• 📅 February and March 2022 are YE 45.2 in the RP.

Power Pack Armor Resubmission

Zack

Inactive Member
Submission Type: Power Armor (sorta)
Submission URL: https://stararmy.com/wiki/doku.php?id=faction:uso:packpowerarmor

Faction: USO
FM Approved Yet? Yes
Faction requires art? Yes

For Reviewers:
Contains Unapproved Sub-Articles? (Yes/No)
Contains New art? (Yes/No)
Previously Submitted? (Yes/No; explain reason if rejected)

Notes:
So this was previously rejected despite similar submissions already existing, so lets bring this submission exactly in line with what was requested through malicious compliance!

Wes said:
I don't think personnel-scale items should be emitting armor-scale shields. But a 5 SP (personnel) shield is fine.

Shield is set to PDR 5.

Wes said:
Let's go with Tier 3 and no side effects, alright?

The device is classified as Tier 3!

Fred said:
In DRv2, that would equate to 5SP. The data on the DRv2 page supports this claim: https://stararmy.com/wiki/doku.php?id=guide:damage_rating_v2

The device itself has had its SP value buff'd to 5ADR!
 

Fred

Retired Staff
ADR is not an SP value.
Replace line:
"SP Value | 5 ADR" with "SP Value 5 SP"

I don't quite get the point of having "Shield Strength" and "Shield Threshold". Remove the former - it is redundant.

Correct the DRv3 tier.
It should read as "3 - Heavy Personnel"
Also, it is "Tier" not "Class"

I do not endorse a double-facing barrier to be on an unit of this size.
My recommendations to the NTSE Mods is to settle for 'bubble'.
 

Zack

Inactive Member
Shield strength is how many SP points the shield can absorb before it goes down.
Shield Threshold is how many points the shield can absorb from a single hit, before that damage bleeds through to the target.

This is intentionally a pretty weak shield, but it is important to have both values so that the full DR stats for V2 are included.

I have also switched Class to Tier.

I've also left it as double-facing, since there is really no reason to go bubble. It makes more sense that the armor would have two emitters since the emitters can't be placed all over to form a true bubble. IMO it would really be right and left facing so that it can encompass the user but the Dvr3 scale doesn't allow for it.
 

Fred

Retired Staff
Then, you keep Shield Strength as "5 SP - Personnel scale" or SP as the same. Not both.

There are no double-facing barriers from something not mecha sized. Your emitters are neither good enough or distant enough to warrant such.
 

Fred

Retired Staff
Wait, I just realized:
The SP value that's Armor scale is the actual sturdiness of the pack itself, not the barrier's. Maybe just mention "Pack SP" for clarity? I was wary of you passing a fast one on me.

5SP/armor is kind of a lot if that's the case. I skimmed the document, but can't seem to find what it's actually armored with. Say we decide to be generous and say it's 5SP (isn't that a whole suit like a Demon?), if it's in durandium, I'd expect it to actually be 3SP (x0.6). Let me know.

As for the facing, the Mindy M2-2D uses multiple barrier emitters all over it for redundancy, but they do end up effectively counting as a conformal barrier. No facings involved. You can technobabble the flavor text if you like to show that off, but the mecha-scale is the one that starts to have the right to have two-facings.

Let me know about what it's made of (adjusting SP accordingly), fix the facing thing, and I'll approve this.
 

Navian

Inactive Member
I don't think I've ever seen an example of a bubble barrier in sci-fi that wasn't generated by a single module or pack, without any need for extra emitters. That's how it works here, too, isn't it?
 

Zack

Inactive Member
5 Armor Scale SP does seem like a lot, which was why the pack was originally 4 to put it in line with similar submissions, and then was reduced to Personal scale 20, then personal scale 15. The pack was set to 5 Armor scale at your (and technically Wes's) request.

I would also like to know how you get to the 3SP number, as you're applying a 0.6 modifier to the base amount of the device. The implication here is that at Armor Scale SP 3, you could just apply the 0.6 again... the point being that armor modifier isn't really for DVr2, and it doesn't really make sense to apply it there as there is no method to making the base number to apply the modifier to. I could just as easily say the pack's original Armor scale structure point value is actually 8 which is why it is 5 now, which again doesn't make sense as we're really crossing wires between systems here.

