Hello, In the current draft of StarGrunt powered armour infantry gain a
*2
multiple for their armour. This is partly to reflect the effects of the
hydro/pneumatic strenght enhancement the armour provides. However, we
should consider some other factors as well, particularly the benefits of
normal body armour. We know that body armour does help in hand to hand combat
(those guys running around in full plate did it for a reason), but in
StarGrunt if we have a regular soldier in partial light armour (d6) and
another regular soldier in Full Light armour (d8) they both roll a D8 (quality
die) with no multiple. Then the outcome of their fight is resolved by who
rolled the higher die... I have two possible solutions: The first is that the
combat multiple is based on the die type for the armour. Armour type armour
die combat mutiple
None D4 2/3
Partial D6 1
Partial Full D8 4/3
Powered Lt D10 5/3
Powered Hvy D12 2
The second solution is to modify the "Am I dead yet?" roll that takes place
after close assault and give modifiers for body armour type. Personally, I
think the first option is better. I would apreciate other's reactions and
suggestions. Phil P.
Gort, Klaatu barada nikto!
Phillip spake thusly upon matters weighty:
> Hello,
and
> another regular soldier in Full Light armour (d8) they both roll a D8
I'm tempted to point out that powered armour may get those benefits
for reasons you don't suspect - huge damage on their HTH due to the
strength, but also amazing targeting systems and incredibly fast
movement - they are hard to hit, since they sprint like the wind, and
they can cut you down real well with on board weapons. All this is reflected
in their bonuses.
Since close assault is shotguns, grenades, SMGs, autofire, bayonets, karate,
hitting people with entrenching tools or monomolecular
vibro-saws, it covers a lot of terrain. I'm thinking that the
difference between partial armour and light armour probably makes little
difference to an autoshotgun or grenade (due to the area of the target),
probably don't help much versus flamers, and in HTH may well be insignificant
(it might even be argued in FAVOR of the
lighter armoured opponent - he's faster and less encumbered and that
is in many ways these days more important than the armour). Any serving grunty
of today will tell you his body armour helps to protect him from fragmentation
and somewhat from concussion, but won't do much against a sharp blade, an AP
slug, and in most cases without inserts, won't do much against standard rifle
ammo. And it won't help a lot versus flamers. But it protects agains the
threats
it was meant to counter well. The trade off is 4-10 lbs, plus the
extra heat, plus a loss of some amount of manouvreability.
> I have two possible solutions:
It's an interesting idea. But are we up to this 5/3rds kind of math?
(Okay, I'm one to talk...) Why not just a die modifier?
> The second solution is to modify the "Am I dead yet?" roll that
This might be reasonable, although I think you'd have to consider
None, Partial/Full, Powered as your options. Powered gets some
benefit in the 'stand-back-up' roll as they have the medical thingies
built in. The argument against what you have suggested is HTH is intense,
close range, uses weapons armour does not defend well against, and (from
gaming end) it can be resolved quicker.
> Personally, I think the first option is better. I would
I'm interested to see replies to my comments too. I'm advancing the 'party
line' here I think. I don't even know if I agree entirely with it. It may be
that someone more in the know than I will suggest that
armour is helpful in HTH/CA. I'd be more in favour of giving a
negative die shift to the troops with weaker armour and not then having to do
more math. This means it boils down to who has better armour and the better
armoured are harder to kill hence you get one negative die shift (which can be
compensated for by good Close Assault Weapons). How's that for a counter
offer?
Tom.