/dcg/ Dropzone/Dropfleet Commander General

So I am not sure if that previous guy's math is right.

I remember reading that essentially the heavy guns have the same damage verse medium and below targets at 3+ and slightly worse at 4+. Bad at 5+.

They only do slightly more damage against standard targets with H&S at 3+ and 4+. I think the idea is that when ships with more special rules come out you will get more damage out of them and they will become more useful.

I suppose I would support a damage increase of 2, but because of the way it needs to be balanced the price of those ships might have to increase. Both the problem ships, Achilles and Perseus also suffer from other issues. Torpedoes suck and the Perseus is kind of on paper inefficient. Assuming torps get fixed then both ships get small price increases as needed to insure med guns still get used, but heavies are not bad chocies.

The cannonades could be different in that they simply get more shots, but stay at damage 1 to fit the way they are modeled. Again with price increases as needed.

>>51522372
what even is that gun

is it a famas

>>51522706
It isn't a real world weapon.

The UCM uses a UM-3 Assault rifle. It is described as a modular bullpup weapon that can be convert to a LMG, sniper, or sub-machine gun variant. It fires caseless ammo, which can be standard, AP, venom tipped, or explosive rounds.

>>51522372
Make 6 a double crit that deals 2 damage, like a marksman or sunspear. Either exclusive to preferred targets or not, I'm not sure. You could fluff it as those external turrets the cruisers have granting extra precision so you don't have to put it on the cannonades (which are stuck in the hull).

>>51522696
Damage 2 is a big deal, it makes them literally twice as powerful. They need a little boost, buff them too much and they become a completely different weapon to what they were intended to be.

File: 1485896144132.jpg (120KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 1200x1600px

>>51522372
Wow, I just noticed how different the rifles of the 2 UCM grunts look. The guy's looks like a shitty metal rectangle.

>>51522696
>>51522861
http://anydice.com/program/a98f

Updated statistics to include giving the heavy guns flat 2 damage, or flat 3 attack, or a special rule "marksman" where they do 2 damage on a roll of 6.

Marksman is an interesting idea, but it's slightly too good when applied to all targets; it makes the heavy guns equally as powerful as the mediums against all targets, but perhaps that's okay.

As for applying it to the battleship cannonades, it's not an issue; there's a less than 50% chance against all armors to outright do 6 damage in total, so it's not a guaranteed heavy cruiser killer. It's going to sting like a bitch, but not that bad.

Personally, I'm in favor of Piercing, Predictive, or Volley.

>>51523109
I still feel predictive (rerolling 1s) is the least intrusive of the rules and probably the best option if one has to be taken.

Apparently the UCM player from last year won Invasion. Even with UCM supposedly being weaker.

It certainly feels like they are, but I suppose the factions have always been pretty close balance wise.

>>51524087
>Megamike won again
As expected

>>51522372
>>51522956

Drop skirmish commander when?

>>51524327
Dropsquad*

>>51524350

Drop troop*

>>51524365
Dropteam*

>>51524087
It's balanced enough that a superior player can win with an inferior faction. Also the fridge acts as a kind of crutch for our otherwise rather lacklustre ground units.

>>51524327
>>51524365
*Droptroop commando

>>51524379
Dropfeet UCM Cobbler Simulator

Drophost commander when. I want my horrific party game about the slow mental degradation of a mind controlling parasite and the significantly faster mental degradation of its host.

Akuma gets its central gun turned into a phalanx and the side ones into arrays.

Y/N?

Hey, guys, me and a friend are taking a look at this. We're trying to decide for either Dropfleet, or Dystopian Wars (of which, we already have miniatures for.) Taking a look at Miniature Market, though, it seems like the only way we could get miniatures for DFC is to get at least one of the two-player starter sets.

Taking a look at the Kickstarter comments are also concerning. How sound is this game and its community? Am I mistaken in my observation that the product seems a little scarce? I'm in the US, by the by. Information would be greatly appreciated.

>>51526063
>Taking a look at Miniature Market, though, it seems like the only way we could get miniatures for DFC is to get at least one of the two-player starter sets.
There's some on TheWarStore as well, not to mention all the other minor sites. Hawl ---should--- be updating their website soon for direct ordering, but likely after all the kickstarter stuff is finally squared away.

>Taking a look at the Kickstarter comments are also concerning. How sound is this game and its community?
All I've heard from where communities pop up is that it's a fun game that pretty much everyone who plays it, likes it.
The kickstarter situation is bad, but not horrible. Hawk is just dragging their feet on getting the last rewards out as they ran into some issues with data collation during their shipment, and a not-insignificant number of backers (me included) fell through the cracks, which Hawk is now rectifying.

>Am I mistaken in my observation that the product seems a little scarce?
I'm assuming they're working to fine tune their manufacturing to deal with the product needed for lost backers, and as such have probably lapsed a bit on shipments to retail.

> I'm in the US, by the by. Information would be greatly appreciated.
If you haven't already, download and take a look at the rulebook scans in the OP. The thread would be more than happy to talk about the game proper.

>>51526163
Thanks for the info. Now, we may also be interested in Dropzone Commander. We have experience in Planetfall and a little bit in Armoured Clash, both Spartan Games stuff. How does it compare, if you know?

Furthermore, how highly would you recommend investing in DZC? I know I'm probably asking in a biased source, but I don't think the lads at the 40k general chat would really be helpful in this regard.

We're looking around for a strategy game, definitely... and I think the Fall of cadia has him concerned, kind of like AoS did a while back.

>>51526349
>How does it compare, if you know?
I couldn't say, being a primarily dropfleet player and having never played any Spartan games, but I'm sure there are a few other anons in the thread who'll speak up.

>Furthermore, how highly would you recommend investing in DZC? I know I'm probably asking in a biased source, but I don't think the lads at the 40k general chat would really be helpful in this regard.
In all honesty, the cost of "investment" isn't all that much for either DFC or DZC; you can build an average sized and competitive army in either system for between 150 to 200 dollars (1250-1500 points, game wise).

>We're looking around for a strategy game, definitely... and I think the Fall of cadia has him concerned, kind of like AoS did a while back.
A thing to note about DZC/DFC; the story moves forward, and continuously so. It is not static or glacially slow like 40k is.

>>51526063
The game's a billion times fucking better than Dystopian Wars. I played that years ago, and it's got major flaws. Still does. I do not trust anything from Spartan after being burned by them 3 times.

The kickstarter complaints were from a vocal minority largely about delivery delays, which are to be expected if regrettable by Kickstarter. Community IMO's pretty decent, I've got over 20 players in my general area (San Francisco Bay)

>>51526063
The problem with availability is just Hawk got slammed by a popularity they weren't expected, and the problems that normally come with a KS were made a lot worse because of how flat footed that left them. Things are stabilizing on that front, and they're shuffling to get as much product out the door as they can, as quick as they can.

The kickstarter comments are largely a salt mine of delayed rewards and haven't reflected my experience with the game in the slightest. The community where I'm playing is small, but we've got all four factions represented and more people showing interest each time we play. It doesn't hurt that its a fairly simple system, with a very good level of balance both internally in each faction, as well as between the factions as a whole.

tl;dr give it a shot. Its a cheap enough game to get involved in that if you don't like it you can walk away without too serious a loss.

File: 34534745135.jpg (27KB, 202x364px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 202x364px

>>51526974
Spartan is that one company I can never truly hate, and only because they make some of the sexiest mini's I've ever seen. Some of the worst, too, but so it goes.

But I agree that their support for games lasts about as long as the game takes to ship to retail, before they're off on something different. That's the reason I never picked up the Halo Fleet Combat game, even though I love the models and the rules are fairly solid - I foresaw what is coming (or has come) to pass, in that it got dumped on the market and left to rot.

>>51526349
I played Planetfall with my glorious Directorate for a bit, and DZC is...well, it's drastically different. DZC is about mobility, objective taking and the correct application of force to just the right spot.

In Planetfall, killing the enemy was always foremost in my mind - Kill that cluster of tanks, flush those infantry out of cover, flankers up my ass god damnit, etc. In DZC, if you wipe the enemy off the board, you can still lose, since you probably neglected to seize any objectives or focal points.

You're definitely thinking a lot more about the big picture than you are about murdering the enemy in front of you. Also, the fact that you can blow up every building on the map, burying infantry and objectives in rubble, is a major focus and something crucially important to just about every strategy.

Infantry function a lot differently in DZC vs Planetfall. From what I remember (and it has been a few years, so forgive me), infantry in Planetfall were fairly tough models, especially if they got into cover, and were very hard to dislodge without devoting specialist units or excessive firepower to their removal. DZC infantry, on the other hand, is slow and fragile unless they're in a building, which is where they'll spend 99% of the game (unless you like splattered troops). With the way weapon ranges work in DZC (entirely dependent on enemy countermeasures), infantry in the open are dead infantry, and quickly.

>>51527273

Hawk dropped the ball pretty damn hard. A lot of people have a right to be upset by this. The tail end of the kickstarter was handled pretty poorly.

That said, Hawk is like 5-8 people and if you didn't know that going in you really shouldn't have backed a KS by them. They are a small business with small business problems. They get a lot of support because in general that is the company they are. The type to refund your money right away if there is a problem or send you a completely new model if a part is missing. The kickstarter is like 95% complete 5-7 month past when it should have been. That 5% is them trying to track down missing orders and problems with orders. Most kickstarters are way way more delayed than that. Things could have been so much worse and I am a dude saying that who got his box right around Christmas time.

It is like, it okay to be upset, but have some perspective. And that is why Hawk still gets my support when other companies would have lost it.

>>51529169
I was won over by Hawk customer service because I had a defect in my Resistance starter set for DZC. They're small as dirt, so it made sense why it took a while to get a response.

