Prev: Re: Curing the fighter blues Next: Re: Directional screens (armor dropped)

# Re: [FT] Hardened Systems

From: "Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@t...>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 18:27:31 +0100
Subject: Re: [FT] Hardened Systems
``````
Schoon wrote:

> >Standard system:
> >
> >Treshold:		Chance to lose...
> >		1 system	2 systems
> >1st		  27.8%     2.8%
> >2nd		  49.4%    19.8%
> >3rd		  40.1%    52.2%
> >
> >Hardened systems:
> >
> >Treshold:		Chance to lose...
> >		1 system	2 systems
> >1st		     0% 	      0%
> >2nd		  27.8%      2.8%
> >3rd		  49.4%     19.8%
> >
>
> Thanx for the corrections in the %-ages. I was sorta winging it.

Yes :-)

> However, the reduction from 27% to 0, and the 49% to 27%, for the
first

> two thresholds are the important ones in my eyes.

For the same cost as 2 hardened systems you could get *3* standard ones
if you use the 50% penalty; this gives you a 7% probability of having
fewer systems than the hardened ship after the first treshold check and
an 11% prob. of having fewer systems after the second; the risks to lose
*all 3" systems are 0.4% (vs 0) after the first check and 8.8% (vs.
2.8%)
after the second. The difference here is pretty minor - especially if
you
count the ships out after the second treshold as you seem to do below
:-/

> Usually after the  second check, a ship is not much longer for this
world.

I'd say that after the third check - after the second, it still tends to
have a reasonable amount of fight left. YMMV, of course, but this is
extremely important for hardened systems - after the second treshold is
where they get their chance of getting even.

>  Even ignoring  that, the 50% seems correct.

Try it out for yourself. With 50% extra Mass for hardened systems, a
ship
with all its systems hardened usually passes its 3rd treshold check on
about the same time the standard ship passes its second, and the
standard
ship usually don't have to take a third check before it destroys the
hardened ship.

With 25% extra Mass, the two are so closely balanced that things like
maneuvering, random initiative (worth approx. 10% extra firepower in any
turn, at least in smaller battles - I haven't kept detailed enough notes
in bigger battles to know) and plain luck (Teske Fields or Kochte
Demons,
your choice :-) decides the outcome instead.

To get those annoying random and skill factors out of the test, put two
ships - one with a standard beam armament, one with all its beams and
FCs
hardened; both ships to have the same hull size, engines, hull integrity
and armour - in fixed positions so they can fire all their weapons at
one
another, and use simultaneous fire all the time. Use real dice for
damage
and treshold checks, though :-) Run this simulation ten times or so, and
see who wins the most. Do it for both 50% and 25% mass penalties for
hardened systems.

For the record, I didn't do this just ten times. Yes, I know I'm
perverse... but it was a lot more interesting than the lectures I
attended (at least physically) at the time :-) And just like you, I
didn't believe the results at first.

> Lets say for the moment that 25% is correct. How does the rounding >
work?

Add all hardened systems together, then round up. Even 0.25 should round
up - otherwise you're getting the hardening for free, which you
shouldn't.

> Balance wise, I think that Hardened Systems need to be slightly less
> effective than their normal counterparts, or else everyone will use
nothing
> else.

Balance-wise, they should ideally be exactly as effective as their
normal
counterparts... if they're *less* effective, I see no reason to use
them.
The few times when they save me from really rotten luck won't hide the
many times they lose me the battle instead <shrug>

Regards,

Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Hen3ry
``````

 Prev: Re: Curing the fighter blues Next: Re: Directional screens (armor dropped)