It should be noted that this definition of Destroyer deviates from the historical definition, which was a shortening of "torpedo boat destroyer". Destroyers were dedicated escort and screening ships for defending larger slower ships from small, fast, and nimble torpedo boats.
Been watching your guides, as I am trying to get back into Space Engineers after on and off play for years... doing my best to build better ships, and these guides help very much. Thank you!
You should do a video on monitors, in the real world they're small ships that have disproportionately large firepower and are stealthy and quick but with little to no armor. Almost like a destroyer but a lot smaller and generally used for defense and flanking. However, in a lot of science fiction and pop culture, the designation monitor can also mean a very large and extremely well-armored ship that doesn't necessarily have the best firepower but can take a beating, kind of the tank of the fleet.
Similarly to the monitors traditional role of defending river mouths, I see the monitor as also being capable of atmospheric flight while still punching well above its weight.
I personally like the halo variation of the frigate/destroyer dynamic. In that they are roughly the same size but are vastly in doctrine. Frigates are more multi role (troop transport, fleet actions, escort, deployment in atmosphere, etc) while Destroyers focus very heavily on ship to ship engagements and fleet action in general. Typically being very heavily armoured and armed.
Ah, destroyers. I actually favor this style of ship design way more than I probably should. Granted, I don't ignore point defense, but what I do typically do is design all my combat ships to be at least capable of alpha-striking in a similar way to a destroyer, with lots of front-facing weaponry. Also, fun fact to note, this is where the "Star Destroyer" style hull design is at its best, as it allows your weaponry to be positioned so that nothing has a blocked line of sight towards the front. Although I'm personally more fond of a forward "wing" shape, similar to Tau Kor'Vattra designs from Warhammer 40,000 Battlefleet Gothic, as it allows for the rest of the hull to maintain a narrow profile and also reduces any rear blind spots.
I really like these warship designation videos, while it doesn't give a solid guideline, it gives you a great idea on what you should make their capabilities be.
Hey man, I’m looking forward to viewing the rest of the series, as I am trying to work on building my own fleet of ships, starting with a corvette. However, I have been having some trouble with actually starting the ship, as i cannot create a proper shape or interior. Do you think you could possibly create a video demonstrating the construction of a ship (preferably a small ship, such as a corvette) from start to finish?
Please don't forget that you can stagger fire railguns if properly set up. Was in a duel the other day and we never stopped firing railguns at eachother...
These videos are great! They are short, informative and tightly packed but somehow still enjoyable and theyre easily the best guide to ship classes ive ever seen.
Thanks a lot! It's all really good information and it suits real life navies well. Hoping to see more videos like this in the future on other classes of warships.
I like seeing the remake of the older videos like these from your channel that go with all the updates since then. I personally would like to see a cruiser or battle cruiser video next!
I'm confused. In what universe (real or fictional) are destroyers used in the anti-capital ship role? In every movie, game, and actual navy I know of, they're used to counter smaller threats.
I got back to space engineers after 4 years, and i gotta say, with all the dlc’s and the new warfare update (which brought me back), I forgot how amazing this game was, and I don’t even need anymore mods to make it work and look nice, these videos have brought me back to make ships of my own again, and I gotta say it has consumed me over the past 2 weeks, it’s been a lot of fun. Keep up the great videos.
Ackshully... The name was short for torpedo boat destroyer and their role was to screen cruisers and battleships against asymmetric threats like torpedo boats, subs and bombers. They were eventually fitted with torpedo tubes and became a bigger version of the thing they were designed to counter.
@@LunarKolony it's a pet peeves of mine the way scifi writers use historical naval terminology incorrectly. George Lucas is particularly guilty of this. My definition of a Destroyer in space engineers would be the following: -cheap, expendable ship without any large reactors or jump drives. -Travels long distances by latching onto the capital ship it's escorting. -The armament would be interior, gatling and assault turrets to deal with grinder engineers and anything too fast for artillery turrets. The sole purpose of the ship would be protecting line ships against asymmetric attackers so that those ships don't have to waste deck space on low calibre weapons. It's just my opinion. As you say, anyone can choose how they wish to class their own ships. I love to discuss this subject and I'm enjoying this series.