My defect was some bent doors for their landing craft. Not a big deal. One also had a slight bubble in one difficult to see area. Also not a big deal, greenstuff would have sealed that perfectly.

Instead, I get a package from them apologizing for the issue after I showed them a pic where I simply asked for a teeny part in an envelope. It was a new starter set entirely, and a convention exclusive bonus model.

Wat.

Good job Hawk. You win. Now that DFC's out, I adore the quality of the models and the rules have been very fun.

Yeah the thing I like about hawk is that Dave and the guys genuinely love the game and the background, and it's as much a hobby as a business. It's just so obvious he's a hobbyist, the gangly adorable awkwardness everytime he's recorded because he just likes what he does so much.

Also, info for US backers. According to some guy on the KS, you should contact [email protected] if you're still missing your stuff, but ONLY if you're US. Hawk apparently set him up solely for America.

Send your name, address, phone number, backer number, pledge number, etc etc.

>>51522696
IMO the Achilles wouldn't need a price increase if its cannons were three shots each. It's horrendously overcosted right now.

Six shots per side would actually make it worth its points.

>>51531471
While I agree interfaction wise, intrafaction wise it'd make the heavy guns unilaterally superior to mediums, and that goes against the currently in place design philosophy of the calibers being various side-grades.

>Atlantis/Johan gets its weapon profiles changed to
4200 (left)...
4200 (right)...
2x 6400; 3+ lock; 4 attack; 1 damage; F/S; alt-1
2x 6400; 3+ lock; 4 attack; 1 damage; F/S; alt-2
4x 6400; 3+ lock; 8 attack; 1 damage; F/S; alt-1&2, bloom

yes or no?

>>51531713
>forgot the Shark missiles
rip

>>51531713
No. It's basically fine, making it into a weird turret Perth is pointless. It's a Moscow with hangars.

>>51525256
interesting idea. Chops off 2 shots, but doesn't mess with it too much. Would you drop it 3 or 4 points to compensate?

So I have a thought - do you think salt chipping would be feasible with DZC models? Have to grind the salt up super fine, but I think I can pull it off. Would definitely help breath some...decay...into my Resistance force.

>>51532582
Actually, the primary reason is that now the Akuma can only put out a max of 4 damage in its side arcs rather than 6, slightly lessening its overall power while silent running except in the front arc, which stays the same.
I'd honestly keep it at the points cost it's at now, simply because of how utterly ludicrous it is.

>>51532833
That's fair thinking. I haven't had a chance to play with the battlecruisers, is there any reasonable solution available to an Akuma? Engaging it with a pack of close quarters frigates ever work okay?

Tournament Meme List
--------------------------------------
Scourge Tourney - 1249pts
Scourge - 2 launch assets

SR20 Vanguard battlegroup (410pts)
1 x Akuma - 205pts - H
+ Fleet Enslaver (20pts, 2AV)
1 x Akuma - 205pts - H

SR20 Vanguard battlegroup (380pts)
1 x Banshee - 190pts - H
1 x Banshee - 190pts - H

SR9 Line battlegroup (245pts)
1 x Chimera - 105pts - M
4 x Charybdis - 140pts - L

SR2 Pathfinder battlegroup (64pts)
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L

SR5 Pathfinder battlegroup (130pts)
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L
3 x Nickar - 66pts - L

>>51532903
Really, your best bet is to try and force it out of silent running with active scanning, or at the very least stay in its sides. An Akuma running in on max thrust turn 1, followed by drifting in on silent running until it can unload in Scald range, will pretty much kill fucking anything.

>>51532981
would limas be helpful with that? Or just suck it up, ping it with a ship I don't mind losing and hope my opponent doesn't have the long firepower to punish?

>>51533112
It's a bit misleading to say "long firepower", since guns and beams are equivalently ranged.
Limas are definitely useful, but so is anything that would normally stay in your back line like Hydras, Andromedas, Opals, etc.

>>51533191
man that's something I'm still getting used to. I feel like I'll need to play a few more games before the threat ranges really start sinking in.

Speaking of beam cruisers, how have the scourge beam shooters shaken out? The variable firing mode seems useful but I can't imagine they have the raw strength of the berlin and that makes them a bit less appealing to me.

>>51533233
>man that's something I'm still getting used to. I feel like I'll need to play a few more games before the threat ranges really start sinking in.
Well, you're kinda half-right; it's not that beams are longer ranged than guns, it's that because of the nature of their arcs they tend to be pulled back more, rather than diving into a brawl or flanking along the sides.

>Speaking of beam cruisers, how have the scourge beam shooters shaken out?
Pretty damn good; the focused mode is excellent at popping frigates or crippled ships that survived, not to mention the flash, while the spread mode is great if you feel like tempting fate and blasting apart a cruiser in one go.

They're less of a "reliable combat weapon" than the Cobras and Twin Supernovas are, but they're far better "openers" and "finishers", if that makes sense.

>>51532903
Taipeis worked out for me, but I got lucky. Those things are just fucked, I'm okay with units requiring special tactics to beat but when those tactics are time consuming and unreliable, and when the target can easily remove one cruiser per turn, things start to get a little tiring.

>When you go full meme

:^)

--------------------------------------
Scourge 1250 quadruple Akuma - 1244pts
Scourge - 0 launch assets

SR20 Vanguard battlegroup (410pts)
1 x Akuma - 205pts - H
+ Fleet Enslaver (20pts, 2AV)
1 x Akuma - 205pts - H

SR20 Vanguard battlegroup (410pts)
1 x Akuma - 205pts - H
1 x Akuma - 205pts - H

SR5 Line battlegroup (105pts)
1 x Chimera - 105pts - M

SR5 Line battlegroup (105pts)
1 x Chimera - 105pts - M

SR4 Pathfinder battlegroup (128pts)
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L

SR3 Pathfinder battlegroup (66pts)
3 x Nickar - 66pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

>>51533753
I think the torpedoes are more helpful, tbphwyl.

>>51533792
--------------------------------------
Scourge 1250 quadruple Akuma - 1249pts
Scourge - 7 launch assets

SR20 Vanguard battlegroup (410pts)
1 x Akuma - 205pts - H
+ Fleet Enslaver (20pts, 2AV)
1 x Akuma - 205pts - H

SR20 Vanguard battlegroup (380pts)
1 x Banshee - 190pts - H
1 x Banshee - 190pts - H

SR5 Line battlegroup (140pts)
1 x Hydra - 140pts - M

SR5 Line battlegroup (105pts)
1 x Chimera - 105pts - M

SR4 Pathfinder battlegroup (128pts)
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L

SR3 Pathfinder battlegroup (66pts)
3 x Nickar - 66pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

We're memeing harder than anyone has any right to.

>>51533832
Oh shit you fit a Hydra in there? Top notch, my man.

>all these anons putting together double or quadruple akuma lists
God I hope they get nerfed before the non KS version gets released and this is easily possible. I even like how the Akuma looks but this shit would be too much.

>>51533832
This is the scariest one. That Hydra is the ultimate support for those fucks. Fighters to soften enemy bomber waves and bombers to murder those silent running CA ships trying to flank.

>>51533850
Yeah, but only 4 gargoyle and 1 Chimera might be too little. Dropping a single Banshee for more strike carriers, maybe some Djinn could be prudent, possibly even competitive.

--------------------------------------
Scourge 1250 quadruple Akuma - 1240pts
Scourge - 6 launch assets

SR20 Vanguard battlegroup (410pts)
1 x Akuma - 205pts - H
+ Fleet Champion (40pts, 3AV)
1 x Akuma - 205pts - H

SR13 Vanguard battlegroup (319pts)
1 x Banshee - 190pts - H
3 x Djinn - 129pts - L

SR5 Line battlegroup (140pts)
1 x Hydra - 140pts - M

SR6 Line battlegroup (137pts)
1 x Chimera - 105pts - M
1 x Gargoyle - 32pts - L

SR4 Pathfinder battlegroup (128pts)
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L

SR3 Pathfinder battlegroup (66pts)
3 x Nickar - 66pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

>>51533875
I'd normally disagree with you, what with most ships not lending themselves to spam, but the Akuma is such a solid combat ship that taking three or four of them as your only combat ships could actually be viable.

File: Tunguska-Marlo-Webber-450px.jpg (744KB, 2000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

744KB, 2000x1000px

>>51533941
I thought 4/1 6/1, or 4/2 was all bretty gud. 4/1 might be a hair on the light side, but isn't really *short*- just light.

Okay fuckers, how do we fix torpedos? It seems generally agreed that they aren't good enough to justify being limited.

File: 1e55dfa05a[1].jpg (166KB, 1053x725px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1053x725px

Haha, time to remove xenos!

>inb4 >just industrious

>>51533832
You fucking legend! I'm going to see if I can borrow a Scourge battlecruiser and play this at the LVO tomorrow.

>>51534746
Options:

A: Make them do more damage, (8/6 10/8 etc..)

B: Make it so they work exactly like bombers, so at 1x thrust they hit immediately

C: Make them auto crit

D: Make them do extra damage on crit

E: Apply some special rule with regards to rerolling or armor reduction or what have you

F: some combo of the above

>>51534746
Make them proper supercapital weapons like the Viper, DMC, Triad, etc. 8 damage on the UCM and PHR, 6 damage on the Scourge.

>>51534746
Remove the ammo constraint and have them hit on the same turn if within thrust range. Also make it so Corruptor is just on hit.

>>51534760
I feel like they should be just militaristic and fanatically Xenophobic instead

>>51534746
make it so if you're within half the torpedo's thrust range you hit immediately? Gives you a nice shotgun blast if you've gotten in real close to the target. alternately reduce it to smaller multiple attacks to make it less swingy, and remove the retry if you miss. Bump the damage up a tad with this change, so torpedoes will do 8 if all of their parts hit but even with 4 2+ shots doing 2 each at least one will miss. This also helps out Scourge torps as getting a crit with the torpedo is now twice as likely and means you can actually stick a corruptor effect.

