Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
E.g. you could try a torpedo-boat. Little/no AA-defences, no shields, no LAMS, light armour, maybe flares - but high speed, and powerfull torpedos.
Will obviously be screwed fighting airships, or designs with high-velocity cannons, but chances are it'll tear stuff like the Crossbones apart.
Perhaps as an example, my only design that's actually up-to-date (allthough I have some more that still work, but at reduced efficiency, due to patches): https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1584828128
Woah man, that ship flies really fast and stable too. (At that speed, I would call anything flies.) Look so realistic too... dang man.
Here's mine design so far. An exact 600 blocks, 39m in length, 19m width and 9m height with 1243.4 volume 11290 resource.
Max speed at the moment reachs from 14mps to 16mps which... feels pretty slow on a supposedly small ship.
It has 4 giant proppeller and a guns thats pending on upgrade soon.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1588228611
I have seen design made by people that looks even smaller than the both of ours... I always wondered how he get the thing
worked in the first place. I guess being a heavy metal guy are just not cut out for the lighter stuff?
The gun is going to blow up the moment anything looks at it. Armour those clips, at least with ERA, plates, or wood, but better would be alloy. It would also likely do better with several barrels (gauge increasers replacing some of the old gauge coolers).
The AI-connector below the cameras is needlessly exposed. Add a slope/corner there.
For anything more in-depth I'd probably need the blueprint.
IIrc my smallest "reasonably functional" boat was 7m wide, 3m high (+1m rudder sticking out at the bottom + 1m detection sticking out on the top), and I think about 12m long. Could take out a Crossbones with half a dozen of them.
That said, it was from before the missile-overhaul, and would likely not be viable the way it was before. Also ugly as hell.
Yeah about the gun design... I was trying to build it smaller too... but I realize building anything smaller than that would be un-reasonably big for a smaller ship design. d:
This must be coming from your experience on fighting some of the higher tier foes... I've been fighting Deepwater Guard level enemy a lot so.. I probably didnt account for the EMP rounds and other weaponry from other faction.
Hmmm.... how do we do that? I have not much knowledge when it comes to sharing stuff on steam and games like this.
Either look for your constructables folder (not sure where it is, iIrc it should be in Documents -> From the Depths -> Player Profiles -> [My Profile]), and upload the .blueprint file somewhere (e.g. Discord, or Dropbox).
Or FtD's main-menu, on the right. Workshop and stuff -> vehicle workshop. Rest should be explained well enough.
Yes... I probably should have thought about that when I tested it in qualification testing mode. Those shell lobbed by the ball of death have poor AP. In most of the engagement I have, the enemy tend to fire them slow enough that the Midal would have taken out the ships important component. But.. if I happen to encounter a fast firing accurate one at that.... one of those round bound to hit where it hurts and take it out for good.
Als, here this is. https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1588420036
80m is practically the size of a small cruiser, in ftd. if you would add more armor around it, i think you might end up being happy with it in the end.
i have the opposite problem. i always design small, minimalistic crafts.
I built ship thats 60-80m long, and they can only fit 1-2 weapons, (Unless I want to be fancy and place a lot of auto cannons lol) Which is probably the reason why even on a 60-80m long I still call it a corvette, not even a frigates d:
My 30-50m boat on the other hand, is a fast attack boat with 1 guns that runs up to 16mps-20mps (the latter speed is actually rare.)
I am quite curious to see what kind of design you have that you would consider 60-80m a small cruiser.
As said, slopes. Also note that propellers count as flat blocks, so those need slopes in front too.
The rudder is placed way too low. Causes rolling whenever trying to turn.
The general layout of the components is not ideal. Leaves you with pretty significant amounts of "useless" hull, especially at the front (even without adding more slopes). E.g. the engine could be placed in front of the AI (or probably a different engine rather than that one), which would allow you to lower the turret (with parts of it being inside the hull), lowering CoM.
There's generally quite a bit of metal on the top. Reduces stability quite a bit, and alloy is still 2/3 as effective. Alloy with wood in front would be lighter, with probably quite similar strength (but more costly and bigger).
Active stability will help. Especially if you want something both small and fast - it will flip, simply due to the ridiculous thrust-to-weight ratios we have in FtD. I recommend hydrofoil pitch and roll (but the latter only as assist - it should still be stable in case of engine-failure).
Needs work with beaming. There are many cases where you could have used fewer blocks. Beams are also tougher, so you're losing on tankyness.
Felt it could do with more ammo storage. May also want to add ACBs to turn the processors off at times, haven't calculated how much of its ammo-needs are covered by passive regen now.
The turret is not exactly great. In part because it's deck-mounted. As mentioned above, I moved the engine to the bow (and modified the AI a bit to be more compact). Turret is now mostly buried in the hull, and should have much greater firepower. The tetris is still not ideal (a good number of empty blocks that are wasted), but it should help.
Do note that your previous shells were "not that great" - if you want maximum speed, skimmer tips are better iIrc; for maximum damage, another frag warhead (or making it fully AP perhaps) would have been the better choice.
