|
Finally got off my rear end and posted about damage tables in the facebook group. Come argue with me for sensible mechanics if you're on there  https://www.facebook.com/groups/604774826202800/permalink/2142502845763316/In addition to that i also got off my rear end and finished up my Shaltari Tutorial, i'm on a roll here. crossquoting from the painting thread: Bistromatic posted:Who's ready to finally learn about Alien Sparkleships?
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2018 06:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:43 |
|
|
Bistromatic posted:Finally got off my rear end and posted about damage tables in the facebook group. Come argue with me for sensible mechanics if you're on there A worthy fight!
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2018 18:07
|
|
|
So many people so resistant to change.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2018 20:18
|
|
|
"But there are bigger issues than this!" they cry without giving an example or explaining why a new edition can't address more than one point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2018 13:24
|
|
|
Also the people who don't comprehend that it's purely about more intuitive presentation instead of changing the odds.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2018 13:44
|
|
|
Well if you will try to dumb the game down.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2018 16:36
|
|
|
That'd be the group I left after their moderators repeatedly took no action against the guy posting Nazi-themed armies? Just sayin', that might be influencing the quality of the debate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2018 18:06
|
|
|
That very same! I was out of it for a few years too but grudgingly joined again eventually due activity becoming increasingly centralised there. For what it's worth i haven't seen any nazi scum since i rejoined, just run of the mill grognards
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2018 18:18
|
|
|
Feeling real salty right now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2018 12:48
|
|
|
"better things aren't possible" - a belief that can apply to all aspects of life no matter how trivial
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2018 13:00
|
|
|
Hello fellow nerds I just bought into Dropfleet after watching some demos at Origins and I’m hoping you can give me some guidance as there don’t seem to be any central repositories of wisdom that I could find. I picked up the rulebook, a UCM battle fleet box and a destroyer blister. My main questions are: 1) what should I magnetize and what should I just glue? I’ve picked up that some ships (New Orleans, Seattle) are used pretty consistently but is it worth magnetizing everything else for maximum flexibility? 2) the book didn’t come with the token sheet - any good place to order 3rd party tokens? 3) what’s the gooncensus on the bases? The guy giving the demos was using beads and dice to mark damage and altitudes. Are the bases too fiddly? 4) any good sources for mats or satellite imagery posters? 5) what’s the go-to place for game info? Are the Hawk forums still used much? Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2018 13:40
|
|
|
1) UCM cruisers are easy to magnetize. The only thing that I found was more hassle than it's worth is trying to get the heavy/regular tops switchable, so just make one or two of them heavy and the rest smooth top. The wing sections friction fit on and off so no need for magnets on them. For the frigates, the sides also friction fit, so you can make enough strike carriers and leave the rest to switch around. No idea about the destroyers though! 2) You can print out a token sheet from the TT combat site (https://ttcombat.com/pages/dropfleet-commander-downloads) if you're fine with paper ones. 3) I think they work fine for spikes/altitude but I use dice for damage. 4) Not sure on this, the guy I bought mine from stopped making them. I've seen some posts about people using these (https://matsbymars.com/collections/dropfleet-commander) but they seem pricey. 5) Unfortunately TTcombat are a bunch of lazy asses and can't be bothered to maintain the old Hawk forum and instead maintain a presence on the shitpile that is Facebook. There's a Dropfleet Community page you can request to join.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2018 15:02
|
|
|
If you fancy it, TTCombat also do Dropfleet acrylic tokens for effects and sectors on their webstore for not that much. As do other companies, such is the way with gaming tokens. I like the bases for spikes and altitude but the damage pegs get fiddly so I have started using small dice for damage as well. I still use the pegs though, I painted a bunch of them different colours and use them to mark my battle groups. Deepcut studios also make some nice dropzone maps. They do them in PVC, cloth or mousepad depending on how much you want to splash out. The possibly cheaper alternative is to download the maps on the TTCombat site and go to a printers. The history of these is that Hawk offered map packs for the kickstarter but the printers who quoted for them jacked up the price making them unviable - so the images were released for free and the backers are getting store credit (eventually). Ugleb fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Jun 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2018 17:25
