Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The relative power level of From the Depths.
2017-04-23, 03:07 PM (This post was last modified: 2017-04-23 03:08 PM by Pyrotech51.)
Post: #11
RE: The relative power level of From the Depths.
I think there's also the fact that FtD ships just wouldn't operate in the same manner as real life vessels... Since I'm fairly certain that hydrofoils which manage speeds of around 90m/s and are armed with high velocity torpedoes and offensive lasers aren't a thing we have managed to pull off to date.

Sure the scales at which some things in the game operate aren't realistic, but to be fair it is a game, and I don't think as many people would bother playing if the answer to every problem was 'Launch a hypersonic missile at it!'.

Aircraft in FtD are slowed, ships are sped up, subs pull off completely crazy speeds, torpedoes are fast enough to assume supercavitation is occurring, there are cannons that fire projectiles the size of your average family car at other ships, and somewhere along the way people figured out how to screw with gravity and generate relativistic speeds Tongue... Realism took a bit of a back seat to entertainment somewhere along the way Big Grin.

Skullsploder - FtD: where engineering reusable self-teleporting nukes is easier than putting.a bomb on a stick attached to a rocket.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-04-23, 04:22 PM (This post was last modified: 2017-04-23 04:24 PM by ZaPhobos.)
Post: #12
RE: The relative power level of From the Depths.
Is there any way that one could convert the values of FTD and real life to be more in line with eachother?

The physics are all wonky after all. Why not start with examples from the WWII scenario and compare that to how actual ships did and see just how OP normal ships would be if they had the explosive power of FTD ships i.e., ripping eachother in half.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-04-24, 01:15 AM (This post was last modified: 2017-04-24 01:16 AM by Hikari.)
Post: #13
RE: The relative power level of From the Depths.
(2017-04-22 06:29 PM)afjklol Wrote:  From the depths is not as Op as you made it sound like. You are looking at it the wrong way.
Average APS have abysmal velocity. Even railguns have really low velocity which barely approaches modern artillery systems.
Wood taking on CRAM because CRAM have a velocity of a baseball being thrown by a baseball player.

1m of wood is enough to stop traditional muzzle loaded cannons from the age of sail. During the American Revolution, a meters worth of ,sand, dirt and/or planks of wood was enough to stop gunfire and cannon fire. In fact iirc couple meters of hay was enough to stop bullets from muskets

FtD range rarely if ever shoots beyond 5km.
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
Even if they do, they miss by a mile. They do have fast RoF, but that is pointless because you get sniped by a supersonic anti-ship missile 20x the range FtD can ever imagine.
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.

Our armor takes like 3 layers of metal to stop a subsonic sabot round. Modern APFSDS can go at high supersonic to low hypersonic speeds. If FtD need that thick of a armor to stop some subsonic projectile, it will be paper to anything a modern weapon system can do.
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


Our planes move as fast as a normal warship. Any WW2 fighter can completely outperform us. We are as agile as some WW1 aircraft, but turn fighters tend to lose to energy fighters.
And modern aircrafts are all better than FtD in terms of energy fighting. Also do note that newer generation fighters with super-maneuverability can be almost as agile as FtD planes.

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

We can't even break the speed of sound.

We broke the speed of light x11.1million times over

Our tanks are fast, but they are paper thin in armor and have guns that can't do anything with our AP munitions due to the low velocity. Most of FtD tanks are huge. Easy target. FtD tanks aren't that accurate so we will get sniped 4-5km away. Our engines... hmmm considering they can power lasers that goes through material... they are fairly powerful I guess. But thats about it

Shells don't need to go supersonic speeds when they're 500mm and weight a few tons, and yet again... armor...

Nukes? We have 12m radius nuke. That is laughable to even conventional munitions.

Modern nukes are better since ftd is stuck with limits for explosions.
__________________________

In a real scenario,
FTD has shields RL will never have, shields that block anything kinetic or energy, nuff said


In land,
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)

I do not see anything in real life being able to match the ability of FTD stuff simply because FTD stuff doesn't follow IRL rules. You don't get gattling guns that shoot 2500rpm 500mm/8m shells IRL. Thats like shooting massive bombs out of a cannon. I don't think you fully understand the scale of things in FTD to modern stuff. Sure modern stuff is more complex, but it lacks in raw aspects of everything in FTD except explosions. Who cares about subsonic solid rounds when you shoot things that are up to a ton for shells. A simple 500mm solid bullet could be ~150kg in a single solid shot. Pyrotech essentially hit every single mark correctly.

