Lower ranking officers have the ability to give orders to higher ranking officers when that lower ranking officer is the officer in command or at a higher tier of the command structure. This is true even in the real navy. It doesn't OFTEN happen, but it CAN happen. Typically when an officer reaches a particular position within the command tier, they have attained sufficient rank to at least equal all officers beneath them and if they have not then they are promoted a rank. But, still, like I said, it CAN happen even in the real navy. (typically it only happens with medical personnel, such as in this case both Troi and Crusher outranking Data but both being medical personnel [doctor and counselor] they are not in the direct chain of command)
Oh, I know that it can happen in the real navy too, but I still disagree with it. I think it should only happen for temporary assignments where a specialist of some kind is needed for their expertise. As far as I am concerned, it should never occur on permanent assignments.
As far as the Trek issue, particularly with Deanna Troi - considering how shaky Deanna was taking command when it was thrust upon her during that epsisode where they hit that anomaly and the whole ship was fubared, I find it surprising that a single test later on was all that stood between her and the rank of commander, and I find it even more surprising that Data could be second officer and not have already passed that test ages ago. The whole setup of the episode made it seem like Deanna couldn't be part of the regular command rotation without passing that test, and yet Data was, and he wasn't a full commander. It just doesn't make any sense to me!
In the modern navy there is also a distinction between line officer and staff officer. Line officers can hold command of ships and installations, where Staff Officers are specialized professionals (such as Doctors, Instructors, and in some navies, Engineers) that may hold command over their department, but not over the the ship. Ex: Hospital Ships may have an officer in command of the medical unit that has seniority and rank over the ship's commanding officer, but the ship's CO is still in command of the ship (although I imagine the senior officer has a high amount of pull)
Oh, I know that it can happen in the real navy too, but I still disagree with it. I think it should only happen for temporary assignments where a specialist of some kind is needed for their expertise. As far as I am concerned, it should never occur on permanent assignments.
As far as the Trek issue, particularly with Deanna Troi - considering how shaky Deanna was taking command when it was thrust upon her during that epsisode where they hit that anomaly and the whole ship was fubared, I find it surprising that a single test later on was all that stood between her and the rank of commander, and I find it even more surprising that Data could be second officer and not have already passed that test ages ago. The whole setup of the episode made it seem like Deanna couldn't be part of the regular command rotation without passing that test, and yet Data was, and he wasn't a full commander. It just doesn't make any sense to me!
Deanna Troi only received the basic starfleet command training that every officer receives. She did not have the specific command training or the command experience that officers such as Picard, Riker and Data had.
I am in full support of Admiral ranks being eliminated from the level progression. Captain ought to be the top rank and I'd love to see NPCs address us accordingly.
We don't even have a wit of Admiral-like abilities either. What's worse, as Admirals we're given orders and assignments from people we largely outrank very commonly. It's baffling when you stop to think about it.
I'm not too wild on the 'jumping through fiery hoops' to get commendations and earn the title, as it's less about what attaining it really means. Consider: people dislike being admirals in name because it implies doing things which we don't desire/are poorly covered in STO anyways. But...
To me, actual admiral ranks belong within the purview of Fleets/Guilds, whereas those in charge, either being the founders of the Fleet (read: Fleet Admiral), their 'officers' Vice-Admirals and deputies/recruiter Rear Admirals would give an accurate glimpse at the sort of administrative duty they uphold, along with unlocking appropriate rank pins and fashion to be addressed as.
As others have said, in the US military (not just the Navy), while rank is important, it's also position that matters. I've been in charge of higher ranking enlisted members before, because I had the skill experience on the job then they did. Remember, Miles was a Senior Chief and while Nog out ranked him, in matters of engineering, Miles was in charge. Also I think Miles was Nogs mentor of sorts, something the US Navy often does where they pair new Ensigns with an experienced Chief . In starfleet, as it is in the US navy, the only person on a ship that can pull rank on the Captain (in this case meaning the commanding officer) is the CMO.
Data was Operations - though I agree that it is odd that he didn't go through the test.
He was ops but also the Chief Science Officer oddly enough. I suppose because they had no non-Medical Science officer on senior staff. (I always heard it was because Data didn't look good in blue.)
Who says, Data didn't pass the Bridge Officer test? For all intents and purposes, WESLEY could have...(In fact he did pass a very similar test to be accepted into the Academy)
It is the requirement for bridge duty and Commander rank, but does not automatically make you a Commander.
