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
  • 📅 January 2025 is YE 47.1 in the RP.

To help clear up some misconceptions...

Uh, there are Kevyn. Refits upgrades and the like. What you're proposing however would kind of hamper creative development as far as ships go. IC years can take quite awhile. ;) I believe YE 29 lasted two years? (Please correct me if I am wrong) But, ships do see refits and upgrades, refining, and defining as you have said. :) But that shouldn't stop the march of progress.

Some of these nations have the sheer manpower to create ship designs in short spans of time, or have been in development for a few IC years, waiting for the right moment to make themselves known.
 
But, it still takes time to actually make things. Real world example; the USAF F22 Raptor fighter jet took the better part of twenty years to go from concept to active service. The what's the turnover in terms of design to production for ships IC? Maybe ten years? Five? Less? I mean, look at the Hray gunship. It went from consept to full production in no more then a year. They developed an advanced stealth space craft from base principles in less then a year! Am I the only one who finds that improbably fast?

I can appreciate that people want to leave their marks on ship designs and the like, but the turnover that is encountered here leads to the sort of headaches that Strangelove is complaining about. What's already occurred can't be changed. But in the future, extending R&D cycles to something marginally realistic will force people to think more about how to use what they have to counter tactics, rather then just relying on scientific oneupmanship.
 
Well, we do use what we have to perform counter tactics. *shrugs* If people want to build their ships, let them it is an RP site after all, and waiting five years is not an option. There will always be people trying to one up the other, that is something no one can stop. =\ Quite frankly it helps breed diversity in ship and technology designs, and encourages for more to be made.

If you're asking to have R&D to be more realistic, we're looking at designs being put on hold for months, and even years OOCly as far as IC time flows.
 
Right, using the now age is never a good idea.

The SARP age is a age of super computers that rattle out things neigh instantly that'd take months to do for a normal human, with massive spaces of areas. As such, things move along quickly.

Think about that if the mass of classes annoys you. :mrgreen:
 
Seeing ships appearing a breakneck pace isn't what the real problem here is. I can kind of appreciate designing new applications of existing technology rapidly here. The problem is that entirely new technologies are being developed remarkably quickly. See Strangelove's above exchange between Team Red and Team Blue for what irritates me.

By all means, keep developing conventional ships. But why are we getting new technology developed from base principles on a monthly basis, IC?
 
'Cause it's a pissing match. You don't see Nepleslia (anymore) or Yamatai introducing such technologies because they're OK where they are. Other nations have to worry about it, though.

Also, what's a new technology? Lor can create new munitions, but they're not really using new tech -- not as far as this setting is concerned. It's all been done one way or another at this point.

Jessica wants some kind of science. Andrew wants regulation and order. Personally, I wish we'd have less of this and more RP.

But this is how the democracy of it works, I guess.
 
Jessica wants some kind of science. Andrew wants regulation and order. Personally, I wish we'd have less of this and more RP.
Click to expand...

This is not what Andrew wants. Andrew wants RP. Andrew is RP Monster. NUM NUM NUM!
 
Toshiro note my comment.
 
Some things I wanted to say about this conversation:

It is a good conversation as that it does shed some light onto some of the more vague descriptions within the setting. Yes--things from within this conversation may influence future OFFICIAL revisions to the system. No--They are not going to be utilized for any kind of immediate overhaul of the SARP systems. If we rush into implementing changes in the way things work on the IC level we risk destroying current plot lines as well as canon.

Making policy changes is a delicate procedure which occurs overtime and is at the discretion of the STAFF and the ADMINS. Snappy decisions tend to have devastating effects on storyline. And storyline is our top priority, it comes before scientific explanation; thus why the first question in our minds on a submission is --is this good for the setting?. My apologies but we just cant go changing canon every time the science buffs come out with some new explanation of why something in the setting doesn't work.

I am not saying these discussions are worthless, rather the opposite. They become important in the conversations staff and admins have when it is time to make changes.

Anyway continue on, I have found some of the information interesting.--Thanks.
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top