Not a member yet? Why not Sign up today
Create an account  

  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
The relative power level of From the Depths.

#31
(2017-04-25, 06:57 PM)TheShadowKick Wrote:
(2017-04-25, 06:37 PM)spookywaggon Wrote: Hate you break it to you guys, but we have missiles that can go at mach 6 easily, and have range measured not in miles, but light years. and when done correctly these can either A, oneshot the target, or B, transport it infinite meters in multiple directions simultaneuosly without technically damaging it.

Yes, that is a thing we have in FTD. They do that.

What are you even talking about?

Wait 1 month after 2.00 and it shall be published. Don't wanna share it now, and even if I did, there are other people working on it with me. it is technically an exploit though, so you might say it doesn't count.

Or there is impulse drives with tac nukes. which require no exploits, and can still 1 hit K.O bulwarks, but not as fun as making stuff go *poof* and disappear.
Uses the golden ratio.

[Image: n4pzmbo]

Fat_ninja - today at 1:40 PM
Would the perfect pair of boobs be 1.6 times the size of the body or vice versa?
Reply

#32
(2017-04-25, 07:15 PM)mrvecz Wrote:
(2017-04-25, 05:31 PM)TheShadowKick Wrote:
(2017-04-25, 12:18 PM)Hikari Wrote: But you skipped right over my emphasis on shields that completely stop all kinetic shells. RL shells go faster which make them even easier to bounce.

Shields don't do a thing against missiles, which most modern navies use extensively.

Well they will after the 2.0 patch

Yeah, but that's dumb so I'm ignoring it. Tongue
I can sail my airplane in space.
Reply

#33
(2017-04-24, 01:15 AM)Hikari Wrote:
(2017-04-22, 06:29 PM)afjklol Wrote: That is a limitation of AI, not the weapon's limitation. You can see APS get up to 20km effective range or more with railguns
20km is rather short by railgun standards. Modern tests have railgun within 100km range.

FTD armor is way stronger than anti-ship missiles and lams take them down even faster. Close range explosive won't affect a few meters of metal.
Given how only one side can inflict damage, Modern day still wins. FtD LAMs is short ranged. I have ye to see one that go beyond 2km which is rather on the short end for even CIWS.

Assuming modern weapons can actually go through 3m of metal.
Abrams has 1m of armor and its pretty much immune to weaponry

FTD ships also can easily do 70+ knots, I am sure modern ships don't do 70
knots

Given FtD armor is soft as butter, yes. You can't compare armor that can't stop a subsonic projectile(FtD) with composite armor that can. 70 knots won't save you from incoming fire. And I only seen hydrofoils achieve that speed. Honestly when you have to go from 150km to 200km+ range and close it to 20km(ignoring AI limitations), 70 knots is not enough. You can probably close in after an hour or two since the modern ships would also be sailing away.

Modern fighters can't fly around with 1m of armor

They don't need to. Only ground attackers need armor. Also given how we have giant transport planes that carry simialr weight with around 4 engines go at transonic... this isn't actually out of the question considering how lightweight modern composite armor can be.

We broke the speed of light x11.1million times over
The few things we manage to break the speed of light is not practical use in real combat. I think you are referring to your giant sabot. Speed of light will destroy everything(doubt that is actually reasonable for FtD to use) and it is one shot? If it isn't, it doesn't really matter considering the size and clumsiness of such device. normal and vast majority of FtD stuff don't even go near speed of sound.
1m armor of butter that can;t stop subsonic projectile... Modern jets rely on speed and agility. FtD can rely on butter armor but when your detection module, exposed jet or weapon system get blown off, you are defenseless. And FtD won't avoid that.

Shells don't need to go supersonic speeds when they're 500mm and weight a few tons, and yet again... armor...
They don't weight over a ton from what I recall(don't have FtD up right now)
500mm isn't that hard to see. Super Yamato were actually bigger in guns.
But physics say: 1/2M*V²
Modern tanks are 120mm. Roughly 4 times in mass.
Giving rather lower end value of 1800m/s modern round to FtD upper end 200m/s is still 9x faster.
According to the kinetic energy formula. Velocity is more important being squared compared to mass which is divided by two. So while FtD have 4x more mass, it will only have around twice the kinetic energy assuming it even have the same velocity.
Comparatively, that 9x velocity compared to FtD will be squared giving much higher kinetic energy.

Modern nukes are better since ftd is stuck with limits for explosions.
I know the reason
Well that is still FtD limitations. We can;t assume a value that is non-existent. And since FtD nukes is 12m then it is 12m for sake of argument.
__________________________
FTD has shields RL will never have, shields that block anything kinetic or energy, nuff said
Can't block missiles or explosion.

