Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker) kaladorn@xxxxxx (18 Dec 2020 16:52 UTC)
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker) Rupert Boleyn (18 Dec 2020 18:25 UTC)
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker) Jeff Zeitlin (18 Dec 2020 18:57 UTC)
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker) Rupert Boleyn (18 Dec 2020 19:06 UTC)
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker) Phil Pugliese (18 Dec 2020 20:17 UTC)
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker) Rupert Boleyn (18 Dec 2020 20:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker) Phil Pugliese (19 Dec 2020 06:44 UTC)
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker) Rupert Boleyn (19 Dec 2020 11:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker) Phil Pugliese (19 Dec 2020 17:01 UTC)

Re: [TML] Penetration and Damage (MT/Striker) Rupert Boleyn 18 Dec 2020 19:06 UTC


On 19Dec2020 0757, Jeff Zeitlin wrote:
>> Armour in MT does tend to be a bit excessive. 'Cloth' is TL6 armour, and
>> I'm not sure what in the heck it's supposed to be made of, because it's
>> better than anything we've managed to make until quite recently. The
>> penetration values of slug-throwers probably all need to be bumped up a bit.
> I think that notionally "cloth" is supposed to be something like a
> ballistic vest - basically, a cop's "bulletproof vest", which is a quilted
> nylon canvas with kevlar inserts. TL6 is maybe a bit early; kevlar wasn't
> used until the 1970s. Prior to that, the inserts were made of steel, or
> occasionally aluminum.
That's the thing - it's a full suit of some kind of ballistic cloth that
can stop most rifle bullets, yet is light enough to be a reasonable
armour choice. We can't make that *now*.

--
Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>