If thread is cancer, run awey quik and let dem otder pepple deep wit it.
-Lemming 2k16 (Inner grammar Nazi intensifies)
(2016-03-27 12:23 PM)BaronBaconeer Wrote:  8/10 Builds things. BIG things. Will possibly cause someone's computer to crash in the future.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-04-24, 03:12 AM
Post: #14
RE: The relative power level of From the Depths.
I think the best way to determine this is to benchmark it using ships from the WW2 scenario....

On the other hand though, our weak laser system hit like cosmic ray and would probably leave the battlefield irradiated to kingdom come. Our particle accelerator ignore terrain (was it a feature or a bug?) and can gore a ship lengthwise.

Defensive wise, our shields make us nigh impervious to all kinetic penetrators, and depending on how armors and shield distance, also impervious to HE.

Note that mass plays just as big a role in damage as velocity. Our shells may not go as fast (and whether is this engine limitation is for debate) but we are shooting fridges at people.

Lastly, the Graviton Ram completely dominates. Even if it doesn't rip it's victim in half, the sheer acceleration would murder the crew. In fact, if our shells are so slow, we instantly win the moment we get our hands on a modern supersonic gun. If a subsonic shell can blow a battleship into the next timezone, then I believe we can actually crack the tectonic plates with a big enough high velocity shell
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-04-24, 11:20 AM
Post: #15
RE: The relative power level of From the Depths.
Let's not forget that we can put an 8m long shell in a 1m^2 box.

Also I don't even wanna know what happens when you shoot an IRL ship with an object travelling faster than the speed of light.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-04-24, 01:43 PM
Post: #16
RE: The relative power level of From the Depths.
I would say short of it is: Anything naval related goes to modern

Anything air and land related goes to FTD

[Image: Screenshot_2017-03-12_12.08.10.png]

I'm gonna cuddle you meow :3
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-04-24, 02:21 PM
Post: #17
RE: The relative power level of From the Depths.
FTD has oddly super effective engines and has some future tech. Although alot of current weapons are massively underpowered when compared to RL counterparts

FTD has:
- MUCH cheaper everything
- Infinite ammo
- Super effective electricity to something changes (Iek charging of PAC)
- Wireless electricity
- AI
- 1m thick armours

RL has:
- Cannons and missiles are much more dangerous
- Longer range
- Crew
- Better aircraft

[Image: vP4vDHc.png]

Check out my Zrytix, Land RTS
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-04-24, 03:46 PM (This post was last modified: 2017-04-24 03:47 PM by Skullsploder.)
Post: #18
RE: The relative power level of From the Depths.
(2017-04-24 01:43 PM)Kohl Armata Wrote:  I would say short of it is: Anything naval related goes to modern

Anything air and land related goes to FTD

I'd actually argue that naval goes to FtD as well. Air is a laughable contest because even the weakest of FtD lasers can penetrate the few millimeters of armour on modern aircraft, as well as being perfect hitscan weapons - although modern aircraft are much faster, so they can avoid fights easily. Not really helpful when they can't pass within 5km (more if we could get our AIs working properly!) of a properly equipped FtD force. Land is just dominated by vehicles four times the size of the maus going at ludicrous speeds and shrugging off 500mm shells. And in the water, FtD craft can reach top speeds drastically beyond what the fastest modern warships can dream of, while also being coated in metres upon metres of steel, and possessing immunity to kinetic rounds and HE rounds with a blast radius of less than 20m, and a very powerful laser screen against all projectiles. This coupled with enough firepower to melt anything within 5km. This is not very far but remember that FtD ships can have an insane advantage in speed and can thus set the engagement range at will.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-04-25, 04:26 AM
Post: #19
RE: The relative power level of From the Depths.
(2017-04-22 06:29 PM)afjklol Wrote:  Rambots and scuttlebots are faster and have better jump, so in infantry-infantry, FtD will definitely win. But because FtD is lacking in everywhere else. Combined arms tactics of a modern army will off-set this. Modern day infantry will always have air and armored support while the rambots won't since their armor and planes is a flaming wreck.
Space weapons will favor FtD. Taking out satellites eliminating long distance communications and GPS for many missiles and planes.
But modern day missiles can still be guided by spotters. A helicopter can spot well beyond 50km by simply flying higher to expand the visual horizon and guide in the missiles fired by the ships.
Aircrafts still have dead-reckoning, compasses, maps, navigational radars and on board communications that can continue to allow them to operate effectively. Meanwhile anti-sat missiles can't be stopped by most FtD space weapons.

