Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > Federation Gameplay
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
03-01-2011, 02:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuatela
Alright, I'll skip the usual opening paragraph, and cut right to the chase. Currently, the ranks in STO are as follows:

Ensign: 1
Lieutenant: 2-10
Lieutenant Commander: 11-20
Commander: 21-30
Captain: 31-40
Rear Admiral, Lower half: 41-45
Rear Admiral, Upper Half: 46-50
Vice Admiral: 51

Now, there's two problems with this:
1. The current setup only allows for two more "canon" ranks to be added (Admiral and Fleet Admiral).
2. The current setup skips the rank of Lieutenant, JG.

How about just adding Lieutenant Junior Grade 2-5 and Lieutenant 6-10.

That way it keeps the current rank system but just changes the name of those number ranks like the Rear Admiral is now with the lower half and upper half.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
03-01-2011, 02:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LtSmith
How about just adding Lieutenant Junior Grade 2-5 and Lieutenant 6-10.

That way it keeps the current rank system but just changes the name of those number ranks like the Rear Admiral is now with the lower half and upper half.
And then people will wonder why LtC, Commander, and Captain are all 10-grade ranks, but Lt, JG, Lt, and Admirals are only 5-grade ranks.

Besides, the point is not just to add in the canon ranks. It's also to allow for further expansion without creating fake ranks. By inserting Cadet, expanding Ensign to a full 10 grades, and adding a 10-grade Lt JG, we'd be pushing the ranks up so Captain is the current cap. This allows the "admiral" ranks to be saved for future expansions in the game, instead of us all being stuck at Fleet Admiral for the rest of our game-life.

One of the major selling points of this game was "You're the Captain." Not "you're the Vice Admiral"...but "captain". Yet 90% of the player base has at least one Vice Admiral by now, and once Admiral and Fleet Admiral are added, we'll have nowhere else to go. The rank revisions I proposed will allow at least four more promotions, rather than just two.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
03-01-2011, 03:07 PM
could we please get rid of the rear admiral lower and upper half? just have it be commodore and rear admiral. how it is now is annoying.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
03-02-2011, 11:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mindmage View Post
could we please get rid of the rear admiral lower and upper half? just have it be commodore and rear admiral. how it is now is annoying.
The answer to your question lies in probably a hundred different places. You're welcome to search for yourself and find the answer.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
03-02-2011, 02:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuatela
And then people will wonder why LtC, Commander, and Captain are all 10-grade ranks, but Lt, JG, Lt, and Admirals are only 5-grade ranks.

Besides, the point is not just to add in the canon ranks. It's also to allow for further expansion without creating fake ranks. By inserting Cadet, expanding Ensign to a full 10 grades, and adding a 10-grade Lt JG, we'd be pushing the ranks up so Captain is the current cap. This allows the "admiral" ranks to be saved for future expansions in the game, instead of us all being stuck at Fleet Admiral for the rest of our game-life.

One of the major selling points of this game was "You're the Captain." Not "you're the Vice Admiral"...but "captain". Yet 90% of the player base has at least one Vice Admiral by now, and once Admiral and Fleet Admiral are added, we'll have nowhere else to go. The rank revisions I proposed will allow at least four more promotions, rather than just two.
Yeah I get where you are going a bigger ranking system so it feels more Trek like because it was not hey look everyone in command of a ship was Admiral and maybe they could have us go through Starfleet acadmey for a tutorial and go through the Ensign and Cadet ranks their.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
03-02-2011, 02:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LtSmith
Yeah I get where you are going a bigger ranking system so it feels more Trek like because it was not hey look everyone in command of a ship was Admiral and maybe they could have us go through Starfleet acadmey for a tutorial and go through the Ensign and Cadet ranks their.
You know...it's almost like you read my mind. I just posted an alternate Federation tutorial idea a few minutes ago, that involves Starfleet Academy.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
03-04-2011, 11:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DekuScrubby View Post
I think they would have done this already if it weren't for the Leonary Nimoy voiceovers.
How long would it take to re-code things so that the Nimoy voiceovers were bound to your selected rank, not your current level?

