mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
The intent is in order to cause damage you must penetrate defences - armour is a defence.
What works? How are ships and vehicles armed?
- Thread starter Badenov
- Start date
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
So
AUTOMATIC 
Critical Hits are ... optional ...? 
"Conditional" ... perhaps?
"Automatic" doesn't mean AUTOMATIC to @mike wightman I guess.
Gets even better when you realize that on LBB5.80, p45 and p47 there is a DMs Allowed to Penetrate: +relative computer size (and Energy Weapons get an additional +2).
If @mike wightman was correct (which he's not
) in his assertions, then relative computer size would ALSO affect Damage Table rolls ... which doesn't happen (for what should be obvious reasons).The better way to think of the damage resolution is that Automatic Critical Hits get resolved FIRST ... and then any additional Surface/Radiation/Internal damage results get rolled AFTER to see what ADDITIONAL damage (if any, which can also potentially result in critical hits) gets dealt over and above the Automatic Critical Hits.
For some reason, @mike wightman thinks it doesn't work like that.
For some reason, @mike wightman thinks that the Surface/Radiation/Internal damage results need to be rolled FIRST ... and ONLY if any of those result in a net roll of 21- are any Automatic Critical Hits "allowed" (permitted?) to be rolled (so they're not "automatic" they're "conditional").
Because the word "automatic" does NOT mean "automatic" to @mike wightman it seems.
Good to know.
That doesn't follow the terminology used, where 'penetration' refers to getting past active and passive defences by rolling on the tables. Otherwise energy weapons getting +2 penetration instead of a damage roll bonus makes no sense.
Your interpretation means that spinal mounts only get extra damage rolls if their first roll does damage, which seems silly.
Also, your interpretation mean armour is double-dipping, as it explicitly defends against automatic criticals (except by meson guns).
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Critical hits are not automatic the rules clearly state that weapons must hit and penetrate.
The debate is the usual pedantic argument about the meaning and intent of the wording of the rules.
The debate is the usual pedantic argument about the meaning and intent of the wording of the rules.
Last edited:
Well, no. In the book definition, armor is not a "defence". Defenses are specifically defined as sandcasters, repulsor beams, and beam weapons used as missile defense, or nuclear dampers, meson screens, and configuration. Choosing to call armor a defense would come under the heading of a House Rule, I suppose? Legit, but not RAW. On the ship's data sheet, it's marked as "Hull Strength"
Last edited:
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
It is in the defences block of the USP.
Also this:
"Defenses may be divided into active and passive classifications. Active defenses include offensive weapons such as lasers and energy weapons, and defensive weapons such as sandcasters and repulsors. Passive defenses include screens such as meson screens, nuclear dampers, and black globe generators, and construction considerations such as configuration and hull armor."
Also this:
"Defenses may be divided into active and passive classifications. Active defenses include offensive weapons such as lasers and energy weapons, and defensive weapons such as sandcasters and repulsors. Passive defenses include screens such as meson screens, nuclear dampers, and black globe generators, and construction considerations such as configuration and hull armor."
Can someone point out where I can find the "roll to penetrate armor" table? I can't find it for any weapon type.
Also, can someone define "automatic" in this context, specifically in relation to the preceding: "(if they hit and penetrate)":
"Critical Hits: All batteries whose weapon code exceeds the size code of the
target ship will inflict (if they hit and penetrate) automatic critical hits equal to the
size difference."
Book 5, p. 41, "Spinal Mounts"
Thanks in advance
Also, can someone define "automatic" in this context, specifically in relation to the preceding: "(if they hit and penetrate)":
"Critical Hits: All batteries whose weapon code exceeds the size code of the
target ship will inflict (if they hit and penetrate) automatic critical hits equal to the
size difference."
Book 5, p. 41, "Spinal Mounts"
Thanks in advance
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
LBB5.80, p41 ... and I quote for @mike wightman who still isn't getting the message:
Critical Hits: All batteries whose weapon code exceeds the size code of the target ship will inflict (if they hit and penetrate) automatic critical hits equal to the size difference. For example, if a missile battery of factor 9 hits a size 4 ship, it will (in addition to any other damage) inflict 5 critical hits. These critical hits are reduced in number by one for each two factors of armor the target ship has; round odd numbers down. Meson gun hits are not reduced by armor.