Only thing I disagree with is that a destroyer should always be bigger than a frigate to carry more and bigger guns, other wise its just an assault frigate. Since these classification videos are short, it would be cool if you stitched them all together after you finish as an end cap to the series.
I love your guides, but, arent Destroyers historically meant almost entirely to be pickets? They were designed to deal with torpedo boats and other small ships, along with planes, being smaller than frigates (Of course, now days, specification is fucked and many destroyers are just frigates under a different name).
@@gustaveliasson5395 Sadly, Yes, it looks like many classes like the Sloop simply dissapear. Then again, maybe they could be re-termed for these circumstances, like how modern destroyers were.
@@gustaveliasson5395 This is a great explanation. What threw me off (and likely many others) is what other nations in WWII would classify as a frigate, the United States Navy called a 'Destroyer Escort' or DE. Compared to a regular 'fleet destroyer' which had to make at least 25 knots to maintain speed with large capital ships, they had lighter guns, few anti-aircraft guns, and worse engines. By sacrificing equipment they didn't need for their role of protecting convoys, they freed up material to be used on fleet destroyers. I think a lot of people consider Destroyers and Destroyer Escorts the same classification even though they're quite different due to purpose.
In terms of role, destroyers were originally developed to destroy torpedo boats, and then people started fitting them with anti-capital weapons (torpedoes) to be a sort of anti-torpedo-boat-boat-that-is-also-itself-a-torpedo-boat-but-bigger. As a result, the destroyers ended up being able to fight everything up to their own size, while carrying something like 6-9 (nice) torpedo tubes for use against capital ships (at least that's what the torpedoes were *supposed* to be used for). Some also carried a set of extra torpedoes that could be used to reload the launchers at sea. It took a few hours and wasn't all that practical, but it could be done. The anti-submarine role caught on somewhat quickly because those were obvious threats against a battlefleet, but most WWI destroyers had at most a few machineguns -and maybe a slow-firing, hand-aimed 3" AA gun- for protection against biplanes and zeppelins. The anti-aircraft role was/is really mostly a self-defense capability that grew large enough that the "self-defense bubbles" of ships started to overlap, allowing them to protect not just themselves but also each other. The japanese started taking aircraft seriously in the 1920s and began building destroyers with dual-purpose main guns; the trend kept growing from there. In terms of offense/defense balance, the Destroyer can be more of an offensive asset than a Corvette or Frigate thanks to its mobility and anti-capital weapons, but will have to use hit-and-run attacks against larger vessels.
I think this is totally fascinating, but I would criticize the idea that fighters hold any real sway in battle. Last I checked massed gatling fire is sufficient to wipe the floor with any fighter. The only situation where I can imagine a fighter being truly useful is when used as a platform for deploying long ranged missiles. In which case, a proper missile ship is probably the better choice since it can sustain its firepower. Regardless, I'm very excited to see your take on "capital ships" such as Cruisers and Battleships.
Recently, I've been testing fighters and after the armour buff they are actually very deadly, especially if they are equipped with cannons or railguns, small grids in general can take more punishment now!
@@LunarKolony Oho, most fascinating! I'm very happy to see this change since SE combat was almost completely dominated by rocket/gatling spam corvettes and missile destroyers. Time to make my carrier i guess!
I still think you aren't prioritizing artillery and railguns enough. Seeing as how you are doing things, your corvettes, frigates and destroyers are weak to gunships. Gunships are very small agile ships with high ranged weapons, like custom missiles, artillery and railguns. The goal is hit-and-run engagements from a distance. Which is ironic considering IRL destroyers were originally designed because of torpedo boats. I do wonder if Jeune École was right when it comes to this game. May be with some alterations your destroyer would be able to take one on, but for now I fail to see the utility of a destroyer. How about space-planet warfare? The navy has amphibious warfare ships, the SE equivalent would be ships capable of traversing atmosphere and space.
