Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,988
# 41
02-08-2013, 03:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by newplayerguy7 View Post
A capped LEVEL character will have the same skills and abilities as any other capped LEVEL character....regardless of what their title (rank) is.

As Captainhunter1 pointed out just above, a level 70 'Commander' is exactly the same as a level 70 'Captain'. That's the crux of the post I think - again the need to disconnect rank and level.

And again, I agree with him that only those commanding true fleets (guilds -not a bot 'fleet' of 5 ships) having access to Admiral rank.
But a level 70 Admiral is not the same as a level 70 Captain due to commanding an npc fleet. A level 70 Admiral has more dps, more survivability, and more skills than a level 70 Captain. A level 70 Captain will intentionally limit their ability in this game by ignoring a major part of the game. At this particular moment, it does not matter what they call us since there is no difference between a Captain and Vice Admiral.

There is a slight problem with attaching a rank to a particular position. Such an Admiral rank will give no real benefit like most ranks we currently have and people will be creating minor fleets just so they can have a new title. If there is actual content behind being a fleet guild leader besides controlling the fleet, then it will cause major problems since all content should be available to everyone if they are willing to put in the effort.

My position is based on giving use to all the inactive ships that we currently have and give this game an interesting mechanic that I doubt any other MMO has. If others want to hinder themselves by staying a Captain, then people are free to play the game how they wish. However, the devs have mentioned that the level cap increase will involve Admiral content and Admiral content means commanding our own npc fleets. It is possible that Admiral content will fail to appear due to various problems, but it will give a level to the game that will make the doff system pale in comparison if they are successful.

Creating the back story of each ship. Deciding who is on each ship. Equipping each ship with the right equipment and bridge officers to make an almost unstoppable fleet. Making bridge officers into playable characters. Will certainly be more fun than having everyone a Captain. Captains can only progress so far before they want to spread out and accomplish things on their own instead of just following orders. Being an Admiral is the next stage of progression.
Commander
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 355
# 42
02-08-2013, 04:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by starkaos View Post
But a level 70 Admiral is not the same as a level 70 Captain due to commanding an npc fleet. A level 70 Admiral has more dps, more survivability, and more skills than a level 70 Captain. A level 70 Captain will intentionally limit their ability in this game by ignoring a major part of the game. At this particular moment, it does not matter what they call us since there is no difference between a Captain and Vice Admiral.

There is a slight problem with attaching a rank to a particular position. Such an Admiral rank will give no real benefit like most ranks we currently have and people will be creating minor fleets just so they can have a new title. If there is actual content behind being a fleet guild leader besides controlling the fleet, then it will cause major problems since all content should be available to everyone if they are willing to put in the effort.

My position is based on giving use to all the inactive ships that we currently have and give this game an interesting mechanic that I doubt any other MMO has. If others want to hinder themselves by staying a Captain, then people are free to play the game how they wish. However, the devs have mentioned that the level cap increase will involve Admiral content and Admiral content means commanding our own npc fleets. It is possible that Admiral content will fail to appear due to various problems, but it will give a level to the game that will make the doff system pale in comparison if they are successful.

Creating the back story of each ship. Deciding who is on each ship. Equipping each ship with the right equipment and bridge officers to make an almost unstoppable fleet. Making bridge officers into playable characters. Will certainly be more fun than having everyone a Captain. Captains can only progress so far before they want to spread out and accomplish things on their own instead of just following orders. Being an Admiral is the next stage of progression.
I'm not sure you're understanding what I'm saying.

A level 70 character is a level 70 character.

A level 70 "Torpedo Target" is the same as a level 70 "Ensign" who is the same as a level 70 "Ambassador".

They only thing that makes them different is the profession they follow (Tactical, Science, Engineering).

By divorcing rank and level, using only titles, a level 70 Tactical Officer with the title "Captain" has the same abilities as another level 70 Tactical Officer who choses to be addressed by the title "Stunning".

The ability to command an NPC bot fleet (when gained by earning a certain LEVEL), is no different from one character to the next - at that same LEVEL. If someone choses to command that NPC (ex-Bridge Officer) bot fleet with the title "Fleet Captain" - great. If they chose to command it using the title "Ambassador" - well good for them too.

