test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Cryptic Please for the love of God and Trek..

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
Cryptic, this is a minor complaint but PLEASE kill this whole lower and upper half rank TRIBBLE! If you need the seperation then reinstate the Commodore rank for lower half but this is the dumbest looking thing in dialog I have ever seen.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    We had many discussions about this on Tribble. We know its not perfect, but the ranks are canon and player requested, so we don't want to change the ranks. There was no quick fix for this.

    So... we are working on tech (that couldn't make it in time for Season 2) to address this by allowing players to set a title they want to be called by. That will come as soon as we can the feature ironed out and all of the dialogs in the game updated.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Daniel, thanks for the quick reply, It is indeed impressive to see you here for such a silly complaint!

    I understand, a quick fix might be to make such references just say Admiral, this is the correct form of address technically.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    dstahl wrote: »
    We had many discussions about this on Tribble. We know its not perfect, but the ranks are canon and player requested, so we don't want to change the ranks. There was no quick fix for this.

    So... we are working on tech (that couldn't make it in time for Season 2) to address this by allowing players to set a title they want to be called by. That will come as soon as we can the feature ironed out and all of the dialogs in the game updated.

    Correction, sir! We've had discussions about this since Beta

    Commodore is Canon. Rear Admiral is Canon. Upper/Lower gets no mention at all in the show.

    Yes, some One-star Admirals are called Admiral instead of Commodore. So a change happened between TOS and TNG. There's no reason why it wouldn't change back by 2409. And a "quick fix" wouldn't be needed, if a fix had been in the works since Beta when it was first decried and a fix demanded.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Correction, sir! We've had discussions about this since Beta

    Commodore is Canon. Rear Admiral is Canon. Upper/Lower gets no mention at all in the show.
    Commodore

    Rear Admiral
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Cryptic, this is a minor complaint but PLEASE kill this whole lower and upper half rank TRIBBLE! If you need the seperation then reinstate the Commodore rank for lower half but this is the dumbest looking thing in dialog I have ever seen.

    Who cares about the ranks. What about the interiors which are just pieces of space stations thrown together and called a day. Heck even the warpcore room is identical to the one you see in the tutorial.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Jeff-El wrote:

    I think he got told.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Tuskin wrote:
    I think he got told.

    ...how did anyone get 'told'? He linked two MA articles that support the statement he quoted. Both ranks appeared in the shows, and while you see two TNG admirals with five pips, they're just called "Admiral" in the actual episodes. And none of the later two-pip admirals are ever called "Rear Admiral Upper"; Again, just "Admiral" or possibly "Rear Admiral", but I can't remember any offhand. The only qualifer TNG seemed to use was "Fleet Admiral", and they used that all over the place.

    The references to Rear Admiral upper/lower come from a backstage costuming guide, which was not always accurate. What's on the finished episode is always the trump cared.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    dstahl wrote: »
    We had many discussions about this on Tribble. We know its not perfect, but the ranks are canon and player requested, so we don't want to change the ranks. There was no quick fix for this.

    So... we are working on tech (that couldn't make it in time for Season 2) to address this by allowing players to set a title they want to be called by. That will come as soon as we can the feature ironed out and all of the dialogs in the game updated.

    I think you have the rank insignia art wrong on the sleaves (at least on TOS uniforms). It should be the large solid bar first, then the thinner bar closer to the shoulder...right now, the thin bar is closer to the hand...that is wrong, at least according to US Navy standards.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    knox1711 wrote: »
    I think you have the rank insignia art wrong on the sleaves (at least on TOS uniforms). It should be the large solid bar first, then the thinner bar closer to the shoulder...right now, the thin bar is closer to the hand...that is wrong, at least according to US Navy standards.

    TOS Rank stripes aren't Navy rank stripes. A side effect of Roddenberry and most of the production crew being Army and Army Air Corps vets.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    You know its quite obvious that somehow, the dialogue system ingame addresses us by a parameter that exists in our player data. Its probably meant to make dialogue work for say, when you do a non-level banded mission like the star clusters, or when you match someone's else's level.

    In which case, it isnt as easy a fix as having all NPCs call us 'admiral', much as that makes a whole lot more sense, because we dont have any rank or title called simply 'admiral', ie, there is no player parameter.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Rather than "telling" anyone anything, I was trying to draw attention to the fact that both sides of the discussion have reasonable canonical support. I really don't think either side is "right" or "wrong" on this one.

