/dcg/ Dropzone/Dropfleet Commander General

Yes. Yes. This pleases me.

BCs when?

Summer hopefully.

>bob ross
Hawk is a bunch of filthy memers
youtube.com/watch?v=O0VsHx_-adM

Last thread I asked about official alternate paint schemes, and was pointed to the DZC core rulebook.

Maybe it's because I'm functionally retarded, but I cannot find which scan has the alternate schemes. Can someone assist?

Check the DZC rules, units, errata, etc link in the OP

DZC > Core Rules > Core Rules > v1.1 Fluff

core rulebook has them after each race's lineup and unit roster. Kinda like how a GW codex was laid out back in 4th ed

Thank you user.

>admirals cost the same between factions
>UCM actually has good cards, and probably everyone else does as well
I don't want to jinx it, but it seems like the command card system from DZC done well.

I'm still eager to see the exact wording on that "attack twice with a burnthrough weapon" card.

>yfw it effects an entire group
>double tapping 3Cairo

I really doubt that. No hopes or dreams allowed.

I just wonder if St Pete will be able to double tap with both its lasers. That would be interesting.

>st pete double taps WF on a Heracles
>brings it from 22 to 0
>resulting 6" 6 damage distortion bubble wipes frigate escorts
I need this to happen,

Anyone know how and where to find groups? Really wanna demo dropzone commander.

So, as is customary in this thread, I was thinking of ways to fix the PHR heavy broadsides, and I thought of something.

What if, instead of messing with their overall damage, they got something more for utility? I figure that, with those huge ass optics and gimbals, they ought be pretty good at aiming.

>Accurate
>due to the powerful optics and sensors paired with them, these weapons are able to efficiently maintain target lock with enemy ships at wildly different altitudes and orbital vectors, along with targets obscured by orbital debris.
This weapon does not suffer lock penalty for targets on separate orbital layers (atmospheric penalties apply as normal) or from firing through debris clouds.

OR

>Long-Range (X)
>whether by some combination of in-transit course change, extremely powerful scanners, extremely powerful delivery systems, or something else entirely, these weapons are able to accurately target enemy vessels beyond what would be expected in normal combat situations.
The range of this weapon is equivalent to the attacking ships scan value, plus the target ship's signature value, plus X".

OR (and this is just a stupid one)

>Penetrating
>extremely powerful and damaging munitions allow for these weapons to harm enemy systems far more than what would normally be possible for weapons of their caliber.
If a target ship would take a critical hit from this weapon AND suffer at least one point of unsaved hull damage, that target ship rolls on the crippling table with a -1 penalty to its rolls (to a minimum roll of 1). If a crippling effect would have that ship take damage, it takes one less damage instead.

Show up at LGS
set up models
???

>with a -1 penalty
Well, "penalty" is the wrong word, but you get the idea.

I actually really like Long-Range. Not sure I'd give it to just any old PHR ship, but it'd be pretty cool on select PHR and Shaltari ships.

I'd change the wording to this though:
>Long-Range (X)
>through the use of extremely powerful dedicated scanners, these weapons are able to accurately target enemy vessels beyond what would be expected in normal combat situations.
For the purpose of determining if a ship is in range of this weapon, add X to the firing ship's scan value.

That was my first draft, actually, but I figured the current wording is less ambiguous. That version could possibly allow for some rules lawyering to increase the range of other weapon systems. Since all weapons choose targets simultaneously, bad wording could be used to help non Long-Range weapons.

I could see it being written as the following, though:

When checking detection range and firing arc for this weapon, the scan value of the attacking ship is considered to be increased by X" only for that purpose.

>I actually really like Long-Range. Not sure I'd give it to just any old PHR ship, but it'd be pretty cool on select PHR and Shaltari ships.
Agreed, which is why it'd only be on the Perseus, Achilles, and BB's (and only on their heavy caliber guns)

>So, as is customary in this thread, I was thinking of ways to fix the PHR heavy broadsides, and I thought of something.

