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.

Rejected Submission [Rules Update] Military Buildup Limitations Update

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

FrostJaeger

Banned Member
Submission URL
https://stararmy.com/wiki/doku.php?id=wip:guide:military_buildup_limitations
For Reviewers:
  • Contains Unapproved Sub-Articles?No.
  • Contains Links to Unapproved Articles? No.
  • Contains New Art? No.
  • Previously Submitted? Yes and Yes; was withdrawn by the submitter both times.
  • Changelog: Link
  • Checklist Requested? Yes.
As you requested, @Wes, the corporate buildup limitations section now consists of two sentences; furthermore, both the faction and corporation sections now have examples. :D

Anyhoo, this is basically a combination of these submissions that's been streamlined to minimize complexity.

Note: This thread is not for discussing issues with the current Military Buildup Limitations and/or the NTSE. If you want to discuss either of the above, make a separate thread. Inflammatory/off-topic/toxic/troll posts can and will be reported to staff members.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
Two notes I would make.

First, great, it's based on the number of industrialized star systems I have. What limits the number of industrialized star systems?

Second, I think that using an actual organization in the examples is probably a bad idea.
 
@Soban - Industrialized systems are limited only by the number of community members actively roleplaying in one's faction, and that limit is only invoked when a faction goes on an expansionistic rampage without any RP to back it up; regarding your second point, however, I must respectfully disagree - as in my opinion using an actual organization for an example increases said example's relevancy.
 
May I ask why the examples chosen were specifically USO related?
I ask because there are much bigger nations and corporations.
 
@Rizzo - USO and FSC were primarily chosen because their small size makes it easier to illustrate the rounding aspects of the corporate limitations.

(Their small size also made it easier on my fingers - I typed this entire submission up on my brother's phone. ;-; )
 
Works for me, may I ask though how a larger company like origin Industries would be graded? If I recall they do business in both of the largest factions and own 3 huge space stations. How would we determine what their limits would be since they do International business?
 
@Rizzo - Origin Industries would be considered a corporation of the Yamatai Star Empire, as its headquarters, located in Ake, falls within the YSE’s territory according to Grid 1421 of the sector map.

“Giant space stations that have thousands of shipyards” would be classified as huge space stations, @Alex Hart. A future update - that was excluded from this submission for the sake of simplicity - will address the issue created by some huge space stations having way more shipyards then others.
 
USER WAS WARNED FOR THIS POST
Didn’t we already decide that this wasn’t wanted, and can we go a week without the Elysian clique trying to target the USO faction with new rules?

I don’t want to have to do a corporate namespace landgrab to increase my ship count.

The only thing I do really want from the buildup guidelines is to slim the whole thing down and allow tier equivalency for shipcount instead of the current guidelines.
 
Stop with the flaming, Zack.
 
ON TOPIC: I'm not sure if we should work on this right now - instead, I personally think we should let the DRv3 update settle for a little bit before trying to change/make/whatever more rules. Though, if you want to carry on with making this update, I do suggest adding at least one "big" faction like Nepland in, just so people might get a somewhat more fleshed out sense of scaling.
 
Analyzing the scaling would also let you realize if it’s overpowered or not. Because while on the small scale things may sound nice, when numbers get big things get wild.

Also, be VERY careful about giving out battleships and dreadnoughts — there aren’t many downsides to fielding them in SARP (yet!)
 
I think it was you that said that this wasn't wanted.

wes said:
I think we should just focus on writing for now and less on stats and ship numbers.
Click to expand...

I would also love to see how many ships current factions are allowed under these rules, and how far down we can expect to see their ship numbers adjusted.
 
Will do, @Arbitrated, as you're right - having a faction like Nepleslia would indeed be helpful for providing a sense of scale.

Don't worry, @META_mahn - one of the provisions of the rules is that corporations cannot field capital ships. :p

Stop attempting to derail this discussion, @Zack. The thread's opening post explicitly stated that this is not the place for discussing the current MBL - and faction ship counts are not affected by this update.
 
I'm a little confused as to why a corporation that is capable of constructinga capital ship couldn't field it. It is unfair to judge all corporationsas having the same means and needs in space vessel. This cannot remain in this list of rules if you expect them to be followed. I understandthat Meta has some interesting views on ships but he is one person. My concern is that this rule will apply imaginary limits on a story. That is bad.

IC Question: "I have the money, the manpower, the necessity. Why can't I captain ship X?"
IC Answer from the rules proposed: "I dunno, you just cant."
Seems quite silly to me.

I'd also quote Wes when he said that he didn't want SARP to become a tabletop RPG. This submission can easily become a problem with that desire. We are telling a story after all, not playing DnD. Be careful that this rule not become rigid so as to inhibit naturally flowing stories.
 
Here's the OOC reason a corporation capable of constructing a capital ship can't field it: It's unbalanced and it's atrociously unfair to corporations in smaller factions. Let's assume, for instance, that Nepleslia has twenty or so industrialized star systems. That right there is three hundred warships available to a Nepleslian corporation - twice the amount a single-system faction like USO has at its disposal - and now you're saying that Nepleslian corporation should have another two hundred capital ships?

That's just a bit too much like a "personal empire," in my opinion - and it's because of this that I intend for the ban on corporate capital ships to remain, as it maintains some semblance of balance between the forces of smaller factions and megacorporations.

Might this rule apply OOC limits on a story? Perhaps yes, perhaps no - but that brings me to my next point.

Here's the OOC reason a corporation capable of constructing a capital ship can't field it: there's no IC reason a corporation would need to do so in the first place - not when a corporation's safety is almost always guaranteed by the military forces of its host nation. A corporation like Google, for example, has no need to maintain its own private military - why bother when it can call upon the United States of America's armed forces - so why would a corporation in SARP need to maintain one?

Lastly, Rizzo, how is limiting the forces of corporations in the same fashion that factions have been limited for at least the past nine years constitute a problem with the desire to not have SARP become a tabletop RPG?" I, in all of my years here, have never once seen the MBL actually get in the way of telling a story nor have I ever seen its rigidity inhibit stories.

EDIT: No, Rizzo didn't double-post - I posted this in response to this, took it down to remove the unnecessary (and kind of passive-aggressive, now that I think about it) quotations - then saw that Rizzo had made another post.

Anyhoo, I don't want to change the MBL now - I just want to expand its "jurisdiction" slightly to include corporations in addition to factions.
 
IC the reason corps should not be allowed to build cappies is because in a faction such as Nepleslia, the strength of the corps surpasses that of the actual military.


This is a bad thing.


If the corporations really wanted to, they could overthrow the government. To prevent this, removing capital ships removes a dangerous part of their arsenal. Now the corporations don’t have a capital ship, which grants the military the range advantage in battle.
 
Okay, @FrostJaeger, I legit thought I had imagined a post from you. I've had a drink!
So if our concern is a corporate takeover of the government, shouldn't that be handled ICly by the government. You know, like law enforcement?

Also, not all governments can protect their corporations. The USO specifically has a certain Mish problem and the faction is, to my great displeasure, composed of groups that cannot seem to cooperate in an efficient manner. In this way I'd have to say that rules like this will cause more complication. Shouldn't our rules serve to remove complications?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top