UCM Medium Ship Guide

Welcome to part two of our UCM fleet deep dive. Here we’ll be talking about the mainstay ships of the Drop-verse: medium ships. These form the core of your fleet, dictating how many light and heavy ships you can take. Our goal here is to give you an idea of how strong these ships are, where they slot into your fleet, and how you should use them on the table. We give each ship a 1-5 rating based on our totally arbitrary feelings about these ships. You can and should disagree as you gain more experience with these ships, and these ratings should by no means deter you from at least trying out a ship. We’re using a unique symbol for each faction. UCM gets explosions to represent their “when in doubt, apply more firepower” approach and generally brutal looking aesthetic. A ship rated with five explosions is something we consider extremely good, probably a “must take” in a competitive sense. On the other end, one explosion means you’re probably going to struggle to justify bringing the ship. Let’s dive in.

The Osaka is a flexible, straight forward option for the UCM. It can fly horizontal to the battlefield and kite or advance as needed. It’s F/S weapons make it able to engage as the situation requires. A group of three can put out some solid kinetic damage without needing anything beyond general quarters to contribute. It has also gotten noticeably more durable in 2.0. It now shares the standard UCM saves: 4+ ES and 3+ KS. Where they were a flanker last edition, they can now be relied upon as a solid centerline. As a light cruiser, it has 2” more thrust over a standard cruiser in exchange for two less hull. Kinetic damage is currently rather hard to stick compared to energy. That makes the Osaka a somewhat mediocre option for their cost. They probably need to be 5-10 points cheaper to be worth their weight.

The many of same things that apply to the Osaka apply to the New Cairo. It is a straight forward option that is very happy to stay on general quarters throughout the game. Just like the Osaka, it has also gotten noticeably more durable in 2.0. It now shares the standard UCM saves: 4+ ES and 3+ KS. As a light cruiser, it has 2” more thrust over a standard cruiser in exchange for two less hull. Its Cobra Heavy Laser is more reliable than the Osaka’s mass drivers. However, what the New Cairo gains in damage potential, it loses in flexibility. Its FN arc requires the ship to joust, limiting options for approach. It could use to be a hair cheaper, but that’s largely because it is so clearly outclassed by the Bruges for only 10 points more.

The Boston is what happens when you slap a bit more armor on the Havana. The Boston brings the exact same weapon loadout as the smaller destroyer, just on a light cruiser chassis. That means more two hull and a one point better kinetic save at the cost of a higher signature. Those are marginal benefits for a 25 point increase. Seeing as some players are questioning the value of the Havana, the Boston is significantly overcosted for what it brings. It wants to be an effective frontline brawler. There are just far better options available.

The Rio is the bog standard UCM cruiser. There used to be a command card in 1.0 that gave you a free Rio, so it long ago became the measuring stick for the faction. And in 2.0, it is solidly middle of the road. It is largely an upgrade over the Osaka, trading 2” of thrust for 2 hull and an additional weapon. That's a solid deal for 15 points. It helps that the shoulder guns bring fusillade, rewarding you for using weapons free to unload both weapons. Like the Osaka, it suffers from the relative weakness of kinetic damage. That said, I'm curious to see how Rios pair with Nuuks. The Rio can put out a large volume of shots. If their target’s defenses are down, that ship would melt very quickly.

The Madrid has had a pretty radical transformation in the latest edition of Dropfleet. It is no longer the cheap, but highly specialized anti-ground asset it used to be. Instead, because of the changes to bombardment weapons, it is a highly flexible ship able to target literally everything. It pays a bit of a tax for the flexibility. Its weapons are strictly inferior to a Rio against ships in orbit. However, it can also target descent ships in atmosphere with no penalty at scan+sig range, much the same as Re-Entry weapons. It retains its solid 2+ lock against drop sights, though improvements to armor stops it from eviscerating dropsites like it used to.

The Berlin is in about the same spot as the Rio. It’s a perfectly serviceable cruiser. It trades 2” of thrust for 2 hull and the additional mass drivers compared to the smaller New Cairo. It does so for only 10 points, an even cheaper price than the Osaka to Rio upgrade. The fusillade on the shoulder guns reward you for going weapons free. You can also view them as more of an alternate weapon to use on general quarters when the main laser doesn’t have a target. The burnthrough laser itself is the main reason to bring this ship. It can punch through energy saves quite effectively. In isolation, this is a pretty solid ship. However, it just pales in comparison to the Bruges when you factor in the UCM Rear Admirals’ Overcharge Lasers.

