Checkerboard Armour Pattern! ⬛⬜⬛⬜ From the Depths Tutorial (OUTDATED)

[@GMODISM]

Ayy, yeah it is slightly better but not a lot, but it has very few drawbacks if you can fit it ^^ Stone metal is really good too and I would recommend that for a cheaper version of double metal

[@GMODISM]

Oh and Jhono1928 did the math

[@BorderWise12]

@@GMODISM Cheers! Not remembering the name was bothering me. :)

[@austinsmith5194]

Thank you for being such an active youtuber on FTD; I've been watching your channel for just under four years now and you're the main reason I still play the game. Thank you for all your hard work and brilliant tutorials!

[@BorderWise12]

You're welcome! Thank you for sticking with me! 😁

[@HMolyneux]

yay! I really like armour tutorials, who want their ships to die right?

[@dillonschroeder985]

Your constant uploads and tutorials like this have helped me so much in becoming better in the game appreciate all the work you do to help people understand this game better.

[@KoboldIV]

Blasphemy! Overpriced metal boxes with dediblade cheese is what is intended.. Wich is odd considering they don't float or are cost effective..

[@SamSchurger]

What I am gathering from this is that volume is better for protection than more durable blocks for low cost builds. I may be wrong, but it justifies my poor armour decisions, so I don't care.

[@BorderWise12]

Pretty much, yeah. Cheap HP + Armor stacking = cost-effective armour.

[@soybean9098]

I saw gmodism do it then used it for my new battleships but with stone instead of wood. Now I understand why it works so well a little better.

[@rabidr3aper213]

Are you saying the stone was effective or it was a mistake?

[@soybean9098]

@@rabidr3aper213 neither. It's the same as with wood but different. Cheaper than metal but more hp and ac than wood but 1 material per meter more expensive.

[@crimzonplays1134]

Interesting. I tried Stacking wood and Stone as it was cheaper. And It seems I have more build tools to learn as you are able to swap between the wood and metal beams really fast. And I also added some EPA replacing some of the wood every so often on the outermost checkerboard layer. I assume that does not help as much as I thought it would, huh?

[@made5966]

I like your armour videos, very helpful

[@SephirothRyu]

Don't forget checker-ERA.

[@BorderWise12]

Yup, didn't mention that just to save time. It definitely needs a video to itself at some point.

[@Knot_Sean]

IF YOU AINT GETTING DRUNK GET THE F’ OUT THE CLUUB. 12:15

[@dnawolf8789]

i really appreciate your toturials helped me to build my own crafts and get hte hang on the game the toturials in game are for me pretty useless so ty for helping newer players and i hope this game grows

[@carrott36]

Hey, I have a question. I'm planning to get From the Depths the next time a sale rolls around, and I already have four potential designs in my head. These are HMAS Blucher, HMAS Ligny, HMAS Iron Duke and HMAS Waterloo. Blucher is a missile carrying ship, holding what I've dubbed 'Baker Missiles' that act as medium-long range quite large precise missiles for taking out smaller targets at long range. Blucher's only purpose is to hold 4 of these, and therefore is quite agile without them. Ligny is an APS and ant-submarine ship. It has a missile protection system in the form of counter-missiles, and also has a few Anti-submarine 'Prince of Orange' rockets that fly up, then down very fast so that their momentum can carry them through the water and allow for submarine impacts. HMAS Iron Duke and Waterloo are both large submarines, Iron Duke being armed with a group of small 'Brown Bess' missiles for eliminating targets at medium-short range. Due to it's shorter range, I'd make sure it could dive without closing the missile hatch for rapid surfacing and submerging. Waterloo is armed with one 'St. Helena' missile that has tactical nukes attached and preferably some kind of cluster bomb system so that it can either cripple or outright destroy large ships. I've tried to design all these with modern warfare in mind, but I don't know how that looks in FTD or if everything here is even possible because, as I said, I don't own the game as of writing this. Are they competent? Do you have any feedback? I'd love to know!

