Forums of the Megaverse®

you really need to be carefull with it, its really inconsistant.

One of the last notes is that it doesn't offer EBA type protection. I'm just curious how you handle some of the other features, namely the 1/2 damage for explosives and IR/stealth.

i'd rule that it protects against attacks, fire, and explosions like any other armor, but that it lacks the air conditioning, oxygen tanks, and NBC protection of the 'space suit' bodyarmors.

vector wrote:shouldn't thermo-kinetic armor reduce laser damage?
i know it says otherwise but doesn't it make sense?
PS. sorry for the necro post

Yeah I see what you're saying. Laser do damage by burning, A.K.A. heat! You could probably argue that damage from lasers is also reduced, but I would think not as well as plasma and kinetic energy. Since lasers are focused light probably in the PW setting the most efficient way to decrease laser damage is to reflect the bulk of the energy. Since the thermo kinetic armor can't reflect the laser I would say the armor probably doesn't reduce the damage enough to make a difference. At least that's my take on it.

Welcome to the boards vector

Carl

gadrin wrote:In cases where a shot hits a certain area it's pretty clear, but explosives often damage the entire area or body (meaning no half-damage).

Actually, by the book, area of effect explosions only affect the main body.

Wangfucius wrote:

Carl Gleba wrote:

vector wrote:shouldn't thermo-kinetic armor reduce laser damage?
i know it says otherwise but doesn't it make sense?
PS. sorry for the necro post

Yeah I see what you're saying. Laser do damage by burning, A.K.A. heat! You could probably argue that damage from lasers is also reduced, but I would think not as well as plasma and kinetic energy. Since lasers are focused light probably in the PW setting the most efficient way to decrease laser damage is to reflect the bulk of the energy. Since the thermo kinetic armor can't reflect the laser I would say the armor probably doesn't reduce the damage enough to make a difference. At least that's my take on it.

Welcome to the boards vector

Carl

Uh, dude? I don't want to turn this into the science channel, but that's kinda inaccurate.

Enlighten us with you P.O.V.

Carl

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't molecular excitation = heat?