安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
He mentioned the cram that Onyx Watch uses, Onyx Watch has extremely bad crams for the most part that are low health, often come in volleys, and are usually mostly payload with little to no hardener. This means that area of effect options such as interceptor missiles or flak are ideal for defeating them. You likely don't even need to make a dedicated anti burst CIWS for this and could just use some normal 50mm 500m/s or so 1m long flak rounds to deal with it.
When using flak you don't need much speed since there's no AP value you have to reach and you have a decently wide area in which you can miss the shell but still hit easily with timed fuses. You also should not add any recoil absorbers because the spread will not matter so it is just wasted cost, low vel means less coolers required too, make sure to make the gun 6 barreled for extra cooling bonuses ontop since the accuracy penalty for multi barrel once again doesn't matter here. This lets you maximize on loaders, you can either pick to go with something like normal 1m loaders with up to 5 clips attached to them for a cheap but somewhat volume inefficient package that never has to stop firing, or you could look into a more compact beltfed setup that focuses only on shooting down enemy munitions and not firing when there are none so as to save on ammo before reloading then hope you've disabled the enemy or at least its munitions before you need a reload.
These sound like you just have them setup for anti air duty rather than CIWS purposes, since the nuke cruise missiles are essentially just kamikaze aircraft rather than a munition proper.
Agreed that flak is pretty damn good, and IMO used well as an outer layer for your Integrated Air Defence System, since it will hit several missiles from the incoming salvo at once, and even misses will likely hit some part of the salvo. For this, I use a 305 mm at 80 RPM which tends to thin a lot of inbound missiles quite well, but I must emphasize again that one of the most important parts of missile defence remains proper use of decoys, which are insanely cost-effective if used well, removing most radar-guided threats entirely.
they slow down your weapons aim
CIWS need to aim fast so use regular barrels
Thanks for the details on that! It is certainly many orders of magnitude larger than I was going for. However I really like the Idea of no future stuff! That is a cool build restriction. Thanks for sharing the details of them. It will be useful when I resume my quest for an effective CIWS. For now I am taking the LAMS and small/medium interceptor approach. I feel like CIWS needs a buff to justify replacing an entire gun with it. When I think of a CIWS I think of a relatively small ultra high fire rate weapon. That concept does not seem to translate to FTD very well. Especially considering that the game has a hard cap on fire rate because of physics steps. I don't think small CIWS are even capable of achieving a volume of fire that would work all that well. But that could just be me being inexperienced.
However! You can kind of counter that weakness by manually setting the fire rate lower, cutting back on your cooling to match, and putting extra ammo inputs on the ALs and clips. If you do it well enough, you can get to the point where the first AL's clip that runs out is done reloading by the time that the gun gets back to it and keep your firerate steady. You lose some of the space savings from going beltfed, but not nearly all of it.
It's not something I have a lot of experience with personally, but I do have enough to know that it works and I know there are other people who use it a lot. It might be worth asking around about it in particular for details.
EDIT: Well color me happy, it's true! Not that I doubted. This definitely means the answer to the OP's main question is "yes if you use beltfed autoloaders" then, lol.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2165699234
Guess what? It's a BAD weapon. The projectile speed of the autocannon is so low this thing is useless outside doing pretty fireworks despite firing at rate similar to my actual CIWS'.
Yeah that is a pretty accurate take away. The real life CIWS that the USA uses has a fire rate that is about twice as fast as is even possible in FTD. Also it is relatively small at like 5ish meters tall. There are only 40 physics steps a second in FTD, and that locks the possible fire rate at 2400RPM. It wouldn't matter if it is a simple weapon or advanced cannon. That's why I said the idea of CIWS does not translate to FTD very well. In FTD the gun needs to be really big to be effective. The fire rate does not matter as much as size. So the concept of small caliber and high volume of fire hits a stone wall so to speak. The needed volume is not achievable without more physics steps. It kinda sucks, but that's ok, I get it. There are a lot of reasons why allowing for realistic CIWS would cause problems in terms of balance and performance. The whole simple weapons trick you pulled of is both hilarious and really cool. Other creative solutions like that could potentially solve the volume of fire problem.
Update: Ignore that whole bit about 2400 RPM being the maximum. It is certainly not. I had thought it was. The APS firing piece says it is, and I remembered seeing somewhere withing the game that FTD has 40 physics steps per second. But I figured I would double check and I have no clue what the maximum fire rate is now. Guns act kinda strange above 2400RPM, but they both do more damage per second and expend more rounds, so I would say they can fire faster than 2400RPM.