Minor Factory Updates

[Gir Quee]

Several of the Factory rules and templates have just received a minor update. I have highlighted these changes in green in the post just below this one so that everyone can easily see the changes.

Most of these changes have occurred in starships. I'll highlight two things from there:

1. 
   The discrepancy between the starship tables and template has been resolved. Minor factions and companies now have the exact same production and fielding limits. In addition, both of these groups can now field small PC-captained battlecruisers up to 3000 meters in length.
   
2. 
   The Hangar field has been split up into two fields. One for traditional starfighter squadrons, which is identical to the old hangar field in terms of numbers. Another field has been added fo support craft (shuttles, gunships, transports, light freighters, etc). The numbers in this latter field cannot be changed and is strictly based on the vessel's size.
   

In addition, squadron counts have been entirely removed from the Vehicle template.



I also want to take this moment to clarify an ongoing issue with how we handle reports regarding factory submissions. Unless a submission is blatantly violating Factory Rules, if your character has not encountered the submission in question in a roleplay enviroment, you should not report it. You should also not report it if you haven't tried to resolve the concern with the submission's user as well.

Reporting a factory submission should be a last resort.

In other words, the submission has to be a problem in the roleplay itself, rather than simply having the potential to be a problem.

The reason for this is that we're not looking to encourage reporting as a work-around to subs getting judged for what people think is their definition of “balanced”. To do so would negate the entire reason for deregulation of the Factory to its current form.

 

[Gir Quee]

Factory Standardized Rules​

Players are encouraged to help discuss create, discuss, and police each other's submissions.​

Players are also encouraged to read and often quote the rules.​

General Factory Guidelines

• 
  All Factory Submissions in the Technology, Vehicle, and Starship forums will be automatically approved randomly once a month unless otherwise specified.
  
• 
  Factory submissions may only be introduced into role-play threads whose start date begins after the submission's posted date.
  
• 
  Plagiarism will not be tolerated.
  
• 
  The entire template must be used in your submission. Users can customize templates to their own personal liking, but the template's fields are not to be changed/removed/altered, additional information may be added but base fields may not be changed or removed.
  
• 
  Be aware that some items and materials are restricted or banned and cannot be used freely. Be sure to consult the list before making a submission.
  
• 
  Do not bump your submissions.
  
• 
  All submissions need to conform to the general idea of Star Wars. No Gundam Wings, no Transformers.
  
• 
  All measurements in all submissions must be in metric.
  
• 
  All specifically named materials used in submissions must be linked to their page on Wookieepedia, wikipedia, or their factory submission on Chaos. General materials, such as 'metal' or 'starship components', do not need to be linked.
  
• 
  No member may "claim" an image unless they created it themselves.
  
• 
  If the owner of the image asks you to take it down, please do so.
  
  Intentionally breaking these rules or attempting to mislead Judges will incur a minimum 30 day zero tolerance ban from the Factory or Codex.
  

General Submission Guidelines

• 
  All companies utilized as manufacturers must be hyperlinked to their submission or canonical article.
  
• 
  All droid characters must first be approved through the Factory if their droid models are not canon.
  
• 
  All submissions should reflect the strengths and weaknesses of their materials and components for transparency, balance, and fair play.
  
• 
  Spoilers are not permitted in submissions. The only exception is for images.
  
• 
  All canon item submissions are to be treated as replicas and can be claimed/reproduced by multiple players.
  
• 
  For rules regarding Restricted and Banned Materials, please review here.
  
• 
  The factory will not base judgements on precedents or the approval of prior submissions.
  
• 
  Modification of old submissions will no longer be accepted.
  

Technology Forum Rules

• 
  Fully constructed lightsabers are restricted to a maximum of Semi-Unique production.
  
• 
  The Armor Rating Extreme will require the submission to be UNIQUE. This armor rating is considered very strong and are usually dealing with unique items that should be restricted to Player Characters only.
  

