• 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 stararmy@gmail.com 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

Rejected Submission [Submission Rules] Armament Limitations

F

FrostJaeger

Banned Member
  • Faction requires art: Nope.
  • Contains unapproved sub-articles? Nope.
  • Contains new art? Nope.
  • Previously submitted? Nope, though it contains elements from this and this.
Well, here you have it, ladies and/or gentlemen. The expanded, fleshed-out, more-thoroughly-explained (no offense @Fred) replacement/re-installment/I don't even know because I typed this up at 4 in the morning for DRv3's weapon limitations.

I'd like to thank @Arbitrated, @META_mahn, @Talarn, and the rest of the SARPChat Discord server for acting as reviewers/moral support/editors/etc. and @Fred for creating the basis of the system in the first place, but, uh, yeah, that's pretty much all I have to say due to being really, really tired at the time of writing.

As before, would @Wes, @Doshii Jun, @Fred, @Ametheliana, and @CadetNewb (plus anyone else who has constructive criticism) mind looking at this thing (or a derivative of it, anyways) one more time?

Also, one other minor request @Wes: Would you lock and/or move the original thread to the "Rejected or Abandoned Submissions" sub-forum, please? In my opinion, this submission kind of, uh, supersedes the older one in terms of purpose and scope.

P.S.: @Zack My apologies for not replying to the 4th Elysian Empire submission in a more timely fashion; I'll be doing so tomorrow - and it's something I'll do my best to be more "on top of" in the future.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
Yeah sure. Thats a modification alright.
Because it's not like power armor was built for using handheld weaponry or anything.
 
Rizzo said:
Yeah sure. Thats a modification alright.
Because it's not like power armor was built for using handheld weaponry or anything.
Click to expand...
I made an edit to my post, I forgot to address the part about the power armor before.
 
Whatever, this is useless and I have a plot about cargo ships pumping several tons of ordinance into some corvettes to work on
 
Well...I asked for a poll because I figured it would show if this submission concept was liked or not, and naturally it closed with 50% of the votes on each side...so basically no help at all.

As it got closer and closer to the poll, my feelings have gotten stronger and stronger on this, kind of like how when you're forced to make a decision, the decision sudden often becomes clear. I was really hoping for a "no" vote by the end.

Here's why:
  • Star Army is not a tabletop RPG. We don't need RPG stat systems and this strongly resembled one.
  • The site already has more rules that it probably should and this only raises the difficulty for people who want to create things. As a ship designer for SARP, I don't feel that these rules will help me make better or more "balanced" ships.
  • Enforcement of these rules would create a burden on me as a submission evaluator, and timely review of submissions on my plate are already an issue on the site. The same applies for the other submission evaluators. Additionally I think it would be pretty demoralizing for me to have to enforce rules I don't support on my own site.
  • The rules, as long have pointed out, don't seem to make logical sense from an IC or OOC perspective with regards to actual capacity.
  • The closeness of the poll results shows the idea is quite controversial and it divided our members pretty badly.
In my view, it's best that in this case we stick with the still-young DRv3 system as is rather than tacking these onto it. I understand why Frost wanted to set a common limit for ship weapons and I applaud him for all the work he did to make this submission the best he could (there were something like 30+ versions in the edit history) so I didn't take this submission lightly. Because the arguments for and against it were pretty even in the thread, I went for the poll for clear, hard numbers. But those numbers haven't materialized, so I've decided we'll stick with the current system and that we will not use Frost's addition. I've also thought about making it a guideline instead of a rule, but that wouldn't really stop the people it would need to stop most. Instead, just go with the amount of weapons that seems to make sense and be reasonable for the shape and capabilities of your starship the way we've always done.

Lastly I want to thank everyone for your patience as we all duked it out in the thread making our respective cases for or against, and most of us kept it very respectful. Frost, thank you most of all for being patient. I was on the other side for this one but I hope you know didn't have any personal beef with you, I just didn't think the change would be good for SARP. I hope we can all go back to our normal activity now that this is settled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…