Register Register

Author Topic: AToW armor effectiveness?  (Read 4554 times)

Acolyte

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1475
AToW armor effectiveness?
« on: 22 March 2013, 05:31:07 »
Anyone else find the personal armor in AToW to be less than effective? It seems as if pistols have an AP of 3-4 and riffles have between 4-5, so you basically have to be wearing the toughest armor and facing the least powerful weapons for it to be of any use. Even wearing a Ballistic Vest, your only reducing the damage by a few points, unless your facing shotguns or the like.

Anybody else feel this way?

   - Shane
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion
It is by the coffee that my thoughts acquire speed
My teeth acquire stains
The stains become a warning
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #1 on: 22 March 2013, 07:29:35 »
It was doubtlessly a deliberate decision to design the game that way.

If something more cinematic is up your alley, they have rules for 'hero mode' levels.  If you want you can apply hero mode to armor and make it way more effective.

VhenRa

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1840
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #2 on: 22 March 2013, 12:40:11 »
ATOW (And the previous RPGs, but slightly less so) is extremely lethal system. If you are in combat, your best bet is to kill the other side quickly and make use of cover and concealment and shooting them from beyond their range to retaliate. Taking hits is not a good idea.

Acolyte

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1475
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #3 on: 22 March 2013, 17:01:01 »
It was doubtlessly a deliberate decision to design the game that way.

If something more cinematic is up your alley, they have rules for 'hero mode' levels.  If you want you can apply hero mode to armor and make it way more effective.

Cinematic? How about realistic. Troops nowadays have body armor that'll stop an AK 47. Thing is, with the cinematic hero modes, they make armor too effective. Sure the RL vest'll stop an AK 47 bullet, but it doesn't tickle either.

Basically I'd need something in between. Maybe flip the equation and instead of the excess BAR reducing damage have the excess AP reduce the BAR and that reduces damage. Still too effective, though. Maybe half Fatigue half Real? I don't know.

The only problem now is that there is very little reason to wear less than Balistic Plate. I'm not sure there's any benifit to listing the BAR of, say the cooling vest or leather. Even Ablative/Flak is anemic against everything it's supposed to resist. About half the pistols punch straight through and the other half are reduced by only 1. Forget about rifles. Any armor less and it's like you're naked.

I would like a system where taking hits is not a good idea, but armor still helps. It doesn't make you immune (like with Fatigue - you rest up and you're fine), but reduces the damage.

   - Shane
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion
It is by the coffee that my thoughts acquire speed
My teeth acquire stains
The stains become a warning
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #4 on: 22 March 2013, 17:53:20 »
Cinematic? How about realistic. Troops nowadays have body armor that'll stop an AK 47. Thing is, with the cinematic hero modes, they make armor too effective. Sure the RL vest'll stop an AK 47 bullet, but it doesn't tickle either.

Basically I'd need something in between. Maybe flip the equation and instead of the excess BAR reducing damage have the excess AP reduce the BAR and that reduces damage. Still too effective, though. Maybe half Fatigue half Real? I don't know.

The only problem now is that there is very little reason to wear less than Balistic Plate. I'm not sure there's any benifit to listing the BAR of, say the cooling vest or leather. Even Ablative/Flak is anemic against everything it's supposed to resist. About half the pistols punch straight through and the other half are reduced by only 1. Forget about rifles. Any armor less and it's like you're naked.

I would like a system where taking hits is not a good idea, but armor still helps. It doesn't make you immune (like with Fatigue - you rest up and you're fine), but reduces the damage.

   - Shane

I'm not sure I understand your complaint.  Regular flak armor holds up vs ballistic firearms smaller than an elephant gun.  That's pretty darn effective.

When you say RL vests it's imporant that you don't equate this kind of vest with the 'bulletproof vests' that are worn underneath clothing by police and such.  While the former can stop an AK-47 round, the latter will not.

Acolyte

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1475
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #5 on: 22 March 2013, 18:07:42 »
I'm not sure I understand your complaint.  Regular flak armor holds up vs ballistic firearms smaller than an elephant gun.  That's pretty darn effective.

When you say RL vests it's imporant that you don't equate this kind of vest with the 'bulletproof vests' that are worn underneath clothing by police and such.  While the former can stop an AK-47 round, the latter will not.

