Possible use for the heavier system letters(drives,plants)

[Beastttt]

Ok the new damage rule look cool but why would you get a larger /drive plant(power,maneuver,jump) when 3 damage points destroys the system no matter the size

what if it wemnt like this
for each letter over the minium needed the /driveplant got 1 more point to the damaged but functional level(normally just the first hit)

how does that sound
of course the 700 ton would be the hull size of choice with 5 extra hits for a Z drive/plant
I would limit this to no more that 3 extra hits

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

The old CT rules reduced the drive by 1 letter value for each hit, so that is why military ships might put better drives than the minimum on their ships.

The current rules do not work that way, so there is no advantage to putting on a bigger drive until you hit the next performance number. Sure, you could do it, but it costs more, takes up more space and gives you nothing back.

Your game, your rules though.

 

[Beastttt]

I remember playing back in the late 70's we did just a space battle
and trying to reduce a ships power plant below the minimum took forever
you just about had to scrub everything off to destroy a ship of any size over 400 tons

the new combat system looks good
but not making use of the extra plant/drive types within the same plant/drive number looks to be a home brew that was not refined
and makes the writer look amaturish

 

[simonh]

The all-or-nothing damage system is less sphisticated perhaps, but it makes a degree of sense. In reality drive systems don't usualy degrade gracefully through a range of performance ratings as they take damage. It tends to be more of an all-or-nothing situation. Sure a larger engien plant is harder to damage, but my take is that cumulative damage doesn't generaly reduce performance, it reduces reliability. Eventualy the damage will be so great that some vital component goes pop, and you lose the whole thing.

Simon Hibbs

 

[captainjack23]

The all-or-nothing damage system is less sphisticated perhaps, but it makes a degree of sense. In reality drive systems don't usualy degrade gracefully through a range of performance ratings as they take damage. It tends to be more of an all-or-nothing situation. Sure a larger engien plant is harder to damage, but my take is that cumulative damage doesn't generaly reduce performance, it reduces reliability. Eventualy the damage will be so great that some vital component goes pop, and you lose the whole thing.

Simon Hibbs

ssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! We need to be VERY careful before waking the dragon of "making sense" :mrgreen:

But....yes, it is an odd effect even for a semi-hemi-demi-inertia independent thrust drive and transluminal jumpy thingie.
Without summoning the equally perilous dragon "Canon",
I might note that eventually the Lanthium jump grid was partially shoehorned into being the reason for that gradual damage reduction - damage to the hull gradually degraded the grid, and thus reduced effectiveness of the Jump and thrust fields generated -or somthing like that.

CAVEAT EMPTOR: I am merely summarizing some old discussions here, not advocating a solution.
WARNING: Content under Pressure ! For Legal Display Purposes Only; Not for Use as A Life-Saving Device; Do not use as a Striking Object; Not a step; do not varorize and inhale; if swallowed, stay away from me.
:wink: