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] M43 Nova Rifle

Charmaylarg Dufrain

Charmaylarg Dufrain

🎖️ Game Master
Submission URL
https://stararmy.com/wiki/doku.php?id=corp:styrling:styrling_nova_rifle
Submission Faction(s)
  1. Nepleslia
Submission Terms
  1. I agree
Alternate standard issue for the NSMC and predecessor to the Nova Pistol i made a while back.

NAV-SOG is referenced in it and is a future nep project that is being worked on that will use this weapon and others and is not a typo or added unintentionally.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
This suggestion has been implemented. Votes are no longer accepted.
The M43 is intended as a harder-hitting alternative to the M3aws which is at T-2.

It is also a battle rifle which while not a category in DRv3 are traditionally higher caliber than standard rifle platforms. Its automatic enabling chip brings it down to T-2 but otherwise is semi-auto only at T-3 so should be fine with fitting in T-3 in my opinion as an outlier considering its stronger than rifle rounds but is limited to semi-auto unless using a chip which allows automatic fire but reduces the damage to T-2 so its not power creep or OP.
 
Last edited:
The rules clearly say rifles are in Tier 2.

Submission is placed on hold until the changes are made.
 
That hardly seems fair. It has a T-2 damage equivalent already for its automatic configuration.

Its also not a Rifle. Nowhere in the article does it say assault rifle or designating it as a Rifle but clearly as a Battle Rifle in its purpose. A platform that is traditionally more powerful than a rifle so it should reflect that in its damage.

Sniper rifles can be T-3/4 so a battle rifle that fits between rifle and sniper rifles can/should fit into T-3.
 
Okay but the NSP that's one of the examples for tier 3 is a pistol capable of this damage, the M43 is a big gun with a big battery and I feel like it makes sense for a big semi automatic energy battle rifle to do tier 3 damage?

Edit: Additionally large-caliber rifles with the tier 3 rating on them already exist on the wiki with a good number of examples, heck even things smaller than full length rifles exist in the tier 3 category, they just suck to fire.
 
Last edited:
in general, the submission review should lean on the side of being a helper rather than a gatekeeper. Star Army members will produce submissions of various quality. Some will be almost instantly ready-to-approve, and some will require major work. As staff members, we should try to assist the submitter to make their ideas work for everyone and to bring their submission up to a very high level of quality.
Click to expand...

doesn't A.S.K. exist and is part of the reviewing process for a reason to avoid stuff like this?

Immediately going NO. And offering no solutions and simply beating down someone trying to submit something and offering no solutions or trying to work with them hinders not only my creativity and motivation to do anything wiki related but also hinders the NTSE when you decide to tie up a review with gatekeeping when you know I'm going to not simply lie there and take it.


Regardless I've changed the base damage to T-2. I just wanted that noted that I'm clearly being gatekept considering how many weapons get to slide past this rule without limitations (which I've clearly added to make it balanced) and are never enforced; Even for the pistol/rifle damage limitations (last i checked i nerfed the Nova Pistol when those limits where put out and the HHG got a nerf but nobody else was required to do so any other time that rule was brought up even when i was NTSE it was ignored by other reviewers).

Before i make any other changes i would like a checklist so my submission can be claimed by a reviewer.
 
I don't see why this can't be approved in it's original (tier 3) state seeing as it's basically the Nepleslian equivalent of the PAAR40, a hard-hitting battle rifle for non-PA infantry, heck they're both bullpups even. I really don't see what the problem here might be beyond personal bias, which should always try to be kept far away from the NTSE.
 
Last edited:
I can't give a full reply right now, because I have a meeting in 4 minutes. But in short, the weapons that are over tiered that I know of are all weapons with actual 'faults' and 'downsides' they are not 'perfectly' functioning weapons. Either that or they are weapons that have a in and out of power armor mode, with using the power armor mode actually causing damage to the user if they are not in power armor. To my knowledge (and I don't know every weapon) nothing had a higher DR just because "It's bigger".
 
Understood and hope ye meeting goes well.

I will say on that-that's also what i tried to do to keep it balanced.

It was a semi-auto (does not fire in full auto) weapon, with a smaller magazine than the M3aws.

Its full-auto capability can not be easily switched and is a tier weaker (Tier 2) and is less than accurate at range because of how it works.

Its overcharged capability is only one shot (not semi or full auto, literally one shot) and drains an entire special magazine so its not something you are unloading at PA but instead a single-use high risk/high reward option.

The special options for it all have drawbacks (The suppressor vents severely limits fire rate, the IR lense can still be seen with the very capabilities every single neko, marine, NDC soldier, etc. has access to, the Automatic chip has already stated its drawbacks, etc.)

It's loud, has heavy recoil, and has a super-bright beam brighter than any tracer.


I was working under the assumption trying to make a balanced weapon with clear drawbacks that isnt OP like having it a full-auto PA killer would be would work in my favor and make the submission easier.
 
As I recall, the DR represented a damage profile that helped establish its role. There are pistols that fire rifle cartridges, and grenade launchers that fire non-lethal tear gas. Energy weapons tend to deal a different type of damage than ballistic weapons.

There's no denying that the non PA footsoldier needs more firepower than a homeowner and a laser weapon is a great medium for that. Something I didn't find was the description of the damage it deals. Maybe that can help the review process?
 
I've always thought of T3 as an order of magnitude higher than T2, as in each level is ten times the power.

I'm just tired of debating over these numbers.
 
This isn't my submission so I wont make the calls, but I will say this that helped me in previous submissions. I understand the want to use rate of fire as a method for compensating for high damage, however we do not have any true statistical expression of RoF when RPing you can pretty much fire as many shots as you want within a post while RPing. So I would advise someone if they wanted to add a handicap to their weapon, to avoid using RoF as compensation unless it's extreme like needed to charge up for each shot and taking 10~30 seconds or something like that.
 
Updated the article with a marksman configuration (still T-2 damage, just increased range), and some new models and scopes.
Removed IPG restrictions since nothing IPG has happened in a while and its already available to purchase to the public anyone can have what really arent very special things to restrict anyway.
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top