I think the last thing you mentioned is an excellent angle. For my part I think that smaller ships are more dominant in atmospheric combat, since it's generally not so hard to take out all the thrust on a large ship and force it to crash. That in mind I think there's a solid place for base defenses and extremely heavily armed and armored ground vehicles that might potentially be able to hold their own against far more expensive airships.
@@personzz1789 Since it's a gravity well, it's easier to put things on a planet than to take it off. Ships can be designed to bombard from space. When in battle, you want to keep in mind how gravity is working with or against you. The defender has the advantage as they are either outside of gravity or down on the planet. Atmospheric ships will do better the longer the fight goes on. The "aerospace" ships will do worse than specialized vessels except for altitude. Smaller flying ships would be more maneuverable, but they are just as easily crippled. I think it equals out here. Statoons can easily be heavily fortified bunkers with 3-6 layers of armor. But since they don't move, are still sitting ducks. Ground vehicles are where it's at. They don't have much weight requirements and cannot sink like their flying cousins. Redundancy can be added very easily. Most planets are pretty flat overall.
With transatmospheric ships a good idea is to strip out any ion thrusters, jump drives, and possibly even reactors, and replace them with atmo thrusters, battery and hydrogen engines, obviously not 1 to 1 as layout and number are different. in atmosphere ships dont limp away, they crash, if you are jumping to them, use a dedicated jump ship As for gunships and smaller corvettes, they aren't fast enough to dodge the mid power turrets, and will die to them pretty quickly, they are worst of both worlds between fighters and large ships.
As I use mods like weapon core I built a Dreadnaught class destroyer with its motto beeing: a big ship with even bigger guns, atleast half of the ship are just two massiv cannons, one beeing 4 series 8 Mac cannons and 20 fixed T3 lasers all paired together, if activated the T3 Lasers will blast the target for about 5 seconds only to be followed up by 4 Mac cannons ripping trough what’s left of the ship or it’s shields, and then beeing bombarded by 500 - 300 mm battle ship cannons.
This is the first I disagree with. Destroyers historically serve a screening role. Some modern destroyers wield have notable firepower, but destroyer can basically be broken down into two groups: Escort (AA, support equipment, some anti-ship weaponry) and Lone-operative (the destroyer's small size and multitude of equipment make it ideal for patrol and small-strike operations) there is a third category that this military is toying with, where they test big experimental rail guns on destroyers, but that's not a dedicated role atm
Honestly Destroyer and Heavy Frigate are almost interchangeable, or at least they serve a close enough role that you have one or the other not both, with Warfare 2 I'd say the main difference is a well armored railgun/ set of railguns, vs an enclosed hangar, so having some point defense isn't bad for a destroyer. Destroyers and frigates are your escorts, their job is to protect transports and larger ships.
Good guide as usual though personally I also consider destroyers as escorts together with frigates. If escorting a large or important convoy a destroyer as a flagship for the escorts means that the escorts can deal with finger ships as well
Yes, destroyers primary job in modern times is as a fleet escort although they do do other jobs solo or at least not with a carrier fleet they have to safeguard. In space though I would say while definitely very much at home in a mix fleet they are fully capable of using hit and run tactics as part of a "wolf pack" of destroyers or destroyers mixed with assault frigates since submarines don't exist in space (aside from in Space Battleship Yamato). Also the idea of a destroyer (momma wolf) leading a pack of assault frigates (cubs) on a hunt is funny to me.
I would still put some kind of pdc on destroyers but not enough to make it a lone wolf ship. For example a ship I just built features six auto cannon pdc’s with 3 on each side not enough to ward off a full attack group of fighters but enough to deter lone wolf fighters.