Well, no regular Flak armor will reduce about half the rifles by 1 and the other half blow through as if it weren't there. AP 5 vs BAR 5 = no reduction. And, BTW, you are quite right about the kind of vest I was meaning, and that I should have been more clear about that. Am I reading the Armor rules wrong? It seems as if the Flak armor you mentioned as holding up against anything smaller than an elephant gun, is only reducing by 1 point, max, and that only on half the rifles. Is there something I'm missing?

   - Shane
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion
It is by the coffee that my thoughts acquire speed
My teeth acquire stains
The stains become a warning
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

Acolyte

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1475
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #6 on: 22 March 2013, 18:31:08 »
Maybe I'm going about it the wrong way.... Maybe I need to introduce a "Civillian Standard Ammo" into the mix with an AP -1 cost * 0.8, and consider the normal ammo as being some nasty millitary LAPEX (Light Armor Peircing EXplosive), or DPAD (Dual Purpose Armor Defeating) style. This is a military game after all.

   - Shane
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion
It is by the coffee that my thoughts acquire speed
My teeth acquire stains
The stains become a warning
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #7 on: 22 March 2013, 19:51:49 »
Another thing to keep in mind (especially if comparing to real-world body armor) is that the armor is designed just to make a shot surviveable... not incidental.  Turning an AK-47 round into an inconvenience is something that only happens in fiction.  A soldier wearing modern military body armor is still more likely than not a tactical kill when shot by a high powered rifle.  The difference the armor made is that he's out of the current firefight due to injuries rather than outright death.

Acolyte

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1475
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #8 on: 22 March 2013, 20:15:23 »
Another thing to keep in mind (especially if comparing to real-world body armor) is that the armor is designed just to make a shot surviveable... not incidental.  Turning an AK-47 round into an inconvenience is something that only happens in fiction.  A soldier wearing modern military body armor is still more likely than not a tactical kill when shot by a high powered rifle.  The difference the armor made is that he's out of the current firefight due to injuries rather than outright death.

Yes, exactly. That's the reason why I'm not a fan of the "Hero" armor rules. Fatigue damage is recovered in minutes, so that doesn't adequately reflect the injury from stopping a bullet. Neo Chain vs Sternschnat Claymore should do more than fatigue. There's also a very large break between no lasting damage at all and no effect at all.

Perhap I haven't shown what I'm talking about clearly enough.

Ballistic vest: Rifles reduced by 1 or 2 points, pistols reduced by 2 - 3. IMO this works quite well.
Flak: vs ballistic rifles are reduced by 1 except for the snipers, Zeus and elephant gun. Those have no reduction. Pistols are reduced by 1 or 2.
Ablative: vs energy, the same as Flak against Ballistic.
Ablative/Flak: No rifle is affected at all, and about half the pistols are reduce by 1. The other half see no reduction at all.

Below this, there's no effect from armor at all against pistols and rifles using standard ammo. Might as well not be wearing any, it just slows you down. This is where the stats break down, at BAR 3 or lower. With Melee, it's actually fine, just with standard pistols and riffles.

So what I'd like is some damage reduction, but not 0 damage or all fatigue.

Maybe just increase the Damage reduction by 1 point? Unless maybe the AP is double? This means that a cooling vest would have some utility against pistols but is totally outclassed by riffles and leather has no effect on gunfire at all, but reduces some melee.

Might work.
   - Shane
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion
It is by the coffee that my thoughts acquire speed
My teeth acquire stains
The stains become a warning
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

guardiandashi

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #9 on: 22 March 2013, 20:42:05 »
well I think there should be a balance between insta death, armor does nothing, and le armored juggernaught

(especially since I am trying to work out an xcom conversion) and  I would like armor to do "something" but not be godly

I am kinda thinking to do partial heroic hitpoints, but not "heroic armor"


Acolyte

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1475
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #10 on: 22 March 2013, 21:00:06 »
well I think there should be a balance between insta death, armor does nothing, and le armored juggernaught

(especially since I am trying to work out an xcom conversion) and  I would like armor to do "something" but not be godly

I am kinda thinking to do partial heroic hitpoints, but not "heroic armor"

This is basically where I'm coming from, and better said than I. Armor should have some effect but, barring BA, should not allow people to ignore gunfire. Even BA shouldn't.

