04-17-2018, 10:52 AM | #18 | |||
Join Date: Oct 2008
|
Re: High tech armor vs Ultra-tech armor
Quote:
As examples: Lets take four real life armors: -A friend of mine has a vintage Ballistic Nylon fragmentation vest from maybe 1970s, it is big, bulky and maybe DR 5. By HT rules it would cause a -2 to Holdout. -I have a class IIa vest from 1990s somewhere packed away, it should thus have DR about 8 and a -3 holdout penalty, but it is definitely easier to conceal, but the cut is a bit clumsy. -I have a modern class IIIa vest. It has thus DR about 12 so should have -4 conceal penalty. But it is by far easiest to conceal of all the armors due to superior cut and being thinner than the two other flexible armors. -I have a class IV stand alone plate. It has a DR of about 48, so by HT rules it should be -48 to conceal and yet it is much easier to conceal than the ballistic nylon vest and fairly easy to conceal under a suit jacket and trivial under motorcycle gear... The UT method in the armor construction articles give closer results. It should be noted that a standalone class IV plate is not possible to create with the article as the maximum DR for Quote:
Quote:
And "scale" is construction method in the article that makes hard materials soft(and thus potentially concealable) but is heavier for the same protection. And the HT description says it is "scalar construction" |
|||
Tags |
armor, high-tech, ultra-tech |
|
|