A question on Armor Piercing

[gaghiel42]

So, we've been debating this and its high time I ask to see if anyone knows the proper answer.  When you get hit with something that has say AP30 and you only have a DR of like 5, where does all the extra AP go?  Does it just vanish, or is that extra incorporated into damage?

How does the same rule apply to NPCs?  We've been going back and forth on this and if anyone has the answer, I'd be greatly appreciative.

[Agent 333]

Extra AP is ignored. Overpenetration is a problem with shooting High AP weapons at soft targets....

[Krensky]

What he said.

SG-1 had rules specifically for this, but I don't have my book handy. If I remember right using AP against something with less then 7 (or something) DR did half damage. My books are packed away and my PDFs are on my other computer.

[Bananapants]

Are the overpenatration rules still in? Do soft targets take less damage from heavy armor piercing stuff?

I have a few PCs in my group who tend to pack serious ammo sometimes...

[meadicus]

AP still makes a big different when damaging objects (who have their damage save reduced by the SP of the attack). But when damaging NPCs any extra AP is lost.

Simple enough to add some if you want though, First printing 2.0 had NPCs damage saves also reduced by the AP, but was dropped I believe because it made AP too powerful. If you want AP to make that much difference, put it back in.

Campaign Quality- AP is god (seasons only): When a standard NPC is damaged by an attack with an armour peircing value, they take a penalty to their damage save equal to the AP.

[Krensky]

This is cribbed from SG-1 (AP and such works differently there).

Over-penetration (+0 XP, Seasons only): Sometimes using a hammer to smash an egg is not the best choice. Any physical (ie: not fire, laser, sonic, etc) attack with more then 10 AP does 1/2 damage to 'soft' targets. A soft target is one that has 5 or less points of DR from armor or a object with a Damage Save of less than 13.

To me this is too fiddly, and the Damage Save bonus really should be play tested and more thoroughly compared to the vehicles and such in the book. Besides, anti-armor weapons in movies and TV never over-penetrate.

[MilitiaJim]

Besides, anti-armor weapons in movies and TV never over-penetrate.

Does CNN count as TV?  I have recollections of some APFSDS-T rounds going through one T-72, blowing the bajeezus out of it, and continuing on to destroy the next one.

[Krensky]

Besides, anti-armor weapons in movies and TV never over-penetrate.

Does CNN count as TV?  I have recollections of some APFSDS-T rounds going through one T-72, blowing the bajeezus out of it, and continuing on to destroy the next one.

In this context, no.

And doing that is WAY to fiddly as it requires tracking where things go, determining how much energy they have left, and, to be fair, tracking misses. Not fun.

[MilitiaJim]

And doing that is WAY to fiddly as it requires tracking where things go, determining how much energy they have left, and, to be fair, tracking misses. Not fun.

Shouldn't be too bad:  It would have to start with a damage roll high enough to go through the armor on both sides of the first tank.  Then second check to see where the round goes after it gets through the first tank.  Apply leftover damage (from slicing through both sides of the first tank) to the armor of the second.

Not quite cake, more like pie, definitely not creme brulee.

[Krensky]

And doing that is WAY to fiddly as it requires tracking where things go, determining how much energy they have left, and, to be fair, tracking misses. Not fun.

Shouldn't be too bad:  It would have to start with a damage roll high enough to go through the armor on both sides of the first tank.  Then second check to see where the round goes after it gets through the first tank.  Apply leftover damage (from slicing through both sides of the first tank) to the armor of the second.

Not quite cake, more like pie, definitely not creme brulee.

If I wanted to play Twilight 2000, I would be playing Twilight 2000.

[MilitiaJim]

If I wanted to play Twilight 2000, I would be playing Twilight 2000.

Touche.  Well played sir.  (Btw, what is Twilight 2000?)

[Mister Andersen]

First printing 2.0 had NPCs damage saves also reduced by the AP, but was dropped I believe because it made AP too powerful.

It wasn't so much that as Alex thinking that people would determine an NPC's damage save to include armour and virtually everyone doing the complete opposite.

[Krensky]

If I wanted to play Twilight 2000, I would be playing Twilight 2000.

Touche.  Well played sir.  (Btw, what is Twilight 2000?)

A post (limited) apocalyptic game from GDW (The Traveller people) back in the day. Had two spin offs that I can recall, one that had a different time line since WWIII was looking less and less likely (Merc 2000), and one that kept the WWIII timeline and moved thngs ahead to 2300 (Traveller 2300/2300AD).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twilight_2000

It had a very exacting and detailed combat system, if memory serves. If I'm wrong, then I'm thinking of the Morrow Project. Or Pheonix Command... It's been too long.

Speaking of MP, I wind up sorely temped to try and do that with SC2 at some point soon.

[Mister Andersen]

Twilight: 2000 is a 1984 role-playing game set in the aftermath of World War III (the "Twilight War"). The premise is that the United States/NATO and the Soviet Union/Warsaw Pact have fought a (limited) nuclear war with all its consequences. Characters in the game are survivors of the war. The system has a reputation for providing excessive fanservice to ballistics data, and if I recall correctly utilised clear plastic target overlays to determine where in your body a bullet would hit you.

Twilight: 2013, the game's 3rd edition as primarily designed by Calyton "Jaegar" Oliver, formerly of the Spycraft design team at AEG. Rather than continuing the original timeline, it diverges from reality at 2007 and places the Twilight War in 2013. It utilises a new mechanic they're calling the Reflex System, which though thoroughly advised by ex-military types is designed with onion-like layers of complexity that essentially give you a video-game like choice of  'easy', 'reasonable' and 'hard' settings.

[Desertpuma]

I trust "Jaeger" on his stuff but the most complex version I always thought was Phoenix Command, kind of like Role/Chartmaster or worse when it came to combat rolling for attacks, damages, and effects of damage.