Author Topic: Proposed Rules - Discussion  (Read 4991 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline NARSES2

  • Nick was always on his mind - just ask the Pet Shop Boys
  • Global Moderator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 35257
Proposed Rules - Discussion
« on: May 05, 2016, 07:43:58 am »
Right here are the proposed rules for the In the Navy GB. These are purely here for discussion at the moment and I will publish the finalised ones in due course.

Other than the specifics they are the same as last year so shouldn't cause a problem ? Famous last words  

1.  Group Build runs from 00.01 Wednesday 1st June 2016 to 24:00 Wednesday 31st August (all times GMT).  If people would rather run Friday to a Sunday then let me know.

2)  Now I understand In the Navy to mean any naval subject, so ships, boats, submarines, naval aircraft and Marine forces where they are part of a Navy. Does not need to be at sea, you could have riverine and lake based as well. Plus having just re-read E.E. Doc Smiths Skylark series Im reminded there are numerous watery planets in Sci Fi. Note that naval vehicles can be included in the scope of this build, so if you wish to play with an Amtrack, play with it.

Now I understand this could be a little contentious, however I do think its unfair to tighten the rules of a G.B. after the vote has been held. This is why Im also very firm in my view that the other poll winners cannot have their definitions changed now. If we want tight GBs then the poll needs to be clear. I for one like them loose, but not ridiculously so, so as to encourage maximum participation.

3)  You may build, draw or write as many entries as you like (good luck!).  The posting of in-progress pictures is encouraged as always.  Back stories - however long or short - win extra points.  Well OK they don't but they're always nice to see.

4)  "Preparation" work is allowed prior to the start of the GB - this includes the cutting out and cleaning up of parts, even printing your own decals (!), but anything involving paint or glue is not allowed.  

5)  Part-started models will be considered by the moderators. You should explain what you have done or post pics (even better) and they will decide, their decision being final - we are relying on the honour of our membership to uphold this rule.

6)  No rule 6 - is there ever a rule 6 ?
 
7)  The GB is to be conducted in the true Olympian spirit - it's not the winning but the taking part.  Coming top of the pile (or is that stash?) does add to the enjoyment though and the winner will receive a hand-crafted illuminated scroll prepared by the monks of Lindisfarne .  In the event of a tie there will not be a 'whif-off', the honours will be shared.

8) I will be in touch with prospective moderators over the weekend.

Chris
« Last Edit: May 06, 2016, 06:57:09 am by NARSES2 »
Decals my @r$e!

Offline Gondor

  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6454
  • Builds Slower Than A Glacier Moves
Re: Proposed Rules - Discussion
« Reply #1 on: May 05, 2016, 07:53:13 am »
With regard to your E.E. Doc Smith reference to Water worlds would "Space Navy" be applicable as "Navy" or is the term "Navy" for this Group Build only "Wet" navy?

Probably not taking part though I can think of one build for this but I can see that someone will have to ask the above question.

Gondor
« Last Edit: May 05, 2016, 07:59:32 am by Gondor »
My Ability to Imagine is only exceeded by my Imagined Abilities

Offline NARSES2

  • Nick was always on his mind - just ask the Pet Shop Boys
  • Global Moderator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 35257
Re: Proposed Rules - Discussion
« Reply #2 on: May 05, 2016, 07:58:10 am »
In my view the subject needs to "wet navy".
Decals my @r$e!

Offline Old Wombat

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6259
  • Armour: The Gods of War love it!
Re: Proposed Rules - Discussion
« Reply #3 on: May 05, 2016, 08:02:04 am »
In my view the subject needs to "wet navy".

Fine by me! :thumbsup:
Has a life outside of What-If & wishes it would stop interfering!

"The purpose of all War is Peace" - St. Augustine

veritas ad mortus veritas est

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Closeted Take That fan
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 27997
  • Whiffing since the 70s
Re: Proposed Rules - Discussion
« Reply #4 on: May 05, 2016, 08:29:31 am »
I'm pleased to se the return of a 'proper' Rule 6.  ;D :lol:
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Offline Librarian

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 2408
  • NOT a Monkey!
Re: Proposed Rules - Discussion
« Reply #5 on: May 05, 2016, 12:39:51 pm »
I'll draw attention to Shirow's 'dry navy' in Tank Police....undersand submarines etc ;D.

Just go out and read anything by Shirow :thumbsup:

Offline Weaver

  • I'm either dumb or evil - you decide.....
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 16150
Re: Proposed Rules - Discussion
« Reply #6 on: May 05, 2016, 02:18:43 pm »
Re these two:

Quote
4)  "Preparation" work is allowed prior to the start of the GB - this includes the cutting out and cleaning up of parts, even printing your own decals (!), but anything involving paint or glue is not allowed.

5)  Part-started models are not allowed - we are relying on the honour of our membership to uphold this rule.

