a half here. Now that Shaltari have the cheapest corvette in the game, you might as well use them as Voidgate escort.

File: IMG_1180.jpg (166KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1200x1600px

Fresh art from OB's Invasion blog. Apparently Hawk might have some kind of ~secret project~ in the works...

File: IMG_1181.jpg (142KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 1200x1600px

>>51494972

File: IMG_1182.jpg (202KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 1200x1600px

>>51494984

>>51494726
The void gates were significantly cheaper than strike carriers and significantly better.

They have huge PD and can tank most damage because nearly everything that could shoot at them has to hit on a 6.

This is all before their better hog abilities.

They were OP. It isn't even a contest.

File: IMG_1183.jpg (262KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

262KB, 1200x1600px

>>51495010

File: IMG_1187.jpg (115KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 1200x1600px

>>51495039

File: IMG_1188.jpg (115KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 1200x1600px

>>51495056

File: IMG_1186.jpg (141KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1200x1600px

>>51495071

File: IMG_1184.jpg (154KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1200x1600px

>>51495098

File: IMG_1185.jpg (196KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 1200x1600px

>>51495113

>>51494972
>>51494984
>>51495010
>>51495039
>>51495056
>>51495071
>>51495098
>>51495113
>>51495129
...Dropsquad Commander?

File: IMG_1190.jpg (181KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 1200x1600px

>>51495129

>>51495171
>>51495175
And there we go, Dropsquad Skirmfinitymander confirmed boys (note: not actually confirmed)

File: IMG_1189.jpg (166KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1200x1600px

>>51495199
Whoops, lost the final image.

>>51495199
>>51495171
>I can only get so erect.gif

>>51495171
>>51495199
>inb4 another KS
Hawk please

>>51495278
>>51495288
>despair_but_also_an_erection.jpg

File: glorious nerfs.png (1MB, 1300x857px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1300x857px

>mfw Hawk is literally bullying Voidgate

>>51495403
>The only other rumour I can bring you, kind of, is the following series of avatars on display, including a Scourge warrior being penned by the very talented Mr Patrice at the event. These avatars are for... well, I can't tell you that, but they're for something exciting!

So its either Dropsquad, Droprpg, or Drop PC game?

File: 1479140618505.gif (2MB, 540x304px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 540x304px

>>51495654
>Drop PC game?
AHHHH YESSSS GIVE ME HOMEWORLD: DROPFLEET EDITION

>>51495654
>>51496086
>implying Hawk has the people to make an inhouse game
>implying they have the resources to hire a studio
>implying D*G is popular enough for a studio to want to license it
MODS
WHEN

>>51495654
A PnP RPG is the most likely scenario for a new product line I'd say. Lowest investment of resources for a relatively decent return.

Only issue is most PnP games need/push player sized miniatures, of which Wark has none in the standard 20~30mm format.

More than likely it's probably concept are for new sculpts or special characters or commander cards.

>>51496305
I kinda want this to be a limited line of skirmish scale minis, if only because that Brave and the Immortal look great in these art pieces.

File: e2f42d4cdb[1].jpg (15KB, 227x219px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 227x219px

>>51495056
FUCKING XENOOOOOOS

>>51496570

Amazing!

Crafting my first 2000pt list. How do you guys think this looks?

>Flag:
x1 Heracles
x2 Calypso
Lv2 Admiral

>Vanguard:
x2 Bellerophon

>Vanguard:
x1 Leonidas
x2 Europa

>Line:
x2 Orion
x2 Europa

>Line:
x2 Theseus
x2 Europa

>Pathfinder
x2 Orpheus
x2 Medea

>Pathfinder:
x2 Pandora
x2 Medea

I'm considering turning one of the Orions into an Ikarus with the leftover points I have, but I feel like I might not have enough conventional shooting if I do so.

>>51497105
I fucked uuuup.

It should read x1 Orpheus in the first Pathfinder group.

