Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 541
12-10-2010, 02:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnaw
Historicly for me Commodore never really was a nice rank to have anyway. Actually it wasn't even a rank it was more of a title first. It became a rank a bit later. It just meant they didn't want to promote you to Admiral, but you still had to do the job. Captains could be promoted straight to Admiral without even seeing the Commodore rank. It was invented to prevent a flood of Admirals.
I don't want to get involved in this whole issue but your whole argument is flawed. ALL ranks were a form of title first.

Lieutenant wasn't a rank, but a title donating those loyal to and under a leader.
Lieutenant Commander evolved from "Lieutenant commanding", when a Lieutenant was placed in command of a ship
Commander evolved from Master and Commander
Commodore was a title originally given to captains commanding a squadron of ships
Rear Admiral referred to the admiral who commanded the ships in the rear of the line of battle

Sorry, just had to add that.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 542
12-11-2010, 01:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maarkean View Post
Sorry, just had to add that.
Shouldn't apologise for offering correct info.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 543
12-11-2010, 03:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnaw
Well Star Trek is an American invention, and the Federation based on US military/naval structure, the Starfleet HQ is located in California, San Franciso to be precise, so get over it.
That being so... the people Starfleet Captains and Admiral work for, namely the Federation.. are located in Paris, France. I respect the pride you obviously have for your countries military, but...

a) Starfleet was founded under a Global goverment, and not an American one

b) It's not very Roddenberry way of thinking, saying that it's all based on one countries military force, seeing as one of his visions was peace and unity

and c) lighten up, it's a game!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 544
12-11-2010, 04:30 AM
Star Trek wasn't based on a US military because it was 'the best' it was only based on a US military structure because Star Trek was for the US audience and creating a sense of familiarity would help with the popularity of the TV show. The fact they even use USS for United Space/Star Ship is just as reflective of the current US ship designations. Roddenberry's vision was for a united earth but how can you sell that to people who are coming out of a cold war and are at the peak of patriotism.

Commodore is an obsolete rank, which is on the shelf along with ranks such as Coronet and Subaltern. But being obsolete is no reason to exclude things from STO, as we have already seen the NX-Class and other old starships make an appearance in STO. Maybe they could make the Commodore rank an accolade that someone has to unlock. That might make it so that people that actually want the rank can go an unlock it, those that don't or aren't bothered can focus on other things.

Cryptic have already proven to integrate what the majority of the fans want in the game into the game. If a Commodore title is another of them, it's not really going to impact my play. Personally, I'm not advocating for or against it, but if it does get into the game as an accolade I'll obtain it the same way I usually do, in the natural(ish) progression of the game.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 545
12-11-2010, 04:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by destiny42 View Post
Commodore is an obsolete rank, which is on the shelf along with ranks such as Coronet and Subaltern. But being obsolete is no reason to exclude things from STO, as we have already seen the NX-Class and other old starships make an appearance in STO. Maybe they could make the Commodore rank an accolade that someone has to unlock. That might make it so that people that actually want the rank can go an unlock it, those that don't or aren't bothered can focus on other things.
Our own Royal Navy uses it, not obsolete, merely abandoned by one nation's Navy in the last 20 years or so.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 546
12-11-2010, 08:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyGreggy
In other words, forget the whole United Earth, all humans and aliens in one big happy family. It's the American way or nothing.
Not to mention that it's canon that Starfleet used the rank of Commodore in TOS as well as in ENT - so obviously they did not just copy the US system as they were created.*

*: And this is not even including the fact that the US system changed, too, and may very well change again in the future. Do you really want to swap Star Trek ranks around every time the modern day US Navy feels they should toy around with their hierarchy?
I don't think it is wise to hold on to such an obvious and illogical connection between a 25th century and a 21st century institution when it is clear that the latter keeps on changing.