What I would be in favour of is an option to choose the rank by which you are referred in your bio section. That way you could choose to be captain if you wished, without forcing the change on everybody who doesn't RP.
Roleplayers are the ones who can ignore it easier, I think.
It wouldn't be out of the question canonically to allow players the option to refuse a promotion as they level up. There's no regulation in Starfleet that says you have to accept a promotion when offered.
The thing that bothers me about it is the ease with which we can become admirals. In a time of war, Starfleet would need ships, crews, and captains, not more admirals. It's not realistic that we would even be offered promotions past captain unless Starfleet wanted us behind a desk instead of on the bridge. I'm not against some players being admirals, I just think they should have to do something extraordinary for that to occur and it should be awarded outside of level progression.
Roleplayers are the ones who can ignore it easier, I think.
Disagree. I don't RP and couldn't care less what rank the game calls me.
The devs have bigger issues to worry about then making sure everyone likes what the NPCs call the players. How about we get a functional economy, mission breaking bugs, and lack of content sorted out before we worry too much about our titles?
Humm what happens when and if they raise the Rank/skill cap won't we be right back to where we are
now ? with the a good majority of players at Fleet Admiral rank ?
I actually like the fact that I'm an admiral now. I just wished they could do away with the lower half/upper half
and just call both ranks rear admiral.
Other than that they just could get rid of the whole [insert rank here] tag the game uses in the mission descriptions
and call us captain out right. Because we are the captain of the ship, no matter our frickin rank.
Humm what happens when and if they raise the Rank/skill cap won't we be right back to where we are
now ? with the a good majority of players at Fleet Admiral rank ?
Nope, just keep the rank at Captain. There's no need for anyone to ever gain the rank of Admiral in this game especially since we are not doing the jobs of admirals. We are doing to work of ship captains. Admirals either drive a desk and deal with bureaucracy all day *snore* or head up entire fleets (which might be fun but would also be a pain in the tookus).
I'd be up for getting rid of RALH and RAUH in place of Commodore and RA. Seriously when missions text displays something like, "You will pay for that Rear Admiral Lower Half!!!". You have to be honest devs that is quite silly.
As far as how long you should be at a rank...all depends on the pace of leveling which depends on the amount of content available at lower levels.
Worse comes to worse just only display your Captain's pips and overhead Captain and I'd be up for a setting to select the default rank you want displayed and to be addressed as.
I'd prefer if it was a choice, like titles, that effects what NPCs call you, OR implemented fully but optional for existing VAs.
My main is a Vice Admiral. Frankly I'd prefer if he were a full Admiral, but VA is close. I don't RP, per se, but I do have a sort of story associated with all my characters. For my two alts, yeah, I don't think they should be any higher than Captain. But my main is an Admiral. Thus, if this were flat-out changed like many have suggested/supported here, I'd be saddened and a little PO'd.
I see the rank as almost an honorary thing. The UFP is at war, so if Admirals were only ever Admirals in the traditional sense, they'd be mostly useless (at least, comparatively) and a promotion could never be a viable reward for outstanding Captains. So instead, there are sort of different branches of Admiralty that basically give them seniority in their field without pulling them from the front lines. Syvik (aforementioned main) is a Tactical Admiral, in command of one of the fleet's most advanced warships. He can pull rank over just about everyone--even command a fleet if necessary--and wield the full power of Starfleet Command because he's part of it.
I could go on, but I think I've made my point. What Leviathan said is correct I suppose - the RP mindset can certainly make it easier to justify the rank. All in all I'm in favor of decoupling level and rank, but only if there's some way to keep some characters - such as my Syvik - as they are, complete with NPCs addressing them properly.
But yes, the RA levels could use some work because those titles are indeed ridiculous. I can't help but mentally abbreviate RALH to "a$$ admiral". xD
Humm what happens when and if they raise the Rank/skill cap won't we be right back to where we are
now ? with the a good majority of players at Fleet Admiral rank ?
Exactly why they need to detach rank from skill level. Having them tied as they currently are has been an incredibly short-sighted decision. Eventually this game is going to need to grow into new levels for our *captains* to level and progress through. Not many more level brackets and they'll have to start making up ranks with ridiculous non-canon sounding names. It needed to be changed before launch, now it needs to be changed ASAP.
I'd be up for getting rid of RALH and RAUH in place of Commodore and RA. Seriously when missions text displays something like, "You will pay for that Rear Admiral Lower Half!!!". You have to be honest devs that is quite silly.
