|
Post by dertrend on Dec 26, 2011 18:30:45 GMT -5
In an attempt to create more elaborate tactical situations I have put together a basic system for rear armor damage. The amount of rear armor should be 50% (rounding down) of the front armor for that location. (see attaches draft of what the amended grid should look like). 1-2 & 9-10 represent the arms and I not included rear armor for these locations. I am also experimenting with directional fire from the right & left. If fire originates from the right re-roll damage locations 1-2. If the damage originates from the left them re-roll damage locations 9-10. The idea is that you can maneuver a mech to try and protect certain damage locations. At this point determining the direction of fire is still a matter of agreed upon judgement. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Dagger on Dec 27, 2011 0:10:35 GMT -5
I like the direction you're going... I just made a decision early on in the design process to take more of an "abstract" approach to representing Mech armor. I wanted the game to play faster and be less of a simulation and more of a strategic/tactical exercise.
That being said, I did give the idea of locational damage some thought. Here are some of the points I was leaning toward:
1) Rear armor could only be damaged from the rear arc. (duh) 2) Front armor could be damaged from the front, left, and right arcs. 3) Arms and Legs could be damaged from any arc.
#3 is true in my mind because as a mech moves it swings its arms and legs... so the left arm and left leg can be seen and hit from the right side as it moves.
Once I got into deciding how many columns to assign to arms, legs, and front/rear torso... and saw that it really needed locational critical hit tables (instead of just one)... I decided it was too cumbersome and not in line with the direction I wanted to go. It would be a nice optional/house rule though...
I like your idea of simply assigning 50% of the front armor value to the rear armor... simple, logical, easy... and it keeps mech construction simple.
|
|
|
Post by dertrend on Dec 27, 2011 1:15:41 GMT -5
I understand your point regarding the abstract armor approach and the more I think about it the more I realize that trying to determine specific hit locations does not work very well and slows the game down.
The rear armor addition on the other hand seems to be pretty straightforward and forces players to think about whats behind them.
|
|