Honestly, I'm somewhat concerned about those. Warfare 2 improved weapon variety by leaps and bounds, but I'm somewhat sceptical about the viability of larger combat vessels. Big ships benefit massively from the square cube law. More volume relative to the surface area that needs to be armoured, and more redundant systems for increased survivability. In SE however, size does not come with the benefit of accuracy that you get from a larger, more stable weapons platform IRL, nor do you get the benefits to sensor range from a taller mainmast. Doesn't quite feel like it's enough for a cruiser to just be a scaled-up destroyer with even more fixed-forward-firing anti-capital weapons and some extra hangar space and endurance. What, then, will a battleship be?
@@gustaveliasson5395 perhaps what will set apart the cruiser and the destroyer are things like printable missiles and torpedo launchers. Weapons that can't really be mounted onto smaller ships due to the limited volume. We're starting to see fire and forget seeking missiles that take advantage of the Turret control block already.
This is the polar opposite of how the term "Destroyer" was used historically. They were small fast ships that destroyed other small fast ships, specifically torpedo boats which could threaten a capital ship. Over time they became larger to be more independent and also target submarines, aircraft, and missiles. When people hear "destroyer" they think that such a ship must be specifically focused on destroying important targets, but instead the term refers to ships that protect important targets.
It should be noted that this definition of Destroyer deviates from the historical definition, which was a shortening of "torpedo boat destroyer". Destroyers were dedicated escort and screening ships for defending larger slower ships from small, fast, and nimble torpedo boats.
Yeah it does
And modern destroyers are actually much more actively anti air roles, as aircraft and missiles took center stage in warfare.
Is this the reason for the explanation of why the star destroyers are shaped the way they are in Star wars?
Enjoying these so far. It's neat to see everyone's take on different classes for Space combat.
glad you enjoyed :)
Been watching your guides, as I am trying to get back into Space Engineers after on and off play for years... doing my best to build better ships, and these guides help very much. Thank you!
happy to help!
@@LunarKolony when are you making a cruiser one?
You should do a video on monitors, in the real world they're small ships that have disproportionately large firepower and are stealthy and quick but with little to no armor. Almost like a destroyer but a lot smaller and generally used for defense and flanking. However, in a lot of science fiction and pop culture, the designation monitor can also mean a very large and extremely well-armored ship that doesn't necessarily have the best firepower but can take a beating, kind of the tank of the fleet.
Similarly to the monitors traditional role of defending river mouths, I see the monitor as also being capable of atmospheric flight while still punching well above its weight.
So heavy armor cube with thrusters and dakka?
so basically a glass-cannon type ship
Kinda execpt very shit dakaa in alot of cases, it depends on your interpretation of it tho
Very true! I didnt even think of the atmospheric side of things but yea that fits perfectly into it's role for space combat!!!
I personally like the halo variation of the frigate/destroyer dynamic. In that they are roughly the same size but are vastly in doctrine. Frigates are more multi role (troop transport, fleet actions, escort, deployment in atmosphere, etc) while Destroyers focus very heavily on ship to ship engagements and fleet action in general. Typically being very heavily armoured and armed.
Ah, destroyers. I actually favor this style of ship design way more than I probably should. Granted, I don't ignore point defense, but what I do typically do is design all my combat ships to be at least capable of alpha-striking in a similar way to a destroyer, with lots of front-facing weaponry.
Also, fun fact to note, this is where the "Star Destroyer" style hull design is at its best, as it allows your weaponry to be positioned so that nothing has a blocked line of sight towards the front. Although I'm personally more fond of a forward "wing" shape, similar to Tau Kor'Vattra designs from Warhammer 40,000 Battlefleet Gothic, as it allows for the rest of the hull to maintain a narrow profile and also reduces any rear blind spots.
Can't wait to see a Dreadnought or Capital/Flag Ship guide, by the way are you thinking of doing a drone guide
Other idea is eventaully do guides are land ideas are cool
I really like these warship designation videos, while it doesn't give a solid guideline, it gives you a great idea on what you should make their capabilities be.