As far as how long you should be at a rank...all depends on the pace of leveling which depends on the amount of content available at lower levels.
Worse comes to worse just only display your Captain's pips and overhead Captain and I'd be up for a setting to select the default rank you want displayed and to be addressed as.
Commodore and Rear admiral lower half are one and the same title.
Commodore got renamed to RAL not only by the US-Navy but by starfleet as well.
You can see that in a few episodes were 1 Pip Adms are adressed as Admiral, or Rear Admiral instead of Commodore.
Its even supported by the Movie, because Kirk was in fact, a RAL before he got demoted.
Captain James T. Krik (commanding officer)
Captain Spock (First officer/science officer)
Commander Leonard McCoy (CMO)
Captain Montgomery Scott (Chief Engineer)
Commander Hikaru Sulu (Chief Helmsman)
Commander Pavel Chekov (Head Navigator)
Command Nyota Uhura (Communications officer)
USS Enterprise, NCC1701-D
Captain Jean-Luc Picard (commanding officer)
Commander William Thomas Riker (First officer)
Lt. Commander Data (Chief of Operations/Science officer)
Lt. Commander Geordi La Forge (Chief Engineer)
Lt. Commander Worf (Chief of Security)
Commander Beverly Crusher (CMO)
Commander Deanna Troi (Counselor)
Are you sure about them being commander?
Star trek has the mannerism of adressing Lt.Cmdrs jsut as 'commander' .
I also remember seeing Troi with Lt cmdr Rank pips in TNG.
So she was propably promoted for her transfer under Riker's command.
I do enjoy being an Admiral btw.
And I think that it is a bad idea to bind it to your fleet. Because this will turn out in:
RAL = 10 Fleet Members
RAU = 25 Fleet Members
[...]
Humm what happens when and if they raise the Rank/skill cap won't we be right back to where we are
now ? with the a good majority of players at Fleet Admiral rank ?
You can always just make it Captain with new numbers for a good long while, if not indefinitely.Plenty of games get along just fine with numbers.
I'd be up for getting rid of RALH and RAUH in place of Commodore and RA. Seriously when missions text displays something like, "You will pay for that Rear Admiral Lower Half!!!". You have to be honest devs that is quite silly.
As far as how long you should be at a rank...all depends on the pace of leveling which depends on the amount of content available at lower levels.
Worse comes to worse just only display your Captain's pips and overhead Captain and I'd be up for a setting to select the default rank you want displayed and to be addressed as.
CBS informed that that as of TNG, Trek used real Navy ranks and had retired Commodore. We never saw a 1 star admiral onscreen in TNG-era but we did see one who was denoted as a rear admiral, if memory serves. There were pretty much constant costume errors with admirals but the intent was to switch to modern Nacy ranks with TNG.
Because it effects immersion. Roleplayers create their own immersion. Lore junkies (which is a lot of Trek fandom) look to the game as a source of IP immersion rather than making their own.
It wouldn't be out of the question canonically to allow players the option to refuse a promotion as they level up. There's no regulation in Starfleet that says you have to accept a promotion when offered.
The thing that bothers me about it is the ease with which we can become admirals. In a time of war, Starfleet would need ships, crews, and captains, not more admirals. It's not realistic that we would even be offered promotions past captain unless Starfleet wanted us behind a desk instead of on the bridge. I'm not against some players being admirals, I just think they should have to do something extraordinary for that to occur and it should be awarded outside of level progression.
Pre-launch, the explanation was that Starfleet lost almost everyone above ensign rank to the Borg and the Klingons practically overnight, with the Borg targeting and eliminating almost the entirety of Starfleet's senior staff. We don't get a lot of feel for that in-game outside the tutorial and if that's the intent, it needs to be sold harder.
Exactly why they need to detach rank from skill level. Having them tied as they currently are has been an incredibly short-sighted decision. Eventually this game is going to need to grow into new levels for our *captains* to level and progress through. Not many more level brackets and they'll have to start making up ranks with ridiculous non-canon sounding names. It needed to be changed before launch, now it needs to be changed ASAP.
Well that's always been the issue when this has come up before Rank is tied to ship Tiers also Kits and weapons are tied to rank which means a BIG code change and given the time table for F2P I just don't see that happening
I forgot to change the D to an E, those were their ranks on the Enterprise E. FYI, Troi was a Lt Commander for most of the TNG series and put on full Commander near the end after she passed the bridge officers test. And yes, those were actual Commander ranks, not Lt Commander ranks.
