KE's decision to take the frigate talent came down to a bit of everything: It would make frigates more combat capable, and numbers were proving to be the superior way to win battles. Most importantly though, it allowed us to field a wide variety of designs, so that all members of the faction could get a ship in the series (though at the start we only had a couple of frigate designs, leading to a lot of dupes on the initial roster). Whilst the frigates have performed about as well as we expected so far, Warfare 2 will likely relegate them back to support duties again, due to a lack of 400mm's. Warfare 2 has simply made them the dominant weapon, with mock battles basically being decided by which ship held on to their 400mm's the longest. On that note though, when will we get a talent for upgunned frigates and destroyers? (think 1 400 for the frigate, and a 2 400 barrels for a DD 😉)
probably never. Season 1-->2 had a original talent tree based around upgrading ships. But we decided this was lame, and changing what made a frigate a frigate, a cruiser a cruiser etc. was lame. and confusing. All talents will offer things, not change things.
@@GetBrocked :sadfroge: I was hoping to see a faction focused around anti-destroyer DD's/super destroyers, similar to what the French and German navies tried during WW2. The CDF's artillery destroyers would've come close, but I suppose those were a one time thing.
Are you hit Space Engineer? (No?) Then listen up. In my day, we didn’t have any fancy shmancy corvettes. We had two small steel tubes and a construction component. And we had to SHARE the component. For the whole squadron!
It’s ironic how in real life frigates/torp or missile boats are reaching the size of WW1 destroyers and modern destroyers are almost the size of some old cruisers
We're in a weird transitional stage where aircraft carriers are the new "capital ships," destroyers (except for Russia) are intermediates and frigates are the screens.
As long as there is a speed limit inGame _(not advocating for the mod, I know that Outlands is already taxing as shit on your end Brock)_ battles, no matter the tactic/composition, is just a 3 year old smashing toy soldiers together. But I like that you give smaller ships some love.
... he's out of line. but he's not wrong. There's a little more too it with our mod system. (~1000m is considered CQB, 2000m is about standard) As well as capital ships hitting at 3000m+
@@GetBrocked Do you have different speed limits for different grid types? Like, small-grid craft could have a speed limit half again, or even double, that of large-grid ships, to make "boom-and-zoom" attacks with "fighter" type vessels against larger ones safer/more effective. Sorry if you already answered this question, I only just found the channel. Though, when the channel gets bigger, you're gonna get a lot of dumb questions you've already answered...
The dream is for a game like Space Engineers to come around and incorporate enough depth (especially in terms of logistics) to drive this sort of combat while also avoiding a lot of the limitations. For a long time I was hoping Starmade would eventually fill this position, but seeing as it’s no longer in active development… yeah. Space Engineers could potentially hit this point too, especially with mods, but at the end of the day I think a lot of these types of games fail just because sandbox games tend to not hold people’s attention indefinitely. This server is a brilliant idea just because by changing the rules to be more competitive and having a session each week instead of a constant uptime players can much more easily work on their goals and logistics are way more manageable as well.
the developement from cruisers to destroyers to frigates reminds me of how late game armies in Age of Empires 2 end up being heavily composed of the cheap units knopwn as "trash"
Yeah this is something I have had discussions with my friends playing space engineers about. I have a few friends who basically only play on creative mode, and this has very much given them the mindset to make massive ships that are basically just choak full of turrets. neglecting the fact that constructing that in a survival game would take stupid amounts of resources, and time, and it can run out of ammo stupidly fast unless you give it ridiculous amounts of ammo. Which if you lose will mean you took an even bigger hit in resources. I tend to build my ships with RP reasons and a hint of practicality. So I have even small escourt ships that. In reality probably aren't that good just because realistically in a multiplayer game I am not going to have the crew for them, but I made them from the perspective that they could be manufactured anywhere in my space empire. Even going asfar as having printers which could make the things on the cheap.
yep. in SE builders tend to only build over built ships. In engineering you quickly learn that "over engineered" is a swear word. And that real engineering is all about building something to spec with the most elegant design possible
Anything one big ship can do, X amount of smaller ships can do. About the only use I see for a big ship is a mobile base, and there's every reason _not_ to use that as a frontline vessel.
im really interested in what you have going on here. how would one join the server? i have a gang of about 5 or 6 pretty regular players and it would be fun to see how we fared within these constraints as opposed to the more loose organized servers and ffa style of play.
the channel pinned video explains the basic. Then join the discord, and read the "info cards" (separate channels) From there decide which faction you want to join. Speak up in the main chat channel and you'll likely be pointed in the right direction
The problem seems to be destroyers just dont take hits. It looks to be that most weapons are either conventional perjectile or dumb rockets. If there where more guided munitions the heavier ships would do better since heavy armor could shrug off the same impact that would obliterate a destroyer or frigate, while able to accurately target multiple ships at once. A larger ship could also support more active protection systems and absorb damage when they inevitably do take a hit. And when youre dealing with accurate guided missiles, a large ship, even a frigate will never be more manuverable.
Hello brock, a slight correction: by 8:16, you quote that riders AND KE built almost exclusively DDs, but the KE almost NEVER built a DD, it was a massive swarm of FF for a LONG time... That said, i always like your tactical evaluation videos! keep them on! And a Gary video, WHEN?!?!
@@GetBrocked see, you already know enough XD but that ship is going to end up as the KE iconic ship. im pretty sure of that. (it's already on the twitch tumbnails as well)
Frigates were fun while they lasted. I wish KE put more squads up and used them more often, they were good fun. But there is expecialy after warfare 2 so many things stacked up against frigates that there not viable unless your pilots are all expert aces. So will most likely become back line suport units once more in every faction. But an great video with some deeper thought into the tactics of our little space war 👍
@@GetBrocked to be fair your killin the SE content, I especially enjoy the instructional videos you do which assess the practicality of different ship design principles like armor / turret placements etc
Question: what drives the combat in your server? Do you organize space battle events? Are there well-known stations factions need to defend and other factions organize raids? Like, what stops an outnumbered defender from just running/jumping away?
