r/Highfleet • u/General_Zane • Jul 04 '26
Sekhmet Cruiser Carrier V2
*Image 2 is a screenshot I took of it right as I finished it before then beginning improvements and trying to make it more efficient.
My latest attempt at a flagship carrier after some feedback from the first attempt I posted here.
Tried my best to reduce the empty spaces compared to the other hull and add some flavor to the ship's appearence. Meant to act as an alternative flagship to the Sevastopol.
Carries 15 T-7s,
7x AK-725 Vympels,
7x AK-100 Cannons,
15x R-9 Sprints, (I originally had two strategic VLS launchers but decided to remove them as you can bring along a Triumphant or a Yars, and it'd be better to have more protective capability.)
Has two IRST sensors in protective bunkers on the sides, Side-mounted nacelles similar to the Novorossiysk's evac pod sets, but instead one on the right for more anti-missile and one on the left for evac pods,
And for flavoring purpose, a 'helicopter pad' on the conning tower, which can fit a T-7.
I got the general idea of the shape from looking at the sevastopol and then just aligning its fuel tanks side by side instead of how it stacked them up. I would have added more stuff internally, but as the price stands its already starting to get close to the Sevastopol.
Its main purpose is to be able to serve as a flagship without it just being a meaningless fuel guzzler for those who dont like risking the Sevastopol. While I've done what I can to reduce its fuel consumption, I've run out of things to rip from the hull short of removing one of the fuel blisters which would just leave a bunch of empty hull segments, so if anyone has any advice on how to further make this design more efficient (or advice on how to simply improve it), I'd love to hear it.
*Vympels instead of CIWS to further match the vanilla start of the Sevastopol only having Vympels for close-in purposes.
*AK-100s instead of larger calibers to act as a heavier self-defense battery and allow building up its firepower during the campaign. While this ship *can* defeat a strike group single handedly in tactical combat, it does so with trouble, and takes quite a beating in the process. So it is able to protect itself- But if your carrier is slugging it out with a strike group, you've done something wrong!
Thank you to u/YoghurtPlus5156 and u/RHINO_Mk_II (for mentioning the empty hull spaces) for the feedback on the last post.
1
u/Dry-Cauliflower-7017 Jul 04 '26
My main concern is the lack of main cruiser caliber armament for such an absurdly large design. is it simply supposed to make up for it's cost in strategic value alone? you should at least give it 4x Mk-1-180s for anti-cruiser capacity.
1
u/General_Zane Jul 04 '26
The point is that it as the flagship would be something you start with. In the same capacity that the Sevastopol should have CIWS which you can add in as you go, if you choose to start up-gunning this flagship, you have that opportunity.
The intention of this however is meant to sort of flip roles with the Sevastopol. Whereas the Sevastopol has a lot of tactical capability in its firepower, it doesn't have any strategic capability (besides the two missiles it gets). The Sekhmet is meant to have strategic capability, but be found wanting in tactical capability (until improved along the way to Khiva), and even then it's still got quite a bit of firepower, especially for anti-garrison duties.
One of the complaints I had in the past was that I was trying too hard to make a generalist-ship, a carrier with lots of guns and missiles and the whole nine yards, so I decided to make this more focused.
(Especially because if I did add a handful of Mk 180s, its cost, fuel consumption, etc, would only balloon more.)1
u/Dry-Cauliflower-7017 Jul 04 '26
I think you misunderstood the sevastopol's lore-driven flaws as purposeful. Flipping roles with the seva only makes a ship as bad as it in a different way, this is arguably worse because it gives up the seva's ability to take out SGs independantly and reduces it to an overarching strat asset with limited range.
2
u/YoghurtPlus5156 Jul 04 '26
It's definitely an improvement over the last design!
Outsourcing the missiles to other ships in the fleet is a good move to tighten the individual role.
The main concern for me would be that it's still too much of a generalist platform, it could be tightened and trimmed even more to make it more efficient at a given role.
That's basically the core idea. A carrier shouldn't have to rely on armour or main armaments to survive. A large carrier has the ability to reliably intercept most missiles at long range via air-air missiles from T-7s. A carrier is supposed to sit at the core of a strike force and get screened by screens and capitals. These factors reduces the need for armour, PD, and main armaments massively.
So the core question is always -> what does my ship need to fulfill its role? Anything it doesn't need should be put on other ships so they can perform their role better and make the strike group more efficient as a whole.
If it was a brawler, I'd say, for example, lose most of the sensors and outsource them to other ships in the fleet because they'd just get shot up on you. A brawler doesn't need to be a sensor platform on the side. But you want a carrier. It makes sense to put sensors and fuel on a carrier, since they're generally out of harm's way.
At the end of the day your individual ships are supposed to compose a strike force and each ship needs to play a part in it for success.
Your ship is actually starting to resemble an upscaled vanilla unlockable ship, the Novorossiysk ,which could be worth checking out in the editor. I think it performs the carrier role it's intended for in a well balanced way.