Vehicle Armor in books 1-3 personal combat

[clementk]

Originally posted by Piper:
The Classic Games reprint has Striker, AHL, Snapshot, Mayday and a bunch more. For my money, it's a good buy.

I'm no longer into boardgames of the design style of FFW, Invasion: Earth, and Imperium. Too long to play in one session, no local players, and no officially recognized online aides. I don't need AHL deckplans, already have Supp. 5 in the Supplement reprint, if I have to buy Mayday I can likely get it for cheap, and I’m not fond of action points, esp. in rpgs. <shrugs>

As for snippets, I don't know if there are any available, but the system is fairly simple.<snip>This is compared to the armor value of the target.
The same type of system is used in MT and Striker.

Well I was thinking along the lines of Fair Use quoting but no big.
Ok. That's what I figured. Will have to take another look at MT. Does MT just copy the armor/penetration rules and numbers from AHL and Striker?

And FWIW, (insert shameless plug here) if you like Book 1 combat, you should really take a look at Snapshot!, also available in the reprint. The action sequence (adopted into AHL) is a really good way to regulate combat actions and the rules for shooting through a bulkhead can be easily adapted to vehicle armor.

I should clarify, I’m not fond of combat matrixes at all preferring task systems but that can be easily swapped out or I can just take a couple of advil before combat heavy sessions.

However I do prefer a simpler combat. I'm mainly not wanting to have to redesign in Striker (after repurchasing it) every vehicle I'm going to use.

So far I’m going with modifying Sigg Oddra’s post with a bit from Andy Slack’s article. Likely making it harder to hit or require more damage to penetrate based on TL past 5 (1 DM or 3 damage per TL over 5) and possibly using the speed chart in MT.

 

[clementk]

Originally posted by Piper:
The Classic Games reprint has Striker, AHL, Snapshot, Mayday and a bunch more. For my money, it's a good buy.

I'm no longer into boardgames of the design style of FFW, Invasion: Earth, and Imperium. Too long to play in one session, no local players, and no officially recognized online aides. I don't need AHL deckplans, already have Supp. 5 in the Supplement reprint, if I have to buy Mayday I can likely get it for cheap, and I’m not fond of action points, esp. in rpgs. <shrugs>

As for snippets, I don't know if there are any available, but the system is fairly simple.<snip>This is compared to the armor value of the target.
The same type of system is used in MT and Striker.

Well I was thinking along the lines of Fair Use quoting but no big.
Ok. That's what I figured. Will have to take another look at MT. Does MT just copy the armor/penetration rules and numbers from AHL and Striker?

And FWIW, (insert shameless plug here) if you like Book 1 combat, you should really take a look at Snapshot!, also available in the reprint. The action sequence (adopted into AHL) is a really good way to regulate combat actions and the rules for shooting through a bulkhead can be easily adapted to vehicle armor.

I should clarify, I’m not fond of combat matrixes at all preferring task systems but that can be easily swapped out or I can just take a couple of advil before combat heavy sessions.

However I do prefer a simpler combat. I'm mainly not wanting to have to redesign in Striker (after repurchasing it) every vehicle I'm going to use.

So far I’m going with modifying Sigg Oddra’s post with a bit from Andy Slack’s article. Likely making it harder to hit or require more damage to penetrate based on TL past 5 (1 DM or 3 damage per TL over 5) and possibly using the speed chart in MT.

 

[mike wightman]

I've found the original version of this I did:
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">vehicle type weapon matrix damage points to
penetrate armour
_________________________________________________
soft skin cloth 12
_________________________________________________
light AFV/
ATV battle dress 24
_________________________________________________
medium AFV/
G Carrier battle dress+1 48
_________________________________________________
heavy AFV/
lgt grav tank battle dress+2 72
_________________________________________________
v.heavy AFV/
med grav tank battle dress+3 96
_________________________________________________
hvy grav tank/
gunship/
spaceship battle dress+4 120
_________________________________________________</pre>[/QUOTE]The damage to penetrate and cause internal damage is modified by TL for AFVs, grav tanks, and gunships, add 5x(TL-5). Spaceships get their High Guard armour factor x5.