|
|
|
Okay, I’m deep into magnetizing my UCM cruisers and am planning to play baby’s first game this weekend but...what’s the philosophy behind building battlegroups? I get the mechanical pieces -the min/max number of each weight class in the types of battlegroups (and I have dflist) - but what’s the thinking behind what ships go together in a battlegroups, and whether that should be a Pathfinder or a Line bg for example (like if I have 2 frigates and a cruiser, it could be either one)? Or am I overthinking this?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2018 04:12
|
|
|
For me the two biggest considerations are usually: Special Orders: Put ships that like the same orders in the same BG. For example a Moscow really wants to go Weapons Free while a New Cairo doesn't benefit at all from Weapons Free. Strategy Rating: Glass cannons and especially Strike Carriers really want to activate before any substantial enemies so they prefer small BGs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2018 06:20
|
|
|
I try to have a couple of very low rating groups to snipe activation advantage. Otherwise I'm looking at what will be positioned close to each other and if anything can freely operate away from the rest of the battlegroup for card playing flexibility.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2018 12:54
|
|
|
3D debris markers! Made from sprues and leftover bits!   
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2018 04:32
|
|
|
finally had some time to bang these out in an evening, fully magnetized wasn't the biggest fan of the models at first but they've grown on me ^ i like the actively exploding one, gotta house rule it to destroy poo poo that passes through the field that much better Sojenus fucked around with this message at 00:04 on Jul 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2018 00:02
|
|
|
Brief update from Dave showing off the UCM Dreadnought render. Comes in two flavours, 40 dice of railguns or launch 15 death swarm!
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2018 10:29
|
|
|
I was worried about the UCM dreadnought but it looks pretty decent. Obviously mass turret overload but what were you expecting? Leeetle disappointed in the recycling of the Remnant cruiser gun turrets; you'd think the UCM would have a different turret design after 160 years. Kinda reminds me of the Comet Empire missile cruiser.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2018 13:07
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm not real hot on the design myself. Just kind of looks like two Atlantis siamesed together with turrets on every surface. Something more along a beefed up New York with the turrets sporting 3 or 4 barrels would probably have looked less like a design overload.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2018 13:19
|
|
|
I am wondering if the PHR version will be two leonidas welded together with 4 gun decks. Hopefully it will be more subtle. I do still like the idea of one ship throwing out an entire fleets worth of launch assets. But then these things are probably going to cost half your fleet so I guess that balances out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2018 15:10
|
|
|
 But with guns down the entire sides.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2018 08:02
|
|
|
I’m kind of disappointed by the UCM super ship too 
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2018 13:14
|
|
|
Bistromatic posted:
Want Homeworld
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2018 13:28
|
|
|
Friend and I played our first game yesterday, my UCM vs his PHR. Lots of fun and I don’t know that we got anything horribly wrong. I definitely learned a lesson about not bunching up my ships though - holy cow is the catastrophic table rough. I think I blew up more of my own ships than my opponent did. We only played 999 points to get our heads around the game. I know now I need more drop. I was only able to commit to 2 of the 3 clusters we had on the board, and one of them I didn’t get anybody on the ground before my strike carriers got vaporized. Also I need more protection with my drop groups to keep them from just getting chewed up. Also, UCM destroyers are love. This was my list, I’d appreciate any feedback on it. -------------------------------------- Speartip - 995pts UCM - 3 launch assets SR11 Vanguard battlegroup (200pts) 1 x Moscow - 163pts - H + UCM Commodore (20pts, 3AV) 1 x Lima - 37pts - L SR10 Line battlegroup (262pts) 1 x Seattle - 132pts - M 2 x New Orleans - 64pts - L 3 x Santiago - 66pts - L SR9 Line battlegroup (240pts) 1 x San Francisco - 111pts - M 2 x New Orleans - 64pts - L 1 x Kiev (exp.) - 65pts - L2 SR13 Pathfinder battlegroup (273pts) 2 x New Cairo - 176pts - M 1 x Jakarta - 32pts - L 1 x Kiev (exp.) - 65pts - L2
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2018 13:58
|
|
|
Bistromatic posted:
*starts playing Agnus Dei*
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2018 21:39
|
|
|
Man, I'm really torn on those Dreadnought sculpts, especially the UCM one! But they are cool...
