[IDEA] Advanced Armor Damage Propagation/Penetration System
Not Enough Votes
I Advanced Armor Damage Propagation/Penetration System
I would love to see a realistic armor block damage sharing system in Space Engineers 2, where projectile impacts distribute stress across connected armor blocks rather than just destroying a single block. This mechanic would simulate structural integrity, making ship design more strategic—players must consider layered armor, compartmentalization, and material choices to mitigate damage.
When an armor block is hit, damage propagates through connected blocks based on:
- Projectile Type (determines spread pattern)
- Armor Block Type (controls how far/shallow damage travels)
- Hit Direction (rear blocks always absorb more than sides)
Key Rule: Damage is redistributed, not increased—total damage stays the same but spreads structurally.
1. Base Distribution (All Projectiles)
- Direct Hit Block: Takes 50-70% of damage (varies by armor type).
- Rear Block(s): Receives 20-40% (transferred from front).
- Adjacent Blocks: Share 5-15% each (lateral dissipation).
2. Projectile-Based Propagation
Projectile Type | | Rear Transfer | | Adjacent Transfer | | Layers Affected |
---|---|---|---|
Kinetic | | 30% | | 10% per block | | 2-3 layers |
HE (Explosive) | | 10% | | 20% per block | | 1-2 layers |
AP (Piercing) | | 50% | | 0% | | 4+ layers deep |
3. Armor Block Behavior
- Light Armor: Damage spreads farther (3+ layers) but with reduced per-block shares.
- Heavy Armor: Confines damage to 1-2 layers but absorbs larger shares per block.
- Sloped Armor: Redirects more damage to rear blocks (angled protection).
Example ScenarioA HE round (100 damage) hits a steel armor block:
- Front Block: Takes 60 damage (60%).
- Rear Block: Gets 10 damage (10%).
- 4 Adjacent Blocks: 7.5 damage each (30% total).
- Total: 60 + 10 + (7.5 × 4) = 100 damage (fully redistributed).
Strategic Player Benefits
- Layered Armor Designs Use heavy front armor to localize damage.Place light armor behind to catch deeper leaks.
- Directional Protection Sloped armor reduces adjacent spread (good vs. HE).Flat plating better resists AP rounds (force damage backward).
- Ammo CounterplayHE: Use against clustered light armor.AP: Aim at critical components behind thick armor.
- Damage Absorption Tricks Sacrificial outer layers (cheap blocks) to protect internals.Air gaps to stop AP penetration chains.
Why i love to see this
- No magic HP sponges – Armor behaves physically.
- Encourages creative shipbuilding – No "best" armor, just tradeoffs.
- Rewards tactical combat – Shot placement matters.
Good points, some of this is addressed in part on the Threads:
Good points, some of this is addressed in part on the Threads:
Projectile velocity in the game is strongly limited, so such considerations are meaningless without significant modifications to the game world physics.
Projectile velocity in the game is strongly limited, so such considerations are meaningless without significant modifications to the game world physics.
Cool idea, though compared to SE1 I don't see huge advantages...
-This would add significant engineering work to pvp/combat ship design, engineers looking for a challenge and pvp'rs looking to minmax will the thrilled,
-Realism is cool,
-Angled armor already can cause shots to ricochet off, dealing only half their damage to the impacted block before skipping off on a different trajectory,
-Shot placement already matters, point-n-spray may be what happens most often because most people are not possessed plot-device marksmanship skills, but a few well placed shots can absolutely end a fight very quickly if people aren't flying a 1-1 scale heavy-armor MCRN Donnager,
-If you aren't trying to meta-minmax then there isn't a best armor, just an ideal for a given strategy, if you are then you're probably abusing the limitations of the game-engine and will find one regardless,
-Air-gaps inhibiting damage transfer will turn things in to a mess of oddly designed shells meant to manipulate damage propagation (Robocraft did this, people used strings coiled in to the shape of a robot to stop opponents from sawing their bot in half with high-penetration weapons).
Overall its a cool idea I wouldn't hugely mind seeing happen, but I don't think it will result in significant improvements to the feel of combat and I'd worry that the substantially increased complexity of the considerations would scare more people away from combat than it would attract.
Cool idea, though compared to SE1 I don't see huge advantages...
-This would add significant engineering work to pvp/combat ship design, engineers looking for a challenge and pvp'rs looking to minmax will the thrilled,
-Realism is cool,
-Angled armor already can cause shots to ricochet off, dealing only half their damage to the impacted block before skipping off on a different trajectory,
-Shot placement already matters, point-n-spray may be what happens most often because most people are not possessed plot-device marksmanship skills, but a few well placed shots can absolutely end a fight very quickly if people aren't flying a 1-1 scale heavy-armor MCRN Donnager,
-If you aren't trying to meta-minmax then there isn't a best armor, just an ideal for a given strategy, if you are then you're probably abusing the limitations of the game-engine and will find one regardless,
-Air-gaps inhibiting damage transfer will turn things in to a mess of oddly designed shells meant to manipulate damage propagation (Robocraft did this, people used strings coiled in to the shape of a robot to stop opponents from sawing their bot in half with high-penetration weapons).
