Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 41
12-22-2011, 10:12 PM
It is silly being addressed by npc's as "rear admiral, lower half". I would assume that someone has pointed out that commodore is the actual rank. I also don't understand why they skipped lieutenant j.g., or even fleet captain. Hopefully one day we will have such ranks to stretch out the game, as well as the addition of admiral and fleet admiral, when we get sufficient content for additional ranks.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 42
12-22-2011, 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Odyssey47 View Post
It is silly being addressed by npc's as "rear admiral, lower half". I would assume that someone has pointed out that commodore is the actual rank. I also don't understand why they skipped lieutenant j.g., or even fleet captain. Hopefully one day we will have such ranks to stretch out the game, as well as the addition of admiral and fleet admiral, when we get sufficient content for additional ranks.
The reason given as to why RALH and RAUH were used instead of 'Commodore' is that in most Western maritime services, the rank of Commodore has been deprecated since the time Star Trek first was on the air.

The real story is actually a little bit funnier, and I'm actually proud (sort of) to say that my old service was partly responsible for this. Up until the 80's, the US Navy and the US Coast Guard (Semper Paratus!) had a habit of promoting senior officers (Captains) directly to two-star flag rank (Rear Admiral) with all rights, privileges, and pay. Basically, the US maritime services ceased using the rank of Comodore. They hadn't used it in decades, actually. This kind of torqued off the Army, Marines, and Air Force, who had to slog through one-star general before getting to two-star general and all the rights, privileges, pay, etc. This is extremely important to the brass; it is VITALLY important that two officers in COMPLETELY difference services who have had the same time in grade be offered the exactly same privileges, the exact same pay, the exact same number of ruffles and flourishes, and the exact same calls from the bosun's pipe. Seriously. The ground-pounders' brass took this to heart. Many golf pairings were broken up over this.

Anyway, in 1985, the Navy reinstituted the one-star rank of Commodore Admiral, but that was awkward, so they shrunk it down to Commodore. But that was confusing because traditionally any Navy captain commanding more than one ship, or commanding certain formations of units, was referred to as a 'commodore.' And the Coasties didn't have any commodores at all. So the rank was changed to Rear Admiral Lower Division, later to Rear Admiral Lower Half. And so the answer to the decade-old question of why anyone would want to be called the 'Lower Half' of anything, least of all a 'Rear Admiral,' is thus: Generals are sore winners.

And sometime after that mess, TNG came on the air and the writers consulted the Big Book of Naval Ranks. Failing to find the rank of Commodore (despite it being OMG IN YOUR FACE! in TOS) they discovered the rank of 'Rear Admiral,' and here we are today.

This lesson in naval history is brought to you by someone who likewise thinks that we are all blessed captains, and I can't think of a single person I've run into in the game who thinks the skipper of a starship should have any rank other than CAPTAIN. Unless you really want to go all Hornblower and call us 'Master and Commander.'

(Which is an interesting series of titles, itself, since it refers to the Sailing Master, in charge of sailing the ship, and the Commander who technically has command of the mis--*BAT'LETH'D!* "There, that oughta shut him up!"
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 43
12-22-2011, 11:01 PM
so no more ensgin 51 then with this new display?.:p
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 44
12-22-2011, 11:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wulfman View Post

Ensgin 0 - 9
Lt 10 - 19
Lt. Commander 20 - 29
Commander 30 - 39
Captain 40 - 50

I am also suprised about the statment that the rank system was confusing. After all, are we sure that the next generation of players really knos that 42 is higher than 38?
Yes. THIS IS GOOD! Even if you don;t want Ensigns flying ships around there is also Lieutenant Junior Grade that could be put in place of the Ensign rank. (It's the solid pip followed by a hollow pip, It's already an option in the uniform selection even!)
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 45
12-22-2011, 11:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tethyr808
< RANKS REVISED >
>> Unrelated, but long-standing: Can y'all figure out what causes massive lag--jerky motion in the Defari system (space map), especially during space combat? Always been a problem in DX9 until graphic settings are major reduced; seems to be mostly lessened by DX11, but still there. I'm convinced it's backdrop, somehow: happens with similar backdrops in exploration.
I've been having similar trouble but it seems to pop up randomly 2-4 times per hour for a couple of minutes regardless of what zone I am in or whether it is ground or space.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 46
12-23-2011, 01:11 AM
Lets dumb down the game some more shall we, whats next auto pvp for those that don't know what they are doing. Admiral 50 what a joke.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 47
12-23-2011, 03:18 AM
I like the change that lets me get a new rank at i.e. 30 instead of 31. After playing so many games over the years, 31 is really unnatural. Now if only your character sheet displayed what tier ship you were at
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 48
12-23-2011, 05:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wulfman View Post
Well, in fact if we change this around why are we not all "demoted" to Lvl 50 Captains. In the end we should not have admirals and if the system is changed it should be also move back to the ranks from Engsign to Captain:

Ensgin 0 - 9
Lt 10 - 19
Lt. Commander 20 - 29
Commander 30 - 39
Captain 40 - 50
QFT. This is what players have been asking for since day one (and prior), and now that Cryptic gets around to changing up the ranks, they shift it in the opposite direction? Why am I not suprised.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 49
12-23-2011, 07:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tethyr808
Aside from the absolute false inference that Cryptic doesn't care or fix real issues, if you dislike STO so much; or that another person's opinion that X-Y-and-Z should leave, how about both of y'all take a cue from the same playbook and find a more worthwhile endeavor?

The adjustment makes perfect sense, as many items referenced include the level # -- as do the Devs constantly -- which works far better universally than trying to list out every single named Rank for each species, especially should more playable Factions be introduced in the future. You cal it a waste of time; some might consider it foresight.
At least say "leave the game then" like an adult. I like STO..it's useless crap like this that makes 0 sense. If ranks were hard to understand, then those players have a bleak future...if one can't understand the basics of something like rank...my God...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diceberg View Post
Lets dumb down the game some more shall we, whats next auto pvp for those that don't know what they are doing. Admiral 50 what a joke.
I expect that in Season 6
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 50
12-23-2011, 09:11 AM
So how is the DirectX 11 working out?
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 03:59 AM.