/dcg/ Dropzone/Dropfleet Commander General

>>51896051
Ooh, my first real fuck up as an OP. It's like a new birthday.

Real previous thread:
>>51790178

Come to me soon, Saratoga-chan. Looking forward to assembling a pair.

>not the Smug Bellepheron-tan posting edition

Come on now.

>>51896216
Get me an appropriate image and I'll do it next time. Anime faces lazily photoshopped onto a ship are acceptable.

>>51896173
It is nice to finally see them moving forward with stuff. Looks like from the pic, you have a resin part on top of a standard plastic butt.

I can't wait to see a painted one.

>>51896060
Shame on your family for seven generations.

Are their any iridescent paints that I can use to paint my scourge with? I know about color shifts, but those only usually seem to switch between 2 colors as opposed to the full spectrum that iridescent or opalescent color schemes should. Furthermore, the only color shift that seems to be worth a damn is the pink to blue shift that ricers paint their Hondas.

>>51899921
If you can paint a blend alright and then throw a shade and glaze over the top you can do a very singular gradient effect similar to what i think you want.

File: Scourge fleet painting 1.jpg (482KB, 1632x1224px) Image search: [Google]

482KB, 1632x1224px

Progress report bump.

The descriptions of the Avalon and Atlantis state that new hulls were constructed after the experimental battlecruisers proved their worth. Does this mean that the Perth and Johannesburg classes will get their own sculpts eventually like with the Saratoga?

>>51902287
Correct; the Perth and Johannesburg will be the "general sale" versions of the Avalon and Atlantis, since those two are exclusive to the kickstarter.

>>51902304
How will autists deal with having a personal version of what is supposed to be a unique ship? There was only ever one Atlantis class built iirc.

>>51902411
The same way 40k players deal with having legendary character minis, I'd suppose.

What's the general perception of the Scourge frigates? I just started putting jellyfish together and took a glance at their small stuff. The Scyllia seems very interesting with its submarine gameplay, but I've never heard anything about them.

>>51899921
If you have an airbrush, iridescent ink is good as a layer. The Facebook has a picture album called "Pearl PHR" which outlines it.

>>51902609
Djinn are hogging all the attention for the time being since they're straightforward and hard-hitting. Their other frigates are either hyperspecialized or a bit redundant - why take a Harpy pair for two Oc shots when you could get a full cruiser for twenty extra points?

>>51902609
Every Scourge frigate is a bit more durable than you'd think at first glance. With good PD, signature and speed, they can really nicely avoid fights they don't want. The ability to go into atmosphere gives them the ability to be very scary as well. Harpies feel a bit underwhelming, but Charybdis are great for their ability to really mess with sectors. Having that tool on a frigate chassis opens a lot of options. Scyllas are weird and I have an urge to run 4 just to see what would happen. Djinn feel like the kings of close action frigates thanks to scald and a 3+ roll to hit leading to lots of tough to beat hits, and their little Nickar brothers can really lay the hurting down.

Are any of you drilling out the engines on your ships? I think it would add some nice detail.

>>51903239
Eh, a little, probably. Not too much I'd say.

>>51902609
Harpies are decent enough flankers. Don't take them with cruisers, that makes it harder to take advantage of their low sig and atmospheric. Some dumb Yokai isn't going to survive doing the work these guys are meant for. Go for rear targets, especially defensive frigates or Limas.

Djinns are the main event. They're a practitioner of the classic Scourge tactic of getting close sneakily and then shooting white-hot plasma all over your opponent's face. Shorter ranged and higher priority than Harpy, but more useful against big stuff with that big damage.

Chars are some nice bombardment. Take a group of 4 and erase sectors with the best of them. A group of 3 can be acceptable if you really can't find the points, but 4 is best. Never take only 2.

Scyllas are a fucking weird ship. Great gimmick for setting up defensively and annoying the shit out of the enemy, but lacking in firepower. They seem to work best in big groups like Char, so either go big or go home I guess.

Just saw the Cairo variant Hawk is teasing. Think we'll get a whole range of alternate cruisers? I hope that culminates in the alternate battlecruiser sprues we're waiting on.

>>51905428
I honestly hope not, because I wouldn't be able to stop myself from buying full squadrons of each of them.

That said, one alternate cruiser model per fleet would be pretty cool. I'd like to see an alt-wyvern, an alt-thesus, and an alt-turquoise.

>>51905464
I would really enjoy that. The Saratoga looks a lot like a less advanced Cairo, so I could see a couple cool ways they could take that.

>Alt-Wyvern is battle scarred and missing fins, and a section of her hull that seems to have been melted by a near miss of plasma fire complete with missing laser PD eyes
>Alt theseus is designed before the rest of the modern PHR fleet was built, meaning its more angular and didn't use the rounded plates its sister ships adopted. Angry space pyrmaid looking to shoot.
>Alt Turquoise is from a shaltari tribe that doesn't have its powerful weather control bombardment tech. they've had to make do with a relatively more primitive/bloody heavy harpoon array that fires harpoons large enough to breach atmosphere. This ship could also be a bit more vicious looking to represent the crueler nature of the weapon.

>>51905561
Personally, I feel like the Saratoga looks like a more advanced Cairo, one that was special built to mount the laser than having it slapped on where guns would normally go.

>>51905606
really? I figured the Saratoga represented a testbed design since the gun is hanging off one prong instead of integrated into it. I figured the Cairo having the gun slapped on where the gun goes represents them moving from the Saratoga's need to have a specially built frame to being able to put a cobra laser on a standard frame, which I have to imagine helps in the shipbuilding process.

File: 72d2237a7d649fe73bf41b57bf6f7768_original[1].png (176KB, 639x251px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 639x251px

>>51905697
Nah man, if you look at it, the laser is connected to both prongs with some significant cooling bits in the lower.

>>51905697
I agree.

The image we have it looks like the Saratoga is scaled down lacking standard essentials. The New Cairo is the design that uses the same proven methods as the other ships in its class and fits into the modular design UCM loves.

>>51905697
It could be a testbed for a fancy new cooling system. Overheating after repeated firing seems to be a problem in fluff.

I do like that it's got an underbite instead of an overbite.

I want my light cruisers to look more distinct than the standard cruisers.

As an aside, we need a better name for 'standard cruisers', as it feels weird to not put a descriptor in front of 'cruiser'. IE, historically it's stuff like 'heavy cruiser', 'protected cruiser', etc. Rarely just 'cruiser'.

>>51906150
Medium cruiser. It's not particularly inspired, but it works.

>>51906150
Line cruiser / Fleet cruiser

>>51906150
>>51906199
Line Cruiser, maybe?

>>51906332
Line Cruiser seems very reasonable. Of course Dave might call another ship line 'line cruisers' but until then that seems like a decent phrase for it.

>bump question time
Dave has gotten an animation company bought/ managed to make a deal with BBC to produce a drop commander universe show. the main plot is charted but the contract calls for 12 episodes and he's only using 8. I want 4 episode suggestions that can be anything in the drop universe. Keep in mind they should be pretty easy to follow, with a simple intro explaining the details that'd be needed for the episode aside from general universal details that would be explained in the show's main arc. For instance, if you wanted to make an episode about Jungle Waifu you'd need to explain the scourge and UCM conflict on her planet a bit and her role, but not the general idea of the reconquest or the conflict between the scourge and the ucm.

The episodes can be linked, but be warned. the episodes will be distributed by the studio fitting their needs, and could be aired with large gaps.

>>51908480
You have no idea how much my beer addled mind wanted that to be real, anon

>>51908480
Don't get me excited like that anon, my heart skipped a beat.

>>51908492
>>51908493
shit, my bad. I clearly worded that first bit badly. Man could you imagine how fucking insane it would be to just suddenly get a dropshow commander?

>>51908480
>episode about a lone Scourge warrior surviving a battle with some important intel and trying to regroup with the rest of its kind, all the while avoiding nearby humans and going completely mad from the isolation (or starting to think independently, or whatever happens to jellies who spend too long away from their leaders)

File: __kaga_kantai_collection_drawn_by_rexlent__e7e14de39767037a60d62b5bdce25bf2.png (269KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 800x800px

>>51908480
>one-off shipgirl episode

>>51908480
Sympathetic PHR walker pilot is rescued by just-out-of-high school Legionnaire recruit, Juanno Reco.

Together, they meet up with a resistance scout seperated, who is a tough as nails but soft once you know her girl.

They then defeat Eden's Dinosaur, before being left in the wreckage of a battle site with the wounded Jungle Devil.

It becomes a Harem show, as Marcus Barros and Caine are like Team Rocket trying to fuck everything up. They hang out with the Kinslayer Shaltari, who is their meowth.

>>51908838
>>51908916
Y'all motherfuckers need to step up your game, this >>51909032 shit is way too strong.

File: 1426633030984.gif (3MB, 280x154px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 280x154px

>>51908480
>PHR arc starring HOTSHOT Apollo pilot and his AI copilot waifu
>first episode split between briefings on their Medea-class carrier to establishing the PHR's extreme hardware integration and unusual culture, and a raid on UCM forces to snatch intel
>leads into urban battle with Scourge forces over [Plot MacGuffin], during which our protag's pantheon gets blindsided by Birdeaters and shot down forcing him to save the day by dragging around data cores and trolling Firstborns (see my dead fanfic folder for details!!!)
>segues into climactic arc in which UCM teams up with PHR and oddly cooperative Shaltari coalition to bully opposing hedgehog fleet responsible for many nasty things and upset their duplicitious machinations
>corner the Shaltari down a gravity well just as Race X shows up to haymaker them into a nasty cliffhanger
Free new faction hype ahoy

>>51908916
YES THIS IS GOOD TOO

>>51909103
>>51909131
Biggest question;

what animation style, and who voices Chad Cybercock?

>>51908480
One-off episode from scourge point of view showing a more sympathetic side and detailing their need to find more species of intelligent life set at the time of the original scourge invasions or during the occupation before the Reconquest.

>Subtle implications that scourge without hosts have no individuality and few if any motivations beyond the genetically programed "find viable hosts."

>Show that Shaltari dickings, poor resource/host management, resistance to becoming hosts, and the inevitable counterstrikes from previous host species has lead to the scourge's continued existence depending on weathering the brutal UCM counterstrike with a sizeable human population under control.

>Reveal that scourge leadership may have been open to negotiations and peaceful co-existence where humans are given to scourge as hosts at or just before their time of natural death.

Basically scourge economics.

>>51909307
>Subtle implications that scourge without hosts have no individuality and few if any motivations beyond the genetically programed "find viable hosts."
They seem to have some level of individuality, but there are also mentions in fluff of constant pain and I can't imagine that being stuck in vehicle storage or a factory system for your entire life is much fun.