Squadrons are limited to 4 ships. then view it as a board game esk situation where transition between tiles are managed, and then the fights played out. A squadron can retreat if it wants, but then it obviously yields that tile, and tile are everything
@@GetBrocked Right - so battles are organized to contest a sector of space. And space = resources. Does that mean there is a server rule preventing players from flying in a sector their faction doesn't own? Asking because when I look at the base game, the emergent gameplay I'd expect would be nomadic players who would simply flee if they're in a combat scenario which doesn't favour them.
Warfare II has rekindled my interest in the game. I have some old ships that I'm proud of, but they were designed before hydrogen thrusters were added (and planets for that matter lol). So I need to design new ships. But in order to design new ships I need to understand what design philosophy has value and what doesn't. What I'm learning from the videos I'm watching is that it really depends upon what server you want to play on, and what rules they play by / enforce.
" we have seen multiple times where these ship go in on a one-way journey and act so aggressively..." Why did my mind flash to the "To seek glory in battle is glorious" ship from the Expeditionary Force series ?
Awesome video! I love hearing how your gameplay experiences mirror reality. This answers a lot of my questions from previous comments. I'm working my way through your actual episodes concurrently.
Irl the torpedo boat doctrine of france was before ww1 and was considered obsolete by ww2. However, the US actually had the greatest success of that doctrine during ww2 in the pacific battle for the Philippines when PT boats managed to sink the battleship Mushashi in a night raid as her enormous formation passed their position, and then later a small force of 1 destroyer, several escort destroyers (frigates by another name) and light escort carriers called Taffy 3 made a heroic last stand against the japanese center force and caused that massive formation to falter in their advance, buying sufficient time for the rest of the US navy to deliver the final hammer blow. They also managed to cause the mighty Yamato to turn and run away from their torpedoes and snake the heavy cruiser chikuma. Most of Taffy 3 was lost but they effectively won the day in one of the most lopsided naval upsets ever recorded.
I love the fact that this series has had so many historical parallels. Seeing "jeune ecole" tactics and mindset come about through the natural progress of combat has been amazing! It also makes me being to wonder if we will begin to see some carriers and carrier operations, fighter/bomber and torpedo bomber off of carrier were the natural conclusion to the "jeune ecole" theory of cheaper, faster, deadlier. Looking forward to the future of outlands!
Carriers are quite good in testing; the issue is. They're not really great in winning battles . And more represents a strategic assets. All factions are currently on the edge of viictory or defeat atm. so no one wants to mess with that
@@GetBrocked that's interesting, what in your opinion is holding them back to just being good but not battle winning? I have read most of the design specifications on the discord and I was wondering what weapons the carrier-based ships use to inflict meanful damage against larger ships. Does the outlands meta contain something analogous to the damage capability of ww2 torpedos? (The well designed and effective ww2 torpedos, maybe not the USN Mk.14)
Here is a idea. A fleet cradle which serves as a mobile repair station. The bigger one is the more expensive it is. These cradles wouldn’t be able to repair heavy damage or fix heavier/more complicated weapons and systems but they can patch holes and stuff. Might be useful in attrition?
That's what we use on our server. The larger factions field support "carriers", which are able to repair ships between battles, while smaller factions have to repair at their bases. They're just mobile stations, essentially, with the drawbacks to boot. Slow, mo AGI, etc. And with weapon limits in place, they don't get much in way of defense, so they don't see action (didn't stop the IMC from destroying their opponent's support ship tho)
With how the series is progressing the frigates seem to be fitting into how Britain used them with a Destroyer Leader type filled by destroyers. A group of ships leader by one slighty bigger and heavily armed ship that is better for the command and control.
there are a couple of Destroyer Leader classes actually. But it was found it actually just made more sense to just use a standard destroyer so they're phased out at this point
Talking about a submarine doctrine gives me an idea on how something similar could possibly be implemented. When i can finally get home (Still currently visiting family) and re-learn the basics of the game, i’ll have to let you know how it goes when the time comes. It could give frigates even more viability for strike and ambush battles.
What’s the current situation with battle cruisers? Being British and curious what’s faction uses battle cruises where it’s essentially a scaled up version of a heavy cruiser mostly with the mass and scale of a battle ship but the flexibility of a cruiser
dude is there somewhere where i can download and look at some of these ship designs. id love to build something as good as this, but id definately have to look at how it is done by a pro, because my designs aren't nearly as functional as these
Not sure if SE would even handle it, but I'd love to see engagements beyond visual range with weapons that have incredibly fast projectiles, and also guided missiles. This could make fighters a viable offensive option as they could get into range, drop their missiles and then bug out before defensive fire / return fire can reach them. Could bring the age of the carrier / battlecarrier. I know you can make a turret target out to 10s of thousands of km, but im not sure if the aiming has a high enough resolution to functionally hit anything that far out.
it actually use to work really well. Now it works only kinda well. At the moment our longest range brawl was at about 8km. We've engaged regularly at 15km+ but that will be a sub 5% hit rate. likely sub 1%
My thinking on all this, is that capital class ships are really an indulgence afforded by prosperity, a mechanic best represented by a hard weapon-fitting bottleneck rather than just a ship-production bottleneck. A ships time to manufacture is strongly correlated to the effort involved in fitting weapon systems within space constraints. More space constrains means harder to install things, a longer manufacture time. Remove the hard limits on turrets points within classes (they eagerly gets filled) and replace with a mechanic that has time costs that increase exponentially with each added turrets. The reason to build a cruiser isnt because it brings a lot of tactical systems, but because it would have taken more time to build several smaller ships out of the same manufacturing facility, fitting that same number of systems onto numerous smaller hulls.
In my personal opinion, frigates are the straight out most useful ship to have, being able to be used en masse in combat for cheap, being able to run anti air armaments to easier destroy fighters, run supplies quickly, and be used for ground missions. That is why they are, in my subjective opinion, the best ship outside of outlands. Outlands has unique restrictions with time restrictions instead of material restrictions, and although Frigates are still the easist to mass produce, most groups would rather have another destroyer, which is generally better in combat roles.
worth noting, in Outlands you're probably describing the Destroyer. Since our frigates have a weapon limitation built in. While destroyers are the "full effect" spamable ship. But the concept still holds. Lots plus cheap, vs expensive and low amounts.