Starships Forum Rules

• 
  Particularly rare or powerful special features may necessitate using a lower production (for example, cloaking technology, gemcutters, crystal grav traps, equivalent stealth or anti stealth technologies, or rare canon technologies and their equivalents will only be permitted at Semi-Unique production)
  
• 
  For rules on what ships can be produced by a Faction, Company or Individual see Table 1
  

​

• 
  For rules on what ships can be fielded/owned by a Faction, Company or Individual see Table 2
  

 

[LT-137]

[member="Gir Quee"] - There's a bit of a discrepancy between Table One and Table Two. When you bumped up the PC-Captained/Unique values in the Combat Ships column of Table Two, shouldn't the same values be updated in Table One as well? To me, it seems a bit silly that we minor factions can't produce the max length ships, but are capable of fielding them instead.

As well, just to point out a Typo - the PC-Captained section in the Military Stations column is missing a colon.

Otherwise, I'm liking these changes.

 

[Cyrus Tregessar]

Look here folks, this is what five years of always adding a note about 'the usual complement of shuttles, launches, small boats, etc' in your subs gets you.

 

[Gir Quee]

When you bumped up the PC-Captained/Unique values in the Combat Ships column of Table Two, shouldn't the same values be updated in Table One as well?

Good catch. I'll fix that shortly.

To me, it seems a bit silly that we minor factions can't produce the max length ships, but are capable of fielding them instead.

It's part of the streamlining. We do want companies to be able to build some of the largest ships on the board, but we don't necessarily want minor factions or companies fielding them. If you want an in-character rationale for this, you could say its operating/maintenance costs.

 

[LT-137]

[member="Gir Quee"] - Okay, that just leaves me a little more confused as the updated tables say differently.

With that said, since the PC-Captained angle's brought in for Battlecruisers, is there a chance that Minor factions could field multiple Star Destroyer class vessels - like at Semi-Unique or at Unique?

 

[Gir Quee]

With that said, since the PC-Captained angle's brought in for Battlecruisers, is there a chance that Minor factions could field multiple Star Destroyer class vessels - like at Semi-Unique or at Unique?

They can right now if they're PC-captained.

 

[LT-137]

[member="Gir Quee"] - Okay, that still doesn't match up with the values in the tables. Like, I totally get the Battlecruiser's being PC-Captained, and that's not what I'm confused about. It's more the conflicting information listed above and what's listed in the templates themselves.

Just for conversational ease:

• Taken from the Starships Template.
• Taken from Table Two: Fielded Values.

To me, these seem to conflict - as a Minor Faction can field a Star Destroyer (Not the same as a Battlecruiser) but only One - yet have the ability to produce Mass-produced Star Destroyers at 2,000m, and field a plethora of Minor and Limited scale ships until the maximum listed value for Unique/PC-Captained vessels.

 

[Raona Cadera]

[member="Gir Quee"]

My question is why the addition to the support craft when there are numerous upon numerous upon numerous instances in both legends and current canon where corvettes carry support craft. It also isn't consistent with the current template as the average for a large corvette is an entire squadron of fighters. It makes no sense that a ship that *has* a hangar can't hold even a single transport and has no effect on balance as these things aren't used in PvP as dogfighters or ships that harm other players.

 

[Gir Quee]

Gir Quee - Okay, that still doesn't match up with the values in the tables. Like, I totally get the Battlecruiser's being PC-Captained, and that's not what I'm confused about. It's more the conflicting information listed above and what's listed in the templates themselves. Just for conversational ease: Taken from the Starships Template. Taken from Table Two: Fielded Values. To me, these seem to conflict - as a Minor Faction can field a Star Destroyer (Not the same as a Battlecruiser) but only One - yet have the ability to produce Mass-produced Star Destroyers at 2,000m, and field a plethora of Minor and Limited scale ships until the maximum listed value for Unique/PC-Captained vessels.

I feel like I'm missing something here.

As you've pointed out in the screenshot of the starship template, it's "multiple non-PC captained Star Destroyers". So there's no restriction in there saying that minor factions or companies can only have one star destroyer, just that any star destroyers being fielded in an RP must have a PC captain.

If the argument is that because they are able to produce it, they should be able to field it, this goes back to the whole "only major factions can field large fleets, armies, etc" board rule.

