QUOTE (HeavyJosh @ May 18 2012, 11:16 PM)

Actually, I like this more than my original idea. I might cap the MoS = AP bonus at the DV of the weapon (a HE shell trying to defeat tank armor is only going to be so effective), and allow Called Shots and Bursts to add to DV still, but we'll see.
Having that as a general rule is certainly an idea. Then you actually have to do called shots or narrow burst in order to hurt something more. This requires reworking the called shot rules, as with the full auto/burst fire inconsistency, but...
(And we absolutely can't forget Spirits when making a big change like that: Spirits won't get easier to hurt, but will in fact get a lot harder to "kill".)
QUOTE (Manunancy @ May 22 2012, 06:47 AM)

A oossible solution could be to extend the damage track for large vehicles and ships - and extend the boxes per damage level along with it to prevent insanely high damage penalties.
So a not so big ship would have '+1 hit/ wound level', meaning it takes 4 damages boxes to increase one wond level and it will have an extra 4 or 5 boxes over a car-sized vehicle of comparable body up to something like like '+10' fora supertanker, making it a real damage sponges that takes a lot of firepower to destroy evven if the armor is crappy.
the only way to get arounf would be targetting individual bits like the antenna mast, gun positions or whatever. It's also quite simple to handle and doesn't alter the game mechanic much. It could also be used the other way around for small drones or the like, meaning they will tend to either shrug the damage or be trashed.
It has the advantage of being simple and easy to implement, without altering teh rest of the mechanic.
Note : I've tossed he numbers around without any kind of estimation or preparation, just to illustrate how it could work.
I also thought of this. So, just give vehicles in general more boxes. This makes it fairly simple to adjust, since you just make a new Condition monitor template. The question is where to run the number of boxes off of. One could either run off body, or off an abstract size idea.
So, say, a car or smaller boat (yacht, below 20 body) adds 12 boxes + 1/2 body, and has four columns in its damage track. A tank or ship (say, fish trawler, 20+ body) adds 16 boxes and has five columns. And a tanker or warship adds 20 boxes and has six columns, and an aircraft carrier might get even more. This makes sure that you actually can do a ton of damage to a vehicle without destroying it.
The other option is running off body: A metahuman or drone adds 1/2 body. A car adds full body. A tank or ship adds 3/2 body, and larger vehicles might add 2x body or more. Again, make more columns. This can potentially add a LOT of boxes.
And then we add a simple method of tracking damage to components: Simply code the columns. So, first column is engine. Second column is propulsion (tires, screw, whatever). Third column might be electronics, but you can't do called shots on those, and further columns are just body, or sections of body, for instance, passenger compartment and storage compartment. Destroying a section of body means that passengers no longer get cover and can't add vehicle armour when you target them directly. Damage to a critical section like engine obviously also has appropriate effects, but damage to a piece of body has no DP penalties for the vehicle until the actual row is filled. Also, DP penalties aren't added up, they just use the maximum applicable. For instance, a vehicle with two filled rows takes the usual -2 to all vehicle tests. If it had one more damage to the engine, it would take -3 to speed related things, but still only -2 to all others. If it it had 3 damage to engine and tires, it would take -3 to vehicle tests, not -6. (Or whatever, I have forgotten the actual penalties involved.)
Now, when a coded column is full, that component fails. And when you simply shoot at a vehicle, you fill up the rows as usually. But you could make a called shot to destroy the engine. Then you fill up the engine column. Now if you want to make the game less deadly you could also just lose excess damage, but especially if you pair this method with the Net hits to AP solution you probably don't want that.
Now how do those numbers look:Method 1, adding boxes by size, with old net hit rules:
(And I'm going to spoiler this, because it's fracking long again.)
[ Spoiler ]
A sedan with 10 body now has 17 boxes distributed over four columns. It's engine column is five boxes long (it's the first). If it also has 10 armour then a penetrating shot with a non-AV weapon, which is always the worst case for a vehicle, will do at least 11P. Using its 20 dice it soaks an average 6.66 damage, meaning this is a case where ablation works nicely: A called shot can either hit a component, for instance, the engine, which now takes 4-5 damage, to give the vehicle a penalty to speed or stops it in its tracks, or it takes about a third of its boxes. And remember that for the minimum penetration case, more AP is always BETTER for the vehicle. So for AV rounds with -6AP the minimum penetrating shot will do 5P, and the vehicle soaks with 14 dice for 3.66 soak, and 1-2 boxes of damage. Obviously things always get iffy when narrow bursts come in. Someone using AV rounds from even just a sub-machine gun could quite happily narrow burst the vehicle into oblivion very quickly.
A heavily armoured car, say, a Black Mariah, has, IIRC, 20 armour and 16 body. It now has 20 boxes distributed over four columns, it's critical columns are all five boxes long. The penetrating shot with a non-AP weapon (good luck) will do at least 20P, and the vehicle soaks with 35 dice, for 11.66 damage soaked. So it takes 8-9 boxes and is only half destroyed. A called shot to a component, however, absolutely destroys that component. So now actually killing the thing isn't binary, but called shots still are. Again, for the minimum penetration case, more AP always means less damage to the vehicle.
