Approved Submission [Galactic Six, not a typo] G6 Brand, Ammo and Rifle

This really feels like I’m arguing with a munchkin again, just so you know. Not wrong by any point on the hard rulebooks, but...

It doesn’t feel right, you know? Something about how the stuff just comes out of nowhere in a space that small.

So. In essence, there is nothing wrong with the rifle.

But there is something wrong with the fabricator, in your opinion. Which has been approved in the past.

So I don't see how you're in any position to judge this as 'arguing with a munchkin' when you are the one not objectively viewing this submission. But instead rehashing an already approved submission and shutting down this submission, which is a practical and achievable use of the Honeycomb, down.

Also, please respect the dog piling rule. It' s not my submission nor did I have any involvement with it's creation. So I will keep it to this post in trend of not dog piling the reviewers either.

But so far 3 reviewers have already posted here.

I know that I posted here that "due to a potential conflict of interest, I [would] unfortunately not be reviewing this submission"; to prevent further drama from occurring, however, I will be reviewing it, as the aforementioned "conflict of interest" was essentially my way of saying that I was afraid of being too lenient on the submitter due to our friendship.

The following review is for the Galactic Six 6mm Caseless Electronically Fired Rounds article.

[ ] 1. The destination URL should be a page in the appropriate namespace and titled lower_case_with_underscores.
[ ] 2. The article is in the appropriate format and article template.
[ ] 3. The article follows our wiki style guidelines, including: No forced line breaks, text after each section header, etc.
[ ] 4. The article is easily read and free of errors in spelling and grammar.
[ ] 5. Links to other wiki articles are present as appropriate.
[ ] 6. The article fits into the Star Army universe's space opera theme and technology levels.
[ N/A ] 7. Images in the article are hosted on Star Army's wiki and sourced responsibly (contact Wes privately if there's a concern).
[ ] 8. The article is original and doesn't contain copy-pasted content from other articles.
[ ] 9. The article complies with Star Army's rules in terms of damage ratings, speed limits, etc.
[ ] 10. The Faction Manager(s), if applicable, have posted approval for this article in this thread.

Here are some fixes this sub-article still needs:

1. Would you mind integrating a link to the Galactic Six article into the opening section, please?

When these fixes are made, please post a reply here so I can re-check the article. Thank you!

Status: Pending

The following review is for the Galactic Six article.

[ ] 1. The destination URL should be a page in the appropriate namespace and titled lower_case_with_underscores.
[ ] 2. The article is in the appropriate format and article template.
[ ] 3. The article follows our wiki style guidelines, including: No forced line breaks, text after each section header, etc.
[ ] 4. The article is easily read and free of errors in spelling and grammar.
[ ] 5. Links to other wiki articles are present as appropriate.
[ ] 6. The article fits into the Star Army universe's space opera theme and technology levels.
[ ] 7. Images in the article are hosted on Star Army's wiki and sourced responsibly (contact Wes privately if there's a concern).
[ ] 8. The article is original and doesn't contain copy-pasted content from other articles.
[ N/A ] 9. The article complies with Star Army's rules in terms of damage ratings, speed limits, etc.
[ ] 10. The Faction Manager(s), if applicable, have posted approval for this article in this thread.

Here are some fixes this sub-article still needs:

1. Would you mind adding a brief sentence to the sections with a "FIXME" in them, please?
2. Would you mind adding the following sections to the article, please?
   
   Spoiler: Wiki Code

   Code:

   ===== Headquarters =====
   
   Information about the company's headquarters, where it is, who runs it.
   
   ===== Facilities =====
   
   Information about the company's facilities, where they are, who runs them, and what their purpose is.
   
   ===== Structure =====
   
   If applicable, information about the various divisions or departments of the company. 
   Links to key characters involved in the company.

When these fixes are made, please post a reply here so I can re-check the article. Thank you!

Status: Pending

The problem comes from the Honeycomb itself. See, this is why we shouldn't promise OOC restrictions on things, because eventually they'll spiral out of control.

Who knows when the next person will come along and think that the Honeycomb looks good for messing around with? Maybe we'll see someone spam them in a large box they put on their waist, which fabricates parts for a power armor. Maybe we'll see them make a compatible device that loads blueprints into the box, which gives them a certain type of armor. Congrats, this is now a Kamen Rider roleplay as people run around with these weird things they load data into to give them their armors.

But why stop there? Why not create a vast array of these Honeycombs to simply fabricate the parts for a battleship? Then why don't we assemble them, so they create a battleship assembly line? Now why don't we leave that on full-auto? Congrats, we've just made Meta's First Setting Killer: The Aether Stromboli. It's a giant structure in space that assembles battleship after battleship, immediately putting it on AI control, and sending it off to the frontlines.

This is why we should be careful about the combination of nanobots and matter conversion.

Edit: I've just been informed that you're also making things that use Honeycombs to change forms of a power armor. What did I say...

and the armor is approved already as well.

The following review is for the Galactic Six Munition Fabricating Assault Rifle article.

[ ] 1. The destination URL should be a page in the appropriate namespace and titled lower_case_with_underscores.
[ ] 2. The article is in the appropriate format and article template.
[ ] 3. The article follows our wiki style guidelines, including: No forced line breaks, text after each section header, etc.
[ ] 4. The article is easily read and free of errors in spelling and grammar.
[ ] 5. Links to other wiki articles are present as appropriate.
[ ] 6. The article fits into the Star Army universe's space opera theme and technology levels.
[ ] 7. Images in the article are hosted on Star Army's wiki and sourced responsibly (contact Wes privately if there's a concern).
[ ] 8. The article is original and doesn't contain copy-pasted content from other articles.
[ ] 9. The article complies with Star Army's rules in terms of damage ratings, speed limits, etc.
[ ] 10. The Faction Manager(s), if applicable, have posted approval for this article in this thread.

