Ablative Defenses and EVE

[Erkenfresh]

I'm a long time player of Eve and I think in my next Star Hero campaign I may want to emulate some of it's aspects since they work well and give more variety to combat. The optional rule for ablative defenses in 5E is that "and hit with maximum BODY damage that would exceed the defense knocks 5 points off the defense". Perfect, let's see how this might work out analogous to Eve now.

 

In Eve, your ship has three layers to get through before your ship explodes in a ball of fire (and you get a mail stating how much insurance money you get, which is usually insulting and makes you wonder why you bothered buying insurance in the first place). First, you have shields which are tough versus physical damage types and weak against energy types. After shields you go into armor which swaps those defenses, weak versus physical and strong versus energy. Finally you get into the hull which has no defense whatsoever. This is a generalization as you can add modules to your ship to adjust resistances. You could have a much tougher hull if you so wanted for example.

 

Force fields are 1 points per defense. This means a single shot would reduce 5 points of defense on your force field. There's several options you could go with here but I figured if you made shields have a 3:2 PD to ED ratio, then a shot would remove 3 PD/2 ED. You could also go with a 4:1 ratio, or perhaps even a 5:0 ratio, if you wanted shots to remove an even number of points. An alternative solution is, pick whatever PD/ED you want for the shields then have a shot remove 5 points from the type of damage it normally does. So an energy shot would remove 5 ED a physical shot would remove 5 PD. In my opinion, the former idea would work best at a 3:2 ratio. Now let's lay this out in HERO terms:

 

Shields: Force Field (30 PD/20 ED), Ablative (optional rule)

Armor: Force Field (20 PD/30 ED), Ablative (optional rule)

Hull (just stats from the vehicle): 100 BODY, 0 DEF

 

How would this play out exactly? The first few shots will likely not penetrate the shields but instead reduce their defenses. Now shots will go on into the armor, however not enough so that the "maximum BODY damage would exceed the defense" of the armor, at least for a while longer. Eventually, shots will be penetrating both and reducing both defenses with the shields going away completely first. Then the same with the armor finally going poof while some hull damage gets taken. Finally, you're into just the hull, taking maximum damage. Ouch!

 

What are your thoughts on this idea? The coolness factor here is that various ships can slant towards shields instead of armor or vice versa. Players will need to think more tactically about using their plasma cannons versus their gauss guns. Furthermore, you may have "modules" to boost your shields or armor (I won't spoil that just now for you non-Eve players).

[Christopher]

Re: Ablative Defenses and EVE

 

Personally I am not a fan of applying Computergame Logic to RPG's.

They usually have to cut a lot of corners, simply because a Turn based game where decisions take 1 second real time does not translates well into real time game. Even if you only had 5 seconds to declare your action, that would still be much mroe time to think/act/react than you have in a MMORPG.

Combat are a lot faster in P&P, if simply because nobody wants to roll out a 1 minute combat (12 Full Turns).

 

There are at least two more approaches to "ablative shields" in 6E: Bariers (Forcewalls with Body Score) and APG I has "Damage Based Endurance Cost" wich I would combine with a Endurance Reserve (the Shield generator). But both are hardly worth the effort.

 

Your example has two problems:

You bought the Armor as Force Field (so you need to pay end to keep it up). It could mean something like the "Polarized Hull Plating" from Star Trek: Enterprise of coruse.

The bigger problem is how you get the points back: According to the Rules Abaltive "recovers" about the same way as charges - once per day at tops.

 

I thought about using a mixed approach for Start Trek Shields: You have to buy a part of your shield defenses ablative. The rest can only be taken down by "aiming for the shield generators".

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Ablative Defenses and EVE

 

Personally I am not a fan of applying Computergame Logic to RPG's.

They usually have to cut a lot of corners, simply because a Turn based game where decisions take 1 second real time does not translates well into real time game. Even if you only had 5 seconds to declare your action, that would still be much mroe time to think/act/react than you have in a MMORPG.