I see frigates as manly point defence ship, but itcan have some anticapital potential. Destroyers i see about same size as frigate but much bulkier, and more heavily armed and armored, and lagging much of the point defence.
the issue is that point defense outside of anti-fighter protection sucks really bad in SE. I'd say 1-50 missiles probably get intercepted in a useful fashion
@@GetBrocked use more gun, thoughts on allowing multiple 20mm in a "blister" per turret slot as long as they're placed in close proximity to each other?
@@keithsimonh the point is that they don't hit missiles enought for that. while 20mm PD are actually (somewhat) accurate, it would mean TONS of messing up with projectile speed of basically all the weapons to even consider to make PD working in any considerable way.
@@keithsimonh The problem doesn't even lie in the shell velocity of the gatlings (in fact, the 20mm's have the highest amongst the gatling type weapons, precisely so it'd be the most "effective" at point defence), but rather lies with the turret AI. Now, I don't quite know what the issue is, but I remember reading somewhere that the rate at which vanilla turret AI tracks targets is rather limited to reduce lag. If this were the case, then it'd be pretty clear why vanilla PD is so horrible, especially against weapons with 500 m/s shell velocities like in Outlands.
I personally would go with light carriers. Bombers are something that negate any advantage a battleship has. And a fleet of light carriers launching staggered sortes will make short work of even the largest battleships.
what about corvettes, I like corvettes, basicly a bigger gun boat or pt boat. big ol speed boat with a deck or 2 in it to bunk, feed etc.. the crew when they aren't fighting. A corvette can't do long term solo missions usually they need support fleet or ports.
Only minor comment I have is that the jeune ecole doctrine was a pre-Dreadnought doctrine began during the 1890s. Nonetheless, the comparison holds true: The French and Italians had different classes of destroyers. Large, powerful fast destroyers that were so big the USN actually classed some as light cruisers, and smaller vessels focussed on torpedo attacks against larger enemies, kind of like frigates appear to be used in this doctrine. The battle you describe reminds me a ton of the Battle off Samar, where a group of US DDs and light carriers routed practically the entire IJN battlefleet.
@@GetBrocked Damn straight it does. Also Narwik. You can’t tell me you don't want to see Warspite oneshot a destroyer... Wait, haven’t i seen that somewhere else recently~?
@@thebudgieadmiral5140 i actually thinkl narwik has a movie, but it's pretty bare on the naval side of things. I think, haven't actually seen it. The whole battle of Norway/Denmark etc really needs more stuff about it.
As far as the "Submarine" camp theory; wouldn't the space engineers equivalent be strike craft that would be "running dark"? long range missile boats that need to use laser antennas for communication via laser antenna buoys. Using self guided warheads to fire on their targets. the goal being that they can deploy these warheads from far distances Target locking also makes me wonder what kind of chaff systems could be used to mask sigs.
Considering torpedo subs in the cold war era to now often use wire guided torpedoes, using laser antennae to guide in torpedoes and giving them updates or triggering their guidance AI to go 'active' and seek out targets nearby could be interesting. That could even be expanded to just leaving "cold" torpedoes sitting in the void then activating them like a self propelled minefield to ambush other ships.
Preface: I don't know anything about space engineers. Question: has your server played with the idea of combat drone carriers or combat drone supported ships in PVP?
Firstly I'm wondering why the second season was so attrition heavy. Secondly Jeune Ecole isn't just 'small ships' and it wasn't a post dreadnought idea. It was a pre-ww1 strategy where small torpedo boats would act as coast defence against BB's while commerce raiders attacked your opponents trade networks. It relied on turrets too slow to track small ships and highly lethal torpedo's. It fell out of favour when destroyer escorts proved effective at screening battle lines. Thirdly frigates only became confused after their modern revival, before that they were simply warships built for speed and manoeuvrability without enough guns for the line of battle. They were primarily for escort and policing i.e. actually controlling the territory after you took it. Fourthly what effect do you think warfare 2 unmodded guided missiles will have if you allow them, considering so long as they get within 800 meters they'll home in without any intervention they could become fairly effective against ships with little point defence.
Season 1 was very static. And very focused. 1 maybe 2 tiles were contested. Season 2 had a faction that was willing to go out every single battle. Turret accuracy received a buff among other things. Presently there are also 3 active contested fronts. Vs really just 1 in season 1. thanks for the info. stuff that didn't happen Jeune Ecole, took a back seat to stuff that did happen in my education. So I'm not well versed on it. Point defense in this game sucks. So they'll be quite strong. the thing is this; with our mod set 800m is considered point blank and missles are already pretty good here with Small vs Large ships. So if that was in effect. It would actually make the large ships have a easier time defending themselves vs small ships.
Why doesn't the Eternity have any frigates? It shouldn't be very expensive, and it could extend the survivability. Edit: (This would also help with planetary resource gathering.)
"repairs take months even years" .... there are a few navy boys in Hawaii who are going to disagree having a 72 hour turnaround ^^ unfortunately you can't have 200 players so you can't have Battlestar type with swarms of fighter ships (i mean you can but do we need a massive fire this year ?) speaking of Britain... "the dreadnought" changed the game, bigger guns and/or focus, similarly to having one more frigate, (i don't know your system) frigates themselves could have some more guns if they focus on a single type or instead of more weapons they could get bigger guns
Size does not matter in SE. Everyone has the same armor. In space games. They have eg you can have 3 layers of armor for tank ship and special armor for some. Also everyone has the same speed.
sorta. yes sorta no. 1) There will always be big ships, and small ships. The desire to have a ship printer (or just build) a couple small ships vs one big capital ship naturally plays out on survival servers regularly. 2) we have a forced mechanism on our server that requires ships to be in a ruled class system. After all. The best ship in the game would be a box roughly 1000-1500 blocks in size covered in thrusters + the biggest weapons. You need some rules to make things fun.
However, some ships can be designed for dodging rounds, and accelerating in diff directions fast enough to dodge enemy projectiles which is they key tactic in small ships vs large ship
I mean...if you're just slapping bullshit together in the vague shape of a ship...yeah. Build them the right way, and you get different results. A log with guns on it is not a warship.