Here are some fixes this sub-article still needs:

1. Would you mind adding a brief sentence to the sections with a "FIXME" in them, please?
2. Please remove the Honeycomb Fabricator from this submission, as its presence makes the submission extremely overpowered, causes the submission to not fit within the technology levels of the Star Army setting, and causes the submission to conflict with the theme of the Star Army setting.

When these fixes are made, please post a reply here so I can re-check the article. Thank you!

Status: Pending

Not "extremely overpowered," Frost. All it does is set up a dangerous precedent. I agree that in the now it isn't much, but we can't simply write guidelines for the now, we need to write guidelines for the future.

I am quite familiar with the Submission Rules, @Immortal Cyan, and please do not be disrespectful towards submission reviewers in this thread - as the next time it happens, I will ask the site staff to revoke your ability to post in this thread.

Ask the same of Meta's ability to post in this thread. He, nor Alex if he decides to partake in the discussions here, have no business here.

Ok holy fuck guys, everyone lets just stop for a moment, no more bitching about nanos.

First of all let me ask this, does anyone here actually believe that skully went out and made this weapon with the intent to overpowered? Does his history or even gh history give any indication that this is something we would do? Now i think metas fear of down the road issues is valid, its another reason i like to try and slip restrictions into my stuff if possible, but lets try not to just beat a dead horse back to life here.

If no one else noticed, skully hasn't even replied yet and frost has posted like 4 reviews, so this is what i think should happen, we all need to take a deep breath, maybe put this sub on hold for a little bit, and just have a calm discussion with the guy who actually made both things. And i dont mean resorting to a favoured tactic of starting a thread about it which has already happened.

People in this community keep trying to move way too fast, a decision does not have to be made in a day over these things you know. And you all know skully is willing to listen and adapt ideas IF, you just have a civil discussion and explain reasonings and whatnot ao that everyone understands.

Okay so, bloody hell you lot like to make things difficult don't you? I like how apparently utilizing current setting technology in a way nobody else has before (and also something that has been sitting in the approved pile for a while) now qualifies it being overpowered, how god damn orwellian to believe new ideas are overpowered. I understand people being like "oh don't make a ship array" or "just don't be a dumbass".

But just... really? everyone is up in arms about this thing (which, sorry for bringing you into this boss man because unlike some people who incessantly ping you for no reason I know you have that bundle of joy to deal with) that @Wes himself has seen and had no issues with, here. I just... that seems like kind of a big deal to me? like maybe the fact the person who manages the site this all happens on saw the technology you all deem overpowered and didn't bring it up anything against it should prove that, opposed to you all saying it is against the setting's technology, actually not.

It isn't a self building ship though, it isn't some bullshit array of missiles that carry missiles, it isn't a certain purple hand cannon that got dragged past rules because of social connections, it is a personnel assault rifle that can refill its own magazine - hell I'm be happy to further nerf the fabrication times a bit because unlike the Pellis (which crafted the simplest of shapes) this actually has to create mechanisms and such.

But the Honeycomb itself? I'm going to defend that thing as hard as I can, and not just by crying wolf but y'know - actually having something that can defend itself.

@META_mahn and btw, the actual suit itself isn't self building - it can just layer itself in light polymers or a layer of metal.

SirSkully said:

But the Honeycomb itself? I'm going to defend that thing as hard as I can

Click to expand...

And honestly that's okay. In and of itself, it isn't a bad thing. It's a relatively harmless thing...alone. The real power comes when you put them in an array, as our long-vanished "friend" Zack has demonstrated multiple times by spamming things that are harmless alone but reveal their true nefarious capabilities when laid out in an array.

And so I suggest this modification to the Honeycomb to prevent abuse and set a precedent: Aether overtap.

The more Honeycombs (or any other fabricator of the like) in an area, the more Aether energy they draw from the Aether. This causes a lack of energy in that region, which makes other Honeycombs build slower. We could give them an exponential decay per Honeycomb in the area, to some point where it just isn't effective to use them anymore as they're all overtapping to such a degree that it just won't be effective.

The way to bypass this issue is to either spread your fabricators out, making your structures large and unwieldy if you're really using them for large production bays, or having a larger fabricator. The larger fabricator however suffers the same effect as grouped small fabricators: As size increases exponentially, the efficiency and speed only increases linearly, making it so that at some point it's not effective anymore.

Can we keep it on topic here? This is about the stuff submitted, and discussion about the Honeycomb should be discussed in a thread created for that, or in its submission thread.

In my official opinion, it is on topic @Alex Hart due to being a part of the submission - and, well, this is the one thread I believe it's safe to discuss it in without fear of the thread being moved to the Setting Discussion forum and locked by a certain staff member.

Since this seems related too. The setting has had an equally powerful fabricator since YE29, and probably other ones looming around. A worry was mentioned about the honeycomb being used to make battle ships and such, but you're not thinking it through mechanically. Yes the honecomb is energy to matter conversion, but energy isn't 'free' even aether. Threre might be unlimited aether in space, but it can't be unlimitedly stacked up on itself. We can just simply say that doing too much with the fabricator in the same spot lowers the aether density and prevents you from being able to construct a vehicle at some ground breaking speeds.

@FrostJaeger made all the changes besides removing the honeycomb unit from the rifle.

Depending on how far the radius in which exponential performance decay starts to take place in the fabricators is, this imposes an interesting limit upon how many operatives you could outfit with these rifles on a single mission (supposing that they'll all be sticking together).