Disabling a car's engine

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Þorkell

If I understand engines correctly, you don't need to penetrate the engine block itself for the engine to stop working. You can hit something important close to and vital to the engine itself, vital hose or two, the radiator, or something like that. Granted the effect will not be instantaneous.

There are a variety of things you can hit in a car engine that will more or less instantaneously disable the car. However, none of them are anything like a mere -3 to hit.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Anthony

There are a variety of things you can hit in a car engine that will more or less instantaneously disable the car. However, none of them are anything like a mere -3 to hit.

To be fair, Vitals isn't calibrated for 'instantly disable'. The distinction between 'crashed around close to several vital things and dinged them up' and 'shut the whole thing down' presumably goes to the damage roll/critical hits for shooting a car in the same way as it does when shooting a living thing. I'm not really happy about the way that works, but it's not specific to this case.

To be complicated, I think you can instantly disable a car with a straight engine block shot...if you're using a proper antivehicle caliber instead trying the limits of antipersonnel rifles.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

There is no such thing as 'the unliving mod', and there is no x3 damage anywhere either. You're describing the situation in terms that are not at all how the rules work.

yes there is unliving gives a wound mod to P & IMP injuries

And the vitals location gives a straight 3x damage mod as well. We're discussing weather they should be combined or if the 2nd trumps the 1st.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Not really, since you're making an argument about what Unliving does/should do rather than an argument specifically about how to handle car engines. (How can I tell? Because you keep going on about wounding multipliers and never talk about DR or anything like that. Remember that pi- has nothing to do with penetrating power...a gauss gun that can shoot through an engine block with ease can be pi-.)

Actually I have spoken about DR and the rest. You are the one who want to bring this down to one area of RAW (location mod trumps unliving mods) as justification for the overall result.

And yes basic damage when combined with P- is obviously relevant, going by your rules there are some PDW and SMGS in HT that spit out high damage p- rounds that will take a car down to negative in single burst, no need for UT gauss rifles.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Again, not always.

Not always what? do you have examples of Zombies being taken out be heart shots? In fact you standard zombie is actually one with no vitals but has a brain. no brain and no vitals being different options for injury tolerance.

Or not always zombie ≠ cars? OK show me your car zombies

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Nope.

erm concise, but is there an answer to my question why are p- bullets 15x more effective when hitting the engine block in comparison to the bodywork, but P++ are only 3x as effective.

Originally Posted by Nereidalbel

An engine block is the Vitals hit location of a car, but it also has Vitals DR to protect it from damage. Those Pi- rounds are going to have an issue getting past said DR.

Only It doesn't in the listing. I agree that it possibly should, especially if you don't apply the unliving mod to Pi-. But that's another reason why I favour combining the wounding mods, because you making the point that yes the engine block is a vital part of the car but still tough that you'll need a lot of Pi- or Pi hits to have an effect.

If you look at my examples earlier using my version it still

more than -2xHp with a shot from a 20mm WW1 anti tank gun
into -HP with a shot from a Barrett 12.7mm
but you need 12x p hits from a 9mm to get to negative (as opposed to 4x with just the vital wound mod in effect).

The thing is when it comes to DR on engine blocks, we know that civilian engine blocks are not specifically armoured to withstand bullets (neither are civilian cars come to that) the DR is a reflection and by-product of the material the engine block / car is made of*. I.e Unless you actually welding on extra armour onto your engine block the DR of the engine block comes from the the fact it's a heavily constructed chunk of metal.

*there's some crossover with cars designed for crash resistance but that's a bit more complicated.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

To be fair, Vitals isn't calibrated for 'instantly disable'. The distinction between 'crashed around close to several vital things and dinged them up' and 'shut the whole thing down' presumably goes to the damage roll/critical hits for shooting a car in the same way as it does when shooting a living thing. I'm not really happy about the way that works, but it's not specific to this case.

To be complicated, I think you can instantly disable a car with a straight engine block shot...if you're using a proper antivehicle caliber instead trying the limits of antipersonnel rifles.

