Thread: Emissive Armor
View Single Post
  #18  
Old September 26th, 2000, 08:12 PM

Psitticine Psitticine is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 2,487
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Psitticine is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Emissive Armor

quote:
Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
While you have armor, damage is distributed randomly among armor components - except when a weapon that skips armor is being used. When armor is gone or an armor ignoring weapon is being used, damage is distributed randomly among non-armor components.


There are a couple of points I've read about that I'd be interested in seeing confirmed or denied, if anybody can do either.

First, I've been told that once a component is damaged, all additional damage taken by the ship is applied to the same component until it is destroyed. IOW, if you fire and strike a particular piece of armour, additional hits will be applied to that same piece until it finally gives way.

This makes sense to me, in terms of saving runtime. It isn't all that realistic but it isn't all that obvious either, and it would take a *lot* more memory to track the exact status of every single component on every single ship, fighter, satellite, WP, etc., as opposed to just if they are operative or destroyed.

Secondly, I've also seen it stated that if a single shot destroys an armour component and has some damage left to do, that damage is applied to the non-armour components. Subsequent shots would be taken by the remaining armour, unless those rounds too are strong enough to destroy an armour component with a single bLast.

This doesn't make sense to me. These two seem contradictory, considering one shot could pierce armour and damage the interior, and then the next could only damage another piece of armour, leading to two seperate damaged components being tracked.

I've never seen the second in action and rather doubt it is really in play, but I thought I'd pass it on in case anybody knows anything about it. Perhaps it was a concept that got tossed out in early development?
Reply With Quote