Combat are a lot faster in P&P, if simply because nobody wants to roll out a 1 minute combat (12 Full Turns).

 

I suppose the problem becomes that it's just a huge slugfest. But the base TE rules are already that minus any kind of variety in defensive structures.

 

There are at least two more approaches to "ablative shields" in 6E: Bariers (Forcewalls with Body Score) and APG I has "Damage Based Endurance Cost" wich I would combine with a Endurance Reserve (the Shield generator). But both are hardly worth the effort.

 

Why? Perhaps one ship has a huge shield array but a small reserve to keep it recharged while another ship flips those roles. It adds variety.

 

Your example has two problems:

You bought the Armor as Force Field (so you need to pay end to keep it up). It could mean something like the "Polarized Hull Plating" from Star Trek: Enterprise of coruse.

The bigger problem is how you get the points back: According to the Rules Abaltive "recovers" about the same way as charges - once per day at tops.

 

I thought about using a mixed approach for Start Trek Shields: You have to buy a part of your shield defenses ablative. The rest can only be taken down by "aiming for the shield generators".

 

I suppose you could just build the power as Armor instead of a Force Field. Ablative wears away 5 CP worth of defense per shot. With Armor, that would mean 3.333 which is a major PITA versus Force Fields being exactly 5. I suppose you could handwave and say armor degrades at 3 defense points per shot. How you get the points back? I was considering this. What if you had an Aid force field power with the "only to restore to original values" limitation? I know the rules say "ablative doesn't come back until the next day!!!!1" but hey it's my campaign and I think this use of the power makes sense. Two of the main ways to tank your ships in Eve is armor and shield repairing which is simply self-healing your armor or shields during combat. It's a pretty integral part of the game. Then again, the only effect this has on HERO would be dragging a fight out for a very long time.

[Christopher]

Re: Ablative Defenses and EVE

 

Question:

Can you aid a Defense that has been completely reduced to 0 by Abaltive?

 

Ablative is not a drain after all...

 

 

Another problem:

Overall damage is not as relevant as numebr of shots. 5 that each do 1 body past defenses bringe more ablation than one that does 15 body past defenses.

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Ablative Defenses and EVE

 

True, ablative is not a drain but it's very similar. The only difference we're worried about here is the fade condition. Can you use Aid to restore DEX that's been drained completely to 0? Of course! I'd think it would work similar in this case too.

[Barwickian]

Re: Ablative Defenses and EVE

 

Ablative works a very differently in 6E (which is what I'm using), in that it reduces the activation roll of the defence rather than reduces the defence itself. 5E ablative is probably closest to what you want, though it does lead to some extra book-keeping, and doesn't play nicely with other EVE concepts like reppers and hardeners.

 

I think the way I'd handle it is to run with the EVE EHP idea, and use characteristics as powers like so:

 

Buy batch of BODY and define it as Shield. Buy another batch of BODY and define it as Armor. Your regular BODY is your hull. Damage goes first to shield, then armor, then hull. Keep track of the three different BODY totals separately.

 

You can buy damage reduction to represent hardeners or other resistance boosters, and healing (5E) or regeneration (6E) to represent reppers pr boosters, with the limitation Only affects Shield or Only affects Armor (I'd rate that as -1/4, since you'll be building your ship around an armor or shield tank; hull tanking is, of course, crazy). You may want to add Requires a Roll for partial resists. You shouldn't try to shield tank and armor tank on the same fit, but if you do, keeping the limitation at -1/4 will mean you end up paying more points for the defences, representing the inefficiency of mixed tanks. Add Costs END to damage reduction for active hardeners.

 

Shield extenders or armor plates are bought as extra BODY and applied to shield or armor as appropriate.

 

If you want to include shield recharge, you could buy that as a low level of healing/regeneration as well, but I'm not sure I'd bother unless you're planning a series of distinct engagements (such as mission running or incursions).