>>51497105
Lot of big guns, but not much objective grabbers for 2000.

Muh tournament list size.


I feel a bit short on scoring units, but on the other hand I feel kinda decent on
>remove xenos
units.


--------------------------------------
TOURNAMENT - 1239pts
UCM - 0 launch assets

SR15 Flag battlegroup (220pts)
1 x Tokyo - 220pts - S
+ UCM Captain (20pts, 2AV)

SR20 Vanguard battlegroup (326pts)
1 x Moscow - 163pts - H
1 x Moscow - 163pts - H

SR10 Line battlegroup (210pts)
2 x Berlin - 210pts - M

SR8 Line battlegroup (177pts)
1 x San Francisco - 111pts - M
3 x Santiago - 66pts - L

SR12 Pathfinder battlegroup (222pts)
2 x Madrid - 158pts - M
2 x New Orleans - 64pts - L

SR2 Pathfinder battlegroup (64pts)
2 x New Orleans - 64pts - L

Wish I'd had enough to fit a small Toulon or Taipei carpet in there though.Or another Santiago trio. How would you play against a list like this?

>>51498687
You have an absurd amount of bombardment. However, not having any launch assets or jakarta will leave you vulnerable.

Moscow are only good when go weapons free. I think the pair is a bad idea.

Remember that your ships will form a group when put in the same battlegroup. That means they have to use the same special orders.

So has anyone used the nuclear option in DFC yet? Is there any point where just nuking the site from orbit is actually the right answer?

>>51498779
I figured the pair was good because they could go weapons free together- that's what they're for. They're a fuckhuge brick that will have the last word if anything gets near them. (Ideally.)

The heavy bombardment is deliberate; I might not have enough landing but I sure as hell don't have to let anyone else land. A Tokyo is a great budget battleship; it's big, it's hard, it has some guns and good area denial. It isn't a killy monster, but it takes a good bit of killing and can put the hurt on scoring assets.

I think there might be some need to reshuffle my scoring units to get lower strategy ratings, but I'm not certain I understand the intricacies of the group/battlegroup system.

>>51498849
the biggest issue with the dual moscow is how brittle it is. A turn of focused fire will leave you with half your heavy firepower crippled or dead, and you don't have the means to keep up. I'd say drop the second moscow for some frigate cover to give you some fast ish moving firepower and keep your stuff flexible.

>>51498831
Yup I did! It is a good way to open up a cluster a bit to ensure you can contest or conquer it in time for a score. Another option is dropping a nuke to remove an annoying building like a scanner or a orbital cannon..

>>51498831
I played a demo game with my dad, showing him the ropes.

Despite my indirect pressing, he grouped up his strike carriers on one objective which seems to be the classic noob mistake. On the other hand, I tried to get too tricky and he tabled me by turn five.

He did use a nuke and with desperate use of his strike carriers (and critical location scoring) managed to tie it up by removing jelly and landing as much as he could. 14 - 15-1.

Worked okay.

>>51495098
Shiet, that's actually pretty spoopy.

>>51499615

>bone-bags don't know how to use what they got
>step aside son ill show you how its done

>>51500395
Why are all Scourge so /fa/?

>>51498687
You have plenty of scoring units for a bombardment skew list, ground superiority becomes easier to achieve when you can remove several sectors a turn.

The real concerns are no carriers/Jakartas and in particular no Limas. Laser+Lima battlegroups are a mainstay for a reason.

>>51501235
Alright. If I dropped a Moscow and a Nawlins, I could add two Limas to the lasergroup and a Seattle in the Moscow's place.

Do you think that's a worthwhile trade? 1 troop 3sc? And do you think I'd still need Jakartas?

Technically, I guess since I have a good force for dealing with the results of landings, the Santiagos aren't as vital (but they're cheap anyway...)

>>51501513
...all with the assumption of a cheap-ass admiral. How important are high rating admirals? DZC players? BFG vets?