Again, all abilities and skills are based off LEVEL - not a rank title.

And again, the hero rank in Star Trek is Captain. It should be by all rights the 'default' rank in STO (and therefore the default cap) - not Admiral. And for those who truely wish to have the Admiral title - it is still available, but isn't forced upon you as it is now.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,988
# 43
02-08-2013, 06:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by newplayerguy7 View Post
I'm not sure you're understanding what I'm saying.

A level 70 character is a level 70 character.

A level 70 "Torpedo Target" is the same as a level 70 "Ensign" who is the same as a level 70 "Ambassador".

They only thing that makes them different is the profession they follow (Tactical, Science, Engineering).

By divorcing rank and level, using only titles, a level 70 Tactical Officer with the title "Captain" has the same abilities as another level 70 Tactical Officer who choses to be addressed by the title "Stunning".

The ability to command an NPC bot fleet (when gained by earning a certain LEVEL), is no different from one character to the next - at that same LEVEL. If someone choses to command that NPC (ex-Bridge Officer) bot fleet with the title "Fleet Captain" - great. If they chose to command it using the title "Ambassador" - well good for them too.

Again, all abilities and skills are based off LEVEL - not a rank title.

And again, the hero rank in Star Trek is Captain. It should be by all rights the 'default' rank in STO (and therefore the default cap) - not Admiral. And for those who truely wish to have the Admiral title - it is still available, but isn't forced upon you as it is now.
And you are not understanding what I am saying. An Admiral is defined by them choosing to command a fleet. Without a fleet, then there is no real difference between an Admiral and a Captain. It is not simply a title. Also, being called by title can be very disturbing. Having an npc call you Moist is particularly bad. So we should have a rank option which only includes a portion of the titles that we can use. Torpedo Target and Stunning should not be eligible ranks. If a player calls themselves a Captain, then they have no right to command a fleet. Fleet Captain can be used temporarily, but that would require switching between Captain and Fleet Captain rank each time. I am certain that people will use the Captain rank and do Admiral content which is something I have no control over or will care about. I am too lazy, apathetic, and realize it is pointless to send GM reports about people not playing their rank properly.

My posts are directed towards those Captains that are for the purity of the rank of Captain and to inform them that it is very possible to miss out on future content due to them wanting to stay a Captain. They will have to make a decision of if they want to stay a Captain and miss out on content or finally give in and become an Admiral. I agree that if a player has their captain wear the Captain rank and has the Captain title, then they should be called a Captain. If they want to be called some of the Commendation titles, Master Chef, Master Bartender, Chef, Bartender, Ambassador, Career Officer, and some others, then they should, but titles like Smashed, Battered, Moist, Stunning, Torpedo Target, and Speedy should not be used as ranks. Also Admiral should be the final rank of the game or maybe Fleet Admiral depending on if the Fleet Admiral has one or more people in the rank. There should be no possible way to be President of the Federation and I doubt you will find any people that would agree to that. If this game was a single player game, then President of the Federation might make sense, but this is an MMO so it makes absolutely no sense.

Being an Admiral will be a completely new system added to the game. By choosing to command a fleet, the amount of damage my fleet can do, the amount of skills my fleet can do outnumbers the amount of damage your ship can do and the amount of skills your ship can do since you are limited to just one ship. A level 70 Admiral and a level 70 Captain can do the same if they are 1 on 1, but a level 70 Admiral has a bunch of ships to use that are almost as powerful as their command ship so depending on their fleet layout, they could afk in a 1 on 1 pvp duel and still beat the captain.
Commander
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 355
# 44
02-09-2013, 09:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by starkaos View Post
And you are not understanding what I am saying. An Admiral is defined by them choosing to command a fleet. Without a fleet, then there is no real difference between an Admiral and a Captain. It is not simply a title. Also, being called by title can be very disturbing. Having an npc call you Moist is particularly bad. So we should have a rank option which only includes a portion of the titles that we can use. Torpedo Target and Stunning should not be eligible ranks. If a player calls themselves a Captain, then they have no right to command a fleet. Fleet Captain can be used temporarily, but that would require switching between Captain and Fleet Captain rank each time. I am certain that people will use the Captain rank and do Admiral content which is something I have no control over or will care about. I am too lazy, apathetic, and realize it is pointless to send GM reports about people not playing their rank properly.

