Reliability and damage

[CmdrBluejeans]

Just want to double-check that I have this right:

Starship A has a Reliability C sensor package.

Starship B has a Reliability E propulsion system.

These two ships engage in combat.

Starship B takes a hit that causes 5 pts of damage, and a roll is made that indicates System Damage to propulsions. At this point, the E-box is marked off on its propulsion system damage track, and the ship is at -1 to Helm Manuevers.

Starship A takes a hit that causes 5 pts of damage, and the roll indicates the damage to be to sensors. The C-box is marked off on the sensor package. At this point, the cumulative totals of C through E kick in (even though the sensor package is only Reliability C to begin with, it functions fine undamaged, but now that it is damaged, it is as if it was brought all the way down from E, D, and C) and the ship is at -1 to all manuevers, and additional -2 to tactical maneuvers, and -1 on initiative.

Is this the right way I'm thinking about it? Or do ships 'ignore' damage levels they can't take?

BJ

[Erik Filean]

Originally posted by CmdrBluejeans
Just want to double-check that I have this right:

Starship A has a Reliability C sensor package.

Starship B has a Reliability E propulsion system.

These two ships engage in combat.

Starship B takes a hit that causes 5 pts of damage, and a roll is made that indicates System Damage to propulsions. At this point, the E-box is marked off on its propulsion system damage track, and the ship is at -1 to Helm Manuevers.

Starship A takes a hit that causes 5 pts of damage, and the roll indicates the damage to be to sensors. The C-box is marked off on the sensor package. At this point, the cumulative totals of C through E kick in (even though the sensor package is only Reliability C to begin with, it functions fine undamaged, but now that it is damaged, it is as if it was brought all the way down from E, D, and C) and the ship is at -1 to all manuevers, and additional -2 to tactical maneuvers, and -1 on initiative.

Is this the right way I'm thinking about it? Or do ships 'ignore' damage levels they can't take?

BJ

Ships do indeed ignore damage levels they can't take. Penalties from "nonexistent" damage levels don't apply, nor does a ship receive an innate penalty for not having a reliability E system. The idea, it seems, is that there are more levels of "broken-ness" to a more reliable system before it conks out completely.

[C5]

Actually, this is the opposite, CmdrBluejeans : ship A will only suffer from the penalties listed in front of the C-box, and not the ones above.
Don already answered to this question here.

[Don Mappin]

Erik is correct as his is reasoning behind the levels. A more reliable system can take more hits before failing--at the cost of performance, however.

[Champions Guru]

If a system with a higher rating is supposed to be tougher why does the first critical on an E system seem so much more dibilitating than the first critical on a D system?

Sensors: E hit -1 All Manuevers; D hit -1 to Initiative I'd rather be a bit slower than my opponent than have penalties with all my manuevers.

Propulsion: E hit -1 Helm manuevers; D hit -1 to initiative, see above.

Operations: E hit -1 Command Manuevers; D hit -1 Computer Use tests; it seems loosing the command manuevers would be a little more dibilitating than loosing the use of a little computing power.

Weapons: E hit -1 Tactical Manuevers; D hit -1 Penetration to all arrays, this seems to even out, either all attacks are affected or all damage done is affected.

Life Support and Shields don't seem to be as imbalanced the first four examples that I can see.

What I can see is that the only bonus from an E Rating over a D Rating is that it can take one more hit, but it seems 20% damage to an E system is more dibilitating than 25% damage done to a D system.

Just my 2 slips worth

Da Guru