I don't think the image of the Scourge as massive scumbags can be damaged too much though, they're downright sadistic towards other species and generally conduct themselves like massive scumbags. It's not without reason though; if jellies started seeing their hosts as actual people it would most likely emotionally destroy them. Remember that hosts are awake and in horrid pain for as long as a Scourge is attached, and it is acutely aware of this.

The way I see it, the Scourge are like a drug addict. They were probably decent at one point, but then someone (probably the fucking hedgehogs) got them hooked on stealing bodies. They suddenly felt really great and were much faster and stronger as well, and all they had to do was learn to ignore the agonized screams of their hosts. Eventually they could even learn to enjoy those agonized screams, which explains their callousness and cruelty towards host species.
The Shaltari, of course, encouraged this habit for their secret Shaltari reasons and supplied them with new host species, making the Scourge into even worse dickheads. This kept on going until we arrive at the current Scourge, who don't give a shit about anything except for getting their next fix.

Bumping with question; when do you think we'll actually get info on the PHR and Shaltari?

Phase 3?
The first expansion of fleet?
DZC core 2.0?

File: __aircraft_carrier_oni_kantai_collection_drawn_by_rexlent__58e764e6e5bd4d733c335e7bee71cb3c.png (329KB, 800x804px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 800x804px

>>51909103
>implying cute ships doing cute things wouldn't be popular enough with the weebs to warrant its own 12-episode animation.

>>51910314
PHR will probably be at 2.0, I'm guessing the new faction will have something to do with the tennis ball, either its creators or its enemies.

Shaltari are definitely going to end up in a civil war at some point, but I'm not sure when.

>>51905464
Its doubtful the other factions go through as many design changes as the UCM compared to their level of tech and commitment to the war.

>>51909032
>Marcus Brorros trying to mess shit up

The Borros' only role in a harem show is being that one guy who encourages the main character to go for harem end.

>>51909654
In that case maybe an episode (or a special that airs after the series has ended) could show the scourge before shaltari dicking.

Everything in the fluff of the game seems to paint the shaltari as the true enemy of man.

>>51911835
They're the true enemy of everybody, especially themselves. They're so advanced, divided and ancient that pretty much everyone has been fucked over by some group of Shaltari at some point, even if they don't know it.

Trying to wipe out the hedgehogs for pointing the Scourge at humanity is kind of silly though, because that was one scheme from one tribe. Even if it was a bunch of tribes working together, chances are that there are a bunch of other tribes that fucking hate those guys and didn't support their decision.

As a jellyhead who's building a fleet for his first game, how good are scourge frigates? What ships do I want to focus on building first and foremost? How many Djinn is too many? What would be a good ratio of cruisers and frigates for the two lowest two point brackets?

Do ships in a group add all their attacks together for overcoming PD?

>>51912221
Start with 4 Djinns and 4 Gargs imo. Read >>51904285 for an overview. Only Shaltari have truly bad frigates.

For ratios I recommend around 2:1, it gives you the freedom to skew either way.

>Do ships in a group add all their attacks together for overcoming PD?
Yes.

>>51912221
Ships in a group do add all their CAW attacks together for overcoming PD, which makes scourge at close range downright terrifying.

>Scourge Frigates
I'd argue they're just behind UCM for best frigates. The harpy is an excellent flanker, send it up the sidelines to prey on backline units or ships that are alone or wounded. The djinn is an outright powerhouse and is the standard by which CAW frigates are measured, the Charybdis in groups can be an effective platform for scouring sectors of life and the scylla is a weird little bastard that can make trying to camp critical locations hazardous for the enemy.
The biggest advantage scourge frigates have is they're damn near unkillable if you want them to be, since every one of them can dive for atmosphere to dick over all but corvettes from shooting them down effectively. A flock of djinn racing up the middle for two turns then submerging makes a horrible little landmine that forces an opponent to keep outside a 14" radius or else death.
>Djinn
Groups of four tend to be the magic number, i find. Six is overkill
>Ships to build
Gargoyles and Djinn are a good start for frigates, then expand from there once you've got four of each. For cruisers, i'd say a hydra, a wyvern and either an ifrit or a shenlong. The ifrit isn't as good as the berlin for its burnthrough, but it can still work well for you, and while the shenlong is outclassed by her older sister akuma, she's still a good ol' girl who'll do you a solid every time.

Also, get some leftover bits and make nickars. Their model isn't out yet, but they're deliciously good at bullying voidgates. I don't run with any less than six of them anymore, split into groups of three. They're fast, sneaky, and will absolutely murder the shit out of strike carriers. Bonus points, they can act like djinn-lite and punch on bigger ships once their main diet of SCs are gone.

How terrible is this as a base scourge skirmish fleet?

--------------------------------------
Test Fleet - 578pts
Scourge - 0 launch assets

SR5 Line battlegroup (110pts)
1 x Ifrit - 110pts - M

SR6 Pathfinder battlegroup (236pts)
4 x Djinn - 172pts - L
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L

SR6 Pathfinder battlegroup (232pts)
4 x Scylla - 168pts - L
2 x Gargoyle - 64pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

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

139KB, 300x300px

Bump

>>51913510
If you're using it to teach people, double Gargoyle might be a bit heavy on ground launch. Gotta give people a match or two to get used to the idea of sector objectives.

>>51915188

Where does the bottom left picture come from?

File: 15591624_963103793795207_4461591790692361949_o[1].jpg (238KB, 2184x1060px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 2184x1060px

>>51916072

File: ConsiderTheFollowing.jpg (59KB, 433x754px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 433x754px

>>51916072
>>51917013
For such a fairly niche game, D*C art has some wonderful reaction images.

File: 1471379608940.jpg (16KB, 169x184px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 169x184px

>>51917035

>>51915190
I've never actually played a game yet, and am planning on playing with a few friends who all bought in soon.

I'm usually the worst at wargaming in my group of friends and want to at least go down swinging

File: FuckFull.jpg (43KB, 338x368px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 338x368px

>>51917291

>>51917013
That resistance design is so good.

File: Scourge Frigs.jpg (162KB, 1632x918px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 1632x918px

I'm more proud of these than anything I've ever painted.

>>51920929
>End of the pipes not cleaned
Bruh

>>51921665
I haven't even washed them yet dude. I'll worry about cleaning paint off the pipes after I've gotten all the paint on the models. No point in needing to clean twice.

>>51920929
Loking pretty damn good, anon. Those Djinns are great!

Are two motherships, a battleship, and nine voidgates enough at 1250?

--------------------------------------
Shaltari Test - 1250pts
Shaltari - 4 launch assets

SR15 Flag battlegroup (270pts)
1 x Diamond - 270pts - S
+ Star Elder (40pts, 3AV)

SR12 Vanguard battlegroup (290pts)
1 x Adamant - 200pts - H
2 x Topaz - 90pts - L

SR12 Line battlegroup (280pts)
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
2 x Opal - 80pts - L

SR5 Line battlegroup (145pts)
1 x Basalt - 145pts - M

SR9 Pathfinder battlegroup (135pts)
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L

SR5 Pathfinder battlegroup (90pts)
5 x Glass - 90pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

File: 1481890053236.jpg (774KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

774KB, 1080x1080px

>>51924792
>9 voidgates
I don't know how Shaltari work, but that seems like a lot.

>>51925914
3-4 voidgates per mothership is the recommended amount, +1 for the BB.

>>51924792
I'd say yes, but only just. 3 Emeralds is preferred, but with the BB there it could work. Just make sure to protect them.

>>51925914
It's pretty much average.

>>51924792
I'd personally suggesting cutting a glass and the topazs for a third emerald if you can. Would really let you overwhelm in the troop game.

>>51926012
>>51926019
I would, but I don't want too much stuff with only disruptors.

Is a Basalt even necessary for the Shaltari? I'd take a Platinum, but that'd mean giving up my Diamond.

>>51926143
They provide 2 very useful utilities. Firstly, they let you use PD with shields, which is helpful for surviving CA ships and stopping bomber waves. Secondly they let you more easily attack small targets, since you don't have that much anti-frigate firepower unless you plan on lots of weapons free.

>>51923203
What's best to clean the widgets? I've been seriously contemplating how the fuck to hold the models whilst painting without them, and 3 mm stands just do not fit, blu-tack is messy and very unstable and drilling a hole also seems unstable and will lead to spinning model.

>>51925914
Voidgates only transfer 1 troop per round. To even make basic use of an emerald, you need 3. Plus you need chain voidgates to keep your very fragile Emeralds out of the line of fire. Not to mention the spares from the inevitable losses your Voidgates are going to take.

Saratoga is an American place isn't it? What's with the UCM and yank cities, nearly a third of their ship names are USA. There's a bunch of pretty significant countries that don't have a ship to their name. India and the UK are particularly conspicuous in their absence, especially since Hawk are poms.

Come on, when are we getting a CA ship with Beast named the Glasgow-class? Or the Dublin-class, they're basically the same.

>>51927740
Evidently the UK doesn't matter to humanity any more 600 years in the future than it does now.

>>51927740
>poos in space
The Scourge's Pajeet bulk lander already made its debut forever tainting Aluminia with curryshits

>>51928219
>>51928774
I'm disappointed, /dcg/. It took you two whole hours to insult both the countries I mentioned. I expect more punctual shitposting next time.

re: PHR linked broadsides guns rumors.

I don't think that's quite it to fix internal balance, but it is in the right area (weapons free reliance and maneuvering reliance compounding to make a conspicuous relative disadvantage). Specifically looking at the Hector/Bellerophon situation, the linking that will resolve that is giving the Hector Burnthrough something like Link 1, Link 2 and giving one medium broadside Link 1 and the other Link 2.

>>51927740

Saratogo is also a UK battle, though. Probably one of its most important ones also although by now the Glorious Continental British American tail would be wagging the cold rain-soaked island shithole dog something fierce(r).

>>51906150
Protected Cruiser, or Cruiser, Armored.

>>51929586
UCM ship classes are all towns or cities, not battles.

>>51929974

Pretty sure that if you're calling a ship the Saratoga, you are referencing the battle and not the town. It's like Lexington that way.

>>51930013
It's the rule though. UCM ships are cities or towns. It's like if you had a bird naming theme and decided to name something Robin after the batman's sidekick. It just doesn't work, you have to name it after the bird.

>>51930163

It's not a rule, it's a trend.