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2018 10:14
|
|
|
I think the UCM one will look a lot better sans those irritating turrets. Stick some WW2-style triple or quad guns on there and it'll look a lot better.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2018 11:54
|
|
|
I'm happy enough with the Scourge and Shaltari offerings. The Scourge dreadnought was always going to be some massive squid beast and I'm OK with that. The Shaltari get a new silhouette with recognisable features so that's fine. I'm less sure about the PHR and UCM. I feel like Dave has just scaled up the Perth and Hector here and I was hoping for new shapes. I don't hate them, but they don't feel all that original. Too safe I guess? The chunky look of the PHR dread is growing on me a bit. Apparently the one at Gencon is actually sporting a broadside armament of some kind and those aren't launch bays. So it's very typical of the PHR line ships, just even more so. The prow BTL can roll into double digits apparently, so that is probably crippling if not out right murdering a cruiser in one shot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2018 13:37
|
|
|
Ugleb posted:The Scourge dreadnought was always going to be some massive squid beast and I'm OK with that. I feel it's the wrong way round, probably out of a desire to recycle the Akuma nose. If it were tentacles-first, like the Aquan dreadnought from Firestorm Armada, I'd be all for it. I'm perfectly fine with the PHR death-whale, it knows what it is and makes it work with a modicum of style. And the UCM one will be fine as soon as I reshuffle the turrets.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2018 14:38
|
|
|
the PHR one is just a big ship of the line in spaaaace, I kinda like it for that alone. The UCM one has that same look as the Battlecruisers, it should have just been a scaled up Battleship, not that crappy tongs design.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2018 14:43
|
|
|
I posted the Pride of Hiigara before but yeah i'd really have like to see new shapes and vertical ones at that. Both because they're interesting to me personally and to minimise the amount of footprint and overhang of these fuckoff huge ships. Practical placement concerns are actually one of my bigger beefs with the game at the moment. They really should either provide incentives for ships to stay away from each other or just remove the option of stacking ships.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2018 18:20
|
|
|
Vertical large resin ships would topple over like crazy unless you used iron bases.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2018 22:13
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:Vertical large resin ships would topple over like crazy unless you used iron bases. I feel that there is a middle ground. I was hoping for a bit more verticality out of them as well. For scourge I was thinking something like a Reaper in Mass effect, tentacles sure, but tapering upwards with the body. I can see how tentacles at the front could have been cool, but it would probably irk some people that it isn't fluff consistent design thingy. If there is a big stability concern though, couldn't they just come up with a larger base? If it meant shorter models you would probably still come out ahead on footprint.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2018 23:23
|
|
|
I'm really not feeling the UMC one at all. I wanted the super carrier to have more of an aircraft carrier/battlestar galactica feel to it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
Anyone seen any indication from TTCombat about when/if they expect to be able to restock retailers?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 18:20
|
|
|
I'm still wondering when I'm going to get my store credit for the maps that were never made...
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 18:23
|
|
|
Pash posted:I'm still wondering when I'm going to get my store credit for the maps that were never made... Last update was 'August, released in waves', so soon hopefully.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 18:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:43 |
|
|
Prefect Six posted:Anyone seen any indication from TTCombat about when/if they expect to be able to restock retailers? Judging by what I've been able to find on the facebook groups it looks like the answer is no, for the US at least. Which is really weird that no one's pressed them on that? Warstore and MM have limited stock and are starting to show stuff as straight discontinued, which is probably not the case and more of a reflection of their inability to restock.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 19:09
|
|