Fighters Bombers Transports Frigates Drop ships Corvettes Destroyers Cruisers Battleships Dreadnoughts. How I've always seen the system work. Frigates are an excellent craft. Designed well enough and you could use frigates as a cheap means to kill larger craft, but you need a way to negate boarding parties and fighters since those can ruin a capitol ship's weapon grid Frigates are a good answer. Arm them with anti capital ship weaponry (rail guns and crafted torpedoes) and a crap load of PD turrets and you have a decent escort. Corvettes would then have to be designed to counter this but that is whole other thing. I am going off warhammer and stellaris however so I'm not sure if having 8-11 different class warships would even be done and I honestly don't know if people do ground drops with armored vehicles to take over a base when you can just drop rods of god on them
frigates tend to be larger then corvettes, otherwise i agree with that, also frigates tend to be more powerful then corvettes and depending on who built them, destroyers
@@GeneralDoge-f3c that's fair and I tend to rethink things and have come to agree that yea Frigates are larger than Corvettes but would be normally smaller than a Destroyer as the latter is very much a hunter killer of smaller ships while able to work with Light and Heavy Cruisers
speaking of real world naval doctrine: Every body except for the US thinks a super carrier is horribly bad and and waste of cash. Most of the world, including Russia are going for destroyers armed with cruise missiles instead of using planes. Or will simply never land the plane thanks to big flying fuel stations called fuel cargo planes they can fly around the world without end. Yes carriers have advantages to carry way more ammo and fuel but a carrier is like putting all your eggs in one basket. Something bad happens to the carrier and your air power is do for. And with Orbital strikes from space stations becoming a thing (Canada plans to make a bunch of those) carriers will become nothing more then a easy and valuable target.
a counter point we have 12 baskets. we also have more destroyer with the aformentioned cruse missiles. And finally a ship launched cruise missile does not keep with air launched weapons in a near peer war.
@@GetBrocked Its more like the US has already invested, paid and built 22 Carriers so not using them at this point would be an even bigger waste. And unlike the fools that runs the American media, the US military is not ignorant. They are fully aware that air carriers are a thing of the past, this is why they almost scraped almost half of them. The US military won't build anymore big ships either, they are focussing on building destroyers and smaller ships. We dont need a thousand guns to take out one target anymore, with satelite guidance we can destroy one target with just one gun so we dont need big ships anymore. Also its a lot easier to hit ships these days. I did not mean to call the US army weak. All im saying is the age when a carrier was a great advantage is over. US will keep reducing carrier numbers as they build replacements. Modern anti ship missiles will one hit kill any ships and can be fired from anywhere on earth and if fired from low orbit, the target wont even have time to react. Its not like in video games. A ships crew are real human beings it takes at least 15 minutes to get a ship from relax non aggression to combat ready and even 15 is very fast, can take up to an hour to react to incoming enemy because you dont just see you and enemy on radar theres a ton of civilian boats planes heck even bird and fish can apear on radar, it takes time to make the difference between friends and foe. If we reacted like on video games we'd be shoot all our ammo on allies and animals. Now that i explained how hard it is to see when you are under attack and how long it takes to react his how long it takes a hyper sonicnti ship misile fired from low orbit would to hit its target: No more then 10 minutes. Depehding on how fast the missile accelarate irt could be just 1 minute. Theres no way you can react to this on time. When ship the satelite aimed at irs a goner. So the goal in making smaller ships is to minimize losses from first contact (unavoidable losses) and still have the capacity to neutralize the threat. So the ideal ship size is big enough to have the firepower to fight the threat but small enough that losing you doesnt cripple the fleet. So the best sizes are the Frigates, Corvettes and Destroyers. Smaller then frigate and you wont be able to mount the necessary weapons, bigger then destroyers and you just become a big easy target like that Russian Kirov battle cruiser that got destroyed and sank in the black sea few months ago, it was just a big fat target.
Do you watch brass facts? Are you Brass Facts? You sound like Brass Facts both voice wise and the way you speak about space engineers combat sounds like Brass Facts talking about some trijicon 420x69 LPVO. Like actually you are talking about Frigates compared to other ships in exactly the way Brass Facts would.
@@GetBrocked Please do an April fools video where you are dressed as a space engineer with a red camera filter and talking about your space engineers pvp rifle set up for mars.
KE's decision to take the frigate talent came down to a bit of everything: It would make frigates more combat capable, and numbers were proving to be the superior way to win battles. Most importantly though, it allowed us to field a wide variety of designs, so that all members of the faction could get a ship in the series (though at the start we only had a couple of frigate designs, leading to a lot of dupes on the initial roster).
Whilst the frigates have performed about as well as we expected so far, Warfare 2 will likely relegate them back to support duties again, due to a lack of 400mm's.
Warfare 2 has simply made them the dominant weapon, with mock battles basically being decided by which ship held on to their 400mm's the longest.
On that note though, when will we get a talent for upgunned frigates and destroyers? (think 1 400 for the frigate, and a 2 400 barrels for a DD 😉)
probably never. Season 1-->2 had a original talent tree based around upgrading ships.
But we decided this was lame, and changing what made a frigate a frigate, a cruiser a cruiser etc. was lame. and confusing.
All talents will offer things, not change things.
@@GetBrocked :sadfroge:
I was hoping to see a faction focused around anti-destroyer DD's/super destroyers, similar to what the French and German navies tried during WW2.
The CDF's artillery destroyers would've come close, but I suppose those were a one time thing.
"Frigates are the smallest warships meant for space combat"
Corvette users: Am I a joke to you!?
Fighter users: Furst time?
@@jasonlincoln7863
Dude with jetpack thrusters on his back : What, is it your first time then?
Guy with a single-thruster hyper-optimised mini drone: First time?
amazon drone: first time?
Are you hit Space Engineer? (No?) Then listen up.
In my day, we didn’t have any fancy shmancy corvettes. We had two small steel tubes and a construction component. And we had to SHARE the component. For the whole squadron!
It’s ironic how in real life frigates/torp or missile boats are reaching the size of WW1 destroyers and modern destroyers are almost the size of some old cruisers
Irl ship class convention is weird and all over the place and the distinction between frigate and destroyer is becoming so blurry nowadays
We're in a weird transitional stage where aircraft carriers are the new "capital ships," destroyers (except for Russia) are intermediates and frigates are the screens.
@@KalashVodka175”it’s a.. uh… ahh Frigg’it.”