This is currently my favorite cruiser in the UCM roster. On the surface, the Bruges might not look all that more impressive than the Berlin or New Cairo. The key difference is the second weapon, in the form of Taipan Lasers, that can leverage the Overcharge Lasers UCM Rear Admiral ability. Two Bruges are the single most effective group using Overcharge Lasers, even overshadowing a full group of Oslos. It doesn’t really care if you’re facing good energy saves, as every piece of its armament is able to reduce saves. They get a total of 4 additional Cobra Heavy Laser shots, making each of those focused shots an average of 4 hits with -2 to energy saves from burnthrough. Even PHR are going to sweat 8 such hits. If in scald range, the Taipan Lasers are able to inflict an average of 6-7 hits with a similar -2 to saves. That combo of weapons has a legitimate shot of one-shotting even PHR cruisers. Even from a distance, that is a lot of energy saves to take. I’ve made two groups of two Bruges the centerline of my UCM fleets, and so far have not regretted it. They can peck away at distance in conjunction with Lima pings before closing in for the close range kill. Weapons free at scan range is glorious. At the moment, the Bruges outshines every other combat cruiser in the roster, even against stronger energy saves.

The second of our torpedo cruiser options, the Ulaanbataar wants to get in close and brawl at scan range. It can unload a solid amount of firepower on weapons free, the highlight being the Arowana Missile Turrets with 6 3+ lock attacks with Scald-1. It has the solid durability of the UCM cruiser chassis to stay in the center of a fight for an extended period. Like the Boston, however, it is quite overpriced for what it does. The torpedoes are the longest range weapon at its disposal, with everything else limited to 6”. It can shoot absolutely nothing at scan+sig range. That’s made all the worse by the fact that just one Ulaanbataar costs only five points less than two Havanas. Once again, the cruiser option for torpedoes is just plain inferior to the Havana.

Finally, we have ourselves a torpedo cruiser that is a decent option. What the Bucharest has that both the Ulaanbataar and Boston do not is an option at scan+sig range, and a pretty good one at that. Taipan Lasers are a really good complement to the Bucharest’s close range weapons. They contribute some reliable energy damage on approach, something no other torpedo cruiser has. When they finally get to scan range, the Taipan Lasers kick into high gear with Scald-2. A group of Bucharests may not be the best target for Overcharge Lasers, but if those extra four shots are the difference between killing and not killing a target, it’s nice to have the option. If you want a torpedo brawler for your medium ship allotment, this is probably your best option.

The Glasgow is a new cruiser variant for 2.0, most closely resembling the Madrid. It changes out the 4200 for the Arowana Missile Turret, paying a few more points in the process. And ho boy am I a fan of that upgrade. The Glasgow has all the advantages of the Madrid’s bombardment weapon. It can shoot literally any target on any layer, while still bringing the smackdown to dropsites. The Arowanas might be close range only, but I see that as a plus. You won't be tempted to go weapons free too early in the game. Instead, you can stay on General Quarters, sticking close to a dropsite, daring someone to come near. When they do, you can open up with those brutal Scald-1 missiles. The Glasgow is a front line brawler through and through. Pick a dropsite to claim as your own and clear away any drop assets nearby.

The Geneva is the backline utility command ship of the UCM fleet. You're taking this ship for three reasons. First is Detector. This is just a fantastic asset for a fleet largely out classed in scan ranges. Sitting in the back and pinging away helps even the engagement. Second is Command Ship-1. That's an additional ability point and a +1 to initiative rolls every turn. The third, which is really just the inevitable result of the first two, is that this ship has absolutely no reason to be anywhere near combat. You can keep your admiral nice and safe behind those dense debris fields, scanning away and telling everybody what to do. The Geneva, however, suffers in comparison to the Las Vegas in my opinion. The additional launch of that ship adds some even more valuable utility to the support role. Still, if you think you don't need any more launch and want to save some points, the Geneva is hardly a bad flagship.

The Seattle remains a solid workhorse of the UCM fleet. With the cap on launch now gone, you need to make sure you at least have some fighter cover. The Seattle is the single most efficient source of fighters and bombers in the UCM roster. It has the standard solid UCM cruiser chassis and a decent main weapon. It has one job: keep a steady stream of launch. It should largely hang back from the fight, but close enough to contribute longer range shots once spikes start getting high. It doesn’t have to worry about any fancy orders. Just clear your spikes, do your move, launch, and take any shots you have available. If you find yourself outnumbered by bombers, be conservative with your Seattle. Your fighters have plenty of range, so you want to keep your own source of launch safe while hunting down opposing carriers with other ships.