>Ticonderoga

>>51930370
Given a choice between
>the battle is more famous
>the town fits the scheme that every other ship adheres to
I think I'll lean towards the latter. Not that it really matters, the name is the same either way and it still fits the naming scheme. Even if it's named after the battle it's still an American battle on American soil, claiming it is British would be like claiming that a ship named Stalingrad counts as German. Yes, they fought there, but it was not their territory and they were driven off.

>>51930641

>USS Bataan
>USS Corregidor

Then again, maybe Americans are weird that way.

>>51930804

They named a ship "The Sullivans". I.E. That One Time We Had To Put Some Escort Ships Up Against A Battleline And Most Sunk and an Entire Family of Sailors All Died this is the Family Referenced.

>who does that????

>>51930804
Americans are pretty weird. What the seps are doing is besides the point though, I'm more interested in the UCM. They know how to keep a naming scheme going. Except for the Ferrum, not sure what happened there. It's not a tank, an aircraft, an artillery piece or a wheeled vehicle so I guess it just didn't fit into any categories they had.

>>51927658
I don't know if it's best but I always use mineral spirits, a small toothbrush, a damp rag, water, and an exceptional amount of care.

>>51929427
I really hope they standardize the firing systems on all the PHR ships. It'd be nice as well to change the Orion, Hector, Achilles, Ajax, and Orpheus (and to a lesser extent, the BB's) to allow for split broadside fire.

>>51933541

If I couldn't atmosphere-fish with a Light Broadside on a standard order, I wouldn't even consider that until corvettes drop.

>>51933774
You would still be able to? It's just that the Thesus can target up to 2 things on standard orders, while the Orion, Ajax, and pretty much everything else only gets 1 target.

In many cases, it's total overkill; the Theseus is a better frigate killer than the Ajax, simply because it can shoot two at once and have a decent enough chance of killing the one shot at by its mediums.

>>51931039
UCM naming schemes for ground units is consistent

Tracked, Armored Vehicles: edged weapons ( Katana, Sabre, Rapier, Broadsword, Gladius, Scimitar)

Wheeled Combat Vehicles: Combatative land mammals (Bear, Wolverine)

Fixed Field Guns: Ancient ranged weapons (Crossbow, Longbow)

Close Support Aircraft: Angels (Seraphim, Archangel)

Gunships: birds of prey (Hawk, Eagle, Osprey)

Dropships: Long distance flying birds (Raven, Condor, Albatross)

Mobile field bases: UCM planets (Ferrum-class, Chromia-class)

Seems pretty consistent to me.

>>51934368
>Mobile field bases: UCM planets (Ferrum-class, Chromia-class)
Have we confirmed that the Chroma is based on the Ferrum chassis?

>>51934620
We know zilch about the Chromia or Osprey really, except speculation. The Chromia is described as an 'Orbital Relay Base', which could appear in any way shape or form, including not being playable in DZC like how likely the 'Grand Walkers' aren't going to be playable given how the Hades is already one of the largest DZC ground units.

>>51935181
>implying we won't be getting a foot long giant enemy spider
In any case, the Chroma HAS to fit in an albatross, meaning ithat won't be YUGE

>>51934368
>fixed field guns are named after ancient weapons
>we might get fixed field guns that need to be brought in on condors or albatrosses

>>51937442
>Ballistae superheavy laser emplacement.
>Brought in on a condor

Fixed guns big enough for an albatross would have to be an off-table tax, I'd say. Ones with models, of course, but off table nonetheless.

>>51934368
Ah, I forgot about the Chromia. My autism is satisfied for now.

>>51938008
A huge long range artillery gun doesn't seem out of the question. There appears to be a limit to what active countermeasures are able to destroy, since dropfleet doesn't use them against non-PD weapons and bombardment is able to push through a missile halo.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDqh0ADLljA

Dave is a beautiful cinnamon roll

>>51939490
RC controlled Hades when?

>>51939684
After the official Scourge Warrior cosplay, but before the drivable full scale Sabre.

>>51941739
I wish it was less realistic and didn't include the brain-controlling parasite.

>>51938008
I think you could do some cool scenarios with a big albatross required howitzer being towed in, but the feasibility of it is a little silly. something that big is meant to be firing on the next table over, not your opponent's position. Maybe a combined arty/command platform like the Ferrum and Chromia?

>>51942912
I'm fairly sure that's what the Chromia is, anon. A souped up Kodiak for even more EXTERMINATUS, maybe some fast mover effecting shenanigans.

>>51942939
I had never even considered the Chromia might help FM like the overseer helped the grav tanks. I would totally be up for that decision.

>>51943079
I'm wondering if the PHR and Shaltari will get support command vehicles as well.

It'd also be cool to see a proper Shaltari "superheavy" unit in the vein of the Ferrum and the Type-4s, something that takes a full Gaia to demat and remat. Maybe a supersized warspire or something?

File: UCM_Frigate_Jakarta1.jpg (97KB, 797x530px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 797x530px

Bump before sleep

>>51943256
>I'm wondering if the PHR and Shaltari will get support command vehicles as well.
Probably not, PHR already have 3 command units and Shaltari have more than enough support shit. A superheavy Shaltari unit is a possibility though.

File: 2017-02-21 (1).jpg (15KB, 383x313px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 383x313px

Anyone got any news or fancy ideas for command cards in DFC?

>>51945438

What about a card that let's you make a ram attempt when you take your last HP, but before you roll for the Catastrophic Damage chart?

Or a card that allows you to deploy a light group or perhaps some Fighters/Bombers from within a Debris field?

External Missile Racks card that grant you extra dice on your first CAW attacks? Although that feels like it should have some pretty comprehensive downsides if you get shot first though. So not sure if that would work as a card.

Are there any big conventions in the US coming up with DFC tourneys?

>>51945438
Local Talon ran a small local tourney this past weekend that had some command cards. I don't know if he made them himself or if he was testing them on behalf of Hawk, but they looked reasonably official.

There were some universal cards, like Espionage and Mass Transit System, the latter which let you move troops between clusters. And everyone had one copy of Jam Comms, which prevented an enemy battle group from using special orders for a turn. Lastly, everyone seemed to have some variation of cards that repaired crippling effects automatically and restored a couple hull points.

I played Scourge, who had the hilarious For the Species, which let a ship ram regardless of remaining health. There were some good solid cards; one that gave you maximum shots on close action and another that let you reroll misses against targets within scan range. The king though was definitely Leviathan of the Void, which gave any friendly ship Beast for the rest of the game.

(Stating again,I do not know if these are official or not. And if they were they are almost certainly subject to change.)

>>51947377
>who had the hilarious For the Species, which let a ship ram regardless of remaining health.
My god, yet another reason to go cruiser heavy Scourge.

Did the UCM have any cool ones?

>>51947377
Dang, those are some nice cards.

So now we know those along with Intensity Point Defence (-1 lock bonus to all PD against one attack), Silent Killer (confers stealth to a ship) and Next Gen Armour Plating (lets you reroll armour saves, FAQ wasn't specific about the context)

>>51947464
Not him, but the ones my Talon showed me included a card that summons Resistance fighters to a cluster that have a chance of actually being hostile to both players a DN one that lets you put a Rio or three Toulon's into play

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

27KB, 202x364px

So I've been wracking my brain on my PHR ships, trying to figure out just what I wanted to do, and how to do it.

I was thinking a desert yellow for the smooth hulls, but I could never decide. Then I thought: salt chipping.

Salt chipping, if done correctly, COULD look fantastic on those large, smooth plates, to simulate battle damage and the general wear and tear of space travel.

I will attempt this, and post pics when in progress/done.

>>51947377
>one that gave you max shots on close action

I need you to be honest with me anon. was that group shooting or one ship shooting? One makes me want to run 5 nickars to get 30 4+ shots at 110 points. the other makes me want something with a plasma storm CAW.

>>51948596
You mean tempest? Storm is the cruiser and Djinn one.

>>51948596
>take lmao18Djinn
>144 3+ CAW attacks
What's the Scourge equivalent of WAAAAAGGGHHHH?

>>51948596
it would have to be ship, group would be beyond broken, remember all ships of the same type in a battlegroup form a group automatically even if that exceeds their group rating, so you could have say 9 strix in a single group (you wouldnt likely but you could) and that would be 144 CAW dice if that card worked on the whole group. Does that sound right to you (note they wouldnt have to all fire at the same target).

>>51948639
I was meaning more a theoretical fuckhueg dice roll, like 4d6 or something.

>>51948447

Good luck anon. I was going to do all of mine with a Top painted like a blue sky/Bottom painted like a night sky cammo scheme, then I blinked like the chicken-shit I am and just did the default studio scheme.

Have at it.

>when a meme spam list actually just barely fits into the points limit
I'm both happy and slightly dismayed that meme lists can be constructed.

--------------------------------------
PIERCE THE HEAVENS - 2990pts
Shaltari - 0 launch assets

SR30 Flag battlegroup (540pts)
1 x Diamond - 270pts - S
+ Prime Starchief (140pts, 6AV)
1 x Diamond - 270pts - S

SR30 Flag battlegroup (540pts)
1 x Diamond - 270pts - S
1 x Diamond - 270pts - S

SR23 Vanguard battlegroup (445pts)
1 x Ruby - 200pts - H
1 x Ruby - 200pts - H
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L

SR23 Vanguard battlegroup (445pts)
1 x Ruby - 200pts - H
1 x Ruby - 200pts - H
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L

SR23 Vanguard battlegroup (445pts)
1 x Ruby - 200pts - H
1 x Ruby - 200pts - H
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L

SR15 Line battlegroup (300pts)
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M

SR9 Pathfinder battlegroup (135pts)
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

File: IMG_1370.jpg (53KB, 595x449px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 595x449px

>>51948751

How are people finding San Franciscos? I built two out of my Kickstarter assuming is want them both but they seem really tough to actually keep alive over a point.

>>51950806
Honestly, I only take 1 just for the sake of doing a drive-by drop on back-line clusters, just so my strike carriers can keep going forward without needing to drop into and pop out of atmos.

File: shocked tourist.png (21KB, 275x440px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 275x440px

>shooting through atmo is not like shooting through a soup. i am glade i did not by this game. what a pile of shit. i think people give this game more credit than it is worth. its a star ship game that just looks stupid and lacks any sort of real hard sifi elements.
Never scroll down while watching battle reports on YouTube.

>>51950973
Batrep link, anon? I'm interested.

>>51951048
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j89Q-ZxNF94

Right now I'm just watching old BoW videos as part of my attempt to absorb some of Dave's bottomless enthusiasm. If I find other good battle reports, I'll be sure to compile them for later posting.

File: 200percentBother.gif (2MB, 279x350px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 279x350px

>>51950973
>>51951150
>atmo is not a fluid
The level of rustled I am operating at right now is beyond imagining.