[@BorderWise12]

Short answer: no plan will survive first contact with the game, and don't try and think in real-life terms of what will work well. Just try stuff, have fun, and don't get sad when things don't work. 😁👍

[@fluffyskunkboy4596]

If you haven’t gotten the game yet, I have some feedback that could help you pin down the designs for these. There are four missile sizes in-game, those being small, medium, large and huge. For the Blucher, small or medium missiles would work better than larger missiles, because they are more agile and faster, and are also lighter. The Ligny’s anti-submarine missiles could be simplified with secondary torpedo propellers, which allow for the missile to work as a torpedo instead of using momentum. Missile hatches in-game act as an airtight seal whether or not they are open, so the Iron Duke should have no problem with them. The Waterloo will be the most complicated of your ships. Missiles are modularly built from missile pieces, and the tactical nuke is a self-destructing block. What the Waterloo would need to do to use nukes is construct and launch small disposable rocket craft to carry the nukes, acting as missiles. Hope this helps!

[@carrott36]

@@fluffyskunkboy4596 Thank you so much! I'll keep that in mind!

[@lagrangepoint9386]

Those Prince of Orange rockets can be just replaced with torpedoes for greater accuracy, a more compact design and less pain in the arse for you.

[@Jekan_1]

How is your experience so far? :D

[@blazeshellz1475]

When you can't use the armor schemes of the cool kids cause your PC dies whenever your craft hits 10k block count. *Sad Poor noises* XD

[@goodstormsgames9744]

So I've been building out of stone alot. Why? I guess I'm paranoid about emp. Also wood stone is pretty cheap

[@twinkyoctopus]

I suppose the advantage of this scheme is efficiency, but for something for later game it's probably better to accept the inefficiency and go all metal/metal ha

[@BorderWise12]

Yup. The advantage is material-efficiency and floatiness, and that's basically it.

[@niroshsaravanan9597]

Composite armor!

[@Graknorke]

if I combine this with crosshatching I probably want at least three layers to not leave any all-wood weak points right?

[@anamerican1054]

What do you press to get the armor class? And I've been meaning to ask, how do you save an object with axis turret?

[@alberttrita5858]

the armour class and health is a tool from the Z menu, the same menu you use to equip rambot's weapons, like the minigun, pistol, etc and other designer-only tools for craft testing and debugging. In order to save a turret, piston or a spinblock with things on it, build on that spinblock, then open the inventory and go to subobjects mode, near the bottom of the parts list, then click "save the subobject you are currently building on", and save it under whatever name you like. You can then open up that menu again, and load any saved subobject, and even change their base between the different turrets, pistons and spinblocks.

[@anamerican1054]

@@alberttrita5858 Thank you it works. I never used prefab mode. I've been using cntl-p for everything. This will make it easier. Next I need to make folders for all my prefabs.

[@Schproemftell]

Didnt you say that you give up on armor turorials ?

[@BorderWise12]

Did I? I must've forgotten I said that. 😅

[@Garethaxz]

I don't know if it's cursed lol, just... complicated XD

[@BorderWise12]

For me, making videos on it is slightly cursed. Something usually goes wrong and I feel silly. 😛

[@Garethaxz]

@@BorderWise12 lol, the problem with stuff this complicated is that everyone's always wrong about or forgetting something.

[@BorderWise12]

@@Garethaxz Very true! XD

[@Schaddn]

Why is it always 4m beams/slopes and not checkerboard with 1m cubes? Is it because of the greater health of the 4m variants?

[@alberttrita5858]

probably that and saving block count for performance reasons.

[@twinkyoctopus]

it saves on block count and I think the 4m slopes have better armor or health/block

[@scorpion563]

Block count Better defense against piercing weapons Lag

[@whwhwhhwhhhwhdldkjdsnsjsks6544]

Why would you ever use 1M cubes? They provide almost no protection to many weapons relative to 4m beams. If you want your armour to be penetrated 5x easier then go ahead.

[@Patadude100]

A shell will only punch through a block if that block's HP is reduced to 0. Beams have more HP.

[@NomadSkye1252]

Question, does this work when the wood & metal beams are horizontal instead of vertical? Makes painting a waterline much easier so was hoping it does work.

[@BorderWise12]

Yup, you just rotate the pattern 90 degrees. 👍

[@NomadSkye1252]

Nice. Thanks man

[@Chauzuvoy]

Is there a version of this that works with cross-hatching beams (I guess using a veryical wood/metal pair followed by horizontal wood/metal pair)? I've been trying to use that to minimize the size of hole that big AP hits can cause.