File: T3vclRF.jpg (440KB, 2133x1200px) Image search: [Google]

440KB, 2133x1200px

>>51501513
>>51501554
>>51498687
Tweaking this a little more and noticed, this does have the benefit of being composed of 2x starter set, 3 corvettes, and 1 bb.

--------------------------------------
TOURNAMENT ][ - 1241pts
UCM - 3 launch assets

SR15 Flag battlegroup (220pts)
1 x Tokyo - 220pts - S (You know, I could swap the Tokyo out for another two Madrids- cheaper and better bombardment. Unfortunately, Madrids don't have outlier, so they'd not be that much more flexible. And there' a certain pizzazz to having the big old rock of a BB in the list.)
+ UCM Captain (20pts, 2AV)

SR12 Vanguard battlegroup (233pts)
1 x Moscow - 163pts - H
2 x Toulon - 70pts - L (I feel like this combat brick has become much too anemic trading the moscow for two toulons, but...)

SR12 Line battlegroup (284pts)
2 x Berlin - 210pts - M
2 x Lima - 74pts - L

SR10 Line battlegroup (158pts)
1 x Madrid - 79pts - M
1 x Madrid - 79pts - M (these will get merged into a group just 'cause, won't they?)

SR7 Pathfinder battlegroup (196pts)
2 x New Orleans - 64pts - L
1 x Seattle - 132pts - M

SR5 Pathfinder battlegroup (130pts)
3 x Santiago - 66pts - L
2 x New Orleans - 64pts - L


4x strike carriers, no Troopships. If I'm working the bombardment skew, (It's not *that* much skew, is it? Solid superiority, but only 4 profiles...) I have less need for infantry. I drop armor, they drop infantry if they want it to survive more than one turn. Orbital and Armor superiority make it work.

(Ideally, I still haven't seen much detail of the ground game.)

Alternately I ditch the Toulons and one SC and get a San Francisco back for precisely 1250.

>>51496305
I'd be totally up for an RPG. nice, simple, plays well with the universe, and it helps a lot with fluff which we can always use more of. Hell, some newer RPGs like the FFG game system don't use models or miniatures, and while I'd love some upscaled models (can you imagine a space marine sized scourge soldier with his trench coat and carapace armor?) I think I could see Hawk releasing just the books to help the fluff out.

>>51502168
I'd switch around the Toulons and Seattle. Lower SR for the strike carriers and easier flanking for the Toulons.

The skew is pretty heavy. You can stomp nearly an entire cluster per turn.

I wouldn't change the Tokyo, you're not exactly overflowing with combat ships and that laser is a good gun, you couldn't afford anything equivalent with the leftover points.

>>51501554
In DZC a high Command value Commander can be a game changer, it gets you more command cards, and can swing the initiative value in your direction. It seems less useful in DFC given the reduced impact, and the largely unknown quantity that is the command cards.

In BFG admirals allowed you to get better leadership on ships and so forth which meant a better chance to pass special orders and other leadership checks, which was pretty important. However at certain points value you also had to have one anyway so it wasnt really optional.

>>51502168
Wherever that ship is from. it's UCM as fuck.

Leadership in DZC is if anything, TOO important: Winning Initiative is important as hell.

Not as much in DFC. We'll need to see the card quality, but so far what's leaked suggests they'll be quite strong.

Team /dcg/ at invasion when?

Has anyone here been to GenCon before? I'm wondering if I should save up and give it a go, and Hawk is pretty high on my list of things to check out if I did.

>>51494726
Or much like all the other typos that got fixed, they chamged some numbers that had all ready been changed before Dropfleet launched but hadn't actually made the printers.

>>51495654
Could be a card game of some sort.

>>51505235
I hope not. I've seen what MtG does to people. Cards are tools of the devil, I tells ya

>>51503918
>>51505099

I usually go to SALUTE every year, Hawk usually have a stand there.
I'm looking to get some Corvettes and maybe expand my UCM and Scourge to 1500pts.