I agree with this, it's just by just using the x3 vitals mod only, you can also do it with a reasonably accurate burst from a 9mm SMG. And you chances improve with the more accurate smaller calibre guns like the H&K MP7A1, 4.6 x 30mm

Which with an aim action and a 15 round burst shooting at the vital of a +3SM sedan is at basic +4 +3 -3 +3 = +7

just using the the Vital mod each shot will do (4d6+1-5)*3 = avg 30 i.e I only have to get 2 MoS (2 hits) to knock the sedan down to negative.

Now obviously that's a rather rarefied weapon, but I don't think it's billed as a premier car stopper.

Use my method and you need 9 hits to go negative on a DR53 sedan (I used the more recent sedan to match the more recent gun) which is rather more difficult to do in one burst.

Basically by taking vitals wounding mod only you've given an advantage to smaller lighter bullets in comparison to the heavier (P++) bullets when firing at the engine block as opposed to the rest of the car.

So if we saying as base assumption that it's more realistic to need heavy anti material rounds (i.e Pi++*) to take out engine blocks quickly, rather than smaller, lighter rounds, I'd say my version fits that better.

*no coincidence I think that the wounding mod for Pi++ is x1 for unliving

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

yes there is unliving gives a wound mod to P & IMP injuries

And the vitals location gives a straight 3x damage mod as well. We're discussing weather they should be combined or if the 2nd trumps the 1st.

Unliving replaces the wounding modifiers for piercing and impaling damage. Vitals hits also replace the wounding modifiers for piercing and impaling damage. There is no 'damage mod' nor is there any meaning to 'giving' a 'wound mod'.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Actually I have spoken about DR and the rest. You are the one who want to bring this down to one area of RAW (location mod trumps unliving mods) as justification for the overall result.

And yes basic damage when combined with P- is obviously relevant, going by your rules ether are some PDW adn SMGS in HT that spit out high damage p- rounds that will take a car down to negative in single burst, no need for UT gauss rifles.

Okay, perhaps I should say you keep talking about the piercing modifiers, which are about the nature of Unliving, and don't differ between zombies and cars, rather than about DR which actually does have specific significance to the issue at hand.

Also, you don't want to mix in rapid fire, because that just amplifies the DR thing and invites in the separate problem of cumulative rapid fire damage that isn't at all specific to the matter at hand.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Not always what? do you have examples of Zombies being taken out be heart shots? In fact you standard zombie is actually one with no vitals but has a brain. no brain and no vitals being different options for injury tolerance.

Or not always zombie ≠ cars? OK show me your car zombies

Silly sidetrack, but All Flesh Must Be Eaten and Armageddon by Eden Studios, respectively.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

erm concise, but is there an answer to my question why are p- bullets 15x more effective when hitting the engine block in comparison to the bodywork, but P++ are only 3x as effective.

Because how much volume of car you disrupt is more important in the bodywork than it is in the engine, where the location of the wound channel makes its size not particularly important. You know, exactly the same reason as the corresponding ratios in living targets (6x and 1.5x, which is within rounding of being the same relationship). If you want to say that's wrong, okay, but unless there's some reason it's only wrong for cars this is the wrong conversation.

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Basically by taking vitals wounding mod only you've given an advantage to smaller lighter bullets in comparison to the heavier (P++) bullets when firing at the engine block as opposed to the rest of the car.

So if we saying as base assumption that it's more realistic to need heavy anti material rounds (i.e Pi++*) to take out engine blocks quickly, rather than smaller, lighter rounds, I'd say my version fits that better.

*no coincidence I think that the wounding mod for Pi++ is x1 for unliving

No, no. You don't need heavier bullets. You need more powerful bullets. These tend to coincide somewhat, but the reason you can (in reality) shoot an engine block with a .50 BMG anti-material rifle but not so much with a 5.56mm assault rifle is penetration, not diameter. A gauss rifle should work. I wouldn't bet on a .50 Desert Eagle being much use.

Do you think a musket would be good for killing an engine block? Or, heck, a spear? Because that's what you're saying by making it about wounding modifier.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Because how much volume of car you disrupt is more important in the bodywork than it is in the engine, where the location of the wound channel makes its size not particularly important.

Except that it does -- a wider wound channel means it's more likely to actually intersect the truly critical components.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Unliving replaces the wounding modifiers for piercing and impaling damage. Vitals hits also replace the wounding modifiers for piercing and impaling damage. There is no 'damage mod' nor is there any meaning to 'giving' a 'wound mod'.