Nice video. Love the series so far. When is the next economy ship review video?
soon tm
Hey man, I’m looking forward to viewing the rest of the series, as I am trying to work on building my own fleet of ships, starting with a corvette.
However, I have been having some trouble with actually starting the ship, as i cannot create a proper shape or interior. Do you think you could possibly create a video demonstrating the construction of a ship (preferably a small ship, such as a corvette) from start to finish?
Absolutely!
Nice work man! Looking forward to you covering the next warship types :)
love the videos could you do a gunship/gunboat next?
"Master! Destroyers!"
Please don't forget that you can stagger fire railguns if properly set up. Was in a duel the other day and we never stopped firing railguns at eachother...
I'm loving this series! I can't wait to see some more videos in this!
Thank you :)
You make very good points, with understanding ship classes, which are often misunderstood in SE community.
Keep up the good work
This is quality videos!
thank you!
Quality content
thank you!
These videos are great! They are short, informative and tightly packed but somehow still enjoyable and theyre easily the best guide to ship classes ive ever seen.
I like to call these battlecruisers
Yea more pls
Thanks a lot! It's all really good information and it suits real life navies well. Hoping to see more videos like this in the future on other classes of warships.
glad you enjoyed :)
Cant wait for the next one..im guessing cruisers are next right?
Perhaps
I like seeing the remake of the older videos like these from your channel that go with all the updates since then. I personally would like to see a cruiser or battle cruiser video next!
I would love to see you do one of these for all class of ships, reaching into dreadnought class if you haven't done so already
I'm confused. In what universe (real or fictional) are destroyers used in the anti-capital ship role? In every movie, game, and actual navy I know of, they're used to counter smaller threats.
in mine, as said at the end, this is for my fleet
@@LunarKolony ah ok, fair enough. but then the title seems misleading. Other than that, great video series. looking forward to the next one
@@s0d4c4n they also play that role to an extent in star wars, if you watch space docks video he has a very similar opinion to myself
Oh boy I'm loving this short little series. Very interesting to think about even as someone who doesn't play much space engineers
Thank you, glad you're enjoying!
can you maybe do a turtorial biuld im really bad at this ... love your ships btw
hello nice video. the yellow ship at 2:47 looks really good
I got back to space engineers after 4 years, and i gotta say, with all the dlc’s and the new warfare update (which brought me back), I forgot how amazing this game was, and I don’t even need anymore mods to make it work and look nice, these videos have brought me back to make ships of my own again, and I gotta say it has consumed me over the past 2 weeks, it’s been a lot of fun.
Keep up the great videos.
Yeah, finally we have some cannons!
This sounds a lot like "monitor" ships usually only armed with one or two capital ship guns but in a tiny ship
Ackshully... The name was short for torpedo boat destroyer and their role was to screen cruisers and battleships against asymmetric threats like torpedo boats, subs and bombers. They were eventually fitted with torpedo tubes and became a bigger version of the thing they were designed to counter.
I am discussing sci-fi not history
What's this got to do with Space Engineers?
@@LunarKolony it's a pet peeves of mine the way scifi writers use historical naval terminology incorrectly. George Lucas is particularly guilty of this.
My definition of a Destroyer in space engineers would be the following:
-cheap, expendable ship without any large reactors or jump drives.
-Travels long distances by latching onto the capital ship it's escorting.
-The armament would be interior, gatling and assault turrets to deal with grinder engineers and anything too fast for artillery turrets.
The sole purpose of the ship would be protecting line ships against asymmetric attackers so that those ships don't have to waste deck space on low calibre weapons.
It's just my opinion. As you say, anyone can choose how they wish to class their own ships. I love to discuss this subject and I'm enjoying this series.
0:05 guessing this is a new LKF destroyer comming soon?
its a modified dynasty class :)
nice
Should I build a destroyer in small grid
For a channel of this size, you're production quality is awesome! I don't know if you do these for fun but no way this channel doesn't blow up.
Seamen
I enjoyed this video, its short simple and to the point
Is that yellow destroyer from the endcard available on the workshop?
