Recent content by Dracous

My campaigns are generally the same, low armour. My players also, generally, don't learn the core rules and rely on me to tell them how things work. They will avoid combat if possible, but like it to be fair if it does happen. To be honest I have never seen any of them buy ablat, they usually...

I think a big problem with the "all or nothing" idea is that players have an innate dislike of something that has no utility. Having had a player look at me and say "So this does nothing, what is the point of it?", with genuine disappointment/frustration/anger in their tone is not a good game...

Sorry, I don't read it that way. if you combine the rule "Importantly, unless otherwise stated, all armour in this section can be worn over the top of standard or archaic armour. However, only one type of anti-energy armour can be worn in this way." With: "Ablat also has a minimal value against...

Just looking at the change to dodge/parry. I like the changes for melee reactions. My players always pick up the dice when I ask them if they want to dodge or parry, and are vaguely disappointed when they are only applying a modifier. This adds more utility and fun. However, I would still leave...

CSC description for Ablat specifically states "Ablat also has a minimal value against other forms of attack but it cannot be combined with any other types of armour."

Can I just confirm how weapon damage works now. If the AP less than the protection, still roll for damage and apply protection as a reduction, ignoring AP?

Under the new rules, Ablat is now useless versus all laser weapons. The use case for Ablat has vanished and can hence the armour can be removed from the rules.

Been thinking about the response to my comment for a little while, which it is why it has taken so long to respond. Yes, according to the rules we are, since a salvo is defined as; Now since Point defense; and and It seems that a Point defence attempt may only be made against 1 salvo...

I see double salvoes as a tactic being employed by an opposing naval commander to overwhelm defences. Why not just have it as an opposed tactics roll. Attacker wins, and the double salvo attack is made, defender wins, and the point defence can be applied to each salvo separately. It represents...

Oh... so it does. Excellent. Now to festoon my grav vehicle with fusion-X guns, should roll occasionally high enough damage to get past the even the best Armour. :twisted:

A Grav tank, according to the rules as written, is technically a ground scale target. :)

So, when a spacecraft weapon with armour piercing is fired at a ground scale target. What do we do with the the Armour Piercing value? Eg. A beam Laser with the Intense focus Advantage. Against a spacecraft this is 1D damage with AP+2 Against a ground scale target it is 1D multiplied by 10...

Carry on! A great job is being done.

I am starting to consider building orbital grav vehicles with multiple Plasma Gun-C fixed mounts, they will make excellent planetary defense fighters against starships. We just need to work out what happens to the AP. I wonder how high a grav vehicle can fly? Hmm... I could put them in...

I'm basically predicting the arguments my players will put forward when this does come up. So, I am semi-serious... call me a tongue in cheek devil's advocate. :twisted: Consider this, when they shoot the vehicle mounted heavy Gauss cannon at that starship, they are going to ask why the AP...