Re: [FT] Shields or not

Richard Bell wrote:

>Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
>
> > I managed to delete the post before replying, but someone said
something
> > like "against K3s a ratio of armour to hull of 2:7 is optimal" - or
at
> > least that's how I read it, but I hope what was written (and meant)
was "a
> > ratio of armour to the first hull row of 2:7 is optimal". Since I no
longer
> > have the post I can't check!
>
>I did not say that  that 2:7 was optimal, I said that it was a good
number.

And I'm saying that it isn't a good number against K3s. 1:7 would be a
good 
number.

>I neglected to state my reason.  The reason is that if you have any
more armor
>than a 2:7 ratio, there will be a significant probablilty that there
will 
>still
>be some undestroyed armor when the ship blows up. Only having two
points of
>armor for every seven points of hull integrity in the first row implies
that
>you intend to leave before the second threshold check.

You got that backwards. After the 2nd threshold check ships tend to be 
combat ineffective anyway (unless of course they've been very lucky with

their threshold and/or repair rolls), so any armour remaining after the
2nd 
threshold check will usually just buy the ship a little more time to -
you 
guessed it - withdraw from combat.

Simply put, armour remaining after the 2nd threshold contribute almost
as 
little to an average ship's combat effectiveness as armour remaining
after 
the last hull box is gone.

Regards,

Oerjan
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

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