STAR ARMY

Sci-fi roleplaying and worldbuilding community

User Tools

Site Tools


guide:submission_rules

This is an old revision of the document!


Submission Rules

Also see Race Submission Rules if you plan on designing a new species.

  1. All submissions must be constructive and useful to the SARP Setting.
    • Tip: Make an effort to improve on existing designs; we have a lot of good designs that could use some refit or upgrading.
  2. All submissions must be in compliance with Star Army Site Policies. In particular we don't want your submission to violate copyright law.
  3. Unapproved articles should be linked on and ONLY on the list_of_unapproved_concepts and must be tagged with a notice saying the page is not yet approved.
  4. Forum posts requesting evaluation/approval must be in the form of links to wiki articles.
    • The NTSE forum is the only place where articles get approved.
    • Permission to submit an article does not imply approval of that article (eg Wes can give someone to make a KFY submission but it still must go through the normal evaluation).
  5. No applicable submission will be accepted without the appropriate damage rating stats.
  6. All new designs are to be in compliance with the Starship Speed Standard.
  7. A submission must meet a reasonable level of plausibility and scientific explanation).
    • Too complex can be just as bad as too weakly described. The staff can determine such application and will attempt to point you in the correct direction.
    • Nanotechnology construction devices or nanotechnology anti-starship weapons are not plausible (see this page for an explanation)
  8. Submissions cannot be for a future year or time. A lot can change; we cannot predict it.
  9. The Admins and Staff have the right to disapprove any technology that is redundant, or overpowered.
    • Any new dimensions or planes that are like hyperspace or subspace
    • Any new method of FTL travel
    • Self-replicating super battleships
    • Godlike beings
    • Some superweapons
    • Stuff obviously designed to circumvent or ignore current SARP rules and systems
  10. If submitting an item made by a corporation/faction you do not control you will need the controlling person's permission before your submission can be approved (Example: All items made by Ketsurui Fleet Yards must go through Wes for prior approval)
  11. It is encouraged to use the standard_product_nomenclature_system.
  12. For each nation, for each military starship submission must be accompanied by one or more (preferably two) quality civilian starship designs.
  13. We won't accept cutting edge or advanced technology for factions that don't have any role-play going on.
  14. Do not try to rush the review process. This includes but is not limited to bumping threads and/or harassing the reviewer in chatrooms by spamming the link to your approval thread.
  15. Please don't use second-person language (you, your) in articles unless you are specifically talking to the reader/player (such as with instructions).
  16. Articles with third-party-hosted images (photobucket, imageshack, etc) will not be approved.

Illustrating The Wiki

Although art is not required, we strongly suggest creating or obtaining illustrations for the following article categories:

  • Characters
  • Planets
  • Species (main article and appearance article)
  • Uniforms
  • Vehicles of any type (multiple views preferred)
  • Weapons of any type, especially handheld weapons

Review Policy

  1. Reviews should include the checklist found in the submission_review.
  2. All reviews must be done in a constructive manner. This is an expectation and will be enforced.
  3. Remember Technology & Setting Forum Staff and Admin reviews hold the weight in terms of approval or disapproval. While it is important to keep the suggestions of your fellow players in mind, you should be focusing more on these reviews.

The Appeal

  1. If your submission is denied, it may be locked. At that time it is the submitter’s responsibility to appeal this by contacting the staff/admin who locked and put “not approved” on it. When that staff/admin feels that the topic is ready to be unlocked pending your discussion on the submission, it will be done.
  2. If after the appeal, your submission is still not approved you should consider strongly the advice given by the staff/admin and move on.

Once your Submission is Approved

  1. Make sure you add it to the one of the lists if applicable:
  1. Any refits, modifications or overhauls that change the submission from its state at the time of approval must be submitted again. Include a list of the changes made, to point out the areas requiring focus.

Permission Restriction & Consequences for not following Submission Rules

  1. Any participant in the Technology and Setting process found in violation of the above rules will be served a 3-7 day permission restriction which will remove their ability to post in the Technology and Setting forum.
  2. Repeated offenders or in cases determined by staff to be serious will be permanently restricted from posting in the section.
  3. Continued abuse of policy may lead to banning.

Things That Irritate Tech Reviewers

  1. Receiving a tech submission or tech question in my Private Messages. These are things we have forums for, and things that should be discussed with the entire community, not just me. I'll never approve a new tech submission via PM. Tech questions should go in the Questions forum - it lets everyone comment. Asking “Does Concept X sound feasible?” is fine, but don't go trying to shove a stat sheet through my Yahoo.
  2. Submissions that have been written yet haven't been posted.
  3. Grammar failure, and excessive typos. You guys already know this. Your work is representative of you and representative of the RP in general. Would you rather look polished and be easily read, or look like a fool and have people stop reading in the middle of your paragraph to try and figure out what you're trying to say?
  4. Lack of detail. When one writes a tech submission, please remember that there's a good chance that player characters are going to come into contact with it, and you might not be around at the time. If you want your submission (or indeed, your character) to be protrayed with maximum faithfulness to the concept, you should include every detail about that object or person. For characters this could mean an extra sentence or two for the hairstyle (artists will want this!). For starships, this could be the color of the seats or the location of various items in the engine room. Give your fellow players something to work with!
  5. Authors failing to use common formats, or to read and abide by the submission rules. Submissions should be in the right format - this makes them easy to read. For starships, that new format is on the wiki for copy/paste. Section 4 is Roleplay Stats and Cost now (and the old 4. Performance) goes in section three now. If I can easily read your submission this will make me a happier person and get your submission approved more easily. As for the rules, they're pretty self-explanatory.
  6. Bombastic language in new tech, and trying to make the universe's best stuff second best. Okay, there's no need for slipping a bunch of words into your submission like “virtually immune,” “nearly indestructable,” “insanely powerful,” “horrible effects,” “best” (unless it's really true). Making a new power armor does not require you to diss the Mindy. Just tell us its stats.
  7. Timeline abuse. Nations with previously limited tech abilities shouldn't be developing Yamatai-style weapons in IC periods of a week or two; it just makes no sense. Furthermore, it makes little sense to create new designs when the old ones are still usable (via upgrades, etc). What I mean is KFY or other ship makers shouldn't come out with a new gunship or cruiser every week (not if it's mass produced, anyway). Upgrade! Add age and flavor! We've got stuff designed in 2003 still happily functioning here (Ayame class) that could be improved upon. The other part of timeline abuse is player characters “designing” stuff when there is absolutely zero evidence of it IC, especially when the character has little or no time to do so.

Quality:
guide/submission_rules.1320088374.txt.gz · Last modified: 2023/12/20 15:53 (external edit)