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
  • 📅 October and November 2024 are YE 46.8 in the RP.

[Rules] Another Military Buildup Limitations Update

F

FrostJaeger

Banned Member
For Reviewers:
  • Contains Unapproved Sub-Articles? No.
  • Contains Links to Unapproved Articles? No.
  • Contains New Art? No.
  • Previously Submitted? Yes; rejected due to being in the wrong sub-forum.
  • Changelog: Link
  • Checklist Requested? Yes.
Yet another small update that moves a couple of bullet points around to enhance readability and more importantly closes one of the few remaining loopholes in the MBL: the fact that under the current rules, it’s theoretically possible for anyone with a shipyard or huge space station to simultaneously construct an infinite number of ships, regardless of what common sense, logic, or IC constraints might say.
 
Is this really needed or useful?

It kinda drives home that DRv3 is a poor fit for SARP. We could have built on DRv2 with point buy, and had an easy to use chart letting us know how long it would take to build a ship of any size, including weird ones, and give us a great way to balance edge-case ships like all-in-on-engines interceptors with ships that are low on engines and high on armor. Instead we doubled-down on making every ship exactly like every other ship in the worst possible way.

Then we have lines like this: "Additional shipyards constructed after a faction’s approval must be constructed by pre-existing shipyards. "

~~POST EDITED BY STAFF TO REMOVE CONTENT THAT VIOLATED THE COMMUNITY GUIDELINES~~ --Wes

Then we have these two rules: "
  • Shipyards can only construct one ship, system defense platform, or huge space station at a time.1)
  • Shipyards can not “speed up” the construction process by sharing their capabilities/resources/etc. with each other.2)
Which, ok, but everyone is more or less following that anyways. With the Lorath players gone, there really isn't anyone trying to abuse these rules. What's going to happen is Frost is going to use this later to make more complaint threads about other factions which no one wants. Its way more interesting to have ships be built in batches, or to have rush-jobs be done to assemble one ship in an emergency than it is to enforce a one at a time rule. Worse yet this is certainly going to be used by Frost to insist that distributed factories and product outsourcing can't be used to contribute to ship construction, or that if a factory on some planet somewhere is being used to make parts for a ship, it can only make parts for that ship for that period of build time.

And the final rule: Huge Space Stations may be equipped with a maximum of ten shipyards.3)

Which the question then becomes is that 1+10+10 shipyards for a total of 21 per system? 1+10 since the huge starbase shipyards count against the total? Or is that just a flat 10 because the huge starbase doesn't count?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here’s what Zack’s post looks like without the personal attacks, the off-topic complaints about DRv3, and the quotes from the submission article:

Zack said:
Should shipyards appear out of thin air for new factions, and should shipyards be the only thing that can build shipyards?

Its way more interesting to have ships be built in batches, or to have rush-jobs be done to assemble one ship in an emergency than it is to enforce a one at a time rule. [This] is certainly going to be used by Frost to insist that distributed factories and product outsourcing can't be used to contribute to ship construction, or that if a factory on some planet somewhere is being used to make parts for a ship, it can only make parts for that ship for that period of build time.

Which the question then becomes is that 1+10+10 shipyards for a total of 21 per system? 1+10 since the huge starbase shipyards count against the total? Or is that just a flat 10 because the huge starbase doesn't count?
Click to expand...


Firstly, Zack, no one’s saying that shipyards should “appear out of thin air for new factions”; rather, the shipyard - be it located in space or on the ground - would’ve been constructed during a new faction’s pre-RP backstory and would’ve been what was used to construct any ships they started out with. The reason “shipyards [are] the only thing that can build shipyards” is because constructing a ship/defense platform/space station/etc. is an extremely complicated task that requires specialized equipment to perform - just like in real life - and because it drastically reduces the potential for abuse and powergaming by making it harder to “shipyard rush” by starting out with, say, 10 construction ships.

Secondly, Zack, although you may find it “way more interesting to have ships be built in batches, or to have rush-jobs be done to assemble one ship in an emergency,” I don’t, because the former leads to the situation I described in the original post - a situation where “anyone with a single shipyard or a huge space station [can] simultaneously construct an infinite number of ships” - while the latter can easily be abused to circumvent the building times, and you’re right: in my opinion, “distributed factories and product outsourcing” should not “be used to contribute to ship construction,” because things like that add what I feel is an unnecessary layer of complexity to what should be a relatively simple and headache-free process. The same goes for taking into account things like “a factory on some planet somewhere [...] being used to make parts for a ship,” because, in all honesty, a system like that - although certainly realistic - seems to me like an extraneous set of rules that don’t add much of anything to one’s roleplaying experience.

Wes, in my humble opinion, sums it up quite nicely here:

Wes said:
I feel like the last thing a statless, systemless RP like Star Army needs is more rules.
Click to expand...