@@Zorro9129
Its not transitional. This is the new reality for the next decades to come
And modern cruisers aee the size of some battleships
As long as there is a speed limit inGame _(not advocating for the mod, I know that Outlands is already taxing as shit on your end Brock)_ battles, no matter the tactic/composition, is just a 3 year old smashing toy soldiers together.
But I like that you give smaller ships some love.
... he's out of line. but he's not wrong.
There's a little more too it with our mod system.
(~1000m is considered CQB, 2000m is about standard)
As well as capital ships hitting at 3000m+
@@GetBrocked Do you have different speed limits for different grid types? Like, small-grid craft could have a speed limit half again, or even double, that of large-grid ships, to make "boom-and-zoom" attacks with "fighter" type vessels against larger ones safer/more effective.
Sorry if you already answered this question, I only just found the channel. Though, when the channel gets bigger, you're gonna get a lot of dumb questions you've already answered...
@@Crazymoniker No that's a good point, however as far as I've seen on the WS there's no just small grid mods, but that would make them more effective
The dream is for a game like Space Engineers to come around and incorporate enough depth (especially in terms of logistics) to drive this sort of combat while also avoiding a lot of the limitations.
For a long time I was hoping Starmade would eventually fill this position, but seeing as it’s no longer in active development… yeah.
Space Engineers could potentially hit this point too, especially with mods, but at the end of the day I think a lot of these types of games fail just because sandbox games tend to not hold people’s attention indefinitely.
This server is a brilliant idea just because by changing the rules to be more competitive and having a session each week instead of a constant uptime players can much more easily work on their goals and logistics are way more manageable as well.
the developement from cruisers to destroyers to frigates reminds me of how late game armies in Age of Empires 2 end up being heavily composed of the cheap units knopwn as "trash"
Yeah this is something I have had discussions with my friends playing space engineers about. I have a few friends who basically only play on creative mode, and this has very much given them the mindset to make massive ships that are basically just choak full of turrets. neglecting the fact that constructing that in a survival game would take stupid amounts of resources, and time, and it can run out of ammo stupidly fast unless you give it ridiculous amounts of ammo. Which if you lose will mean you took an even bigger hit in resources.
I tend to build my ships with RP reasons and a hint of practicality. So I have even small escourt ships that. In reality probably aren't that good just because realistically in a multiplayer game I am not going to have the crew for them, but I made them from the perspective that they could be manufactured anywhere in my space empire. Even going asfar as having printers which could make the things on the cheap.
yep. in SE builders tend to only build over built ships.
In engineering you quickly learn that "over engineered" is a swear word. And that real engineering is all about building something to spec with the most elegant design possible
@@GetBrocked I introduce to you, The Brick. The least over-engineered ship of all time.
Anything one big ship can do, X amount of smaller ships can do.
About the only use I see for a big ship is a mobile base, and there's every reason _not_ to use that as a frontline vessel.
"Everybody wants a battleship-"
But nobody wants to pay for a battleship :p
im really interested in what you have going on here. how would one join the server? i have a gang of about 5 or 6 pretty regular players and it would be fun to see how we fared within these constraints as opposed to the more loose organized servers and ffa style of play.
the channel pinned video explains the basic. Then join the discord, and read the "info cards" (separate channels)
From there decide which faction you want to join.
Speak up in the main chat channel and you'll likely be pointed in the right direction
nice to see the flow between seasons broadbrushed. answers a lot of questions I've been musing over in the discord
at some point I need to do a "season 1/2 summary"
@@GetBrocked …any month now
The problem seems to be destroyers just dont take hits.
It looks to be that most weapons are either conventional perjectile or dumb rockets. If there where more guided munitions the heavier ships would do better since heavy armor could shrug off the same impact that would obliterate a destroyer or frigate, while able to accurately target multiple ships at once.
A larger ship could also support more active protection systems and absorb damage when they inevitably do take a hit.
And when youre dealing with accurate guided missiles, a large ship, even a frigate will never be more manuverable.
Hello brock, a slight correction: by 8:16, you quote that riders AND KE built almost exclusively DDs, but the KE almost NEVER built a DD, it was a massive swarm of FF for a LONG time...
That said, i always like your tactical evaluation videos! keep them on!
And a Gary video, WHEN?!?!
it would just me screaming GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARYYYY all match
@@GetBrocked see, you already know enough XD but that ship is going to end up as the KE iconic ship. im pretty sure of that. (it's already on the twitch tumbnails as well)
Frigates were fun while they lasted. I wish KE put more squads up and used them more often, they were good fun. But there is expecialy after warfare 2 so many things stacked up against frigates that there not viable unless your pilots are all expert aces. So will most likely become back line suport units once more in every faction.
But an great video with some deeper thought into the tactics of our little space war 👍
I love the rimworld music. Great videos
RIMWORLD MUSIC 🔥🔥🔥
I should restart my playthrough of rimworld
@@GetBrocked to be fair your killin the SE content, I especially enjoy the instructional videos you do which assess the practicality of different ship design principles like armor / turret placements etc
Question: what drives the combat in your server? Do you organize space battle events? Are there well-known stations factions need to defend and other factions organize raids? Like, what stops an outnumbered defender from just running/jumping away?
Squadrons are limited to 4 ships.
then view it as a board game esk situation where transition between tiles are managed, and then the fights played out.
A squadron can retreat if it wants, but then it obviously yields that tile, and tile are everything
@@GetBrocked Right - so battles are organized to contest a sector of space. And space = resources. Does that mean there is a server rule preventing players from flying in a sector their faction doesn't own?
Asking because when I look at the base game, the emergent gameplay I'd expect would be nomadic players who would simply flee if they're in a combat scenario which doesn't favour them.
Warfare II has rekindled my interest in the game. I have some old ships that I'm proud of, but they were designed before hydrogen thrusters were added (and planets for that matter lol). So I need to design new ships. But in order to design new ships I need to understand what design philosophy has value and what doesn't.
What I'm learning from the videos I'm watching is that it really depends upon what server you want to play on, and what rules they play by / enforce.
@@GetBrocked Are there shielded space stations the admin transfers ownership of when a tile is captured?
