Jump to content
Sky_Admiral

Official Kurak Alliance Thread: Hawker Industries

Recommended Posts

I'm thinking dual engine (i.e capable of flying in atmo and in vacuum) that can be outfitted for everything from ground attacks, to dogfights with fighters being something in between.  

 

Now the question is, was the referal to the Hawker patrolfleet in the podcast a mixup or should I wait in expanding my Hawkers to Grand fleet level a couple of months?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that the Stalwarts were given such nice models I started looking into the possibility of fielding them with my Excelsior. I discovered to my surprise that it's statistics were really mediocre in comparison to most other escorts. Terrans are cheaper and potentially as tanky as the Stalwarts, Sorylians have more PD and a point of AP and Aquans are just as tanky, with more speed, mines and minefields to boot , for the same price as the Stalwart. Is there something I don't see or are the Stalwarts just pretty bad after the nerf?  (I love the reference to the nerf in the fluff though) 

 

Right now the option of just running them as Hawker "Corvettes" with the stats of the Endeavor looks a lot better than using them as escorts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how does the Regent fare as a substitute for an Ares carrier in a Terran fleet? I really am not a massive fan of the Ares, but would love to get some SRS shenanigans to play with in some of my lists and wondered how well it works with the rest of a Terran Fleet. Won't be getting any Resolutes for awhile to escort either to bare in mind, not at least until the Hawker box probably gets a re-release into full resin etc, so would just be Stalwart escorts or nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cyberwarfare weapons.....

Can't go wrong with venting atmosphere to reduce crew or shut down PD and send in the Bombers, next turn.

Watch the sour look on your opponents face. Giggle for joy....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone successfully magnetized the shield panels on the Hawker models.   I have small enough magnets, but not sure if that size magnet would hold on the horizontal shield panel on the cruiser model.   Finally getting to painting my two patrol fleets. (one of the Excelsior's modified into a Regent carrier)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone successfully magnetized the shield panels on the Hawker models. I have small enough magnets, but not sure if that size magnet would hold on the horizontal shield panel on the cruiser model. Finally getting to painting my two patrol fleets. (one of the Excelsior's modified into a Regent carrier)

I'm working on this myself. Take a careful look where the pieces that hold the shield vanes mount to the BB, that hole you see is a 4.75mm magnet counter sunk for it's mating magnet.

20150430_173444.jpg

Resolutes,

I think 3mm magnets will work for the shield vanes on the cruisers. I haven't decided to try this: If you sink one magnet, two magnets depth into the mini, and glue a magnet to the metal bit. The magnet that is glued to the shield vane will then attach to the magnet deeply sunk in the mini and provide a little extra support....

My fear is that the vanes would just break of the magnet that is sunk in the hole and you will never get it out then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quiet01, thank you for the very detailed reply.  Magnetizing the whole side of the battleship instead of just the vanes is a good idea. (not sure why I was trying to do it the hard way)     The inset magnet idea is a very good, didn't think about that at all.    Using a 5 minute epoxy, I have never had a magnet come loose. (knock on wood)   Its just a pain to work with.     When I get them done I will post some pictures.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm working on this myself. Take a careful look where the pieces that hold the shield vanes mount to the BB, that hole you see is a 4.75mm magnet counter sunk for it's mating magnet.

20150430_173444.jpg

Resolutes,

I think 3mm magnets will work for the shield vanes on the cruisers. I haven't decided to try this: If you sink one magnet, two magnets depth into the mini, and glue a magnet to the metal bit. The magnet that is glued to the shield vane will then attach to the magnet deeply sunk in the mini and provide a little extra support....

My fear is that the vanes would just break of the magnet that is sunk in the hole and you will never get it out then.

This is a great idea!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm working on this myself. Take a careful look where the pieces that hold the shield vanes mount to the BB, that hole you see is a 4.75mm magnet counter sunk for it's mating magnet.

