Approved Submission Military Buildup Limitations Update

Zack said:

This is the exact kind of double-speak that is the problem. The DRv3 system is already based on Tier Equivalency. Shouldn’t this complaint have been brought up then? It is something we’re already using for the NTSE so why not use it again here instead of rolling out a new system? Is it really any different to have to count up each type of ship you have and put those numbers into a spreadsheet? You’re going to have to count up your totals either way unless you throw out the MBL entirely.

The side effects of this is that you can throw out nearly all the extra MBL rules about fighters, ships vs capital ships, etc and replace it with two guidelines. What makes a military ship, and how many Tier equivalent levels you can have per system.

The guidelines should be ‘if it has weapons it is a military ship’ and 700 tier 10 equivalent levels per star system to match what we have now.


To add to that, if you want to reduce ship levels, you can’t just make an arbitrary change again like last time and expect to get anywhere. You’d need to figure out what everyone wants from the setting and then make the rules to match that. Without that first step you’ve got no way to gauge how effective your change was, and no real way to tweak that change later to get the desired results. Worse yet if you try and roll all of these different changes into one discussion you’re never going to be able to roll out gradual changes then see how they affect the site. To tie this into earlier we can ask how the new faction ban is going? Has it improved things? Is there any process wrapped around that to determine if things have changed because of the ban? This is the real substance here: evaluation of previous efforts and learning from them.

Click to expand...

Rizzo said:

Wow. So all of this math is really annoying. Can't we just assume that weapons are intelligently designed to achieve their desired purpose and have fun with explosions and stuff? I mean, when does PvP even happen anymore?

Click to expand...

Wes said:

Tier equivalent systems is something that would be best calculated in a computer simulation, it's a pain in the ass to calculate manually. The same way DPS is. It works in MMOs but SARP isn't an MMO or a simulation, it's text-based RP where GMs are encouraged and empowered to go with what feels cool rather than running numbers through a spreadsheet.

Click to expand...

Fred said:

Also, there's no choice. There's nothing in the allotment we have that defines a faction war doctrine regarding unit preference. Do you build small and fast, or do you prefer to focus on fewer but hardier units?

So, thought experiment. Less say that a resource-plentiful starsystem can enable a faction to produce and maintain a total of Eight of their best capital vessels.

Since I'm lazy and unimaginative, I think I can actual draw from the way DRv3 deals with units and how tier-equivalent weapons can be broken down into weaker weapons. The best uit would start with the (tier 15) flagship and then downward. So, for 1 flagship, you could have...

1 Flagship
2 Battleships
4 Heavy Cruisers
8 Light Cruisers
16 Destroyers
32 Frigates
* and support crafts below, you get the idea

(32 x 8 = 256; which is close to our current 250 number - seems like a good departure point)

Click to expand...

• In the Military Object Types section, I removed the mention of size from the "Other Warships" definition, as some escorts and gunshups in the setting are shorter than 200 meters in length.
• I removed mentions of DRv2 from the article, as, well, it's no longer being utilized in submissions and could potentially cause confusion.
• I removed the mention of "Mobile Shipyards" from the Building Times section, as it was redundant.