My posts are directed towards those Captains that are for the purity of the rank of Captain and to inform them that it is very possible to miss out on future content due to them wanting to stay a Captain. They will have to make a decision of if they want to stay a Captain and miss out on content or finally give in and become an Admiral. I agree that if a player has their captain wear the Captain rank and has the Captain title, then they should be called a Captain. If they want to be called some of the Commendation titles, Master Chef, Master Bartender, Chef, Bartender, Ambassador, Career Officer, and some others, then they should, but titles like Smashed, Battered, Moist, Stunning, Torpedo Target, and Speedy should not be used as ranks. Also Admiral should be the final rank of the game or maybe Fleet Admiral depending on if the Fleet Admiral has one or more people in the rank. There should be no possible way to be President of the Federation and I doubt you will find any people that would agree to that. If this game was a single player game, then President of the Federation might make sense, but this is an MMO so it makes absolutely no sense.

Being an Admiral will be a completely new system added to the game. By choosing to command a fleet, the amount of damage my fleet can do, the amount of skills my fleet can do outnumbers the amount of damage your ship can do and the amount of skills your ship can do since you are limited to just one ship. A level 70 Admiral and a level 70 Captain can do the same if they are 1 on 1, but a level 70 Admiral has a bunch of ships to use that are almost as powerful as their command ship so depending on their fleet layout, they could afk in a 1 on 1 pvp duel and still beat the captain.
I think you are confusing rank with skill/abilities - though I can understand why - because that is how the current system is set up, the two are one and the same.

Using the OP's proposal, rank would only be a title - just like every other commendation title in the game. It would have nothing to do with ability.

Abilities and skills would be awarded purely on the LEVEL a character earns - having nothing to do with rank (a title only).

There would be no "Admiral" content - only LEVEL 70 content.

Any level 70 character can play that content regardless of which 'title' they use.

Using this system would mean that the highest 'title' a character could earn while LEVELING would be Captain - unless they are in charge of a real Fleet (guild) in which case the "admiral" title is unlocked for them - that they can chose to use or not.

And while I agree that using the titles like "Stunning" are kind of strange for characters - which is no rank at all - only a title - it is already in the game and apparently some people like it. It in no way effects your play at all, as only NPCs would be addressing them as such in mission dialogs - - that only they can see.

So yes, LEVEL 70 content will most likely include the ability to control multple ships, but what if the character in question (a LEVEL 70 individual) is roleplaying as a quartermaster and the ships he is directing are part of a supply group? His TITLE rank may only show 'Chief Quartermaster" - not even an officer - and yet he 'commands' multiple ships in their duties. Or how about the person playing as a diplomat using the "Ambassador" title? Techncally he holds no rank whatsoever - however because he is LEVEL 70, he has earned the right to 'command' a number of ships to do missions for him.

So again, rank would have nothing to do with in-game abilities or skills. It would be a title only (unlocked as you LEVEL, capping with the title Captain - unless you become a true Fleet leader). Any LEVEL 70 character could 'command' a bot fleet, they have that ability - just because the chose to do it using the TITLE "Ambassador", "Bartender", or..."Stunning" has nothing to do with it.

LEVEL (abilities) and rank (title) would be completely separate.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,988
# 45
02-09-2013, 11:17 AM
I am not confusing rank with skill/ability. If a person is playing as a pure Captain where they control only their ship, then controlling a bot fleet is something they can't do. It is a matter of choice that they don't control a bot fleet or do any other Admiral related content. My definition of Admiral is simply a person that controls more than one ship and Captains by definition only control their ship. It does not matter what rank they use. People can rp whatever reason like Ambassador, Quartermaster, or Pirate to play admiral content. They don't need to call themselves Admirals, but that is essentially what they are.

As I said before, people that want to stay Captains will have to make a choice in the future. It is likely that Iconian STFs that might come out in a couple of years will require the use of bot fleets to complete due to the challenge of these STFs. People that stay Captains won't have access to bot fleets due to their own personal decision and they have purposefully hindered themselves and the STF team. Now it is possible that they do better than a player with a bot fleet, but that is a matter of skill. So unless the Captain plays with the others on a regular basis, then there will be some discrimination over Captains with these new STFs. Essentially, we respect your choice to play as a Captain, but we need Admirals to do this run so goodbye. So the Captain will have to make a choice to stay away from such content, play only with people that are willing to deal with the added challenge, or suck it up and become an Admiral. If you want to experience how that might feel, then try running a Tier 3 ship in an Elite STF. You will do better than an afker, but not as good as a player in a Tier 5 ship.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 176
# 46
02-09-2013, 11:51 AM
Is it realistic that a captain commands a fleet? No.

Is it realistic that Starfleet is brimming with thousands upon thousands of flag officers? No.

The boat has sailed on realism re: ranks. It is a choice between implausible scenarios. Anybody who is honestly concerned with 'realism' in the ranks of this make-believe space ship organizations should be asking for mandatory waves of demotions to bring the number of flag officers down to more plausible levels. Short of that, what we are talking about is roleplay and gameplay concerns. Realism has a secondary or tertiary role.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,988
# 47
02-09-2013, 01:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pompouluss View Post
Is it realistic that a captain commands a fleet? No.

Is it realistic that Starfleet is brimming with thousands upon thousands of flag officers? No.

The boat has sailed on realism re: ranks. It is a choice between implausible scenarios. Anybody who is honestly concerned with 'realism' in the ranks of this make-believe space ship organizations should be asking for mandatory waves of demotions to bring the number of flag officers down to more plausible levels. Short of that, what we are talking about is roleplay and gameplay concerns. Realism has a secondary or tertiary role.
Agreed. Realism is secondary to gameplay and fun. If realism was important, then everyone would be wearing the same style of uniform, lockbox ships wouldn't exist, and various ships like the Ambassador, Constitution, and Excelsior wouldn't exist. It doesn't matter if someone is called a Captain, Admiral, or Master Chef.
Commander
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 355
# 48
02-09-2013, 01:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by starkaos View Post
I am not confusing rank with skill/ability. If a person is playing as a pure Captain where they control only their ship, then controlling a bot fleet is something they can't do. It is a matter of choice that they don't control a bot fleet or do any other Admiral related content. My definition of Admiral is simply a person that controls more than one ship and Captains by definition only control their ship. It does not matter what rank they use. People can rp whatever reason like Ambassador, Quartermaster, or Pirate to play admiral content. They don't need to call themselves Admirals, but that is essentially what they are.

As I said before, people that want to stay Captains will have to make a choice in the future. It is likely that Iconian STFs that might come out in a couple of years will require the use of bot fleets to complete due to the challenge of these STFs. People that stay Captains won't have access to bot fleets due to their own personal decision and they have purposefully hindered themselves and the STF team. Now it is possible that they do better than a player with a bot fleet, but that is a matter of skill. So unless the Captain plays with the others on a regular basis, then there will be some discrimination over Captains with these new STFs. Essentially, we respect your choice to play as a Captain, but we need Admirals to do this run so goodbye. So the Captain will have to make a choice to stay away from such content, play only with people that are willing to deal with the added challenge, or suck it up and become an Admiral. If you want to experience how that might feel, then try running a Tier 3 ship in an Elite STF. You will do better than an afker, but not as good as a player in a Tier 5 ship.
I agree that there may be a few people out there who would limit themselves from a pure roleplaying aspect of never, ever using more than one ship. And they would certainly be handicapping themselves in content designed for multi-ship use.

However, you again use the term "Admiral content" - with what the OP is suggesting there would be no such thing. There would only be LEVEL 70 content. As you rightly point out, a good deal of it would would most likely involve the need for multiple ships (both player and 'bot'). However...

This would not be contigent on any RANK a charactrer has, it would be purely based on LEVEL.