Not at the moment sorry
I appreciate you taking the time to make these.
no worries! people seem to enjoy them :)
Only thing I disagree with is that a destroyer should always be bigger than a frigate to carry more and bigger guns, other wise its just an assault frigate.
Since these classification videos are short, it would be cool if you stitched them all together after you finish as an end cap to the series.
yeah ill probably do that!
I love your guides, but, arent Destroyers historically meant almost entirely to be pickets?
They were designed to deal with torpedo boats and other small ships, along with planes, being smaller than frigates (Of course, now days, specification is fucked and many destroyers are just frigates under a different name).
thank you :)
In terms of displacement, the order is:
Corvette
@@gustaveliasson5395 Sadly, Yes, it looks like many classes like the Sloop simply dissapear.
Then again, maybe they could be re-termed for these circumstances, like how modern destroyers were.
@@gustaveliasson5395 This is a great explanation. What threw me off (and likely many others) is what other nations in WWII would classify as a frigate, the United States Navy called a 'Destroyer Escort' or DE. Compared to a regular 'fleet destroyer' which had to make at least 25 knots to maintain speed with large capital ships, they had lighter guns, few anti-aircraft guns, and worse engines. By sacrificing equipment they didn't need for their role of protecting convoys, they freed up material to be used on fleet destroyers. I think a lot of people consider Destroyers and Destroyer Escorts the same classification even though they're quite different due to purpose.
In terms of role, destroyers were originally developed to destroy torpedo boats, and then people started fitting them with anti-capital weapons (torpedoes) to be a sort of anti-torpedo-boat-boat-that-is-also-itself-a-torpedo-boat-but-bigger.
As a result, the destroyers ended up being able to fight everything up to their own size, while carrying something like 6-9 (nice) torpedo tubes for use against capital ships (at least that's what the torpedoes were *supposed* to be used for).
Some also carried a set of extra torpedoes that could be used to reload the launchers at sea. It took a few hours and wasn't all that practical, but it could be done.
The anti-submarine role caught on somewhat quickly because those were obvious threats against a battlefleet, but most WWI destroyers had at most a few machineguns -and maybe a slow-firing, hand-aimed 3" AA gun- for protection against biplanes and zeppelins.
The anti-aircraft role was/is really mostly a self-defense capability that grew large enough that the "self-defense bubbles" of ships started to overlap, allowing them to protect not just themselves but also each other.
The japanese started taking aircraft seriously in the 1920s and began building destroyers with dual-purpose main guns; the trend kept growing from there.
In terms of offense/defense balance, the Destroyer can be more of an offensive asset than a Corvette or Frigate thanks to its mobility and anti-capital weapons, but will have to use hit-and-run attacks against larger vessels.
What kind of classes do you plan to make videos about? So far they are nicely done :)
Gonna cover the main ones first fighter, bombers, gunships, cruisers etc then see
Where is that yellow destroyer? That ship is nice looking. I need it in my sub list 👀
its a ship myself and a friend made specifically for the video, it has no interior so not really worth posting
This is quite epic
epic moment
Make one for battleships please
Me literally on single player: yes i need to know.
this is the way
@@LunarKolony Wish i knew where to use all of that in multiplayer, your videos are dope.
Also what is best way to power them
I think this is totally fascinating, but I would criticize the idea that fighters hold any real sway in battle. Last I checked massed gatling fire is sufficient to wipe the floor with any fighter. The only situation where I can imagine a fighter being truly useful is when used as a platform for deploying long ranged missiles. In which case, a proper missile ship is probably the better choice since it can sustain its firepower.
Regardless, I'm very excited to see your take on "capital ships" such as Cruisers and Battleships.
Recently, I've been testing fighters and after the armour buff they are actually very deadly, especially if they are equipped with cannons or railguns, small grids in general can take more punishment now!