Move that into your Constructables folder, if you want to take a look at it. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/357965913636470786/522132841493168128/FastAttackCraftMidalMKI_Improvement.blueprint
Probably pretty small designs, because WW2 cruisers were much bigger than that. Or he uses wide designs.
Is the balance propulsion system that bad? I didn't realize it might cause some trouble.
The rudder placement is.. actually based on what I seen on google, people says placing the rudder far behind the center of mass and below?... Hold on... so the rudder can still turn the boat at the center of mass? with more stability?
"Useless hull" you mean that it doesn't protect the ship vital component? I have thought that thicker walls would mean that the enemy will have to go through a lot more to hit the inside?
Never really liked using wood due to its poor armor though.
Woah! a definite improvement on stability and mobility.. its moving at 30mps! Mighty great thanks to ye man.
Hoo, they got the AI using the hydrofoil now? I saw it turning, way back then the AI would never use that thing unless you have ACB.
Cannons tend to consume less ammo than even the smallest of missile, so the old setup I had it firing consistently even with those little ammo factories in it.
I notice the use of PID, I never understood how to use those boxes, description wasn't that clear on what those value actually do to the ship.
Inertial Fuse... should have known that would help ensuring the shell detonating on impact regardless of AP value. I've been leaning towards the shaped charge shell alot, so that might do the trick... although it so far I did not see any sort of deflection my shaped charge advanced cannon shell yet.
I've also noticed that the barrel is... abnormally large in handling the little 60mm custom shell. Normally it will be thin as a stick... how is it possible?
High explosive are normally use to blow up woods or help a scharge/sabot round goes into the ship right? and the frag helps to destroy heavy metal armor?
Even if the algorithm was good (and didn't occasionally deactivate every last thruster on a stable design), it'd still reduce efficiency. Better to see the vehicle flip and adjust thruster-placement, than not notice anything is wrong and operate at reduced speed.
Depending on the hull-shape, you might actually want the rudder below CoM, but at times also above. Depends on the sideways-drag. But CoM is generally a good starting point.
I don't think placing the rudder intentionally below CoM ever increased turning force. Only thing I can think of is that people were trying to shift the centre of drag to the direction they wanted to turn. That could, depending on your hull-shape, speed things up a bit (especially your "wings" would be effective for that with flat blocks), but would also ruin your speed. And look terrible. And potentially mess with aiming. And wouldn't work on realistic hull-shapes.
So TL;DR rudder at, or close to, height of CoM.
Walls are usefull. But unless you're building a frontal broadsider, having 2m side armour and >4m frontal armour is not an optimal distribution of armour.
Basically, your entire bow was just structural blocks. A hit there wouldn't really hurt the ship much, but it'd still cost materials - if you had nothing there, it wouldn't hurt at all and wouldn't cost mats. If you had more components there (as I made it), you could increase dakka. And you can neva have enuf dakka.
Wood, on its own, is paper. Wood, when backed with high-AC components, is very cost-efficient.
Sum is the amount of "AP * kinetic_damage" you'd need to pierce with an AP-projectile (only applies at up to twice the lowest AP, but you won't usually see >30 AP on non-railgun cannons).
As you can see, 2m metal + 3m wood is a little tougher than 3m metal, but cheaper and lighter. Also better vs lasers, as all well-designed lasers ignore AC (they ignore layering, and getting 30 or 80 AP isn't difficult for them).
Basic AI doesn't. You need PIDs for that (or Lua, or ACBs). They're located near the engine (use shift + P until it only shows important blocks), but you could place them anywhere.
Fake point is the intended postion (altitude for alt-PID, pitch-angle for pitch PIDs, etc.). Integral is usually best set to max. Derivate tries to "dampen" movement, acting against the current change (so if the craft is pitching down, it'll try to push up, even if above the intended point).
Gain is the general strength. Gain of 0 disables the PID.
Mess with derivate if it wobbles, gain if it's still unstable. That should usually be enough.
HEAT-head (and HESH and hollow-point) has an impact fuse. Explodes on first contact with a block, but not on reflection by shield or water.
Mind you, HEAT will generally do better at higher calibre (like all HE-, EMP-, or flak-based shells). Which leads us to...
I'm reasonably sure the cannon is 14cm calibre. The slider in the shell-customiser doesn't do anything - it's just to help you design it. You can load that into any kind of cannon you like (as long as you use direct-feed, or loaders of sufficient length).
14cm should be just barely sufficient for HEAT, but it won't do much unless hitting weakspots. So I wouldn't rely too much on it.
I doubt you can put it like that (allthough HE can be used to strengthen HESH and HEAT, yes).
Both frag and HE will not do well against any kind of tough armour. If you do meet tough armour, frag will be quicker to pierce (if it keeps hitting the same spot), but HE will ultimately rip bigger holes. Also, HE has a tendency to seek weak-spots (due the updated explosion-algorithm). This can allow HE to "sneak" through a weakspot without hitting it directly, or to strip non-structural components (as long as they're weaker than the surrounding armour).
Also a PS on the design: You could set the RoF to 3 times of what it is now - it only uses 3 of the 9 beltfeds, to allow the others to reload, making it a steady stream of bullets. If you want burst-fire, you could use all 9 (but would likely need more recoil absorbtion/stability assist).