My question is why the addition to the support craft when there are numerous upon numerous upon numerous instances in both legends and current canon where corvettes carry support craft. It also isn't consistent with the current template as the average for a large corvette is an entire squadron of fighters. It makes no sense that a ship that *has* a hangar can't hold even a single transport and has no effect on balance as these things aren't used in PvP as dogfighters or ships that harm other players.

If you want to carry transports instead of starfighters in the fighter hangar bay, that's perfectly fine. While there are corvettes that do carry support in canon, many of the more common corvettes in canon do not.

 

[LT-137]

As you've pointed out in the screenshot of the starship template, it's "multiple non-PC captained Star Destroyers". So there's no restriction in there saying that minor factions or companies can only have one star destroyer, just that any star destroyers being fielded in an RP must have a PC captain.

That is a restriction in and of itself. lol

I like that we as Minor's have gotten the ability to field a battlecruiser now, but that leaves a wide range of vessels stuck in "situational" limbo, especially with the supposed IC justification of our faction's being unable to field such vessels in great number due to lack of manpower and such. It just seems a bit contradictory in my eyes. However, I suppose that issue technically fixes itself when cross-referencing the tables.

Guess I was over-thinking it and confusing myself. Sorry about that, lol.

Nevertheless - Looking forward to what's going to be updated next.

 

[Raona Cadera]

[member="Gir Quee"] That simply isn't the case but Admins gonna Admin. You still haven't given us a "why" as I've said before, support shuttles have no bearing on PvP or "balance" to begin with so why in this age of deregulation you've placed such an arbitrary one could use a little more explanation.

This is also odd considering your message on the reporting function. Shuttles on ships has never been an issue before on the site in regards to balance so its even more curious as to why this would come up at all in the first place.

 

[Gir Quee]

Guess I was over-thinking it and confusing myself. Sorry about that, lol. Nevertheless - Looking forward to what's going to be updated next.

No worries. There is certainly a possibility that things will be looser in the future.

You still haven't given us a "why" as I've said before, support shuttles have no bearing on PvP or "balance" to begin with so why in this age of deregulation you've placed such an arbitrary one could use a little more explanation. This is also odd considering your message on the reporting function. Shuttles on ships has never been an issue before on the site in regards to balance so its even more curious as to why this would come up at all in the first place.

Since [member="Cyrus Tregessar"] also seems curious about this change in general, there are probably more of you that are curious about the reasoning too.

Yes, in general, support craft in general have not been an issue in the past. However, we've recently seen several ship submissions that are really carrying what far more small support craft than what would typically be realistic. This may not even be an issue if they weren't armed. However, because many of these "support craft" were in fact combat craft like gunships and well-armed dropships, so it has became a balance issue. As an example of this issue, you could make a small frigate sub that had zero fighter squadrons but then list 24 well-armed gunships as "support craft" separately. That defeats the intent and spirit of the old hangar system.

With the old judging system, we could have immediately caught that during the judging process and told them to edit. However, we don't judge subs like that more, so this explicitly closes that loophole.

 

[Raona Cadera]

Yes, in general, support craft in general have not been an issue in the past.

In other words, the submission has to be a problem in the roleplay itself, rather than simply having the potential to be a problem.

Players are encouraged to help discuss create, discuss, and police each other's submissions.

I would take a page from your own book here and let the members figure this out over time. The new factory has been the way it has been for quite a few months now and even if your claim were true, there's not only been so little pvp as to this not having been an issue, but for all of my almost 6 years on the site it hasn't been an issue.

In all honesty I think this particular rule needs to be seriously looked at again in the light of your own reminder to us to make sure things are actually a problem in practice because at the moment all this does is actually reduce the "realism" as you call it, and further restrict the creative process which the new factory was made to foster.

 

[Gir Quee]

[member="Lisza Starseeker"], your feedback is noted.

 

[Raona Cadera]

[member="Gir Quee"] I actually just thought of a potentially solid compromise.