>>51949014
Dude, I know the feeling. I had these dreams of doing all my PHR up with WW2 ship dazzle camo. But then I realized just how much god damn work it was to mask, paint, remask, paint, highlight, etc. And I am way, way too lazy.

So I made some rules back in the day for Homeworld in BFG. An anon in the Homeworld thread suggested DFC as a suitable conversion, and being familiar with the rules, I thought that sounded fun - so I have taken it upon myself to do so.

However, the biggest problem I'm coming across now is differentiating between the Taidann and Kushan. Aside from a few oddball units, their ships are markedly similar and the tech is in the same boat.

I could do things like slight thrust/sig/scan differences, but it gets a bit boring when it's only a number or two different for two very visually different ships of the same class - it'd be like an Orion and a Rio fighting, and the only difference is the Rio having +1" thrust. Not terribly exciting.

So for those familiar with the setting, any suggestions would be appreciated. As it is, I'm leaning towards having all of the HW folk lumped into one fleet list.

>>51951472
One of the problems you're going to run in to is that Homeworld has really weird ship classes, with Corvettes just being heavy fighters and the largest ships being Heavy Cruisers (but no other crushers).

I'm afraid I don't have much useful advice, though I wish you luck. Painting my UCM up as Hiigaran.

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

2MB, 3000x2778px

>>51947377
>>51947464
>>51947495

I want PHR to have a card that gives something regenerate, a card that gives reinforced armor and a card that makes another ship within scan-range get 0'' scan for a turn.

Anyone else have something they want to see in the form of a command card?

I can see the shaltari get a card that gives you a Limited 1 distortion weapon for a single turn as an "Experimental Weaponry" card.

>>51951582
Yeah, ship scale is something that was a massive problem when I was dinking around with the BFG rules - according to the Cataclysm rulebook, one of the Somtaaw frigates has a crew of only 5, which is quite small. DFC/DZC has a massive sense of scale, and not just in the ships, so I might have to flub things a bit to get it all to work. Lumping all the fighter and corvette types into the fighter/bomber role is going to have to be a given, too, as much as I don't want to.

>>51951472
Id suggest differenting them based on ship types similiar to how HW2 tried to differentiate the sides, So give the Tiidan better strike craft and corvettes and better cruiser class ships, and give the Kushan better frigates and destroyers class wise

>>51948447
Please do, currently I'm thinking of doing an pearlescent inverted colour version of the studio scheme (charcoal/near black armour with red/gold shimmer and bronzed/anodized metal) maybe with a few gundam decals for a GITS look maybe.

>>51951640
I dont think thats needed, you dont need to scale it correctly to current DFC, it just needs to be internally consistent, there is plenty of room in the mechanics for corvettes, frigates, destroyers, and cruisers with each having a distinct role in a fleet

>>51952256
>>51952217
Hrm. If we compared the ship classes to DFC, the HW fleets are going to have massive frigate variety, and very few ships of the line. Coupled with their ships almost universally using 270/360 turrets and Ions/Burnthroughs...going to be an interesting balance challenge. And that's not even counting the Somtaaw and their energy cannon and missile volley shenanigans.

However, the more I think on it, the more I like it. Gonna start drawing up a ship template using the glorious power of my work copy of microsoft word.

>>51952433
id recommend for the sake of interest in looking at random mods and other stuff and possibly making some ships up (not too many mind you) but enough to fill in some role gaps here and there

>>51953005
Yeah, that's definitely gonna be on the menu. We've got frigates out the ass, a beefy capital ship, and a destroyer. Middle ground is a bit sparse.

>>51943256
I could see PHR getting a support vehicle that helps railguns out, kinda like burnthroughs but helping in accuracy.

>>51929427
What rumour is this?

Are they considering making all broadsides linked or something?

>>51955922
that honestly doesn't seem that unreasonable.

>>51955922
I was under the assumption that they'd split all broadsides into linked batteries (possibly the cannonades too) to allow for split fire.

>>51955922
Iirc the rumour is limited to Orion, Ikarus, Achilles and Hector. Which sounds fine, Orpheus is the only other candidate for that and it needs a buff about as much as Valkyries do.

anyone wanna give me some super basic general advice since I have no clue where to start really. I've decided I wanna do UCM and play both systems. I'm just trying to figure out what I wanna get first. I am obsessed with the Albatross and the phoenix command ship. I barely understand the game though So I dont wanna accidently buy anything I cant use. I design every army I play with what I think looks cool But i need to understand a bit more about the game. I've watched some batreps and it seems pretty awesome!

>>51958571
If they're doing all that, I'd say the Orpheus needs it as well. Everything so far in DFC doesn't point towards arbitrary changes like that.

>>51958715
Phoenix is a giant death gunship to put your commander in, you really can't go wrong there.

>>51958997
Ajax has linked already and Orpheus doesn't. Also Orph is a troopship, that's a worthy distinction.

>>51958715
The two player starters are supergood value, if you can find someone to play scourge, but one each and swap factions.

The nice thing about dropzone is that there are very few objectively bad units, it's not like something like 40k with units that are a lose button if you play them

File: IMG_1375.jpg (215KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 960x640px

>>51958715
If you like the Albatross, you'll probably want a Ferrum as well to ride around in it sometimes. Apparently Ferrum drones are really good.

>>51959214
Ferrum is a drive on unit.

>>51959153
>Ajax has linked already and Orpheus doesn't. Also Orph is a troopship, that's a worthy distinction.
Ajax is a special case that's really weird and out of pattern for literally everything else, and I'd hope that this would standardize everything alongside it.

My only worry is that now there's literally no reason for PHR cruisers to go weapons free.

>>51959214
Generally you don't want to transport your Ferrum, it stays at the back and hides while its drones do the work. Trying to dump one on a focal point will get it killed 9 times out of 10.

I find Alba more useful for cheaply transporting swarms of light/medium tanks to overwhelm focal points or critical locations. Really wish it was actually decent at killing things though, 4+ accuracy and prohibitively expensive missiles mean it can't do much after dropping its payload.

>>51959639
There's plenty of ships with no reason to go weapons free. Broadside ships need to close the distance to be maximally effective anyway, so it's not a huge deal.

>>51959639
>My only worry is that now there's literally no reason for PHR cruisers to go weapons free.

I wouldn't worry about it; either the internal or external balance of PHR broadside/prow weapon ships didn't quite get through the beta. They're getting buffed *somehow*.

>I'd like to see them try taking out all the special rules and just make them all cheap as hell

>>51959992
>There's plenty of ships with no reason to go weapons free. Broadside ships need to close the distance to be maximally effective anyway, so it's not a huge deal.
Yes, but this is literally an entire faction who won't need a specific special order.

I wonder if the game would benefit if the Change Course order didn't allow shooting... that'd make beam and F(N) weapons have an actual major downside for sure.

>>51960669

It'd hit broadside ships on the 'ole nerf-bat backswing, though.

>>51960651
Theseus, Agamemnon, battleships, troopships, Ajax and Hector if their lasers are lined up, and Perseus if anybody drags her out of the garbage can she lives in.

>>51960785
Ok, fine, fair points.

I still think they should just break all broadsides down into dual batteries and link single sides together.

>>51960785
>and Perseus if anybody drags her out of the garbage can she lives in

After I took an Ajax and played 5 points down I knew this would never happen anon. At least she keeps out of the way and quiet so nobody has to notice her shame.

>>51960816
Split fire is meant to be a special feature of the Ajax so I'm not so sure about giving it to Orion and the heavy cruisers. I totally support actually giving it to Ajax though, that would make her more of an alternative to Orpheus.

>>51960865
Percy's existence is only suffering.

>>51960935
>Split fire is meant to be a special feature of the Ajax so I'm not so sure about giving it to Orion and the heavy cruisers. I totally support actually giving it to Ajax though, that would make her more of an alternative to Orpheus.
Anon, I don't think you're quite getting the point here. The point is to standardize the PHR systems just like the rest of the factions are, rather than giving PHR ships different weapon profile distributions for the hell of it.

Two batteries per side, both batteries linked to one another. Possibly link the prow gun to both sides, but still require weapons free for both sides.

The Ajax is dead killy, but it's horrendously inefficient at killing frigates for its cost.

>>51960983
Independently targeting batteries are something that needs to be specifically installed on certain ships, as seen in the fluff for Theseus, Perseus and Ajax (which doesn't actually have them in-game for some reason). I'd agree with you if it wasn't justified in the fluff, but it has been.

I'm fully on your side for Ajax though, it should absolutely have split fire.

>>51961115
I suppose I agree, but it just rubs me the wrong way that there's no on model detail that differentiates why the Ajax gets indep targeting and not, say, the Orpheus or the Orion.

Generally speaking, all stats are consistent across ships with the same model components.

If anything, the fluff can always be rewritten as well.

>>51961155
I'd assume that targeting systems like that would be primarily internal, and there's a few details like that which just aren't worth the money and effort it would take to represent them, like the Chimera and Sanfran's unexplained shitty CA.

>>51961210
Perhaps, but it's just so off color compared to the rest of Dave's usual attention for detail. I'm honestly of half a mind that the Sanfran and Chimera's CAW are typos.

>>51961287
I really doubt it since it's consistent across all troopships and motherships except for PHR's bullshit ones.

>>51961302
I would argue that it makes sense for the Shaltari, since the core of the ship is changed and is thus a change different from all the other cruisers.

For the Chimera and Sanfran, nothing changes compared to the rest of the cruisers. The hull stays the same.

>>51961342
Yeah, that's why I didn't mention it originally. Same with the New York, the entire front of the ship is a different piece to Beijing/Tokyo which could justify inferior CAW.

But since all non-assault troopships have frigate-tier CAW I highly doubt that it's a typo. It's too consistent.

>>51961362
Well, regardless if it's a typo or not, it's mightily triggering my autism.

>>51961371
Don't worry dude, I got you. Remember, it doesn't matter that I just made this bullshit up. All that matters is that it sounds like it makes sense.

Sanfran: As much space as possible on each ship is dedicated to troop, ration and equipment storage, as well as spare parts for bulk landers. Most of the missile storage areas were cleaned out and replaced with supplies for ground forces.

Chimera: Normal cruiser plasma cannons were considered a danger to their own cargo and were downgraded after several unfortunate incidents involving friendly fire and liquefied bulk landers. The cannons used in plasma clouds can be safely fired even while bulk landers are leaving the ship.

