SE Warfare II: Destroyers Are Better Than Cruisers
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 09. 2024
- No probably not.
But in terms of circumstance; sometimes it makes more sense to build Destroyers over Cruisers.
Sometimes you're playing a game of value; and in that category, the ability to have more, sometimes beats the ability to have less.
Playlist for Outlands Season 2
• Outlands Teaser: A Dif...
Check Out Kmax Prime's Channel (alt Pov)
/ @kmaxprime
Want to catch up on the story so far? Watch the Last season of Outlands
• Space Engineers: Outla...
Come join the discord!
/ discord
Like the work I do? Want to help pay for servers? Leave a tip?
/ getbrocked
As a Battletech nerd, this is what I call "Succession Wars Syndrome", where constant cycles of strategic warfare without sufficient pause for recovery result in a mutually degrading industrial base, causing a kind of forced de-escalation where both sides end up using less advanced but more logistically sustainable weaponry
catapult doctrine :D
I love the fact that you talk about actual real-world naval analogies. Came for the cool spaceships, stayed for Jutland.
i think his confusing the heavy cruiser as the cruiser’s role. the heavy cruiser was usually used historically as a commerce raider/defender an long term patrol ship. which also replaced the protected cruisers which was a light cruiser….more armor, same speed roughly sometimes more, bigger guns, heavy cruisers in general were an upgrade to the commerce raider/defender.
in fact the term cruiser originally applied to fast light frigates that did exactly that, till around 1880.
than you had armored cruisers which were more of a fleet oriented ship, fast, take punches, can deliver punches.
the armored cruiser was replaced by the battle/dreadnought cruisers (historically the term battle and dreadnought cruiser was used interchangeably but dreadnought would refer to the method of armament) and the killer cruisers (cruisers that specialized in killing cruisers).
ironically the heavy cruiser ended up taking the role of the convoy raider/defender and the light cruisers took up the role of battle.
than it switched again with the advent of technology making cruisers a little too redundant with subs and naval aircraft.
the heavy cruiser became a troop supporter for amphibious assaults and naval battles.
an the light cruiser became an escort and occasional raider.
an eventually both of these were rolled up into one in the modern era with missile cruiser generalist that could do it all; escort your ships, raid enemy ships, sometimes even hunt subs, and support troops.
@@draconisthewyvern3664 yeah but you have to also understand that that is very nieche knowledge that not many know
@@draconisthewyvern3664 sir, this is a CZcams video about a science fiction game, not a history channel.
I think you have hinted at it a bit, but I would love to see a breakdown of how the KE has absolutely dominated this season, they seem to have tore through the CDF and Rider fleets. Would love to see a tour of their ships to see how they did that
yeah, I have a video on deck on the fall from the CDF perspective.
But the KE story isn't over yet. So I'd like to save that
as a KE guy, i've gotta say we had a lot of lucky moments, for real. but i'm also really interested in seeing a "this faction, this season" kind of video as well.
their is no break down. they have small ships and lots of them focuesed on speed. the previos fights where slugs. different rules different outcome. no suprise
@@cardinalthewarden888 well they seem to have sort of abandoned that for pure gun power, since they've produced 4 sluggish battleships, all with 12, 400mm guns and an assortment of secondaries and tertiaries.
@@cookiecraze1310 in a way, the KE emulates the orks from 40k with both their desire for more speed and gunz, as well as their chaotic ship design
I'm sad I have yet to see any faction invest in an Aircraft Carrier. I understand the fact that due to the speed cap that small grid is basically useless in a battle like this but I thought a formation of 1 AC and 3 Destroyers or 4 Frigates would have been awsome.
view it as a case of WWI--> WW2 era atm
but we're still in a war in the 30s.
The aircraft actually has proven to be insanely good in tests.
But the Riders are in a fight for survival. While the KE are just looking to deliver the lights out.
No one wants to risk a unproven tech at the moment
@@GetBrocked Thats surprising, I would have thought that Aircraft would get chewed up by the amount of 20 and 43mm rotary cannons there are. There is also one question I have been wanting to ask you, are you a Battletech fan?
Id love to design a drone AC where it just spews out drone fighters at an abborhant amount. And only one guy needs to controll one fighter and the other drones will fall in line.
@@Rileylego-fq6wc Would be interesting, I think the early weaponcore tournaments had a team like that. Would be an interesting programming challenge for the drones though.
