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

On Wed, 2 Dec 1998, Sean Bayan Schoonmaker wrote:

> Railguns (and... never mind)
> 
> Dean accurately points out that we don't want to have the "to hit
roll"
> affected, nor do we want to adjust the damage multiplier, which is too
> extreme of a reduction (9 points to 3 for a Class 3 RG). He also
points out
> that the damage should be the only thing affected - and in that gives
us a
> potential answer.
> 
> 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.
> 
> 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+.
> 

Ok, I will step back in, This is not fully thought out yet, but here
goes:

The Kra'Vak armoured hulls do not have anything special agaist missile,
or Railguns. What I have been playing with is moving the damage track to
allow the Kra'Vak to take the harsh damage from these systems..

Example 72mass (double MT mass) Va'Dok Heavy Cruiser.

Avg 'K' hull 40% Damage Track - 29 boxes. 

Damage track looks something like this:

---------*-----
---------*----

Instead of 

-----*--
----*--
---*---
------- 

So what do you think..

Sa