Lastly, the final part of your post is a great question, and one that I apologize for not answering in the submission itself. Here’s what I meant to convey in the submission:
  • Appropriately-equipped huge space stations may function as shipyards.
  • Huge Space Stations that function as shipyards count towards the limit of 10 shipyards per controlled star system.

Edit: I updated the submission to match what I said in this post, and I’m pretty sure that Zack is referring to this thread when he says that I “objected [...] on the grounds that only shipyards can build shipyards” - though after re-reading said thread, I never said anything about shipyards being the only thing capable of building other shipyards, so maybe he’s referring to something else...?

Edit #2: To simplify things even further, I’ve edited this post and the submission to read that huge space stations may function as one shipyard instead of ten, and that huge space stations functioning as shipyards count towards the limit of ten shipyards per controlled star system. Aplogies for any confusion this causes... >.<
 
Last edited:
USER WAS WARNED FOR THIS POST
So a while back, Rizzo bought Howard station.

This involved his character getting a loan from another character, who came into a lot of money through the salvage lottery. They then RP'd deployment of the station as well as building the interior infrastructure. This is basically a perfect example of how things should be done.

Frost objected to this on the grounds that only shipyards can build shipyards, to which we replied 'Obviously not' and 'stop bothering us'.

Fast forward to now and Frost is just asking that we change the rules to fit his interpretation. I mean obviously shipyards can be built by other things. Obviously adding more gamey rules goes against Wes feeling like stararmy doesn't need those rules.

~~POST EDITED BY STAFF TO REMOVE CONTENT THAT VIOLATED THE COMMUNITY GUIDELINES~~ --Wes
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ametheliana said:
This is going nowhere without the SM. If anybody thinks replying right now is helping their case is foolish, so don't do it. Just let this sit until the SM can make a call.
Click to expand...
I'm on this side. I don't really get why we're seeing Zack ragging on Frost and dragging him through the mud, screaming for an NTSE ban, in a submission thread. I'm also not sure what you've been smoking, Zack, that you think no one wants to do Elysia things. Their Discord is active and Elysia-related RP is scattered in many plots.

Stop using the settings board to wage your personal war against Frost. No one else bumps heads with him AFAIK due to IC-blocked rulings. There's plenty other people, GMs, and FMs who don't have ANY problems with the things getting clarified/added/removed in the NTSE.

Seriously, I'd love if this underhanded "ban Frost reeee" stuff stopped. It got old when this tactic was used against people before and it's already old. Grow up and stop trying to bend the rules with your RP if you are ACTUALLY getting held up. For all the claims of how great USO does, how the hell can anyone believe Frost is actually hindering you?

TLDR: We need military build-up limitations so that maybe in the future we can begin introducing new factions again without them hitting the swing-fly-fall pace problems that happened with new nations wanting to spring to top-tier power. This isn't hard to get or really arguable. I'm sure Wes will state something similar, since he's approved the limit for years. And they have worked multiple times to prevent quick-burn nations from leaving tons of unanswered assets already. You can bet once the rules get removed that someone will want to break them/abuse the system. Then it devolves into "well my RP said X about my fleet so sucks to be you".

This isn't a system that hinders RP. It deters and keeps factions in check so people have to commit time to them if they want large fleets.
 
I need a list of actual changes that were made to really compare the new one to the old one.

I think we should try to make the guidelines as simple as we can because no one is going to track if the rules are being followed or not if it's complicated to do that.

Perhaps we should be looking at changes that will help the site. The current part about star systems and/or planets encourages land grabs but often planets that get added or colonized aren't actually getting used or detailed in the RP. Instead I am thinking that maybe it might make more sense to drop that in favor of crediting factions with ship-buying credits for things like the number of new posts their faction gets on the forum each month. This would be simple to count from the front page of the forum.

Also: Personal jabs will not be tolerated from either side.
 
The credits idea could work; however, FMs could simply produce low quality plots at an incredible pace. This does take some effort, but if one was really dedicated to messing with the system that would cause collapse.

Personally build credits don’t make much sense to me. Reasons here.

1. Planets = ships makes a little more sense due to increased factors of production, but posts = ships could end up with like a tiny faction with a pop of 100 having a ridiculous amount of ships because they have like, 50 posts a month. This makes little sense.

2. What if it’s an old, established faction LIKE ELYSIA or the Neshaten? They have a lack of players, and on top of that Frost is constantly busy, which makes it so we really only have one plot. It doesn’t make intuitive sense how either would have a very small fleet, although by credits they’ll have tiny fleets because they’re just trying to get to their feet again.

Build credits attatched to ships doesn’t make too much sense. Ideally we’d implement an actual economic system, but I would rather not have FMs need to deal with macroeconomic principles.

