What's new
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
  • 📅 July 2024 is YE 46.5 in the RP.

[Origin] Impulse Components page

Kai

Kai

Retired Staff
Inactive Member
Submission Type: Power Armor components listing
Submission URL: https://wiki.stararmy.com/doku.php?id=origin:impulse_powered_armor_system:components

Faction: Origin
FM Approved Yet? (Yes/No; Who, When) Yes, Me, when I made it.

For Reviewers:
Contains Unapproved Sub-Articles? Yes:
Backpack Modules

Previously Submitted? (Yes/No; explain reason if rejected) No

Notes: Custom parts for the impulse. Performance comes with a Price. Also, the Atlas SAoY variant will have its own page made in the future. If need be, I can remove that section from this article for now.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Just was curious to know if you knew that Nepleslia is using the Atlas codename for a new destroyer class.
 
I was not aware- The Atlas name for the Impulse variant was actually decided upon and accepted by Wes about four months ago, and it's just taken me this long to submit the article.
 
Can you fix the random capitalization?
 
This review is for: [Origin] Impulse Components page

The submitted article is/has…
[x] A very high level of overall quality
[x] A general topic sentence under the title header
[x] Artwork (illustrations are required 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)
[-] 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
[x] 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
[-] 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.

  • Red Links

Status: Pending

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.

Lack of an in-character manufacturing date.

I intend to finish this review by: Finished
 
I have added the year the components became available in the first section.
As for the red link- That page is waiting on this page to be made, and will be submitted once I have been able to finish it, which shouldn't be too long.
 
Well for now go ahead and remove the red link itself, then once it's approved, just add the link back in :)

Because, by sub rules, can't have any red links.
 
Done, though I'm not certain why it's deemed such an issue for one small red link.

Anywho, any other questions or concerns? How about the backplate modules, anything wrong with those?
 
Yes, there was, and No problem. I'd rather not have something sneak by that could have possibly been improved! or something.
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top