I think... that I'd like to see your ideas on fixing the Jade.

The phrase "for the purpose of" pretty much shuts down any use that isn't specific to that weapon.

fucking hummies

The Jade is simple enough, along with all other particle weapons. Universal 2+ lock.
Jade and Granite are still have less average damage overall, simply by virtue of missing every once in a while, but their max/likely damage is equivalent to the average damage of comparable weapons.

I'd also reduce the Jade to about 39-41 points, and the Topaz to 43-45.

I'd also give the Adamant/Ruby linked lances, rather than a lance pair.

True enough, but I figure that it pays to be extremely precise with rules, since Hawk's wording is nowhere near as watertight as, say, MtG.

At least we aren't a gritty reboot of an autistic cartoon

>The Jade is simple enough, along with all other particle weapons. Universal 2+ lock.
>I'd also reduce the Jade to about 39-41 points

I don't think that does it.

It really does, honestly. The Topaz (and Toulon and Harpy) only do about an average of 1 damage against 4+ armor.

The (2+) Jade would universally do .833 damage on average, and while this is less over an arbitrarily large number of games, it has the least chance out of any combat frigate to outright whiff and do 0 damage.

This fits the Jade in with the intended roll of the particle lances, lower damage, but extremely consistent. Coupled with a reduced cost (approaching but not equal to the Toulon), wolfpacks of Jades would become exceedinly efficient and usefull frigate-killers, as well as allowing you to spread your heavier firepower around rather than wasting it on wounded ships, since (2+ lock) Jades would be all but guranteed to do that damage.

What the Jade needs is burnthrough-2.

The problem with the Jade right now is that wolfpacks of Jades are irrelevant to cruisers.

They're not supposed to be; two Jades are an effectively guaranteed crippling against any given frigate, as well as being efficient clean-up.

They're for if your opponent has two or three cruisers drifting around that are one or two points of damage away from being crippled or destroyed. They're supposed to be consistent, easy damage that you can apply without worry, for if your other damage doesn't do quite enough, so that you don't overkill.

I would rather not set that kind of precedent on particle lances, honestly. It'd also blur the differentiation the Shaltari have with the other races, in that they have no burnthrough whatsoever.

It's more reliable than the Topaz at the cost of average damage, and is cheaper. That helps it finish fools off or smack frigates.

Though perhaps the Topaz comparison isn't the best since Topazes aren't that good either. That's more down to a lack of purpose than anything else though.

>They're not supposed to be; two Jades are an effectively guaranteed crippling against any given frigate, as well as being efficient clean-up.

Their gimmik is only a premium against the PHR, and there they don't do enough damage. As anti-frigate frigates they are unwieldy and very overcosted- a Topaz does it better and easier. Low damage granularity is crippling them, if "1.5" damage existed, they'd be passable. "1"- they actually suck, and that's why they suck.

Personally, I just think the Topaz is too expensive as well. Damage wise, it's equal to both the Toulon and the Harpy, but with worse arcs and much better range. I'd drop it down to 40-42, around the Harpy's range, and make the Jade somewhere around the Toulon or Lima. Maybe 36 to 38 points? This is with the 2+ lock buff, however.

You're thinking of them in terms of single ships, user, not in terms of of 2, 3, or 4 of them working together.

Additionally, we're not talking about them as they are NOW, but as they ought BE, along with the 2+ lock buff. With that, as well as a points reduction, they end up serving a unique function that no other faction has. Efficient, consistent, cheap light damage that frees up their bigger guns for more worthy targets.

>Low damage granularity is crippling them, if "1.5" damage existed, they'd be passable. "1"- they actually suck, and that's why they suck.
That's why they suck *now*, and it may actually end up being their strength if they are improved as has been discussed.

Also, you could technically give them D2 damage per attack, but that'd go against the entire ethos of Shaltari design.
Also, there's no precedent for variable damage on a weapon, yet.

So when are the resistance going to complete their space-battle bus program and join us in DFZ?

Nah, Resistance space presence will involve loading old shuttles and not!Saturn V's with high explosives and shooting them into capital ships from below.