So how does adding one to the damage reduction sound? ie. AP 4 vs BAR 4 normally would be 0 damage reduction, under this rule damage would be reduced by one. Probably cap at AP double the BAR. so for our BAR 4 armor:

AP 0: Damage reduced by 5
AP 1: Damage reduced by 4
AP 2: Damage reduced by 3
AP 3: Damage reduced by 2
AP 4: Damage reduced by 1
AP 5: Damage reduced by 1
AP 6: Damage reduced by 1
AP 7: Damage reduced by 1
AP 8: Damage not reduced.

Thoughts?
   - Shane
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion
It is by the coffee that my thoughts acquire speed
My teeth acquire stains
The stains become a warning
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

Labyr

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 117
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #11 on: 23 March 2013, 02:39:49 »
There is a way to get armour to work, you have to wear it in layers. I think two layers of Flak armour will completely stop a pistol round. If you have a trooper wearing the standard Lyran armour with a ballistic plate vest over top I think you can stop most Rifle rounds. Anti-personal grenades will still mess you up, and they are cheap.

The downside of layering armour is the encumbrance rules. Being armoured up really limits your mobility, plus the fatigue isn't fun.

Acolyte

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1475
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #12 on: 23 March 2013, 10:50:37 »
Another thing to keep in mind (especially if comparing to real-world body armor) is that the armor is designed just to make a shot surviveable... not incidental.  Turning an AK-47 round into an inconvenience is something that only happens in fiction.  A soldier wearing modern military body armor is still more likely than not a tactical kill when shot by a high powered rifle.  The difference the armor made is that he's out of the current firefight due to injuries rather than outright death.

Hmm.. How about the Expanded Wound effects from AToW Companion? Maybe the armor works as per normal, but if the BAR is equal to or greater than the AP, you use the Fatigue chart. Still does Standard Damage, and the same amount to boot, but the nasty internal damage and fractures are reduced to bruises and dislocations. A tactical kill without the chance of dying.

   - Shane
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion
It is by the coffee that my thoughts acquire speed
My teeth acquire stains
The stains become a warning
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

Oborous

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #13 on: 23 March 2013, 11:45:31 »
I always interpreted it as you needed cover -and- armour. 

That often the hits would start trying to penetrate your barrier and then your armour giving you protection, at least until the protection degrades.  When you look at AToW Pg 187, barrier ratings get pretty big, pretty fast.  An interior wall is BAR 3, so ~3 extra points of armour really puts your vest plus wall to be much more effective.


Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4408
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #14 on: 23 March 2013, 12:44:05 »
I always interpreted it as you needed cover -and- armour. 

That often the hits would start trying to penetrate your barrier and then your armour giving you protection, at least until the protection degrades.  When you look at AToW Pg 187, barrier ratings get pretty big, pretty fast.  An interior wall is BAR 3, so ~3 extra points of armour really puts your vest plus wall to be much more effective.

Not really. Unless I'm missing something, cover works just like armor, so anything with an AP of 3 or better will go right through that wall without any reduction in damage. Armor isn't cumulative. Each piece, whether from cover or worn armor, is treated on its own separate item.

So for every ballistic pistol, that BAR 3 interior wall will provide absolutely no damage reduction, since every ballistic pistol's AP is 3 or better (every energy pistol I think as well).

Even the exterior wall of a house (BAR 4) won't provide damage reduction from about half of the pistols in game (of course, you'll get a big cover modifier, so that helps!).

And if you're going to stack armor, you want the heaviest on the outside, on the off chance that it might reduce the AP of the attack low enough so the lighter armor can have a chance.

For example, the ballistic rating of a Lyran Alliance Armored Jacket is 5. The ballistic rating of a cooling vest is 2. If you're hit by a TK Enforcer firing a single shot, you're hit with a shot of 3 AP and 3 damage (plus MoS). So if you have the jacket on the outside, you reduce the damage and AP by 2, making the shot 1 AP 1 Damage. The shot then hits your cooling suit and the damage is reduced by another 1 to 0 AP and 0 damage.

If you had dressed funny that day and put your cooling vest on over your jacket, that same shot would hit the cooling vest, and its AP 3 would let it blow through the cooling vest without being reduced at all. It would then hit the jacket, its AP and damage reduced by 2, and the final round hitting you would be 1 AP 1 Damage.

