Re: FT: Damage Track Sliding Scale Suggestion

hal @ buffnet.net wrote:
>   After reading the analysis of the sliding track damage system, I
would
> like to mention something that occurs to me after reading Mr. Alun's
> conceptual statement earlier...

"Alun"s my forename - If you want to be formal, my sirname is "Thomas"
:-)

>  If a ship has 3 damage tracks, with 4, 5, and 5 on it's tracks, then
> doesn't it take 4 points of damage under the old system before it
takes a
> threshold check rather than the 3 that Mr. Alun seems to imply?  I was
> confused by the statements recently made.

Err, did I say that somewhere ?
(could you let me know what gave you the impression I was saying that?)

> [...] gets only two damage points, but since it has to stretch the 
points in
> 4 tracks, the first track is "empty", the second track has one, the
third
> track is empty, and the fourth trach has the final damage point.  When
> skipping over a line due to "empty", the ship has to take threshold 
checks
> at the worse level rather than the missed level. [...]

Wouldn't this clobber escorts ?
A 4 hit ship currently gets 2 rows with 2 hits each. This would give it
4 
rows
with 1 hit each - 1 threshold check per point od damage taken.

[Moved from above for clarity]
>   With regards to the concept that I mentioned earlier, I suggested
that 
we
> break the track down into "groups" and also standardize how each 
grouping is
> done. [...]
>   If we want to make the number of "group" checks per 1/3 of a line
(ie
> three threshold checks per "line"), then the following kinds of
threshold
> checks come into being:
> 36 mass ship:

> 6) OOO  OOO  OOO
> 5) OOO  OOO  OOO
> 4) OOO  OOO  OOO
> 3) OOO  OOO  OOO

I'm not sure how these group checks differ from the normal threshold 
checks.
If theyre the same, then you might as well say that the ship has 12 
(4lines*3groups)
damage track lines.
If they're not the same, then how would you envisage your "group" checks

working?

Alun.