Frigates did what the USS Johnston (DD-557) at the battle of Battle off Samar.
that crew had balls of steel
" we have seen multiple times where these ship go in on a one-way journey and act so aggressively..."
Why did my mind flash to the "To seek glory in battle is glorious" ship from the Expeditionary Force series ?
happy to see a Halcyon class cruiser kicking asses
Awesome video! I love hearing how your gameplay experiences mirror reality. This answers a lot of my questions from previous comments. I'm working my way through your actual episodes concurrently.
Irl the torpedo boat doctrine of france was before ww1 and was considered obsolete by ww2. However, the US actually had the greatest success of that doctrine during ww2 in the pacific battle for the Philippines when PT boats managed to sink the battleship Mushashi in a night raid as her enormous formation passed their position, and then later a small force of 1 destroyer, several escort destroyers (frigates by another name) and light escort carriers called Taffy 3 made a heroic last stand against the japanese center force and caused that massive formation to falter in their advance, buying sufficient time for the rest of the US navy to deliver the final hammer blow. They also managed to cause the mighty Yamato to turn and run away from their torpedoes and snake the heavy cruiser chikuma. Most of Taffy 3 was lost but they effectively won the day in one of the most lopsided naval upsets ever recorded.
I love the fact that this series has had so many historical parallels. Seeing "jeune ecole" tactics and mindset come about through the natural progress of combat has been amazing!
It also makes me being to wonder if we will begin to see some carriers and carrier operations, fighter/bomber and torpedo bomber off of carrier were the natural conclusion to the "jeune ecole" theory of cheaper, faster, deadlier.
Looking forward to the future of outlands!
Carriers are quite good in testing; the issue is. They're not really great in winning battles .
And more represents a strategic assets.
All factions are currently on the edge of viictory or defeat atm. so no one wants to mess with that
@@GetBrocked that's interesting, what in your opinion is holding them back to just being good but not battle winning?
I have read most of the design specifications on the discord and I was wondering what weapons the carrier-based ships use to inflict meanful damage against larger ships.
Does the outlands meta contain something analogous to the damage capability of ww2 torpedos?
(The well designed and effective ww2 torpedos, maybe not the USN Mk.14)
@@xXStampsXx They would have to add mods to fix that. The warheads in space engineers now are just too weak to do any serios damage.
12:08 "To a degree" Look up the naval armament race in South America before ww1 and Italy during the inter-war period.
Here is a idea. A fleet cradle which serves as a mobile repair station. The bigger one is the more expensive it is. These cradles wouldn’t be able to repair heavy damage or fix heavier/more complicated weapons and systems but they can patch holes and stuff. Might be useful in attrition?
that is an idea, I like it. I might have something like that for S3
That's what we use on our server. The larger factions field support "carriers", which are able to repair ships between battles, while smaller factions have to repair at their bases.
They're just mobile stations, essentially, with the drawbacks to boot. Slow, mo AGI, etc. And with weapon limits in place, they don't get much in way of defense, so they don't see action (didn't stop the IMC from destroying their opponent's support ship tho)
@@CMTechnica nice
@@GetBrocked cool!
With how the series is progressing the frigates seem to be fitting into how Britain used them with a Destroyer Leader type filled by destroyers. A group of ships leader by one slighty bigger and heavily armed ship that is better for the command and control.
there are a couple of Destroyer Leader classes actually. But it was found it actually just made more sense to just use a standard destroyer so they're phased out at this point
Talking about a submarine doctrine gives me an idea on how something similar could possibly be implemented. When i can finally get home (Still currently visiting family) and re-learn the basics of the game, i’ll have to let you know how it goes when the time comes. It could give frigates even more viability for strike and ambush battles.
You’d be surprised when a small destroyer packed with half a dozen large warheads can do to a capital ship
What’s the current situation with battle cruisers? Being British and curious what’s faction uses battle cruises where it’s essentially a scaled up version of a heavy cruiser mostly with the mass and scale of a battle ship but the flexibility of a cruiser
dude is there somewhere where i can download and look at some of these ship designs. id love to build something as good as this, but id definately have to look at how it is done by a pro, because my designs aren't nearly as functional as these
Frigate is the smallest warship? Where the corvettes? Gunboats? Blockade runners? No other classes?
Not sure if SE would even handle it, but I'd love to see engagements beyond visual range with weapons that have incredibly fast projectiles, and also guided missiles. This could make fighters a viable offensive option as they could get into range, drop their missiles and then bug out before defensive fire / return fire can reach them. Could bring the age of the carrier / battlecarrier.
I know you can make a turret target out to 10s of thousands of km, but im not sure if the aiming has a high enough resolution to functionally hit anything that far out.
it actually use to work really well. Now it works only kinda well.
At the moment our longest range brawl was at about 8km.
We've engaged regularly at 15km+ but that will be a sub 5% hit rate. likely sub 1%
Heard the rimworld music. Stayed for the content.
My thinking on all this, is that capital class ships are really an indulgence afforded by prosperity, a mechanic best represented by a hard weapon-fitting bottleneck rather than just a ship-production bottleneck. A ships time to manufacture is strongly correlated to the effort involved in fitting weapon systems within space constraints. More space constrains means harder to install things, a longer manufacture time. Remove the hard limits on turrets points within classes (they eagerly gets filled) and replace with a mechanic that has time costs that increase exponentially with each added turrets. The reason to build a cruiser isnt because it brings a lot of tactical systems, but because it would have taken more time to build several smaller ships out of the same manufacturing facility, fitting that same number of systems onto numerous smaller hulls.
Also, I suspect concerns for lag factors onto this as it is hard enough for a single server to coordinate multiple players as is
Rimworld music :)
I'm gettibg flashbacks to...
an early 2000's lotr rts on pc...
In my personal opinion, frigates are the straight out most useful ship to have, being able to be used en masse in combat for cheap, being able to run anti air armaments to easier destroy fighters, run supplies quickly, and be used for ground missions.
That is why they are, in my subjective opinion, the best ship outside of outlands. Outlands has unique restrictions with time restrictions instead of material restrictions, and although Frigates are still the easist to mass produce, most groups would rather have another destroyer, which is generally better in combat roles.
In other words, I fully agree
worth noting, in Outlands you're probably describing the Destroyer. Since our frigates have a weapon limitation built in.