20150430_173444.jpg

Resolutes,

I think 3mm magnets will work for the shield vanes on the cruisers. I haven't decided to try this: If you sink one magnet, two magnets depth into the mini, and glue a magnet to the metal bit. The magnet that is glued to the shield vane will then attach to the magnet deeply sunk in the mini and provide a little extra support....

My fear is that the vanes would just break of the magnet that is sunk in the hole and you will never get it out then.

I've had this happen before with magnetizing projects.  You can use a drill bit and some perseverance to eventually pull the magnet out of the hole or a stack of magnets to provide more force while doing the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all. I'm a new player waiting for my Hawker Industries Patrol Fleet and Id'like to know if there is any posibility of getting new ships in the near future, or in any future.

I love the Hawker's models, but, after realize I'd fell in the same trap than many others (I have few models, but I can put Terran ships as allys... meeeec) I hope some day may increase my fleet options.

Any idea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm... if these "Terran Charter Enforcement divisions Carriers" are, in fact, true carriers, that would imply that the invasion ships are also going to be designed to serve a purpose in the game. I wonder if that's going to be universal (ie. will they all be carriers) or if each nation's dropships are going to have a different focus (for example, if the Sorylian invasion ship was more of a speedy gunboat, which would both be more in tune with the Sorylian ships we already have, as well as explaining the strength of Sorylian planetfall artillery). Interesting...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the connection between FsA and PF is going to bring some interesting sections for us. This is reminding me of the Starwars Rebellion computer game.

http://www.gog.com/game/star_wars_rebellion

In Rebellion you had to bring along a invasion fleet, if you want to take the planet. It made some very interesting games because you had to protect the troop tansports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Rebellion you had to bring along a invasion fleet, if you want to take the planet. It made some very interesting games because you had to protect the troop tansports.

Rebels had a way around it, being able to invade with troop transports without requiring a fleet to take out ships before hand.

Back on task, troop ships could be allowed to have Wings, but be limited to Assault Craft. Think of it as Army blokes trying to board a ship. They may be required to have a deficit, though, like requiring a 5+ for a roll to be successful since attacking a planet is far different than the difficulties in boarding a spaceship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rebels had a way around it, being able to invade with troop transports without requiring a fleet to take out ships before hand.

Back on task, troop ships could be allowed to have Wings, but be limited to Assault Craft. Think of it as Army blokes trying to board a ship. They may be required to have a deficit, though, like requiring a 5+ for a roll to be successful since attacking a planet is far different than the difficulties in boarding a spaceship.

 

Not necessarily.

  1. I'm not sure, in the cost-benefit analysis (or call it the fun-per-word ratio) that giving troop carriers that many special rules is really worth it. I mean, enough ink will be spilled describing how they can be used to score points and influence Planetfall games - is it really worth it to add even more special rules regarding what kind of SRS they can and can't take and how they can use them.
  2. You're assuming that the invasion ship would use its payload of soldiers offensively. What if the troop carrier's SRS bays were intended to be used defensively? Or what if it had SRS bays in order to participate in the space battle, and as a result those bays were as versatile as any carrier's? Think of it this way: you wouldn't say that an invasion ship gunboat would need a special rule where its weapons are less accurate if you are too far away from a planet. Its guns are there for defense and offense, like any other ship's, so it can contribute to the battle and blast enemy ships out of its way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think troop invasion/ground assualt ships would have a large CP number to represent Army troops (tanks/apcs) and not a large AP number. They wouldn't be as effective as marine ship to ship assault troops. Just as marine ship to ship troops wouldn't be as effective against ground armor attacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think troop invasion/ground assualt ships would have a large CP number to represent Army troops (tanks/apcs) and not a large AP number. They wouldn't be as effective as marine ship to ship assault troops. Just as marine ship to ship troops wouldn't be as effective against ground armor attacks.

 

This makes sense to me - use the existing rules to reflect the game concept. No need to invent something new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.