test content
  • Games
  • Social
  • Arc News
  • Support
  • Zen
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Forums > Home› Feedback› Federation Discussion

Why are we all Vice Admirals?

thestargazethestargaze Member Posts: 1,020 Arc User
edited February 2013 in Federation Discussion
... I don't know about you but I did not aspire to be vice admiral when I was watching Star Trek. No, I wanted to be captain or lower ranks like Commander and Lt Commander etc. I don't get the concept of having thousands of Vice Admirals roaming about on STO.

This ranking system does not make any sense to me. What's the fun in this? If I am a starfleet officer, I like to work myself up.. yes .. but I also like to stay being Commander for some time. I don't think leveling up should be connected to your rank. We all level up quickly and never stay in one rank for long. The reason for that is the limitations of the lower ranks (and sometime crappy ships).

Point is, can't we separate the two.. the leveling and the rank?

Also as lower rank of Commander, you are not suppose to be captain or have your own ship, right?

Is there a better system for this? If so,.. what would it be?
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • mcconnamcconna Member Posts: 255 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Doesn't matter since your rank is merely a level milestone. If rank is a big thing for you, you can always join/make a roleplay fleet that uses their own ranking systems. In-game it's really a non-issue since it's more about your own character progressing and not so much about others.
  • mn03mn03 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Give your character the rank of Commander, it's that easy. You can even play Ensign if you want to! :eek:
    Join date: 5 Feb 2010
  • thestargazethestargaze Member Posts: 1,020 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Yes but won't i be problematic for the game creators when they increase the cap,... which the have done over the years? Soon you might get to full Admiral.. then what? President?

    I just hint that there could be a better system.

    You can change your pips yes.. but in your info it says Vice Admiral.
  • mcconnamcconna Member Posts: 255 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    thestargaze wrote: »
    Yes but won't i be problematic for the game creators when they increase the cap,... which the have done over the years? Soon you might get to full Admiral.. then what? President?

    I just hint that there could be a better system.

    You can change your pips yes.. but in your info it says Vice Admiral.

    They can re-name it so that RA (Lower) becomes Commodore with 10 levels like it should be. Then fill out the 10 each for the next 2. Which would bring the levels up to 60 for VA. Then for the next increase to Admiral with 10 bring it to 70. Then FA to 80. So yes they can keep doing it with ranks if they wanted.
  • UnknownUnknown
    edited February 2013
    This content has been removed.
  • neoakiraiineoakiraii Member Posts: 7,468 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Because I saved the galaxy and Federation so many times in less than a year, that they should make me King. :D
    GwaoHAD.png
  • kahless2001kahless2001 Member Posts: 130 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    neoakiraii wrote: »
    Because I saved the galaxy and Federation so many times in less than a year, that they should make me King. :D


    I want the title of HRH now, thanks for that.
  • stirling191stirling191 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Because Cryptic was stupid, and linked rank to level.
  • twg042370twg042370 Member Posts: 2,312 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Oh! An "Only Captains" thread. Has a week passed already?
    <3
  • stirling191stirling191 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    twg042370 wrote: »
    Oh! An "Only Captains" thread. Has a week passed already?

    That depends, how many "Nerf Escorts because I want cruisers to do everything" threads have gone up in the meantime?
  • raventomoeraventomoe Member Posts: 723 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    stirling191 wrote: »
    That depends, how many "Nerf Escorts because I want cruisers to do everything" threads have gone up in the meantime?

    Please, that argument is as moronic as the "Escorts are the best tanks, Cruisers suck" threads that make my brain hurt reading. *Points at sig if one wants proof of my feelings on the matter*
    "The Multiverse, the ultimate frontier..."
    Thus begins...Lyrical Trek
  • snoggymack22snoggymack22 Member Posts: 7,084 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    fulleatherjacket wrote: »
    The devs have said that "Fleet Admiral" will be the highest possible rank and they will never raise the level cap above that.

    Recently? Or was this the reference to the dev post from 2010 that outlined how the level cap was going to 60? That dev left the company a few months later and the topic was dead for a long time.
    So we're looking at level 70 as the ultimate cap.