>You'll never play a fleet of old school ships from a grander age accompanied by jury rigged vessels and small suicide ships.

Kill me.

Harpies and Toulons work because they have a defined role within their faction: They flank, and Toulons can additionally provide cheap supplementary firepower. A Topaz doesn't have the arcs for flanking and is too expensive to be used as cheap firepower. Hell, an Amber is a better candidate for flanking than Topazes since the unshielded signature difference is minimal and Ambers can shoot in side arcs. Topaz doesn't need to compete with other factions' gun cruisers, it needs to compete with other Shaltari things.

>other factions' gun cruisers
*gun frigates

user, that's the point of what this entire discussion has been about. We're not talking about why they're bad now, we already know they're bad, there's no reason to further reiterate it.

Unfortunately, there's really nothing you can do to Topazes besides reducing their price; their design is, plain and simple direct forward firepower, and their arcs is necessitated by their model.

There are two things I can think of that can be done to the Topaz:
A) Give it (and every other frigate, possibly including void gates) the vectored rule, simply to help out with its arcs and allow for some degree of flanking.
Or
B) Give it 3 attacks.

I do not like B, as I don't think the Shaltari are deserving of a frigate that's outfitted with something that's almost a full cruiser level gun.

Points reductions are included in both options, since it just really shouldn't be that expensive.

Has the possibility that these pricings are meta-balance?
Like, given the Shaltari's *other* options, the capacity of the topaz as a flanker is deliberately expensive to keep their strategic options in check (or at least deliberately weighted)?

I think the other user's point was that the Topaz is not a flanker in any capacity, and that roll was filled by the Amber/Onyx.

>You're thinking of them in terms of single ships, user, not in terms of of 2, 3, or 4 of them working together.

No, I've only been thinking in hunter-killer groups. Contemplating a single Jade is to weep- and a hunter-killer group of Jades SR-blitzing can be safely *ignored* by any cruiser in the game and a PHR frigate if it feels like it's having a good day.

It's probably the Granite's fault, a 45 point Jade is on the 2-damage particle weapon continuum. It handles standard orders so well as to make the the Granite overtly points, not that the current situation is getting people to take Granites.

You're missing the second point, where I put forward that groups of Jades aren't supposed to go after full-heath cruisers.
The purpose of them (or at least the intended purpose) has always been limited but consistent damage for the purposes of picking off other frigates or wounded ships. Sometimes you just really want one or two damage on something, and don't want to worry about the percentages of getting that 1 or 2 damage.

Giving all particle weapons a universal 2+ lock will fix the Granite as well (maybe with a points reduction to ~95-99 if it REALLY needs it), the same with the Jade and its own points reduction, will solve all of their issues.

The Jade (and the Granite, to an extent) is unique among all ships is that it's not supposed to be an alpha-strike "kill big shit" kind of ship. It's supplemental, consistent firepower for cleaning up near-dead or near-crippled ships, and giving it 2+ lock is pretty much the only way to go about it.

>You're missing the second point, where I put forward that groups of Jades aren't supposed to go after full-heath cruisers.

That part sounds like sour grapes- a maxed out group not having a mathmatical possibility of crippling anything strategy 5 or better? "It isn't supposed to be doing that anyway" rings hollow. Presenting it as support only is more of the same thing- can't stand on its own, can't fight most those things even in a maxxed-out swarm, narrow arc, and its weight in any other ship taken gets the job done just as well.

There's a ton of cheaper and easier ways to kill frigates. Topazes for one. Amethysts for two. Both those can also fight cruisers well enough to be noticed. Jade's a thorough failure.

>That feeling when there's no DZC/DFC scene in your area
>That feeling when you really wanna demo the games out but your friends don't seem interested in it.

I've lost all hope. Might just have to start the scene myself. Or hope to god someone from my area frequents the hawk forums.

Firstly, you are taking into account the changes proposed to the Jade, correct? 2+ lock and points reduction? You're not talking about the Jade as is?