 

[mike wightman]

I've found the original version of this I did:
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">vehicle type weapon matrix damage points to
penetrate armour
_________________________________________________
soft skin cloth 12
_________________________________________________
light AFV/
ATV battle dress 24
_________________________________________________
medium AFV/
G Carrier battle dress+1 48
_________________________________________________
heavy AFV/
lgt grav tank battle dress+2 72
_________________________________________________
v.heavy AFV/
med grav tank battle dress+3 96
_________________________________________________
hvy grav tank/
gunship/
spaceship battle dress+4 120
_________________________________________________</pre>[/QUOTE]The damage to penetrate and cause internal damage is modified by TL for AFVs, grav tanks, and gunships, add 5x(TL-5). Spaceships get their High Guard armour factor x5.

 

[Golan2072]

One more thing on a closely related issue: how do you fit starship weapons into ship-to-ground combat? beyond the difference in damage calculation (hit charts for ships vs. attribute damage to characters), starship weapons fire once or twice per 1,000-second turn; ground combat uses MUCH SHORTER turns. So, how do you make ship weapons useful against mobile ground targets? the original ROF would downright SUCK.

 

[Golan2072]

One more thing on a closely related issue: how do you fit starship weapons into ship-to-ground combat? beyond the difference in damage calculation (hit charts for ships vs. attribute damage to characters), starship weapons fire once or twice per 1,000-second turn; ground combat uses MUCH SHORTER turns. So, how do you make ship weapons useful against mobile ground targets? the original ROF would downright SUCK.

 

[Piper]

Originally posted by Employee 2-4601:
One more thing on a closely related issue: how do you fit starship weapons into ship-to-ground combat? beyond the difference in damage calculation (hit charts for ships vs. attribute damage to characters), starship weapons fire once or twice per 1,000-second turn; ground combat uses MUCH SHORTER turns. So, how do you make ship weapons useful against mobile ground targets? the original ROF would downright SUCK.

Striker allows ship lasers to fire every round. You can justify this by assuming that space combat represents a burst of fire, spaced to provide the best hit chance rather than a single shot.

 

[Piper]

Originally posted by Employee 2-4601:
One more thing on a closely related issue: how do you fit starship weapons into ship-to-ground combat? beyond the difference in damage calculation (hit charts for ships vs. attribute damage to characters), starship weapons fire once or twice per 1,000-second turn; ground combat uses MUCH SHORTER turns. So, how do you make ship weapons useful against mobile ground targets? the original ROF would downright SUCK.

Striker allows ship lasers to fire every round. You can justify this by assuming that space combat represents a burst of fire, spaced to provide the best hit chance rather than a single shot.

 

[robject]

That's what I figured, too. Ship's lasers release a steady barrage of shots over that 1000 second period; for space combat, it makes sense.

 

[robject]

That's what I figured, too. Ship's lasers release a steady barrage of shots over that 1000 second period; for space combat, it makes sense.

 

[Golan2072]

My general ideas (I might cobble up something more complicated out of LBBs 4 and 8 later, after I finish writing my personal weapon/equipment house rules):

For the sake of simplicity, weapons used against vehicle will have fixed damage equal to the amount of wound dice the weapon does against organic targets (i.e. rifles will do 3 damage "points" against a vehicle). Armor determines both to-hit (as usual, representing the difficulty of hitting a vulnerable [sp] spot) and damage absorption (in vehicle damage "points", that is full dice). If a weapon does less damage than the absorption score, it does not penetrate (special AP rounds would halve penetration). Remaining "points" cause internal damage; one roll should be made on a hit-location table (I'll base it on LBB2 ship tables and LBB8 robot tables) for every several vehicle damage "points" (1? 3? 5?). A "Crew" hit will indicate that the remaining (after absorption) wound dice would be rolled for wounding for each character inside the vehicle.

 

[Golan2072]

My general ideas (I might cobble up something more complicated out of LBBs 4 and 8 later, after I finish writing my personal weapon/equipment house rules):

For the sake of simplicity, weapons used against vehicle will have fixed damage equal to the amount of wound dice the weapon does against organic targets (i.e. rifles will do 3 damage "points" against a vehicle). Armor determines both to-hit (as usual, representing the difficulty of hitting a vulnerable [sp] spot) and damage absorption (in vehicle damage "points", that is full dice). If a weapon does less damage than the absorption score, it does not penetrate (special AP rounds would halve penetration). Remaining "points" cause internal damage; one roll should be made on a hit-location table (I'll base it on LBB2 ship tables and LBB8 robot tables) for every several vehicle damage "points" (1? 3? 5?). A "Crew" hit will indicate that the remaining (after absorption) wound dice would be rolled for wounding for each character inside the vehicle.

