• 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
  • 📅 February and March 2024 are YE 46.2 in the RP.

Request for minor update to DRv3 text.

Toshiro

Well-Known Member
My apologies for not using the standard form. The following doesn't seem to fit in with it.

There was a recent discussion on speed doublers/triplers/overdrive, as well as confusion as to the top speeds of vessels of the Plumeria lineage as well as missiles. Specifically, there was no provision in the DRv3 standard for or against them on the wiki and some articles still possessed them -- even ones being currently submitted.

Eventually, the proof of their rejection from the setting had to come not from the wiki, but from the memories of some players and Wes' statement in the forum, six years ago: https://stararmy.com/roleplay-forum/index.php?threads/panopteles-class.7164/#post-116623

The Plumeria and Fuji have since had overboost removed by Wes, and the Turbo Aether Plasma Article has as well. Given that the lack of documentation caused this problem in the first place, however, I request the following sentence (or some better interpretation to be defined in this thread through discussion) be added under the "How fast can I go" section of the DRv3 wiki page:

"Means of exceeding these speeds (previously employed as overboost, speed doublers, and speed triplers) were removed from the setting as of January 1, 2011. Articles containing these aspects are obsolesced and should be corrected."

(Edit: Sorry for putting this in the wrong area, thanks for moving it.)
 
Last edited:
Sounds fine to me.
 
Not so much for me.

The "How Fast Can I Go" section was mostly a holdover of DRv2 having the same information and it seemed semi-relevant due to armor qualities being stated in DRv3's protections section. But I've never liked having it there. It seemed almost redundant given the speed standard pages elsewhere, but is tenuously retained for stuff that doesn't adhere to those standards (non-military/independant ships).

Now, there's this proposal to add even more information which wasn't a factor before in DRv2, and still isn't a factor in DRv3. To me, that's just adding needless weight to it.

I say if the overboost/doubler/tripler is obsolesced, then it shouldn't be mentioned. It's giving attention to something that doesn't need it.
 
I might agree, except that the overboost/doubler/tripler was already not mentioned and it caused trouble later because people (including staff) forgot that it was obsolesced. The lack of mention in the wiki caused this problem in the first place.

An alternative is to remove every reference of overboost/doubling/tripling in the wiki, I suppose, which should be done anyway...but I'm still wary of this happening again with new submissions like it did with the Fuji and the missile article.

Edit: Upon reflection, the Fuji was only so because the Plumeria still had it, so that one would have been resolved by wiki removal, but I don't know about the missile. Maybe we should just wipe out all wiki references to it, and have that be enough...
 
Last edited:
Yes, that would be nice, Wes.

Another issue has cropped up in the missile discussion. Since FTL speeds are limited in star system, FTL torpedoes (like the Ke-Z1) apparently do not function at FTL speeds in such situations. There is an argument for increasing the maximum STL speed limit under DRv3 specifically in the case of missiles, in exchange for them using one use (overloaded) propulsion systems. While a +0.025c argument was initially recommended, some believe it should be higher for various reasons stated here in this thread: https://stararmy.com/roleplay-forum...ia-adrast-type-tactical-missile-update.59224/

I was an advocate of the +0.025c idea, but now am wondering if that is insufficient at longer ranges. Arguments have been made for both camps. I also request the amendment of the Ke-Z1 article to better reflect current interpretations, since it currently references obsolesced interdiction rules instead of current FTL practices.
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top