Vehicle template standardization

[Netherworld]

It's come up at least twice in factory chat, so I'm dragging it here where it won't get lost. The issue is this:

Armaments: (What weapons are mounted on the vehicle? List them in full or optionally provide a rating relative to the scale of vehicle from: None, Very Low, Low, Average, Moderate, High, Very High, Extreme. [Links: Vehicle Weaponry, Vehicle Launchers, Approved Technology])

Which goes against the requirement the Vehicle template has under Speed, Maneuverability and Defenses. It also goes against the same requirements put on Starship templates, where the ratings are required, and listing individual systems is optional.

It's inconsistent, and only makes balancing vehicles the more difficult when everything else is listed with ratings, except for the weaponry. I say we drop the 'optional' from there and make the rating required, like everywhere else.

 

[Jamie Pyne]

I'm fine with this. I like uniformity.

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

Agreed.

 

[Jairus Starvald]

Yes please.

 

[Raziel]

Let me explain the logic of how we arrived here:

Armament ratings were made mandatory on starships for a very good reason. It was in no way easy to look at the armaments simply and decide if that was appropriate or not. Therefore we made the rating mandatory and permitted submitters to add whatever fluff they wanted for actual guns after it (which we mostly ignore now).


I make ratings mandatory when the alternative is too confusing to judge.


On the vehicle template defensive and manoeuvrability ratings are mandatory because I could think of no other obvious way to make it easy to judge. How else would you describe these two facets? Thickness of armour and shield ratings?


Vehicle speed in Km/h and the weapon on a small vehicle should be much more grounded. Everyone should have a vague idea of what looks sensible. I see no reason that we can't easily judge a vehicle looking at these two in ratings or km/h and actual armaments and therefore it remained a choice for the submitter to use one or the other.


If the membership and submitters are shown in favour of these changes I'd be happy to make them. Or [member="Cira"] can tell me to make them anyway

 

[Netherworld]

[member="Raziel"]

That only works to a point, I feel.

Vehicle speed in Km/h and the weapon on a small vehicle should be much more grounded.

We don't get only small vehicles. For tanks and transports yeah, it works, but there's also stuff like massive walking fortresses and walkers, armed to the teeth. That's where you quickly get into the territory of starship-level weapon arsenals.

Though I guess that could be resolved as simply as requesting the submitter to add a rating in such a case. That works for me, but maybe others have got concerns.

 

[Raziel]

Happy to hear them. Hopefully I've explained that there is a logic and that I have been against forcing ratings on submitters unless necessary.

 

[Jamie Pyne]

Uniformity. That's why. Making the templates as close to one another makes things easier on both judges and members because they expect to see the same things in the same places.

The other reason is because there are varying sizes of vehicles from the smallest speeders to the largest walkers. They have variable speeds for their particular vehicle groups, and since we already separate those vehicles into groups via the samples, it clearly shows there is enough differences to warrant ratings for those groups.

[member="Raziel"], [member="Cira"], [member="Netherworld"]

 

[Cira]

With this in mind, lets see what we can do to examine how to approach both concerns.

Would there be a way to edit the template to dictate that vechiles over a specific size will require ratings?

Or would that just be too confusing?

 

[Netherworld]

[member="Cira"]

IMO that would be too confusing. It'd also require a line be drawn somewhere, and those types of distinctions will always be arbitrary.

Personally I think it's far easier to require all the fields have the Rating listed – as [member="Jamie Pyne"] said, the ratings, like with starships, are relative to size. A massive walker with Very HIgh armament will obviously pack more firepower than a speeder with the same rating. The same walker with Average speed will also be slower than the speeder with Average speed.

I think the ratings are easier to understand both for judges and submitters, and they eliminate a lot of numbers balancing on both sides. Additionally, a lot of info isn't available for these Categories – what's 'very fast' for a walker in km/h? What's 'very fast' for a speeder? No data, sources will vary, etc. But if you just compare the ratings, this problem is entirely eliminated.

 

[Cira]

[member="Netherworld"]

Okay. With that levy, then lets update the templates to be uniform.