I have just finished listening to your show and well i got to say i understand your point of view
I like the idea i think we should all get behind this i am fed up of being an admiral i am a captain and nothing more i agree with the op about the ranks and think they should be changed what would be ideal is that we who are admiral's at the moment get a mission where we get demoted if we choose and those who want to be admirals get to stay admirals or well all just get demoted im easy with what ever
I'm noticing a lot of changes to rank-ups, including the fact that we now get promoted without spending skillpoints.
I think now is the time to go back to what a lot of us said since Beta:
Rename the max rank from Vice Admiral 1 to Captain 21.
I'm NOT suggesting that Admiral be unobtainable but I think it should be a NON-rank based accolade title, maybe for maxing out the duty officer system.
There are 12 DO categories, right? Make it so that completing any 4 unlocks the Rear Admiral title and pips, completing any 8 unlocks the Vice Admiral title and pips, and completing all 12 unlocks the Fleet Admiral title and pips. The DO system tests your ability as a paper pusher and delegator and makes more sense as the means to progress your Captain sideways into the admiralty rather than as a field commission rank up.
Likewise, other advancements could be done through other progression systems.
On DS9, we saw Starfleet Intelligence had Deputy Directors and Directors with unique pips. This could be the post-Captain PvP progression.
In turn, maybe Fleet Actions, STFs, and Fleet Activity take you down a Fleet Captain -> Commodore path.
And then, maybe crafting could lead you through a special Corps of Engineers progression with pips based on the Marquis pips from Voyager and O'Brien's special badge on DS9, as both the Voyager Marquis and O'Brien were exemplary and unorthodox engineers in large part who could have become synonymous with great engineering.
But your rank in game mechanics terms would be Captain. This other stuff would be stacked on top of that based on what you are in addition to being a Captain, as opposed to a linear rank-up. (Which fits with the shows, where Admiral wasn't really treated so much as a progression so much as it was a Captain who was also a skilled bureaucrat, with a chain of command that almost never treated Admirals as being ABOVE Captains.)
Hello,
Everytime i reach Captain i didnt chance my Pipes on my Characters.
Yeah i want to be Captain and we still could get T5 ships, we have some levels later more Experience as we came fresh to Captian.
But i think it would then it should be implatent too that the Title we choose and thats displayed on the Character are useing the NPCs too.
I mean maybe someone will play a Amabassador so he could choose the choose Amabassador and the NPCs would talk to him Amabassador XYZ.
And the Admiral rank/title should became avaible too if you founding a fleet for the founder.
I think this would be a nice touch too.
I actually like the fact that I'm an admiral now. I just wished they could do away with the lower half/upper half
and just call both ranks rear admiral.
Other than that they just could get rid of the whole [insert rank here] tag the game uses in the mission descriptions
and call us captain out right. Because we are the captain of the ship, no matter our frickin rank.
I like being called Admiral and hate it when the game forces "Captain" on me. Same with General.
Admittedly, KDF Generals have more business on a bridge, but I RP that my VA ICly only gets pulled into missions and such when her ship is the closest, or gets ambushed, things like that. Most of the time, her ship is a roving command center in character. I see no issues with a VA commanding a mission if the circumstances are right. Stretches belief a bit more with ground missions, but that exists at any rank really, should be sending the XO.
Pre-launch, the explanation was that Starfleet lost almost everyone above ensign rank to the Borg and the Klingons practically overnight, with the Borg targeting and eliminating almost the entirety of Starfleet's senior staff. We don't get a lot of feel for that in-game outside the tutorial and if that's the intent, it needs to be sold harder.
That's pretty unbelievable. That would require a major attack on Earth at Starfleet Command, Vulcan, Andoria, every starbase, and anywhere else admirals are assigned, and given how huge the Federation is, I can't buy that most of the admirals were wiped out.
You're right in that they really don't sell it if that is their intent. In the Federation sectors in game, it feels pretty business as usual as if the war were almost an afterthought.
I think the better option is to make it so that once you attain a rank, you have a drop down in the upper left corner where it normally shows your rank, and lets you select any of them. That way if you level to RALH 1 and want to still be Captain, just select Captain and you are Captain 11.