File: Aa7uCu4[1].png (27KB, 180x200px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 180x200px

>>51961499
It sort of helps

So what are the UCM even going to use Shangri La for? Eden has vast mines and factories, Elysium will be invaluable for agriculture now that Aluminia is fucked, and Olympus has a huge network of orbitals, but Shangri La is largely just jungle and hotels. Most mining and industrial operations there are purely Scourge-built, meaning that the UCM can't immediately start using them once they're captured. It doesn't seem worth the effort considering that the planet is an absolute bitch to invade.

>>51896051
>people pay money for this model

File: 1487549813242.png (138KB, 524x458px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 524x458px

>>51962449
>So what are the UCM even going to use Shangri La for?
Killing jellies, duh.

>>51963333
she's just tossed out with the cruisers as a 5p-carrier-chan

>>51963721
Though considering that muh pro shaltari lists seem to include 0 cruisers and 15 gates...

>>51964749
That's 0 frigates you're thinking of. You also need 4 Emeralds and combat cruisers to support your Diamond.

>>51964805
I thought it was 2/3 emeralds (hardly count) and then BB/BC only?

Shaltari mischief, anons.

Gates, Glass, Amethysts, Diamonds- all of them can do it.

>>51964830
Fuck no, 2/3 Emeralds is for normal lists. Tryhard lists need as many troops as possible. I actually forgot about one thing though. It's 12+ voidgates, a Diamond, 4 Emeralds and then as many Glasses as you can cram into the list. Maybe bring in some cruisers if you're up against PHR, Glasses aren't as bullshit against them.

>>51962449
I would say that denying the Scourge their infrastructure on that planet is worth enough. Plus, don't the Scourge have their experimental breeding hives on the moons?

>>51964928
Troopspam tryhard lists make me immensely sad, there really ought to be a troop limit of some kind.

>people discussing digital rulebooks inna forums
>meanwhile, the PDF links in the OP have been downloaded over a thousand times
S-sorry Hawk ;_;

File: IMG_0647%20-%20Kopie[1].png (459KB, 720x291px) Image search: [Google]

459KB, 720x291px

>these fucking PHR conversions
The Minos and Scipio look amazing, in my opinion; not so sure about the rest

>>51966018
>>51966034
>>51966045
On the uphand, I know how I'm going to paint my PHR now. Marble with gold trim.

>>51966018

Most of dread's stuff looks like shit. A few of his conversions had potential, but they don't fit PHR at all.

>>51964928
Still four cruiser hulls and four times that in gates.

>>51966796
I have to agree with this for most of the conversions, but the Minos and Scipio are pretty good.

Afternoon bump

Midnight bump

File: 1474611404995.jpg (437KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

437KB, 1920x1080px

EVE OF THE RECONQUEST bump

Do we have any specific dates when Corvettes are going to hit the market?

>>51969130
>>51969231
>>51969312
>>51969312
>three bumps within 15 minutes
What fresh meme is this?

>>51969530

Three different anons trawling /tg/ through the catalogue noticing the threat was in Orbital Decay over a 15-minute duration in which nobody refreshed their screens?

>>51969312
Some time between now and when the battlecruisers hit; the cruiser packs and frigate packs have already been shipped, right?

I'd say corvettes will hit sometime in March or April.

>>51969637
Plausible, and mystery solved.

>>51969728
Going to High Orbit now lads!

>>51966796

I like it, and the biggest problem I think it has (the abruptness up the cruiser underside) is native to the original design.

>>51966018
The design of the hangar bay and the gun banks on the Scipio seems poorly thought out. Those poor bombers.

>>51966018
>>51966034
>>51966045
>I wanted my Halo(R) Covenant(R) gun shaped ships to look even more like guns

File: HR-UNSCPillarOfAutumn-Side.png (703KB, 1800x600px) Image search: [Google]

703KB, 1800x600px

>>51970933

At that point, you might as well actually get some of the ships Spartan Games did for Fleet Wars.

To be honest though, I always was a sucker for those ship designs. Probably because of the Battle For Reach book, where despite being about Halo, managed to directly appeal to my semi-hard scifi naval combat fiction tastes instead of being about not!space marines called John.

>>51965163
there doesnt need to be a troop limit, the problem with dropfleet as it is right now is that the list building is too open, the slots are so generic that within a few limits you almost just have an unbound list setup. There needed to be more granularity in ship "tonnage" beyond Super Heavy, Heavy, Medium, Light, or not use tonnage for list building and instead use role. If you look at DZC you have a wider variety of unit "roles" which better restricts list building, DZC has HQ, Standard, Support, Infantry, Exotic, Scout, Heavy, Air. That is twice as many as DFC. It might be too many I feel like 6 would be optimum for DFC. Something like Flag, Vanguard, Line, Support, Escort, Transport. Maybe even have tonnage and role restrictions

>>51971333

I'm in the position of saying that's a great idea, anon, and that if adopted it would straight-jacket Task Force design and so it shouldn't be.

Limited Transport slots and it isn't going to be long before the winningest fleet is some sort of Shaltari/Scourge fuckery that can reliably wipe out the maximum allowed allotment of transport picks and opponent can have in short order.

...I'm not kidding; an Amethyst group that ends a turn the tail-end battlegroup and starts a turn the needlepoint one can hit anything on a table, and it's probably got the strategy rating to make it a rigged gamble.

>>51971333
While I don't really disagree, it'd need some thought put into it. I personally feel like the current system, combined with slightly more judicious use of the "Rare" rule, is enough.
Really, the biggest issue among the supermeta is troopspam, and to a lesser degree, corvette spam.

The first is easy to solve with a troop limit, and the values needed are easy enough to see based on recent tournaments. Just as how each launch of fighters, bombers, and torpedos count for 1 launch-cap, each dropship, bulk lander, or gate counts for 1 troop-cap.

Recent winners have been Shaltari with 4 emeralds and a BB (13 total cap), and PHR with 3 troopships and 8 strike carriers (14 total cap).
If we set the following values, 9 cap at skirmish, 12 at clash, and 15 at battle, they help mitigate the largest spam, especially in the case of the Shaltari.

Skirmish isn't really an issue, and we don't have enough data on battles, but setting the clash cap at 12 does a few really nice things.

1) It allows for Shaltari players to take four emeralds if they really wish, but they cannot take a BB in that case. They're forced to choose between three emeralds and a Diamond, or four emeralds.
2) It still allows for a heavy ground presence without being utterly insane.

As for the issue of corvette spam, I can't really say. I think it's less an innate problem, and more to do with the Nickar and Glass just being exceedingly efficient.

>>51971842
so your saying we cant limit the number of transports because a shaltari player might take a large number of amethysts and wipe them all out by turn 4 somehow, even though what I said would also limit the number of amethysts you could take as well?

How would a buff for bombardment ships/mechanics work out? Enough that it would provide suitable incentive to ensure you have combat ships to fight them off and overly troop-focused lists would just get their drops wiped off the map every turn.

>>51971911
>The first is easy to solve with a troop limit, and the values needed are easy enough to see based on recent tournaments. Just as how each launch of fighters, bombers, and torpedos count for 1 launch-cap, each dropship, bulk lander, or gate counts for 1 troop-cap.

No. It is a response to an identified problem, but no. My recommendation is to award victory points for destroyed troopships- that is some seriously important cargo on those things, and it shouldn't be considered lightly.

>>51971960

Amethysts is just one mechanism among many. I'm saying that restricting what is ultimately an adaption to circumstance is a well-intentioned mistake.

>>51971911
THats the thing though the system im proposing allows you to limit both corvettes, and troopships (with in the numbers youve mentioned) whilst not really changing much else, hence why I said 6 catagories, corvettes shouldnt ideally be slottable in any light slot given how few points they cost

>>51972003
But that makes no sense at all; the point of the game, objective wise, is not to kill the other dudes. The point has always been to take and hold planetary locations.
Unless you're concerned with the wider strategic situation of the reconquest, which is outside the scope of DFC (unless you do a huge, custom campaign), you don't benefit from destroying troopships if, at the end of the day, you don't hold any land.

The focus is and always should be on taking and holding land.

Besides, something like that would massively swing game advantage to whoever gets first hit off. Not only do they get immediate VP, but now it's even harder for the other player to gain VP via taking objectives. It becomes a nearly-insurmountable lead, just from killing a single strike carrier or troopships.

And if it's just for troopships it puts even more incentive on players to only bother with strike carriers.

>>51972117

I was including Strike Carriers, and the wider situation is the troops themselves, not the troopships.

>>51971333
>>51972066
I disagree; the tonnage system is already an intrinsic part of the game, and it'd take a huge amount of rules revision to introduce a second classification field that's actually useful.

The tonnage system and fleet-building structure is fine as is, and most spam doesn't actually end up working that well in game, aside from the afformentioned troop and 'vette spam.

Troop spam is easily solved, see >>51971911, and corvette spam is just an issue of them being too efficient, or frigates not being efficient enough (especially in the case of the Shaltari).

>corvettes shouldnt ideally be slottable in any light slot given how few points they cost
Why not? They're effectively the same size as frigates, and it's rather weird to design an entire classification for a single, specific ship class. Hell, if you really wanted to curb corvette spam to some degree, make them count as launch-assets due to their size!

The issue of corvette spam is in part caused by the aforementioned troop spam; less troops means necessarily more combat vessels, which means more things for corvettes to be shot by and less things for corvettes to shoot at.
Except for the Glass, which is just fuckery on a plate.

>>51971911
Honestly it seems more like a specific issue related to Shaltari and PHR. You don't see UCM and Scourge spamming nearly as much.

The problem with PHR is that their troopships are too cheap for what they do. They're each a full combat ship with heavy cruiser stats for about 20 points more than the barely armed troopships of other races. There is no reason not to take a bunch of them, so people take a bunch of them. At about 145-150 points they'd still be used but you couldn't afford to take as many without compromising the rest of your list.

The Shaltari issue is that the nature of voidgate chains means you can take a shitload of gates and never have to move your Emeralds forward at all. They can stay safe at the back the entire game while everybody else is forced to send their troopships into the firing line. It's a bit more of a complicated issue, a solution would need to be well thought through so I won't push my shit theories.

Nickars are alright, they're really good corvettes but short ranged and less efficient than their equivalent points in Djinns. Glasses seriously need to be made beam CAW, when you do more damage than a weapons free combat cruiser for the equivalent price there needs to be a downside.

>>51972258
Sorry, but it's just not a good idea at all, in the slightest; you're effectively doubling up the advantage the opponent gets with every troop vessel they destroy.

Back to the fluff, the troops themselves are also only a wider strategic thought, not something to be concerned of at the tactical layer that DFC operates on. The goal of the game is to take land, not to preserve the lives of the troops.

