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
M10 Raider Light Armor
- Thread starter Sigma
- Start date
Aendri
Inactive Member
Nepleslia has lots of older designs, in the same way that Yamatai does. And just like Yamatai, they're not using most of the older designs anymore. The problem is that neither of their current generation armors are anywhere near as modular as the Mindy/Daisy/MCAS combination are, so they have to keep using older armors to fill in the gaps.
Sigma
Inactive Member
4th Fleet PCs will be assigned this armor on an as-needed basis. 4th Fleet NPCs may be seen using it, especially sailors guarding ground installations or in boarding actions.
I wish to request a second NTSE mod's opinion. The current one has been, in my opinion, disrespectful and provocative. He has insinuated that because he pays more than I do, my contributions matter less. That my efforts surmount to basically how much I can pay from my pocket. The current tech reviewer has also failed to answer my requests for his justification of the rulings he has made. All I have been told is that the current speeds are either overpowered or of questionable ability. No explanation for this has been provided save for "I didn't say [the Hostile, Aggressor & Mindy speeds] were [overpowered]. I'm talking about this submission only. Submissions have to stand on their own, not in comparison to other submissions."
I am calling the impartiality of this NTSE mod on this particular submission into question and would like a second opinion. I am offended by the comments about comparisons between the amount of money we provide to SARP.
I wish to request a second NTSE mod's opinion. The current one has been, in my opinion, disrespectful and provocative. He has insinuated that because he pays more than I do, my contributions matter less. That my efforts surmount to basically how much I can pay from my pocket. The current tech reviewer has also failed to answer my requests for his justification of the rulings he has made. All I have been told is that the current speeds are either overpowered or of questionable ability. No explanation for this has been provided save for "I didn't say [the Hostile, Aggressor & Mindy speeds] were [overpowered]. I'm talking about this submission only. Submissions have to stand on their own, not in comparison to other submissions."
I am calling the impartiality of this NTSE mod on this particular submission into question and would like a second opinion. I am offended by the comments about comparisons between the amount of money we provide to SARP.
I'm trying to illustrate the setting but it's an uphill battle when new things are getting added constantly. And the membership says we should require art because they want articles illustrated too. But I already said I'd take it without art since you think it's so necessary to add this to the setting. And I agreed to the speeds even though I think they're too much. You're focusing on issues we already talked about. This could have been approved by now if you'd fix the other red items on the checklist.
Hello Sigma,
Here are a few issues that I have noted that have nothing to do with rules. I'll get to those later.
4. Life Support
This system as written severely limits the usefulness of the armor. There is no thermal control system, so the user is either going to roast or freeze depending on the climate. Using the Zero atmosphere parameter and applying to our terrestrial moon. Surface temps on the moon get down to -153 degrees C at night, and 105 degrees c in the day time. You should include some sort of system to compensate for that.
While it will not stop incoming fire, the impact gel does significantly lessen the kinetic force of an impact by absorbing it. It also makes the armor more comfortable for the pilot. - Actually the gel does nothing to lessen the kinetic force of an impact. The armor still gets hit as hard. It does however reduce the chance of injury to the user. By cushioning them when they are knocked into the sides of the armor by an impact. Just as airbags and the like do the same in a car crash. The car takes the same out of force, but they lessen what the user feels. - Recommend rewording to reflect that. As you have it written for the gel to absorb kinetic impact for the armor it would have to be on the exterior, like an ablative armor.
Moving on.
Power Armors which falls into the category of, are not piloted. They are worn, so the term pilot should be replace with another term such as user, wearer, etc.
Nanomuscles - recently we established what each species can typically lift and carry, can you provide an estimate of how much of an increase the armor gives. eg, does it double, triple etc.
The operating time of 24-48 hours. What is the reason for the wide range, is it due to the air supply? the fuel available for the generator?
These items still need to be addressed from the check list.
A general topic sentence under the title header
Wikified (terms that could be a link should be a link)
The in-character year of creation/manufacture.
The Standard Product Nomenclature System, which should be in the NAM format Na-M10-01a
FYI, the no copy pasta rule has been in place for close to three years. The reasoning behind it is a) consistency, making sure that any piece of equipment that uses the same system has the same exact verbage. b) easy of updating, periodically as the site rules change we have to update items to reflect it. Having a piece of equipment in one place to maintain is easier than having it copied ten times and having to update each of those ten places when anything changes.