    If I had to pick a personal preference, it would be to stick with Rear Admiral Upper and Lower Half, as those references are by far the most "current" in the timeline. However, either would ultimately be fine with me.

    As it is, I do hope a fix comes in for the way NPCs address us, because I agree it's rather silly. I can see how it's a pretty tough thing to change, though, and I'm glad to see it's being worked on.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Why not have Fleet Captain and then Rear Admiral. There's speculation that Sloan held the rank of Fleet Captain when he first cropped up on DS9: Sloan's Background. It can't have been a made up rank either as Bashir would've questioned it immediately.

    His rank was four pips above a horizontal bar, which would suggest a grade higher than captain, but below the rank of admiral, which has the rectangle-enclosed pips.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Cryptic Studios Forum Usage Guidelines ~GM Tiyshen
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    its not really a small problem when an NPC constanly addresses you with this:

    "Greetings, Rear Admiral, Lower Half Tiberion"

    It looks ridiculous. No one would use that in a conversation. In fact it would be rude to point out that they're lower half

    I think all admirals should be addressed as "admiral" in conversations. Letting us choose would be better, if say someone were wanting to remain a captain in the manner of Kirk or Picard (who certainly had the seniority of admirals, if not the rank at times)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Cryptic, this is a minor complaint but PLEASE kill this whole lower and upper half rank TRIBBLE! If you need the seperation then reinstate the Commodore rank for lower half but this is the dumbest looking thing in dialog I have ever seen.

    The dialogue thing is dumb (but imaginably easy -but tedious- to fix).

    However, in the shows, Rear Admiral Lower Half replaced Commodore. I doubt Cryptic go RALH approved without passing it by CBS.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    While we're at it, I want my Vice Admiral to be a Colonel like Colonel West (he wore a VA uniform).:D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Having the rank ingame isn't so bad, but could you at least stop quest characters using the rank in mission dialogue. Would you hear that rank being used to address an Admiral in real life 'cos I never have?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Oh god yeah...I don't care about the rank structure normally, but an NPC calling me "Rear Admiral, lower half is just idiotic.

    Why not have every one above admiral just flagged as Admiral.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    yes get rid of the lower and upper ranks, it so silly.
    if not commodore use something like group Admiral or Rear Admiral Second Grade. anything other than lower half :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Jeff-El wrote:

    this is irrelevant. it should be commodore. just because that rank wasn't mentioned in any series, other than TOS, doesn't mean it's not still in use. besides, it sounds so much better
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    So two different threads here...one of people arguing that the upper/lower half thing isn't canon, and the other half complaining about the awkward dialogue that results when it's inserted that way (and yes, it is horrible).

    The problem there from a technical standpoint is that when it does that, it's calling something like "%rank" (whatever they use for the variable), that pulls the name of your current rank. Every single place that shows your current rank probably pulls it using that same variable.

    To change it in dialogue without changing it anywhere else would require creating a new variable, and then replacing every occurrence of the 'rank' variable with the new one...in every single dialogue string in the ENTIRE GAME.

    after that, you could set it up to pull whatever you wanted. The logical thing to make it customizable would be their currently set display title. You could also just set something for each rank...IE: LTCMDR gets called 'Commander', All the Admiral ranks get called 'Admiral', the rest get their ranks straight up... or any other scheme you wanted. It's a variable after all.

    Not hard, just a loooot of gruntwork to replace and check all those variable calls.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    The current rank structure is horrible and the npc dialogue is really poor.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Why any of us have rank beyond captain is still a puzzel to me.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Forums having a brain TRIBBLE.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    dstahl wrote: »
    We had many discussions about this on Tribble. We know its not perfect, but the ranks are canon and player requested, so we don't want to change the ranks. There was no quick fix for this.

    So... we are working on tech (that couldn't make it in time for Season 2) to address this by allowing players to set a title they want to be called by. That will come as soon as we can the feature ironed out and all of the dialogs in the game updated.

