Re: [GZG] More advanced screens

Hugh Fisher wrote:

>Been thinking about the rules for advanced screens.
>
>#1: advanced screens should subtract 1 per level from
>every damage roll instead of ignoring rolls of 6 for
>level 1, 5 or 6 for level 2.

Sorry, I can't find the original post so I'll have to ask a stupid
question:

Does this -1 apply to beam dice as well as to straight-D6 damage rolls?

(The reason I ask is that a -1 modifier to a beam die roll is identical
to 
level-2 standard screens. IOW, if these advanced screens use the same -1

DRM against both beam dice and D6 damage rolls, this has some rather 
obvious implications about what the system needs to  cost.)

>I just did a quick analysis of what percentage of
>mass various FB1 ships devote to 'passive defence',
>screens, armour, or extra hull.

How do you define "extra" hull? Specifically, how do you compare, say, 
"extra" hull boxes on the 4th hull row of an ESU capital ship with Mass 
spent on armour or screens? It is by no means a 1:1 relationship, like.

>NAC ships are mostly 9 to 11% (the Vandenberg heavy
>cruiser is the highest). The NSE, as you are well
>aware, don't spend more than 5% on any ship. (The
>most 'defensive' FSE design turns out to be the San
>Miguel destroyer, with a whole 5.8% spent on armour.)
>
>The NSL ships turn out to be 8-12%, not really very
>different from the NAC. (The best protected is the
>Markgraf cruiser on 12%.) I guess the mechanism of
>armour absorbing lots of early hits gives them the
>reputation/actual effect of being better.

Actual effect, not just reputation... against non-Kra'Vak opponents. 
Anything that delays the first and second threshold checks has a big
impact 
on the ship's combat power, whereas delaying the third check and/or the 
destruction of the ship *without* also delaying the first two thresholds

mostly just prolongs the ship's death throes. (Which is why NSL-style 
armour schemes don't work very well against the Kra'Vak: heavy K-guns
can 
inflict thresholds *without* first destroying all the armour.)

>UNSC ships only have screens at best, like FSE. I
>estimate that the advanced hulls are equivalent to
>2.5% of armour per row (30% / 4 = 7.5%, 30% / 3
>= 10%) so 'gain' another 7.5% by paying extra points.

The UNSC ships only 'gain' about 4% "extra armour" from their 3-row
hulls, 
not 7.5%. Those boxes on the 2nd and 3rd rows aren't worth a "full"
armour box.

>Given these, I don't feel comfortable about making
>a ship with level 2 advanced screens spend 20% mass
>on it.

If they're too cheap at 4xMass and you don't want to increase the Mass 
further, you'll have to increase the Cost/Mass ratio <shrug>

Regards,

Oerjan
orjan.ariander1@comhem.se

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

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l