>>51535059
>borrow a Scourge battlecruiser
>a
What about the other three, anon?

How's this looking, thread?

--------------------------------------
Shaltari 1250 #2 - 1250pts
Shaltari - 4 launch assets

SR16 Flag battlegroup (285pts)
1 x Diamond - 270pts - S
+ Star Elder (40pts, 3AV)
1 x Voidgate - 15pts - L

SR9 Line battlegroup (185pts)
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L
1 x Opal - 40pts - L

SR9 Line battlegroup (185pts)
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L
1 x Opal - 40pts - L

SR15 Line battlegroup (375pts)
2 x Turquoise - 230pts - M
1 x Basalt - 145pts - M

SR3 Pathfinder battlegroup (90pts)
5 x Glass - 90pts - L

SR2 Pathfinder battlegroup (90pts)
5 x Glass - 90pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

>>51534746
They're very close. You just need to give them Thrust 12 instead.

>>51534760
I did that exact same build and made a UCM.
By the end of the game, we had a new government. Called the Imperium of Man.

File: 1484618574251.jpg (77KB, 775x1523px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 775x1523px

>>51535235
>precisely one signature-targeting combat ship
I guess you get the reassurance of knowing that your opponent's fleet will go for your motherships every time.

RIP enemy strike carriers

>>51535435
>precisely 1
Glass aren't CAW, senpai.

>>51535235
Shouldn't your glass pathfinder groups be SR 5?

Also this army looks like it has very little firepower. Your only combat only ships is your diamond. Hogs have good close action yes, but a Jakarta heavy or PHR player is going to tank those CA shots or be able to just shrug off the glass attacks with 3+ saves.

You might get a turn advantage before he moves in and just starts deleting all your effective combat forces and then by turn 4 dominating the map so badly your initial ground asset advantage will disappear.

>>51538296
All dedicated Shaltari CA ships have beam CA which bypasses PD completely. I generally don't take Jakartas against Shaltari, PD just isn't a high priority since more often than not their carriers are used primarily as fighter factories and their CA is either shit or completely immune to PD.

And PHR might be able to laugh in the face of a Glass swarm but the Turquoises can and on average will cripple a PHR cruiser in one turn, I wouldn't underestimate them. That's not to mention the well placed Opals that can both active scan to give the Diamond a target for its guaranteed rape cannon.

>>51531633
Which fine right now, because heavy guns are only on the extremely expensive Achilles, the currently useless Perseus, and the also extremely expensive (but not too expensive) battleships.

The Achilles and the Perseus are both able to actually do something with three-shot heavy batteries, while not ousting any other ships from their spots. Sure, the Achilles would be better at broadsiding than the Orion, but it SHOULD be. It's 165pts, the Orion is 107. Even with three shots on each heavy battery, the Perseus wouldn't be as consistently killy as the Orion against medium targets, it'd be able to do what it is supposed to do - take small potshots against ships its guns specialize against, that are unlikely to kill, but are likely to add that little bit of extra damage you need after a ship with more guns has put the major hurt on.

>>51535235
>SR3 Pathfinder battlegroup (90pts)
>5 x Glass - 90pts - L
>SR2 Pathfinder battlegroup (90pts)
>5 x Glass - 90pts - L

>5x glass - 90 pts - SR2
>5x glass - 90 pts - SR3

???

>>51538296
>>51539165
Sorry, DFList hasn't updated yet with the proper values of the Glass yet, so I had to manually change it.

How about this?

--------------------------------------
Shaltari 1250 #2 - 1246pts
Shaltari - 4 launch assets

SR16 Flag battlegroup (310pts)
1 x Diamond - 270pts - S
+ Star Elder (40pts, 3AV)
1 x Opal - 40pts - L

SR11 Vanguard battlegroup (213pts)
1 x Jet - 165pts - H
1 x Amethyst - 48pts - L

SR9 Line battlegroup (160pts)
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L
1 x Voidgate - 15pts - L

SR10 Line battlegroup (255pts)
1 x Basalt - 145pts - M
1 x Amber - 110pts - M

SR9 Line battlegroup (160pts)
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L
1 x Voidgate - 15pts - L

SR6 Pathfinder battlegroup (108pts)
6 x Glass - 108pts - L
--------------------------------------

>>51538890
>Which fine right now, because heavy guns are only on the extremely expensive Achilles, the currently useless Perseus, and the also extremely expensive (but not too expensive) battleships.
And? There'll obviously be future PHR ships with heavy guns, so it's prudent to keep them in line with mediums and lights now. The PHR don't get "better" guns like the UCM or Scourge, they just get more of them.

>The Achilles and the Perseus are both able to actually do something with three-shot heavy batteries, while not ousting any other ships from their spots.
Except now their heavy guns are outright superior to the equivalent medium guns in all situations.

>Sure, the Achilles would be better at broadsiding than the Orion, but it SHOULD be. It's 165pts, the Orion is 107.
So the Hector should have better broadsides than the Orion as well? Surely that also means the Perseus heavies should be inferior to the Achilles heavies.
What you're proposing goes against every design decision that makes up the PHR.

>Even with three shots on each heavy battery, the Perseus wouldn't be as consistently killy as the Orion against medium targets
Actually, the Orion would be only -slightly- superior to the Perseus if you changed heavy guns in this way, and I'm talking on the scale of a tenth of a single point of damage or so.

http://anydice.com/program/a9bd

>>51539608
It pains me in a necessary evil kind of way. Mayne try to file down the sprue to be thinner and more rounded so that it's at least trying to fit in.

>>51539486
>So the Hector should have better broadsides than the Orion as well?

Yeah, probably.

The Hector is not a good ship as things stand. It's certainly not worth 175 points.

>>51539906
That's not how it works, anon; you can't just assign different arbitrary stats to weapon systems that look exactly the same.

Making the Hector cheaper is fine, but not buffing its guns in a way that mismatches with the Orion.

>>51539486
>What you're proposing goes against every design decision that makes up the PHR.

Then maybe that design needs to be reconsidered.

>>51539969
Yeah, the Hector should just be cheaper, that'd be the easiest way of dealing with the problem.

I guess you could give it some kind of special durability or make its guns linked if you were set on its current price. It seems like Hawk would prefer this, since they want the PHR to be the expensive powerful faction like in Dropzone. Maybe the Hector should have Reinforced Armour in its front arc, helping it get into position, or something.

>>51539997
>Then maybe that design needs to be reconsidered.
Why? It's possible to balance the heavy guns in a satisfactory way that doesn't make them straight upgrades to mediums; There have been multiple of proposed solutions, and pretty much all of them maintain proper parity with mediums and lights.

It's just an unfortunate fact of mathematics as to why heavy guns are the way they are currently, locked into place by the schema of the other guns, but it's not an unsolvable problem.

>tfw half considering going to the UK games expo as a mini-vacation, possibly doing the DFC tourney (Hawk is planning one)
>600-900 dollar round trip airfare, plus hotel costs, for a 3 day event (+/- one day to see a little bit of England)
Fug; britfags inna thread, how fun is the expo? Is it worth going to from across the pond?

File: Skyranger.png (527KB, 862x477px) Image search: [Google]

527KB, 862x477px

So this thing's going to get what looks like different missile bits and... a scourge cannon bit?

Dang Rodrigez. Perhaps this will be the new Resistance command unit.

>>51539997
you can re-balance the whole design schema of a faction because 3-4 ships are a little bit under-powered for what you get that's throwing out the baby with the bath water. The heavy guns might need a slight tweak I think that precision idea proposed to let them reroll 1s was solid, then the hector and achilles need a slight varying cost reductions, and probably the perseus as well, The battleships are fine they both have plenty of damage output and are also tough.

File: 20170203_101230.jpg (1MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x1836px

At LVO 2017. Factions are as follows:

>Scourge: 4
>PHR: 3
>Shaltari: 2
>UCM: 0

Reconquest cucks BTFO! How will they ever recover?!?!

>>51541672
Confused scourge? Do they think they're shaltari?

>>51541672
>2 A K U M A
>A
>K
>U
>M
>A
Good luck, anon; bring glory to /dcg/!

>>51541133

Anon that was confirmed though I thought...

The next thing resistance gets after the tiltrotor is a mech.

>>51541672
Slight update. 5 Scourge. Jelly madter race bros!

>>51530861
>send email
>get response within 18 hours
>pledge should be shipped early next week, and delivered a few days after

EMAIL THIS MAN, FELLOW U.S. BACKERS
FINALLY, MY LONG WAIT IS ALMOST OVER

File: scourge world.jpg (149KB, 599x599px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 599x599px

>Another week gone by
>Another week without shipping confirmation on KS ships

>>51541672
Won my first game against PHR. Double Akuma is really strong. One of the guys has Shaltari with double motherships, the laser battleship, two more cruisers, and a million void gates. I'm not quite sure how to beat it.

>>51541756
Going to paint them like the aliens from Gunbuster/Diebuster eventually. Only had time to primer and pick out a few details.

Are you planning to post pics once they're painted?

>>51541672
Are those victories?

>>51544842
You have wonderful taste.

>>51544771
Double Akuma? Close action frigates to assassinate one. You an get a double activation in probably.

>>51545743
>Double Akuma? Close action frigates to assassinate one. You an get a double activation in probably.
Akuma is likely to outright delete 3 frigates per WF

>>51547976
On weapons free, the Akuma presents a 14" minimum targeting radius. Any decently offensive Vanguard or Line battlegroup should be able to respond from midfield and cripple it at least.

Now quad Basilisks, that makes my nuts hurt just thinking about it.

>>51547976
Only if they are in its front arc I can only being one guy to beat in the side, and nothing from behind. Since you can't turn on SR or WF its not impossible to do an end around and shoot it in the ass.