Both the V/Os and the 'My Characters' page work solely by level, even if you've not ranked your character up.

In other words, if your playing a character at 'Lt. Commander 16', NPCs will still treat you as a Lt. Commander and you'll appear that way in the HUDs of other players, but the Character page on the site and the Nimoy V/Os will read your level and assume that you're 'Commander grade 6'.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
03-05-2011, 02:41 PM
I think it should be:
Rear Admiral, Lower Half: 61-70
Rear Admiral, Upper Half: 71-80
Vice Admiral: 81-90
Admiral: 91-100
Fleet Admiral: 101
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
03-16-2011, 07:16 AM
Here is my .02,. I personally have no objection with leavi\ng it the way it is now and maybe adding Admiral and Fleet Admiral to the end, the reason why this is ok is that no matter your actual ingame rank your still the acting captain of the ship.

Its a time of war, so even the lower ranking people can get command of ships, smaller of course, but still get command.

So it takes much less then a year, prob 6 months to level up to va right now, so what many people have multiple characters to add to the total timeplay of the game.

We would all like to see some added features and increased gameplay time, but at what expense? Making it increasingly difficult for N00bs to level up, I think not. I don't know about you, but I like to play the game, I like to help new people, but making the levels all 10 and going up to 101 is just riduculious,

In game rank such as lt. commander or admiral doesn't necessarly have anything to do with fleet rank, which is why its fine the way it is, I dont know about you, but for the cap to be captain and only letting fleet leaderrs have the titles of admiral is dumb, thats part of the gameplay is getting up to admiral, while technically your never going to command more then one ship at a time, its still part of the gameplay that makes it fun.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
03-19-2011, 10:50 AM
I'm pretty sure you completely missed the whole point of my post. Lemme see if I can answer each part and explain exactly what I'm talking about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goetzjam View Post
Here is my .02,. I personally have no objection with leavi\ng it the way it is now and maybe adding Admiral and Fleet Admiral to the end, the reason why this is ok is that no matter your actual ingame rank your still the acting captain of the ship.

Its a time of war, so even the lower ranking people can get command of ships, smaller of course, but still get command.
These changes have nothing to do with being in control of your own ship. The changes are intended to allow for future expansion. As it is now, the only two ranks that can be added are Admiral and Fleet Admiral, which means only two more promotions are possible. That's very near-sighted, and pretty much a dead-end where STO is concerned. These rank changes wouldn't solve the problem, only delay it. However, they would allow for slightly more expansion than the current system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goetzjam View Post
So it takes much less then a year, prob 6 months to level up to va right now, so what many people have multiple characters to add to the total timeplay of the game.
It only takes 6 months if someone isn't trying hard. Most people can do it in about 120 hours or less.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goetzjam View Post
We would all like to see some added features and increased gameplay time, but at what expense? Making it increasingly difficult for N00bs to level up, I think not. I don't know about you, but I like to play the game, I like to help new people, but making the levels all 10 and going up to 101 is just riduculious,
For one thing, leveling up is not hard at all in this game. Even on the Klingon-side, where there's very little PVE content, a character can be leveled in a week or two. Plus, adding more levels is a long time away, probably a year or two at least. By then, there will be a lot more content to play through, and leveling up will be even easier than it is now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goetzjam View Post
In game rank such as lt. commander or admiral doesn't necessarly have anything to do with fleet rank, which is why its fine the way it is, I dont know about you, but for the cap to be captain and only letting fleet leaderrs have the titles of admiral is dumb, thats part of the gameplay is getting up to admiral, while technically your never going to command more then one ship at a time, its still part of the gameplay that makes it fun.
Again, you missed what I said. The current cap would be Captain, but future ranks would be admiral ranks.
Reply

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 02:41 PM.