>>51972426

You're penalizing taking more than you need, in a malleable way. You're paniccing, what you ought to have done is consider existing game results and adjusting the final victory point margins; I'm guessing 4-6 point shifts or so for a transport spam played against a non-transport spam. Doesn't flip but half the games, but it flips games. It isn't a compounding disadvantage, it's a feedback penalty.

>>51972401
Agreed; I haven't seen a single UCM or Scourge list break more than 12 troop capacity; usually they stick around 8 or 10, which is perfectly fine.

Agreed on the assault troopship part; considering how they're literally heavy cruisers, giving up one of their (fairly mediocre, in all honesty) prow slots for troop capacity, I'd also recomend either increasing their price or doing something totally out of the ballpark and actually making them heavy tonnage ships. It'd certainly fit in with the PHR fluff of "rarely bringing mass ground forces to battle" (paraphrased)

Agreed on the voidgates, it's definitely something that really needs to be looked at. At the very least, I'd say they need a cost increase. 18-20 points each, at the most, but that'd definitely be enough to curb some of the "4 voidgates per emerald, 4 emerald" memery going around.

Nickars do need a slight 1-2 point increase (especially if them missing outlier and scald is a typo), but I'm still of the mind that Glasses should just have their arcs reduced to F, or in a more extreme case, reduced to F(N) and gain vectored. I don't think them having full guns is that bad of a thing, it's just that they're too damn efficient for their cost.

>>51972525
It still allows for spam in the first place, which is what this entire discussion is about preventing.

>It isn't a compounding disadvantage, it's a feedback penalty.
A feedback penalty IS a compounding penalty; under your method, every transport destroyed immediately benefits the opponent (they gain VP) and nonimmediately disadvantages the player (they're less able to gain VP from the ground). It widens the gap between players AND makes it harder for the losing player to close that gap. No margin is going to get around that simple fact.

TL;DR: You're making the slope between the winning and losing player both longer and steeper.

>>51972649
>TL;DR: You're making the slope between the winning and losing player both longer and steeper.

Not at all. Take the existing games you have witnessed and played. Have each ship also worth victory points according to its troop launch capacity. What happens? I'm not getting a graph-cliff here, it's offsetting the games where a troop-spam nearly got tabled (and not completely), everything else is a slight variance/net zero effect- everybody takes troops.

>>51972815
Not at all, like I said, every killed transport widens the gap between the loser and winner (or closes it), but it further exacerbates the issues that come with unbalanced transport amounts. Statistically, over time, the player with less transports will make less VP than the player with more (assuming they both deploy optimally to maximize their own VP gain).

If they equally trade transport deaths, it's all good. It's not any different than how it is now, and the "winning" player only benefits from a turn or two of extra troop deployment.

If they don't equally trade transport deaths, however, the advantage gained by the winner is even greater than it already would have been.

There's no reason for this change besides giving players even more incentive to take lots of corvettes to protect their stuff. The exception is if you made VP gained from transport destruction a sufficiently large amount, but then you're drawing focus away from the main objective; land control.

>>51972649
I don't think no scald is a typo desu. They probably originally gave it scald but changed that for game balance. You'd need more than 1-2 points with that crazy rule around. Outlier on the other hand I'm pretty sure is a typo.

Worse arcs wouldn't do much to Glasses except make them worse at their actual job, and they're barely more efficient at their actual job than Santiagos. Full guns are the source of all that efficiency, and it's what made them into a full on combat ship. They're not meant to be a combat ship, but that's what they are because they're so incredibly good at damage dealing when they train their guns on someone. Against other Shaltari this issue is compounded because the crit immunity of shields doesn't do shit to them so they're always averaging at least 5 damage per 6 Glasses. If they were forced to get close where their lack of toughness is more pronounced then they could still dish out mad damage, but there would be a lot more risk involved and the player would need to think about their approach.

>>51973064
I think it is a typo, simply virtue of the fact that there isn't a single other Scourge weapon without Scald, except for the Scylla's grav-gun. And I think that should get Scald too.

Now that you put it that way, I half agree and propose a compromise.

>Glass
>Ion Cannons: 5+ lock; 3 attack; 1 damage; F/S; alt-1
>Ion Lances: 5+ lock; 5 attack; 1 damage/ F/S; alt-1, Air-to-Air, CAW(beam)

Glass can still be used as the Shaltari's light attack boat, but now they're not quite as good at it as they should be. Shooting at full range, a single glass will only put out a single hit compared to the 1.66 hits it used to put out.

>>51973676
I think the real solution is to make the Topaz and Jade viable as light attack boats so that they can perform that role. It's what they're meant for, after all. The only Corvette actually meant for void work is the Echo.

>>51973900
Fair point. Jade is obvious; give it 2+ and drop its cost to 40 or something.
I can't really think of anything for the Topaz besides a slight price reduction, honestly. It's a good frigate, just beat out by other stuff.

>>51975142
One solution is to redo the frigates entirely. Compare the Topaz to other gun frigates.

Toulons are so cheap that you can get 3 for the price of one Rio, which means 1.5x the firepower on standard orders. This is in addition to the lower sig and better speed, but at the expense of toughness and CAW.

Harpies are more expensive, but for a very good reason: They can go atmospheric. That alone makes them worth considering over a cruiser for some roles such as flanking, even though they can't even get close to matching the damage of a weapons free Sphinx.

Europas are also expensive for their firepower compared to an Orion, but by frigate standards they're tough as fuck. 3+ armour and 5 hull with frigate level signature means these things are more survivable than they look. Linked lets them have more maneuverability and keep their low sig, and their faster speed is more significant on a broadside ship since they want to get close.

Then we arrive at the Topaz. It's expensive, the most expensive basic gun frigate in the game, with 2 only being 20 points cheaper than the faction gun cruiser. It has the standard +2" thrust, but with Shaltari ranges that's not as much of a big deal. The signature is almost identical until shields go up, at which point both frigates and cruisers can be hit from halfway across the map. Its arcs aren't as good as its cruiser equivalent, so any hopes of being a flanking ship are dashed. Its pretty tough with shields up, but the Amber gets those shields too and can put out far more firepower on weapons free. There's just not much that Topazes can actually do that an Amber couldn't also do with more staying power and for fewer points. And that's the GOOD Shaltari gun frigate. I won't even get started on the bad one.

>>51975740
Problem is, as much as this thread likes to theorycraft, I think we should always try to keep in mind two facts.
1) Dave loves WYSIWYG; models correlate directly to stats, and stats correlate directly to models.
2) Hawk likely wont retire a frigate design, especially one that's already had a plastic mold made for it.
>inb4: this is just theorycrafting, nothing we talk about will ever happen
It's discussed under the assumption that it might.

All that in mind, we aren't really left with much to do with Topaz.
We could give it 3 attacks, but then it's the absolute best gun frigate in the game.
We can't change its lock or damage because then it'd be a literally different weapon.
We could change its arcs, but then it'd be inconsistent with the Amber/Onyx, with the dorsal/center prongs being front only. Not as much an issue, but still an issue.
We could give it vectored, but then all of the Shaltari frigates would need vectored (possible solution).
We could just drop it down to 41~ points, on par with the Harpy, simply because atmos-capability is equivalent to the Shaltari range.

I can't think of any other changes besides those.

>>51975893
I'd consider making frigate shields 5+ and significantly cheaper. Maybe with lower shielded sig to compensate.
I also support increasing the arcs. It hurts my autism, but good arcs are really important on gun frigates meant for flanking. And desu you could pretty easily add 1 point to Onyx and 3-4 points to Jet in order to make their central guns F/S as well. Just to keep it consistent.

>>51976113
I wouldn't agree on the shield nerf, any nerfs at all to the frigates in their current state isn't worth any points reduction.

No to the arc increase either, as doing so ruins A) the monopoly the Toulon has on good arcs and B) the monopoly the UCM cruisers in general have on variable fire arcs; the Onyx would become strictly better than the Moscow in pretty much every way, and removes the one area of superiority the UCM has to compete with the superior firepower of the Scourge and Shaltari.

As I said, vectored is a good "general buff" to give the Shaltari for everything that's a light cruiser or smaller, including the glass (even if its reduced to F arc or CAW(beam)).

>>51976759
>the monopoly the Toulon has on good arcs
That's not a thing. Harpies have the same arcs with the same average damage. Europas can put out double damage but have shit broadside arcs. Topazes have inferior arcs with no extra damage.

All the small ships getting vectored could be alright though, it could compensate for the arc problem. Not sure it would be enough to make Topazes worthwhile over an Amber and its proper good arcs, but it's something.

>>51976924
>That's not a thing. Harpies have the same arcs with the same average damage.
I was about to call you an idiot and to check your rulebook, but lo and behold, I'm the idiot here.

In that case, yeah; I'd agree with giving the topaz 3 attacks rather than just 2, maybe even including the vectored buff.
I'd bump them up to maybe 46 or 47 points because of both; maybe 46 if it's just the attack buff, but yeah.

Also, funnily enough, I noticed that the Chimera has its Occulus Beam listed as F/S rather than F.

File: 1474270308174.png (158KB, 672x808px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 672x808px

>>51976924
>>51977364
>Harpy gun has the same name but different arcs
Color me surprised.

>>51977506
This, I could have sworn it was front arc only since, yknow, litterally every "Occulus Beam" in the game is front arc only.

>>51977506
>>51977567
Well, actually, now that I think about it, it's not that surprising. Considering how the Shenlong and Onyx have guns with the same names but different arcs.

>>51977506
Oculus weapons are a collection of many small shooty guns, they're not big individual cannons like UCM turrets. The profiles are more like strength ratings rather than specific models. The Harpy has enough red dots to warrant the oculus beam profile and has them set up in a way that allows for F/S arcs.
Same goes for plasma weapons, cruisers can fire their plasma storms in the rear arc but Djinns can't, because their plasma cannons are set up in a way that won't allow it.

The Chimera having F/S is weird though, I think that's probably a typo.

Just out of curiosity, how many transports do you take in 1250-1500 point games, /tg/?

New Orleans, Gargoyle, and Meda = 1
San Francisco, Chimera, Orpheus, and Ganymede = 2
Emerald = 3
Diamond and Platinum = 1

http://www.strawpoll.me/12447186

>>51978156
>16-20
I blame you for this, anon. But only because blaming myself would send me mad.