Secondly, a Topaz isn't -that- much better at killing frigates than a Jade is. In terms of raw probability distribution, it's not all that more powerful.

Thirdly, and most importantly, the Amethyst (and to a lesser degree, the Topaz) have the VERY easy potential to overkill frigates. It's important to maximize the amount of meaningful damage you do to targets, and the (updated, need I remind you) Jade would provide an exceedingly cheap, exceedingly consistent platform to put out singular points of damage on targets that don't warrant full weapons.

You keep applying the Jade to the role of "direct frontline damage" like a normal gunfrigate or the Pandora, when it's not. It's cleanup. It's auxiliary. It's something you take two of to make sure that, in case your actual damage dealers come just short of what you need, you have some form of insurance to kill that ship on its last few hull points, to ensure that it can't activate again.

>the Amethyst (and to a lesser degree, the Topaz) have the VERY easy potential to overkill frigates
1 Amethyst per target or 2 Topazes per target works pretty well. Even if the Amethyst rolls poorly and only gets 3 attacks, that's still a 50% chance to get the required damage which is better than nothing.

You seem scared of overkill but remember that underkill is the far greater threat. I'd much rather deal too much damage than not enough.

>It's something you take two of to make sure that, in case your actual damage dealers come just short of what you need, you have some form of insurance to kill that ship on its last few hull points, to ensure that it can't activate again.
The problem there is that you could take 2 Topazes instead for just a few points more, and they'd be almost as reliable for cleanup while also being able to dish out reasonable damage. By my calculations Jades can have almost 10% more reliability than Topazes against 3+ targets, which isn't too shabby, but against anything else they're basically the same. So maybe against PHR they'd be okay?

Shields are a different issue altogether. Fixed Jade would be a decent choice against other Shaltari because not having your damage halved by crit-ignoring fuckery is a big deal.

>You seem scared of overkill but remember that underkill is the far greater threat. I'd much rather deal too much damage than not enough.
I mean, there's not much risk of underkill on a 2+ lock 1 attack 1 damage weapon. It's either 0 damage 1/6 of the time or 1 damage 5/6 of the time, no in between.

They're technically more likely to do at least 1 damage against anything than the Topaz, but the Topaz does have the occasional two damage.

>The problem there is that you could take 2 Topazes instead for just a few points more, and they'd be almost as reliable for cleanup while also being able to dish out reasonable damage.
That is true, but at the same time, it'd be an inefficient application of points.

I'd much rather take two fixed Jades and two fixed Topazes and save some points to fit in something else (maybe an Opal or a few extra voidgates) over four fixed Topazes, simply because using Topazes for the purposes of the Jades is a slight waste of their cost.

But hey, there is always special rules to give lances a slight edge over their competitors. Long-Rang as mentioned a couple dozen posts above, or perhaps Precise.

Theorycrafting bump

Jade fix: "On Target" While an auto-critting weapon, if the die roll for the Jade's weapon would have been a crit otherwise, it deals two damage.

>You seem scared of overkill but remember that underkill is the far greater threat. I'd much rather deal too much damage than not enough.

Fully aware of the implications, this is why I'm very much against breaking up the PHR light broadside into two weapons profiles. It's a shit idea Dave, championed by filthy optimists.

To be fair they might have a point there. Even I'll admit an average damage of 4 is a bit excessive against a single frigate.

Well, except PHR frigates. But they're just generally annoying fucks who enjoy being functionally twice as tough as everyone else's frigates.

And Shaltari. And then in out of the usual cases across orbital zones an atmospheric fishing.

"Kill a frigate, pretty reliably, across the bell curve even at the nether end, on a standard order" is a whole lot better than "maybe kill, maybe nothing" on a standard order. Weapons-free, there's other ships for that (or there *should* be, it's not my fault they Orpheus-spam) and they aren't bringing light broadsides. They should leave well enough alone.

