Would CRAM morters be good for attacking bases?

✨ Promo*SM

I appreciate your dissemination of information. The bug on fuel calc for instance- here I was thinking the fuel requirements for flamers was bonkers, turns out it's a bug. (I should have known.) One thing that I find tricky with rams is that if you aren't hitting exactly on the ram itself, you're breaking off a large part of your own vessel. And multidirectional rams, such as to prevent the vessel from trying to climb over or under the opponent adds a lot of drag. In that regard, as long as you aren't putting your vessel in ramming danger while using flamers (which is still a bit of risk on stock AI) flamers allow you to keep more general maneuverability. It could be a product of my style of building, but rams as I say tend to have a lot of drag and be somewhat heavy, and hitting anything but the ram will break a section of vessel possibly including what the ram is attached to leading to further damage. I've not built anything like your vivisector though, and I doubt anything but black magic can output better damage. I'd have to say that it's far higher damage than the average FTD player has the skill to output, though, so it's best suited as a top-end comparison than a mean.

nerd >:c, lol, good video man

So far, the niche that flamethrowers seems most promising in is that you stick one on a drone and have it fuel fires that are started deep inside a ship by APS/Cram API rounds. That way you can bypass armor with AP, and then potentially pump very significant amounts of damage into the internals without having to pay any additional "delivery" cost.

"We are going to see what kind of a niche flamethrowers have for themselves" made me lol, it's a flamethrower, I think I might know.

Good video you bring up some valid points. BorderWise made a doom cram with flame that looked pretty scary. I do thinking adding flame will make wooden ships that much easier.

You mentioned local weapon controllers being able to control the flamethrower by connecting to any block, but I couldn't manage to make that work, regardless of if I was using the 2 cell or 4 cell range on the lcw. The flamethrower would only be controlled if the lcw was attached to the firing piece. Is this just a bug?

Alright, hear me out: A missile... with a flamethrower it rams the enemy to get inside, and then burns them from within.

I'm just happy that I can now have AP-I rounds. Now if the devs added kinetic spalling that'd be the final piece.

let's go here come the fire USE guides. Looking forwards to figuring out AP incendiary stuff.

One thing not mentioned in this video about steam engines is that boilers now create fire when destroyed by anything; "Destroying steam boilers under pressure creates fires, fuel is a function of the size of the boiler chain and pressure"

I came for the From The Depth content I stayed for the intro song

Great intro 😂

I like using steam because you can turn them off with a valve when not needed. The best is the brick of small pistons but needs 7 x 7 x 8. They need to add fire extinguishers if fuel and material can burn so easy.

very nice, now teach it some party tricks

My main resource gatherer for campaign is a quadjet, using either propellers or huge jets. I did it this way because I wanted both a vehicle that could 1) be cheap 2) be fast and 3) hover in place over a resource point (even though this doesn't matter when it's out of play). Quads worked very well for this use case. And yeah, the breadboard got pretty fancy.

I've actually made a craft similar to this that sits above GT frontsiders and beams them with rail burst HESH. I noticed that sometimes the "rotate to angle" spinblock mode is a bit slow, especially for thrust outputs moving through/near the origin. To make it faster, I had the continuous spin rate mode set up with bread to change the rate to try to reach target orientation in the next game tick, and that way it can rotate at 30 rad/s no matter how much weight is put on the spinblock. My next idea would be to put the pitch-axis spinblocks onto roll-axis spinblocks for strafe and a better yaw moment. I think it would be fun to see you do this as well!

Wow! I wish I knew more about bread boards. Are you working on it to avoid projectiles? With how fast it moves, it'll have a high instability. Missiles might be a better option but kind of defeats the purpose.

my first atempt was using props, it was a nightmare because not only do you get delay from turning, but also from the propulsion system itself 😆. I think in the end i manually turned the thrusters, and had the ingame ai do the thrusterbalancing. If you can work with the delay of custom propellers you get a "free" reverse thrust tho

Great, now I know how to do tilt jets time to waste 5 hours designing a craft that I will never use!

Having it bob up and down would be super helpful

You should really test with a version of the game that predates the April Fools : Sean - 09/04/2024 12:21 Just a note that some unintentional changes went into stable regarding lasers. With the fire update lasers will get some rebalancing. But due to April Fools it looks like the laser damage buffs went through but not the nerfs on the other side of scale. Therefore lasers will overperform at the moment. We are aiming for the start of May for the fire release into stable so it'll be like that until then or unless Nick makes a hotfix. Thanks!