Full cloak nerf when

I'm trying to round out a Shaltari collection for Dropzone. At the moment, I've got:
4x Braves
4x Firstborn
8x Pungari

3x Tomahawk
3x Kukri
2x Birdeater
1x Ocelot
1x Dreamsnare/Leopard
2x Thunderbird

3x Haven
2x Spirit
3x Eden
1x Gaia

Am I missing anything particularly vital or interesting here, resident hedgehogs?

Same anon who was asking questions to get into DZC/DFC from last night. Just as an update, I was able to strike a deal with a local hobbystore where we have a small group of players (5-6), and the store accidentally ordered 2 starter sets of PHR for DZC, rather than 2 for DFC. Was able to get both starter sets for a cool $90. Friend has said he's willing to also get into DZC, fully intending to get into DFC later on after being told that DFC probably won't be in full swing for a few months now. He has his heart set on the UCM for the moment.

>>51549560
You're missing a command unit, that's pretty vital. I'd recommend the Gharial but the Coyote is still a respectable choice too.

Firedrake is pretty interesting, very powerful gunship and that can also act as a gate.

>>51551521
Oh yeah, forgot to list a Gharial and a Warspear in there too.

I've got it pretty much narrowed down to a choice between a Jaguar, a Caiman, or some Tarantulas. Walkers are cool, but so are huge guns.

>>51549810
that's a damn good deal anon! resin or plastic starters?

>>51549560
what points value are you shooting for because your a bit light on AA options, and have almost no AT options/something to try and hold a focal point and not die

>>51547976
>>51545743

Ended up getting 3rd and a free Battleship from Dave. Having played double Akuma, it's amazingly fun and really effective. Going to try a list with 3 of them and see how it goes.

>>51553760
>Ended up getting 3rd and a free Battleship from Dave
Shiet, nice! Hawk was there?

>>51553760
who was above you, im hoping it wasnt all scourge.

>>51553811
Yeah. Dave was running demo games all day. Talked to him and apparently he wants to add stuff like planetary effects and geosynchronous debris.

>>51553888
1st and 2nd were Shaltari running the exact same list. Laser battle ship, 3 CA Cruisers, 3 Motherships, 3 Shield Booster Frigates, and the rest of the points are devotes to spamminh voidgates.

>>51553760
>free battleship
>after winning by using the battlecruisers that render battleships obsolete
How ironic.

>>51554038
That isn't surprising. Shaltari are so fucking weird in so many ways that they were always going to be exploitable, and with shit like the Jade and all those costs divisible by 5 I think they may have not had enough time spent balancing them.

>>51554240
yeah the shaltari starter set is total bullshit has 60 points over all the other starters.

>>51554314
Can you hear the people sing?
Singing the song of voidgate bullying

>>51554383
It's been too long since we bullied Voidgate. Has she lost weight since last time? I think it's good that she's trying to do something about that hideous body.

Does anyone else have the urge to buy like 6 scourge battleship kits and just make a giant space doom wyrm

>>51552568
Plastic starters. Since showing my friend the Resistance, he's fallen in love with them, and plans on getting a UCM fleet, pirating it the hell up, and calling it his resistance in space.

>>51554038
>1st and 2nd were Shaltari running the exact same list. Laser battle ship, 3 CA Cruisers, 3 Motherships, 3 Shield Booster Frigates, and the rest of the points are devotes to spamminh voidgates.

>not even some token Glass
C A N C E R

>>51554862

That would be kind of cool!

Do it and show us!

>>51555491
yeah thats 1 Diamond, 3 Turquoise, 3 Emerald, 3 Opal, and 14 Voidgates from what I can think

>>51555491
There are no glass models right now so I can actually buy that.

>>51554815
Yeah, she's lost a full third of her weight.
It cant be healthy, especially now that the santiago triplets are eyeing her.... kinda hungrily.

>>51553760
Real question time anon, which battleship you building?

So, corvettes when?

File: 8605500c6c[1].png (35KB, 638x313px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 638x313px

>>51558839
That's actually kind of scary.

>>51560350
L A Z Y

File: Cybrog.jpg (111KB, 1143x1600px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 1143x1600px

bamp

>>51562362

How would you kitbash an Avalon you think?

>>51565306
Put two lasers connected on the bottom

Glue more med guns on the bottom of the wings.

>>51562147
I heard fauna comes out next month with some more DZ stuff.

may-june for corvettes

>>51562362
Yeah I'm not actually sure how you would deal with 14 voidgates and 3 motherships without some serious skew. Combined with the BB and 3 turquoise which can focus fire to just delete anything. That list is pretty broken.

I feel like the list building in DFC is almost too open and maybe needs more constraints on what can go where.

>>51566899
You deal with it by air bombardment.

Nice try Xenos. If I can't have this city, nobody can.

>>51569304
That sounds like an invitation to repost my Tokyo/Madrid/Madrid 1250 list.

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

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

SR12 Vanguard battlegroup (233pts)
1 x Moscow - 163pts - H
2 x Toulon - 70pts - L

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

SR8 Line battlegroup (145pts)
1 x Madrid - 79pts - M
3 x Santiago - 66pts - L

SR7 Pathfinder battlegroup (143pts)
2 x New Orleans - 64pts - L
1 x Madrid - 79pts - M

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

>Best part: Starter set + another starter set, 3 corvettes, and a BB.

>>51566899
Lima-chan best girl, scanlaser all day. Sneaky Taipeis work too. Emeralds go down like bitches. Voidgates are nothing more than vermin, they're only priority targets if they get in the way of your troop landing or you can fuck up a network with a single kill.

Those combat ships are the real trouble. Diamonds are the very definition of nasty business and the ball ships are no pushovers either, though the latter can be outranged by scans or bombers. Actually bombers might be a solid option against that list since the choice between 0 PD and shit armour isn't a nice one when you've got no fighters to pick up the slack.

Most fighting will be over objectives, right?

And Orpheii really are that good, aren't they?

1242pts
PHR - 8 launch assets

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup (180pts)
1 x Bellerophon - 180pts - H
+ Director (80pts, 4AV)

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup (180pts)
1 x Bellerophon - 180pts - H

SR7 Line battlegroup (210pts)
2 x Europa - 80pts - L
1 x Orpheus - 130pts - M

SR10 Line battlegroup (214pts)
2 x Orion - 214pts - M

SR7 Pathfinder battlegroup (210pts)
1 x Orpheus - 130pts - M
2 x Europa - 80pts - L

SR5 Pathfinder battlegroup (168pts)
3 x Echo - 90pts - L
2 x Medea - 78pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

>>51569877
i dunno man with that many voidgates you could just orbit the emeralds in the back area all day everyday and it be tough to get past the CAW pack and Papa Cripples you

File: marcus salute.jpg (55KB, 800x447px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 800x447px

>>51530861
>Send a message to Andrew
>Response within 12 hours
>ON THE WEEKEND
>Says he tried to find the pledges but was unable to locate it
>Says he's going to be re-pick/pack them in the next few business days and ship asap

God bless you Andrew.

File: FUCKING XENOOOOS.png (138KB, 524x458px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 524x458px

>>51570031
>pic
save'd

How useful are Azurites and Aquamarines?

So hawk finally releases FAQ for DFC, but I still don't know one thing- launch assets take damage for moving through debris fields. At the same time, launch assets are placed, not moved when they're deployed from ship. Does this mean they will only take damage if they're already trailing a ship (more than 1x launch distance from target), but don't take any damage if you resolve the attack in one asset phase? Cause that's what it seems from RAW, and it feels silly.

File: a rocket ship can go to space.png (464KB, 489x674px) Image search: [Google]

464KB, 489x674px

>>51573030
I'm not finding an explicit text block detailing their interaction with debris during the actual Launch Phase, but the Launch Assets and Debris illustration shows bombers "moving through" debris, taking losses, and the survivors "continuing to target".

Since Hawk does have a habit of putting vital information in their visual examples, I'd take this to mean that when the straight line between your carrier and its target crosses a debris field, those squadrons are rolling for casualties regardless of thrust range or time to target.

>>51572302
Haven't tried Azurites, but Aquamarines left me feeling conflicted. On the one hand, their damage sucks compared to other lights and their gimmick is situational. On the other hand, in situations that favour it that gimmick is like a fucking miracle. I'm really not sure, I may have to run them a few more times before I really get used to how they work.

Azurites seem more like straight up damage flankers similar to Osakas or Yokai, if a little unorthodox when it comes to arcs.

File: 1 (1).jpg (1MB, 3771x2121px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3771x2121px

Finished my PHR fleet. Hail White Sphere!

>>51569982
>And Orpheii really are that good, aren't they?

They sure are tough bastards.

>>51534760

The feck is that?

>>51574484
Stellaris - Grand strat PC game. There is an option for an off-shoot militaristic human faction and he changed the names.

>>51573160
In absence of other evidence, I will use that explaination. It's far better than bombers materializing out of thin air and disappearing without trace when doing 1-turn runs.

>>51574306

So I think I like it, except the choice of purple as a light color. As it stands it just blends in too much and makes the rest of the ships from a distance look underworked.

Maybe you should hit with a gloss to just make it pop a little more.

>>51570024
If they're going for voidgate chaining then I'd be half tempted to ignore the emeralds and go for tactical voidgates- kill link gates or go for the ones that limit troop chaining- each gate can only deploy 1 per turn, so if you can limit the gates that can actually drop / prevent teleport redirection then a lot of their gates just become wasted points.

It is going to be a bit of a pain in the ass to deal with though if that becomes a meta.

>>51534051

...But that was Morrokweng.

>>51575224
...no?

>>51574306

So underslung medium turret, no drive fins on a frigate chassis is the official-unofficial Echo?

