Prev: Re: Armor Next: Re: Armor

Re: Armor

Date: Mon, 4 Nov 1996 05:38:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Armor

At 08:01 AM 11/4/96 +0000, you wrote:
>Date sent:  4-NOV-1996 08:55:19 
>>>Armor Rules by Brian Bell
>>>Tons: 1
>>>Cost: 5
>>Great idea but it changes the rules regarding fire.  Shields and Armor
>>Full Thrust prevent damage from enemy fire but they don't add to the
>>damage a ship can take.  Also, 5 points of armor protection for 1 mass
>>extremely generous.  Maybe invert the mass/cost ratio (mass determines
>>decisions in ship construction never cost).  Then try to determine
>>how much armor is equivalent to level-1 shields, instead of giving the
>>more "hit points."
>I like the idea of extra hits, but agree that 5 points is generous. It
>would be quite acceptable IMHO to allow a ship to use unused capacity
>for armour on a 1 for 1 basis, improving the damage capacity at the
>expense of system capacity. This would not have 'facing'.
>| Adam Delafield, I.T. Officer        | Bolton Institute,  |

	5 points is probably too much but I would hate to lose facing
armoring--that's the best part of this idea if you ask me. I love the
of systematically pounding one side of an alien battleship so we can
tear her guts out!!

	Armor facing adds a new component to combat--maneuvering to keep
your weak side away from the enemy's batteries and those pesky fighters!


	      /|[|]|\	_______  __	//    //
      _ _   /==|[|]|==\(_______)/  \__[__]__[__]__MMMMMMMMMM\
     [_|_|\%%===[|]====(_______)|  |===================HHHHHH\
     [_|_| %%===[|]====(_______)|  |=X=X=X==X=X=X======HHHHHHH]
     [_|_| %%==========(_______)\__/ }C=K@	  WWWWWWWWWW/
      Main    Bridge/	   Fuel/      Weapons/	   Scanners/
      Drive   Quarters	Jump Drive  Ship's Boats Spinal Mount

	Battlecruiser INTREPID, CORMORANT-class
	Captain James L. Butler III, Commanding

Prev: Re: Armor Next: Re: Armor