RE: [FT] K'V Armour Vs. Weapons

Schoon wrote:
> By so aptly comparing RGs to PTs, we have our answer. Armour affects
them
> in the same way...
> Level 1 Armour - subtract 1 from damage
> Level 2 Armour - subtract 2 from damage
>
> "Wait !" I hear you say. "Doesn't this mean that Class 1 RGs are
> ineffective against armoured targets ?" Yup.

The subtracted damage is from total damage I assume and not per hit
rolled
since you  don't mention Class2 RGs not hitting.  So for a Class2 to do
damage to a ship with Level 2 armour, both rolls would have to be hits.

> Looking at K'V designs, however, reveals that they don't use Class 1s
on
> any ship not expecting fighters or smalls ships as opponents. All
cruisers
> or larger mount only Class 2+.

But in FT larger ships never had C beams either but in the FB they
appeared
on almost all ships due to the increase in arcs and functionality
changes.
A larger K'V ship in a 6-arc universe I think would mount Class1 RGs on
the
sides and rear to give some weapons coverage in those arcs, especially
if
the Class1 RGs are the only ones with more than 1 arc.

> Beam 1s are just as ineffective against human armour unless they've
had it
> stripped down by other weapons, or get lucky on their roll.

Beam 1s still do damage to human armour and given time will destroy any
other human ship.  Class1 RGs with the armour level rules you have above
can
never do any damage to an armoured ships no matter how much time they
have.
I don't think making an armoured ship totally impervious to Class1
railguns
is a good idea.

Keep coming up with ideas.  This armour level vs railgun problem along
with
the shotgun effect of the multiple to-hit dice for your railgun proposal
still doesn't work for me but this discussion is good ;)

Dean