>>51573030
Asked Dave just now. You draw a line from the carrier to the target and if the line intersects any debris, you roll for each strike craft to see if it's destroyed. You then place the survivors in contact with the target.

>>51575466

Yes. Tunguska, they fed to a Paanuri. Morokweng they won a game of chicken with.

>>51576118
It got eaten by Paanurri(whatever) because it was throwing around heavy gravatics.

By wrapping TAG I in gravy and crushing it. RIP TAG I, best ship AI

>>51573030
Check the Quesion about torpedos and atmo. It mentions launch assests going through debris fields as well, IIRC.

>>51576147

They were still in the taussenigan ob'enn parasite-craft for that one. TAG came later.

File: SizeComparison.png (18KB, 280x210px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 280x210px

>>51576436
...darn, you're right.

Well, I blame the artist.

>>51575224
>>51576118
>>51576147
>>51576436
>>51577089
Whats all this then?

File: schlock20040224a-manhattan.png (48KB, 725x211px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 725x211px

>>51577536
Webcomic about hurting people and breaking things for money.
It has some acceptable spaceships.

File: 1483849308174.jpg (204KB, 876x1920px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 876x1920px

>>51522372
GUYS GUYS.
DROPFLEET Errata and FAQ is now up.
>Command cards when?

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

File: 1482862956496.jpg (73KB, 650x299px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 650x299px

So...
PHR's Calypso just lost it's abillity to defend against torpedoes.
Can we now justify using the calypso at all? If so, in what scenario?
>Calypso can add +1 Lock value to 1 weapon profile belonging to 1 ship per round.
>The shaltari Battleship with the crippling +2 laser is the only reason I can see myself to take them.

>>51577962
Perth and maybe an opposing hercules too.

Does it work on a bomber swarm? Can you turn 8 3+ attacks into 4+ attacks?

>>51577872

You're about half a month late, anon.

>>51577962
>Calypso
It's pretty good at neutering big weapons like burnthroughs and supercapitals (DMC/Triad).

For instance; the wide beam Furnace Cannon becomes all but useless on a 5+.
The narrow beam Furnace cannon will struggle to hit damage cap on a 3+
The Cobra, Viper, and Twin Supernova aren't hit quite as hard, but they certainly become less effective at hitting damage cap than usual.
Single Supernovas are too small to worry, but they get fucked over too.

Funnily enough, the Triad is barely impacted by the Calypso.

What do you guys feel the best troop amount is for Shaltari at 1250, two or three motherships? How many voidgates per, three or four? Would the presence of a battleship effect this, or is that one extra troop just supplementary?

>>51578075
>Does it work on a bomber swarm? Can you turn 8 3+ attacks into 4+ attacks?
Nope, Calypsos cannot effect launch assets.

>>51577962
They shit on burnthroughs. Especially if your opponent is using on of the 4+ burnthroughs.

Also, they can pretty much neuter a lot of attempts to get opportunistic hits on a ship. Or massively soften the blow of a Weapons Free attack.

>>51577962
I stick them with my battleship.

It does seriously slow down the damage clock.

>>51577962
They're sooo good on Burnthroughs.

Reducing crit chance by HALF basically guts BTLs. Or with two of them, making sure that Avalon can't even crit you, and probably's going to only scratch the paint for ~1 damage? Extremely valuable.

Consider it's ability basically halving the damage you're taking from a single weapon each turn--- for just one Calypso. Since PHR really don't care that much for non-critical hits.

>>51577962

2-dice cap at 6 damage burnthroughs? I'm sure that can't actually be the worst thing ever, but nothing else is pushing past it.

>>51580509
im not sure what you are saying?

>tfw you think the Shaltari light cruisers are the coolest looking ship in the game
>Azurite is meh, Aquamarine is too unreliable
DAAAAAVE

>>51582152
Its absurd to me the emerald has the exact same armament as an azurite and is only about 15 points more. The ability to turn better helps, but not by that much.

>>51582729
Honestly, the Shaltari light cruisers could be bumped down to 80-83 points; weapons wise, they're the outright weakest of any faction, and vectored doesn't quite fix it.

>>51583281
Disruptors are actually on par with an Osaka's guns or an oculus array. It's just gravity coils that do shit damage.

>>51583409
Disruptors are actually slightly better by a small margin, and are an acceptable main gun, I just don't feel like they're worth it as a F(N), even with vectored.

>>51583508
Depends on the target. 6 4+ dice are better against lightly armoured or shielded targets while 4 3+ dice are better against heavier armour and can still crit with a lock penalty.

>>51583703
seems like a vectored fast ship with a decent anti light armor weapon would be solid

>>51584590
Azurites are pretty solid. Only real problem with them is the arcs and the fact that a bunch of other ships get disruptors.

imo vectored should give you the ability to turn twice on standard orders, and maybe even once on silent running. That would be a great gimmick.

>>51585415
then what would going on a come to a new heading order do, give it three turns, cause that would be OP desu

>>51585527
I considered that and desu you could just test to see if 3 turns is too much and if it is then just make course change give 2 turns as usual. It makes the order pointless for vectored ships but that isn't a particularly big deal, some orders like weapons free are pointless for plenty of ships.

File: IMAG0043.jpg (1MB, 2688x1520px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2688x1520px

DZC about-turn!

I really like DZC, it's still a great game. I think one thing that's starting to get a bit much though is that the shift is farther from tank-type units actually engaging each other, as most factions have stuck to the same number of tank-type units, and instead had a major proliferation of superheavies and gunships both.

What do you think would it take to make tank fighting more interesting? I suppose Scourge got it in the form of Overseers making their basic grav tanks EXTRA GOOD, but what about UCM? PHR basic Walkers (instead of Apollos, which are kinda Tank-Gunship hybrids), and the various technicals, trucks and heavy tanks of Resistance?

>>51587470
I dont think you have to do much to get that to happen. I think most of the factions could use a slight buff to heavy dropships so that taking large or multigroup squads is more appetizing. Also as far as other changes you could play fewer search for objectives, and play with more focal points, or taking and holding territory type missions. This would shift the focus off just getting there fast. Also you could shift how you determine the control of focal points from say pure point value comparisons, to something similiar to DFC, like DP or models.. etc

>>51587470
Make them actually necessary. The only reason I take basic tanks is because I have to. The new fancy support/heavy units like gunships and huge walkers usually kill far more effectively than standard choices, and the extra price of big stuff can be more of a strength than a weakness with focal points working how they do. Skimmers are comparatively survivable and fast so they tend to be affected less, but the problem is still there.

I have high hopes for DZC 2.0, a new edition allows you to make large changes that give all units a relevant role and adjust (or overhaul) all the old and new units together.

>>51587586
I think you could be onto something with focal points being more similar to DFC critical locations, with different unit types contributing different amounts. It would be easy to exploit if done wrong but if done well it could shake things up.

>>51587973
I was thinking that you set it up so it tilts in favor of basic combat units, so that while taking that superheavy is great, its not going to do as much to control the point, and quantity would be the order of the day, again I dont think its a huge serious problem where basic units never see play. I think units like the sabre and ares, get less credit than they are due because people dont have enough low walls and rubble piles in their terrain collections to make LOS blocking terrain other than the all or nothing that is buildings.

>>51588204
Speaking of rubble, is there a good source for a cheap bucket of N-scale cars? I need to make my streets more post-apocalyptic.

>>51587586
>>51587973
Hmm. Perhaps some kind of capture system that's based on numbers rather than points.

Like if you need 3 vehicles to secure a building. So it could be 1 hades and 2 walkers, just as easily as it could be a 3-pack of Sabres. Or a group of infantry and a tank.

The Hades or Gunships are still superior kill units, but it makes tanks a scoring type unit, just like how Infantry generally are.

Reduce standard 'building objectives' to perhaps 3 a map, have one or two critical locations, and three or four of these 'cap zone' objectives.

>>51588258
I know someone a while back got quite a few for a good price, but its been so long i dont remember where that was.

>>51588204
Ares is solid with that 3+ no exceptions accuracy, it has its own function. PHR get pretty decent standards in general apart from the big joke that is the Menchit.

I agree with you that people should use more non-building terrain and that would give articulated weapons a boost, but that's not the biggest problem Sabres have. They can do their jobs quite respectably, but at this point that just isn't good enough. Why go for a single E10 shot on an unremarkable platform that can't contribute that much to taking focal points when you could get more shots, or an E11 shot, or an artillery gun? All the things that Sabres can do can be done better by something else.

I feel like a lot of units need some form of rapid redeployment to make them more attractive for dropship use.

Like if every faction deck had 3x of a card: Rapid Deployment
This (medium dropship) can deploy it's units, which can move or fire without penalty after deployment.

Something to give the little guys more kick when air-dropped.

Or perhaps if all dropship mounted units may attack after being dropped, at a accuracy penalty.

Perhaps while we're at it, allow APCs to go much faster on the ground and deploy/pickup troops while making a full run. A car stopping and people piling in after all, should be faster than a helicopter landing, and people coming in, then it taking off.

File: ad vindictam.jpg (1MB, 2362x2188px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2362x2188px

Why is UCM the best?

>>51591027
You already posted why anon. We have the best girls.

Moscow-chan is fiesty and tough.
Toulon-chan is that girl next door that you can't help but fall in love with and who always comes through for you.
Taipei-chan is the shy girl that when you get to open up is full of surprises.
Berlin-chan is a naughty girl can't get enough.
Seattle-chan has a slamming body with great assets.

How can anyone else compete?

Probably been asked loads of times, but what should I built with my phr starter set? I've already got a theseus, two medeas, and the broadside frigate, what should I make with my other three cruiser sprues and frigates?

>>51591536
Orpheus and Bellepheron for cruisers. Both are excellent and best in their class.
You have another sprue after that? That's from kickstarter isn't it? I'm not sure what else to make, perhaps another Theseus or an Orion or Ikarus to improve your broadside team.

