RE: FT3 DEVELOPMENT QUESTION: FTL

That just gave me the Idea of Armor stopping Threshold checks (any
system).  If you roll for a system and get it, you can expend armor to
"save it" (or designate X armored systems based on Armor value)





Michael Brown

mwsaber6@msn.com

 
  
> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 20:12:26 +0000
> From: roger@firedrake.org
> To: gzg@firedrake.org
> Subject: Re: FT3 DEVELOPMENT QUESTION: FTL
> 
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 04:00:27PM -0400, Damond Walker wrote:
> >Speaking of core systems - has anyone thought about removing the
concept
> >all together and just slapping those icons directly on the SSD in
essence
> >treating them like anything else on the SSD?
> 
> If you were going to do that then I think it might be an idea to
> genericise the "critical armour" that they get now. Now, most other
> systems won't be allowed to have it (a beam batt or an FCS needs to
> see out, so you can't put it in the middle of the ship; the answer to
> battle damage is to have a spare one). But I can see e.g. a merchie
> having an exposed bridge which gets damaged like normal ship systems
> (because that lets them squeeze in one more container per voyage), or
> a late-war UNSC ship having a deep-buried bridge that's really hard to
> knock out, at huge mass penalty.
> 
> But this is definitely an optional rules module!
> 
> R
>