I would also point out that two facing shields are 'more common' on starships and mecha, but there really is no guideline for where they can and can't be used. It doesn't make sense to adjust it here unless those rules are fixed so that there is a reason to change it here. Again, unlike the Mindy, this pack only has the sides and rear for mounting shield projectors, so it makes sense for it to have a left/right configuration where a half bubble is projected to either side from a single emitter panel on either side, but again the Dvr 3 system only allows for front/rear so it makes sense to use 2 facing.

---

So I guess what I want for clarity:

Do I listen to the Fred who says 5 Armor Scale SP is correct, and rejected the 3 Armor Scale (15 Personal Scale)?

Or do I listen to the Fred who says the 3 Armor Scale (15 PS) is the correct amount, and refuses to approve the 5 Armor Scale version?

---

Then there is the further question of do we go by what Fred is saying here regarding shield facings? Or do we go by what is on the rules page? If we go by what Fred is saying here would anyone mind if I go in and fix the DVR3 page to bring it in line with what I'm being told by the staff?

---

The SP value of the pack has also been changed to read 'Pack SP'
 

Syaoran

Retired Staff
I did not want to post here but through all teh post you guys missed it. In DRV2, Armor and personnel use the same SP. Just look at this chart. Personnel goes 1 2 3 4 5, and Armor starts at 5 and then goes 10 15 20 25. So when someone says 5SP in the old system that is PDR5/ADR1. Structural points do not directly transfer into DR except at personnel scale.

The conversion chart above is for converting DR, not SP. You have to keep in mind that DR and SP are two different things. That is where the confusion is coming in.
 

Navian

Inactive Member
Point the red lines at the column headers at the right of the SP table, Zack, and note that the conversion chart is for damage, not for SP.

I don't think we should be using DRv2 at all, but if we absolutely HAVE to, can we please fix it so that when people claim to know how it works, there's some reason to agree or disagree with them other than how many times they make the same assertions, and whether the repetition makes us believe them or just makes us annoyed?
 

Syaoran

Retired Staff
Yes Zack those words are there. But you see between the two charts? The defense section doesn't start until -after- the first chart. Meaning nothing above the defense line actually applies to defense. Now if you look at the chart in the defense section, you can see that Both Personnel and Mecha scale are simply listed as "Structural Points" it's not till Ship scale is it actually listed as a different scale, this means they're using the same scale for the first two.
 

Syaoran

Retired Staff
No I'm saying a Leather jacket has SP1. SP1 equates to PDR1. If you want to compare it to DR, until you get to ship scale, the entire SP thing is actually in PDR, not ADR
 

raz

SAINT Director
🌟 Site Supporter
🎨 Media Gallery
Zack is reading DRv2 correctly.

If personnel and armor scales used the same SP, power armor would get wrecked by personnel scale weapons. That obviously is not the case.

In other words, an 8SP Daisy has 8 armor SP.
 

Syaoran

Retired Staff
8SP puts its armor between ADR 1 and ADR2, which neither would be really effected by Personnel scale weapons. Only PDR5 can really do anything to ADR.
 

Navian

Inactive Member
If they use different SP, that means that the weakest power armour is five times as durable as the strongest personal armour, which means the system has a gap in it. If they use the same SP, then the weakest power armour is as tough as the strongest personal armour, which actually makes sense. I'm sure that interpretation causes other things not to make sense, but the rules are in a sticky spot, either way.

The 'armour scale units are immune to personal scale weapons' assumption is another thing that's not actually mentioned in the DR guide, but has been taken as if it was. If that's going to be a rule, it should be in the guide.
 

raz

SAINT Director
🌟 Site Supporter
🎨 Media Gallery
You can't shoot an unshielded Daisy 8 times with a PDR1 handgun and expect it to be destroyed.

If that's the operational assumption, it's news to me.
 

Navian

Inactive Member
Yes, it makes no sense for a handgun to disable a powered armour for the same reason it makes no sense that you can destroy a Sharie-class battleship by bouncing a few hundred thousand 2 cm shells off its hull plating--that's an HP system problem.

That's not 'actual proof', Raz, unless you mean proof that someone else interpreted it the same way. It also doesn't address any other flaws if we do decide that it was intended to be that way.
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Top