is a 6+ armour ship at a disadvantage?

[Der Kommandant]

because half of the time that it's damaged it's going to be a critical.
it just sounds kind of wierd to me that when you actually manage to get through the armour on a heavily armoured ship 50% of the time it's going to be a crit whereas you can damage a ship with less armour all day without it being a crit. well that is until you sink it of course!

 

[Ultron]

That's an interesting point, one that I had not thought about. I guess it wouldn't be a disadvantage against me, because I rarely roll "6"s anyway. :lol:

I would personally still rather have armor at 6+ to reduce the possibility of any damage at all.

 

[Reaverman]

because half of the time that it's damaged it's going to be a critical.
it just sounds kind of wierd to me that when you actually manage to get through the armour on a heavily armoured ship 50% of the time it's going to be a crit whereas you can damage a ship with less armour all day without it being a crit. well that is until you sink it of course!

Heavily Armoured Knights in the middle ages, were hard to injure. But when they did, the enemy did injure them, the wounds were horrific. Why, becuase sometimes the armour was penetrated at its weakest point. Like visors, under the arms, crotch, or joints etc.

The point I am making, is that sometimes the only way the ship can be penetrated, is through a weak point (in other words a crit).

 

[MongooseMatt]

In practice, no. Remember, secondary weapons cannot cause crits, and the big guns you use against these monster ships tend to modify the dice roll anyway. . .

 

[Soulmage]

Yeah, that has been my experience in actual play. The 6+ armor is always a good thing!

Think about it, against a 5+ armor ship you are still going to roll the same number of criticals, you just will do a bunch of extra damage on top of it!

Just think about it as the 6+ armor is deflecting all the small/glancing stuff and keeping it from getting through, but only the dead square hits on vital systems that no armor can protect against are actually doing any damage.

That is why when in my battle report the Bismarck shot everything at the Hood and inflicted 11 points of damage, then turned around and shot everything at the Leander, had almost identical die rolls, and did 22 points of damage!!! Which ship would you rather be on? LOL!!

 

[DM]

Oh yes, I recall this from playtesting too Thanks for remind ing me.

 

[witteridderludo]

In practice, no. Remember, secondary weapons cannot cause crits, and the big guns you use against these monster ships tend to modify the dice roll anyway. . .

And I should remember this from where exactly?

When I read this, I couldn't recall seeing this in the rules, so I grabbed my copy and started looking through the rules on firing, damage etc... About a minute later I hadn't seen anything stating that secondary don't cause criticals, a second reading and still nothing.

Either I've been looking over it every time (please tell me where I can find it)or you guys need to put up an errata sheet ASAP.

 

[Soulmage]

It is under the "weak" quality description.

 

[witteridderludo]

Ah OK, has nothing to do with being secondary wepaons in se, but just with a weapons trait. Matt's remark was a bit confusing.

 

[Soulmage]

You just haven't obtained encyclopedic knowledge of the rules yet!

You will get there I am sure!

 

[Jammybee]

Me and my friend are experimenting with a rule that goes as follows:

If you need a natural 6 to damage a ship, crits are scored on a 5+.

Only really affects some gun cruisers, so massive problem to begin with.