Comments
Oh, I know that it can happen in the real navy too, but I still disagree with it. I think it should only happen for temporary assignments where a specialist of some kind is needed for their expertise. As far as I am concerned, it should never occur on permanent assignments.
As far as the Trek issue, particularly with Deanna Troi - considering how shaky Deanna was taking command when it was thrust upon her during that epsisode where they hit that anomaly and the whole ship was fubared, I find it surprising that a single test later on was all that stood between her and the rank of commander, and I find it even more surprising that Data could be second officer and not have already passed that test ages ago. The whole setup of the episode made it seem like Deanna couldn't be part of the regular command rotation without passing that test, and yet Data was, and he wasn't a full commander. It just doesn't make any sense to me!
Exactly so.
Deanna Troi only received the basic starfleet command training that every officer receives. She did not have the specific command training or the command experience that officers such as Picard, Riker and Data had.
We don't even have a wit of Admiral-like abilities either. What's worse, as Admirals we're given orders and assignments from people we largely outrank very commonly. It's baffling when you stop to think about it.
I'm not too wild on the 'jumping through fiery hoops' to get commendations and earn the title, as it's less about what attaining it really means. Consider: people dislike being admirals in name because it implies doing things which we don't desire/are poorly covered in STO anyways. But...
To me, actual admiral ranks belong within the purview of Fleets/Guilds, whereas those in charge, either being the founders of the Fleet (read: Fleet Admiral), their 'officers' Vice-Admirals and deputies/recruiter Rear Admirals would give an accurate glimpse at the sort of administrative duty they uphold, along with unlocking appropriate rank pins and fashion to be addressed as.
He was ops but also the Chief Science Officer oddly enough. I suppose because they had no non-Medical Science officer on senior staff. (I always heard it was because Data didn't look good in blue.)
It is the requirement for bridge duty and Commander rank, but does not automatically make you a Commander.
Roleplayers are the ones who can ignore it easier, I think.
The thing that bothers me about it is the ease with which we can become admirals. In a time of war, Starfleet would need ships, crews, and captains, not more admirals. It's not realistic that we would even be offered promotions past captain unless Starfleet wanted us behind a desk instead of on the bridge. I'm not against some players being admirals, I just think they should have to do something extraordinary for that to occur and it should be awarded outside of level progression.
Disagree. I don't RP and couldn't care less what rank the game calls me.
The devs have bigger issues to worry about then making sure everyone likes what the NPCs call the players. How about we get a functional economy, mission breaking bugs, and lack of content sorted out before we worry too much about our titles?
now ? with the a good majority of players at Fleet Admiral rank ?
and just call both ranks rear admiral.
Other than that they just could get rid of the whole [insert rank here] tag the game uses in the mission descriptions
and call us captain out right. Because we are the captain of the ship, no matter our frickin rank.
Nope, just keep the rank at Captain. There's no need for anyone to ever gain the rank of Admiral in this game especially since we are not doing the jobs of admirals. We are doing to work of ship captains. Admirals either drive a desk and deal with bureaucracy all day *snore* or head up entire fleets (which might be fun but would also be a pain in the tookus).
Navy-Memory Alpha
Rear Admiral Lower Half - Commodore
Rear Admiral Upper Half - Rear Admiral
Vice Admiral - Vice Admiral
I'd be up for getting rid of RALH and RAUH in place of Commodore and RA. Seriously when missions text displays something like, "You will pay for that Rear Admiral Lower Half!!!". You have to be honest devs that is quite silly.
As far as how long you should be at a rank...all depends on the pace of leveling which depends on the amount of content available at lower levels.
Worse comes to worse just only display your Captain's pips and overhead Captain and I'd be up for a setting to select the default rank you want displayed and to be addressed as.
My main is a Vice Admiral. Frankly I'd prefer if he were a full Admiral, but VA is close. I don't RP, per se, but I do have a sort of story associated with all my characters. For my two alts, yeah, I don't think they should be any higher than Captain. But my main is an Admiral. Thus, if this were flat-out changed like many have suggested/supported here, I'd be saddened and a little PO'd.
I see the rank as almost an honorary thing. The UFP is at war, so if Admirals were only ever Admirals in the traditional sense, they'd be mostly useless (at least, comparatively) and a promotion could never be a viable reward for outstanding Captains. So instead, there are sort of different branches of Admiralty that basically give them seniority in their field without pulling them from the front lines. Syvik (aforementioned main) is a Tactical Admiral, in command of one of the fleet's most advanced warships. He can pull rank over just about everyone--even command a fleet if necessary--and wield the full power of Starfleet Command because he's part of it.