If you we’re discussing variations on RAW and which is 'most realistic', “but, but precise wording of RAW says this” is not a supporting argument for your position.

Does the unliving status/trait modify injury after damage has penetrated DR yes/no?
Does Vital location on targets that have vital locations modify injury after damage has penetrated DR yes/no?

Now yes you can correctly say they replace weapon wound mods, but since they replace them with multipliers that modify wounds (which in the case of unliving are specific to weapon wound type!), I'm not sure your point is quite a home run?

Unless your pointing out possibly imprecise uses of 'wound', 'injury' and 'damage' as per GURPS, then OK fine, you can probably find a few spelling mistakes as well.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Okay, perhaps I should say you keep talking about the piercing modifiers, which are about the nature of Unliving, and don't differ between zombies and cars, rather than about DR which actually does have specific significance to the issue at hand.

Only I can keep DR in mind even while discussing Unliving.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Also, you don't want to mix in rapid fire, because that just amplifies the DR thing and invites in the separate problem of cumulative rapid fire damage that isn't at all specific to the matter at hand.

Only it is because you have Assault rifles and pi- weapons killing engine blocks rather easily with one burst. You know the overall result being the sum total of all contributing factors (a bit like how I can include DR in the conversation without actually mentioning in each post).

Also since your applying a flat x3 multiplier after DR, the issues you mention are more true of your system than mine.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Silly sidetrack, but All Flesh Must Be Eaten and Armageddon by Eden Studios, respectively.

OK point made but silly sidetrack spawned by silly equivalency

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Because how much volume of car you disrupt is more important in the bodywork than it is in the engine, where the location of the wound channel makes its size not particularly important.

Really you think the size of the wound channel in a engine block that weights a couple of hundred Lbs is not a factor. I get the point about damage tolerance in car body work, it has been made, it just it doesn't answer the questions regarding damage in engine blocks that are made of unliving metals. Your point is clear, it’s just not the entirety of the debate.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

You know, exactly the same reason as the corresponding ratios in living targets (6x and 1.5x, which is within rounding of being the same relationship). If you want to say that's wrong, okay, but unless there's some reason it's only wrong for cars this is the wrong conversation.

No it’s not the same because the direction of increase or change in effect is not the same and other factors apply.

Pi+ on living targets goes from x1.5 to x3 (a x2 benefit)
Pi- on lining targets goes from x0.5 to x3 (a x6 benefit)

Pi+ on unliving targets goes from x0.5 to x3 (a x6 benefit)
Pi- on unliving targets goes from x0.2 to x3 (a x15 benefit)

Which is in abstract x3 and x2.5 (which is what I guess you mean by to within a rounding, which rather ignores the nature of multiplying fractions)

But the first pair start off either on side of the x1 line, on the other pair both start below it.

This makes a big difference when you swap all that with a flat x3 mod.
You need to look at how this impacts on the actually damage done
Let’s assume 2d6 damage so average of 7 for all scenarios.

Pi+ on living targets goes from x1.5 to x3 = 10.5 (10) up to 21 a 110% increase in injury
Pi- on living targets goes from x0.5 to x3 = 3.5 (3) to 21 a 600% increase in injury

Pi+ on unliving targets goes from x0.5 to x3 = 3.5 (3) to 21 a 600% increase in injury
Pi- on unliving targets goes from x0.2 to x3 = 1.4 (1) to 21 a 2000% increase in injury

Not very similar after all, then you have factors like living targets suffer shock or suffer knockdown, human targets are much more likely to have the damage they can take capped at by location than cars are from human scale weapons etc, etc.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

No, no. You don't need heavier bullets. You need more powerful bullets. These tend to coincide somewhat, but the reason you can (in reality) shoot an engine block with a .50 BMG anti-material rifle but not so much with a 5.56mm assault rifle is penetration, not diameter. A gauss rifle should work. I wouldn't bet on a .50 Desert Eagle being much use.

The thing is your using a weapon that doesn't exist to illustrate a point that we already know the answer to based on weapons that do exist. The point being that while yes if you include weapons from UT ‘heaviness’ of projectile and ‘powerfulness’ of weapon might have less correlation, but in the real world with real weapons that relationship tends to hold true.

