NEWS

UDI 2073 Catalog

  • 79 Replies
  • 17719 Views

FastJack

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6035
  • Kids these days...
« Reply #60 on: (11:40:03/09-11-10) »
I might bring the Armor down to 20, since reinforced concrete is 24. But other than that, it looks good!

John Schmidt

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 564
« Reply #61 on: (12:18:22/09-11-10) »
This is one of those instance where I don't agree with the game. From my experience and research I would say that it is possible for armor to out perform reinforced concrete in terms of ballistic protection. Of course, we don't know how thick the reinforced concrete is to be able to achieve that 20 Armor Rating.
It's not the one with your name on it; it's the one addressed "to whom it may concern" you've got to think about.

FastJack

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6035
  • Kids these days...
« Reply #62 on: (12:47:33/09-11-10) »
You're right, SR4a only lists the thickness in the structure rating (1m square, 10 cm thick). Although, reinforced concrete means it strengthened with rebars/plates/wire. I'd still lower the armor, though since a normal security door is only at an 8 and they're usually steel doors.

(Interesting side-note: My brother-in-law, the cop, got called out to a crime scene last night where they had to break through a steel door. His buddy bet him five bucks he couldn't kick it in. He took the bet and kicked in the door. Snapped the deadbolt lock in half, no damage to the door or door frame.)

John Schmidt

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 564
« Reply #63 on: (18:16:24/09-11-10) »
That bet could have ended very badly for your brother-in-law, just one mortise lock...ouch. To be young and lucky once more.  ;D
It's not the one with your name on it; it's the one addressed "to whom it may concern" you've got to think about.

Mystic

  • *
  • Freelancer
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 981
  • Word Mercenary
« Reply #64 on: (06:53:31/09-12-10) »
That bet could have ended very badly for your brother-in-law, just one mortise lock...ouch. To be young and lucky once more.  ;D

I agree, kicking in doors can lead to nasty consiquences. I prefer breeching rounds in an Remington 870, myself.

 8)
Bringing chaos, mayhem, and occasionally cookies to the Sixth World since 2052!

"Just because it's easy for you doesn't mean it can't be hard on your clients"-Rule 38, The Seventy Maxims of Maximally Effective Mercenaries, Schlock Mercenary.

John Schmidt

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 564
« Reply #65 on: (07:17:01/09-12-10) »
I would add, that there are just weird occurances where the metal is fatigued or flawed.

What sets this door apart is that it has composite armor plating, reinforced with a laminate honeycomb in the middle, followed by a second layer of composite armor plating. 10cm or 3.9 inches of reinforced concrete is not thin by any stretch of the imagination, when I think of concrete bunkers though we are talking feet thick (reinforced). The difference between structural materials is pretty vast. At one end of the spectrum you have cinder block, makes for a good structurally sound building, but I have seen video of an Uzi on full auto (standard ball ammo) just devastate it. Standard residential construction, 2x6 wood frame, vinyl siding, vapor wrap, 3/4" sheating, insulation, and drywall, excellent structurally for its purpose but I wouldn't consider it cover...good concealment though.

Current material engineering leads me to believe that there are some very promising lightweight materials out there that have excellent potential as armor. So I am extrapolating, but I don't think that I am out of the realm of possibility in thinking that two sheets of 15mm thick composite armor using carbon nanotubes and other materials would be pretty darn tough. There again though, I would like to think that I am open minded.  ;D

Sound off people, 24 AR or lower?

Edit: I would certainly be willing to concede that a cutting charge (think RO Blade) would probably have little problem with this door though.
« Last Edit: (07:19:53/09-12-10) by John Schmidt »
It's not the one with your name on it; it's the one addressed "to whom it may concern" you've got to think about.

FastJack

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6035
  • Kids these days...
« Reply #66 on: (11:57:58/09-12-10) »
Well, my argument for the lower armor is that, yes, you have the carbon nanotubes and composite armor and all that, BUT, that's not as hard to come by in 2072 as it it in 2010. I guess my main point is, in 2072, you have corporations that have been through a number of corp wars, millions of shadowruns and all the other stuff that the sixth world presents. So, I doubt a security door in 2072 is the same as a security door you'd find in our time.

John Schmidt

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 564
« Reply #67 on: (05:59:03/09-13-10) »
Are you alluding to that while material may improve so do the counter measures, because that is a good point.

Lets say I meet you halfway...and give it a AR of 24?
« Last Edit: (06:00:34/09-13-10) by John Schmidt »
It's not the one with your name on it; it's the one addressed "to whom it may concern" you've got to think about.

FastJack

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6035
  • Kids these days...

The_Gun_Nut

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1583
« Reply #69 on: (17:15:31/09-14-10) »
Shock Lock shotgun rounds rip that down to 12.

I am in love with Shock Lock ammo (if you hadn't noticed).
There is no overkill.

Only "Open fire" and "I need to reload."

John Schmidt

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 564
« Reply #70 on: (17:26:05/09-14-10) »
Completely understandable, the right tool for the job.  ;D

My intent is to make it difficult but not impossible, challenge the players but keep it possible.
It's not the one with your name on it; it's the one addressed "to whom it may concern" you've got to think about.

Doc Chaos

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 777
  • Bavarian Mr. Johnson
« Reply #71 on: (00:56:34/09-15-10) »
My intent is to make it difficult but not impossible, challenge the players but keep it possible.

Which sadly some people forget should be the main idea behind the difficulty level of 'runs...
SR4A Limited Edition [german] - 0478/1100

The_Gun_Nut

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1583
« Reply #72 on: (05:50:30/09-15-10) »
I have no problem with overly difficult runs.  The basic objective might not be to succeed in the mission, but something else.  Handing players easy victories all the time takes away from the idea that the Shadows are a dangerous place.

Fortunately, my players are wise enough to see when things are getting too hot.  They then either find a loophole to exploit in order to get paid anyway or just back off and consider living to see another day their payment.
There is no overkill.

Only "Open fire" and "I need to reload."

John Schmidt

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 564
« Reply #73 on: (06:12:38/09-15-10) »
Sounds like you have a talented group of players.  ;D
It's not the one with your name on it; it's the one addressed "to whom it may concern" you've got to think about.

Raventrickster

  • *
  • Newb
  • *
  • Posts: 64
« Reply #74 on: (22:19:31/10-11-10) »
I'd like to sound off for colour, but it sounds like the black and white crowd has it at the moment.  That said I look forward to this, always nice to see more interesting gear come to the table.