I can understand banning part-started models for something like the One Week GB where a few hour's work done in advance constitutes a significant advantage, but it seems a little harsh in the context of a three-month GB. It's been normal practice to say that pre-started models should be submitted to the mods for approval before being entered, and the mods can then decide on a case-by-case basis. That's how we did the Cold War GB that's just finished.
Neophyte: Is Eris true?
Malaclypse the Younger: Everything is true.
Neo: Even false things?
MtY: Even false things are true.
Neo: How can that be?
MtY: I don't know man, I didn't do it.
Principia Discordia

Twitter: @hws5mp
www.minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline ysi_maniac

  • Kit Surgeon First Class
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6010
Re: Proposed Rules - Discussion
« Reply #7 on: May 05, 2016, 03:07:57 pm »
^^^^^
I agree with Weaver.
Will die without understanding this world.

Offline sandiego89

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Proposed Rules - Discussion
« Reply #8 on: May 05, 2016, 03:34:11 pm »
I think the proposed rules look great.  As from my earlier discussion I tend to prefer things a little tighter, to keep somewhat of a theme spirit, but am fine with Marine entries if folks are so inclined.   

I prefer "wet"-  no sci-fi or steampunk "Navies"

I would prefer no pre-started entires, but Weavers suggestion to allow a submission to the mods seems reasonable if someone really has something minimally started they want to submit- no re-sprays/re-works.

2) does not specifically mention Navy "vehicles" but I would say yes (wheeled/tracked vehicles, trucks, SEAL dune buggies...)

-Dave
Dave "Sandiego89"
Chesapeake, Virginia, USA

Offline NARSES2

  • Nick was always on his mind - just ask the Pet Shop Boys
  • Global Moderator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 35257
Re: Proposed Rules - Discussion
« Reply #9 on: May 06, 2016, 06:59:47 am »

I can understand banning part-started models for something like the One Week GB where a few hour's work done in advance constitutes a significant advantage, but it seems a little harsh in the context of a three-month GB. It's been normal practice to say that pre-started models should be submitted to the mods for approval before being entered, and the mods can then decide on a case-by-case basis. That's how we did the Cold War GB that's just finished.

Noted and draft amended. The kit I have in mind has actually had it's deck cut in two so I would have needed to have asked anyway.



2) does not specifically mention Navy "vehicles" but I would say yes (wheeled/tracked vehicles, trucks, SEAL dune buggies...)

-Dave

Noted and I've made the draft rules clearer I hope
Decals my @r$e!

Offline Old Wombat

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6259
  • Armour: The Gods of War love it!
Re: Proposed Rules - Discussion
« Reply #10 on: May 06, 2016, 07:35:53 am »
Hmm!? The amendments open up the possibility of me holding off on further work on my RAM F6F in the hope that it's not too far along the road & trying for 2 entries. :thumbsup:
Has a life outside of What-If & wishes it would stop interfering!

"The purpose of all War is Peace" - St. Augustine

veritas ad mortus veritas est

Offline Knightflyer

  • Targeted for assassination by JMNs
  • ****
  • Posts: 768
Re: Proposed Rules - Discussion
« Reply #11 on: May 06, 2016, 08:15:03 am »
Would an aircraft flying for the Fleet Requirements and Air Direction Unit (FRADU) count ?
Probably spent more time than is healthy painting a Bear's bottom!

Offline Nick

  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 4385
Re: Proposed Rules - Discussion
« Reply #12 on: May 06, 2016, 12:13:09 pm »
I support the idea of allowing part-started kits as I have too many half-built waiting for a reason to finish them and this GB would be a good motivator. Of course this would be down to the moderators discretion.

Offline Dizzyfugu

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 8516
    • Lots of works in my FlickR gallery
Re: Proposed Rules - Discussion
« Reply #13 on: May 07, 2016, 01:05:59 am »
Would an aircraft flying for the Fleet Requirements and Air Direction Unit (FRADU) count ?

I'm no moderator, but IMHO: yes, with appropriate details.

I'd also allow part-started kits/projects, after approval, though. A GB is always a good motivation to finish things off, this should be supported.

Generally, I'd vote for a wide topic interpretation, at least in this case - as long as the subject shows distinctive signs of naval and military usaga or purpose. A FRADU test aircraft would fall into this category, as well as naval mecha (that could open a window for a project I started many years ago - there's a started diorama base staring at me from the display shelvem but the kit to go into it was never started, even though it rests in the pile and catches dust...).

Other GBs like a "F-105 GB" can be tighter and more precise, but "In the Navy" stirs imagination and opens a wider field of creativity.

Just my 2 cents, though...  ;)

Offline zenrat

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 13499
  • Not on the rug, man!
Re: Proposed Rules - Discussion
« Reply #14 on: May 07, 2016, 04:56:07 am »
Firstly, I would prefer Space Navy to be allowed.  Although if it isn't it'll only need a change in the decals.  But I feel to have to do so would leave my build aesthetically challenged.  The proposal was "in the navy" not "in the wet navy" or "messing around in boats".
Secondly, please drop the reference to the olympic spirit as I feel it sullies the good name of GBs lowering them to the realms of back handers and performance enhancing substances.
Thirdly, I don't think I should have had that second glass of port.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2016, 04:58:11 am by zenrat »
Fred

Another ill conceived, poorly thought out, crudely executed and badly painted piece of what-if modelling muppetry from zenrat industries.