@@dragonmaster1500 ive seen a script where you can have other rc ships fly behind you as a fleet but only like a min long clip on yt. But theres another ytber that using the new turrets has created a drone that autopilots and swarms enemy ships using the auto target. I think if you had a big rod with bunch of those drones taped to it and just shot the rod out at an enemy ship once it was within range all the drones could launch. They probs wont do mutch damage but they will free up defence systems so a cheaky shot can be launched at the enemy ship hopefully disableing it. Or a handcrafted missile can sneak in and detonate several warheads right next to the ship.
note that might give a slight bit of favour to cruisers: taking more hits to kill also means it likely takes more time, which can be very valuable in a battle that can take only a few minutes to half an hour. being able to survive a few blews and rendevouz can be useful to let the vessel survive or if it's still mostly operational fight back with a counter-push
More hits to kill doesn't necessarily translate to more hits to disable or render combat ineffective, though. Pound for pound it seems larger vessels should be stripped/crippled much sooner, since surface area (and hence space for hardpoints) does not increase as quickly as volume
@@cptnoname Unless you use designs with empty zones or complex forms that maximize surface area
That can only account for so much, though, and will reduce overall structural integrity, introducing more points of failure. Can't escape the area to volume issue, either way. Regardless of the form factor, surface area is still going to increase by a factor of L² while the internal volume increases by L³.
@@cptnoname
Just to note, even considering the square cube law, your ship's form factor still matters. A flat wing will always be able to bring more of its weapons to bear on a single target than a cube simply because its guns won't have their line of sight blocked. You're otherwise correct, you just missed a detail.
@@cptnonameon the other hand, bigger ship means it's easier to apply an effective redundancy. In a small DD even if you make redundant conveyor lines, they're so close from each other than a single lucky shot or a massive blast can rip them apart...
been there, done that, a dual railgun salvo struck my ship from starbd to port and disabled my conveyors plus erased few batteries leaving her with no propulsion for 2/3 of the length including forward thrust... oopsie. I had a four way redundancy, but due to earlier battle damages and ship size, two were already damaged on several points and then zapped by railgun.
The combination of heavy armor/blastdoors carefully placed and space make a redundancy design far more durable on a large ship like a cruiser than on a mosquito like a destroyer or a frigate.
Might just be my perception, but seems like Gary has a crazy amount of additional thrusters, far more than the other cruisers. If so, explains its slipperiness.
most KE ships have 30-50% more thrust, so yeah. Good observation
@@GetBrocked that makes a ton of sense considering how hit probabilities seem to have played out across the war so far. Less the KE being more tanky, more just being untouchable
Wait aren't thrusters also super tanky (almost heavy armor like) due to the Metal Grid re-balance. Wouldn't that mean the the Gary is basically coated in HA with breaking the rules?
@AegisAngel the armored thrusters were nerfed
ke Motto is "MOAR THRUST!"
and answering the rules question about the thrusters "HP", we now use a house mod for them, they have the same HP as light armor for their size.
The way I set it up, a cruiser is a more versatile ship. With dedicated hangar bay, production, and a more versatile array of armament, but in doing so makes it less potent pound for pound against large warships. Destroyers sacrifice a hangar, production and basically anything else not mandatory to gain speed and firepower, and has almost no point defense weapons, instead gaining a devastating artillery array to gun down large foes. So cruisers will still always have a purpose as a good general jack of all trades ship that can fights when needed. But when shit gets real, a destroyer hunting pack will kill almost any major threat.
Just got back into Space Engineers and Love these type of roleplay servers, definitely checking it out.
"If a ship is a box with thrusters..." zooms in on an actual box with thrusters.
Love your videos man. Your talk about faction wars and all that space ship thing made me interested in space engineers again, trying to learn simple stuff like ho to make hovers and bases.
Although i may not understand all the ships classifications and stuff like that, i genuinely adore the style of your videos.
Torpedo boat destroyers are also mainly used to/good for screening heavier ships from, well, torpedo boats. Hence the name. Later they added torpedoes because the hero lives long enough to become the villain.