    I still think we're looking at a level 50 ultimate cap and rep grinds as the alternative for advancement in this game going forward.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • stirling191stirling191 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    raventomoe wrote: »
    Please, that argument is as moronic as the "Escorts are the best tanks, Cruisers suck" threads that make my brain hurt reading. *Points at sig if one wants proof of my feelings on the matter*

    You really need to get your sarcasmometer checked out if you thought that was a serious quote.
  • lterlter Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I think there's no problem with players reaching the level of Vice Admiral or Admiral. But reaching this rank in a week with less knowledge of the game than a cadet of first year, I think its problematic. Currently the game is design to be a rush to VA in order to make new players feel advanced and let them quickly in the need of buying a C-Store VA ship, or a C-Store "Fleet" Module Ship.
  • raventomoeraventomoe Member Posts: 723 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    stirling191 wrote: »
    You really need to get your sarcasmometer checked out if you thought that was a serious quote.

    Oh, I know it wasn't serious. I was just making clear I felt those threads were idiotic too.

    But yeah, trying to insert logic into an online Star Trek game? Yeah...Vulcans would even raise their eyebrows at you for the illogical action you have taken my dear Original Poster.
    "The Multiverse, the ultimate frontier..."
    Thus begins...Lyrical Trek
  • khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,008 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    thestargaze wrote: »
    ... I don't know about you but I did not aspire to be vice admiral when I was watching Star Trek. No, I wanted to be captain or lower ranks like Commander and Lt Commander etc. I don't get the concept of having thousands of Vice Admirals roaming about on STO.

    This ranking system does not make any sense to me. What's the fun in this? If I am a starfleet officer, I like to work myself up.. yes .. but I also like to stay being Commander for some time. I don't think leveling up should be connected to your rank. We all level up quickly and never stay in one rank for long. The reason for that is the limitations of the lower ranks (and sometime crappy ships).

    Point is, can't we separate the two.. the leveling and the rank?

    Also as lower rank of Commander, you are not suppose to be captain or have your own ship, right?

    Is there a better system for this? If so,.. what would it be?

    In the actual Navy you can Captain a ship while retaining a low rank. LT's captain small ships.
    Your pain runs deep.
    Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
  • garaks31garaks31 Member Posts: 2,845 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    i see it this way i am as the player the admiral and my toons are captains :rolleyes:
    tmprl.jpg?width=998&height=499

    https://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1249570/axanar-locks-in-start-date-for-filming
  • chrisedallen89chrisedallen89 Member Posts: 17,293 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    Well practicality wise they have not fixed the exp amounts.. The Last time I made a toon it took me less than 3 weeks casual play to get to VA.
  • tancrediivtancrediiv Member Posts: 728 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    thestargaze wrote: »
    ... I don't know about you but I did not aspire to be vice admiral when I was watching Star Trek. No, I wanted to be captain or lower ranks like Commander and Lt Commander etc. I don't get the concept of having thousands of Vice Admirals roaming about on STO.

    This ranking system does not make any sense to me. What's the fun in this? If I am a starfleet officer, I like to work myself up.. yes .. but I also like to stay being Commander for some time. I don't think leveling up should be connected to your rank. We all level up quickly and never stay in one rank for long. The reason for that is the limitations of the lower ranks (and sometime crappy ships).

    Point is, can't we separate the two.. the leveling and the rank?

    Also as lower rank of Commander, you are not suppose to be captain or have your own ship, right?

    Is there a better system for this? If so,.. what would it be?

    Ah. The age old question. Why indeed are we all Vice Admirals?
    Player and forumite formerly known as FEELTHETHUNDER

    Expatriot Might Characters in EXILE
  • squatsaucesquatsauce Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    If you do not want to be a Vice Admiral, setting your rank and title to something lower works fine.

    Personally, I do not think Vice Admiral is grandiose enough. I demand to be addressed as "His Glorious Potency, Lord High God-king" regardless of my character's actual gender or in-game accomplishments.
  • zachverantzachverant Member Posts: 111 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    It really is not that big of a deal...if you do not like being a VA, then just say you are a Level 50 Captain.

    You have been Assmilated...Get over it...:eek:
    "Sips her PWE Koolaide and looks at alllll the goodies in the Z store"
    Badname Betty (PvP...PvE...STF...Trophy Hunter...Latnium Collector...Federation)
    Commander Morgana (PvP...PvE...STF...KDF)
    1000 day vet and LTS
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] STO Join date: 7 Feb 2010
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    thestargaze wrote: »
    ... I don't know about you but I did not aspire to be vice admiral when I was watching Star Trek. No, I wanted to be captain or lower ranks like Commander and Lt Commander etc. I don't get the concept of having thousands of Vice Admirals roaming about on STO.