FtD probably can't even beat WW2 era. FtD can probably give WW1 a run for their money, FtD might atcually can win. Though WW1 isn't going to be easy, will have to think more on that before able to determine a victor.

I think even that's being generous, Rambot/scuttle bot may be faster and more maneuverable but they have hideously short range weapons. realistically I think they'd simply be shot to pieces by crew-served weapons, grenade launchers, and just massed AP rifle fire before they're able to close the distance. Similarly FTDs space weapons still have limited acquisition abilities beyond 5km assuming they start in space (somehow) they'll have difficulty targeting anything and will be completely helpless against the kinds of hyperkinetic projectiles or missiles that will be used against them. If they don't start in space I don't think they actually have the power to overcome earth's much higher gravity since they're almost all built to reach a 'space' that's only a few hundred meters away

-Do not bring forth an argument as fact that can be disproven with a 10 minute Google search.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-04-25, 05:28 AM
Post: #20
RE: The relative power level of From the Depths.
(2017-04-24 03:46 PM)Skullsploder Wrote:  
(2017-04-24 01:43 PM)Kohl Armata Wrote:  I would say short of it is: Anything naval related goes to modern

Anything air and land related goes to FTD

I'd actually argue that naval goes to FtD as well. Air is a laughable contest because even the weakest of FtD lasers can penetrate the few millimeters of armour on modern aircraft, as well as being perfect hitscan weapons - although modern aircraft are much faster, so they can avoid fights easily. Not really helpful when they can't pass within 5km (more if we could get our AIs working properly!) of a properly equipped FtD force. Land is just dominated by vehicles four times the size of the maus going at ludicrous speeds and shrugging off 500mm shells. And in the water, FtD craft can reach top speeds drastically beyond what the fastest modern warships can dream of, while also being coated in metres upon metres of steel, and possessing immunity to kinetic rounds and HE rounds with a blast radius of less than 20m, and a very powerful laser screen against all projectiles. This coupled with enough firepower to melt anything within 5km. This is not very far but remember that FtD ships can have an insane advantage in speed and can thus set the engagement range at will.


FTDs vehicles would be absolutely shredded by beyond visual range weapons especially considering that modern missiles are orders of magnitude faster than FTDs missiles, easily able to bypass slow FTDs defenses. Modern artillery are capable of similar feats, able to strike point targets from well beyond the 5km FTDs limits. Modern aircraft are also able to deliver what are essentially CRAM shells (200lb, 500lb, 1000lb, 2000lb bombs to name some standard weights) at much higher speed with pinpoint precision from altitudes/ranges well beyond what FTDs vehicles can target. The lack of this ability is one of the reasons carriers under perform in FTDs and why cannon vessels are still viable.

Even if you grant FTDs vehicles a fair fight almost all of them suffer from one grave weakness: they run out of fuel in minutes/hours whereas most modern vehicles have combat endurances measured in hours/days. In all likelihood FTDs vehicles would run out of fuel long before they reached the battle and it would be incredibly easy for aircraft, artillery, and missile strikes to cut their supply lines given that they have no defense against high altitude, high-speed aircraft/long range munitions and that their logistical needs are orders of magnitude higher than even the most taxing modern vehicles. An Abrams tank has more endurance than even 'high efficiency' designs.

-Do not bring forth an argument as fact that can be disproven with a 10 minute Google search.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)