In land FTD has things larger than the Ratte and move at over 300miles per hour. (135m/s being the land speed limit in ftd)
No air superiority, giant target, butter armor, transonic railgun projectile at best.
Forgot to mention most stuff get stuck in any slight bump.

No further comment. My opinion. Great arguments but I got comebacks.Tongue

EDIT: Actually I do. Someone said FtD planes have lasers. But Literally everything we have except for infantry, tanks, IFV, APC and the like is at least twice the range FtD fights at. Planes short ranged missiles are measured in 50-100km.
Modern day artillery are around 40km range.
Our tanks can shoot up to 5km range which is already rather extreme by FtD standards.
And as someone else mentioned FtD are fuel guzzlers

-About the physics incompatibilities. I'm just comparing what FtD achieves in FtD and what RL achieves in RL.
Also the WW1 scenario. Artillery in WW1 literally changed the European landscape.... that got to mean something right? I say it is hard for FtD to win because WW1 armies excelled in defense and rightly so.
Another thing is that do note why tanks were invented in WW1. Because cars struggled to go through the trench and craters. Given how AotE needed to be flat for the game to even work... Attacks will bog down rather quickly and terrain changing artillery barrages lasting weeks on end will start to rain upon them.
Some more consideration will have FtD win but it still isn't a walk in the park. FtD win by air superiority. WW1 ships were inaccurate but they could hit targets reliably within visual range of 21km which already gives FtD a rather decent target but not impossible one.
Some further consideration I would say FtD can try to fight WW2 mainly because ranges aren't that insane.
[Image: fvn8BOX.gif] [Image: RFSgkaw.gif]
Reply

#34
The main problem is that FtDs limitation is balance. If we ignore balance updates and engine limitations:

Cannons that go through several meters of armor in one shot.
Lasers that obliterate everything
Particle Cannons that can cause enough force to render an entire Yamato Class useless
I made a very small cannon capable of 1.2kilometers per second. The shells can go through 16m of HA, which is several times more durable than metal.
Shields. Just, shields.
LAMS that can instantly wipe out anything at any speed.
Warp Drives
Repair bots and tentacles.
If we can make aircraft with 1m armor go at supersonic speeds, if we can use several millimeter armor then, well, since FtD armor can seemingly go through the atmosphere with no issues, we can make extremely quick jets.
The sheer RoF of everything, toppled with range from long shells decimates everything.
If all factions went on a truce we have loads of resource.
Grav rams makes everything OP.
Not to say 33k mass battleship can go 40mph
Lasers that go through several meters of armor every second.
With modding, 3000mm shells.
If shells go at proper speeds, we can destroy pretty much everything.
Automation. Nothing needs maintenance and crew. Not to say resistance emp blasts. Even if stuff gets fried repair tentacles can handle the job.


I'd say modern tech stands no chance
Darkness always surrounds light

There is never enough dakka. More is always better.
[Image: eai9kib.png]
[Image: jQbChCV.png]


Reply

#35
(2017-04-26, 05:39 AM)Nathaniel411 Wrote: I'd say modern tech stands no chance

Nukes, it wouldnt matter how strong FTD weapons are if nuke detonates 500 metres away. Nothing would survive. Since nukes dont have 12 m blast cap radius.
Reply

#36
500m radius is a balancing feature.

Hell if we use proper lasers it would detonate before it reaches. Also, we can use docking stations to lure ships out of the area to space.
Darkness always surrounds light

There is never enough dakka. More is always better.
[Image: eai9kib.png]
[Image: jQbChCV.png]


Reply

#37
Ship wouldnt even see the missile to shoot it down

After it gets like in 5km radius it will impact in like one or two seconds so lasers wouldnt even have eneugh time to heat the missile.
Reply

#38
Again, engine limitations. Modern day equipment doesn't need eyes to see targets.
If modern day tech can detect it so can FtD
Darkness always surrounds light

There is never enough dakka. More is always better.
[Image: eai9kib.png]
[Image: jQbChCV.png]


Reply

#39
(2017-04-26, 05:39 AM)Nathaniel411 Wrote: The main problem is that FtDs limitation is balance. If we ignore balance updates and engine limitations:

It seems rather silly to ignore FtD's limitations. We could also come up with a number of ridiculous IRL technologies if we ignore R&D costs and physical limitations.
I can sail my airplane in space.
Reply

#40
Forgot to mention, small 3x10 satellites 500m in the sky can see an island around the size of Hawaii... If we have bigger satellites 10k meters up in the sky we basically see half the globe.
Darkness always surrounds light

There is never enough dakka. More is always better.
[Image: eai9kib.png]
[Image: jQbChCV.png]


Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)