    I'm a Vice Admiral because the higher ranks haven't shown up yet. :D
    thestargaze wrote: »
    This ranking system does not make any sense to me. What's the fun in this? If I am a starfleet officer, I like to work myself up.. yes .. but I also like to stay being Commander for some time. I don't think leveling up should be connected to your rank. We all level up quickly and never stay in one rank for long. The reason for that is the limitations of the lower ranks (and sometime crappy ships).

    Point is, can't we separate the two.. the leveling and the rank?

    Also as lower rank of Commander, you are not suppose to be captain or have your own ship, right?

    Why? Do you think todays Navy has full-bird Captains commanding destroyers and friggates? Lt.Cmdrs and Cmdrs. run them. Even Ensigns can have ship commands. Typically, the lower the rank, the smaller, less tactically superior the vessel.
    thestargaze wrote: »
    Is there a better system for this? If so,.. what would it be?

    If this is the biggest issue you have with the game, you should feel happy.
  • howiedizzlehowiedizzle Member Posts: 122 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    I had kind of always wished the game could have had about 50 different skills and about 30 possible points in each skill and at cap you have a total of 300 points spent... Sort of a larger 'Mass Effect 1' style skill tree layout and everyone caps at Captain rank...

    But that problem pales in comparison to the larger ones going on, so it's not THAT big of a deal...
  • logan375logan375 Member Posts: 27 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    So what does you're level/rank mean anyway. I mean at level 50 (VA), you get access to New Romulus, where the first thing you do is ensign work. I just look at it as a level number, not a rank.
  • eraserfisheraserfish Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    tancrediiv wrote: »
    Ah. The age old question. Why indeed are we all Vice Admirals?

    The same reason why all Starfleet personnel start at the rank of Ensign, probably. Or maybe for the same reason why South American military dictatorships had more colonels than corporals. Or maybe because referring to tiers, number rankings or levels seemed too uninteresting to the developers.

    In any case, I wouldn't mind the ranking of "Vice Admiral" as much if I could choose to be properly referred to by my chosen title or rank. I've always thought of myself more as a privateer/mercenary than an actual Starfleet captain.
  • magusofborgmagusofborg Member Posts: 186 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    *Walks in*

    Oh this thread...again.

    *Walks back out*
    Joined August 2009
  • s1ckbeards1ckbeard Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    eraserfish wrote: »
    The same reason why all Starfleet personnel start at the rank of Ensign, probably. Or maybe for the same reason why South American military dictatorships had more colonels than corporals. Or maybe because referring to tiers, number rankings or levels seemed too uninteresting to the developers.

    In any case, I wouldn't mind the ranking of "Vice Admiral" as much if I could choose to be properly referred to by my chosen title or rank. I've always thought of myself more as a privateer/mercenary than an actual Starfleet captain.


    That's a good point - would be nice to add faction choices that give various relevant perks. Not just be a klingon or in starfleet
  • eraserfisheraserfish Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    s1ckbeard wrote: »
    That's a good point - would be nice to add faction choices that give various relevant perks. Not just be a klingon or in starfleet

    Well, even if you are part of Klingon or Starfleet, why can't you have the freedom to refer to yourself according to your own beliefs? What if said beliefs are integral to your race?

    More Federation hypocrisy >=(

    Even the Klingons are more likely to call you a warrior, which is at least acceptable.
  • chrisdangershowchrisdangershow Member Posts: 4 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    This is one of those things (along w/ the reasoning behind not raising the cap level to +50, player-ran planets/stations/colonies, opening up more of the quadrants for exploration via new content, and lockboxes) that I've been asking myself for awhile. Seeing a bunch of lvl 40-50 folks w/ admiral tags can dishearten a new player and also makes space a bit crowded w/ their over-inflated jalopies...
  • age03age03 Member Posts: 1,664 Arc User
    edited February 2013
    To bad you can't be demoted.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Age StarTrek-Gamers Administrator
    USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
    Star Trek Gamers
Sign In or Register to comment.