Shaltari if shields are up, but a lot of the time they aren't. 75% chance for two kills against unshielded Shaltari and Scourge is pretty good, 65% against UCM a bit less so but still solid. Against high priority targets like Opals or Limas it's better to focus fire and evaporate the threat immediately, but there are situations where a 75% chance to take out 2 threats is better than a 95% chance to remove 1. Bringing down 1 out of 4 Djinns won't do shit to protect you when the rest are still coming. Unless you've got 4 broadsides trained on them or get really lucky with explosion chaining, you're still going to get fucked by those remaining 3 Djinns. Taking out 2 at a time halves the investment required, and your odds are still good.

6 4+ lock shots gets the job done against frigates. If it didn't then my Toulons would be unusable, because they're usually on frigate hunting duty and that's what they have to work with.

Light Broadside isn't stress-tested against Toulons; it is stress-tested against shielded Shaltari and the like. Over-commitment against some threats is better than reducing the range of capabilities to optimize against those specific threats (and even there the horror-story is coming up just short on two targets). 1 Cruiser/1 Standard Order/1 dead frigate/near-enough-always is a great thing to have and it would be unwise to exchange it for something else that can be reproduced using other means.

Breaking up the broadside and making the two banks linked is fine, but reducing the dice that can be put out on a standard order is throwing away something good (certain work being done on a standard order, which is valuable beyond all calculation- literally, going by the state of list design) to appease theorycraft.

That's why you link the batteries together so they can fire together. That way the Ajax is capable of focusing fire on a single tough frigate or splitting fire against two weak ones. Nobody is suggesting that the batteries not be linked (or if some people are I'm not one of them)

Also imo Orpheus should not have split fire. Orpheus has more than enough nice things already, to the point where nice things should actively be taken away from it.

I do love the look of the Echo.

But user, splitting the broadside into two linked batteries doesn't mean you need to use only one battery per target. You can still use both against one target, but now there's the option to split fire if desired.

I don't think anyone ever put forward the idea to split the broadsides without linking the resultant batteries.

>Breaking up the broadside and making the two banks linked is fine, but reducing the dice that can be put out on a standard order is throwing away something good (certain work being done on a standard order, which is valuable beyond all calculation- literally, going by the state of list design) to appease theorycraft.
I don't think it's ever been said to not give split broadsides linked; the idea is to standardize all PHR cruisers in that they can all engage up to two targets per standard firing, in the same way that the Theseus and Perseus can, with weapons free being to get their other side working.

There's a lot more fancy stuff that could be done in regards to multiple links between weapon hardpoints, but that's the basics of it.

>Also imo Orpheus should not have split fire. Orpheus has more than enough nice things already, to the point where nice things should actively be taken away from it.
Nah, that goes against the design structure that Hawk set up. No arbitrary stat changes that aren't reflected by the model.

That said, due to the fact that PHR troopships are literally heavy cruisers with troop capacity, I have a simple solution. Make them heavy tonnage with a corresponding points increase.

Now PHR players have to make a very real choice between taking Bellerophons and taking Orpheusii. It does make them far more capable at holding critical locations, but that's not much of an issue in my mind anyways.

Does anyone have some Samurai on hand? I'm wondering how big they are compared to regular Shaltari infantry for the purpose of using them as Dropfleet asset markers.

Here you go. They're not terribly large.

>that gold
Nice. Could use some shading, but it's Aztec as fuck.

Give them some shading, turquoise, maybe some red, and they'd look choice as hell, user.

How tall are Samurai, if Braves are 8 feet tall? They must be at least 16, nearly two stories even.

>mfw the Shaltari do traditional mecha better than the PHR
>mfw I have no suitable hedgehog reaction face

You're not wrong.

>That said, due to the fact that PHR troopships are literally heavy cruisers with troop capacity, I have a simple solution. Make them heavy tonnage with a corresponding points increase.
I've thought of that, and I think it creates worse problems than it solves. Access to heavy tonnage ships is much more limited than medium tonnage.

That's entirely the point, user. The PHR has access to exactly four heavy slots at clash sized games, and it'll certainly put a spanner in the works for some of the hyper-efficient meta lists.