Have you made one Europa or two? If only one, make another. Just one is illegal to use.

For other frigates make what you wish. All are valid. Europas are good in broadside teams to help Theseus and later other broadside ships like Orion and Ikarus, Pandora are good targeters that add spikes if they hit, Andromedas are fast carriers that can give helpful fighters and can kill stray frigates with bombers, Calypsos can neuter big weapons of enemies, and of course Medeas are your always important strike carriers.

>>51591536
Three Orpheus.
C'mon, trust me. Don't be a bitch.

>>51591536
Two Bellerohpon
One Orpheus
Pandoras and/or more Medeas

>>51591027
As a serious response to go along with shipgirlposting

>excellent beams on nearly every class of ship
>pretty damn tough overall
>all other stats are base, but really no downside
>Lima, and to a lesser extent, Jakarta
>cheapest frigates
>cheapest stuff in game, overall

>>51592534
Oh and
>bombardment
>even more bombardment

>>51592601
Also good arcs on the guns and some good CA too. Swordfish missiles in particular are almost Scourge-tier

File: 6b99668b0f54c59bfd94300dd8b1d165_original.jpg (105KB, 680x557px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 680x557px

>>51591276
>>51592534

PHR perspective on answering the question. Hypothetically speaking, as if Assault Troopships weren't the be-all-end-all and pic included didn't put all those teasing strumpets out of your mind.

>F/S/R arcs on good attacks, on everything. It adds up. There comes a time when no matter how long you stare forlornly at the table, you are just not going to get that broadside to bear with a Standard Order. Never the case for anything for the UCM- with enough ships on the table, it adds up.
>Tough enough ships. You plan out your shots, you give what you think is a decent enough margin... and nope, just shy enough of crippling damage. Should have massively over-committed on a single target.
>Nothing you can really ignore.
>Freaking Jakartas man. Limas too I guess but freaking Jakartas. PHR bomber pilots get pre-flight tail gate parties from a brigade's worth of Sirens if there is any justice in the world. Medusas if you prefer freaky, Valkyries for vanillas that are just a little too far from their girl-next-cubicle right before they face the flak wall.
>And damn man but there sure are a lot of hulls on the table, and more coming.

File: 1462981333914.gif (940KB, 627x502px) Image search: [Google]

940KB, 627x502px

So tell me about your dudes, /dcg/.

Have you fluffed up your DZC/DFC force yet? Who are the commanders? Are they awesome, with fantastic twirly mustaches? Or are they cruel, sadistic leaders, throwing lives away willy nilly in an "end always justify the means" style of leadership?

>>51593352
They're good botes, Anon. They're good botes.

My Scourge have been code-named unfortunately by less poetic commanders. During our games, usually, by an opponent.

'The Wifebeater'
'Dodgy Motherfucker'
'Thin your paints'

>>51592929
ANON YOU CAN'T SHOW ENGINE PICS LIKE THAT WITHOUT SPOILER TAGS.

THAT LEWDNESS IS NSFW

>>51593352

I am still painting my ships, but soon they will all have personalized names! I can't wait to start seeing how they do. Seattle has already done some create work and Avalon has murdered several cruisers and a battlecruiser.

>>51593352
I'm naming my entire fleet after various rock songs, and boy am I glad I made a one ship per artist rule. There's a lot more good rock songs out there than there are ships in my fleet.

That said, Killer Queen the Beijing-class has survived every game so far and is generally kicking ass and taking names, so I'm hoping to keep that going. I'll fluff it out more when I actually get my fleet together.

>>51594212

That actually works really well as a semi-official ship's nickname thing. Patrician-level fluff, anon.

"Killer Queen" would probably be the "Maria-Therese" or something.

>Or Friedrich der Grosse, I guess
>*rimshot*

>>51593352
Haven't gotten too many ships marked with names yet. The Stolas and Strigoi are my pair of Strix-class lights, and I've got a djinn generally referred to as the "Little Bastard".

>>51593352

I take a kind of pride in my DZC PHR being nameless starter-box/Core rulebook types. Playing Junos just to keep it real, that's me.

DFC... modular assembly gets in the way of forming attachments. But I do love that Scipio line-breaker.

>>51594522
Thank you good sir. Though I'm not sure some others will be as easy to justify. The Limas "Dance Commander" and "Invocation of Apocalyptic Evil", for example.

>>51594887
>a djinn generally referred to as the "Little Bastard"
That's all Djinns, anon.

>>51530344
I had a defect in my kickstarter battlecruisers, sent an email. That was 2 months ago, sent another email, hopefully I'll get a response this time.

>>51593352
I've refrained from magnetizing my ships solely so they can be 120% more My Dudes.

I've not regretted it. The Grand Fleet battleship Indefatigable has so far lived up to its name. 3 battleship kills, 4 one-shot DMC cruiser kills, 0 scuttlings, despite a pretty harrowing brush with orbital decay during her second engagement.

The other common MVP is Battlegroup Africanus, my x2 Theseus x2 Europa line group. Sweeping frigates off the table for days. I've sort of got the vague idea that the commander has an unreasonable dislike for small ships.

>>51595202
It is, but this one in particular just seems to be unkillable. It's the only one with paint on it, so we know its the same ship each time.

File: 24624852457.jpg (98KB, 800x532px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 800x532px

>>51593352
Mine as well speak of my own dudes, since I brought it up. I haven't expanded beyond test painting some DFC, but my DZC is built and has gained me much glory on the tabletop.

My Resistance band is a sort of vassal state of Salakhan's that went even further off the deep end - led by a man covered in tires, license plates and rims, whose name is Kurg. The army is full of berzerkers, battle buses and hordes of technicals and trucks, with limited air support in the form of Lifthawks and a single Barrel Bomber somehow kept running through the years. Gunnar the Ferryman sometimes finds his way into the list as well, when I feel like adding some oomph.

Imagine an army of Borderland's Psychos, and you have the general idea. It's a lot more effective on the table than I would have expected, but then again target priority get's a bit fucked when you have that many models on the board. They die in droves, but all for the GLORY OF KURG (and Salakhan, of course, but only when he's nearby).

File: Dropzone-Ruined-Station.jpg (247KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 800x600px

Afternoon bump with sexy tables.

>>51599570

Holy shit that looks great

File: a39fbe9118f7c49cbe212f62cad24999.jpg (298KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 1280x960px

>>51599686
I think it was one of the Salute tables. They always have great shit at events like that.

>>51600233
>>51599570

Yeah it was, 2015's I think. I think they only brought the DZC scale New Orleans to 2016, along with the resin prototypes for the Diamond and Herakles.

I should remember to get myself some tickets for this year at some point.

>>51600758
Speaking of gaymen conventions, how's the UK game expo, if anyone knows? I'm considering going this year as a minivacation (since lol across the pond), possibly join in on the DFC tourney. Anything cool in Birmingham to make the most of trip besides tabletop stuff?

>>51596559
Good little bastard then. Might want to paint up its cousins and see if survivability hops up then!

>>51602959
its a work in progress. im almost done with the strigoi, and I've started on the battleship. I promised a thread or two ago I'd post pics of more green scourge, but work has made the going slow.

That said, I need to keep track of the number of motherships the little bastard smokes. My local shaltari player never learns.

File: image.jpg (184KB, 1026x924px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 1026x924px

>>51603522
>shaltari motherships will statistically have more shaltari aboard then even their battleships (not counting pungari)
>shaltari's faces when they realise one Djinn can claim more lives lost than any other single ship in the galaxy

>>51603576
Time to extinct some shaltari

>>51604928
question for the thread. Its looking like you're about to lose the game, but you have some nastiness stored up in a group of CA frigates that are getting into range of the enemy's backline after a turn or two of silent running. will you

A) go for the fucking Diamond that's been blowing your shit to kingdom come and make him regret coming into work today? or

B) hit the emerald sitting in the back and kill as many Shaltari as possible?

This feels like a really big philosophical conundrum and I'm not sure what the best answer is.

t. UCM fucking xenos hater

>>51606460
Depends on the turn:

>turns 1-3
Go for the emerald, I can hopefully cripple is troop capacity and pull some cheese during the scoring turns

>turns 4-6
Go for the diamond, thanks to Shaltari teleportation shenanigans he's already got at least 9 or 10 armor assets ready to pop up in any cluster, best I can do is make sure my ships survive to possibly counter it.

>>51606460
Diamond. The young ones are expected to die. It's the old admirals that make really valuable kills because they don't expect it.

>>51606660
Thats fuckin' diabolical that is. I like that one. They've got to have a real fear of death in them.

File: IMG_1110.jpg (88KB, 578x743px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 578x743px

Gentlemen, I am angry
Angry about priming

File: Raven-A touchdown.png (446KB, 417x480px) Image search: [Google]

446KB, 417x480px

Early morning bump

File: The UC of M's Finest.png (1MB, 1148x511px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1148x511px

>>51608145
Later morningbump

>>51607558

I hear you. I figured out right after it'd have solved all my problems that I should just mount the damned things on dowells and spray them after assembly.

>getting fatty tax return
>should save, want to get spaceships
>haven't started painting the ones I have
>BUT I COULD TOP OFF TWO 1250 FLEETS
>painting is hard and scary though
kill me

>>51610566

Have you tried just undercoating and then applying ink-washes? It's what I did with my Scourge and they look great.

I used Army-Painter US Marine Tan Green spray (or whatever that is called) and then experimented with Leviathan Purple and Asurmen Blue. The Blue gives a nice effect, whilst the Purple results in a somewhat muddy colour, but not one that doesn't work for the Scourge.

I also did my Battlecruiser by going White Basecoat and then successive layers of Badab Black. Although that needs a bit of skill to get things looking decent.