PS: And just to point it out one more time - Dahar Master is not a military rank!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 547 Rank Structure
12-11-2010, 10:38 PM
I would like for the beginning of the game to be changed a little. I think that in the beginning here are the ranks:

1. Cadet--First through Fourth Classes
2. Ensign
3. Lt. Junior Grade
4. Lt.

At the cadet rank, there should be training missions like the one we currently start playing. However, they should be missions held at Starfleet Academy and then field training. Currently, runabouts are mostly useless so they could be used by cadets in training. Since we have to choose tactical, engineering, and science divisions, we should receive specific training in our chosen specialty instead of having to learn our specialty while in command of a starship. To me, learning your specialty while commanding a starship doesn't make much sense. Then at ensign through Lt., we could assist in completing assignments given by the captain or first officer gaining more field experience in our specialty and bridge experience.

5. Lt. Commander
6. Commander
7. Captain
8. Rear Admiral, LH
9. Rear Admiral, UH
10. Vice Admiral
11. Fleet Admiral

Then, starting at Lt. Commander, we could be assigned command of a starship. During the Dominion War, Sisko was re-assigned by Ross. Since Worf was on a Klingon ship, Jadzia Dax (a Lt. Commander) was placed in command of the Defiant for many missions. To make the game more interesting and last longer, if you complete more than the minimum of an assignment such as eliminating all Klingons on P'jem, the points you receive should go toward giving you an advanced promotion. I know that currently does happen. However, they need to revamp the missions a little. It is very easy to make Lt. Commander even on the Elite difficulty setting. Then, you end up playing missions that are for Lt.-5s while your at Lt. Commander. When playing the daily missions, once you accept the daily that you want, the daily is set at your current level (not 5 to 10 levels under your level).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 548 We need the Commodore Option
12-12-2010, 08:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrT043
Instead of Rear Admiral, Lower Half, why not Commodore? I know it might require some adjustment to what's already in game, but the upper half/lower half terminology feels.... ungainly.
I agree with those people pushing for this. On of the only reasons historically the Navy made a Rear Admiral Lower Half was for officers to get their flag rank (since commodore only exists in wartime or is used informally for the senior Captain in a squadron like the Destroyer Squadron Commanders in the US Navy). Let the players chose which they like.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 549
12-12-2010, 09:17 AM
We could also spice things up a bit and throw Fleet Captain rank into the mix, or even the enlisted ranks, since we have the rank stripes for "Chief" in the game, which is Chief P.O. in canon, I'm led to believe.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 550 A Fleet for my Admiral
12-12-2010, 09:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Computer.Ed
First the concept of starting with a Cadet or even leaving it at Ensign is fine. What would be cool is to instead however start at Star Fleet Academy and be in command of a Runabout.

As for the Commodore vs Lower Half crap I agree lets get Commodore. There is canon for both positions but a LOT more canon supports Commodore and it sounds better. We are worried about our female officers weariung skin tight cloths for not other purpose than some T&A, surely fixing a rank so it sounds better should not be that big of deal.

Finally I agree with Direphoenix in that we need the game once above Captain to take on a new feel. Commodores for example typcially command a Star Base or small sqaudron of ships, Admirals a minimum of a small squadron if they are at anything other than a desk job. As such the current game really kills the emmersion with using the Admiral rank as it is used now.
100% agree. Especially the need for an Admiral's game, in other words command of a small fleet or squadron. Perhaps a couple of NPC frigates for you to command and utilize. Also if you do that a more in depth mission designed for the usage of a squadron. Directing your escorts to complete tasks as well as how closely they support you or launch diversionary attacks. If they are killed in a mission you can have escape pods sit there awaiting rescue and after the mission ends the ship can be respawned with the number of crew you rescue determining how skilled the new escort is to start with. Maybe as Admiral's you need to spend points on the junior ships (Starfleet Merits I woud think) to improve them. Cyrptic really needs to look at this as a possibility.

Also a junior crew on my Bridge like Petty Officers or Yeoman bring the Captain reports may be cool!
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 01:32 PM.