There's literally no problem with it, as it either cuts down on Bell spam, or it cuts down on Orph spam, or it forces a balance between the two.

It plays into the fluff of the PHR being a highly-elite army that rarely deploys infantry en masse, which is why their troopships would be so limited (and why' they'd take so many Strike Carriers to compensate)

The main issue with this is that it gives even MORE competition to the Hector and Achilles, but they aren't picked anyways so it's not that much of an issue.

You're full of shit, user. Hostile biased feedback kinds of shit.

>PHR troopships are armed like cruisers, not heavy cruisers. They don't interact with Heavies in list design at all, much less compete with them in roll- they can't do any of the things heavies can do, there is no intersect- they are 1 thrust slower regular cruisers with two extra hull points at a 33% markup. If you make the PHR bulk lander choice take heavy slots, the PHR heavy role is strangled at all levels of play (no BCs properly run in Skirmish should have been obvious- 10 inch thrust linebreaker shackled to a 7-thrust cluster-loiterer? Leonidas will never get a Weapons Free while using its mobility to proper extent). The fluff is they're the people that bothered to design and build the things, and the UCM thinks there is something to it.

>but it serves you fucking right if this happens and then the PHR gets an optimized carrier as a Line choice

And there are more intellectually honest ways to say "I want the PHR to have half as many heavy slots at all levels of play".

No need to be vitriolic, user. This is an anonynous thread and it's not like any of these suggestions will really hit Hawk's ears (unless they lurk here), so there's no reason to get nasty about things.
The PHR troopship statline is IDENTICAL to their heavy cruisers in every way.
If their troopships were reduced to a normal cruiser statline, I'd agree with you. As it is now they're budget heavy cruisers (since PHR cruisers and heavy cruisers barely differ except in a single weapon slot, their difference mostly being hull stats) that provide a necessary role to the fleet. Them getting cruiser-level firepower is good; them getting heavy-cruiser-level survivability is good; them getting both is fucking insane.

>And there are more intellectually honest ways to say "I want the PHR to have half as many heavy slots at all levels of play".
I also outright said as much in my post, I wasn't trying to obscure that implication.

>Nah, that goes against the design structure that Hawk set up. No arbitrary stat changes that aren't reflected by the model.
Not arbitrary. Ajax, Theseus and Perseus all specifically mention the ability to split fire and there is no specific piece on the latter two to represent that, so it can be safely assumed that having 2 independent targeting systems for each broadside does not change the look of the ship.

Orph just needs a price bump to 155 or so. That would probably stop them being spammed so much, but they'd still be used and it wouldn't require any awkward changes.

Even still, giving just the Ajax (along with the Theseus and Perseus) it feels a bit strange, as the model ought have precedence over both the fluff and crunch. Not to mention it's just a good idea in general for the PHR as a whole, and it'd do a lot to make broadsides more palatable as an actual choice.

I would agree with that price change, the both of the troopships fitting in somewhere between 145-155.

Alternately, they could just be given a normal cruiser statline and kept at their current prices.

>the model ought have precedence over both the fluff and crunch
Except the model is setting no precedent whatsoever. The guns are the same except when they're different, there is nothing on the models to represent what can split fire and what can't. That's where the fluff steps in.
Universal split fire wouldn't help the Orion/Achilles/Hector all that much anyway, since medium and heavy batteries aren't very good on their own. It would just help the Orpheus, and the last thing it needs is more help.

>Universal split fire wouldn't help the Orion/Achilles/Hector all that much anyway
More granular fire is never a bad thing, user. Like has been said before, overkilling on already wounded targets is an extremely inefficient situation. The PHR being able to split fire to pick off wounded ships is a good thing.

>Except the model is setting no precedent whatsoever.
Exactly, which is why it's strange that only the Ajax would be the only full-broadside ship to get split fire. The fluff ought reflect the model, and there's no difference between the Ajax and the Orion (for example) that shows this.