While destroyers are the "full effect" spamable ship. But the concept still holds. Lots plus cheap, vs expensive and low amounts.
what are the mods used in this series, i would like to be able to use them on my own ships
Funny how destroyers in real life (during ww2) also plays the same role they are setting as.
I see frigates as manly point defence ship, but itcan have some anticapital potential. Destroyers i see about same size as frigate but much bulkier, and more heavily armed and armored, and lagging much of the point defence.
the issue is that point defense outside of anti-fighter protection sucks really bad in SE.
I'd say 1-50 missiles probably get intercepted in a useful fashion
@@GetBrocked use more gun, thoughts on allowing multiple 20mm in a "blister" per turret slot as long as they're placed in close proximity to each other?
@@keithsimonh the point is that they don't hit missiles enought for that. while 20mm PD are actually (somewhat) accurate, it would mean TONS of messing up with projectile speed of basically all the weapons to even consider to make PD working in any considerable way.
@@maverickr0x822 i meeeeean, naval guns normall have a velocity of 500-900m/s, those don't need to change, gatts and autocans could use a speed bump
@@keithsimonh The problem doesn't even lie in the shell velocity of the gatlings (in fact, the 20mm's have the highest amongst the gatling type weapons, precisely so it'd be the most "effective" at point defence), but rather lies with the turret AI.
Now, I don't quite know what the issue is, but I remember reading somewhere that the rate at which vanilla turret AI tracks targets is rather limited to reduce lag.
If this were the case, then it'd be pretty clear why vanilla PD is so horrible, especially against weapons with 500 m/s shell velocities like in Outlands.
I personally would go with light carriers. Bombers are something that negate any advantage a battleship has.
And a fleet of light carriers launching staggered sortes will make short work of even the largest battleships.
You can't catch light carriers. You'd have to split up to do so, and that's the end of overlapping fire support.
brickship technology is advancing
what about corvettes, I like corvettes, basicly a bigger gun boat or pt boat. big ol speed boat with a deck or 2 in it to bunk, feed etc.. the crew when they aren't fighting. A corvette can't do long term solo missions usually they need support fleet or ports.
Only minor comment I have is that the jeune ecole doctrine was a pre-Dreadnought doctrine began during the 1890s. Nonetheless, the comparison holds true: The French and Italians had different classes of destroyers. Large, powerful fast destroyers that were so big the USN actually classed some as light cruisers, and smaller vessels focussed on torpedo attacks against larger enemies, kind of like frigates appear to be used in this doctrine. The battle you describe reminds me a ton of the Battle off Samar, where a group of US DDs and light carriers routed practically the entire IJN battlefleet.
battle of samar needs a movie... but like a good one.
@@GetBrocked Damn straight it does. Also Narwik. You can’t tell me you don't want to see Warspite oneshot a destroyer... Wait, haven’t i seen that somewhere else recently~?
@@thebudgieadmiral5140 i actually thinkl narwik has a movie, but it's pretty bare on the naval side of things. I think, haven't actually seen it.
The whole battle of Norway/Denmark etc really needs more stuff about it.
How many points would a maximum sized frigate with the most amount of weapons a frigate can have be?
Can you make a video about formation shapes. Like these?
.
. . . . . .
. . . . .
. . . .
. . . . . . . .
As far as the "Submarine" camp theory; wouldn't the space engineers equivalent be strike craft that would be "running dark"?
long range missile boats that need to use laser antennas for communication via laser antenna buoys. Using self guided warheads to fire on their targets.
the goal being that they can deploy these warheads from far distances
Target locking also makes me wonder what kind of chaff systems could be used to mask sigs.
Considering torpedo subs in the cold war era to now often use wire guided torpedoes, using laser antennae to guide in torpedoes and giving them updates or triggering their guidance AI to go 'active' and seek out targets nearby could be interesting. That could even be expanded to just leaving "cold" torpedoes sitting in the void then activating them like a self propelled minefield to ambush other ships.
Preface: I don't know anything about space engineers.
Question: has your server played with the idea of combat drone carriers or combat drone supported ships in PVP?
Drones would cause a shitload of lag
Have you read Julian Corbett?
Is that RIMWORLD MUSIC I HEAR?
Firstly I'm wondering why the second season was so attrition heavy.
Secondly Jeune Ecole isn't just 'small ships' and it wasn't a post dreadnought idea. It was a pre-ww1 strategy where small torpedo boats would act as coast defence against BB's while commerce raiders attacked your opponents trade networks. It relied on turrets too slow to track small ships and highly lethal torpedo's. It fell out of favour when destroyer escorts proved effective at screening battle lines.
Thirdly frigates only became confused after their modern revival, before that they were simply warships built for speed and manoeuvrability without enough guns for the line of battle. They were primarily for escort and policing i.e. actually controlling the territory after you took it.
Fourthly what effect do you think warfare 2 unmodded guided missiles will have if you allow them, considering so long as they get within 800 meters they'll home in without any intervention they could become fairly effective against ships with little point defence.
Season 1 was very static. And very focused. 1 maybe 2 tiles were contested.
Season 2 had a faction that was willing to go out every single battle.
Turret accuracy received a buff among other things. Presently there are also 3 active contested fronts. Vs really just 1 in season 1.
thanks for the info. stuff that didn't happen Jeune Ecole, took a back seat to stuff that did happen in my education. So I'm not well versed on it.
Point defense in this game sucks. So they'll be quite strong. the thing is this; with our mod set 800m is considered point blank and missles are already pretty good here with Small vs Large ships.
So if that was in effect. It would actually make the large ships have a easier time defending themselves vs small ships.
Why doesn't the Eternity have any frigates? It shouldn't be very expensive, and it could extend the survivability.
Edit: (This would also help with planetary resource gathering.)
"repairs take months even years" .... there are a few navy boys in Hawaii who are going to disagree having a 72 hour turnaround ^^
unfortunately you can't have 200 players so you can't have Battlestar type with swarms of fighter ships (i mean you can but do we need a massive fire this year ?)
speaking of Britain... "the dreadnought" changed the game, bigger guns and/or focus, similarly to having one more frigate, (i don't know your system)
frigates themselves could have some more guns if they focus on a single type or instead of more weapons they could get bigger guns
using the same analogy, there were some ships there that took upwards of a year and a half to repair.