>>51505327

Cards are crack. Minis are beer.

>>51505327
Not to sound like a GW shill, I feel like a card game would detract from the game.

>>51505235
Please no; CCGs drawn from existing franchises are often shit.

>>51505235
gonna have to back up
>>51506682
>>51505327
>>51506624
Please no card game

File: Uncle Bad Touch.jpg (257KB, 1143x1600px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 1143x1600px

>Play 2k DZC game with my Resistance against Scourge friend
>We agree to bring special characters, he brings Cavebreaker
>I take Gunnar
>I drop him and his myrmidons into an objective building close to his side, as area denial, because I MADE FINGER PIZZA JUST FOR YOU
>He sends in Destroyers
>GUNNAR WILL NOT BE STOPPED
>Gunnar and Friends are D3+2 for CQB value
>5,5,5,6 rolled
>Each stand is now worth 25 dice
>100 dice against his destroyers

I HAVE THE SHINIEST MEAT BICYCLE

>>51508590
>there are that because that vehicle is pretty Scourge, or might get a general release
>third resistance command vehicle might be a giant copter to go along with tiny copter
[AYYPOCALYPSE NOW INTENSIFIES]

>>51508659
>100 dice against his destroyers

As a UCM player, I know you ferals and us have our differences, but we will always agree on how great it is to murder destroyers.

>>51508846
The difference being that UCM can only do it by bringing down the entire building from afar.

>>51508958
I was just saying I like it when they die, not that we are good at it.

File: laughingwarboy.gif (229KB, 180x104px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 180x104px

>>51508846
Thing is, after his destroyers were absolutely obliterated, he did not take kindly to my daring to own a building within LoS of his shiny bits. He spent the rest of the game trying to dislodge them, which of course suits me perfectly, since it meant I wasn't getting Cavebreaker AoE's up my ass every turn like I usually would.

Before the building went down, I managed to save the three stands that were left (falling masonry killed more of them than his own troops did), hurl them into the transport, and leg it away from his AA.

Thing is, he could have just ignored Gunnar - he cant search for objectives, so he's just sorta there to be annoying and force you from buildings that he decides are his now. But my friend was dead set on getting that objective, and he paid the price for it.

Pro-tip: Ignore Gunnar when you have the other 1700 points of a Resistance army shitting all over the board doing Mad Max things at break-neck speed.

>>51508590
I love that this thing carries 10 MF-R as well as being a sorta gunship.

>Firebrand, this is Menace 1-5: Ready to Deploy.
>End of Mission
>Total Casualties: All. Rating: TERRIBLE.

>>51509940
It's cool, they were all squaddies. It's their job to die horrible deaths, so that others may attain great rank.

Late afternoon bump.

>>51508540
Man I wonder if that scourge shape is a downscaled heavy version of the mobile oppression palace. I wouldn't mind exploring more alternate scourge walkers.

>>51513763
Nah senpai, that's the jungle waifu's kustom mobile oppression palace.

>>51513763

That is the jungle devil, she rides in a mobile oppression palace with AA guns.

>>51513791
>>51513825
>didn't recognize my own jungle waifu
I am ashamed and deserve only mockery.
I don't suppose we've seen the other battlecruiser designs, have we? Really curious about what I'll be slumming with.

>>51514632
>I don't suppose we've seen the other battlecruiser designs, have we?
Nah, the non-KS BCs should be out sometime in summer.

>>51505235
It's going to be unit profile cards. Bet you two to one.

>>51495654
>DropRPG
It'd be pretty fun to play as a small squad of resistance dudes; you could also go semi only war as legionaries or warriors.

>>51514931

I agree!