Two questions for you:
How did you paint that delicious gold basecoat, and what can you tell me about the performance of heavy warsuits on the table?

There's also no difference between the Orion and Perseus to show this, aside from having different varieties of gun. From a gameplay standpoint it's obvious that different guns would be different profiles, but there's nothing on the models to show whether or not a ship has independent targeting. As far as the models are concerned it's completely arbitrary. And so we move on to the fluff, which states that Theseus, Perseus and Ajax all have 2 targeting systems per broadside. This implies that such things are not standard on most cruisers.

It tells us that batteries have the potential to independently target, regardless of their type.
Secondly, there's no reason why the fluff can't be changed. Regardless of what it IS, I'm saying that it's strange and arbitrary for it to be limited to the Ajax, and that there are tangible (and not overpowered benefits) for extending it to the Orion, Hector, Achilles, and for the sake of consistency, the Orpheus.

There are lots of things both right and wrong with the PHR, and changes would have to be made concurrently.

>but there's nothing on the models to show whether or not a ship has independent targeting.
Right, except for the weapons, which is why if the Ajax gets it, all ships get it. I don't see what the resistance to this is for, as it's not an overwhelming buff to the non-lights, and it would go well with the proposed points increase to the Orpheus.

> As far as the models are concerned it's completely arbitrary.
And this is very, very bad. There ought be consistency between the rules and models; visible indicators that correlate directly to the rules. Hawk has always been very WYSIWYG, and this applies even more so to DFC.

I honestly don't care if Hawk splits fire for Orion, Hector, etc, it might encroach a bit on the real frigate hunters like Ajax and Theseus but not enough to worry about. I just don't think they'd be likely to do that, they've made it clear that split fire is something special rather than standard issue for all ships.

I'd be more hesitant to give it to Orpheus simply because split fire is
1: So powerful, troopships are one of the most common targets for CAW frigate teams in my experience. Being able to slaughter them with such incredible efficiency could be a bit much.
2: Something that the Ajax could use to make it more distinct from the Orpheus. Even if you're paying 50 points rather than 30 to upgrade it, the troops an Orpheus provides are almost always worth it.

>And this is very, very bad. There ought be consistency between the rules and models; visible indicators that correlate directly to the rules.
You seem to be making a bigger deal out of this than you need to. I see only two reasons to be concerned about the inconsistency, either fluff (targeting computers are internal) or rules confusion (one ship having split broadsides while all others don't isn't much to remember)

What the fuck is a type 6 and type 7 grand walker? Also why does the sound of them get me hard?

No idea yet, but presumably something much, much larger than an Aegis defense laser.
And because GIANT MECHA.

>Larger than the defense laser

Be still my beating heart there was a reason I chose PHR.

Big thing. Will probably not get a model in any game for a long time, if ever.

There's also confirmed type 5 walkers as well as UCM Osprey dropships and Scourge Executioner hovertanks. No hints for Shaltari from what I can recall.

They're both delivered via bulk lander, so it can't be that much larger. Still pretty fucking big though.

>large-scale UCM dropship
I don't even know what she looks like, but I love her already.

Aight lads, my fleet is nearing completion, and that means I need to get autistic as all hell and give my ships names names. What do you think?
>inb4 autism
I know.

>Vanguard battlegroup "Subtle Hammer"
Perth class battlecruiser "Judge and Jury"
Lima class frigate "Fire at Will"
Lima class frigate "Leyline"

>Vanguard battlegroup "Pub Crawlers"
Moscow class heavy cruiser "Taurus"
Toulon class frigate "Three's a Charm"
Toulon class frigate "David"
Toulon class frigate "Centurion"
Toulon class frigate "Lion's Thorn"

>Line battlegroup "Gambler's Fallacy"
New Cairo class light cruiser "Alea"
New Cairo class light cruiser "Iacta"
New Cairo class light cruiser "Est"

>Line battlegroup "Globe Trotters"
San Francisco class troopship "Greyhound"
New Orleans class strike carrier "Trojan"
New Orleans class strike carrier "Eclipse"
New Orleans class strike carrier "Crusader"
New Orleans class strike carrier "Hegemon"

