Shield burn through clarification please

[Kang]

This may have been answered elsewhere but I could not find it.

Shield burnthrough occurs when you hit an enemy shield for at least ten points of damage but it 'does not penetrate [the] shield.

What happens if the damage exactly equals the remaining shield points? The damage has 'penetrated' the shield - it's knocked it down - but there's not quite enough to get through to the ship.

So if I hit a shield for say fifteen points, and there's fifteen boxes left, is it fourteen on the shield and one burnthrough, rather than knocking the shield down? I guess it's hinging on the definition of 'penetrates' the shield; if damage has to be internal for it to be 'penetrating' damage, then that sorts it out.

[mjwest]

"Penetrating" means that it causes internal damage.

So, ten points done to a ten point shield means that burn-through is done, resulting in nine boxes to the shield (leaving one box) and one point of burn-through internal damage.

[storeylf]

As a follow up, If you declared directed damage but only managed to score a burnthrough is that still a directed burnthrough. I though it was, but couldn't find anything in the middle of a game the other day when someone queried it.


NVM - found the answer several pages of posts in. Yes as I thought it is still directed.

[Kang]

Yeah, that's right. Plus a burnthrough point always bypasses armor too.

[Scoutdad]

The moral of the stor is, "Always declare directed targeting."

that way, if you only score one point - you've got a 50% chance to get a power or weapon hit - depending on what you declared.

[Hod K'el]

Why does burnthrough bypass armor? This just does not make any sense to me, so is there a logical explanation?

My thinking is: I have a shield; I get shot; the shot makes it through the shield; the next thing that gets hit is the armor I put on my ship; if the shot gets through my armor, what damn good is the armor? Good people are getting killed here!

[pmiller13]

If you think about it thought it is actually better for the 1 point burn through to his a system on the ship rather than armour. Armour cost 9 repair points to fix, all other boxes cost 4 or less. This means that on most cruisers or larger you can repair the 1 point of damage on the same turn it is taken where as if it was taken on the armour it would take 3 continues turns to repair.

[Mike]

If you think about it thought it is actually better for the 1 point burn through to his a system on the ship rather than armour.

That still doesn't answer the question as to WHY the game works this way. Whether it is good for the ship being hit or not, the question is: What is the rationale for such a rule?

[mjwest]

I figure it is just game play. By skipping the armor, it means that the burn-through is always relevant and always in play. Without it, armored ships would be immune to burn-through, and that was not desired.

Now, I can't give you a techno-babble explanation, but that is likely the real reason.

[Hod K'el]

Ah! A twelve beer rule! Now I understand...

So why have armor? Oh, wait, it will buy time for the damaged ship to turn a fresh shield towards the enemy...sort of like a trick of the trade...

[Kang]

My techno-babble explanation for burnthrough has always been that weapons fire does not always damage things directly, but can cause power surges and such. Especially with phasers, which are specifically stated [well, in SFB anyway] as causing electrical discharge elsewhere in the ship, I see it as some of the damage being caused in this way.

Now I realise that armor is not just physical armor like hull plates, extra bracing and such, but also hardening of the ship's systems to EMP damage and all that sort of thing.

But still I would say that the burnthrough damage is caused by power surges rather that actual physical damage. That is has passed the armor is probably caused by the same reason it has passed the shields, which meshes nicely with MJW's contribution above.

And how many times have we seen on screen an incoming weapons strike where the console erupts in a pyrotechnic flash behind Lt. Tuvok, and Harry Kim shouts out 'Shields at 80 percent Captain!' ? Burnthrough causes that, I think.

[Kang]

The moral of the stor is, "Always declare directed targeting."

that way, if you only score one point - you've got a 50% chance to get a power or weapon hit - depending on what you declared.

I've had chance to develop that idea today, Tony. New tactic thread at http://www.starfleetgames.com/federatio ... php?t=2543

Comments welcome, as always

[Scoutdad]

My only comment is, "Well Done!"

My only complaint is... #%$^&! work.

I've been toying with that Command Note idea (and 2 or 3 others) for two months now, but have been too busy at work to write them out.

[Mod: extra posts cleaned out.]
[edit: Thanks, Mike - I appreciate the assist.]

[Kang]

My only comment is, "Well Done!"

My only complaint is... #%$^&! work.

I've been toying with that Command Note idea (and 2 or 3 others) for two months now, but have been too busy at work to write them out.

Thanks I appreciate the compliments. Great minds think alike, they say, so why I can think like that is beyond me

Get your ideas into print! No-one's going to do it for you. Well, they might, but then they get the credit....

Nice one on the post count. The wonders of modern technology.... Where would we be without it?

[djdood]

Re: armor -
Nick Blank's deck plans for the War Bird/Eagle show the armor as big blocks of energy absorbing material, just inside the outer hull. Presumably, they take the energy of the incoming fire and do "something" with it to keep it from penetrating into the inner hull.

What that "something" is, would be technobabble debate-fodder (ablative burn-off, subspace material phase-change, etc., etc.).