Here are a few issues that I have noted that have nothing to do with rules. I'll get to those later.
4. Life Support
This system as written severely limits the usefulness of the armor. There is no thermal control system, so the user is either going to roast or freeze depending on the climate. Using the Zero atmosphere parameter and applying to our terrestrial moon. Surface temps on the moon get down to -153 degrees C at night, and 105 degrees c in the day time. You should include some sort of system to compensate for that.
While it will not stop incoming fire, the impact gel does significantly lessen the kinetic force of an impact by absorbing it. It also makes the armor more comfortable for the pilot. - Actually the gel does nothing to lessen the kinetic force of an impact. The armor still gets hit as hard. It does however reduce the chance of injury to the user. By cushioning them when they are knocked into the sides of the armor by an impact. Just as airbags and the like do the same in a car crash. The car takes the same out of force, but they lessen what the user feels. - Recommend rewording to reflect that. As you have it written for the gel to absorb kinetic impact for the armor it would have to be on the exterior, like an ablative armor.
Moving on.
Power Armors which falls into the category of, are not piloted. They are worn, so the term pilot should be replace with another term such as user, wearer, etc.
Nanomuscles - recently we established what each species can typically lift and carry, can you provide an estimate of how much of an increase the armor gives. eg, does it double, triple etc.
The operating time of 24-48 hours. What is the reason for the wide range, is it due to the air supply? the fuel available for the generator?
These items still need to be addressed from the check list.
A general topic sentence under the title header
Wikified (terms that could be a link should be a link)
The in-character year of creation/manufacture.
The Standard Product Nomenclature System, which should be in the NAM format Na-M10-01a
FYI, the no copy pasta rule has been in place for close to three years. The reasoning behind it is a) consistency, making sure that any piece of equipment that uses the same system has the same exact verbage. b) easy of updating, periodically as the site rules change we have to update items to reflect it. Having a piece of equipment in one place to maintain is easier than having it copied ten times and having to update each of those ten places when anything changes.
Sigma
Inactive Member
I have made all the edits you suggested, Nashoba. Thanks. Very helpful, pointing out things such environmental control and nanomuscles, I had not thought of.
The problem with this linking rule, specific to Nepleslia, is that a lot of current shared technology do not have their individual pages. This is possibly due to the age of some of these pages. I actually stumbled onto some of those links after a tip from Soresu. Thus, when I was told to provide links to shared tech, it seemed that the onus of making new tech pages also fell to me. The HUD, the nanomuscles, and Noisemaker are just three systems which fall into this category.
Didn't understand what you meant here though. I made the changes but a quick check showed that both the Mindy and Hostile pages use the term pilot frequently.
The problem with this linking rule, specific to Nepleslia, is that a lot of current shared technology do not have their individual pages. This is possibly due to the age of some of these pages. I actually stumbled onto some of those links after a tip from Soresu. Thus, when I was told to provide links to shared tech, it seemed that the onus of making new tech pages also fell to me. The HUD, the nanomuscles, and Noisemaker are just three systems which fall into this category.
MoonMan
Inactive Member
Sigma said:
This is mostly because the current generation models of the Hostile and Aggressor were made before it became common to give subsystems their own wiki pages for ease and accessibility. I believe that the Hostile and Aggressor were released in 2008, both from my own memory of the submissions and the fact that the artwork for both clearly state 2008; that's a good four years ago, which
does indeed mirror the general timeframe that Nashoba presented. Since then I do not believe we have produced further powered armor, because the point of both the Hostile and Aggressor was to par down the impressively large number of highly specific armors that we previously had; I believe at the time when the Hostile and Aggressor were released, we had 6-7 active armors with very specific roles and weaknesses, which was a concern expressed to me from many of Nepleslia's players at the time. The two new powered armorsuits took what we had and condensed them for ease of use and understanding, and now we have roughly 2-3 actively used ones which excel in the variety of roles; we haven't had a need for new armor that couldn't be filled with producing a new type of weapon that could be used by the current generation.Nashoba said:
With all that said, I am not opposed to the idea of new powered armorsuits. I welcome innovation, like your Kegbuster, because it was a nice addition to the Hostile's repertoire. However I want to make sure, as with all major Nepleslian submissions, that we need this sort of thing, rather than just wanting it; 'greed over need' is how a lot of settings became bogged down by constant fluctuations of 'this is cooler than that' and so forth.