>Pathfinder battlegroup "Island Hoppers"
New Orleans class strike carrier "Thule"
New Orleans class strike carrier "Cortez"

>Pathfinder battlegroup "Vagrants"
Santiago class corvette "Gunsway"
Santiago class corvette "Rapscallion"
Santiago class corvette "Anchor Cutter"

Looks good to me mate, especially considering people have named their ships worse things. I had a Veeky Forums compiled list of ship names (got it a few years ago), but iirc it's on another hard drive. If the thread hasn't died by tomorrow I'll dig 'em up and post 'em for inspiration/free use.

As for mine, I'm being a normie and just using the name stickers. I've just finished putting together my first UCM starter fleet, and have painted a Moscow (Huntsman), Berlin (Aurora), and one of the New Orleans (Undaunted) so far. I'll also be posting that tomorrow when there is some better lighting.

It may be a Njord-style big combat dropship. That would be pretty hype. I'm hoping the Albatross actually gets made passable in combat at some point though. They're a complete joke against anything but basic bitch infantry sitting in the open.

Autism

The other two New Cairos are gonna be really embarrassed if one dies. Sunstar Iacta Est or Alea Iacta Big Toast doesn't work nearly as well.

But speaking of autism, I'm gonna post my fleet names when I find the list.

I'm thinking about buying a resistance army. Does this ship prepainted?

Is this an actual question or the ghost of an old meme come back to haunt us?

Either way; no

Those aren't mine, actually, I just snagged it from google for the user who was curious.

I'm too shit to play Shaltari, no matter how much I try. Going full Mad Max with the Resistance is the only thing I've managed to do correctly in DZC.

If I had to guess, the gold is fairly bright, so he either based white, or brought it up from black with a bunch of coats. Also glossed the black bits as well, which is a nice effect. Could definitely use a wash too.

It's rather pale for a gold, to me it seems more like brass. Either way, a light brown wash would make them pop. If I had any idea how to play Shaltari I'd love to do a similar scheme.

Is it true the scourge didn't well... scourge a couple races cause they weren't worth the effort.

You think the ones they didn't eat will end up as factions? I don't even now what a new faction would be based around. Actual Bioweaponry that rivals the scourge? A actual robot faction? Aquamen?

If I were to take a guess at a 5th faction, I'd say that we're most likely to see the race responsible for the white sphere. I would also guess that this race would have some history with the shaltari and/or scourge and a reason for the PHR to not immediately ally with (like the sphere being a rogue ai).

Failing that, my next guess at a faction would indeed be the remnants of a race or races that were used by the scourge to the point of unsustainability or who eventually fought off the scourge. They could be seeking to ally with the humans against the scourge, but because of one part humanity fuck yeah, one part "slaves" to an ai, and about 15 parts fucking hedgehogs; no accord is ever reached.

Might as well do the same, I've been meaning to give the rest of my ships names.
>Pathfinder battlegroup "The Bastard's Flock"
Djinn - "Little Bastard"
Djinn - "Minor Disaster"
Djinn - "Cinderspawn"
Strix - "Stolas"
Strix - "Strigoi"

>Line battlegroup "Hellhives"
Hydra - "Vespid Swarm"
Chimera - "Whore of Olympus"

>Line battlegroup "Infernal Beacon"
Ifrit - "Flash Fire"
Harpy - "Carrion Crow"
Harpy - "Dirty Buzzard"
Harpy - "Vengeful"

>Pathfinder battlegroup "The Ferrymen"
Gargoyle - "The Boatman"
Gargoyle - "Styx Crossing"
Gargoyle - "It Got Away"
Gargoyle - "General's Lament"

Pathfinder battlegroup "Hogslayers"
Nickar Squadron - "Hoghunter", "Prison Shank", "Diamond Breaker"

Flag battlegroup "Lasting Devastation"
Dragon - "Gnawing Doom"
Shenlong - "A Quiet Murder"