-
If you were supposed to get an email from the forum but didn't (e.g. to verify your account for registration), email Wes at [email protected] or talk to me on Discord for help. Sometimes the server hits our limit of emails we can send per hour.
-
Get in our Discord chat! Discord.gg/stararmy
Approved Character (independent)Kessler Ryzka + one off ship
- Thread starter Jack Pine
- Start date
This review is for: The ISS Brimstone
The submitted article is/has…
[Eh] A very high level of overall quality
[Y] A general topic sentence under the title header
[N] Artwork (Required for new species; Strongly recommended for vehicles and hand weapons)\\
[Not really but it's a one-off] Needed and/or useful to the setting
[Y] In the proper format/template
[No] Proofread for spelling and grammar
[Y] Easy to read and understand (not a lengthy mass of technobabble)
[N] Wikified (terms that could be a link should be a link)
[Y] No red and/or broken links
[Y] Reasonably scientifically plausible
[Y] Reasonably neutral point of view
The submitted article is/does not…
[N] Overpowered (or cutting tech for a faction with little or no roleplay)
[N] Obtusely redundant
[N] Contain copy pasta descriptions of systems or interior compartments
[N] Unauthorized by faction managers or player-controlled corporation
[N] Contain references to IC events that have not occurred (SM must authorize retcons)
[N] Use second-person language (“you” or “your”) unless it is an instructional guide aimed at players.
[N] Use bombastic language (“virtually immune,” “nearly indestructible,” “insanely powerful,” “horrible effects”)
[Y] Use an unbalanced header/text ratio (many headers but sections are one-liners)
[N] Use major unapproved sub-articles that should be submitted separately
[Y] Lacking Detail
[N/A] Images hosted on sites other than stararmy.com (Photobucket, Imageshack, etc are not allowed)
The article has…
[NO] Speeds in compliance with the Starship Speed Standard, if applicable
[Y] Damage Capacity and Damage Ratings in compliance with the DR Guidelines
[Y] The in-character year of creation/manufacture. (Should be current year. Future years not allowed).
[N/A] The Standard Product Nomenclature System, if applicable.
Summary
Note here if any serious issues are present. These are the issues that will hold up approval.
The first major issue with this ship: it is way too fast. Even military warships have needed to stay within barriers provided by the speed requirements.
There is a contradiction with the damage values of the ship, is it Tier 10 or Tier 11?
You can't stack shields, thus the dual-shield system this freighter is attempting to use is invalid.
A lot of the areas and sections only seem to be one line each. Some of them are two. These sections need to be expanded upon, and preferably if there is existing, available technology said technology would be used in this submission. More importantly however, is that the sections get more text at all.
Status: Pending
Notes
There are grammatical errors nearly completely covering this article.
I would imagine that even with effective maintenance this ship wouldn't last forever. It would still probably last for years, but not forever.
It would be quite helpful to give examples of what vehicles could fit inside the cargo bay when you expand its section.
Please add an OOC notes section for the article's possible future approval.
I intend to finish this review by:2/10/2018
The submitted article is/has…
[Eh] A very high level of overall quality
[Y] A general topic sentence under the title header
[N] Artwork (Required for new species; Strongly recommended for vehicles and hand weapons)\\
[Not really but it's a one-off] Needed and/or useful to the setting
[Y] In the proper format/template
[No] Proofread for spelling and grammar
[Y] Easy to read and understand (not a lengthy mass of technobabble)
[N] Wikified (terms that could be a link should be a link)
[Y] No red and/or broken links
[Y] Reasonably scientifically plausible
[Y] Reasonably neutral point of view
The submitted article is/does not…
[N] Overpowered (or cutting tech for a faction with little or no roleplay)
[N] Obtusely redundant
[N] Contain copy pasta descriptions of systems or interior compartments
[N] Unauthorized by faction managers or player-controlled corporation
[N] Contain references to IC events that have not occurred (SM must authorize retcons)
[N] Use second-person language (“you” or “your”) unless it is an instructional guide aimed at players.
[N] Use bombastic language (“virtually immune,” “nearly indestructible,” “insanely powerful,” “horrible effects”)
[Y] Use an unbalanced header/text ratio (many headers but sections are one-liners)
[N] Use major unapproved sub-articles that should be submitted separately
[Y] Lacking Detail
[N/A] Images hosted on sites other than stararmy.com (Photobucket, Imageshack, etc are not allowed)
The article has…
[NO] Speeds in compliance with the Starship Speed Standard, if applicable
[Y] Damage Capacity and Damage Ratings in compliance with the DR Guidelines
[Y] The in-character year of creation/manufacture. (Should be current year. Future years not allowed).
[N/A] The Standard Product Nomenclature System, if applicable.
Summary
Note here if any serious issues are present. These are the issues that will hold up approval.
The first major issue with this ship: it is way too fast. Even military warships have needed to stay within barriers provided by the speed requirements.
There is a contradiction with the damage values of the ship, is it Tier 10 or Tier 11?
You can't stack shields, thus the dual-shield system this freighter is attempting to use is invalid.
A lot of the areas and sections only seem to be one line each. Some of them are two. These sections need to be expanded upon, and preferably if there is existing, available technology said technology would be used in this submission. More importantly however, is that the sections get more text at all.
Status: Pending
Notes
There are grammatical errors nearly completely covering this article.
I would imagine that even with effective maintenance this ship wouldn't last forever. It would still probably last for years, but not forever.
It would be quite helpful to give examples of what vehicles could fit inside the cargo bay when you expand its section.
Please add an OOC notes section for the article's possible future approval.
I intend to finish this review by:2/10/2018
...Huh.
I'll probably also put that into the Speed constraints later then so it's easier to find.
I'll probably also put that into the Speed constraints later then so it's easier to find.
Jack Pine
Well-Known Member
@Arbitrated I have fixed the tiers for hull and shields, switched the shield system to solely a conformal system, added an OOC section, and expanded the description of the cargo bays description and a reference to what size vehicles can fit in the bay.
It seems mostly alright now. I linked the U-1 in the cargo bay section for you ^^
Some of the sections, especially those lower down on the page, could use a little bit of expansion still, or maybe you could mash a couple of sections together to reduce headers - for example, the emergency and life support systems probably could be put together under a single header.
Some of the sections, especially those lower down on the page, could use a little bit of expansion still, or maybe you could mash a couple of sections together to reduce headers - for example, the emergency and life support systems probably could be put together under a single header.
Everything's in order, I hereby APPROVE this ship!
(Darn coding broke...)
(Darn coding broke...)
