Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 421
08-18-2010, 12:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottb80 View Post
One way I could see Admiral ranks being more admiral like is to give admiral rank players their own fleet they can command. I'm not talking about temporary buffs like we have now, I'm talking permanent NPC ships you can recruit that become part of your fleet that you can command similar to the way away teams (ground missions) are currently handled but they are ships in space instead of bridge officers on the ground.

The way I in-vision it, the higher the rank the more ships a player gets in their fleet.

For example:

Rear Admiral Lower Half = 2 NPC ships (or a fleet of 3 including your ship)
Rear Admiral Upper Half = 3 NPC ships
Vice Admiral = 4 NPC ships
Admiral = 5 NPC ships
Fleet Admiral = 6 NPC ships

Another idea, would be to give higher ranking admirals (Vice Admiral and up) command of their own space sectors where the game becomes more like a RTS (real time strategy) game where they can coordinate fleets and try to defend their sector like a game of chess except using fleets of ships.
This is a good idea.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 422 Nice sure
08-18-2010, 02:55 PM
Take this to a marriage between Star Fleet Command and Armada. Something that could be fun .
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 423
08-18-2010, 02:59 PM
OK, for everyone that doesn't know, the Star Trek Universe uses US Navy Officer rank structure for their ranks.

What most people DO NOT know, is Commodore is a military rank used in many navies for officers whose position exceeds that of a navy captain, but is less than that of a rear admiral.

HOWEVER! I think it's total BUNK that the Admiral ranks are limited to 5 grades each. Why not make them equal to their lower grade counterparts?! This would DEFINITELY increase the available level cap, as the "Rear Admiral" ranks in real life are two distinct ranks. It would mean all of our Vice Admirals would 'revert' to Rear Admiral UH 1-5, but it would allow for considerably MORE room for growth above and beyond the current levelling cap.

Rear Admiral Lower Half is a 1-Star Admiral.
Rear Admiral Upper Half is a 2 Star Admiral.
Vice Admiral = 3 Stars
Admiral = 4 Stars
Fleet Admiral = 5 Stars (rarely, if ever, used)


Just my thoughts and whatnot.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 424
08-19-2010, 10:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by burningstarzero View Post
This is a good idea.
Thanks


Quote:
Originally Posted by SenshiBat View Post
Take this to a marriage between Star Fleet Command and Armada. Something that could be fun .

Now that would be fun.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 425
08-21-2010, 03:36 AM
I think they should'nt have skipped a couple of ranks when doing the system. Ensign should've been 1-5, Lt. Jr. Grade 5-10, Lt. 10-20, Lt. Commander 20-30, Commander 30-40, Captain 40-50. Then as the game progressed added R. Adm Lower 50-60, Upper 60-70, Vice Adm 70-80, Admiral 80-90, and finally Fleet Adm 90-100. Ultimately you could have Commander in Chief at 101.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 426
08-21-2010, 03:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maximus92 View Post
I think they should'nt have skipped a couple of ranks when doing the system. Ensign should've been 1-5, Lt. Jr. Grade 5-10, Lt. 10-20, Lt. Commander 20-30, Commander 30-40, Captain 40-50. Then as the game progressed added R. Adm Lower 50-60, Upper 60-70, Vice Adm 70-80, Admiral 80-90, and finally Fleet Adm 90-100. Ultimately you could have Commander in Chief at 101.
or seeing as we have a diplomatic corps... let us vote for our commander in chief
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 427
08-21-2010, 05:36 AM
they just need to get smart remove ranks all together and go by levels. Maybe ranks can be their own system for doing missions and such, This way everyone is a captain and if you really wanna grind to get above that more power to ya but keep ranks and levels separate stupid to have everyone a rear or vice admiral ... its stupid.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 428
08-21-2010, 11:20 AM
Honestly, my preference would have been to do away with combat levels entirely. I mean, it's an unrealistic mechanism in a realistic setting. I know, it's science fiction, but everything is allegorical.

Consider: You have two soldiers, a 20 year combat veteran and a raw recruit fresh from basic training. Who is tougher? Does the veteran have more health? If I shoot them in the face, who will survive? Does it matter if the gun is a .38 or an M-16?

The answer is, neither is really tougher. If anything, the recruit would be since he'd be younger and presumably fitter. Neither has any more health, and if shot in the face, both would die, regardless of the gun.

However, in a combat situation, who is more likely to survive? It's the Veteran. Why? It's not because he's got more health, or has a bigger, more powerful gun. It's because he's got more skill. He knows when and how to move. How to avoid being hit, and how to make his own shots count.

THIS is how I'd like to have seen the game. More realism.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 429 Admiral Rankings
08-21-2010, 11:25 AM
Why Is The Leving In The Admiral Ranks Only 5 Or 6 Grades And All Other Ranks Are 10 Or 11? We All Like New And Better Ships But It Would Be Nice To Have It Take Alittle Longer When Your A Lifer!

P.s. Please Get Rid Of The Upper And Lower Admiral Stuff!

Thank You!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 430
08-23-2010, 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Honestly, my preference would have been to do away with combat levels entirely. I mean, it's an unrealistic mechanism in a realistic setting. I know, it's science fiction, but everything is allegorical.

Consider: You have two soldiers, a 20 year combat veteran and a raw recruit fresh from basic training. Who is tougher? Does the veteran have more health? If I shoot them in the face, who will survive? Does it matter if the gun is a .38 or an M-16?

The answer is, neither is really tougher. If anything, the recruit would be since he'd be younger and presumably fitter. Neither has any more health, and if shot in the face, both would die, regardless of the gun.

However, in a combat situation, who is more likely to survive? It's the Veteran. Why? It's not because he's got more health, or has a bigger, more powerful gun. It's because he's got more skill. He knows when and how to move. How to avoid being hit, and how to make his own shots count.

THIS is how I'd like to have seen the game. More realism.
Isn't this what we have today? Granted you get more health as you level, but that's a gameplay mechanic. In the end the higher level/rank you are it's supposed to symbolize more experience, being more of a veteran officer than the ones just getting out of the Vega Colony. The higher levels have more skill, and should know how and when to use them and against what type of enemies. Granted this may not apply to every player of the game, but from a "storyline" standpoint that is what we have.

And I agree, RA should be a 10 level grade just like all other levels. In fact they should all be 10 grades across the board. RA should just have the pip options and title options for Lower/Upper if you want but everything in game should just call you Rear Admiral. Functionally there isn't really a difference since it isn't a new tier and you're in the same area of space fighting the same enemies anyway.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:52 PM.