So order matters :)

Acolyte

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1475
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #15 on: 23 March 2013, 14:15:23 »
Well, I'm a big fan of cover. Anytime a round can hit something other than me, it's good. Wall, telephone pole, some poor schmucks car, whatever. Regardless of the armor you're wearing, you should always try to find cover.

What I'm looking at is what happens when you get hit with just your armor protecting you. Hopefully, you were running towards cover and not just charging a gun, but you've just been shot.

What I'm trying to get is armor that helps at least a little, but doesn't let you ignore the shot. So, reducing the damage to more survivable levels.

Not really. Unless I'm missing something, cover works just like armor, so anything with an AP of 3 or better will go right through that wall without any reduction in damage. Armor isn't cumulative. Each piece, whether from cover or worn armor, is treated on its own separate item.

So for every ballistic pistol, that BAR 3 interior wall will provide absolutely no damage reduction, since every ballistic pistol's AP is 3 or better (every energy pistol I think as well).

Even the exterior wall of a house (BAR 4) won't provide damage reduction from about half of the pistols in game (of course, you'll get a big cover modifier, so that helps!).

And if you're going to stack armor, you want the heaviest on the outside, on the off chance that it might reduce the AP of the attack low enough so the lighter armor can have a chance.

For example, the ballistic rating of a Lyran Alliance Armored Jacket is 5. The ballistic rating of a cooling vest is 2. If you're hit by a TK Enforcer firing a single shot, you're hit with a shot of 3 AP and 3 damage (plus MoS). So if you have the jacket on the outside, you reduce the damage and AP by 2, making the shot 1 AP 1 Damage. The shot then hits your cooling suit and the damage is reduced by another 1 to 0 AP and 0 damage.

If you had dressed funny that day and put your cooling vest on over your jacket, that same shot would hit the cooling vest, and its AP 3 would let it blow through the cooling vest without being reduced at all. It would then hit the jacket, its AP and damage reduced by 2, and the final round hitting you would be 1 AP 1 Damage.

So order matters :)

Yep, if you're looking for cover, try to find something solid to hide behind. O0

   - Shane
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion
It is by the coffee that my thoughts acquire speed
My teeth acquire stains
The stains become a warning
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4408
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #16 on: 23 March 2013, 14:33:06 »
An additional point of damage reduction (that you mentioned earlier) might work. That way you get some reduction in damage no matter what.

Acolyte

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1475
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #17 on: 23 March 2013, 14:45:25 »
An additional point of damage reduction (that you mentioned earlier) might work. That way you get some reduction in damage no matter what.

This is probably the best way to go and probably the way I will House rule it.

BTW, I've just re - read the Barrier rules and I had it wrong.  :-[ A barrier provides full protection until it shatters, so a wall with a BAR of 3 and a Barrier Integrity of 4 needs 12 points to shatter in one blow. The damage is divided by the BAR and this reduces the Integrity. A 5 point hit, for example, reduces the Integrity by 2 (5/3=1.667 round to 2) leaving 2 points to stop further attacks.

   - Shane
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion
It is by the coffee that my thoughts acquire speed
My teeth acquire stains
The stains become a warning
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #18 on: 23 March 2013, 14:48:03 »
Not really. Unless I'm missing something, cover works just like armor, so anything with an AP of 3 or better will go right through that wall without any reduction in damage. Armor isn't cumulative. Each piece, whether from cover or worn armor, is treated on its own separate item.
I always interpreted it as you needed cover -and- armour. 

That often the hits would start trying to penetrate your barrier and then your armour giving you protection, at least until the protection degrades.  When you look at AToW Pg 187, barrier ratings get pretty big, pretty fast.  An interior wall is BAR 3, so ~3 extra points of armour really puts your vest plus wall to be much more effective.



I'm not so sure about poo-poo'ing cover. 
Sandbags should be literally as common as dirt in a military setting, and would provide excellent cover.  The most shoddy sandbag wall will be at LEAST as effective as cement patio furniture (BAR 5), and if you do a proper wall of sandbags I don't see why they wouldn't provide BAR 6.  A full-on Hesco Barrier should be at least an 8 or 9.

Even a tree trunk big enough to crouch behind should be at least as effective as a thin slab of cement.
And let's not forget the immortal classic, hiding behind a simple rock outcropping.  BAR 10 baby.