As my UCM, I just went with Grey with Blue mixed in and drybrushed it over the top of a Black Undercoat. It looks decent enough.

>>51610303
We need an edit of this with Khell's destruction on the screen.

>>51610958
Its nice that we've got some myths for the general. Ancient stories of assbeatings across all forms of communication.

>>51610637
I'm bad and nervous and it's a pain to sit down and actually do work though.

>>51610958
You fool. Clearly he needs to be posting the remove kebab copy pasta.

> Remove xenos REMOVE XENOS

>>51610958
>>51610303

What we need is an edit of this with Leonidas-chan on the screen.

>>51611979

Eh, I get the shakes for any kind of detail work and my brushes are 10 years old and all fishtailed, just spray those ships from 20-30cm away, then lash that ink wash on in great thick amounts until the models a colour you like.

>>51612159

Marcus Barros.

>>51606460
Knee jerk is mothership, our local hog player doesnt know how to use his. But that diamond and all its old, smug fuckers on board...

UCM gets close action light cruiser when
Taipei needs an older sister.

>>51613611
The forum unit design contest has some pretty neat ones; I'm wondering if Hawk will take influence from any of them.

>>51612394
Muscles Barrels.

I wouldn't mind a light cruiser torpedo boat.

>>51615530

A second Torpedo ship for the UCM would bring it up to parity with the other factions. Although I feel like maybe the plan is for that to be their Dreadnaught.

I'm not sure what form the UCM Dread is going to take, it might have a Torp variant and a Viper variant for instance. I'm pretty sure Reinforced Armour will feature on all of them though.
Modelwise, I'm imagining a Battleship with it's dorsal keel fitted to take extra guns, like the Heavy Cruisers do over the normal cruisers.

Of course, a Dreadnaught with a Viper and Torpedo capacity would be even sweeter.

>>51616255
>Viper laser
nah, too small for a dreadnought. Jormangundr supercapital laser when?

>3+ lock, 6 attack, 1 damage, BTL(10)

>>51613878

Some of the units that are in Dropzone now were contest favorites.

The panther was not one of them.

>>51616461
> st Pete still has a higher damage potential

Peter is good and deserves love!

>>51616461

I feel like that would need like... double Bloom or something, and a rule where you can't fire it whilst on Weapons Free orders.

>>51616545
>Flare: This weapon is so powerful that it takes all of its mounted ship's energy to fire. Firing this weapon gives the attacking ship a major spike; no other weapons may be used at the same time as a weapon with Flare, including CAW or launch assets, regardless if the attacking ship is weapons free or not.

>>51616518
You know, that kind of reminds me. I feel like Aquamarines and Sapphires would be a lot more useful if Impel was extended to be able to pick and choose from the following, if it hits its damage threshold

>turn ship up to 45 degrees
>reduce target ship's thrust by D6" to a minimum of 2" until the end of target ship's next activation
>induce orbital decay on target ship on a 5+ roll
>pull or push target ship in a straight line between it and the attacking ship; 3D3" for light ships, 2D3" for medium and heavy ships, D3" for superheavy ships.

And other weird stuff like that

File: 1474216611914.jpg (118KB, 880x587px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 880x587px

>>51618351
>induce orbital decay
TOO FAR

Messing with thrust would be cool, though it could end up being a nightmare for bookkeeping in some situations.

>>51618351
>>51618484

Allowing you to induce a change in orbital layer would be interesting, but it'd have to be limited to chucking things upwards rather than downwards, or you could just dump things into the planet. Like some way of overloading the Anti-Gravity systems on the target ship so they become hyper efficient?

That'd be pretty hilarious if they ever made a Shaltari Covette with an Impel (1) A2A gun.

>>51618484
>>51618917
As it stands, gravity coils only have at 37.5/44.5/52.0% chance to do 2 damage per firing, so allowing for stuff like orbital decay on s 4+ or 5+ isn't that untoward; it'd certainly give them a proper bite as a weapon.

>Induce rotation: Turn target ship by 45 degrees
>Induce translation: push or pull the target ship D6" on a straight line between it and the attacking ship; D3" if the target ship is superheavy.
>Induce descent: roll 1D6; on a roll of 5+, the target ship suffers orbital decay
>Induce collapse: Target ship suffers 1D3 additional damage

>>51619405
>>Induce collapse: Target ship suffers 1D3 additional damage
This damage cannot be saved against*

>>51619405

Yeah, but it'd actually pretty hilarious to be able to hurl a Strike Carrier back up into Low Orbit.

Shaltari Frigate Fishing suddenly becomes a thing.

>>51619627
While hilarious statistically, it'd never happen. 2 1 damage attacks on 6+, and BOTH need to damage.
That's already a 1/36 chance, not even taking armor into account.

>>51619708
>While hilarious statistically
While hilarious, statistically*

>>51619405
When you have 2 going off, as is mandatory, that chance increases to more than half against all targets (except other dirty fucking shielded Shaltari). Orbital decay is a really big deal, caused only by the most serious crippling rolls. That shit has the power to destroy any ship with a single roll. I like the forcing movement idea, maybe forcing the target to switch between high/low orbit could work. That would keep the spirit of it without murdering battleships.

>>51620328
>When you have 2 going off, as is mandatory, that chance increases to more than half against all targets
Only if you're focusing both Aquas on the same target, and even then it's not quite as effective since Gravity Coils don't combine fire into a singular attack.

With 2 Aquas against 1 3+, the chance to do at least 1 Impel effect is .61
Against 4+, .69
Against 5+, .77

To get two Impel effects, the chances are:
3+; .14
4+; .20
5+; .27

Even then, orbital decay isn't an auto kill for stuff, as even with decay you can move up a layer (unless you also have engines offline, in which case you already have decay); really, the ONLY dangerous scenario is if the target ship is in low orbit and activated before the Aquas, giving it no time to pop back up to HO before having to roll for decay.

>>51620502
Yeah but you could fire at a shop in low orbit after it moved. This could force the orbital decay and kill the ship in the roundup phase. You onky have a 50% chance to fix orbital decay. I don't think even a small chance to insta kill any ship is flavorful on a weapon that should conceivably only be used to cause movement shenanigans.

>>51620502
In my experience it's just a bad idea to have weapons that do that sort of thing, and it's not like you couldn't specifically target a ship in LO that had already moved. The only weapons that have any sort of proc like that are lasers, which just put a spike on the target, and very few huge weapons like the DMC and Scourge torpedoes.

Besides, aren't gravity coils meant to physically push things in a short burst rather than turn off systems? An instant forced layer change would make more sense.

>>51619740
>implying it's not statistically hilarious

>>51621012
That's what I implied in my post, but fair point. However, do keep in mind that the Orbital decay only has a 33% chance to happen (5+), and then you get that additional 50% chance to negate it in roundup.

>>51618917
>captain we are over the target zone.
>excellent, open the doors and kick the groundpounders out. Keep an eye open for any hog interference, I don't want any su-
>captain we are heading up above the target zone, need to close dropship doors before we asphyxiate the poor boots!
>Alright who gave my fucking navigator a nip too many
>*shaltari laughing in the distance*

>>51618917
>>51622690
>Induce Rotation: turn target ship 45 degrees
>Induce Translation: move ship towards or away from attacking ship 2D3" in a straight line; D3" if target ship is super heavy
>Induce Maneuver: move target ship to the orbital layer of the attacking ship

File: 1471379020463.jpg (328KB, 1600x810px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 1600x810px

>all this talk of particle lances being bad
>first place at LVO was 4x motherships plus gates and Opals, a Diamond, and two Obsidians
It seems pew-pew has been underestimated

>>51622801
Note that most proposed buffs to particle lances involved increasing the price of Obsidians and Rubies to compensate, and nobody has at any point proposed buffing the Diamond because that lance triad is fucking madness.

The smaller the particle ship, the shittier they are. Granites need to go weapons free for a decent damage output and terrible arcs compound that problem. Ambers cost 10 extra points but are superior in almost every way.
In comparison Obsidians are also cheaper than their disintegrator counterpart, but they also get linked on 2 of their guns whereas Onyxes do not. This makes them far more of a viable alternative, as they actually do more damage than the competition on standard orders and don't whiff completely 1/3 of the time like Obsidians do.
Rubies are in a similar situation to Obsidians. 2 lances on standard orders is good, and supporting disintegrators for side arcs or weapons free is lovely as well. The best of both worlds, really.
Jades are straight up inferior to Topazes in every way against everything but shields. They're more reliable against shields but still have a grand total of 1 damage potential, meaning the average damage is still the same. All while having worse arcs and costing the same. Absolute shit.

>>51623226
*and don't whiff completely 1/3 of the time like Granites do

File: Scourge bulk lander.jpg (37KB, 254x522px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 254x522px

Alright jellyfolk, I've got my BC, a Hydra, and an interchangeable Hydra/Chimera built.

A Wyvern or two Strixes next? Tell me of your CA cruiser adventures.

>>51623226
All this; personally, the changes I would make are:

>particle lances to 2+ lock
>link both Granite lances
>adjust cost of particle ships to taste; probably the following
>Ruby to 205
>Obsidian to 160
>Granite to 105
>keep Jade at its current pride
>make light particle lance 2+
OR
>make light particle lance 2 damage, but stay at 3+ lock

What's a fun small ship count slightly competitive list I could run in either Scourge or Shaltari that's cheap money-wise and good for getting into DFC?

>>51623457
you cannot link the granite's lances that effectively makes the obsidian pointless, why would you pay 60 more points for a ship that gets you 50% more firepower in an only slightly more durable package, while being forced to go weapons free to utilize it. Instead (with your changes) you could snag either a second granite, or a jade and get literally the same effect without ever having to go weapons free.

Im frankly opposed to giving the shaltari increased numbers of ships which dont need to weapons free to get the most firepower output. They have tiny signatures and can use this to great effect, they need to be forced more so than other factions to make that hard choice to increase their sig or not.

