• 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 stararmy@gmail.com 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 Submission DERP

This suggestion has been implemented. Votes are no longer accepted.
I guess that makes sense. That would probably entail an increase in caliber, but there's space in the model for an increase.
 
Righto, I've looked over everything Ame had pointed out and they look good. One question before I approve/reject, they're semi-guided, correct? How accurate are they if the SHIVA was shot from one planet to the other? I would assume gravity, space, and the general minute and subtle movements of a planet would affect the accuracy, no?
 
Requesting the checklist be used on this one. No objections to the new name.
 
The munitions are guided the whole way, but I suppose it would depend on where the ship were positioned.
I was told the shells were "semi-guided" when the idea was first pitched. I would doubt it's ability to hit pin-point as the shell travels from one planet to the other. As for the purpose of it's weapon, how many of these things does USO have? It seems like a lot of work for it to have been created within YE 39? Are we using the concept of space, time, and magic?

Also, can I see some art?
 
To answer:
- Yes the accuracy would be considerably reduced.
- This weapon would likely be a one-off.
- I will rp development and testing with malefic.
- Art is coming, slowly...

Also, semi-active homing means guidance comes from an outside source, as opposed to active homing (fire and forget)
 
Righto. Might I ask that you back the creation of this weapon up with some choice role-play before I re-consider?
I'd like to see some art so I can grasp the scale, deployment, and whether or not it's feasible this monster of an artillery gun can be built and deployed within YE 39.
And isn't it basically supported by a ship in orbit, anyways? It should be semi-active instead, no?

And good that the accuracy is reduced.

@Rizzo

I read it all! Excellent points!
 
Last edited:
Accuracy would depend on the math behind the shot. This wouldn't be the type of weapon that would be fired off the hip, it's a strategic weapon. The gunners would actually be mathematicians, astronomers, and generally the best minds we can find.

Even then, hitting an interplanetary target would be like threading a microscopic needle. Just hitting the planet would be amazing, hitting a specific target on that planet would be an absolute miracle.

An interplanetary shot has a lot of moving parts.
First you need to consider the rotation of the planet you are firing from, unless the gun is in space, to ensure that the shell can leave atmosphere and have a co use of unobstructed flight to location of the target.

Next, you need to have a clear shot. One might think this is simple but since the planet the target is on is in motion it's important to consider that another stellar body(which is also in motion) could easily become an obstacle. Essentially, you're not just aiming the gun, you need a flight plan for the shell that considers all obstacles, including gravity which could potentially be used to slingshot ordinance and make possible NLoS interplanetary shots... or throw your aim off completely and in the next ten trillion years someone has a really bad day.

Third, timing is the all essential part. The shell will take time to reach its target, all while the target is rotating around the planet's axis which rotates around a star's axis which often has multiple planets in it's orbit. More often than not this weapon will not be able to hit a target because it's just a bad time.

In conclusion(tl;dr), this weapon has the potential to be extremely accurate IF it can hit at all.
 
This is why I put that it can only fire interplanetarily situationally. Also, the art will probably be finished sometime in mid-July.
 
The more I look at it the less the name is making sense to me. SHIVA is fine I'm just not so sure the name spelled out makes much sense. I mean, vanguard means to be leading something, as in to be in front leading. This building isn't going to be anywhere near the front of anything.
It's a glorified sniper, the whole idea is that it is really far away from its target!

Perhaps we can just rework the acronym, and of course I bring with me a suggestion for the name before it can shoot between planets and after.

  • Strategic Hypervelocity Intraplanetary Vector Artillery
  • Strategic Hypervelocity Interplanetary Vector Artillery
    • Strategic: because it's so far away.
    • Hypervelocity: because of how fast it lobs a shell.
    • Intraplanetary: within the planet, on in our case on it.
    • Interplanetary: firing between planets
    • Intra/Interplanetary Vector: the direction is at whichever is applicable and the shell definitely has magnitude.
    • Artillery: because it's a cannon.
Or alternatively we could do SHIBA.
  • Strategic Hypervelocity Intraplanetary Bombardment Artillery
  • Strategic Hypervelocity Interplanetary Bombardment Artillery
I'm equally preferable to either of these(because I made them) and I think they make more sense than the current acronym
 
I'll be taking the reins back on this submission.

This wouldn't pass the checklist yet as things that can be linked aren't linked and there are also headers that need text under them.

Such as:
"Ammunition
NEED TEXT HERE
Ammunition:
"
And:
"Weapon Mechanisms
NEED TEXT HERE
Loading:
"

As far as linking things goes... Well, would you mind if I went ahead and did that (things like DR, YE 39, Sky Guard, etc.)? I just know what has and does not have a wiki at this point, whereas you're a bit new and may not know what is and isn't linkable and I also don't want to put you through the trouble of needing to do so. If you want me to link things, let me know and I will ^-^

Also, is this SHIBA or SHIVA? I almost changed the thread name and switched it over to another namespace on the wiki, but I don't know which of Rizzo's fine suggestions you decided to choose. Once you do, either change the wiki namespace over as well as the info in the article to the new name, ask me how if you don't know how, or have me do it for you.

The reason I asked about size was because this weapon can only have the highest tier of what it is— tier 11. You are putting tier 13 offenses on a tier 11 sized weapon. Either you're going to have to make this bigger or nerf it.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…