What's new
Star Army

Star ArmyⓇ is a landmark of forum roleplaying. Opened in 2002, Star Army is like an internet clubhouse for people who love roleplaying, art, and worldbuilding. Anyone 18 or older may join for free. New members are welcome! Use the "Register" button below.

Note: This is a play-by-post RPG site. If you're looking for the tabletop miniatures wargame "5150: Star Army" instead, see Two Hour Wargames.

  • 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
  • 📅 October and November 2024 are YE 46.8 in the RP.

Community Meeting

In Discord Voice 1
In Discord Voice 1

Damage Rating and Structural Points System Revision

Light, Medium and Heavy Armor is easy: to me, that's:
Light armor: Mindy
Medium armor: Daisy
Heavy armor: Hostile

Mecha is, however, far more blurry. I'll make an attempt:
Light Mecha: Armored Personel Carrier, SMX Ripper, Tasha
Medium mecha: Battle Tanks, most large mechas (see Origin, Iroma VANDR)
Heavy mecha: Armored Dropship

* * *

One thing I'd offer to keep in mind is how flying vehicles are generally built very light (to fly in the first place), which can make something like a shuttlecraft or a fightercraft look like it'd fit in the mecha-grade category. But looking at the art of some of our shuttles like the Kuma, the Raccoon and at the Kawarime fighter, it doesn't look like they have all that much better than 'Armor grade' protection (relatively thin outer shells), whereas anything in the 'mecha grade' protection likely has that heavier plating and structural reinforcement.
 
I'd also like to point out that this would stream line the NTSE process and probably cut down on the heart ache and lengthy process of tech submission because it creates true standard for technology.
 
Took me longer to reply than I liked, but I'm sold as well. Though I find the hard numbers comforting in their precision when used to detail things, well, it's tossed out the window as we RP, just as you say Fred. Since so many of us are liking the system so far, perhaps it's time it get its own rough-draft of a wiki-article?

After that, we can start trying to break the system to hammer out the kinks! I'm personally wondering where an Aggressor would go for an example.
 
I like that Fred, a simple to understand system. Though, as someone else here mentioned, putting examples there to give a general idea of where certain weapons might fall will help with the understanding.
 
The problem with the hard numbers though is the tendency to be abused. Everybody immediately goes for the MOST NUMBERS with out even knowing what those numbers even mean or caring. All they know is that their number is larger and thus better.
 
I agree with you on that Ira, and so far would prefer Fred's system be taken. It's a larger overhaul that would require more work, but in the long run, would be more beneficial to the site as a whole. However, I'd recommend we take my DR system modifications (or a leaf or two from it) only if Fred's Priss Scale doesn't make it through. The reasoning behind this is simple; it's literally better than no changes.

If we end up stuck with those very same numbers, the least we could do is make them a little more workable and a little less prone to abuse.
 
It is better then no change.

But to say it like that does not really give Fred's system the credit it is deserved.

The beauty of it is the fact that the system is intuitive. As I mentioned earlier one can assume what a hand gun is going to be, and what a massive cannon on a super star fortress is going to be.
 
That's true, but sadly, you well know why I say that. We've yet to have any feedback or replies from where it matters the most. Though considering that reality, even a small change is unlikely to happen. I'm getting depressed again...
 
For a proposed new DR system, we should have a comprehensive article explaining it. We can then vote on it via forum poll to see if we want to make it the new system. I suggest we keep the current system around too, at least for a while (articles would have stats for both damage systems).
 
Whoa guys. Take it easy. :)

It's the weekend, and I don't just stay cooped in front of the computer. I've friends to see, D&D games to DM, shopping for birthday presents to do, and a sundry of other things - not the least being my networking studies.

I didn't really expect to have the task suddenly trust on me, after the suggestions and the refusal to really make a change for it. Suddenly, there is. Baffling. I'll get to it, but I need to warn you that I have other priorities, such as using my free time to finalize the plotship design for the Byakuren plot.
 
Well, you've given a good basis for a start. Let's help out so that you don't need to focus on it too much!
 
Eh, I'd say no need to rush it. As far as keeping the old system around I have to say "No." Due to potential conflicts of interest.

Plus half measures usually do not end well any way.
 
I agree with Fred - I don't have all the time in the world either to help with this, so I understand. Hell, I ended up overstretched more than once in the past, something he knows about himself. However, if an article is started, I can at least look in and provide suggestions and so forth.

And I also agree with Ira - best not to do it half way, or we might end up regressing or other. We're better not keeping both systems operational at the same time, and make a total leap to the new one if/when it's done.
 
Okay, look - I'll work on this, well enough for it to be ready for the things I am going to submit for my plot. So, I'll make it part of the creation process, and "lead by example" by being the first to use it. My own submissions will have the bonus of serving as test drives for it.

This way, we can have our cake, and eat it too.
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top