Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-06-2010, 07:13 PM   #1
blacksmith
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Default Why does UT concealable armor suck?

The best TL 10 concealable armor has a DR of 18/6 with the 18 only against pi and cut while the best tl8 concealable armor is 35/5 with the 5 being only against crushing attacks. So what gives?

Why does armor in the future suck so much, or at least be unable to be concealed?

Also it seems that the electromagnetic version of guns is not better than the ECT version with APEP ammo. Maybe for a couple like the Gauss Shotgun and pistol shotgun, but say for the anti material rifles, the ECT version does better damage.

Last edited by blacksmith; 07-06-2010 at 07:16 PM.
blacksmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:21 PM   #2
David Johnston2
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Default Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?

Quote:
Originally Posted by blacksmith View Post
The best TL 10 concealable armor has a DR of 18/6 with the 18 only against pi and cut while the best tl8 concealable armor is 35/5 with the 5 being only against crushing attacks. So what gives?

Why does armor in the future suck so much, or at least be unable to be concealed?
Wrong question. The real question is how the heck 35 points worth of modern body armour are concealable by any stretch of the imagination. That's a gigantic leap over the 8 point concealable armour in the Basic set.
David Johnston2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:27 PM   #3
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?

Quote:
Originally Posted by blacksmith View Post
The best TL 10 concealable armor has a DR of 18/6 with the 18 only against pi and cut while the best tl8 concealable armor is 35/5 with the 5 being only against crushing attacks. So what gives?

Why does armor in the future suck so much, or at least be unable to be concealed?
...I'm dubious about the truth of this charge, I don't think you can get 10d DR in concealable. Not everything flexible is concealable! Will check my books when I get to them...
Quote:
Originally Posted by blacksmith View Post
Also it seems that the electromagnetic version of guns is not better than the ECT version with APEP ammo. Maybe for a couple like the Gauss Shotgun and pistol shotgun, but say for the anti material rifles, the ECT version does better damage.
...Is ECT maybe ElectroThermalChemical?

Yeah. EM weapons aren't good because they're more powerful than advanced chemical slugthrowers, for the most part. Their main selling point seems to be high capacity and cheap ammo. Not bleeding edge performance. If you want a gun for hunting battlesuit, you may want one that smokes after firing.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:27 PM   #4
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?

Quote:
Originally Posted by blacksmith View Post
The best TL 10 concealable armor has a DR of 18/6 with the 18 only against pi and cut while the best tl8 concealable armor is 35/5 with the 5 being only against crushing attacks. So what gives?
TL 8 armor with rigid inserts is being incorrectly listed as concealable? Upper limit on realistically concealable TL 8 armor is roughly level IIIa, which is around DR 12, and even then isn't that concealable.
Anthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:36 PM   #5
Langy
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CA
Default Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?

No, the 35/5 DR concealable armor is in High Tech (and Action 1). It's called 'Advanced Body Armor', is flexible (unlike armor with a rigid insert), and provides a +4 Holdout bonus, making the net penalty to Holdout only -8, so someone skilled at Holdout could reasonably hide it under an undercover long coat or some other heavy clothing.

Of course, that TL10 concealable armor has a -6 penalty to holdout going by the rules in High Tech, so it's not all that much better than the TL8 stuff at being not-seen, while the TL8 concealable vest has a -4 penalty to holdout.

Also, the 'Advanced Body Armor' is specifically mentioned as being based on a real-life set of armor, 'Pinnacle Armor's SOV', which is more commonly known as 'Dragon Skin'.
Langy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:45 PM   #6
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Langy View Post
Also, the 'Advanced Body Armor' is specifically mentioned as being based on a real-life set of armor, 'Pinnacle Armor's SOV', which is more commonly known as 'Dragon Skin'.
Ah. I think I would still classify this as 'High Tech is Wrong', not 'UT Armor Sucks'. You could conceal a full breastplate under a long coat, but I wouldn't call that concealable armor.
Anthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:49 PM   #7
blacksmith
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Default Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Langy View Post
No, the 35/5 DR concealable armor is in High Tech (and Action 1). It's called 'Advanced Body Armor', is flexible (unlike armor with a rigid insert), and provides a +4 Holdout bonus, making the net penalty to Holdout only -8, so someone skilled at Holdout could reasonably hide it under an undercover long coat or some other heavy clothing.

Of course, that TL10 concealable armor has a -6 penalty to holdout going by the rules in High Tech, so it's not all that much better than the TL8 stuff at being not-seen, while the TL8 concealable vest has a -4 penalty to holdout.

Also, the 'Advanced Body Armor' is specifically mentioned as being based on a real-life set of armor, 'Pinnacle Armor's SOV', which is more commonly known as 'Dragon Skin'.
Well strictly speaking in UT the concealable armor never appears to be armor, just clothing. If it is light clothing like T shirts and lingerie it has less Dr.