You don’t think the .50 Desert Eagle is that great at damaging engine blocks, I agree which is why with my version it less able to than with yours (mine 4d6 x0.5 x3 = avg 21, yours 4d6 x3 = avg 42).

Also that fact that the .50 desert eagle is pi+ and the 12.7mm BMG is P++ , is that it’s not just diameter but length and also therefore over all mass of the projectile as well.

The thing is in a attempt to accurately model as yet undeveloped gauss rifles, you make the H&K MP7A1 a car killer. So should the H&K MP7A1 be that effective?

As to the Gauss rifle question in relation to GURPS, I’ve read too many threads that start “why are gauss rifles so crap” to take it at face value. So if you using a strict RAW is correct argument here to make Gauss rifles effective car stoppers because Gauss rifle RAW has made then poor choices to do so, will the appeals to RAW get a bit selective.

I do agree with you that imagine a gauss rifle would be pretty good at penetrating engine blocks in comparison to a weapon firing a similar sized projectile conventionally, only the problem is this ability to penetrate thick hard material seems to modelled with high damage and good armour divisors. Well OK if we say penetrating engine blocks is factor of your ability to penetrate think heavy material then that will have an effect on your theory that engine blocks are apparently of the same consistency as body work .

Maybe we’re wrong of course, gauss rifles are firing comparatively very light projectiles maybe projectile mass is an important factor after all even when you over compensate with super high velocities.

Grav guns would be pretty brutal against our TL8 sedan though, but they are another thing all together.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Do you think a musket would be good for killing an engine block? Or, heck, a spear? Because that's what you're saying by making it about wounding modifier.

Not very good examples to make you point with*, in HT the three Flintlock rifles mentioned are:

4d-1 pi+, your system avg 39, mine avg 19
3d pi++, your system avg 31, mine avg 31
3d+1 pi+, your system avg 34, mine avg 17

If you go earlier (low tech) well again anything pi++ is equal in both systems, anything pi+ is less effective in mine than yours

The Spear will also do the same in both systems (but not very much due to DR5), it would appear that my system makes you point. Wounding modifiers not being the whole picture but merely a part of the whole picture, just not one that I think should be ignored.

But if you're really getting into time travelling sedans lets look at the small sling, your system gives it flat x3 damage to the engine block, mine would give it overall x1. So I guess my question to you is do you really think slings are good for killing engine blocks, "because that's what you're saying when (ignoring wounding modifiers)".

*but incidentally good one's for my point about where the wounding multipliers is in relation to the x1 point being more important rather than in relation to that of other weapons in unliving.

[Ulzgoroth]

Frankly, between constantly calling the rules my system and refusing to consider any relationships except your one pet ratio, I'm done with this.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Frankly, between constantly calling the rules my system

Yeah you've really honed in on the really important part of the discussion there haven't you? My very first post to you made the point that I thought your interpretation was a very reasonable one of RAW.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

and refusing to consider any relationships except your one pet ratio, I'm done with this.

Excuse me, from my last post on this page just before yours here: "Wounding modifiers not being the whole picture but merely a part of the whole picture, just not one that I think should be ignored". Also I am specifically considering two ratios (along with everything else) it's you who'd relying on just one ratio.

Given the fact you failed to addressed half the content in my posts at least half the time, including I notice the examples of what were talking about in action I don't think its me who been refusing to consider stuff.

For example do tell me again how my version has Flintlocks destroying engines "Because that's what (I'm) saying by making it about wounding modifier".

If you're not going engage in the discussion don't do this "I'm offended by your use of words, I must leave" shtick, as an out and final passing shot, there is no need.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Anthony

There are a variety of things you can hit in a car engine that will more or less instantaneously disable the car. However, none of them are anything like a mere -3 to hit.

Especially when you include the SM of the car as well

Originally Posted by Anthony

Except that it does -- a wider wound channel means it's more likely to actually intersect the truly critical components.

Good point. even if there's no tumble (meaning no longitudinal aspect to the channel size) a wider projectile will leave a wider channel even if it enters and stays head on. Leaving aside the fact that projectiles interacting in hard materials tend to fragment, larger projectile means more and/or larger fragments.