I could go on, but I think I've made my point. What Leviathan said is correct I suppose - the RP mindset can certainly make it easier to justify the rank. All in all I'm in favor of decoupling level and rank, but only if there's some way to keep some characters - such as my Syvik - as they are, complete with NPCs addressing them properly.
But yes, the RA levels could use some work because those titles are indeed ridiculous. I can't help but mentally abbreviate RALH to "a$$ admiral". xD
Exactly why they need to detach rank from skill level. Having them tied as they currently are has been an incredibly short-sighted decision. Eventually this game is going to need to grow into new levels for our *captains* to level and progress through. Not many more level brackets and they'll have to start making up ranks with ridiculous non-canon sounding names. It needed to be changed before launch, now it needs to be changed ASAP.
Commodore and Rear admiral lower half are one and the same title.
Commodore got renamed to RAL not only by the US-Navy but by starfleet as well.
You can see that in a few episodes were 1 Pip Adms are adressed as Admiral, or Rear Admiral instead of Commodore.
Its even supported by the Movie, because Kirk was in fact, a RAL before he got demoted.
Are you sure about them being commander?
Star trek has the mannerism of adressing Lt.Cmdrs jsut as 'commander' .
I also remember seeing Troi with Lt cmdr Rank pips in TNG.
So she was propably promoted for her transfer under Riker's command.
I do enjoy being an Admiral btw.
And I think that it is a bad idea to bind it to your fleet. Because this will turn out in:
RAL = 10 Fleet Members
RAU = 25 Fleet Members
[...]
Why would anybody who didn't RP care?
You can always just make it Captain with new numbers for a good long while, if not indefinitely.Plenty of games get along just fine with numbers.
CBS informed that that as of TNG, Trek used real Navy ranks and had retired Commodore. We never saw a 1 star admiral onscreen in TNG-era but we did see one who was denoted as a rear admiral, if memory serves. There were pretty much constant costume errors with admirals but the intent was to switch to modern Nacy ranks with TNG.
Because it effects immersion. Roleplayers create their own immersion. Lore junkies (which is a lot of Trek fandom) look to the game as a source of IP immersion rather than making their own.
Pre-launch, the explanation was that Starfleet lost almost everyone above ensign rank to the Borg and the Klingons practically overnight, with the Borg targeting and eliminating almost the entirety of Starfleet's senior staff. We don't get a lot of feel for that in-game outside the tutorial and if that's the intent, it needs to be sold harder.
Well that's always been the issue when this has come up before Rank is tied to ship Tiers also Kits and weapons are tied to rank which means a BIG code change and given the time table for F2P I just don't see that happening
I like the idea i think we should all get behind this i am fed up of being an admiral i am a captain and nothing more i agree with the op about the ranks and think they should be changed what would be ideal is that we who are admiral's at the moment get a mission where we get demoted if we choose and those who want to be admirals get to stay admirals or well all just get demoted im easy with what ever
This is a great idea
Everytime i reach Captain i didnt chance my Pipes on my Characters.
Yeah i want to be Captain and we still could get T5 ships, we have some levels later more Experience as we came fresh to Captian.
But i think it would then it should be implatent too that the Title we choose and thats displayed on the Character are useing the NPCs too.
I mean maybe someone will play a Amabassador so he could choose the choose Amabassador and the NPCs would talk to him Amabassador XYZ.
And the Admiral rank/title should became avaible too if you founding a fleet for the founder.
I think this would be a nice touch too.
Greetings and have a nice Day
I like being called Admiral and hate it when the game forces "Captain" on me. Same with General.
Admittedly, KDF Generals have more business on a bridge, but I RP that my VA ICly only gets pulled into missions and such when her ship is the closest, or gets ambushed, things like that. Most of the time, her ship is a roving command center in character. I see no issues with a VA commanding a mission if the circumstances are right. Stretches belief a bit more with ground missions, but that exists at any rank really, should be sending the XO.
That's pretty unbelievable. That would require a major attack on Earth at Starfleet Command, Vulcan, Andoria, every starbase, and anywhere else admirals are assigned, and given how huge the Federation is, I can't buy that most of the admirals were wiped out.
You're right in that they really don't sell it if that is their intent. In the Federation sectors in game, it feels pretty business as usual as if the war were almost an afterthought.
Best way to make everyone happy IMO.