@@GetBrocked well the yamato won't be back in working order until 2203, so yeah some do take a bit ^^
I'm guessing guided missiles and bombs don't get used in Space Engineers pvp.
they do; and we're trying to make them work. The issue is; they seem to be niche, or utterly OP, and no inbetweeen.
Napoleon reference!
Size does not matter in SE. Everyone has the same armor. In space games. They have eg you can have 3 layers of armor for tank ship and special armor for some. Also everyone has the same speed.
sorta. yes sorta no.
1) There will always be big ships, and small ships. The desire to have a ship printer (or just build) a couple small ships vs one big capital ship naturally plays out on survival servers regularly.
2) we have a forced mechanism on our server that requires ships to be in a ruled class system.
After all. The best ship in the game would be a box roughly 1000-1500 blocks in size covered in thrusters + the biggest weapons. You need some rules to make things fun.
However, some ships can be designed for dodging rounds, and accelerating in diff directions fast enough to dodge enemy projectiles which is they key tactic in small ships vs large ship
I mean...if you're just slapping bullshit together in the vague shape of a ship...yeah. Build them the right way, and you get different results. A log with guns on it is not a warship.
are we even commenting on the same video?
Any proper battleships?
Fighters
Bombers
Transports
Frigates
Drop ships
Corvettes
Destroyers
Cruisers
Battleships
Dreadnoughts.
How I've always seen the system work. Frigates are an excellent craft. Designed well enough and you could use frigates as a cheap means to kill larger craft, but you need a way to negate boarding parties and fighters since those can ruin a capitol ship's weapon grid
Frigates are a good answer. Arm them with anti capital ship weaponry (rail guns and crafted torpedoes) and a crap load of PD turrets and you have a decent escort.
Corvettes would then have to be designed to counter this but that is whole other thing. I am going off warhammer and stellaris however so I'm not sure if having 8-11 different class warships would even be done and I honestly don't know if people do ground drops with armored vehicles to take over a base when you can just drop rods of god on them
frigates tend to be larger then corvettes, otherwise i agree with that, also frigates tend to be more powerful then corvettes and depending on who built them, destroyers
@@GeneralDoge-f3c that's fair and I tend to rethink things and have come to agree that yea Frigates are larger than Corvettes but would be normally smaller than a Destroyer as the latter is very much a hunter killer of smaller ships while able to work with Light and Heavy Cruisers
i am a Frigate
Can xbox join this server?
Ngl, if the Yamato beached itself it would have been 💯 more effective then what it was, a glorified kamikaze
The Rimworld music in the background really threw me off.
it's a vibe.... the best vibe.
@@GetBrocked Absolutely.
hey, rimworld music!
speaking of real world naval doctrine: Every body except for the US thinks a super carrier is horribly bad and and waste of cash. Most of the world, including Russia are going for destroyers armed with cruise missiles instead of using planes. Or will simply never land the plane thanks to big flying fuel stations called fuel cargo planes they can fly around the world without end. Yes carriers have advantages to carry way more ammo and fuel but a carrier is like putting all your eggs in one basket. Something bad happens to the carrier and your air power is do for. And with Orbital strikes from space stations becoming a thing (Canada plans to make a bunch of those) carriers will become nothing more then a easy and valuable target.
a counter point
we have 12 baskets.
we also have more destroyer with the aformentioned cruse missiles.
And finally a ship launched cruise missile does not keep with air launched weapons in a near peer war.
@@GetBrocked Its more like the US has already invested, paid and built 22 Carriers so not using them at this point would be an even bigger waste. And unlike the fools that runs the American media, the US military is not ignorant. They are fully aware that air carriers are a thing of the past, this is why they almost scraped almost half of them. The US military won't build anymore big ships either, they are focussing on building destroyers and smaller ships. We dont need a thousand guns to take out one target anymore, with satelite guidance we can destroy one target with just one gun so we dont need big ships anymore. Also its a lot easier to hit ships these days.
I did not mean to call the US army weak. All im saying is the age when a carrier was a great advantage is over. US will keep reducing carrier numbers as they build replacements.
Modern anti ship missiles will one hit kill any ships and can be fired from anywhere on earth and if fired from low orbit, the target wont even have time to react. Its not like in video games. A ships crew are real human beings it takes at least 15 minutes to get a ship from relax non aggression to combat ready and even 15 is very fast, can take up to an hour to react to incoming enemy because you dont just see you and enemy on radar theres a ton of civilian boats planes heck even bird and fish can apear on radar, it takes time to make the difference between friends and foe. If we reacted like on video games we'd be shoot all our ammo on allies and animals.
Now that i explained how hard it is to see when you are under attack and how long it takes to react his how long it takes a hyper sonicnti ship misile fired from low orbit would to hit its target: No more then 10 minutes. Depehding on how fast the missile accelarate irt could be just 1 minute. Theres no way you can react to this on time. When ship the satelite aimed at irs a goner.
So the goal in making smaller ships is to minimize losses from first contact (unavoidable losses) and still have the capacity to neutralize the threat. So the ideal ship size is big enough to have the firepower to fight the threat but small enough that losing you doesnt cripple the fleet. So the best sizes are the Frigates, Corvettes and Destroyers. Smaller then frigate and you wont be able to mount the necessary weapons, bigger then destroyers and you just become a big easy target like that Russian Kirov battle cruiser that got destroyed and sank in the black sea few months ago, it was just a big fat target.
Do you watch brass facts? Are you Brass Facts? You sound like Brass Facts both voice wise and the way you speak about space engineers combat sounds like Brass Facts talking about some trijicon 420x69 LPVO.
Like actually you are talking about Frigates compared to other ships in exactly the way Brass Facts would.
420x69 LPVO haha.
@@GetBrocked Please do an April fools video where you are dressed as a space engineer with a red camera filter and talking about your space engineers pvp rifle set up for mars.
First?
I guess you win.
So we've estabelished that
Dreadnoughts
umm, wrong sign,
Dreadnoughts>Battleships
Battleships>Cruisers
Cruisers>Destroyers
Destroyers>Frigates
-P.S this si copy pasted