Granted, outdoors it's much easier to find bullet-stopping cover than indoors.  But that's one of the many reasons you shouldn't be getting into a firefight indoors.  Still, the sorts of firearms that are likely to be encountered in an indoor fight are SMGs, Pistols, and Shotguns.. all typically with AP3.  It's important to win initiative and call dibs on cover behind the real, quality wood or sheet metal fixtures (BAR 4) and leave the flimsy particleboard furniture (BAR 3) for the rubes.

Acolyte

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1475
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #19 on: 23 March 2013, 15:01:20 »


I'm not so sure about poo-poo'ing cover. 
Sandbags should be literally as common as dirt in a military setting, and would provide excellent cover.  The most shoddy sandbag wall will be at LEAST as effective as cement patio furniture (BAR 5), and if you do a proper wall of sandbags I don't see why they wouldn't provide BAR 6.  A full-on Hesco Barrier should be at least an 8 or 9.

Even a tree trunk big enough to crouch behind should be at least as effective as a thin slab of cement.
And let's not forget the immortal classic, hiding behind a simple rock outcropping.  BAR 10 baby.

Granted, outdoors it's much easier to find bullet-stopping cover than indoors.  But that's one of the many reasons you shouldn't be getting into a firefight indoors.  Still, the sorts of firearms that are likely to be encountered in an indoor fight are SMGs, Pistols, and Shotguns.. all typically with AP3.  It's important to win initiative and call dibs on cover behind the real, quality wood or sheet metal fixtures (BAR 4) and leave the flimsy particleboard furniture (BAR 3) for the rubes.

Actually, from reading the rules just now, a sandbag or hesco would have a BAR of 3 maybe 4. The Integrity, on the other hand, 10 - 20 for the sandbags and I'd comfortably give a Hesco 20 -30.
At BAR 4 INT 30, it's going to take 90 points to go through and will completely protect you until it does. Then you move over 3 meters or so and begin again.

   - Shane
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion
It is by the coffee that my thoughts acquire speed
My teeth acquire stains
The stains become a warning
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #20 on: 23 March 2013, 15:43:29 »
I'm not sure where you read that 'full protection' means BAR that is lower or equal to AP still stops the shot.  Did I miss that somewhere?

guardiandashi

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #21 on: 23 March 2013, 15:49:55 »
you know I was thinking about it a bit more, and I think I realize what is missing under the current armor rules.  Hp for the armor itself.

now bear with me a moment I understand why they removed hp for armor and replaced it with a degridation table aka (5+ hp blowthrough means you blew a hole in the armor) but for my purposes giving armor "hp and an "absorption factor" ala mw 2nd edition may work better.

IE you have flack armor, it has 15 hp (for the sake of arguement) and bar 1/5/1/3 that means it (under the old rules) would stop closer to 1/4 damage from melee, and energy, 3/4 from explosive and all damage from ballistic up to its limit (more or less) but the armor itself sorta works as a barrier does now

it makes the armor a little more complicated to track armor "hp" but if you dramatically exceed the armors barrier rating you would still get "blow through" but it would still reduce damage

what I am thinking is lets say 15 point flack armor unless you exceed the barrior rating by 2x (from the ap) it still subtracts a minimum of 1 damage from the damage dealt and if the bar of the armor is more than 2x the ap of the attack then the wearer doesn't even take fatigue damage (but the armor still takes damage "soaking the hit"

IE flack armor bar 5 vs ballistic attacks, you get shot and hit by a ap 10 round (mech weapon) the armor still eats 5 points of char scale damage but the round is likely to be barely slowed as if hits and passes through your armor (and you)
but hitting you with an ap 3-9 hit is going to cause you to take some hp/fatigue (minimum of 1 always) however any ap2.5 or less ballistic attack will be essentually shrugged off

Acolyte

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1475
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #22 on: 23 March 2013, 15:55:43 »
I'm not sure where you read that 'full protection' means BAR that is lower or equal to AP still stops the shot.  Did I miss that somewhere?

Yep, same place I missed it 'til this very morning. ;D Pg. 187 Barrier Armor Degradation:
Quote
When attempting to determine the effects of an attack against (or through) a barrier, the rules for tactical armor degradation apply. The barrier receives a special "barrier integrity" value that reflects how easily it may be shattered (or destroyed for cover and barrier purposes) by the resulting damage. snip this value reflects the barriers overall ability to maintain enough structural integrity to present an obstacle.

