| From: | Richard M Conroy <Richard_M_Conroy@***.ir.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Thermite (was Re: Game Balance) |
| Date: | Wed, 07 Aug 96 10:54:00 PDT |
:> <snip thermite explanation>
:This is a pretty accurate description of thermite. Burning through
:the hull would take a while though, (at least 20 seconds or so), so the
:occupants of the vehicle should be able to 1) make a decent call for
:help and 2) exit in mass and hit the dirt so that a sniper should only
:be able to get 1 or two of them.
This was an APC, not a tank, and in any case most Armor Vehicles have
very thin armor on the roof. I think the M1 only has about 30mm worth,
compared to about 480-510mm (depending on version) on the front and
turret. By that same logic an APC would have even less, it's only
designed to protect the crew from firearms (though it would also stop
rounds up to around the .50cal HMG variety) anything above (eg panther)
and the thing would start taking damage. Armor on the roof would be
redundant, as the only bullets that would generally hit the roof would
be of the 20mm aircraft cannon variety, which would chew the APC up
anyway.
I was running with a figure of about 20mm roof armor, which
would not stand up very long to 1kg of thermite. The armor wouldn't melt
immediately, but the bonds in the steel would start breaking down, and
it would crack, allowing the stuff to pour in and start doing some real
damage, speeding up the melting process, as the roof warped under heat
expansion.
As for the guys bailing out the back, well remember Chechnya
(sp?) ? All those bodies around the back of the APCs ? They tried to do
the same thing~ bail out into withering automatic fire.
2 of the guys were splattered by molten metal when it burned
through. They blocked the other 2 in the main cabin, so they couldn't
get out (although on tried through the turret when the fire got too
bad). The 2 guys nearest the rear, got out through the back hatch, and
got wasted. Eventually the fire got too bad in the APC and they all
started buying it.
:I might argue that 21st century armor might have more ceramic in it
:than modern armor, which would reduce thermite effectiveness pretty
:well, but that is definately a GM call.
Not really. Some MBT's might have ceramic armor layered on the outside
like reactive armor to protect against lasers and the like. Generally,
armor is designed to protect against a certain type of threat. An MBT
can take most shit: shells, missiles, autocannon. The APC was just
designed to withstand small arms fire~ protect troops in transit. Making
it thermite proof is a bit pointless: if troops (it's main threat) ever
got close enough to chuck thermite at it, they'd be using grenades,
satchel charges, grenade launchers, pipebombs, light infantry support
weapons, molotov cocktails as well as banging in the hatches. Thermite
is the least of it's worries: a 1kg block of C4 will put an APC on it's
head. The extra ceramic armor would not be nearly as bullet-proof as
regular composite steel, and would be better replaced by regular armor,
which would slow down the APC so much as to make it a poor Cavalry
vehicle (wouldn't even keep up with tanks).
The thermite was all they were willing to expend in those
quantities. Plastic is too hard to come by, but they could always make
more thermite...
For what it's worth, the overuse of thermite by the team was fairly
balanced (the underground watertank comes to mind...).
Richard.
O--------------------------------------------------------------------O
\Food for thought lies in the\Richard_M_Conroy@\Roadkill on the Info \
\depth of an inedible brick. \ccm.ir.intel.com \-rmation SuperHighway\
O-------------------------------------------------------------------O
