Re: Damage Tracks

PDGA6560 @ compuserve.com (Brian Bell) wrote:

> The problem with the Sliding Scale for damage is that it mirrors or 
> amplifies one of the current problems of the current system. Namely
that 
> small ships are too fragile and large ships are too invulnerable.

Well, I think most escorts would be better off : ships of mass 6 and
below wont 
take
any threshold checks at all, and other escorts get one extra damage box
in the
first row.

Yes, larger ships get larger initial damage tracks, but the increase
isn't 
linear.

For instance, a mass 16 escort would get 5 hits in the first row of the
damage 
track,
compared to 4 in the current system.

A mass 32 cruiser would get 7 hits in the first track, compared to 5
under the
current system.

A mass 64 capitol would get 11 hits in the first track compared to 8
under the
current system.

A mass 128 supership would get 15 hits in the first track compared to 16
under 
the
current system.

> Set Length Alternative:
> Have a maximum length to each section (5 seems about right). One
section 
> of damage boxes are filled out before another row is filled. When a 
> complete section is damaged, make a Threshold roll. All threshold
rolls 
> are at 6 to damage a system. Systems are rolled from the Largest to
the 
> lightest (Engine, FTL, SMNC,...). The maximum number of systems that
can 
> be damaged out by a Threshold Roll is equal to the number of sections 
> completely destroyed. If more than one section is destroyed in a
single 
> round, only 1 set of rolls are made with the maximum number of systems

> that can be damage equal to the total number of sections destroyed.

That sounds like it would complicate play somewhat.

The partitioning into sections of 5 boxes might be workable, but the
extra 
complications
of counting the number of systems destroyed, and of working through them
in 
size order
sound like they'd slow play down too much.

Alun.