 

[SgtHulka]

Originally posted by Casey:

I should clarify, I’m not fond of combat matrixes at all preferring task systems but that can be easily swapped out or I can just take a couple of advil before combat heavy sessions.

Maybe you should download the MegaTraveller Player's Guide from DTRPG? I believe it's still free until the end of the week? Based on this comment and some others about your preferred playing style, it might be just what you're looking for: a task system, no action points, and integrated rules "scaling" combat encounters (man to man, man to vehicle, man to starship).

 

[SgtHulka]

Originally posted by Casey:

I should clarify, I’m not fond of combat matrixes at all preferring task systems but that can be easily swapped out or I can just take a couple of advil before combat heavy sessions.

Maybe you should download the MegaTraveller Player's Guide from DTRPG? I believe it's still free until the end of the week? Based on this comment and some others about your preferred playing style, it might be just what you're looking for: a task system, no action points, and integrated rules "scaling" combat encounters (man to man, man to vehicle, man to starship).

 

[Golan2072]

Originally posted by Casey:
I'm looking for something that either fits into CT books 1-3 as is or with minimal adjustments, like usable with the Challenge or Paul Elliot's task systems. I do not want to have to convert everything and play a game of Striker just for a round or two of party level combat.

My variation on Paul Elliott's task system includes preliminary vehicle combat (LBB1 with an ultra-simplified version of Striker penetration); eventually, I'll include a simple set of guidelines to convert the complex (but fun to design, if you have the time) Striker vehicles into my simpler system. I'll also convert several sample (LBB3-style) vehicles from Striker to my system so you won't even have to convert them yourself.

I also eventually intend (if it will be legal and/or possible according to CT rules) to create a "standard component" simplified design system for CT vehicles; the idea is to build several components in Striker (for example, several standard chassises and several standard power plants), drop some of the Striker-only-relevant details and arrange an LBB2-style hulls-n'-drives table. Sure, there will be two tables (ground and grav), but I'll simplify it by ignoring many Striker things (such as the difference between tracks and wheels, the difference between the various types of internal combustion, etc). It's alot of work but will probably be worth it.

 

[Golan2072]

Originally posted by Casey:
I'm looking for something that either fits into CT books 1-3 as is or with minimal adjustments, like usable with the Challenge or Paul Elliot's task systems. I do not want to have to convert everything and play a game of Striker just for a round or two of party level combat.

My variation on Paul Elliott's task system includes preliminary vehicle combat (LBB1 with an ultra-simplified version of Striker penetration); eventually, I'll include a simple set of guidelines to convert the complex (but fun to design, if you have the time) Striker vehicles into my simpler system. I'll also convert several sample (LBB3-style) vehicles from Striker to my system so you won't even have to convert them yourself.

I also eventually intend (if it will be legal and/or possible according to CT rules) to create a "standard component" simplified design system for CT vehicles; the idea is to build several components in Striker (for example, several standard chassises and several standard power plants), drop some of the Striker-only-relevant details and arrange an LBB2-style hulls-n'-drives table. Sure, there will be two tables (ground and grav), but I'll simplify it by ignoring many Striker things (such as the difference between tracks and wheels, the difference between the various types of internal combustion, etc). It's alot of work but will probably be worth it.

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by Employee 2-4601:
I also eventually intend (if it will be legal and/or possible according to CT rules) to create a "standard component" simplified design system for CT vehicles; the idea is to build several components in Striker (for example, several standard chassises and several standard power plants), drop some of the Striker-only-relevant details and arrange an LBB2-style hulls-n'-drives table. Sure, there will be two tables (ground and grav), but I'll simplify it by ignoring many Striker things (such as the difference between tracks and wheels, the difference between the various types of internal combustion, etc). It's a lot of work but will probably be worth it.

Well worth it, I'd say.

I look forward to seeing what you come up with

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by Employee 2-4601:
I also eventually intend (if it will be legal and/or possible according to CT rules) to create a "standard component" simplified design system for CT vehicles; the idea is to build several components in Striker (for example, several standard chassises and several standard power plants), drop some of the Striker-only-relevant details and arrange an LBB2-style hulls-n'-drives table. Sure, there will be two tables (ground and grav), but I'll simplify it by ignoring many Striker things (such as the difference between tracks and wheels, the difference between the various types of internal combustion, etc). It's a lot of work but will probably be worth it.

Well worth it, I'd say.

I look forward to seeing what you come up with