From my understanding, M10s are between powered armor and body armor. They are said to be used for guarding ground installations, boarding, etc. To be clear of my concern, consider that Hostiles and Aggressors are fully capable of performing guard duty to areas of high importance, and would be potentially a wiser choice of boarding protection; they are not so unweildly that they cannot traverse hallways and corridors.
My question is, Sigma, for what purposes do you need something of that nature for?
Sigma
Inactive Member
In the current mission, we're running boarding actions on NMX warships. All the problems of inadequate NMX wiki information aside, I've deduced that, the ceiling height of a corridor in an NMX warship is roughly 8 feet. A Ripper is 7.5 ft so add an extra half foot room for clearance. A 13 ft Aggressor and a 9 ft VOID cannot fit into smaller, confined areas like the NMX corridors. Not unless I make the corridors extremely large and spacious. That's not the intention - I wanted to make the corridors cramped and suffocating for the players. Individual rooms may be larger or smaller, but the corridors are intended to be small and act as chokepoints.
With regards to my plot, specifically, the need is to arm the sailors in the event that I need more power armored troops. While I could solve this by enlarging the number of Marine units present, I don't want to do that. From player feedback, the small number of Marines reinforces the impression that these marine squads aren't simply grunts; they're handpicked units. That fits perfectly with the original intention to use 4th Fleet as a raiding unit. However, for a large scale operation like this attack on Mwigflukbajik, which will involve a planetary invasion of entrenched NMX forces, 60 Marines is hardly enough. Kampfer has been kind enough to lend me assets from the 3rd Fleet but I can't count on his generosity on manpower all the time.
Arming the 4th Fleet sailors with a lighter suit helps to differentiate them from the more well-trained and better equipped Marines. And the ability to do so, ICly, fell into my hands when, amongst other things, I received a couple power armor replication chambers. Is there an OOC need? No, I think players are quite happy with the existing suits and so am I. For IC flexibility, on the other hand, I would like to add this as an option. It will be available to 4th Fleet players as well since it is, statistically, less exceptional than the current Hostile/Aggressor. As 4th Fleet GM, I think it has a place in my Fleet and plot as both a player equipment option and a GM/NPC tool, but whether that applies universally to all the other Fleets and GMs, I do not know and cannot say. I'm completely happy to limit its use to the 4th Fleet.
Again, this is true and I don't dispute it. But does every location we need to guard with power armor warrant the top-class armor? Isn't it more cost-effective to have a cheaper guard unit in the rear to allow the best stuff to be sent to the front? Unless every ammunition depot and supply base we have houses VIPs and national defense secrets, why not send those Marines to the front and have armed sailors in Raiders take over those duties. That was the logic I had when I said that it could perform guard duties.
With regards to my plot, specifically, the need is to arm the sailors in the event that I need more power armored troops. While I could solve this by enlarging the number of Marine units present, I don't want to do that. From player feedback, the small number of Marines reinforces the impression that these marine squads aren't simply grunts; they're handpicked units. That fits perfectly with the original intention to use 4th Fleet as a raiding unit. However, for a large scale operation like this attack on Mwigflukbajik, which will involve a planetary invasion of entrenched NMX forces, 60 Marines is hardly enough. Kampfer has been kind enough to lend me assets from the 3rd Fleet but I can't count on his generosity on manpower all the time.
Arming the 4th Fleet sailors with a lighter suit helps to differentiate them from the more well-trained and better equipped Marines. And the ability to do so, ICly, fell into my hands when, amongst other things, I received a couple power armor replication chambers. Is there an OOC need? No, I think players are quite happy with the existing suits and so am I. For IC flexibility, on the other hand, I would like to add this as an option. It will be available to 4th Fleet players as well since it is, statistically, less exceptional than the current Hostile/Aggressor. As 4th Fleet GM, I think it has a place in my Fleet and plot as both a player equipment option and a GM/NPC tool, but whether that applies universally to all the other Fleets and GMs, I do not know and cannot say. I'm completely happy to limit its use to the 4th Fleet.