So the UT armor should have no real penalty as armor because your business suit can be a suit of concealable armor. See the tailoring armor rules.

This gets mitigated or fixed by assigning the tactical vest with inserts the same concealability though.
blacksmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:50 PM   #8
Langy
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CA
Default Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?

*shrug* It's relatively concealable, compared to a full-on assault vest with trauma plates (a holdout penalty of -35!). I think that might be what 'concealable' refers to - it doesn't actually indicate that you can easily hide it, only that it's at least vaguely possible.

That said, a breastplate would be easier to hide than an Advanced Body Armor vest. It'd only have a Holdout penalty of -5! (assuming a breastplate with DR 5).
Langy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:51 PM   #9
blacksmith
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Default Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
Yeah. EM weapons aren't good because they're more powerful than advanced chemical slugthrowers, for the most part. Their main selling point seems to be high capacity and cheap ammo. Not bleeding edge performance. If you want a gun for hunting battlesuit, you may want one that smokes after firing.
The problem is that they are not cheap. You need to shoot a lot to overcome the cost difference fundamental to the weapon.
blacksmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2010, 07:53 PM   #10
Mailanka
 
Mailanka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven, the Netherlands
Default Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?

Quote:
Originally Posted by blacksmith View Post
The best TL 10 concealable armor has a DR of 18/6 with the 18 only against pi and cut while the best tl8 concealable armor is 35/5 with the 5 being only against crushing attacks. So what gives?

Why does armor in the future suck so much, or at least be unable to be concealed?
If you want to know what soldiers wear, look at Tacsuits. They're strong enough to at least reduce most bullet damage and completely absorb all grenade fragmentation. They won't save you from a sniper, but modern armor won't do that either.

The armor you're looking at is civvy armor.

Quote:
Also it seems that the electromagnetic version of guns is not better than the ECT version with APEP ammo. Maybe for a couple like the Gauss Shotgun and pistol shotgun, but say for the anti material rifles, the ECT version does better damage.
Listen to yourself. "With an APEP..." Do you know what those cost? Seriously? You think people just hand those out? You think players can afford to?

The Storm Carbine does 7d pi++ damage base. It also has an accuracy of 4, a weight 8, an RoF of 12, 50 shots, a bulk of -4 and Recoil of 3. If you make it an ETC weapon, it jumps up to 10d pi++. A normal Storm Carbine costs $1800, while an ETC Storm Carbine costs $3600

The Gauss Rifle does 6d+2(3) pi- damage base. It has an accuracy of 7+2 (much better), a weight of 8.5, an RoF of 12, 60 shots, same bulk, and a recoil of 2. This means its fires more often, is more likely to hit, and hits more often. The weapon costs $7,100

In fact, two characters with skill 10 firing in a white room using only their accuracy as a bonus, the Storm Carbine will hit an average of twice, while the Gauss Rifle will hit an average of 4 times. This is not inconsequential.

You referred to the APEP, I can assume, because you already grasped that the Gauss weapon has better penetration, and that's true: the ETC Storm Carbine penetrates an average of DR 35, whereas the Gauss Rifle penetrates an average of 66.

So, what about the APEP. Does it really even things out? Certainly seems to, as it applies an (3) armor divisor to the storm carbine (giving it over 100 points of armor penetration). It reduces the damage code, but this is meaningless when we acknowledge that the Gauss rifle deals pi-.

But lets look at ammo costs. A full clip of ETC Storm Carbine Ammo (disregarding the power cell cost) is $40. A full clip of APEP ammo is $400. Four hundred.

The Gauss Rifle costs $4. Four. Ok, technically, it costs $3.6. And even if you wanted to include the cell in the cost (might as well, as you use up a cell per clip), you spend a mere $14 total.

"The APEP makes the Storm Carbine better than the Gauss Rifle!" simply isn't so. Frankly, the APEP is a sniper round. Giving it to guys with machine guns is a waste of money.

Now, by the time you have ETC weapons, I don't think going to Gauss is a sure thing, and by the time you have ETK, frankly, you have such better weapons that most armor simply stops being effective (my solution? I don't use ETK in my games), but technological advancement isn't always a cause of newer is vastly better. Sometimes, it's "newer is a little better," or even "newer is different."

Quote:
Originally Posted by blacksmith View Post
The problem is that they are not cheap. You need to shoot a lot to overcome the cost difference fundamental to the weapon.
This is not a problem. The average soldier is probably going to be carrying a good 3-5 clips into every battle. Armies spend far more on bullets than on weapons. The savings with a gauss weapon are absurdly huge.
__________________
My Blog: Mailanka's Musing. Currently Playing: Psi-Wars, a step-by-step exploration of building your own Space Opera setting, inspired by Star Wars.
If you want to support me, check out my Patreon!

Last edited by Mailanka; 07-06-2010 at 07:56 PM.
Mailanka is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.