Hardened Armor: Yes or No?

[jimdigris]

How often did it fall over?  That's the real weakness of the Stalker II: Hardened Armor and a Torso-Mounted Cockpit are an unpleasant combination if you're trying to keep your mech upright.

No one failed their piloting check.

[klarg1]

Weirdo's comment about Blue Shield got me wondering . . . do we have any Hardened with Blue Shield?  are they compatible?  would you do it?  How about with the BRA?

BRA + Blue Shield seems like a pretty killer defense, if you can afford all the tonnage and critical slots.

Among various benefits, I think the blazer cannon, and point-blank heavy gauss might be the only head-capper left to menace your pilot.

[RoundTop]

BRA + Blue Shield seems like a pretty killer defense, if you can afford all the tonnage and critical slots.

Among various benefits, I think the blazer cannon, and point-blank heavy gauss might be the only head-capper left to menace your pilot.

Clan Heavy Large Laser also will do it (16 damage).

That said, the following will still penetrate to make a crit roll:
UAC20, LBX20, AC20, HGR (ranged), HPPC+Capacitor, cERPPC+IS Capacitor (not sure if it is compatible).

Heck if the Hatamoto-suna dropped the ER Medium laser and the Apollo FCS from the MRMs, it could easily mount the BlueShield.

[Brakiel]

cERPPC+IS Capacitor (not sure if it is compatible).

The Clan ERPPC is specifically excluded from being capacitored. I suppose you could take the Illegal quirk for it, but that's up to the your group.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

The Clan ERPPC is specifically excluded from being capacitored. I suppose you could take the Illegal quirk for it, but that's up to the your group.

Capacitor systems for CERPPCs became legal in the equipment update in TRO 3145.

[Brakiel]

Capacitor systems for CERPPCs became legal in the equipment update in TRO 3145.

*double checks back of TRO3145*

Wow, I would not have seen that in a million years on my own. Any canon designs that use it?

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

None that come to mind.

[The_Livewire]

None that come to mind.

Going from memory here, since I don't have the TRO, but don't we have that combo on the Leviathan III?

[Firesprocket]

Going from memory here, since I don't have the TRO, but don't we have that combo on the Leviathan III?

You are correct.  I think there is another aerospace fighter that has them as well.  I have played maybe 2 games of aerotech, but as I recall time and scale are completely different and the PPC Cap. doesn't have any recharge time that leads it to fire every other turn.  If I'm wrong on that someone feel free to correct me.

[Colt Ward]

Yeah, for TT that every other turn for something that just adds 5 points of damage to a 15 pointer already . . . meh.

[Sartris]

the lev III is the only clan unit i'm seeing with a capacitor and clan erppc

there are three fighters that use an IS erppc + cap - Sternenstrum A (3145), Stuzaku 14 (Prototypes), and Zero CX-3 (XTRO: ComStar)

[Jellico]

Aerotech is kind to Capacitors because it has 60 second turns compared to Battletech's 15 second turns. So no charging time.

Also Aerotech is kind to Reflective armor because physical attacks and falling are a little bit different and lasers are more common.

[marcussmythe]

Aerotech is kind to Capacitors because it has 60 second turns compared to Battletech's 15 second turns. So no charging time.

Also Aerotech is kind to Reflective armor because physical attacks and falling are a little bit different and lasers are more common.

And the fact that Aerotech is kind to both of them at the same time is a really happy coincidence.

I find the existence of various specialty armors a good argument for diversity in armament in circumstances where I would otherwise, for logistics and powergaming reasons, be inclined to standardize heavily.

[Paul]

I'll see about sorting the damage modification out, as not even the BMM solves the issue.

Looping this back, as it got sorted out.

Please note that we are updating this answer, to keep it in line with the following thread:

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=3391.0

In short, PSRs forced by damage are based on the damage actually taken by a unit, not what would theoretically have been dealt before any possible damage modifications.

This will be reflected in the this year's BattleMech Manual errata.

This means that you need 40 standard damage inflicted on a Hardened Armor unit before a PSR is needed, which makes it suck less.

It's still a mediocre investment in many cases though.

[Colt Ward]

Dunno, if its a Lyran waddling right up the middle . . . it helps.  Of course it also helps more if you are using the TacOps rule about every 20 points of damage adding another +1 since Hardened means you need 40 to reach the same threshold.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Looping this back, as it got sorted out.

This means that you need 40 standard damage inflicted on a Hardened Armor unit before a PSR is needed, which makes it suck less.