So, basically, it's treated as tactical armor. The frustrating thing is that the only example of a barrier actually being used as such is the glass example, and that's demonstrating a blowthrough.

   - Shane
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion
It is by the coffee that my thoughts acquire speed
My teeth acquire stains
The stains become a warning
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #23 on: 23 March 2013, 16:16:01 »
Yep, same place I missed it 'til this very morning. ;D Pg. 187 Barrier Armor Degradation:
So, basically, it's treated as tactical armor. The frustrating thing is that the only example of a barrier actually being used as such is the glass example, and that's demonstrating a blowthrough.

   - Shane

Nice catch, very interesting.

I can see how a pistol might make short work of a groundcar as a viable vehicle, but will take all day to shoot enough holes through it to render it inviable as an obstacle.

Acolyte

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1475
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #24 on: 23 March 2013, 16:34:01 »
Hmm... perhaps not such a good catch. Other things seem to contradict this, such as the description of barriers on pg 185 and the example on pg 186 - although no barrier integrity is mentioned in that one. Well, maybe time to ask the rules guys.

   - Shane
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion
It is by the coffee that my thoughts acquire speed
My teeth acquire stains
The stains become a warning
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

Acolyte

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1475
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #25 on: 23 March 2013, 17:44:13 »
Well... Tai Dai you were right, I was wrong. #P So, do sandbags stop a rifle bullet? If so, it'd need a BAR of at least 8.

   - Shane
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion
It is by the coffee that my thoughts acquire speed
My teeth acquire stains
The stains become a warning
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4408
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #26 on: 23 March 2013, 18:36:01 »
Well, at this point I'm confused :)

Acolyte

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1475
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #27 on: 23 March 2013, 18:40:57 »
Well, at this point I'm confused :)

erp.. sorry 'bout that. Had a divertion from the OP to do with Barriers. I totally flubbed the rules and thought they were far more effective than they were.

I think I'll go with the extra point unless the AP is double thing. Seems to work.

   - Shane
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion
It is by the coffee that my thoughts acquire speed
My teeth acquire stains
The stains become a warning
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #28 on: 23 March 2013, 18:53:22 »
Real world, about 2 feet of dirt will stop any small arms round. (reasonably easy enough to accomplish with a few sandbags)  About 5 feet (a reasonable width for a single HESCO barrier) will stop a RPG.   But the problem with real world equivalencies is you end up with BAR ratings reserved for things like ferrocrete and bank vaults.  Sandbags are great vs bullets but they're not THAT tough.

Game balance wise, I think a BAR of 5 or 6 seems fair for sandbags.

guardiandashi

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4100
Re: AToW armor effectiveness?
« Reply #29 on: 23 March 2013, 19:01:48 »
Well... Tai Dai you were right, I was wrong. #P So, do sandbags stop a rifle bullet? If so, it'd need a BAR of at least 8.

   - Shane
well when I read pauls response I got a slightly different conclusion from barriers.  and I will try to share:

I will use 3 examples of barriers to reflect my thoughts:

barrier 1/2 glass window:
lets say "normal" glass window barrier 1/2/1/1  integrity 2 ok this is going to constitute a pretty flimsy defense, melee attacks are going to virtually ignore it same with energy, and explosive attacks bullets will generally go through it (except in the case of something like a bb/pellet gun) and "good" or military weapons are either going to punch holes right through it or take out the whole window

armored glass bar 3/5/2/2  integrity 6 this is more along the lines of your bullet proof glass, car winshields with the double layered safety glass or the like   this is going to stop most light duty weapons and slow down or stop some high powered ones as well

sandbags would be at least like the "armored glass" example ... except with more integrity, aka harder to destroy the barrier, thicker, and 1 big advantage ... you can't see through it, so whoever is shooting at you can't just keep shooting at a small area hoping to blow through and tag you they have to "hope" you are behind the section their bullets go through (if) they cause damage through the barrier.

shipping crate, 4/6/4/9 (highly resistant to explosions in this example) integrity 50 this is going to be a large shipping crate filled with "something" that both blocks los and is resistant to having holes punched in it
« Last Edit: 23 March 2013, 19:04:21 by guardiandashi »

 

Register