Prev: RE: [CON] ECC IV - March 2-4, 2001 - Call for participation Next: Re: [FT] Relative damage

Re: Vertical Damage (was: [FT] nasty idea for spinal mounts)

From: "Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@t...>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 19:57:41 +0200
Subject: Re: Vertical Damage (was: [FT] nasty idea for spinal mounts)

Alex Kettle wrote:

>Hello all, just a thought on this.
>If you were to mark the damage off of the first undamaged box in each
>row, with extra damage being applied starting again at the top,
wouldn't >this tend to weaken the ship rather effectively for follow up
attacks with
>regular weapons?

Hull damage alone doesn't cripple a ship - it will *destroy* it
eventually, but unless that ship also takes threshold checks it'll be
fighting at its full strength right up 'til the second it blows up.
Threshold checks do cripple ships, diminishing their combat power
before they die.

If the vertical-damage weapon doesn't inflict (considerably) more
damage than the same cost of horisontal-damage weapons, and doesn't
inflict extra threshold checks, they will delay the enemy's threshold
checks and thus allow him to hurt *your* ships worse than he would've
been able to if you had used normal weapons - probably enough to knock
out some (more) of your weapons, further reducing the amount of damage
he takes, etc. 

Regards,

Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Hen3ry

Prev: RE: [CON] ECC IV - March 2-4, 2001 - Call for participation Next: Re: [FT] Relative damage