Getting hit below the waterline by explosives exploiting the fact that water is regrettably, incompressible is really bad. Torpedoes aren't guided at the time however, and may not run shallow enough to hit a ship with a shallow draft either. Practically that means that a ship with torpedoes must get in close to make her attack (benefits from being small and fast), has difficulty hitting smaller vessels (which are also small and fast), and extremely good at killing larger vessels (which are not fast, and have armor/structure too massive for subcapital guns). While you can't sink a battleship with 5" guns (You can damage one fairly badly at very close range however, see the Solomons for examples), you can absolutely sink her with torpedoes.
I'm mostly reminded of playing victory at sea with a friend where I brought a fairly balanced IJN skirmish force consisting of a CA (Myouko), CL (Aoba), and four DDs (Kagero-class), while my opponent brought KMS Scharnhorst and two 1938A Zestoren.
Scharnhorst's a battlecruiser (One might say a battleship, but an early battleship is perhap accurate), and my surface guns can't meaningfully damage her at medium range. We close range, she plugs Myouko to the point of crippling her, and I realize at this point I should just sprint for torpedo range. Aoba's also crippled on the way in, but his two DDs can't screen my four, and the Kageros penetrate his screen. Scharnhorst takes 8 torpedo hits from Type 93s and promptly ceases to be a surface ship.
Screening's important, kids.
As for "big gun hits" and destroyer survival, it depends on the shell. USS Johnston (& Taffy 3 in general) was hit multiple times by IJN Yamato (& escorts/center force in general), but since Yamato was firing 18" AP shells, they punched right through the Fletcher's thin/nonexistent hull "armor" (1/2" STS splinter protection goes lol) and didn't detonate. 18's a lot of inches, but so is a ship. If you hit a destroyer and aren't firing common shell or special common or some other form of HE, you probably aren't going to kill it with less than several hits.
I think if you wanted to balance out Destroyers, you could find a mod that makes armor act like armor, where smaller caliber bullets just bounce off it and don't do damage. Maybe try to balance it out by having destroyers use 'torpedoes' so they aren't completely helpless against battleships and cruisers. There just isn't too much reason to go for big armor and Big guns
thats not how IRL works with armor.
any ship can be destrpyed by any other ship, given enough time, ammunition, and direct hits in the same place.
as arnor has an impact energy rating, but also multiple impacts of sub max rating.
such as 3a armor stopping several pistol bullets before it fails, but wouldnt stop one or two rifle rounds on top of each other, because of the added energy, however that dont mean you cant defeat that armor by repeatedly hitting the same place, as every successive hit does a bit more damage to that spot until it eventually fails and allows partial penetration, leading eventually to a full penetration.
the issue i have with SE armor is it doesnt take into account glancing blows, or armor angle when calculating damage to a block.
isn't volley fire the answer to the problem of long range + low acuracy
somewhat, but even then it's still pretty dismal .
Given what I'm hearing here, it seems like the Naval ship classification system (not mentioning your server's weapon limitations) isn't structured for how Space Engineers works. For example, your description of the Cruiser and it's actual function seems much more like a light battleship, not a cruiser.
Huh, so cruiser would be nice to have with stable economy, to secure own territory. In case of attack, they would slow down or engage a larger enemy force.
Destroyers (or lighter ships) are good scouts or skirmishers. Cruiser can be local breaking point in mission specific scenarios.
But as you noticed: attrition changes things - the rate effectiveness to cost matter. If one can afford to send light cruisers to the frontline, they would do so.
Cruisers, in my mind, are meant to do just that. Cruise.
So for me it's a destroyer, with a bunch of extra stuff for long voyages, independent operation (possibly even a small hangar/resource capability) and top speed. Which adds to the cost.
It's not really a slap fight ship. It's the original concept in my eyes of a "mothership" a small one anyway.
plus taking into account the aggression people have for your flagship in a fight you can find yourself swarmed fast if you aren't careful, restricting your abilities.
Special weapons were also a big part of WW2 and WW1 destroyers mainly the depth charges which made destroyers some of the only and best anti submarine counters
Ya know, I wonder what we would do about stray bullets in space in the future when we have real ships. All those shells being launched 360 in all directions, they may burn up in atmosphere but by then, we would have some moon colonies and space stations floating around. Unless they're some special self destruction bullets, but wouldn't it just create more shrapnel.
Realistically, you wouldn't be using unguided ammunition like you see in Space Engineers. Engagements in space would likely take place over such long distances that orbital mechanics become a factor. There's been some Kerbal Space Program warfare series (like Kethane Station or Macey Dean's vids) that I'd argue are good examples as to how long-ranged space combat would take place.
