• 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 Missile Container

Status
Not open for further replies.
This suggestion has been implemented. Votes are no longer accepted.
 
What would that look like exactly? Listing a DR value for if the container falls on you? Is there a template you're expecting me to follow?
 
Weapons Systems
The weapons need to be listed with the following nomenclature:
* [[(Wiki link to weapon)|(weapon purpose) (weapon name)]]
example:
* [[stararmy:weapons:ke-s3-w3020_main_weapon_array|Light Anti-Capital Main Weapon Array]]
Weapons

Purpose
In weapon articles, the first primary entry for “Purpose:” needs to provide information matching the “Purpose” entry of the Tier table.
**Purpose:** [[(wiki link back to this article's Tier heading)|(weapon's purpose, i.e.: Light Anti-Mecha)]]
 
Wouldn't that be done on a ship article? The container itself wouldn't be listed as a second weapon set on itself.
 
No, I want this to be made clear in the article so that there's no confusing this down the line for anyone who wants to use this. This is a weapon and has to be counted as one within the ship article I want EVERYONE who uses this to know that so that this argument never has to happen again.
 
And what would that look like exactly?


This is already listed as having a weapon system, and would be included on the ship that is using its weapon systems area.
 
This is exactly what it would look like, @Zack:

Code: 
Each individual RUDaaS Container counts as one [[guide:damage_rating_v3#tiers|Tier]] 13 (Light Anti-Capital Ship) weapon under the [[guide:weapon_limitations]].
 
If that is included, as is, I will approve the submission. However, if you choose not to make it clear within the article exactly how it behaves within the weapons limitations, and do not do so in a way that satisfied the concerns raised by your fellow community members this article will not be approved.

I am placing a 3-day rejection timer on this submission. If the requested changes are made in a satisfactory manner, that timer will be removed and the article will be approved.

Be aware that any disrespectful behavior towards the NTSE or your fellow community members will hurt your chances at this submission being approved, as that sort of behavior is not welcome.
 
Is this in place on any other article or is there an NTSE rule regarding this? Or is this article being singled out for special treatment?
 
Zack said:
Is this in place on any other article or is there an NTSE rule regarding this? Or is this article being singled out for special treatment?
Click to expand...

You can't reference other articles for your submission - that has been stated clearly, to you, on multiple occasions so I'll ask that you please stop ignoring that and also stop referring to past articles. Furthermore, other articles 'do' reference that kind of information in some capacity - based off how things were done previously.

As NTSE mods, they can state what is needed to pass a submission, they can be overruled by the staff. However, given that this is clearly a weapon, what is being requested is appropriate and something that you need to do.

Thus, I support @Alex Hart actions here and ask that you comply with his requests.
 
The weapons limits limit the amount of weapons that can be used on a ship but not the amount that can be carried as cargo.
 
That's a good point, but these aren't inert cargo. The container is intended to be launched out of a vertical launch cell, and then fire its missiles, effectively giving whatever ship it's held within free weapons in order to bypass the weapons limitations.

It's effectively saying "They're not weapons now but at any time I can launch these containers out from my ship and then they're missile launchers that I didn't have to include in my weapons limits."

There may be no rule against what Zack's doing, but everyone in the NTSE can see that it's intended to bypass the current rules in a way that allows him to cheat extra weapons onto ships. My feeling is that if multiple NTSE reviewers think something shady is going on with this weapon, there's probably something shady going on with it.

The reason that this isn't OK is the same reason that absurdly high numbered high tiered launch systems are not OK. They exploit the rules in an attempt to get a leg up on everyone else.
 
Last edited:
In regards to the VLC system it would perfectly qualify as a single weapon system made with multiple missile containers, and thus count as only one weapon, but even that exception still puts the C8 and C9 out of WepLim.
 
Wes said:
The weapons limits limit the amount of weapons that can be used on a ship but not the amount that can be carried as cargo.
Click to expand...
Interpreting as meaning that you can have X many missiles in reserve. As in, the amount you can load into available missile tubes. Thing is, each one of these containers is actually technically a missile launch tube, meaning they are active weapons.
 
In regards to the VLC system it would perfectly qualify as a single weapon system made with multiple missile containers, and thus count as only one weapon, but even that exception still puts the C8 and C9 out of WepLim.
Click to expand...

That'd be true, however, Zack's still refusing to count the missile container as a weapon. And I feel that would not work, since under the current rules the "weapon" for missiles is the actual launcher of said missiles. The VLC doesn't launch missiles, it launches missile containers.



Edit: In any case as far as I can tell, the consensus of the NTSE mods present in this thread is that the missile container counts as a weapon, not the vertical launch cell, as the vertical launch cell does not launch the missiles. I've given Zack some time to make the requested edits in order to make it clear that the containers are the weapons, not a launchable payload which does not count towards weapons limits. As of yet he has not made that edit.
 
While they could be carried as cargo (the container is supposed to be a long term storage option for the missiles) they can also be used in a VLC style system.

However that is something that you declare on the ship page, not on the weapon page.

It’s just one line of text, but at the same time it’s a special requirement that’s asked of no one but me. That is obviously unfair and I’m having to decide if I want to fight this now, or deal with unfair treatment going forward.
 
That's true. And there is a reason we only ask you. It's because you're the only one who comes up with this stuff. The needed edits are so minor. Please, can you make this easier for everyone and just make it fit the WepLim?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…