[Ultra-Tech] Cheap and Expensive Rugged Equipment

[MatthewVilter]

If I make something Rugged and Expensive will it be:

1*1.2*2/3 = 0.8 x weight and 1x2x2 = 4 x cost

-or-

1+0.2-1/3 = 0.867 x weight and 1+1+1 = 3 x cost


Same with Rugged and Cheap:

1*1.2*1.5 = 1.8 x weight and 1*2*0.5 = normal cost

-or-

1+0.2+0.5 = 1.7 x weight and 1+1-0.5 = 1.5 x cost


Also:

What is the DR, HT, and HP of weapons in Ultra-Tech normally?

Is p. 17 really the last word?

10 HT and 4 DR or 12 and 8 for rugged? (Seems quite low to me...)

[vierasmarius]

UT was written before 4th edition adopted the CF (cost factor) concept. As such, by RAW it would be the former - multiply all modifiers together. The additive method is still valid for cost modifiers, but even if you use it for there the weight modifiers should still be multiplied.

As for equipment stats, all three tech books use the same standard for HT and DR. One thing not mentioned on UT17 (but which is mentioned in the corresponding paragraphed in the other books) is that Good or Fine gear get an additional +1 or +2 HT, cumulative with the Rugged option.

[Ulzgoroth]

The absence of stats for armored gear is a definite problem for armored fighters whose weapons can be destroyed by splash damage that won't hurt the soldier...

[MatthewVilter]

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

UT was written before 4th edition adopted the CF (cost factor) concept. As such, by RAW it would be the former - multiply all modifiers together. The additive method is still valid for cost modifiers, but even if you use it for there the weight modifiers should still be multiplied.

Interesting... Thank you!

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

As for equipment stats, all three tech books use the same standard for HT and DR. One thing not mentioned on UT17 (but which is mentioned in the corresponding paragraphed in the other books) is that Good or Fine gear get an additional +1 or +2 HT, cumulative with the Rugged option.

I don't think Ultra-Tech even includes Fine equipment...

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

The absence of stats for armored gear is a definite problem for armored fighters whose weapons can be destroyed by splash damage that won't hurt the soldier...

Indeed. This is even a problem for unarmored warriors who siting in hard cover and just sticking their weapons out to fire.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

The absence of stats for armored gear is a definite problem for armored fighters whose weapons can be destroyed by splash damage that won't hurt the soldier...

A remediable problem if you've got Spaceships - simply assume the weapon is a streamlined spaceship of equal mass, ignore the volume component of armor, and just add in the DR, cost, and mass. A 10 lb rifle would be SM-2. Armoring it with nanocomposite (TL10) would mean each +3 DR would weigh 1.5 lb and cost $75 (you need 3 systems to cover the whole weapon). This should get you close enough. IIRC, Ultra-Tech used better (but more expensive) armor than Spaceships, so you could use that material instead for better DR.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Varyon

A remediable problem if you've got Spaceships - simply assume the weapon is a streamlined spaceship of equal mass, ignore the volume component of armor, and just add in the DR, cost, and mass. A 10 lb rifle would be SM-2. Armoring it with nanocomposite (TL10) would mean each +3 DR would weigh 1.5 lb and cost $75 (you need 3 systems to cover the whole weapon). This should get you close enough. IIRC, Ultra-Tech used better (but more expensive) armor than Spaceships, so you could use that material instead for better DR.

Nice trick. I'm not sure where to come up with the stats for the better armor, though.

Your hack is probably actually a bit over-harsh for the weapon, since the reference spaceship is probably less dense than a gun is. But it's workable.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Nice trick. I'm not sure where to come up with the stats for the better armor, though.

Look at the clamshell armors and expand them to cover the whole body. DR and price scale linearly with weight, and an SM 0 spaceship would weigh 200 lb, so just scale DR up or down until weight is a multiple of 30 lb (each system is 10 lb, you need 3 systems to cover the whole body). Now build an SM 0 spaceship with the same number of systems on each section and see what the difference in price and DR is. This will give you your price and DR modifiers for the better armor.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Your hack is probably actually a bit over-harsh for the weapon, since the reference spaceship is probably less dense than a gun is. But it's workable.

If you'd like, treat the weapon as unstreamlined instead if you think this would be an issue.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Look at the clamshell armors and expand them to cover the whole body. DR and price scale linearly with weight, and an SM 0 spaceship would weigh 200 lb, so just scale DR up or down until weight is a multiple of 30 lb (each system is 10 lb, you need 3 systems to cover the whole body). Now build an SM 0 spaceship with the same number of systems on each section and see what the difference in price and DR is. This will give you your price and DR modifiers for the better armor.

Assuming based on Low Tech that the clamshell is chest coverage and so whole body coverage is four times that?

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Assuming based on Low Tech that the clamshell is chest coverage and so whole body coverage is four times that?

Maybe. ISTR that UT has some tailoring rules that you'd be able to extrapolate to make a full-body "clamshell." That's what you'll want to go off of.

EDIT: Here's an old analysis that indicates x2.5 for both DR and cost would be appropriate. So applying this to what I posted upthread, that's +5 DR per +1 lb and +$125.

[MatthewVilter]

Originally Posted by Varyon

...x2.5 for both DR and cost would be appropriate. So applying this to what I posted upthread, that's +5 DR per +1 lb and +$125.

Nice. And then, I guess, if you wanted more armor on the front it would be +15 DR per +1 lb and +$125?

That's based on TL 10 Clamshells? So TL 9 would be 3.75 or 3.33 DR (11.25 or 10 for just the front)?

(The thing is, heavy and light clamshells are not consistent.)