Ballistic Reinforced Armor vs. LB-X

[MarauderD]

Hey all,

Did a couple searches because I thought there was a thread on this recently but I couldn't find much newer than 2014 about it--probably just bad search-fu.

Under the errata from BMM, the current rules read like this:

Game Rules: Each point of ballistic-reinforced armor absorbs up to two points of damage from attacks of the DB or M types
before being destroyed. Leftover single points of damage are discarded, but a damage source will always destroy at least one
point of this armor.

So:  You get hit in a mech with BR Armor by a LB-10X.  Lets say 6 pellets hit you and they all hit different locations.  When I read this rule I can see it two ways: 

A.  Since every pellet hits a different location, you get 6 pts of damage from the LB-X and the BR Armor effectively does nothing to help..

B.  Only one point of damage gets done by the LB-X hit? 

Neither of these seem fair to either party.  Anyone know how this works right now?

Cheers,

[Scotty]

It's A.  I asked when Ballistic-Reinforced came out in FM3145.  Specialty armor affects instances of damage (i.e. each cluster, referred to as a source in that rules passage), not total damage from the weapon used.

[Paul]

It's A.  I asked when Ballistic-Reinforced came out in FM3145.  Specialty armor affects instances of damage (i.e. each cluster, referred to as a source in that rules passage), not total damage from the weapon used.

Yep. In fact, if all 6 of the pellets went to the same location, you're still remove 6 armor, since they're to be treated as 6 distinct events.

Flip side is SRMs only do 1 armor damage each, and the theoretical 3 point damage groups likewise only do 1 damage to the armor, but there's not a lot that is resolved that way that's also DB or M. (Nothing jumps to mind, but maybe I'm overlooking something)

[MarauderD]

Thanks for the confirmation.  I won't stray into fan rules territory, but 2 pretty simple logical fixes come to mind. 

As it stands, it makes the LBX a weird outlier and a strong weapon against armor intended to protect against autocannons.  /shrug?

[OatsAndHall]

We count each pip as worth two-damage. So, we'll put a slash through a pip when hit by a weapon that does one point of damage. Versus just filling it in.

[Sabelkatten]

A couple of years ago I suggested that since - with the odd exception of single BA troopers and similar - all 1-point hits are cluster weapon, those weapons should get a cluster penalty instead of changed damage vs BR or FL armor. IIRC -4 removed about 50% of hits (assuming <2 means 0 hits).

[Scotty]

Not the place for fan rules, gents.  It's an odd quirk, but the armor already does horrific things to a large number of weapons, it arguably doesn't need to be better.

[Charistoph]

It probably makes up for being completely neutered by Ferro-Lemellar.

[Gorgon]

Yep. In fact, if all 6 of the pellets went to the same location, you're still remove 6 armor, since they're to be treated as 6 distinct events.

Flip side is SRMs only do 1 armor damage each, and the theoretical 3 point damage groups likewise only do 1 damage to the armor, but there's not a lot that is resolved that way that's also DB or M. (Nothing jumps to mind, but maybe I'm overlooking something)

The only source for three points of damage I can think of would be HE-ATMs (or the average cluster role for lrm-5s)

[Scotty]

ATMs hit in clusters of five damage.

Heavy Machine Guns and AP Gauss do three points of damage.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

It probably makes up for being completely neutered by Ferro-Lemellar.

IIRC, that was part of the reason for the ruling: total immunity to 1 point damage cluster hits was a unique trait of Ferro-Lemellar Armor.  Other armors weren't going to get it.