@@LunarKolony Oho, most fascinating! I'm very happy to see this change since SE combat was almost completely dominated by rocket/gatling spam corvettes and missile destroyers. Time to make my carrier i guess!
just found your channel today, love these classification videos, they've inspired me to try to build an actual fleet
awesome! good luck :)
I’m excited to see a guide on Cruisers or Carriers.
That yellow ship looks like it can bring some pain at long range. Sadly I don't see it in ships mentioned. Anyone know what it is?
Its a ship made my myself and a friend specifically for the video! It doesn't have an interior or much else you'd want really
@@LunarKolony interior can always be worked on. Should post it up on the workshop. :)
Are these small grid
I still think you aren't prioritizing artillery and railguns enough. Seeing as how you are doing things, your corvettes, frigates and destroyers are weak to gunships. Gunships are very small agile ships with high ranged weapons, like custom missiles, artillery and railguns. The goal is hit-and-run engagements from a distance. Which is ironic considering IRL destroyers were originally designed because of torpedo boats. I do wonder if Jeune École was right when it comes to this game. May be with some alterations your destroyer would be able to take one on, but for now I fail to see the utility of a destroyer.
How about space-planet warfare? The navy has amphibious warfare ships, the SE equivalent would be ships capable of traversing atmosphere and space.
I think the last thing you mentioned is an excellent angle. For my part I think that smaller ships are more dominant in atmospheric combat, since it's generally not so hard to take out all the thrust on a large ship and force it to crash. That in mind I think there's a solid place for base defenses and extremely heavily armed and armored ground vehicles that might potentially be able to hold their own against far more expensive airships.
@@personzz1789 Since it's a gravity well, it's easier to put things on a planet than to take it off. Ships can be designed to bombard from space.
When in battle, you want to keep in mind how gravity is working with or against you. The defender has the advantage as they are either outside of gravity or down on the planet.
Atmospheric ships will do better the longer the fight goes on. The "aerospace" ships will do worse than specialized vessels except for altitude. Smaller flying ships would be more maneuverable, but they are just as easily crippled. I think it equals out here.
Statoons can easily be heavily fortified bunkers with 3-6 layers of armor. But since they don't move, are still sitting ducks.
Ground vehicles are where it's at. They don't have much weight requirements and cannot sink like their flying cousins. Redundancy can be added very easily. Most planets are pretty flat overall.
@@the11382 makes a lotta sense. I think I will use aerospace scouts and transports, ground vehicles, and varous starships for my fleet going forward.
With transatmospheric ships a good idea is to strip out any ion thrusters, jump drives, and possibly even reactors, and replace them with atmo thrusters, battery and hydrogen engines, obviously not 1 to 1 as layout and number are different. in atmosphere ships dont limp away, they crash, if you are jumping to them, use a dedicated jump ship
As for gunships and smaller corvettes, they aren't fast enough to dodge the mid power turrets, and will die to them pretty quickly, they are worst of both worlds between fighters and large ships.
Loving these videos, its very helpful to get a second opinion on what roles different ship classes should perform. Hope to see more in the future :D
thank you!
Building a destroyer with railguns would do well with the UNSC style layout. Aka the ship built around the main central/spinal railgun.
As I use mods like weapon core I built a Dreadnaught class destroyer with its motto beeing: a big ship with even bigger guns, atleast half of the ship are just two massiv cannons, one beeing 4 series 8 Mac cannons and 20 fixed T3 lasers all paired together, if activated the T3 Lasers will blast the target for about 5 seconds only to be followed up by 4 Mac cannons ripping trough what’s left of the ship or it’s shields, and then beeing bombarded by 500 - 300 mm battle ship cannons.
This is the first I disagree with. Destroyers historically serve a screening role. Some modern destroyers wield have notable firepower, but destroyer can basically be broken down into two groups:
Escort (AA, support equipment, some anti-ship weaponry)
and
Lone-operative (the destroyer's small size and multitude of equipment make it ideal for patrol and small-strike operations)
there is a third category that this military is toying with, where they test big experimental rail guns on destroyers, but that's not a dedicated role atm
He i made a destroyer with a salvo script... With new small grid weapons i was able to have 260rpm artillery... So constant fire! Shreded other ships
Are you gonna do cruiser soon?