I would also append the parenthetical (in addition to any other damage) included in the quoted section is remarkably obvious and plainly definitive.
Yea, honestly, I think SF is right here. And, it's quite a bit of a sea change in how the game is played, as I've not considered it before.
The Armor DM to the damage table is the same kind of DM as the weapon factor, or pulse laser, or whatever.
Taking a Pulse laser as an example, it has to "hit", the "penetrate" the sand casters fired in defense. If it gets through those, THEN it "rolls damage". At that point the weapon factor, the pulse laser trait, and the armor DM are applied to see what kind of damage happens.
It may still "bounce off" because of the armor, but the hit is a hit.
There are 3 clear phases: to hit, to penetrate, roll damage. The crits need to hit and penetrate (i.e. land on the target), then the ship "takes damage". Both from the explosion tables, as well as from any crits.
Armor is not an active defense to "penetrate" like beams or sand. It's something to mitigate damage ONCE DONE.
This is a much different game.
Will require some noodling.
The Armor DM to the damage table is the same kind of DM as the weapon factor, or pulse laser, or whatever.
Taking a Pulse laser as an example, it has to "hit", the "penetrate" the sand casters fired in defense. If it gets through those, THEN it "rolls damage". At that point the weapon factor, the pulse laser trait, and the armor DM are applied to see what kind of damage happens.
It may still "bounce off" because of the armor, but the hit is a hit.
There are 3 clear phases: to hit, to penetrate, roll damage. The crits need to hit and penetrate (i.e. land on the target), then the ship "takes damage". Both from the explosion tables, as well as from any crits.
Armor is not an active defense to "penetrate" like beams or sand. It's something to mitigate damage ONCE DONE.
This is a much different game.
Will require some noodling.
Can you state where is this specifically defined?
As Mike says, Armor is in the defenses block of the USP, and I guess everyone will agree armor is a kind of defense (what else is it, if not?)
OTOH, as Rupert also states, as the same wording is used (penetrating defenses), assuming armor must also be penetrated would also mean the spinals would only roll more times if the first one does damage, and I guess we’ll agree this is not the case…
Using logic, I understand the several rolls from a Spinal should be applied nonetheless, as the sheer power they throw is this way represented (in MT, where higher TLs are also in the tables, some bays may have factor over A, but they don’t roll extra rolls, as this is only for Spinals). And any such rolls overcoming the armor would suffice to trigger the various critical rolls
OTOH, I agree with Mike is difficult to understand how a ship may be affected by a critical if armor is not overcame. How can you destroy the bridge without penetrating the armor?
I see it as a case of poor wording, and I frankly think it can be interpreted both ways
He is. The wording is "hit and penetrate" , not "cause damage".
Still waiting for a guide to the "penetrate armor" tables.
LBB5 p40, Step E, middle of second paragraph.
So, I think I see the disconnect.
Under LBB5p18, the source of Mike Wightman's quote, passive defenses do include hull armor. But in LBB5 p40 Step E, Hull Armor is specifically not mentioned (presumably because it comes into play in a later step). Since p40 Step E is specifically about the combat calculation for damage and not a general statement about ships, I would give that more weight in combat calculation than the general case of listing defenses, which is what is on p18.
Then there's this:
"Defenses pitted against the array of weapons given above include most of the weapons mentioned themselves, plus configuration, hull armor, nuclear dampers, meson screens, repulsors, and force field generators."
That's from the first edition (1979) of High Guard which does have a hull penetration roll. What's contributing to the disconnect is that they never changed the ship data sheet. Block 15 is still "Hull Strength".
"Defenses pitted against the array of weapons given above include most of the weapons mentioned themselves, plus configuration, hull armor, nuclear dampers, meson screens, repulsors, and force field generators."
That's from the first edition (1979) of High Guard which does have a hull penetration roll. What's contributing to the disconnect is that they never changed the ship data sheet. Block 15 is still "Hull Strength".
HG79, p18: "Defenses pitted against the array of weapons given above include most of the weapons mentioned themselves, plus configuration, hull armor, nuclear dampers, meson screens, repulsors, and force field generators."
