What's new
  • 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
  • 📅 September 2023 is YE 45.7 in the RP.

Rejected Submission Bloodrage Missile

Edto Xar'Sivaree

Edto Xar'Sivaree

Lizard Freak!
Inactive Member
Submission Type: Missile
Submission URL: https://stararmy.com/wiki/doku.php?id=corp:komodo_arms_manufacturing:bloodrage_missile

Faction: VDTF
FM Approved Yet? Yes
Faction requires art? No

For Reviewers:
Contains Unapproved Sub-Articles? Yes, Necrosis
Contains New art? Yes
Previously Submitted? No

Notes: So while writing up this weapon, I made a realisation that the rules for weapons itself are rather... non-existent when it comes to weapon types that have a very set amount of shots.

Take my Necrosis, which this missile is technically designed for ((It will work on other small craft but eh, Necrosis)). It can carry 6 of them, from what I hope. This is a lot, and it seems people believe that each missile is a weapon, meaning I can only hold X amount of missiles.

So, if I were to say, go out with 6 T9 missiles, obviously, these are not my primary weapon. I get 6 shots before I am stuck with just my primary weapon. So how many shots do you have before it can be considered a weapon of it's damage tier?

The reason I ask is because if a Missile is considered it's tier worth in weapons on the ship, then what would stop me from sticking a single max tier weapon on my ship and getting more bang for my buck? This only really applies to Armour and Mecha tiers.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
Bang for your buck isn't supposed to be the concern. The concern should be what value would most accurately depict the effectiveness of your missile.

Doing counting, you're 'allowed' 8x Tier 7 weapons, right? Half of that is taken by your fixed cannons, which leaves the other half for 'pod space' (battletech jargon, sorry).

My rule of thumb for ammo based weapons is to count them as an actual weapon if its port/launcher/tube can consistently fire it throughout an entire fight. Then it's actually a weapon in its own right. If it has a more one-shot nature to it, then consider it more kindly... unless it shoots above its weight a lot.

So, you could likely pack a sizeable amount of minis within half your payload. not much of a problem there. But the total of 6 Heavy Anti-Mecha missiles on a light anti-mecha platform is somewhat worrisome. Firing them all allows it to be a threat to things way above its weight. After all, they can all be fired at once.

@Doshii Jun
For reference, I suggest picturing how most modern fighterplanes (F-18, F-22) have missiles that typically are equal-tier to them (potentially lethal). I don't feel like I have a good solid answer to this, so, when you rule on this, you'll be setting precedent.
 
Last edited:
I would not necessarily say that the missiles of most fighters in today's day and age are "Equal Tier" given I don't think I have seen one just walk away from actually being struck by a Missile. They are pretty destructive to craft like their own, which is why I went for T9 at a maximum. That would make it highly destructive ((But by some miracle of god you can survive)). Otherwise, it would be just as effective as my main cannons, which would be pointless. I would be just as effective with a 30mm gauss cannon than I would be with a Missile. That doesn't make a lot of sense. A missile hitting T9 though? That would make it potentially lethal to Heavy Mecha and Fighters, but highly destructive to fighters of their own class. Only difference being you do more damage to bigger things with the shots you have to be conservative with, and people can dodge them easier.
 
I do get the notion that putting them on equal tier would make them just as effective as the primary guns on your craft, which would make them kind of pointless.

@Doshii Jun is the one dealing with the submission. I'll let him make the call.
 
In this case, v3's guidance leaves us wanting.

The guideline does not differentiate between types of weapons when it offers its "rule of thumb." We only have the numbers there and the description of the "rule", which is that it is not perfectly firm. We also have past affirmations from Wes that he wants submissions to not reach so far above weight as to threaten too far beyond it -- at least not without a kind of opportunity cost. The weapons "rule of thumb" codifies that cost within loose tolerances.

Even with Fred's added guidance, there's nothing concrete about how it is going to work in each case.

That's especially true for craft such as armors, mecha and fighters. They could be submitted -- as this fighter was -- with half of its weapon slots filled. A weapon is developed later that the fighter clearly should be able to mount in earnest, but cannot because of the OOC rules that we have.

That means submitters and reviewers have some space with which to wiggle. I plainly state this so everyone seeing this thread is on notice. We can work toward consistency among reviewers or gently tweak v3, but for awhile, this problem will feature some softness when it comes to these kinds of higher-tier, single-shot weapons.

With that in mind, this becomes a game of balance like what we were used to with v2, but without the hard numbers. Instead, v3 asks us to "encourage it to look dramatic, cinematic."

* * *

When it comes to this missile, I believe that the tiers make some sense. Just like the starfighters of other nations, the Bloodrage is meant to threaten bigger targets. That becomes especially important for the Necrosis-class, as it is unshielded and unarmored. It likely has to use weapons like these to survive encounters at all, as armored and shielded targets will be far harder to kill otherwise.

However, the submission itself talks about batteries of these missiles being loaded onto warships to deal with small attackers. We've yet to see large warships in SARP use projectiles in that fashion; we've certainly seen energy weapons used that way in the past, though.

In this case, I think Heavy Mecha-grade is too far. I also question how a nuclear turbine is meant to be used as a warhead, when nuclear weapons as we know them have much simpler ignition systems. We also don't see how it reaches that speed of 0.6 c. Lastly, we don't have capacities for either missile type on the Necrosis-class, except a picture. Please advise on these questions.

I have reviewed this submission in accordance with the Guide for Submission Reviewers.
 
After speaking with Edto, this submission is rejected for IC usage because it is overpowered in its final application. The purpose of the rejection is so Edto has grounds to appeal to Wes.
 
Edto Xar'Sivaree said:
Given the weapon limit was removed entirely, may I please have this submission looked at, as the primary reason for it's requested rejection is now no longer in place.

@CadetNewb
Click to expand...

Just a heads-up, @Edto Xar'Sivaree: while you were away, Wes said here that "submitters don't get to pick their reviewers[,]" hence I'm going to also tag @Ametheliana, @Arbitrated, @Fred, and @META_mahn. Furthermore, Wes said here that "submission reviewers should avoid being a reviewer on their own stuff or reviewing things where their impartiality is likely to be called into question" - which therefore effectively "disqualifies" @CadetNewb from reviewing this submission, seeing as how he's a Co-FM of the Vekimen Defensive Task Force according to the Factions page.

Regarding the submission itself, I have a few concerns, all of which are minor and easily addressable:
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Top