Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker)
kaladorn@xxxxxx
(18 Dec 2020 16:52 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker)
Rupert Boleyn
(18 Dec 2020 18:25 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker)
Jeff Zeitlin
(18 Dec 2020 18:57 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker) Rupert Boleyn (18 Dec 2020 19:06 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker)
Phil Pugliese
(18 Dec 2020 20:17 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker)
Rupert Boleyn
(18 Dec 2020 20:50 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker)
Phil Pugliese
(19 Dec 2020 06:44 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker)
Rupert Boleyn
(19 Dec 2020 11:53 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker)
Phil Pugliese
(19 Dec 2020 17:01 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker) Rupert Boleyn 18 Dec 2020 19:06 UTC
On 19Dec2020 0757, Jeff Zeitlin wrote: >> Armour in MT does tend to be a bit excessive. 'Cloth' is TL6 armour, and >> I'm not sure what in the heck it's supposed to be made of, because it's >> better than anything we've managed to make until quite recently. The >> penetration values of slug-throwers probably all need to be bumped up a bit. > I think that notionally "cloth" is supposed to be something like a > ballistic vest - basically, a cop's "bulletproof vest", which is a quilted > nylon canvas with kevlar inserts. TL6 is maybe a bit early; kevlar wasn't > used until the 1970s. Prior to that, the inserts were made of steel, or > occasionally aluminum. That's the thing - it's a full suit of some kind of ballistic cloth that can stop most rifle bullets, yet is light enough to be a reasonable armour choice. We can't make that *now*. -- Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>