High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Kromm has clarified that AoA is so all-out/reckless that it is obvious to an opponent as an opening/opportunity. I suppose you can call it lowercase-t telegraphed in terms of opening/defenselessness.

Thing is that in the unspoken assumed context of GURPS combat (i.e vaguely cinematic, not kids windmilling in the play ground, or drunks rolling around on the pavement outside the late serving kebab shop

And that leaves aside real life is never going to be as binary/gamest as everyone having the ability in a second by second scale to say "ah that chap's just hit with a +4 bonus he will not be able to actively defend against me" as opposed to "hmm that chap has received no bonus to hit me by trading his ability to defend, so therefore he will be able to defend at full ability for the next 1 second"


Real life fights are just not like that, but rule systems by their nature are always a playable abstraction of, or compromise to reality

I.e different manoeuvres while they might be specifically and distinctively defined by different rules in the system, in reality they are a sliding scale of trade off that are much harder to define let alone outwardly spot (especially where they combine with each other).


However as to weather combatants should automatically know what manoeuvres there opponents are doing is an old question with various POVs. And is also a matter personal taste of play style and combat in the game.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

There is no functional difference between TL4 steels and TL6 steels except for the way they are produced.

Urr... if you said TL5 that would mostly be true. TL 6 armor steels are alloys that cannot be reliably manufactured at lower TL.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Thing is that in the unspoken assumed context of GURPS combat (i.e not kids windmilling in the play ground, or drunks rolling around on the pavement outside the late serving kebab shop

And that leaves aside real life is never going to be as binary/gamest as everyone have the ability in a second by second scale to say "ah that chap's just hit with a +4 bonus, he will not be able to actively defend against me" as opposed to "hmm that chap has received no bonus to hit me by trading his ability to defend, so therefore he will be able to defend at full ability for the next 1 second"


Real life fights are just not like that, but rule systems by their nature are always a playable abstraction of, or compromise to reality

I.e different manoeuvres while they might be specifically and distinctively defined by different rules in the system, in reality they are a sliding scale of trade off that are much harder to define let alone outwardly spot (especially where they combine with each other).


However as to weather combatants should automatically know what manoeuvres there opponents are doing is an old question with various POVs. And is also a matter personal taste of play style and combat in the game.

If you consider telegraphed openings implausible, then Telegraphic Attacks should too be impossible. Yet telegraphing exists in real life, both in terms of offense and in terms of defense. People do notice and use openings in their opponents' guards. The fact that an opening was caused by an AoA is a secondary concern.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

If you consider telegraphed openings implausible, then Telegraphic Attacks should too be impossible. Yet telegraphing exists in real life, both in terms of offense and in terms of defense. People do notice and use openings in their opponents' guards.

No I don't consider telegraphed openings implausible in some situations. But just because I don't doesn't mean I therefore have to accept that everyone in every situation can automatically tell the difference between an Attack, a Committed attack, an AoA(d) attack, and an AoA(d) that's also a -4 deceptive attack as they are made. Certainly not at the level of specificity regarding the repercussions of each that such knowledge would give in game terms.

I tend to allow skill rolls with evaluate bonuses for this kind of thing, I also tend to tailor my descriptions in order to clue people in.

The point being two seasoned professional fighters who are taking time to size each other up and looking for weaknesses and openings etc, is really not remotely like the average school or pub punch up.

Also a key point here regarding Telegraphic attacks, the player of the Character who's facing an incoming telegraphic attack doesn't need the GM to say that's an telegraphic attack, in order to get the game bonus to their defence.

I.e. it's an attack that the character is more easily able to defend against (which I agree would be something they would likely notice at the time compared to other examples above)

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

The fact that an opening was caused by an AoA is a secondary concern.

No because different things are different, a Telegraphic attack gives the defender a directly felt bonus to their response, AoA limits the attackers subsequent choices. This will look and feel different

[safisher]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Urr... if you said TL5 that would mostly be true. TL 6 armor steels are alloys that cannot be reliably manufactured at lower TL.

You cannot take Dan at his word when it comes to metallurgy. I've tried to follow his reasoning and I can't make heads or tails out of it.

[safisher]

Originally Posted by Magus

But I don't think the HT rules on steel armor were made with LT II in mind.

HT came long before the Pyramid article. As others have pointed out, coverage, as used in Low-Tech and in the Pyramid article do no match up with that way it is used in Basic Set and High-Tech. You'll have to decide which you want -- build your own armor, or the armor as items approach as in Basic Set and HT.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Urr... if you said TL5 that would mostly be true. TL 6 armor steels are alloys that cannot be reliably manufactured at lower TL.

Out of interest what alloys are you thinking of (TL6 is what 1880's - 1940), and what DR per inch would you give them. i.e in terms of RHAe

Isn't RHA kind of the standard at TL6? And although I'm sure there was variation around it in terms of DR per inch was there that much?

Are you talking stuff like STS, Class A and B, face hardened and cemented naval armours etc

FWIW the pyramid article don't have significantly better steels showing up until TL7.


Don't get me wrong I have no doubt that at TL6 there were steel alloys that couldn't be made earlier. But was it better than the best TL4 stuff? Or just different as in way more consistent and way easier to produce. Especially at the body armour scale rather than much thicker armour plate were some of the construction options weren't available.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Out of interest what alloys are you thinking of (TL6 is what 1880's - 1940), and what DR per inch would you give them. i.e in terms of RHAe

Nickel and chromium mostly? I would give them DR 70/inch; I would give TL 3-5 iron about DR 55/inch, though sufficient work might allow face-hardened plates that match or exceed RHA (sword-making techniques did allow reasonable control of carbon content, though that's an awful lot of work for a breastplate).

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Nickel and chromium mostly? I would give them DR 70/inch; I would give TL 3-5 iron about DR 55/inch,

FWIW, I usually benchmark at DR 2/mm, which is DR 51 per inch. So agreement with the range.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Nickel and chromium mostly? I would give them DR 70/inch; I would give TL 3-5 iron about DR 55/inch, though sufficient work might allow face-hardened plates that match or exceed RHA (sword-making techniques did allow reasonable control of carbon content, though that's an awful lot of work for a breastplate).

Cool cheers, so yeah that's pretty much a match for RHA.

The Pyramid article pretty much matches that range for cheap iron, and is more generous with what it calls "good" iron. It also had the best "hard" steel at TL4 beat out RHA, but its very expensive and gets way cheaper at later TLs.

Of course the best possible at the time and what is commonly available for general use often being very different things especially when your talking about Pre industrial manufacturing.