I cant comment on the 2+ change id have to see where that goes, perhaps only the granite and jade should go to 2+ something about being more maneuverable than larger ships allowing better aiming.

>>51623457
I'm not sure about linking the Granite lances. It would steal a lot of the Obsidian's thunder and put out an excessive amount of standard order firepower for such a cheap ship.

The Jade is so bad that I wouldn't take it over a Topaz even with a 2+ lance. I'd make it 42 or 43 points as well.

>>51623707
You mean like a starter set? because thats 530 pts right there which is the lowest you could go for, and its what 45$, a cruiser pack and a frigate pack would be total about 100$, and at that youd have 5 cruisers and 12 frigates which would be about 1000 points depending on config

>>51623774
As long as the starter sets are good and are easily upgradable.

>>51623731
>>51623736
Fair points, the linked may be too much.
One thing I do have to note that's interesting, is that the Obsidian has two linked lances, while the Ruby has a single lance pair; simply meaning that the Ruby can't split fire.

That all being said, I feel like you're underestimating how powerful that two extra damage on weapons free is for the Obsidian; at best, the Granite will only ever be able to cripple a light cruiser in a single max firing; an Obsidian has a >50% chance to outright cripple anything up to a heavy cruiser on weapons free, if it had the 2+ lock change.

Particle weapons, by their nature as weapons, can't quite be thought of in the same way as normal guns are; at 2+ lock, their reliability and alpha potential become far more important than overall damage.

Jade could probably be dropped down to somewhere in the range of 40-43 points with either the 2+ lock or the 2 damage, I agree.

>>51623806
Right now the best upgrade to a starter set is another starter set.

Ah, the joys of having 3/4ths of a faction's ship options in a single box.

>>51623707


The starter sets come with standard fleet options. You pay 50 and get round 7 total ships, they all work pretty well for getting into the game. The shaltari one is slightly more stronger than the others.

Really you kind of need at least 2 starters and that will shoot your price up to around 100 US.

>>51623831
the point is that for only 40 more points you can exchange the obsidian for another granite, and get more firepower in a package that can still turn to fire it, and doesnt spike itself to do so, and frees it up to do all sorts of nonsense like spam come to a new heading to stay on target its far more flexiable than the obsidian for far less points, and doesnt take up a heavy cruiser slot with your changes. It would be like linking the broadsides on the orion or something it removes too much thinking from the use of the ship and thats not good for a faction that already has a bit of a brainless (relatively) playstyle atm

>>51623806
You basically get to build your own fleet. A starter set gives you 3 cruisers and 4 frigates, which means you can build any 3 cruisers and any 4 frigates you wish.

>>51623831
Even without a super weapons free, a 105 point ship that would be able to dish out that much damage that reliably on standard orders is just too much.

I wouldn't make the Jade 2 damage, its lance is noticeably smaller than the cruiser ones and having a single 3+ lock particle weapon while all others are 2+ lock upsets my autism.

>>51623806
currently the bread and butter of fleets is cruisers and frigates, both of these come on plastic sprues which allow you to make any variant of cruiser and frigate, excluding battlecruisers. So you have a very flexible package that lets you build about 80% of your roster, and can be upgraded with more such kits for low cost to make nearly anything you want. Its not quite as constrained as DZC.

>>51623975
>>51623993
Alright, fair points indeed; 2+ lock on its own is probably more than enough.

>>51623399
I've had much better luck with double Strix versus single Wyvern. That, and if they both somehow live long enough to get to grips with the enemy, its utter madness the rape they bring to bear.

Grain of salt, though; either way your CAW cruisers are priority targets if your opponent doesn't have one full obscenity of Jakartas or a very fighter-heavy list. Expect them to die regardless of which choice you make.

Winning lists from LVO

LVO First Place Achilles

SR15 Flag Battlegroup
Diamond

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup
Obsidian

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup
Obsidian

SR12 Line battlegroup
Mothership
Mothership
2x Opal

SR12 Line battlegroup
Mothership
Mothership
3x Voidgates

SR9 Pathfinder battlegroup
9x Voidgates

>>51623399
If you go for a Wyvern make sure you build another one afterwards. Wyvern pairs are really good, the survivability advantage isn't as pronounced when you've only got one.

LVO 2nd Place: Andrew Fitzgerald
Clan Destine

SR17 Flag Battlegroup
Diamond class battleship "Fist of the Old Gods"
2x Voidgates

SR6 Line battlegroup
Mothership "Validity"
1xOpal "Reliability"

SR12 Line battlegroup
Mothership "Eye of Infinity"
Mothership "Eye of Eternity"
2xOpal Frigates "Tilted Mind" and "Laughter of Loki"

SR9 Line battlegroup
Turquoise Cruiser "Dreambreaker"
2xVoidgates
2xVoidgates

SR9 Pathfinder battlegroup
Turquoise Cruiser "Final Sunset"
2xVoidgates
2xVoidgates

SR9 Pathfinder battlegroup
Turquoise Cruiser "Hope's End"
2xVoidgates
2xVoidgates

LVO 3rd Place Scott Kenji Watanabe
Scourge 1250 LVO Double Battlecruisers

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup
1 x Basilisk
SR10 Vanguard battlegroup
1 x Basilisk
+ Fleet Enslaver (2AV)

SR7 Line battlegroup
1 x Ifrit
2 x Gargoyle

SR15 Line battlegroup
1 x Hydra
1 x Hydra
1 x Chimera

SR4 Pathfinder battlegroup
1 x Gargoyle
3 x Nickar

SR4 Pathfinder battlegroup
1 x Gargoyle
3 x Djinn

LVO 4th Place JD Welch

SR20 Vanguard battlegroup
1 x Bellerophon
1 x Bellerophon
SR10 Vanguard battlegroup
1 x Bellerophon

SR5 Line battlegroup
1 x Orpheus

SR9 Line battlegroup
1 x Orpheus
2 x Medea
2 x Medea

SR9 Pathfinder battlegroup
2 x Medea
2 x Medea
1 x Ganymede

File: Avenger Salute 1.jpg (233KB, 1500x562px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 1500x562px

Papercraft avenger download when?

>>51625053
>New Orleans-class has a different bridge design because that's where they keep the army grunts
Truly the deepest lore

The Pre-Corvette meta is interesting.

Mass a shitload of ground units, and your most effective stand-off specialists (ie, Beamships, Scourge battlecruisers, Diamond, Obsidian). and your most capable close assaulters (mass bombers, Turqoise, Scourgeshits).

If I was UCM (not represented here), I'd try to counter this with a fuckload of Strike Carriers, Troopship, Corvettes, and the rest being as many Berlins or New Cairos as I can cram together with some Limas.

>>51625264
It may be skewed due to the effectiveness of PHR troopships as combat ships and the utter absurdity of the Shaltari ground game. The Scourge list had far fewer ground assets.

Some Taipeis and Moscows/Seattles/Johans would also be appropriate for UCM. Beams will get flanked to shit if they move too far and you need something to defend your troopships, because they can't take care of themselves like PHR and they can't sit at the back like fucking scum hedgehogs. Also Perth, reliable 8 damage is top tier.

Bombardment is a maybe. It's extremely useful to just remove an entire cluster in 3 turns with a couple of Madrids but I'm not sure how that holds up on a higher level.

>>51625264
im with this guy although I think i would throw about a thousand taipei's at em

>>51624656
The mad man. He actually did it!

>>51628632
I'm still impressed that our double-basilisk anon took third (I'm assuming that's our double basilisk anon, and not some other double basilisk player)

File: 1d75bda8b5[1].png (31KB, 617x463px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 617x463px

HAHAHHA
YES
FINALLY
BASED ANDREW

So, why would you take a ship without burnthrough weapon over one with it?

>>51629723
Generally speaking:

>more able to take advantage of maneuvering
>more efficient against flankers
>can get right up in the thick of battle to use their CAW, unlike beam ships which need to hand back to keep their targets in arc

>>51624656
Its nice to see 4th place also visits 4chan the madman.

>>51630383
I'm fairly sure he's just a hawk forums guy, I reposted his list to the thread because of how CUHRAYZEE it was.

>>51629723

Not everyone's most accessible burnthrough is 2 attacks, 3+ lock, and Burnthrough (6) you know.

>>51630413

Are the Shaltari lists any saner?

Tanzanite class light cruiser when?

>Tanzanite
>Particle Lance
>Ion Halo: 3+ lock, D6 attack, 1 damage, F/S/R, Close Action (Beam), Alt-1
>Ion Nimbus: 2+ lock, 2 attack, 1 damage, F/S/R, Bombardment, Alt-1
>Harpoon Cascade

>>51522372
>what if we make our guys ODST's with the rifle and everything but change the name

File: Four Horsemen of the Reconquest.png (178KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 300x300px

>>51634237
>implying [generic militaristic human semi-futuristic infantryman] isn't the best trope

File: Four Horsemen of the Reconquest.png (139KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 300x300px

>>51634529
Wew, fucked up the cropping on nosegoggles*

>>51634237
>Halo invented shin guards, shoulder pads, and tactical vests with pouches

>>51634237
>similarities between ODSTs and Legionnaires
>both wear armour in space
>both hate aliens
>both use bullpup rifles
Oh fuck, this must be plagiarism or something.

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

299KB, 1215x1102px

Bumping to bump limit so I can make a new thread before 3 AM

>>51636972
Don't worry mang, I can do it.

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

908KB, 2048x1574px

>>51637010
It's all good famigo

File: YOU-SEE-EHM.png (832KB, 1151x504px) Image search: [Google]

832KB, 1151x504px

And the greatest old meme of them all

new thread when

>>51637801
Page 10

New thread, commanders

>>51638921
>>51638921
>>51638921