 

Speed tanks and transverse velocity are probably handled better natively by GURPS (heresy!), but you can hack them in Hero by buying extra DCV for speedy ships (and if you really want to go the whole hog, that means you should buy armor plates with a DCV penalty, and ABs/MWDs as a compound power with a DCV bonus).

 

Use END Reserve to represent your capacitor, with enough REC to cover all your END use for a stable fit, and less for an unstable fit or pulse tank.

 

Missiles and artillery are bought with Costs 0 END, but they and hybrids use Charges (I'd probably handwave hybrids required END and charges; that doesn't work too well in Hero).

 

This method will work with either 5E or 6E, though 6E costs more for the END Reserve. Making shields and armor BODY also fits the feeling you get in EVE when you notice your tank starting to fail, and adds a little spice to what is basically a war of attrition. That's more of a gut thing than a game mechanics thing, and your gut may vary.

 

Anyway, that's how I'd do it.

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Ablative Defenses and EVE

 

Andy, that's a great way of looking at it with far less bookkeeping. I had been leaning that way before taking a break from planning this campaign. For a shield tanked ship you may have this:

 

[TABLE=width: 100%]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]54[/TD]

[TD=align: left]Shields: (Total: 60 Active Cost, 54 Real Cost) +30 BODY (Real Cost: 30) plus Physical Damage Reduction, Resistant, 50% (30 Active Points); Only to reduce damage dealt to shield's BODY (-1/4) (Real Cost: 24)[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]39[/TD]

[TD=align: left]Armor: (Total: 45 Active Cost, 39 Real Cost) +15 BODY (Real Cost: 15) plus Energy Damage Reduction, Resistant, 50% (30 Active Points); Only to reduce damage dealt to armor's BODY (-1/4) (Real Cost: 24)[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]57[/TD]

[TD=align: left]Shield Booster: Healing BODY 4d6, Decreased Re-use Duration (1 Turn; +1 1/2) (100 Active Points); Self Only (-1/2), Only to repair shields (-1/4)[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

Perhaps the linked disadvantage would make more sense on the compound powers. It really only changes the real cost which doesn't much matter though since nobody is paying character points for their ships. Hull of course is just the base body of the vehicle, so nothing special there. By the way, real men hull tank!

[Barwickian]

Re: Ablative Defenses and EVE

 

Yeah, that's pretty much what I had in mind. Makes me wonder about working up some EVE ships. I know that wasn't the oroginal intention of yor post, but it's still an interesting idea,.

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Ablative Defenses and EVE

 

Well, I had an idea that you could give each ship a limited number of slots for "modules". I don't see much point in introducing power grid and CPU requirements, but perhaps a Active Point limit makes sense. Or simply limit it to a number like 3 modules. Then each player could upgrade his own ship as he sees fit. Want more damage? Fit some gyrostabilizers on there. More speed, an afterburner. And so on. I think it could add a lot of variety to the starship combat in HERO but without going too overboard on all the detail Eve includes.

[Barwickian]

Re: Ablative Defenses and EVE

 

Yeah, if you want all the detail, play EVE. I'm still intruiged by the idea of building some simplified EVE ships in Hero terms, though.

 

I was also thinking that it's best to ditch power grid and CPU limits, but I was thinking of pushing it further than the simple three module option. I'd thought of pushing it as far as high, mid and low slots, with turrent hardpoints or launcher limits for the highs, and creating modules to fit them. The number of available slots for each vessel can be ported straight from EVE.

 

I'd say frigates can only fit small units, cruisers up to medium and battleships up to large ones. That is a simplification.

 

For instance, a Rifter would have, as in EVE, 4 highs (3 turrets, 2 launchers), 3 mids and 3 lows.

 

Because we aren't modelling EVE skill trees, I'd forget meta levels and T2, so each race would simply have a range weapon and a low-range damage weapon at each size class.

 

 

 

On the other hand, my hardcopy of Fires of Heaven just landed, so...