I like your videos a lot. It's nice to see SE combat being realised. But even way back in the day when it was broken af there was a fairly obvious diminishing return on increased mass vs effectiveness. When you factor in logistics/cost. In that the most efficient ship is the smallest "big" class of vessel. Aka destroyer. As you go up in size/class they for sure get more powerful, but they also get less efficient
I remember when we first figured this out with Starmade in 2014. Was enlightening to realize cheap mass produced drones were vastly superior to ships with inordinate amounts of firepower and shielding. Nice to see the tradition continues to this day. =)
@GetBrocked i think you’re confusing the heavy cruiser as the cruiser’s role. the heavy cruiser was usually used historically as a commerce raider/defender an long term patrol ship. which also replaced the protected cruisers which was a light cruiser….more armor, same speed roughly sometimes more, bigger guns, heavy cruisers in general were an upgrade to the commerce raider/defender.
in fact the term cruiser originally applied to fast light frigates that did exactly that, till around 1880.
than you had armored cruisers which were more of a fleet oriented ship, fast, take punches, can deliver punches.
the armored cruiser was replaced by the battle/dreadnought cruisers (historically the term battle and dreadnought cruiser was used interchangeably but dreadnought would refer to the method of armament) and the killer cruisers (cruisers that specialized in killing cruisers).
ironically the heavy cruiser ended up taking the role of the convoy raider/defender and the light cruisers took up the role of battle.
than it switched again with the advent of technology making cruisers a little too redundant with subs and naval aircraft.
the heavy cruiser became a troop supporter for amphibious assaults and naval battles.
an the light cruiser became an escort and occasional raider.
an eventually both of these were rolled up into one in the modern era with missile cruiser generalist that could do it all; escort your ships, raid enemy ships, sometimes even hunt subs, and support troops.
I would do some reading, it was not nearly as specialized as you make it out to be. Especially in the prewar-WWII era.
@@GetBrocked commerce raider, convoy defender, long term patrol ship, troop supporter, sometimes a little sub hunting
i don’t see how what i said would be considered specialized. those are just things cruisers did, the cruiser was largely a generalist ship while being relatively fast with sub classes that were specialized/leaning into one area over another, for example ww2 the usa had aa light escort cruisers that could still support troops and… like the atlanta class cruiser or the omaha class with its 14 aa guns (8 20mm 6 40mm) while also having torpedo tubes and…
I don't play this game, but the fights going on the the video are mesmerizing lol. And I guess some of what you're talking about can be used in the book I'm writing.
The U.S has a naval doctrine of accuracy by volume. That's why we have so many destroyers and cruisers per carrier and did away with battleships. I like to play with the komdo 2 destroyer . Guided missiles we with 5km range (vannilla) are amazing.
I really wanna join the server and just do recon missions. Like i wanna build a small stealth ship ( i forgot the actuall name of them) and just make a big ol guided missile and tape it to the side to just bassicly snipe at enemy thrusters and then leave and wait for the main fleet to come in and do some plinkin. Or just stare into a camera for hours. Thats also fun
it's always nice to have new people aboard. joins us and enjoy the ride!
@@maverickr0x822 id love too but the only thing stoppin me is my horrendus internet. Which is why id wanna do recon kinda stuff. Dont need a low ping to do that if i do it correctly.
@@Rileylego-fq6wc RN we actually dont have "recon missions" going on. we usually just "play" the battles and such. you might wanna check outlands videos on getbrocked channel to check it out how it works.
that said, you are more than welcome to join us on discord and talk about the series and a bunch of not series related stuff. ;-)
You are very well informed on these topics, but a bit rambly in your discussion of them. Do you use a script when making these discussion videos? If not then you totally should! If you do then maybe have someone else review your scripts?
(spoilers sort of)
it would be nice to see a breakdown of why your think the khan curb stomped the riders and in particular the CDF so hard during the 2nd season.
video already done coming up soon.
It's pretty lite analysis for a number of reasons but yeah next week
About what you said regarding US abilities to build. Ive read that Chinas biggest shipyard, have more capacity than all seven US naval shipyards combined.
Yes but no.
They can make more ships sure. But the US also isn't building at the same break neckspeed.