Seriously. We’d be entering some 4X game-level of madness. We’d have to manage production, population, happiness, and the resources we have access to. I’d write up some INCREDIBLY CONVOLUTED FORMULA that abstractifies how much money your faction makes per month, and each FM would have to divvy that up. I mean Frost would probably be up for the game of numbers, but an FM like Ame or Legix, well, they probably wouldn’t want to deal with Meta’s Wild Math Ride(tm).

But, maybe we can simulate that somehow. I just don’t know how, would like ideas.
 
Would it be possible to just send out a monthly PM or something, first of the month, between the FMs and Wes or Ame and the other setting people that just says what you either built last month or planned to build the coming month? And give a very short explanation, maybe with a link to a thread? And if anyone sees a problem they point it out in private, Wes or whoever has final say, and everyone has a record of who did what when, and why? Or maybe a check-in every other month, every quarter, etc.

I'd suggest using a wiki page to track it, but that could be edited without everyone noticing, and having it saved in a PM would be 'safer' I suppose.
 
Reynolds said:
Would it be possible to just send out a monthly PM or something, first of the month, between the FMs and Wes or Ame and the other setting people that just says what you either built last month or planned to build the coming month? And give a very short explanation, maybe with a link to a thread? And if anyone sees a problem they point it out in private, Wes or whoever has final say, and everyone has a record of who did what when, and why? Or maybe a check-in every other month, every quarter, etc.

I'd suggest using a wiki page to track it, but that could be edited without everyone noticing, and having it saved in a PM would be 'safer' I suppose.
Click to expand...
While this is definitely the ideal, I think monthly tracking wouldn't do much aside from try people's patience. There's a lot of work that goes into being FMs even before the level of tedious micro-meta managing it would plop toward some of us.

I think the better way is still via over-time or discussion. Nothing says we can't discuss and try to work this stuff out, but the system is a fallback so we don't have to police one another heavily. Having the system allows us to simply manage for those who aren't in this for the metagame-level number-creep, while also slowing those who are trying to only do that. Bypassing the system is also not unheard of, but these exceptions have been done in the past because people spoke with the SM and got it cleared.

This is why it's a good healthy reminder that the limitations are a mix of guideline and rules. You are expected to follow it, but you can speak and at times work around it to promote RP. It keeps things simple while also securing checks.
 
Alrighty-o. @Wes, here’s the list of changes you requested...
  • To increase cohesiveness and decrease the amount of “backtracking” readers have to do, the three sentences under the table in the Limitations section of the original article have been put under a sub-header titled Notes in the new article and have been converted into a bulleted list that also includes the two bullets from the original article’s Additional Notes section. Both the sentences and the bullet points themselves remain the same.
  • The Huge Space Station and Shipyard bullet points in the new article’s Military Object Types sub-section have had an additional sentence added to them in order to close the loophole mentioned in this thread’s opening post.
    • Huge Space Stations
    • Shipyards
      • Original: “Shipbuilding facilities and/or starships that are capable of building capital ships and/or warships.”
      • New: “Installations or starships that are capable of building huge space stations, shipyards, starships, system defense platforms, or some combination thereof. They can only build one huge space station, shipyard, starship, or system defense platform at a time.”
  • The sentence under the table in the new article’s Building Times section has been expanded to account for the new Notes sub-section beneath it.
    • Original: “These build times override any previously listed build times on starship stat pages.”
    • New: “These build times override any previously listed build times on starship stat pages; similarly, the rules listed in the section below override any conflicting information found elsewhere on the wiki.”
  • The Notes sub-section mentioned in the previous bullet point contains the second sentence from the original article’s Building Times section in bulleted form. Though said sentence remains unchanged, it’s joined by two new bullet points (which, like the additional definition sentences mentioned earlier, were added in to close the loophole mentioned in this thread’s opening post):
    • ”Additional huge space stations, shipyards, and system defense platforms constructed after a faction’s approval must be constructed by pre-existing shipyards.”
    • ”The construction process of huge space stations, shipyards, starships, and system defense platforms cannot be “sped up” for any reason.”
(I know, I know - some of the changes contradict what I said here. It’s because I thought about the matter while working yesterday, and realized that it makes little sense for SARP’s equivalent of this to have the same amount of “building capacity” as SARP’s equivalent of this. Sorry... >.<)

Edit: A bit late, I know, but here’s the rest of my post.

I agree wholeheartedly with what META_mahn said here - although it appears to be an elegantly simple solution, “crediting factions with ship-buying credits for things like the number of new posts their faction gets on the forum each month” would in my opinion promote quantity at the cost of quality by turning roleplaying into a competition of who can put out the most amount of posts in the shortest amount of time - and with what Legix said here. Although a monthly PM would be the “cleanest” way of doing things, it would require a decent amount of extra work - and, without a set of rules to back it up, would invariably lead to arguments like “faction x is making too many ships for their faction size” and “faction y is making their ships too fast.”
 
Last edited:
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top