Overall its a cool idea I wouldn't hugely mind seeing happen, but I don't think it will result in significant improvements to the feel of combat and I'd worry that the substantially increased complexity of the considerations would scare more people away from combat than it would attract.
The armor blocks in SE aren't just solid chunks of metal, but are actually plates layered together. If you look at the construction model for a basic cube per example we can see this. So they would be able to distribute the forces of a bullet impact fairly well. Depending on caliber they may not completely dissipate it with one block, but would absorb most of it decently enough. In the real world yes you could potentially surrounding armor plates get damaged on something like an APC if one of the plates was hit hard enough. However we're talking some massive rounds and high energy for that to happen.
Gameplay wise however it makes no sense for this to happen the way you're making it sound above. Unless you have explosive damage going on or you hit right on the border of 2 blocks it makes no sense for a surrounding block to be damaged by a weapon impact. Armor deformation already is supposed to deal with alot of this stuff, but this comes off as wanting even more damage beyond deformation.
"This mechanic would simulate structural integrity, making ship design more strategic—players must consider layered armor, compartmentalization, and material choices to mitigate damage."
This feature as a whole strikes me as wanting free extra damage to foes to make them easier to destroy. Also this particular line comes off as wanting to punish people who build "incorrectly" and limit how people build, which is not a good thing. I would hope you don't intend it to come off that way, but anytime I see something like this that's what it suggests to me. It suggests to me that people don't like that others build "gun bricks" or whatever other terms they throw around and want people limited to what they consider realistic. Again I hope that's not how you intend it to come off, but that's how I read stuff like this, especially the bit in bold. One of the chief draws of SE is the fact that we have as much build freedom as we do and we can build the ugliest looking gun bricks you ever saw, or the most elaborate sci fi ships, or even more real world equivalents. Limiting that freedom would negatively impact the game as a whole and not be good. I don't fault people liking realism, but I also believe in fun over realism save in super extreme cases.
If you want to elaborate more about the proposed interactions between the blocks and how you would distribute the damages then I'm all ears. They've experimented with ricochet and similar in SE1 already as you can actually bounce railguns if it hits the armor just right. If they can find a balance between realism and such then cool. But so far based off the explanation here I'm not sold on this being a good idea.
The armor blocks in SE aren't just solid chunks of metal, but are actually plates layered together. If you look at the construction model for a basic cube per example we can see this. So they would be able to distribute the forces of a bullet impact fairly well. Depending on caliber they may not completely dissipate it with one block, but would absorb most of it decently enough. In the real world yes you could potentially surrounding armor plates get damaged on something like an APC if one of the plates was hit hard enough. However we're talking some massive rounds and high energy for that to happen.
Gameplay wise however it makes no sense for this to happen the way you're making it sound above. Unless you have explosive damage going on or you hit right on the border of 2 blocks it makes no sense for a surrounding block to be damaged by a weapon impact. Armor deformation already is supposed to deal with alot of this stuff, but this comes off as wanting even more damage beyond deformation.
"This mechanic would simulate structural integrity, making ship design more strategic—players must consider layered armor, compartmentalization, and material choices to mitigate damage."
This feature as a whole strikes me as wanting free extra damage to foes to make them easier to destroy. Also this particular line comes off as wanting to punish people who build "incorrectly" and limit how people build, which is not a good thing. I would hope you don't intend it to come off that way, but anytime I see something like this that's what it suggests to me. It suggests to me that people don't like that others build "gun bricks" or whatever other terms they throw around and want people limited to what they consider realistic. Again I hope that's not how you intend it to come off, but that's how I read stuff like this, especially the bit in bold. One of the chief draws of SE is the fact that we have as much build freedom as we do and we can build the ugliest looking gun bricks you ever saw, or the most elaborate sci fi ships, or even more real world equivalents. Limiting that freedom would negatively impact the game as a whole and not be good. I don't fault people liking realism, but I also believe in fun over realism save in super extreme cases.
If you want to elaborate more about the proposed interactions between the blocks and how you would distribute the damages then I'm all ears. They've experimented with ricochet and similar in SE1 already as you can actually bounce railguns if it hits the armor just right. If they can find a balance between realism and such then cool. But so far based off the explanation here I'm not sold on this being a good idea.
Replies have been locked on this page!