Modelling human responses to threats (combat rules) kaladorn@xxxxxx (26 Apr 2020 19:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] Modelling human responses to threats (combat rules) Jeffrey Schwartz (27 Apr 2020 01:31 UTC)
Re: [TML] Modelling human responses to threats (combat rules) Timothy Collinson (27 Apr 2020 08:30 UTC)
Re: [TML] Modelling human responses to threats (combat rules) kaladorn@xxxxxx (28 Apr 2020 01:15 UTC)
Re: [TML] Modelling human responses to threats (combat rules) Rupert Boleyn (28 Apr 2020 02:00 UTC)

Re: [TML] Modelling human responses to threats (combat rules) Rupert Boleyn 28 Apr 2020 02:00 UTC


On 28Apr2020 1314, xxxxxx@gmail.com wrote:

> I liked a lot from TNE (the ship combat system with specific damage  > areas and modelling of each ship design for instance) but overall it
 > didn't feel like Traveller without 2D6. And designing your own ships
 > (complete with said characterization for damage by area) was never >
something easily done (and they didn't cover bellweather designs like >
the Type A, Type S, etc).
Huh? Type A and Type S ships, along with patrol cruisers, etc. are in TNE.

It's frustrating for players to get one-shot takeouts. Mind you, they
generally don't mind it when it is on their opponents.... but it will
tend to inform how and when you fight (carefully, with surprise and
ambush, and no too often). Reminds me of Cyberpunk... their combat
system could be quite lethal and they made the point of mentioning this
and indicating the best way to deal with an adversary might be a well
placed claymore mine instead of a straight up fight.

Well, CT did one-shot drops a *lot*. MT not quite so much, unless the
shooters were skilled. TNE was less lethal and less likely to take you
right out of a fight than earlier editions.

--

Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>