--------------------------------------
The memes are a burden on my soul - 1497pts
Shaltari - 0 launch assets

SR21 Flag battlegroup (378pts)
1 x Diamond - 270pts - S
+ Star Elder (40pts, 3AV)
6 x Glass - 108pts - L

SR13 Line battlegroup (245pts)
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L

SR13 Line battlegroup (245pts)
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L

SR14 Line battlegroup (253pts)
1 x Emerald - 100pts - M
6 x Glass - 108pts - L
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L

SR11 Pathfinder battlegroup (183pts)
6 x Glass - 108pts - L
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L
2 x Voidgate - 30pts - L

SR9 Pathfinder battlegroup (153pts)
6 x Glass - 108pts - L
3 x Voidgate - 45pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

>>51958715
so i went ahead and pulled the trigger and bought everything I wanted. I haven't played a game, But I just did what i usually do and bought what I think looks cool. anyone wanna let me know any general tips about how to play this list? I just loved the idea of everything in a transport, and although I've read that its not a good idea to use the Ferrum with a transport, I'd like to do it anyway since I think it looks awesome!

Command

Pheonix - 190
x4 Falcons - 160
Praetorians x2 w/ Raven A's - 124

Armored Formation

Sabre x3 w/ Condor - 142
Rapier x3 w/ Condor - 166

Legionnare Corps

Legionnaries x2 w/ Raven A - 80
Legionnaries x2 w/ Raven A - 80

Legionnaire Corps

Legionnaries x2 w/ Raven A - 80
Ferrum w/ Albatross - 231

UCM Expeditionary Group

x4 Wolverine A w/ 2 Raven B - 102

Colonial Fleet Air Wing

Archangel x2 - 134

I know I'm asking for shitloads of Information, But I went ahead and bought a starter fleet for UCM as well since I plan on playing both systems. Any good information I know before I start putting those ships together?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5XgJsFaAIA

It's time for more Dave. As it should be.

>>51980501
>that huge ass pocketknife
>"A normal penknife"

>>51981460
It's a Londoner fighting knife, for the traditional London knife fights.

>>51980175

split archangels into 2 squad.

I personally prefer not to take transports for wolverines and ferrum. especially ferrum.

>>51982422
also you can consider taking some longbows.

>>51981526
>giga-ultra swiss army knife
>traditional Londoner fighting knife
Damn mountain Jews, where else have they infiltrated their chocolaty reach?

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

446KB, 417x480px

Bump

File: You're a big scorpion.jpg (68KB, 820x576px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 820x576px

Post something, fags
How're your fleets coming along?

>>51987780
i started painting my scourge, mostly because I have painters block on every other faction, and there were so many dots to paint i just psyched myself out after finishing a frigate, most of a cruiser, and the head of a battleship. I just cant bring myself to work on the rest.

>>51987780
My UCM is good, but I dunno about Scourge. I made the frigates and I'm pretty confident there, but someone give me a rundown on their cruisers.

>>51988561
>but someone give me a rundown on their cruisers.
>God Tier
New Cairo: holy shit, the most cost-effective ship destroyer in the game
Avalon/Perth: the New Cairo of battlecruisers, can cripple anything less than a battleship in one go and has enough guns to make using them worth it

>Great Tier
Berlin: Tougher New Cairo with guns it'll likely never use
Seattle: Rio, but with a lot more firepower
Atlantis/Johannesburg: Moscow, but with a lot more firepower

>Good Tier
Rio: Cheaper Seattle
Moscow: Cheaper Atlantis/Johannesburg
Saint Petersburg: Even more cost effective than the New Cairo for the sheer amount of damage it can put out, but lining up its shots is a bit finicky.

>Okay Tier
Osaka: Really no reason to take these unless you absolutely need some cheap guns

>Support Tier
Madrid: One of the better bombardment platforms in game; pretty much useless in combat
San Francisco: It's a troopship. Slightly more useless in combat than the Chimera

>>51988881
I actually meant Scourge cruisers, my UCM fleet is a planned out.
And I've found Osakas to be really solid flankers, closer to Toulons than Rios really.

>>51988996
>I actually meant Scourge cruisers, my UCM fleet is a planned out.
Ah, okay.

>God Tier
Basilisk/Akuma: There's really no reason to go into detail why
Hydra: Most point efficient carrier in the game

>Great Tier
Shenlong: Same reason as Akuma, just not as good
Raiju: Beam on stealth is pretty good
Manticore/Banshee: Can use all its firepower on stealth
Wyvern, Strix: Basically the same thing, just lots and lots of CAW on fast hulls

>Good Tier
Sphinx, Yokai: I'm actually not all that enthralled with the Scourge guns, save the Akuma, because their CAW is so much better
Ifrit: Not quite as insane as the Berlin and Cairo, but meh

>Support Tier
Chimera

>And I've found Osakas to be really solid flankers, closer to Toulons than Rios really.
Perhaps, but only if they were a tad cheaper. Mathematically speaking, the six 4+ shots that two Toulons put out is equivalent to an Osaka, while being far cheaper by a fairly large margin. Additionally, two Toulons have the same combined hull as an Osaka, the same speed, the same scan, and the same armor. Larger squadrons of Toulons beat out Osakas every time.

>>51988996
>God Tier
Akuma: almost as many guns as a BB, cannot be spiked, lolcrazy good
Wyvern: point blank rape in a can, take two and point them at the enemy
>Great Tier
Strix: Wyvern, but cheaper and faster. Fire and forget platforms par excellence
Hydra: launch 5, 'nuff said. Lots of bees on target
Shenlong: Akuma's overlooked little sister. Near as much firepower, slightly less stealthy but cheaper
>Good Tier
Banshee: Bigger, sneakier Wyvern with a torp. Okay but expensive.
Ifrit: Variable setting burnthroughs. Work great in pairs
Sphinx: Lots of guns, but starting to lose out on durability for the weapons free firepower
>Okay Tier
Yokai: cheaper sphinx, but generally only good for one weapons free before exploding
Raiju: sneaky burnthrough, but silent running lasers require a bit of finesse
>Support Ships
Chimera: The troopship. Meh guns, but its a non-PHR troopship, so no surprises there

>>51989324
>Toulons
Problem with comparing the straight number of HP is every 2 damage is a crippling roll with a good chance of reducing damage output permanently. Osakas guns tend to take more damage to silence on a gun for gun basis.
I still prefer Toulons, but there's a good case to be made for the osaka

>>51989415
True, but I personally don't think the extra 16 points an Osaka costs compared to 2Lon is worth the increased durability.

>>51989324
Explosion chains and 2/3 chance to lose significant firepower after a piddly 2 damage make the Toulon a bit less attractive. Not dying instantly to crippling is a really nice feature of cruisers. Also not having your firepower cut in half at +1 lock opens the door for all kinds of shenanigans, and more shenaniganry potential is a good thing for flanking teams to have.

I tend to use both Osakas and Toulons together, they support each other well. The fear of explosion chains was instilled in me early on, I don't like using all-frigate battlegroups now unless they're specifically made for suicide like Taipei packs.

>>51988881
any chance you wanna go over their frigates? new player just trying to get a grasp on what is worth taking.

>>51990827
UCM Frigates? They're all pretty solid
>Toulon
Adept flanker, excellent arcs and solid shooting makes for a solid group for picking off weakened ships or threatening enemy backlines
>Taipei
A solid suicide rush CAW frigate. In groups they're devastating, just don't expect them to survive.
>Jakarta
Take two, hug your valuable or threatened vessels, watch enemy bombers and CAWs do fuck all. The least useful of the lot, but that's -only- because the other frigates are so damn good
>Lima
Ho damn. Able to fly seperate from the battlegroup, and able to scan in pairs if you take two. Almost essential for turning your new cairos into long range murdermachines
>N'awlins
Strike carrier, hence, utterly essential. Nothing special beyond that though.

>Newbie recommendations
A pair of N'awlins and a pair of Lima make for good use of a starter box. After that I'd recommend Toulons over the other two, unless you have a lot of Scourge CAWs or bomber lists in your meta.

>>51990827
>Toulon
Most cost effective gunfrigate in the game; sets the baseline by which the other four are measured, and does a damn good job for its cost. Never really any problem with taking a squadron of two or three of these for some extra firepower.

>Taipei
A decent enough missile boat by all measures, but soundly beaten by the Djinn and Amethyst. Not a bad idea to take two of them for the sake of assassinating troopships or carriers, but not all that strong.

>Lima
The other prize jewel of the UCM, along with their beams. Gives the entire fleet unparalleled versatility in engagement, everything can benefit from it, and it's damn cheap as well. An automatic two-of in most fleets, with four-of not being a bad idea.

>Jakarta
One of the better defensive frigates, beaten by the Opal, but +6 PD to everything in 4 inches isn't anything to scoff at. It's also the cheapest frigate in the game, costing as much as a strike carrier, so there's no harm in taking one or two for a little bit of help against Scourge CAW or launch assets in general.

>New Orleans
It's a strike carrier? Regardless of its efficiency, you'll be taking, at least, four or five of them in 1250 point lists. There's no point in discussing it because it's one of the two scoring units you have.

>>51990973
thank you so much! Awesome info. I have 2 UCM starter boxes shipping to me right now and me and friends are planning on playing 1000 points. In your opinion what would a decent starter list look like?

>>51973064
How about making the Ion Lances only work in Atmosphere?

>>51990827
Toulons are some versatile little fuckers. 4 make a nice flanking team, and 2 can be attached to a larger ship for some cheap supplementary firepower.

Taipeis want to get close and unleash hell with their CAW. I recommend a group of 4, but a pair can do some damage as well. The fluff doesn't lie about their abysmal survival rates though, make sure you're sneaky with them on approach because they will be targeted.

Jakartas can stop a lot of CAW and bombers in their tracks, and can take the edge off large bomber waves and dedicated CAW ships. Essential against Scourge, but of limited usefulness against Shaltari. They work decently alone and brilliantly in pairs, I've never seen anyone take 4 but it might be fun

Limas are a damn near autoinclude. Put 2 in with a beam team, and 2 more elsewhere doesn't hurt either.

New Orleans is your strike carrier. It strike carries competently. Make 4-6.

>>51991186
Effectively, it'd make them no different from A2A Caw.

They'd still only have 12" range in atmos, would still ignore PD, and there isn't much of a reason to do so, considering how all other corvettes can engage in the void.

>>51991035
Going by just what you'd have in a starter box, and ignoring proxying for battlecruisers or corvettes, this is what I've got, though I'm a scourge player by heart. I'm sure another anon could refine this and make something a bit more solid.