And now the larger vehicles can use the same sets of rules, but will simply have more boxes that need to be filled.
There are some corner cases: High body/low armour vehicles. A 40 body ship with 10 armour (basic hull for a ship that size) could buy 10 soak even on a -10AP shot. With 36 or even 40 boxes (now) it's fairly tough.
An autocannon with 12P base and +14 for narrow burst FA couldn't kill it in one IP. You will be dealing 27P, to be soaked with 34 dice (-6AP), but even if it soaked nothing at all, it would still not be destroyed. So this case is dealt with fairly well - it isn't even very binary under the standard rules, in spite of only having 28 boxes. The trouble here are the penalties. Of course with a few net hits this is still a crippling attack, even with more boxes and more columns.
The binary case would be the high armour/low body example: Let's say, 20 armour on a 10 body vehicle. But I would still say in this case it's actually desirable to have it fairly binary. From personal experience I'm going to say it doesn't even have to be. A hacker character of mine had a 16 armour, 13 body vehicle, and the vehicle was not destroyed by a 22P tamped explosion.
The most powerful ship from Arsenal (I don't have my copy of WAR handy right now) is the Celebrian Striker, with 30 body and 20 armour. Under the expanded rules it will have 31 boxes and 5 columns. The minimum penetrating attack will not get close to killing it. The minimum penetrating autocannon FA narrow burst will do 30P to be soaked with 44 dice. On average about 15-16 damage will get through, so you could destroy it with two of these hits. I think when considering how expensive an attack like that is, on average "just" infiltrating under water and placing a shaped charge will usually be the method of choice for shadowrunners when attacking a ship like that. Actually, running away might just be the best option, since you have to expect it to be packing at least one autocannon like that, too, so...
All that being said, let's not forget that ANY FA or explosive attack under standard rules is very likely to kill everyone on board before even hurting the ship. Even with the quick-fix of only allowing passenger damage to penetrating attacks, the first penetrating FA or explosive attack will kill everyone on board, simply because they have far fewer boxes to fill.
Method 1, with net hits to AP:
[ Spoiler ]
Unfortunately there is now no way of specifying the minimum penetrating shot. If AP is not capped, then theoretically the minimum penetrating shot only needs 1P. But in this case we can just look at some weapons: A sub-gun still needs 6 net hits to damage the 10 armour vehicle, only now it deals 5P damage, and the vehicle soaks with 14 dice. This improbable case makes the game even more ablative. The much more probable case of a called shot for damage: The sub-gun now deals 9P, and needs 2 net hits. We're probably already in the stupid land of narrow bursts, but let's forget those again, and let's also forget the strange concept of wide burst called shots. A 9P shot soaked with 18 dice is still very ablative. The narrow burst case with 11P soaked with 18 dice is still ablative. A long narrow burst under present rules can't do called shots, because you need FA to do those, right?
So what does that create, and a disconnect follows: Basically, your best bet of damaging a vehicle with a non-AP weapon is a called shot with a narrow burst, only then you can't target a component, because that would mean another called shot. If the vehicle has a high defense pool from being rigged it will be quite hard to hurt it. Previously, the full wide burst might have done a lot of damage, at least, if it managed to penetrate, but now you are doing base damage, which is arguably piddly. However, now the "Death from a thousand cuts" scenario might be possible. This is good for riggers, but bad for teams who don't have one. It's also very good for mages.
The striker example now takes 27P vs 41 dice for 13-14 damage, and the patrol boat survives two attacks.
Now that I look at this, Method 2 seems excessive, the only advantage would be making vehicles really tough without inflating body scores into the hundreds. For instance, what should the body score of an aircraft carrier be? Individually, sections of a very large ship aren't much tougher than sections of a smaller ship, so giving a carrier or supertanker a body bonus of 80 boxes while leaving body at 40 might be an option - and considering the size, it's not even that bad. Actually, you should not be able to hurt it with an autocannon, although spraying the bridge might help. An aircraft carrier shouldn't have more than 30 armour, and might even have less, since it's not meant to engage hostiles directly. A supertanker or container ship is just as large or larger, but has very little armour, and should also be largely unaffected by a 30mm gun. Adding 80 boxes is still selling it short, because you can still spray it to death that way, when you should be absolutely required to hit specific components.
Now ideally, you really want to be looking for the realistic option: Sinking it, instead of destroying it. In WWII, the last era of super-battleships, 5000lb bombs or larger were used against ships. In SR perspective that's just a stupid scale, and like thor shots, I think best left to the imagination. However, simply using barrier ratings and defining how many sections of hull have to be penetrated to sink it can be used to keep things numerically sound. And you simply have to keep these extremely large vehicles off the vehicle rules entirely. But where to make the cut-off? SR3 had this method of ship hull, and anti-ship weapons.
TL;DR version:I think just adding more boxes and columns will serve to make the game less binary, and more ablative. Adding net hits to AP would be convenient without adding more boxes, and might be excessive in combination.