Also from HG79 (no paragraph E in this version): "Once the firing weapon has penetrated all defenses, it utilizes the hull table to determine if the hull of the target itself has been hit. Note that, with respect to the meson gun, hull armor is not considered; ship configuration is instead taken as the hull defense."
So this looks like a problem with poor wording in HG, using the same terms to define different things in different cases. Hull Armor is a defense in the general sense of the word, but it does not come into play until Step 5E of the Game Turn sequence at the bottom of page 46 under Damage Determination. Armor is a +DM on the Ship Damage Table. At the top of page 41 says "Weapons which penetrate the ship's defenses inflict damage on their targets. Each battery is allowed one roll on one or more damage tables, depending on weapon type. This roll may be modified by various factors." Armor is one of those factors, but it takes its effect on the Ship Damage Table after defenses have been penetrated. It seems like the intent is that the shot has 'penetrated' before armor is considered. Automatic Critical Hits only need to hit and penetrate (p41, two paragraphs down), not defeat armor, before the Automatic Critical Hit is incurred.
All of the text inclusion of armor among the defenses of the ship come from general statements, not the actual calculation procedure (Except the last from Ekofisk, but that's HG79, which was amended by HG80, so has been superseded).
All of the text inclusion of armor among the defenses of the ship come from general statements, not the actual calculation procedure (Except the last from Ekofisk, but that's HG79, which was amended by HG80, so has been superseded).
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
HG 79 there is a roll to penetrate armour or configuration, configuration is a +DM on the damage table, damage can not be pushed off the damage table.
HG 80
Armour is a passive defence - page 18
to inflict an automatic critical a weapon must hit and penetrate - page 41
the damage table is the armour penetration table (note to the pedantic, the other weapon vs defence tables are not labelled as penetration tables either)
armour value can now push damage off the table all the way to no effect (not possible in Hg79) - i.e. no penetration, i.e. no damage and therefore no critical.
Any other interpretation is just ridiculous - a weapon does no damage and yet blows a ship up...
HG 80
Armour is a passive defence - page 18
to inflict an automatic critical a weapon must hit and penetrate - page 41
the damage table is the armour penetration table (note to the pedantic, the other weapon vs defence tables are not labelled as penetration tables either)
armour value can now push damage off the table all the way to no effect (not possible in Hg79) - i.e. no penetration, i.e. no damage and therefore no critical.
Any other interpretation is just ridiculous - a weapon does no damage and yet blows a ship up...
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
LBB5.80, p45-47.
See those tables?
Those define what are Defenses that need to be penetrated in order to score a HIt that will deal Damage via Combat Steps 5B through 5D, yielding Combat Step 5E after all battery hits (Y/N) through Defenses have been determined.
Last edited by a moderator:
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
Only @mike wightman would classify a Ship Vaporized result as "Not A Damage Result" ... or at least, not a valid/legitimate one ...Any other interpretation is just ridiculous - a weapon does no damage and yet blows a ship up...
Maybe it's just me ... I would have thought that "blowing a ship up" was damage.Any other interpretation is just ridiculous - a weapon does no damage and yet blows a ship up...
Mr. Flow beat me to it. Apparently I'm not the only one.
A massive hit slams into a tiny fighter or shuttle like a giant hammer (Weapon 9 vs Size 0) and things shake loose even if the armor holds. Makes perfect sense to me, and that's a pretty steady trope in fiction. ST TOS did it pretty often even when the shields did absorb the hit.
I suppose this is sidewise related to the original question of how to build ships, because it affects what a ship needs to withstand, but I'm more concerned about whether small craft can use armor or not at all. HG implies not, but someone pointed to a case where it was allowed. It's kind of a big deal in worldbuilding because it makes turrets and barbettes basically worthless, which doesn't seem like was anyone's intent.
I suppose this is sidewise related to the original question of how to build ships, because it affects what a ship needs to withstand, but I'm more concerned about whether small craft can use armor or not at all. HG implies not, but someone pointed to a case where it was allowed. It's kind of a big deal in worldbuilding because it makes turrets and barbettes basically worthless, which doesn't seem like was anyone's intent.
Similar threads