It's still a mediocre investment in many cases though.

But Hardened Armor doesn't reduce damage, it just takes two points of damage per pip.

[Paul]

But Hardened Armor doesn't reduce damage, it just takes two points of damage per pip.

Yes. So you need to input 40 damage to output 20 damage points, which then results in a PSR.
If you just apply 20 damage, you only do 10 damage points, and no PSR.

Same with Composite internal structure, or the damage of an ammo explosion getting vented by CASE: the actual pips removed is what causes the effects. "Damage *TAKEN*." (p.60, TW)

That's the intent of the rules.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Except that with Hardened Armor, unlike other specialty armors, you're still taking the same amount of damage: you get hit with an AC/20 in your Stalker II, you've taken 20 damage even though you're only filling in 10 pips.  Whereas a Hatamoto-Suna that takes the same hit has only taken 10 damage: the Stalker II would need to make a PSR while the Suna would not.  Hardened Armor breaks the normal rule where one pip equals one point of damage.

[Empyrus]

So, hardened armor and reinforced structure effectively reduce damage by 50% like reflective or reactive or ballistic-reinforced armor vs appropriate weapons? But instead of being merely multiplied by 0.5, it is treated a bit differently, being presented as absorption effect, presumably to retain fractions.

This makes hardened armor pretty good, previously it had uses but its drawbacks were pretty big deal. This adds further bonus to the armor, especially for heavier 'Mechs as they can't be knocked down as easily anymore.

[Brakiel]

Hardened Armor doesn't do anything different with regards to damage taken, unlike the other armors brought up in this topic (Ferro-Lam, et. al.) which apply a scalar to the damage value. An AC20 still does 20 damage, the book keeping is just different. And since it's still 20 damage regardless of bubbles marked off, you roll for PSR.

[Retry]

I third this.

Hardened Armor's description in Tactical Operations states that every point of hardened armor can sustain 2 points of damage.  It does not state that the damage is halved.

It'd presumably work similarly with Reinforced Internal Structure: getting hit by an AC/20 on an exposed piece of reinforced structure doesn't "halve" the damage, each point's just soaking up 2 damage.  On the other hand, getting vulnerable Composite Structure clobbered by an AC/10 would mean that the vulnerable structure can only absorb half a point each, but it doesn't mean it took double damage and would roll for a PSR unless other weapons are also involved.

[Scotty]

You guys are aware this is errata, right, and not some random musing by a guy with a Mod Beemer, right?

"Number of pips removed" is now the standard by which PSRs are judged.

[Paul]

You guys are aware this is errata, right, and not some random musing by a guy with a Mod Beemer, right?

I get no respect, I tell ya...

Oh you meant Xotl... ;)

[Retry]

You guys are aware this is errata, right, and not some random musing by a guy with a Mod Beemer, right?

"Number of pips removed" is now the standard by which PSRs are judged.

From the errata thread that is linked, Xotl refers to damage points specifically: The PSR is based on actual damage points taken, not "pips" or filled circles per se (which is almost a pointless distinction except specifically when it comes to hardened armor).
Something like Ferro-Lamellor reduces the number of damage points taken.  Hardened Armor (281 tac ops) only increases the amount of damage a single point can sustain; It does not reduce the number of damage points actually taken.

[Scotty]

Then we'll ask Xotl to update the language to be more clear.

Paul and I were both party to the errata in question, and can state concretely and conclusively, that number of pips removed is the intent.

[Brakiel]

So would doing 20+ bubbles with Re-engineered Lasers also force a PSR? Because that would also change some other errata questions, such as :

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=33515.0

[Paul]

A weapon does X damage.
X damage will do Y damage *points*.
Often X = Y
Depending on Armor, Internals, etc. X might != Y.

So would doing 20+ bubbles with Re-engineered Lasers also force a PSR? Because that would also change some other errata questions, such as :

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=33515.0

Yep, I'm wrong there. Thanks for finding that. In that example (PPC + R-LL) the damage points taken so far is 5+9 = 14.

Paul

[Retry]

Yep, I'm wrong there. Thanks for finding that. In that example (PPC + R-LL) the damage points taken so far is 5+9 = 14.

Paul

In other words, a point of Hardened Armor does not sustain 2 points of damage, it instead takes half damage with the possibility of taking damage in half-points.

[Xotl]

One thing not mentioned in that errata post is that there will also be wording for Hardened Armour itself, which will make clear the principle so that people don't have to try and extrapolate from the more general PSR ruling.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Cool.