Yes!
hello, the yellow one is unpublished?
Yep
Just some constructive criticism, but the intros hit hard and I think I accidentally skipped ahead every time.
Honestly Destroyer and Heavy Frigate are almost interchangeable, or at least they serve a close enough role that you have one or the other not both, with Warfare 2 I'd say the main difference is a well armored railgun/ set of railguns, vs an enclosed hangar, so having some point defense isn't bad for a destroyer. Destroyers and frigates are your escorts, their job is to protect transports and larger ships.
nice
Can we get a video on carriers?
soon tm
I love this series, but where can I find a server where I can have pvp fleet battles with these classes of ships?
May you can make a modular encounter system port with your lunar fleet
Good guide as usual though personally I also consider destroyers as escorts together with frigates. If escorting a large or important convoy a destroyer as a flagship for the escorts means that the escorts can deal with finger ships as well
awesome!
Yes, destroyers primary job in modern times is as a fleet escort although they do do other jobs solo or at least not with a carrier fleet they have to safeguard. In space though I would say while definitely very much at home in a mix fleet they are fully capable of using hit and run tactics as part of a "wolf pack" of destroyers or destroyers mixed with assault frigates since submarines don't exist in space (aside from in Space Battleship Yamato). Also the idea of a destroyer (momma wolf) leading a pack of assault frigates (cubs) on a hunt is funny to me.
I would still put some kind of pdc on destroyers but not enough to make it a lone wolf ship. For example a ship I just built features six auto cannon pdc’s with 3 on each side not enough to ward off a full attack group of fighters but enough to deter lone wolf fighters.
That way having a frigate or a couple of corvettes acting as escort would still make sense
Can't wait to see the cruiser video.
I'm building myself a cruiser at the moment so I'll be curious to hear what perspectives other players have on their design too.
Honestly, I'm somewhat concerned about those. Warfare 2 improved weapon variety by leaps and bounds, but I'm somewhat sceptical about the viability of larger combat vessels.
Big ships benefit massively from the square cube law. More volume relative to the surface area that needs to be armoured, and more redundant systems for increased survivability.
In SE however, size does not come with the benefit of accuracy that you get from a larger, more stable weapons platform IRL, nor do you get the benefits to sensor range from a taller mainmast.
Doesn't quite feel like it's enough for a cruiser to just be a scaled-up destroyer with even more fixed-forward-firing anti-capital weapons and some extra hangar space and endurance. What, then, will a battleship be?
@@gustaveliasson5395 perhaps what will set apart the cruiser and the destroyer are things like printable missiles and torpedo launchers.
Weapons that can't really be mounted onto smaller ships due to the limited volume.
We're starting to see fire and forget seeking missiles that take advantage of the Turret control block already.
What's the song used in the intro?
when i kissed the teacher - abba
@@LunarKolony Ur the GOAT dude
is the yellow ship on the workshop or is it a personal ship?
What’s that yellow destroyer?
This is the polar opposite of how the term "Destroyer" was used historically. They were small fast ships that destroyed other small fast ships, specifically torpedo boats which could threaten a capital ship. Over time they became larger to be more independent and also target submarines, aircraft, and missiles.
When people hear "destroyer" they think that such a ship must be specifically focused on destroying important targets, but instead the term refers to ships that protect important targets.
good thing this isnt history then
@@LunarKolony Yes. It is a disinformation. Destroyers were and always are dedicated fleet escorts.
Love the ship analysis vids!
name of the intro song?
Love these videos!
Hi
I don't see the yellow ship Blueprint or did I miss it?
we made it just for this vid, we havent posted it
@@LunarKolony really like the staged super fire Weapons on the side. Are you planing to release it on the Workshop?
@@bloodysath I'm not sure at the moment