It is currently Wed Sep 18, 2019 5:44 pm


UCM mass driver fleet. Comments?

Help your brothers take back the Cradle Worlds!
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

swampsheep

  • Posts: 58
  • Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 10:24 pm
  • Location: Aalborg, Denmark

Re: UCM mass driver fleet. Comments?

PostSun Oct 15, 2017 10:01 am

Lorn wrote:
But it has the ability to drop 6 infantry. I’ll spare you the math and approximations but 6 infantry are somewhat better than 3 tanks but equally bad against 4 tanks.


Actually that is false at least over time, to elaborate:

3 Tank tokens have 9 Attacks out of which 4,5 will hit and 3 Infantry tokens will fail their saves.

6 Infantry tokens have 6 Attacks out of which 3 hit removing 1 Tank token.


You are right. And for once, this is a place where I neither "presented my work" (as my math teacher would have said) nor actually saved it, so I can't figure out why I got this wrong. I guess I might haved switched the saves around (that would explain it, at least). Oh well, the post is edited and it does not affect the overall conclusion.


Lorn wrote:Also in your blog post you leave out weapons that benefit from big targets like the Diamonds Particle Triade or the Avalon BTL, which like to eat Troopships for breakfast. Secondly an important part of survivability in DFC is whether you are seen or not. A Troopship is one target to scan and has a higher signature (3" more in case of UCM 5" more in case of Scourge). Those factors detract from the survivability you proclaim.


This is a fringe argument, in my book. If my opponent chooses (and gets the opportunity) to focus his most deadly firepower on a troopship, yes it will suffer. But that that firepower is then not aimed at another target then. What if I bought two troopships?

My point is, that when you're arguing this we have to start look into stuff like overall fleet composition, what are the available targets, where are the space stations located compared to entry points, etc. That is why I chose only to compare it to common weapons, or way too many factors enter into the analysis to be able to conclude anything.

When I use my PHR troopships my opponent often don't have much chance of firing at them before they drop - and I rarely experience them to be at the receiving end of heavy firepower. I do use a lot of silent running and make sure that there is sufficient target saturation when something is actually in range. I see no argument why UCM couldn't do the same.

Lorn wrote:Though I think that in low orbit the playing field between Strike Carriers and Troopships is pretty even as you mention, in case of the PHR even to the advantage of the Troopships, but most missions also or only contain Cluster which allow Strike Carriers to reach atmosphere. Then this turns to the disadvantage of troopships.


Agreed. I am not arguing that troopships are better than strike carriers. I am arguing that against space stations they have some advantages, that makes them worth considering. I basically only oppose the opinion that they are never worth considering.

This is a part of the reason why I think that majority of missions played should include space stations - when you only play with clusters, I think the game loses some depth, that is really important. Missions only with clusters (or only with space stations) should combined be less than half the games played, I think.

Shaltari is good example of a fleet who has a very hard time in a space station heavy scenario (too hard, I think) and it forces different ideas and strategies I think is critical.

In any case, I guess this is a point for another time.
http://linkedbroadsides.com - My blog with analysis, tactics and thoughts about dropfleet. Updates weekly, mostly on Mondays.
Offline
User avatar

Nicius

  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2015 6:00 am

Re: UCM mass driver fleet. Comments?

PostSun Oct 15, 2017 9:46 pm

I still think most of the time a strike carrier might be a better bet then the San Fransisco. I've been using troopships since I started playing DFC and looking back what I accomplished with Troopshios I could have easily also accomplished with strike carriers.

Even in low orbit a strike carrier has a signature advantage over a troopship.I think the San Fransisco needs something to make it better. It lacks the speed of the Scourge or the dureability of tge PHR
Offline

Nobody

  • Posts: 859
  • Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 2:25 am

Re: UCM mass driver fleet. Comments?

PostSun Oct 15, 2017 9:59 pm

I just wanted to point out that whenever I've seen UCM do well in a tournament setting, they've taken troopships. Indeed, the UCM player in the recent Michigan tournament took 2 and won all 3 of his games (he ended up coming in third due to the tournament scoring).

I don't think I've ever seen an all strike carrier list do well in such a setting, but I haven't seen nearly as many tournaments posted for DFC as I have for DZC.
Offline

Lorn

Hawk Talon

  • Posts: 2450
  • Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 12:48 pm

Re: UCM mass driver fleet. Comments?

PostMon Oct 16, 2017 9:24 am

Tournaments tend to be more Space station heavy then the mission in the rulebook on average little wonder that Troopships fare better there.

German space magic for PHR would you like to know more?
http://www.hawkforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=7017

German space magic for all and this time it is in Space!
viewtopic.php?f=36&t=10506
Previous

Return to UCM - Fleet Lists and Tactics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest

cron