[member="Gir Quee"]
I wasn't aware you had a system like that; I didn't intend my remarks as personal criticism.
I agree about the need for standardization. However, I have trouble imagining that in any functional way without another complete overhaul of starship stats, which is far more trouble than it's worth. I also have serious trouble imagining standardization being fair: there are just too many factors involved in judging a starship. Normally, ships have been eyeballed, but that always ends up generating a variety of personal standards, which leads to public perception issues.
The simplest way to approach standardization might be a point buy system based off the example ships. Each class has 3-4 example ships, and from what I've seen, we all tend to judge in relation to those examples. So here's one way we could jury-rig a consistent system:
5 posts of dev = 1 point
1 point can be:
- +1 to armament or defense
- -1 to speed or maneuver
- one advanced component
The problem is that then we're nickel-and-dime-ing people again, plus advanced components can't possibly be defined in a consistent way, plus systems like this are extremely vulnerable to edge cases and exploits and apparent inconsistencies, plus it's not consistent with the judging rule at the top of the thread.
Another possible solution, and here's where the rule I cited comes into play:
- Ask for no dev threads.
- If a submission is significantly stronger than average, ask for 20-30 posts.
- If a submission is incredibly unbalanced, have it nerfed.
Doing it this way would be consistent with the rule that we haven't been following. It would stop huge disparities. However, it would also cause issues when people show up with 200 posts and ask (in good faith) for really really nice ships, because that's what people have always done.
Simplest way to keep the rule:
- Continue eyeballing subs and judging on gut feeling.
- Stop asking for so much dev. Wean yourself off the need to demand that people work as much for your toys as you feel you worked for yours. Accept lots of dev when people do it voluntarily, but stop asking for anything over 30-40 posts, and save that for extreme cases.
That would be consistent with the rule, and would go a long way toward solving the very serious public image issues the Factory has right now. I'm not sure it's clearly understood that the Factory's current dev requirements are much higher than they've ever been, and that we're running into the same public perception trouble that the Codex did a year or two ago. That perception affects our ability to do our jobs.
Whether or not we make formal reforms in this direction, I'll be judging according to the rule from now on.