Traveller Store CotI Features New Posts Mark Forums Read Register


Go Back TravellerRPG.com > Citizens of the Imperium > 2300/2320AD > 2300AD & 2320

2300AD & 2320 Discussion of the original 2300AD from GDW, the revised 2300 from Mongoose Publishing, or QLI's 2320AD.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 25th, 2004, 11:51 PM
kaladorn kaladorn is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa (Ontario Subsector/Canada Sector)
Posts: 2,293
Gallery : 0
kaladorn Citizen
Post

I have the older game. I'd sort of assumed that the newer variant didn't do too much to combat (specifically with small arms and body armour). I've heard suggestions that lethality/results are significantly different.

Anyone with both versions care to put together (please!) a brief precis of the differences as they pertain to small arms combat?

If their are large and significant differences, I may have to start looking on E-bay for a copy of 2300 AD. I remember doing a number of modifications because armours tended to make some weapons absolutely useless....
__________________
"Tell them, that from this place we will deliver notice to the parliaments of conquerors that a line has been drawn against the darkness. And we will hold that line, .. no matter the cost." -- Cpt. Sheridan "The Long, Twilight Struggle"
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old January 26th, 2004, 01:01 PM
ecalupig ecalupig is offline
Citizen: SOC-7
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 26
Gallery : 0
ecalupig Citizen
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by kaladorn:
I have the older game. I'd sort of assumed that the newer variant didn't do too much to combat (specifically with small arms and body armour). I've heard suggestions that lethality/results are significantly different.

Anyone with both versions care to put together (please!) a brief precis of the differences as they pertain to small arms combat?

If their are large and significant differences, I may have to start looking on E-bay for a copy of 2300 AD. I remember doing a number of modifications because armours tended to make some weapons absolutely useless....
That should be interesting to see. As far as I've seen in 2300 AD, the only weapons that didn't prove to be that much of a threat against armor seemed to be some of the pistols, an air rife, and maybe the shotguns (I don't recall exactly.) Any of the military slug throwers (and quite a number of the bigger bore civvie ones) are potentially deadly (especially with the optional lethality rules and even more so with explosive ammunition)even with layered armor. You do not want to get tagged by a high energy weapon of any sort as they will almost certainly ruin your day most armor types notwithstanding.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old January 26th, 2004, 03:19 PM
BMonnery BMonnery is offline
Citizen: SOC-13
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Oxford
Posts: 579
Gallery : 0
BMonnery Citizen
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by EVC:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by kaladorn:
I have the older game. I'd sort of assumed that the newer variant didn't do too much to combat (specifically with small arms and body armour). I've heard suggestions that lethality/results are significantly different.

Anyone with both versions care to put together (please!) a brief precis of the differences as they pertain to small arms combat?

If their are large and significant differences, I may have to start looking on E-bay for a copy of 2300 AD. I remember doing a number of modifications because armours tended to make some weapons absolutely useless....
That should be interesting to see. As far as I've seen in 2300 AD, the only weapons that didn't prove to be that much of a threat against armor seemed to be some of the pistols, an air rife, and maybe the shotguns (I don't recall exactly.) Any of the military slug throwers (and quite a number of the bigger bore civvie ones) are potentially deadly (especially with the optional lethality rules and even more so with explosive ammunition)even with layered armor. You do not want to get tagged by a high energy weapon of any sort as they will almost certainly ruin your day most armor types notwithstanding. </font>[/QUOTE]The 2300ad revision rules are online: http://anch_stevec.crosswinds.net/armor.htm

Essentially, a rifle at close range will pierce heavy body armour, but pistols and rifles at 500m + won't.

Helmet: 1 (FAM-90 at close range has 40% chance of a kill)
High-Threat Combat Helmet: 2 (FAM-90 or Sk-19 won't penetrate)
Steel Helmet: 0.2 (100% kill with FAM-90)
Chainmail Vest: 0.1
Rigid Breastplate: 1
Nonrigid Vest: 0.6
Inertial Armor Vest: 0.8 (40% chance of kill with FAM-90 at close range)
Full-body Nonrigid Armor: 0.3
Full-body Inertial Armor: 0.4
Full-body Combat Armor: 1
BH-21 Combat Walker: 8
Kz-7 Combat Walker: 10

Combat walkers are immune to small arms fire, but vulnerable to fairly light AT weapons.

Bryn
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old January 26th, 2004, 07:01 PM
kaladorn kaladorn is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa (Ontario Subsector/Canada Sector)
Posts: 2,293
Gallery : 0
kaladorn Citizen
Post

Doubling the penetration at close range and the non-penetrating damage would make a bit of a difference. But layered armour seemed to make a lot of weapons have a very small chance of doing anythign meaningful (esp without the doubling or blunt trauma).
__________________
"Tell them, that from this place we will deliver notice to the parliaments of conquerors that a line has been drawn against the darkness. And we will hold that line, .. no matter the cost." -- Cpt. Sheridan "The Long, Twilight Struggle"
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old January 27th, 2004, 01:45 AM
ecalupig ecalupig is offline
Citizen: SOC-7
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 26
Gallery : 0
ecalupig Citizen
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by kaladorn:
Doubling the penetration at close range and the non-penetrating damage would make a bit of a difference. But layered armour seemed to make a lot of weapons have a very small chance of doing anythign meaningful (esp without the doubling or blunt trauma).
True, but then you'd end up drastically reducing your movement and initiative. I'd imagine that someone who's extremely heavily armored would draw a heckuva lot more attention and presumably more fire (and heavier firepower). Case in point would be the Los Angeles firefight in 1997.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old January 27th, 2004, 06:43 AM
GJD GJD is offline
Citizen: SOC-12
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 177
Gallery : 0
GJD Citizen
Post

2300ad added the option for a second roll on the location table to idicate wound severity, so that not every hit to the head would be a killing hit and not every hit to the leg would be a light wound. The location hit provided a DM to a second roll on the location table to find a wound severity, so a hit to the head would confer a -4 (IIRC) mod, meaning the second roll would be more likely to get a lower location, and therfore a more serious wound type.

It also added an optional 2d6 task resolution. Target numbers increased by 1, but everything else remained the same.

G
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

This website and its contents are copyright ©2010- Far Future Enterprises. All rights reserved. Traveller is a registered trademark of Far Future Enterprises .
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 2010-2013, Far Future Enterprises. All Rights Reserved.