[@BorderWise12]

@@Chauzuvoy Cross-hatching isn't really something to worry about. The depth of the hole is more concerning than its width.

[@Un_soldat]

What if you used 4m alloy slope instead of the wood in a alternating pattern so if it ricochets it goes through a 4m beam then into another slope stoping it? Would that work better?

[@jadekaiser7840]

You lose the armor stacking that way, which is most of the point

[@jadekaiser7840]

Also loses most of the cost savings, which is the other side of the point.

[@Un_soldat]

@@jadekaiser7840 true I didn’t think of that I was just wondering if it would be semi effective and thanks for reminding me I haven’t played the and in a while

[@Garethaxz]

I think a slightly lighter, but more expensive, alternative was stone and alloy, or something like that. It was briefly mentioned in a GMODISM battleship video I think.

[@dukealabaster5767]

What makes this tutorial outdated? and what would me an updated one if there is one and can it be added to the description?

[@BorderWise12]

@@dukealabaster5767 It's outdated because it turns out this armor scheme is worse against APHE and AP-frag than just regular layered metal and wood, so there is not much point to using it at all. 😅

[@Gebunator]

No ERA? Has BW finally learnt his lesson? If anything, at least turn the era facing butt at boollets. That way it actualyl stops HEATS when used as airgap filler. Otherwise, it blocks 1-2 pellets from HEAT/HESH

[@BorderWise12]

The ERA patterns I've used before are for stopping really big APHE/EMP railguns, not HEAT. ERA wasn't relevant to this video, which is why I didn't mention it.

[@DasAnthra]

I Hope this Game will BE get translatet in German its to complex for me in english

[@matthewyang7893]

hello

[@KoboldIV]

Greetings.

[@edwardmaginot]

Hi.

[@BorderWise12]

👋

[@Maxw3llTheGreat]

You should try the setup you used at the end of this video, but replace the slopes with heavy armor. Ive been using variations of that armor pattern for a while now and it seems to stop almost anything

[@lanej5828]

But the cost!

[@Maxw3llTheGreat]

@@lanej5828 just using heavy armor for the slopes isn't that much extra cost but it can mean the difference between loosing a turret and not, which generally will cost a lot more to replace than the heavy armor did

[@lanej5828]

@@Maxw3llTheGreat Right now, i'm focusing on building cheaply, so the cost is a lot to me, but actually for an average build it's really not that much and for citadel armor i'm sure it's actually worth it. U right.

[@Maxw3llTheGreat]

@@lanej5828 when I'm trying to build cheaply I don't use the heavy armor but anything past early game builds it does make a difference

[@DasAnthra]

Armor buhhh. News 4 layer of Armor in Sides so 8 and the Interieur so ships get Just quadrupple think only for Armor its hilarous

[@comradetonk8280]

Literally why. I see time and time again people trying some gimmick to try and create some fancy new super armor, like spamming ERA in the main belt, or poles, or alternating the beam orientation. And guess what. Just a ton of metal and a layer or 2 of beamslopes works exactly as well or better. Don't overcomplicate the one simple part of this game. The 4th example on that platform is functionally identical to just normal layers, except the front 2 layers get less armor on half the beams.

[@scorpion563]

Yes

[@BorderWise12]

Since apparently it didn't come across in the video... TLDR: material-efficiency and floatiness.

[@comradetonk8280]

@@BorderWise12 It is... In no way more material efficient than normal layers. It's going to cost the same. And about buoyancy, making the outer hull out of alloy is probably the better option in that case.

[@whwhwhhwhhhwhdldkjdsnsjsks6544]

@@comradetonk8280 in this case it is, wood is already very material efficient and staggering it like this doubles it’s strength, making the wood really material efficient. As always with wood the downside is it takes up a lot of space for how many hitpoints it has.

[@comradetonk8280]

@@whwhwhhwhhhwhdldkjdsnsjsks6544 Ah, so it's not good, it's just cheap. Aight, sure there might be some merit to it then. In the campaign before they added diplomacy. You get an insane amount of mats in the campaign nowdays, you can 100% afford a ship with proper armour. All you end up doing is handicapping your ships if you decide to take them into campaign with that armour scheme. Idk maybe in Aperatures battlefleet tournaments if you messed up your budget and need to cut corners, maybe it might be useful there too?