If a person wanted to stay absolutely true to the "a Captain only controls one ship" concept - well more power to them, but they would still be level 70 at end game and have all the ability to play said content, just sans a bot 'fleet' - - because they PERSONALLY chose not to use an ability that was available to them. (But as you also pointed out - they would have quite a challenge doing so- like taking a tier 3 ship into an elite STF - good luck there! lol)

I'm pretty sure such players would be few and far between.

Again it comes down to the use of titles. Did Picard and Sisko as 4 pip Captains command more than one ship at various times. Yes. Were they more skilled and better than many Admirals? Yes. Can a player emulate that in STO currently with rank tied directy to LEVEL. No.

They were, among all the other hero leaders in Star Trek, only paultry level 40/4 pip Captains in STO terms. And this is why rank needs to be separted from level. Pike, Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Janeway, Archer...all of them would definately qualify as LEVEL 70 characters, however they all carried the revered RANK of Captain - a Star Trek tradition for hero ship commanders. Unfortunately STO has made that great rank as much a throw away as 'Ensign' on the climb to end game.

This is why the default top rank (title) should be "Captain" (with Admiral still available - but in far fewer numbers). And why NPC's should address a character by the title they have chosen for themselves - whether it's "Commander", "Tribble collector", or "Merchant". That way we can have a LEVEL 70 Picard who commands his own ship, yet still can take command of a battle group - even though his offical rank TITLE is "Captain". (Or have a LEVEL 70 "Ambassador" who has a ship he regularly uses in his duties, but also directs a number of other vessels as well, etc)

The only way to do that is to separate RANK from LEVEL.

(And this also avoids the forced promotion to "President of the Federation" when the level cap is moved to 80 Just how many will there be? )
Commander
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 355
# 49
02-09-2013, 01:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pompouluss View Post
Is it realistic that a captain commands a fleet? No.

Is it realistic that Starfleet is brimming with thousands upon thousands of flag officers? No.

The boat has sailed on realism re: ranks. It is a choice between implausible scenarios. Anybody who is honestly concerned with 'realism' in the ranks of this make-believe space ship organizations should be asking for mandatory waves of demotions to bring the number of flag officers down to more plausible levels. Short of that, what we are talking about is roleplay and gameplay concerns. Realism has a secondary or tertiary role.
But we like to have our "make believe" as realistic as possible. (with 'realism' here meaning as close as possible to what is seen it the shows/movies)

Otherwise why draw ships in such detail? Why have a rank structure at all? Why have planets and solar systems to fly to? Etc.

The more 'realistic' our imagined world is the more immersed we feel in it.

Otherwise just copy "Hello Kitty World" and slap "Star Trek Online" across the front page. Hey, a game is a game right?

Last edited by newplayerguy7; 02-09-2013 at 02:05 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,988
# 50
02-09-2013, 02:02 PM
Admiral content is merely a name to distinguish bot fleet content from other level 60 or 70 content. It can be called something else for all I care. As far as the Admiral and Fleet Admiral title goes, if a player wants to be that, then they should not have to be the Fleet Leader or some other annoying task that severely limits it from the people that want it. It is all about choice.

All that is needed IMO is a rank indicator and maybe changing the item requirements to level instead of rank. Having an item listed with a minimum level of 40 is better than Rear Admiral, Lower Half.

The game has always separated Rank from Level, it is just not obvious. There is no possible way that a Lieutenant could command a ship. The tutorial would have to be leave Vega System and be put under the command of a different Captain. You would work up the ranks on a ship until you reach Captain where 30 levels later you finally get command of your own ship. So essentially, we go up a few ranks from Ensign to Captain in the tutorial and we stay Captain until they finally add content that seems completely different from what a Captain does and that is a personal choice.

As far as the whole President of the Federation thing goes, it is completely impossible for any player to be it since it is an Elected Civilian position. In order for any player to be President of the Earth, they would have to retire from Starfleet and put their name in for the ballot. Might be possible for Klingons to do that, but it still seems like you give up control to your ship after the successful coup.
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 08:47 PM.