You all the problems I’ve had with the torpedo cruisers so far? Yeah, it’s a similar story here. This ship is to the Ulaanbataar as the Seattle is to the Rio. It trades the Ulaanbataar’s Arowana Missile Turrets for Launch-2 Fighters and Bombers. That weaponry, unfortunately, forces it to either not use its weapons, or put itself into a much more risky position than a Seattle would. There’s not contributing shots from distance. You either need to be up close and personal, or you’re paying five more points over a Seattle to contribute less to the game. It’s not a good trade.

The San Fran is UCM’s main source of bulk landers. For that reason, you may feel like it’s a ship forced upon you. Don’t feel that way. The San Fran is one of the best all around troopships in the game these days. It has the usual UCM cruiser durability, solid speed, and only costs 100 points. That’s all you really need. Put this baby on silent running or hide behind some debris early in the game. You will generally want it to activate early in turns, when dropsites have the highest chance to have no opposing troops, in order to maximize your bulk landers. They will most certainly be high priority targets. Don’t be afraid to throw Intensify Point Defense or Next-Gen Armor Plating on this ship despite being a group of one. The longer it is around and the harder you make it to kill, the more troops you will get on the ground and the likelier you will win the game.

This ship has been renamed from 1.0 because screw Putin and his invasion of Ukraine. Good for TTCombat. And just like the name is an upgrade in 2.0, so is this ship. The combination of the Cobra Lasers into a single weapon makes for one nasty energy shot on standard orders. Even PHR ships need to sweat this baby. That’s because it takes only one energy save to take PHR down to a 5+ energy save. Heck, it only takes two criticals to reduce the best energy save in the game down to the minimum 6+. This laser hurts. Yeah, those UF-4200s exist, but they’re not why you’re bringing a Warsaw. It costs only 30 points over the standard cruiser equivalent in the Berlin, for which it gets more hull and a big upgrade in its laser. If you keep this ship on general quarters all game and just snipe from distance, it will be plenty effective for its cost.

This ship likewise has been renamed since 1.0. Again, screw Putin. Slava Ukraini. And just like the Warsaw, the Vilnius came to throw down in 2.0. This ship absolutely loves the change to general quarters allowing half of its weapons to fire rounded up. That means it is able to use both of its UF-6400s without exposing itself to additional spikes. It can instead save that order for when it wants to bring the 4200s and their fusillade into play. It's an impressive amount of damage for only 30 points over the Rio. This ship will shine against targets with lower kinetic saves. I really want to see what it can do in tandem with a Nuuk. If you can turn off a target’s defenses, the Vilnius puts out the most points to point hits in the UCM fleet.

I am going to admit upfront I may be overestimating the Edmonton. This ship intrigues me. At first glance, its weapons are an odd combination. Because you can't launch on weapons free, you can never use all of its weapons at the same time. That said, you are only paying 25 points over a Seattle. I think that might be worth the price for the laser and the extra hull. The Cobra Laser has a significantly higher chance of getting damage to stick against all targets than 6400s. When things slip out of that FN arc, you can default to the F/S 6400s. Otherwise you can use this in the same way as a Seattle. My default preference for UCM launch is to prioritize fighters to keep enemy bomber wings at a manageable size. Stick can, launch away, and contribute damage to targets of opportunity. When it comes choosing between the Seattle and the Edmonton, I suspect it's largely come down to preference rather than power.

I absolutely adore the Las Vegas. It might be the single best flagship in all of Dropfleet. I already love the Seattle for its workhorse efficiency. This ship takes that same capability, gives you the Command Ship-1 keyword to boost your admiral level, and then adds in a source of Detector you can use while your weapons are out of range. You could not ask for a better flagship. Even more so than the Seattle, the Las Vegas wants to play it safe. You can’t go wrong sticking to the rear to push out a steady stream of launch assets and ping things with your scanner array. Once spikes start piling up, it can carefully push into weapons range to contribute some kinetic damage. At only 35 points above a Seattle, this ship is very well priced. Most of my UCM fleets start with this ship and a Seattle to provide a minimum of fighter coverage.