Also even if you don't play RPGs, there is no doubt an rpg book would be a great source of fluff. Also we might get 28mm minis,

>>51515019
Gonna be honest,although he's an amazing vehicle modeler, I don't exactly trust Dave's skill as a character modeler, unless he's done some REALLY choice work I haven't seen.
Just looking at the fauna for DZC, I don't think he can do proper justice for 28-30mm minis.

>>51515133

I would image that doing the 10mm stuff is actually much more difficult.

Bumping with more hevay caliber math-hammer bullshit.

http://anydice.com/program/a972

What does the thread think of these?

>>51517071
what special rules are you running out for each set, i dont recognize some of them?

File: dee-see-gee in a nutshell.jpg (908KB, 2048x1574px) Image search: [Google]

908KB, 2048x1574px

Late night bump

>>51518717
They're custom rules/specials in an attempt to bring heavy calibre broadsides on par with lights and mediums; the comments above each block should explain it fairly well.

Here's an updated version with the light batteries for comparison.
http://anydice.com/program/a97b

As it stands now, it looks like the "volley" rule is actually most on par with the light guns.

>>51518813
i feel like predictive works the best puts them at approximately the same as medium at other targets, but better at prefered, doesnt do anything to wierd just a reroll. basically the least intrusive option.

>>51517071
Heavy guns are in a bit of an awkward position. They suck when on cruisers because they simply don't do enough damage against their primary target and are lacklustre against everything else. 4 damage maximum on an entire broadside sucks balls when your preferred targets are very tough and quite rare (usually too rare to shoot 2 at once, unlike frigates). So something that allowed them to dish out more damage, perhaps like the marksman/sunspear rule in DZC could work.

However this would also buff the already potent battleship cannonades and turn them into ridiculous death machines that could potentially delete a heavy cruiser in a single turn. So that would also need to be modified.

>>51519307
Solution: Just make the Achilles cheaper. The battleships are strong enough as is.

>>51519307
>So something that allowed them to dish out more damage, perhaps like the marksman/sunspear rule in DZC could work.
That's kind of what the "Gauge" proposition in the link is; +1 damage on critical hits against preferred targets, for a potential maximum of 4 damage per battery, or 8 damage per broadside.

Fair point about the Battleship cannonade, which is why I feel the volley rule is the best solution as it doesn't outright allow the broadside to totally wipe a heavy cruiser.

>>51519438
That still doesn't solve the problem of the heavy guns being a literally inferior weapon to the mediums and lights in a systematic sense. They're fairly consistent, but they don't have quite enough -oomph- behind that consistency to be worthwhile.
They're pretty much the particle lances of the PHR, and the battleship heavy guns are only acceptable because there's a lot of them. The Equivalent amount of battleship tier medium guns would be far superior.

http://anydice.com/program/a984

>>51519491
The biggest kicker to take away from all these stats, in fact, is that the medium cannonade actually has better chances of doing at least 6 damage (taking armor into account) than the heavy cannonade does!
The medium cannonade is literally more likely to cripple a heavy cruiser than the heavy cannonade is, and this extends all the way down to broadsides and batteries, proportionally.

File: 1474613290755.jpg (36KB, 526x375px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 526x375px

New bread in the morning, I expect.

Make it a good one, gentlemen.

>>51519438
Nah, the heavy cannons need more shots, or they need to do two damage each.

They're just not effective.

>>51520872

It's kind of baffling as to why they don't get 2 more shots. All the other calibers of cannon have an average damage on M enemies of 4. So in order to keep to that the Heavy Cannon double broadside should have 6 shots, or 3 shots per Heavy Gun component.

I mean, don't get me wrong, Crits are nice and all, but quantity is quality.

>>51521853
Average of 4 hits, not 4 damage. That's an important distinction because armour neuters light guns really hard. Against 4+ save medium targets lights and heavies do the same average damage.

With 3 shots they'd be better than mediums against all targets except shields, and I don't think that's the intention.

New thread, commanders.

>>51522372
>>51522372
>>51522372