|
07-06-2010, 06:13 PM | #1 |
Join Date: Aug 2005
|
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 06:16 PM. |
07-06-2010, 06:21 PM | #2 | |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?
Quote:
|
|
07-06-2010, 06:27 PM | #3 | ||
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?
Quote:
Quote:
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. |
||
07-06-2010, 06:51 PM | #4 | |
Join Date: Aug 2005
|
Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?
Quote:
|
|
07-06-2010, 06:27 PM | #5 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?
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.
|
07-06-2010, 06:36 PM | #6 |
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CA
|
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'. |
07-06-2010, 06:45 PM | #7 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?
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.
|
07-06-2010, 06:50 PM | #8 |
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CA
|
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). |
07-06-2010, 06:49 PM | #9 | |
Join Date: Aug 2005
|
Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?
Quote:
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. |
|
07-06-2010, 07:48 PM | #10 |
Wielder of Smart Pants
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
|
Re: Why does UT concealable armor suck?
Which probably doesn't actually work and even if it does breaks down very quickly under actual use. It currently lacks a NIJ certification, is banned by the US Army, strongly discouraged by the USMC and the Air Force is suing Pinnacle.
Last edited by sir_pudding; 07-06-2010 at 07:51 PM. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|