RE: [FT] Kra'Vak Summary So Far...

Steve Arrowsmith wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Dec 1998, Dean Gundberg wrote:
>
> > > [NOTE: We're still discussing how this armor will work against
various
> > systems.]
> >
> > So how does KV armor Level 1 effect the RG damage routine you
> have set up?
> > If you subtract 1 point of RG damage per level, class 1 and 2 RGs
can be
> > useless.  If you throw less dice per level, again the smaller RGs
are
> > useless.
> >
> Dean, the level-1/-2 refers to Human Bean attacks, not railguns,
missiles
> or torpedoe.. [NOTE: We're still discussing how this armor will work
> against various systems.]

That is what I was discussing :-)  How should Level 1 and 2 armor work
against the Schoon Railgun currently proposed.	The K'V use armor which
has
to be somehow effective against their own weapons but it should not make
ships invincible against their own weapons (the K'V weapons R&D people
would
work overtime to keep the balance).

There are 3 componants that make up the Schoon Railgun attack, 1)the
number
of dice rolled, 2)the damage caused when a hit is rolled and 3) the
to-hit
value needed.  Both 1) and 2) are based on the multiplier which is the
class
size.

1) If Level 1 or 2 armor effects the number of dice rolled by -1 or -2,
Class 1 and Class 2 Railguns could not damage ships with Level 2 armor
and a
Class 3 would only use 1 die.
2) If the armor reduced the damge caused by a hit by the armor level,
then
any hits by a Class 1 or Class 2 Railgun would do no damage to a ship
with
Level 2 armor (and  a Class 3 RG would only do 1 point per hit)

So this leaves 3) the to-hit value.  Here the armor level could be added
to
the dice rolls in effect treating the target as if it were in a more
distant
range band.  Resulting in smaller Railguns having to be closer to hit
well
armored ships.	I would rather have armor effect the amount of damage
caused
instead of the to-hit roll but I don't see any another option for the
Schoon
type of railgun, anyone else?

So then if this does not work we have 2 options as I stated before: A)
Go
back to FB style armor or B) Back to a MT style of to-hit roll and then
a
separate damage roll which is modified by the armor level.

> So how do you feel this type of armour should protect or act agaist
> Railguns, missiles and torpedoes?

If we keep the armor level concept (which I do like), I would prefer
Railguns to have a single to-hit roll and a separate damage roll which
is
modified by armor level, as in MT.  Salvo Missiles and Pulse torps, I
think
reducing the amount of the damage roll by the armor level as Schoon
stated
is appropriate.

Dean