Summary of Armour Comments Made in 1998

In 1998, the debate began about what MDC value the helmet should have as
compared to the main body.

On one side of the argument, it was suggested that the MDC of the helmet
would be the same as the rest of the body. The reasoning behind this was that
the protection value provided by the helmet is based upon the materials
used, the molecular engineering process that makes the armour, and the
thickness of the armour itself. Since all of these factors are the same
in the helmet as the rest of the armour, the MDC should be the same.

On the other side of the argument, it was suggested that the MDC of the
helmet would be much less than the rest of the body. The reasoning behind
this was that the MDC system is based on total material and not other factors.
Since the helmet of the armour does not have as much material as the rest of the
armour, the MDC value of the helmet should be much less. The example of
power armour was quoted as not having nearly the amount of MDC in the helmet,
as there was in the rest of the body.

The argument was eventually held mute by the purchasing of the Rifts
sourcebook Coalition War Campaign. In this book, it describes the armour breakdown
of Coalition armour. The typical breakdown of the helmet of Coalition armour
was typically over 50% of the value of the main body. This clearly shows,
once and for all, that no one can determine what is going through the minds of
the makers of Rifts at any one time. It also shows that elements of both
arguments were applicable. Applying these observations to other armours, I now
think that 50% of the main body is an appropriate MDC value.