    Am very, very much looking forward to this....
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    I have no problems with being a Rear Admiral Lower/Upper Half, or Vice Admiral or whatever. I do have a problem with everyone calling me "Read Admiral Lower Half" though! It feels forced and artificial. That's all.

    dstahl wrote: »
    ...we are working on tech (that couldn't make it in time for Season 2) to address this by allowing players to set a title they want to be called by. That will come as soon as we can the feature ironed out and all of the dialogs in the game updated.
    That's awesome news, however, I'd really be pleased if whoever we were talking with would address us differently, based on their stats/affiliation with us, rather than a title that we get to choose. Better yet, I guess... allow us to choose different titles, one for enemies, one for friends, one for neutral factions, and assign those titles in the dialog box in run-time.

    I wish things were as easy as I can describe them... but I can dream, can't I? ;)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    The RALH/UL thing is awkward. It sounds awkward and it comes off awkward. In the real world military, nobody calls a one-star admiral 'lower half.' They just say 'rear admiral' or, more commonly, 'admiral.' Canon is fuzzy on this, though we did admittedly see no Commodores after the first or second season of TNG. We also didn't see any Fleet Captains after TOS and TAS. While 'absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,' I could concede that the rank of Commodore doesn't exist, even though it's only an artifact of the US military deprecating the rank of Commodore. Cryptic working on tech to allow whatever title you choose to be the one you're addressed as is a good compromise. Stamp of approval!

    Funny story about this: When the Navy got rid of the rank of 'Commodore' it bumped all its one-star admirals to 'Rear Admiral.' The Army and Marines complained because it gave guys who were equivalent to Brigadier Generals the pay of a Major-General. After some complaining to Congress -- some on this board might call it ****ing or QQing :p -- the Navy -- and by extension the Coast Guard, the Health Service, and the NOAA Corps -- brought back the one-star rank but were at a loss as to what to call it. Somehow 'Lower Half' got into someone's brain (I blame the Marines! :D ) and that's what the rank was called. So... anyone care to tell me how Starfleet got into that situation? :o
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    Krenn wrote: »
    this is irrelevant. it should be commodore. just because that rank wasn't mentioned in any series, other than TOS, doesn't mean it's not still in use. besides, it sounds so much better

    It's absolutely relevant. You just don't agree. Which is fine, but I think it's unfair to simply dismiss it out of hand.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    dstahl wrote: »
    We had many discussions about this on Tribble. We know its not perfect, but the ranks are canon and player requested, so we don't want to change the ranks. There was no quick fix for this.

    So... we are working on tech (that couldn't make it in time for Season 2) to address this by allowing players to set a title they want to be called by. That will come as soon as we can the feature ironed out and all of the dialogs in the game updated.

    I'm fine with the ranks themselves being what they are currently, I'd just like to see an option added for a "short" rank name to be used where appropriate. Something like this: (Using my Klingon character as a reference; Korvaugh, Son of Morgh, which is <Fname = Korvaugh> + <Mname = Son of> + <Lname = Morgh>... which is a slightly different syntax than the Fed side, so would need a faction designator. My character would be called "General Korvaugh", which is his first name, whereas a Fed character would be "Admiral LastName".)

    Basic form of address: Standard greetings, most communications where name and rank are appropriate.)
    <Short Rank> + <K Player First name> or for Feds: <Short Rank> + <F Player Last Name>; so in most cases, I would be addressed simply as General Korvaugh.

    Formal form of address: Promotion ceremonies, possible first contact or diplomatic situations (the other side wouldn't know that the entire rank wouldn't be used, therefore would probably stick to the whole thing so as not to potentially offend. So:
    <Full Rank> + <K Player First Name> + <K Player Middle Name> + <K Player Last Name> (or for Feds: <Full Rank> + <F Player First Name> + <F Player Middle Name> + <F Player Last Name>); in these more formal occasions, I'd be addressed as "Lieutenant General Korvaugh, Son of Morgh".
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited July 2010
    dstahl wrote: »
    We had many discussions about this on Tribble. We know its not perfect, but the ranks are canon and player requested...

    You're using canon as a defense? Let's talk about the size of interiors... :)

    But seriously, player-rank should stop at CAPTAIN since our command is limited to a single ship. This would be completely in line with what we've seen in the shows. Only leaders of Fleets should be referred to as ADMIRAL (who do, in fact, command multiple vessels).
Sign In or Register to comment.