What's new
  • 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
  • 📅 April 2024 is YE 46.3 in the RP.

Approved Submission [Nepleslia] Coyote light tank

Charmaylarg Dufrain

Charmaylarg Dufrain

🎖️ Game Master
Submission URL
https://stararmy.com/wiki/doku.php?id=faction:nepleslia:vehicles:coyote_light_tank
Submission Faction(s)
  1. Nepleslia
Submission Terms
  1. I agree
@Legix for FM stamp.

A Modular light cavalry tank with three possible main weapons ranging from a standard main cannon to two lighter autoloader cannons, to a tank destroying plasma lance. Im well aware how some people feel about tanks in this setting and frankly throw all the constructive criticism you want if ye find yourself in this thread but i know a good deal about mechanized warfare and how it scales to even a post-modern Scifi setting and for nepleslia who uses combined arms doctorines they are a very viable platform to compliment and are complimented by powered armor, infantry, and every other branch of combined arms.

If you dont like tanks dont make them and dont use them. But i do, So i will.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
This suggestion has been implemented. Votes are no longer accepted.
3 day approval timer - go!

After taking a look and cleaning things up a bit, I feel like the article's in good shape. I especially like the addition of different tiers for the various sides of the tank.

Speaking of tiers - the front tier is above what I think the tank would be as a whole, but the majority of the tank is on or below tier compared to my expectations. Input on this approach is appreciated. Personally, I like it.

Can you include tiers on the tank's weapons? Will help me make sure everything is appropriate and match how it's usually done.

Thanks :D
 
The front tier is higher to compensate for the lower tiers on the side and back. In RP tiers don't matter and you can kill a starship with a little killer if you write it well enough for the suspension of disbelief. but in an article form, i like to give people tools they might not otherwise think of or shouldn't have to think of right off the bat.

Tanks have thicker armor in the front where their profiles are the smallest and they would be facing the enemy. The sides less so and the back where the engine, exhaust, etc. is the weakest and if it's facing an enemy or an enemy have a line of sight on the back of a tank its a recipe for disaster. Its just a low-key nod to like the one GM in the future who might use this tank. And having it even a tier lower on the front invites certain people in the future to inevitably belittle my effort when i make the sides a tier less than that and the rear a tier that they will then use the rules to gloat over an infantryman being able to casually shoot through the rear of a tank with his primary weapon by stating the damage rating rules that they otherwise despise except when it suits them.

The overall tier difference is also due to a lack of shields that are prevalent on an armor, shuttle, man-portable scale and as a way of softening the blow of weapon limitations seeing as the Svarog starts at tier 11 and the Plasma-lance even written as to be on a not-starship grade is Tier 12.

I have however, performed the requested change towards the implementation of damage rating on the main weapons. Some of which are downscaled such as the plasma lance which is in fact a starship grade secondary weapon. I just dont have it in me to make too many weapons that will only ever be used on one article when through saying its downscaled on the wiki it simply becomes that.
 
The way you handled the DR tiers on the tank's sides makes perfect sense for a tank. Just wanted to see if other people feel the same way as I do. Again, I like it! Good RP implications. Sorry for not making that more clear.

I'm also good with down-scaling or up-scaling weapon tiers. "It's this cool weapon, but smaller/bigger" makes a ton of sense in many cases and means we don't need twelve articles for the same tech. The weapon templates generally support this approach.
 
Timer's up, let's take a look!

[ ✅ ] 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 and are not broken
[ ✅ ] 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.

Approved! Cool tank. :D
 
Not really signifigant changes but I changed to new models Ive made since the originals like 5 years ago, One new weapon configuration that is weaker than the other three options, and replaced the power source since nep has the antimatter batteries since the coyote was made.
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top