>>51991530
Forgot the list, durp
--------------------------------------
1k UCM - 993pts
UCM - 3 launch assets

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup (163pts)
1 x Moscow - 163pts - H
+ UCM Commodore (40pts, 3AV)

SR12 Line battlegroup (250pts)
2 x New Cairo - 176pts - M
2 x Lima - 74pts - L

SR7 Line battlegroup (202pts)
1 x Seattle - 132pts - M
2 x Toulon - 70pts - L

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

SR4 Pathfinder battlegroup (128pts)
2 x New Orleans - 64pts - L
2 x New Orleans - 64pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

>>51991388
>12" range in atmos
8"

>>51991601
Sorry, you're right, I forgot that the Glass is the only Shaltari ship without 12" scan.

>>51991540
this is an awesome start! thank you so much!

Lads, how many Santiagos is cheese at 1250?

>>51994163
I'd say over 6. at that point you're just bringing baby taipeis because you will have hunted down everything in atmos in a turn or two.

>>51994182
Is 6 exactly cheese? I love their efficiency and the look of their model, in all honesty, but I'd honestly prefer a more varied light distribution than have 6 out of my 16 light being corvettes.

>>51994204
I think 2 groups of 3 would be reasonable. It lets you mobilize them towards a cluster you want to hold on to, and keep enemy strike carriers off.

>>51994225
Sounds about right, thanks anon.

>>51994396
Happy to help anon.

Still no word on Faction X?

File: it is a mystery.gif (298B, 65x22px) Image search: [Google]

298B, 65x22px

>>51994443

>>51994443
I don't think we ever had a timeframe on them, but I wouldn't expect them for a year.

Do you guys have any good recent batreps, either DZC or DFC?

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

1MB, 2362x2188px

Alright, which one of you posted shipgirls to the Hawk forums

>>51997785
normies reee

>>51997929
Muh sekrit club, anon

>>51997945

Not a secret club, anon. Gentleman's club. Not a topic of conversation in more respectable venues. You don't ask your vicar if he enjoyed that lapdance next time you see him.

>you don't ask your daughter if she liked giving it and hey, the man is single.

>>51991388
My point was it would stop them using their weapons in void. Strong in atmosphere (as suggested by the fucking name "Cloudriders") but dead weight in space. Mainly as protection for Voidgates (other factions' corvettes I heard bully Voidgate-chan) and counter-strike carriers (what with the only bombardment ships being split between 2 roles). A2A CAW (Beam) still would be able to fire in void, which is the cause of most of this glass-spam (or so I've heard). At that point you might as well have the Obligate Air-to-Air rule instead on its own for the same effect.

>>51998310
>A2A CAW (Beam) still would be able to fire in void, which is the cause of most of this glass-spam (or so I've heard).
The problem isn't that Glass can attack in void, the problem is that the glass has full guns, rather than just CAW, meaning they can act as light-attack gunships in void.

Reducing them to CAW is an acceptable change.

>>51998310
Being able to only fire at short range would stop the massive fuckery. Within 8" the Glasses can be shot and destroyed, not so when they're killing cruisers at 14" or even 20" with their tiny signatures to protect them. If they're forced to close the distance then enemy ships can effectively engage them.

File: 1448341175661.png (227KB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 540x540px

>>51997785
I like how the first five responses are "I wonder what Scourge would look like".

After wrecking a handful of PHR frigates and a Theseus with a shitty can of Army Painter red primer, I'm tempted to try slathering them with Tamiya Clear Red to see what that looks like.

Probably not the best plan, but since nothing I've soaked them in seems to be dissolving this primer I might as well use them as a testbed right?

>>52001196
What have you soaked them in?

>>52001282
Simple Green 6 hours, scrubbed, then Isopropyl Alcohol overnight. Neither of which helped take the slightest amount of primer off the models.

>trying to think of schemes to paint my stuff
>nothing seems to compare favorably to the studio schemes

File: Finished Frigate.jpg (98KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 960x960px

>>52001629
Pearl PHR are a great deluxe version of the studio scheme.

File: 20170219_002222.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

>>52001629
You could Mass Effectively, perhaps?

>>52002451
That scheme gets me so hard.

>>52002342
Personally, I'd go for straight white rather than pearl, but I'm not in love with straight white either.

None of the other major colors particularly strike my fancy either, and I personally don't think that fades or gradients would look good on the PHR.

>>52002451
I do like that very much; I was thinking a similar scheme, with grey primary, blue secondary, and white tertiary, but I'm not entirely sure yet.

Scourge I was thinking a flat green fading to bare, darkened metal along the edges.

Shaltari I was thinking a "green-marble" kind of effect, with lots of veins and perturbations, if I can pull it off. What'd be a good core color to go along with that?

>>52001391
Leave them for a few days, primer can be an absolute bitch sometimes.

>>52003663
Funny, my scourge are more pale metallic green becoming darker towards the edges.

As for PHR, my plan is to try a tiger shark style color scheme, with rippling stripes of tan and the like. The point being, have you considered options other than straight colors on the hull, outside of two-tone gradients?

>>52004764
>Funny, my scourge are more pale metallic green becoming darker towards the edges.
Interesting; I want to keep the red occulus eyes in my scheme, so I might actually go pure magenta.
Alternately, I'm also thinking the Red Chrome or Dark Pearl (w/ red eyes) schemes from DZC core could be cool.
Speaking of, I really wish Hawk did alternate schemes in the DFC rulebook.

>The point being, have you considered options other than straight colors on the hull, outside of two-tone gradients?
I honestly don't think it'd look all that great, the PHR lend themselves very well to a single primary color, but a very simple pattern of two colors could work.

I'm also thinking of doing my Shaltari as Amazons, Mongols, Maya, or Tlaxcallan.

>finally decide to put Fireblades in my list because I can't afford another squad of Katanas
>the turn after they drop they singlehandedly torch a base and a half of those Destroyer fucks hiding in a building
I'm sorry I ever doubted you Fireblade-chan. Fire truly is mankind's greatest ally.

>>52006623
Prometheus didnt steal fire from the gods for nothing dude.

>>52001196
>>52001391
The hardest cleaning you can do safely on most miniatures is to ultrasonicate in ethanol. Get a ultrasonic jewelry cleaner from amazon or something.

I don't know what kind of plastic/resin Hawk uses so maybe test it on some sprue to start with, but ethanol isn't very reactive with most plastics.

So, there's some fairly obvious references and bases for all the factions.

UCM is ODST, Colonial Marines, and basically "Militaristic Near Future Space Humanity" in general

Scourge are alien body snatchers from space, yeerk edition, with a healthy aesthetic of Geiger and Beksinski

PHR are ANIME AS FUCK, the faction, primarily GITS and other such similar things.

What are the Shaltari? They're obviously the "ancient, manipulative aliens" race, but I can't draw an exact source for their aesthetic.

>>52007895
They're rooted well enough in the standard X-Filesian Grey concept and have a couple flying saucers to boot, beyond that it's probably up to personal interpretation.

I see a bit of Klingon in their culture, and leftover concepts from War of the Worlds after the Scourge got done cannibalizing it for tentacles and void-scale heat rays.

>>52007975
I wouldn't really say that they have flying saucers; the Emerald counts fairly well, but besides that all I can think of is the Warspear and MAYBE the back half of their BB's.

I'm more wondering what the base of their artistic aesthetic is drawn from.

>>52007895
I honestly wouldn't say PHR are all that anime. They like more western-style legtank mechs and the clean white rounded aesthetic is popular everywhere. The GITS comparison is apt, but I wouldn't go as far as saying that they're actually anime.

Shaltari seem to blend together a lot of classic alien tropes with their tripods, heat rays and flying saucers while also sprinkling on some native American influences. However they also seem to love mixing boxy, jagged and rounded shapes together, and I'm not sure where they get that from.

File: warspear_1_2048x2048[1].jpg (150KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 900x600px

>>52008107
>I honestly wouldn't say PHR are all that anime
Now that I think about it, I half to agree. The faction as a whole feels very GITS, but most of their stuff (mechs, immortal power armor, bodysuits, etc) also draw heavily from western scifi.

As for the Shaltari shapes, it's been said in these threads before that all of the factions draw from Art Deco in some way, shape, or form.
I can't quite see it in the Scourge and PHR, except for when the PHR look like "cars of the future" with their sweeping radiators, but I can definitely see it with the UCM, and especially with the Shaltari.

There are a huge amount of sunburst and geometric motifs present in the Shaltari constructs that it outright screams Art Deco to me.
The most blunt example of this, to me, is the Warspear.

Tell me that pic related doesn't remind you of the roaring 20's.

File: s-l1000.jpg (164KB, 1000x730px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1000x730px

>>52007990
>>52008107
Their uniting theme is probably being jewelry-like in design, considering their written fluff actually mentions that as an aesthetic resulting from their ability to miniaturize anything.

That also serves as a complement to insect influences, particularly in their fliers and gates.

>>52008276
I'd agree that it's a combination of jewelry, Art Deco like in >>52008218, as well as a dose of native motifs.

anyone wanna critique this bad boy for me? I haven't even played a game yet, I just am trying to make a list to use when all my models get here. I have 2 starter sets and 2 battleships coming me me in the mail right now. I hear battleships aren't too hot to play with right now but i'm not worried about making something super strong. I just want it to be playable and cool looking! I am really into carrier's, which is why I have 2 seattle's and the new york in the list.
--------------------------------------
BigDuke6 - 1486pts
UCM - 12 launch assets

SR30 Flag battlegroup (480pts)
1 x New York - 260pts - S
+ UCM Captain (20pts, 2AV)
1 x Tokyo - 220pts - S

SR10 Vanguard battlegroup (163pts)
1 x Moscow - 163pts - H

SR10 Line battlegroup (176pts)
2 x New Cairo - 176pts - M

SR12 Line battlegroup (317pts)
2 x Lima - 74pts - L
1 x Seattle - 132pts - M
1 x San Francisco - 111pts - M

SR7 Line battlegroup (202pts)
1 x Seattle - 132pts - M
2 x Toulon - 70pts - L

SR4 Pathfinder battlegroup (128pts)
2 x New Orleans - 64pts - L
2 x New Orleans - 64pts - L
------------- dflist.com -------------

>>52009004
Put the Limas in with the Cairos, or perhaps with the Moscow.

>>52009156
ok cool thanks. other then that, it's playable? I know that 2 battleships is asking for it but I figured it would look awesome.

>>52009526
2 battleships is valid. The New York is a bit lacklustre thanks to the mediocrity of torpedoes, I'd rather go with Beijing+Tokyo. Its strike craft are still solid though, especially if you're able to combine fire with the Seattles.

Other than that the list is solid. UCM has a real lack of bad choices.

>>52009662
ok awesome, I plan on not glueing stuff on the battleships until I figure out what I like. thanks for the input!

>>52010408
>>52010408
>>52010408

Fresh baked