We also contract out building typically. So the US active shipyards varies quite a bit.
No one is competing with #s when it comes to china you're right
Just like stellaris,
Destroyers are better than battleships
Too bad noone invested into light cruisers with purpose of hunting destroyers. Light Cruiser being mostly thrusters so to make them just as fast and maneuverable as destroyers with light and medium guns.
I believe just one light cruiser would chow on destroyers or atleast keep them at bay while normal cruisers and destroyers would deal with heavier opposition
the khans have done that, hence their success rate. but the reality is, even there the Destroyers are the ones racking up the kills
Good stuff!
Modern destroyer/cruiser designations are way more logical for space engineers, not sure why you said they depart from logic, a roles based systems just makes more sense in an age of guided missiles.
yeah, but space engineers doesn't have guided missiles.
@@GetBrocked I would argue even then, given the setting of space engineers, that the modern designation system makes more sense, at least personally.
@@teargass1849 thats fair. Different strokes for different folks.
Always prefered smaller ships that pack a punch over big capital types.
Smaller ships like corvettes and destroyers have always been my go to over battleships and carriers
another point. the destroyer is most faster to bulid than a crusier, when you finish a crusier, your enemy haf 2 o 3 destroyers
indeed. In our universe it's either 1:4 or 1:6 for light and heavy cruisers respectively.
A cruiser like a battleship is a rearguard vessel meant to protect the flagship while supporting frontline vessels like destroyers and frigate’s they would only engage if there’s low risk of losing the cruiser or your just desperate.
Like for every 1 cruiser there 2 destroyers and for every 2 destroyers there’s 4 frigates this is a basic battle group you could double this if your battle group includes either a battleship or a carrier. But for the most part the roles of your cruisers is unchanged and should still hang back to help protect the flagship.
And yeah to me destroyers are just cheaper pocket cruisers that are superior in speed and maneuverability over the more expensive cruisers
A Cruiser is great if you have a Cruiser.
but not so great when you have to choose between a cruiser and 4 or more destroyers.
@@GetBrocked Indeed!
But I wonder maybe if the problem was just as simple as Cruisers being overpriced? 2x the block count, but 4x the cost...
If a ring attached to a rig spins in space, what would spin, the rig inside the ring, or the ring around the rig? And if it is based on mass, what ratio is required to offset to cause one or the other🌐 think rubics cube.
It sounds like the loss of a destroyer is not as significant as as it should be.
What all mods do you guys use? I use assault weapons, and I see Lifetech Power, I guess I'm more inquiring about the rear thrust on the Eternity.
a custom variant of tiered thrusters
Ah, noted. Thank you.
Has anyone tried to make a carrier, that launches small craft to take on the bigger ships and drift thru the cloud of missiles to harass and pinpoint damage onto enemy craft?
we're working on it. The carrier is not the hard part. It's the fighters
Has any faction made something akin to the pocket battleships like the German Deutschland class from WWII? A heavy cruiser with BB guns or something along those lines?
I’m not sure if the Oil would fall into the category or not
Not even related to the video ik but I’m curious. Seems like a missed opportunity if not, but maybe the rules don’t allow it
the ravager would basically be that (light battleship)
@@GetBrocked Not really.
The Deutschlands were effectively just uparmed armoured cruisers, and were reclassified to heavy cruisers at the onset of WW2.
The nickname of pocket battleship mainly referred to their 283mm guns, even though said calibre had already fallen out of favour as battleship armaments by the time the class entered service. What's more is that their increased calibre didn't really improve their capability to take on other cruisers, which is probably why the succeeding Admiral Hipper-Class would see a return to a more standard 203mm guns.
Now, in Outlands you can't really make something similar to the Deutschlands, given that all available capital grade turrets are 400mm's, but taking a pair of quads and focusing on medium weaponry for the rest would probably be the closest you can get to the concept.
As for the Rav, given her backstory she'd be more of a fast battleship in comparison to what's supposed to be available in the Pioneer System, though at this point she's got some heavy competition for that classification.
So basically, cruiser's are better in every way apart from build speed, manoeuvrability and how many are generally available to be fielded but because of how much longer they take to build, they kinda suck ;)
Hi
All these mods but no increased max speed mod lol
here we go, back to engineers saying anything you have ever thought cool is actually BAD XD
hello
hi mabs
@@GetBrocked kiss