So at least 50% nerf to essentially everything, and 25% to DWG, the faction that has 1 craft you might want a laser against, that seems a bit harsh

Thanks for doing all the testing (and thinking)! From the notes it seemed the intent was to give watercraft more of an edge against airships. Watercraft can keep all their important bits just under the waterline, whereas airships can catch fire (alloy, speed) and have a hard time putting it out fires, esp with 'smoke nerf' that was intended to buff the lasers. Will have to investigate more. Still, a well made airship can be mostly immune to CRAMS, slower missiles, payload APS, melee, and now flamethrowers. While being slightly more vulnerable to lasers and plasma. It's very hard to have something make up for the advantage in simply having mobility, when it is so easy to achieve in this game.

Rapid Firing EMP PACs can do alot against fliers, since most aircrafts are too small to have EMP protection, its a very easy way of just dealing with a squadron of aircrafts

That laser cutter craft is sweet. Can't wait until you come out with some more awesome craft.

I'd done some bugtesting last night and found that regardless of frequency doublers lasers never start fires with an intensity above 10, which seriously hurts its performance

Wow, first plasma and now flamethrowers. Looks like the devs are in the mood to spice up the game.

Not sure if this was addressed elsewhere, but part of the reason your medium missiles were slower than the interface was telling you was due to the fin module near the front of the craft. That introduces more drag than if it were in the back, and slows the missile down overall.

Nice!:)

The best option for armor is to combine 4m beamslopes and 4m wedges, as wedges have been becoming prevalent, AP-Heat rounds are seeing widespread use for against targets failing to have multiple airgaps. The best option for defeating properly designed armor is always flanking, as this type of armor takes up a lot of space and cannot be arranged in every orientation. HESH bombers are a great option for this campaign, or high-speed flanking tanks with AP-Heat rounds.

I just started university, and integration is the bane of my existance.

The mnemonic I learned was "Oscar/Had A/Hunk Of/Apple" but I like that "So/h Ca/h To/a" clues you in to which formula does what.

Unironically With small volume craft, like those in ashes, Sabot Frag becomes a pretty reasonable munition. The tradeoff in payload damage is offset by how compact and dense the internals of enemy craft tend to be.

Where a shell hits your pole is evenly distributed across y. Not theta

Yippie. So in theory if i make a boxy tank like a tiger and make it angle it using a breadboard it should be incredibly effective?

I might as well just watch my AP chem lecture notes due tomorrow.

I love how the thumbnail is a lovely drawing of a tank, but the video is just math, math, and more math. you have successfully click baited me

14:26 You can hide any block with decos. You just have to chesk the "box" that hides the original mesh when you are creating/editing a deco (it will fully hide the block it's tethered to!) I even use this to make glass out of HA (transparent/hidden HA is cheezy).

I was laughing so loud until the word pad part... then I sh*t myself laughing... I really needed that laugh. Thank You!

I appreciate your choice of Lt Hawkeye, I'm more partial to Judith from Tales of Vesperia.

The new breadboard stuff is unhinged, The single most powerful block in the game just became even better lol...

Nice this is clean!

For taking out air fighter craft a PAC would work great.

🎉 1,000 subs!

Just 1 more sub...

This is my second favorite type of content. I really enjoy testing and demonstrations of different tactics like this. I look forward to seeing how this craft's new role affects your larger strategy in the campaign. Your designs in particular seem to have more specific consideration for how they will work as part of a group than what I've seen from other creators. Not that they don't try to make specific craft to fill certain roles, but that the roles they choose seem less cooperative. (This might stem from the general difficulty of making even 1 craft behave how you want, so I see why most prefer to let each craft function pretty much independently rather than struggle to implement synergy between multiple uncooperative AI.)

I don't even need to watch the video to say that it's really good and I liked it.

With regards to the fighter at home: - I think there is a safety module for missiles, that prevents detonation, if it hits the aircraft it was launched from - you definitely can build an aircraft, that can go faster, than 170 m/s without exploits. However, mostly to make them look good, like canted canards and horizontal stabilizers, you'll definitely need to use spin blocks, which will just make the part in question not drag inducing->the aircraft slips into cheeseland... but still, looking cool is never a crime in my book ;). With that being said, I think where most would suffer is the agility department, the fighter at home is actually very nimble due to it's size. Overall, where it could be improved is the drag department to achieve a higher top speed, but it still gets the job done for a very low price.