Categorize any shuttle or transport with an armament of Average or higher as starfighters. In this way shuttles with low-no armament continue on as they have in the past and the heavily armed vessels you and your team are worrying about mucking up balance can't slip through the cracks.

 

[Gir Quee]

[member="Lisza Starseeker"], anyone is always welcome to bring suggestions for improving the community.

However, I'd recommend starting a new thread in the feedback forum to discuss this idea.

 

[Kurayami Bloodborn]

All specifically named materials used in submissions must be linked to their page on Wookieepedia, wikipedia, or their factory submission on Chaos. General materials, such as 'metal' or 'starship components', do not need to be linked.

This presents a slight problem in my view. In my experience this will lead to submissions not explicitly stating materials and components utilized in their construction. Why would that be a possible issue? SImple, the author has nothing keeping them from changing the materials /components/armament based on each thread they are in with said ship. If there is no specificity due to everything having to be linked(which I may add for odd systems or materials is fine), leading to a single ship going from durasteel and standard reactor in one thread, to coated with phrik and sporting an isotope 5 reactor in the next thread. Extreme example perhaps, but the point is still valid.

I see no reason as to why anything outside the exotic or lesser known components/materials(including all Chaos canon subs) should need to be linked, much like it has been for quite sometime.

 

[Huxy]

​

• 
  All specifically named materials used in submissions must be linked to their page on Wookieepedia, wikipedia, or their factory submission on Chaos. General materials, such as 'metal' or 'starship components', do not need to be linked.
  

Would this include all types of metals in the SW universe such as Quadanium, Plasteel, Durasteel, etc?

 

[Matt the Radar Tech]

I think people are over-complicating the metals and components. The more you push on these points, the more chance restrictions and limitations will be considered - such as specific component info points for hulls, electrical systems, structural materials, etc, etc. And personally I don't want to go through a sub accounting for every single element and technical specification of a starship. Hell, I don't even think the canon books have gone that deep with their explanations and diagrams!

My suggestion to you [member="Kurayami Bloodborn"] and [member="Kraken Society"] is to assume providing a link to materials is the safest bet, and to simply do it anyway. The designs I have for my CA ships all link to materials, save for the generalized components and extras that aren't really quantifiable (example, I don't know what wiring is used for radar panels, so I put 'system components').

That said, hopefully that helps.

---

[member="Gir Quee"]

Concerning the fighters and support craft, I have a suggestion that might streamline the process:

What about, instead of two specific numbers (one of which is seen as 'restrictive' by some), you combine both fighters and support ships into a single process. By providing a maximum docked ship count, based on size as currently used, players could then allocate numbers from both fighters and support ships from that max number. Example:

• Hangar Space: (Please provide the amount of hangar space this submission can hold in it's hangar by count of Squadrons, which hold 12 average Starfighters. The higher your squadron count, the lower your Armament and number of advanced systems should be. )
  1000 Meters: [None: 0 | Very Low: 1 | Low: 2 | Average: 3 | Moderate: 4 | High: 5 | Very High: 9 | Extreme: 10]
• 1500 Meters: [None: 0 | Very Low: 2 | Low: 3 | Average: 5 | Moderate: 6 | High: 8 | Very High: 12 | Extreme: 14]
• 2000 Meters: [None: 0 | Very Low: 3 | Low: 4 | Average: 7 | Moderate: 8 | High: 11 | Very High: 15 | Extreme: 18]

[*]Hangar Allocations: (This is the allocated amounts of starfighters and support craft (dropships, shuttles, gunships, etc) this submission can hold in its hangar based on the maximum hangar capacity above.)

• Starfighters: X Squadrons
• Support Craft: X Squadrons

So, using that, my Star Destroyer (2000m) would look like this in the sub:

• Hangar Space: High [11]
• Hangar Allocations:
  Starfighters: 8 Squadrons
• Support Craft: 3 Squadrons

We now have a specified max of hangar capable craft, and a specified allocation of each type. And the benefit is that players can determine their allocations without feeling restricted.

I also would like to suggest we avoid decimals. Having a squad of .5 (in the case of smaller corvettes) could get messy in fleet listings.