I have no further issues with this submission.
This review is for: M10 Raider Light Armor
The submitted article is/has…
[x] A very high level of overall quality
[X] A general topic sentence under the title header
[-] Artwork (illustrations are recommended for Starships, Vehicles, Hand weapons or Small Arms, Uniforms for military forces or large corporations and new alien species not from the race of the day CCG)
[x] Needed and/or useful to the setting
[x] In the proper format/template
[x] Proofread for spelling and grammar
[x] Easy to read and understand (not a lengthy mass of technobabble)
[x] Wikified (terms that could be a link should be a link)
[x] No red and/or broken links
[x] Reasonably scientifically plausible
[x] Reasonably neutral point of view
The submitted article is/does not…
[x] Overpowered (or cutting tech for a faction with little or no roleplay)
[x] Obtusely redundant
[x] Contain copy pasta descriptions of systems or interior compartments
[x] Unauthorized by faction managers or player-controlled corporation
[x] Contain references to IC events that have not occurred (SM must authorize retcons)
[x] Use second-person language (“you” or “your”) unless it is an instructional guide aimed at players.
[x] Use bombastic language (“virtually immune,” “nearly indestructible,” “insanely powerful,” “horrible effects”)
[x] Use an unbalanced header/text ratio (many headers but sections are one-liners)
[x] Use major unapproved sub-articles that should be submitted separately
[x] Lacking Detail
[-] Images hosted on sites other than stararmy.com (Photobucket, Imageshack, etc are not allowed)
The article has…
[x] Speeds in compliance with the Starship Speed Standard, if applicable
[x] Damage Capacity and Damage Ratings in compliance with the DR Guidelines
[x] The in-character year of creation/manufacture. (Should be current year. Future years not allowed).
[x] 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.
** Short description of the issue. If a longer explanation is needed, put it in Notes.
Status: Approved.
Notes
This field is for any extra description needed for the issues stated above or (as the name suggests) and additional notes you wish to state in the record regarding the item.
I intend to finish this review by: 04 Jul 2012
This review is for: M10 Raider Light Armor
The submitted article is/has…
[x] A very high level of overall quality
[X] A general topic sentence under the title header
[-] Artwork (illustrations are recommended for Starships, Vehicles, Hand weapons or Small Arms, Uniforms for military forces or large corporations and new alien species not from the race of the day CCG)
[x] Needed and/or useful to the setting
[x] In the proper format/template
[x] Proofread for spelling and grammar
[x] Easy to read and understand (not a lengthy mass of technobabble)
[x] Wikified (terms that could be a link should be a link)
[x] No red and/or broken links
[x] Reasonably scientifically plausible
[x] Reasonably neutral point of view
The submitted article is/does not…
[x] Overpowered (or cutting tech for a faction with little or no roleplay)
[x] Obtusely redundant
[x] Contain copy pasta descriptions of systems or interior compartments
[x] Unauthorized by faction managers or player-controlled corporation
[x] Contain references to IC events that have not occurred (SM must authorize retcons)
[x] Use second-person language (“you” or “your”) unless it is an instructional guide aimed at players.
[x] Use bombastic language (“virtually immune,” “nearly indestructible,” “insanely powerful,” “horrible effects”)
[x] Use an unbalanced header/text ratio (many headers but sections are one-liners)
[x] Use major unapproved sub-articles that should be submitted separately
[x] Lacking Detail
[-] Images hosted on sites other than stararmy.com (Photobucket, Imageshack, etc are not allowed)
The article has…
[x] Speeds in compliance with the Starship Speed Standard, if applicable
[x] Damage Capacity and Damage Ratings in compliance with the DR Guidelines
[x] The in-character year of creation/manufacture. (Should be current year. Future years not allowed).
[x] 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.
** Short description of the issue. If a longer explanation is needed, put it in Notes.
Status: Approved.
Notes
This field is for any extra description needed for the issues stated above or (as the name suggests) and additional notes you wish to state in the record regarding the item.
I intend to finish this review by: 04 Jul 2012
