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

Shouldn't Subadmiral II just be Admiral?

rickeyredshirtrickeyredshirt Member Posts: 1,059 Arc User
edited July 2013 in Romulan Discussion
The progression goes Subadmiral I, Subadmiral II, and then Vice Admiral. You go from subcommander to commander so shouldn't it be subadmiral, admiral, vice admiral?
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Options
    pwebranflakespwebranflakes Member Posts: 7,741
    edited July 2013
    The rank "Admiral" is higher than "Vice Admiral".

    Cheers,

    Brandon =/\=
  • Options
    tlamstriketlamstrike Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    Admirals outrank Vice Admirals (Vice Admiral = Vice as in second from the Admiral). Subadmiral I and II is like saying Subadmiral Lower Half and Subadmiral Upper Half. It probably should go Subadmiral I, Subadmiral II, Admiral or Subadmiral, Vice Admiral, Admiral, however those might become confusing since Admirals and Generals might become the ranks of Lvl 51-60 so we would end up having Admiral (Fed), General (KDF), and Admiral-Something (Romulan) making everything even more confusing ("Is that Fed Admiral or Romulan Admiral?")

    All the ranking systems in STO are pretty much missing ranks, example: the Feds are missing LT. JG. The Romulans are missing Sub-Lieutenant and it makes their ranks look a little strange.

    Ranks between services don't always match up. NATO made up OF Codes so there would be some semblance of normalcy between the dozens of different services that might operate together. Cryptic seems to have made the decision that the end game ranks will line up across factions, while the lower rank (where it doesn't matter as much) ones will not; which is one of the reasons we don't see KDF Majors or Colonels even though their end game ranks are army insted of naval, and on the show we saw Klingon "Captains".

    The way the ranks in STO work is...
    Lvl 0 is OF-1
    Lvl 1 OF-2
    Lvl 10 is OF-3
    Lvl 20 is OF-4
    Lvl 30 is OF-5
    Lvl 40 is OF-6
    Lvl 45 is OF-7
    Lvl 50 is OF-8
    ~Lvl 60 is OF-9

    When dealing with messed up rank systems across services just use OF numbers to know who to salute. :D
    My Romulan Liberated Borg character made it to Level 30 and beat the (old) Defense of New Romulus with the skill point bug. :D
  • Options
    fmgtorres1979fmgtorres1979 Member Posts: 1,327 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    Although you address the person as "Admiral" in several ranks, there is a specific Admiral rank, which is the highest (with the exception of Fleet Admiral) .
  • Options
    rickeyredshirtrickeyredshirt Member Posts: 1,059 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    pwebranflakes wrote: »
    The rank "Admiral" is higher than "Vice Admiral".

    Cheers,

    Brandon =/\=

    Agreed, so what we are saying is that the rank structure for Romulan admirals is inherently flawed, no? As I stated, it goes from subcommander to commander so to follow suit one would think it would go from subadmiral to admiral. Perhaps SAI should be Vice Admiral (or Lower Admiral or something) then SA2 would just be subadmiral followed by admiral. Would make way more sense IMHO.
    tlamstrike wrote: »
    It probably should go Subadmiral I, Subadmiral II, Admiral or Subadmiral, Vice Admiral, Admiral, however those might become confusing since Admirals and Generals might become the ranks of Lvl 51-60 so we would end up having Admiral (Fed), General (KDF), and Admiral-Something (Romulan) making everything even more confusing ("Is that Fed Admiral or Romulan Admiral?")

    Agreed, I am very familiar with rank structure and if anything, Romulan ranks once you pass Commander are confusing.
  • Options
    fmgtorres1979fmgtorres1979 Member Posts: 1,327 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    They match the Federation ranks.


    Subadmiral I is Rear admiral lower half
    Subadmiral II is Rear Admiral upper half
  • Options
    doffingcomradedoffingcomrade Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    tlamstrike wrote: »
    which is one of the reasons we don't see KDF Majors or Colonels even though their end game ranks are army insted of naval, and on the show we saw Klingon "Captains".
    Technically, the Klingon ranks are in Klingon and their translations merely happen to be Army-like. A character referred to as "Captain" may, even more confusingly, be referred to by their position as a ship's captain, and not necessarily because of their rank.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    badname834854badname834854 Member Posts: 1,186 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    Max level should be Captain anyways - having a gazillion admirals is just silly and easily fixed.
  • Options
    fmgtorres1979fmgtorres1979 Member Posts: 1,327 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    badname834854 wrote: »
    Max level should be Captain anyways - having a gazillion admirals is just silly and easily fixed.
    I agree (more or less). I even believe you should never get promoted. You started as Captain and kept being Captain. The character progression would be in skills, not in rank. But i don't have a problem with how it is now.
  • Options
    stofskstofsk Member Posts: 1,744 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    badname834854 wrote: »
    Max level should be Captain anyways - having a gazillion admirals is just silly and easily fixed.

    Agreed x1000
  • Options
    whoami2whoami2 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    How do u reach lvl 60?
  • Options
    fmgtorres1979fmgtorres1979 Member Posts: 1,327 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    whoami2 wrote: »
    How do u reach lvl 60?
    You don't.

    it's possible that more 10 levels are added in the future. But it's just that, a possibility.
  • Options
    zeuxidemus001zeuxidemus001 Member Posts: 3,357 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    badname834854 wrote: »
    Max level should be Captain anyways - having a gazillion admirals is just silly and easily fixed.

    What they need is a system like one mmo that the name is censored on this forum that has a system where there is a point system and when you spend said points you de-rank your character. So that kind of system would be decent because it wouldn't put the game where every single player is an admiral/general.

    Most likely that is how I believe they should do that thing stahl was talking about is create those faction reputations and every player's account would be on a base type system so you could see a player ranking based on the faction. Only downside to this is they would probally make it character based but it would really would need to be based on account due to the investments a lot of players have in their accounts/characters. Basically the design concept behind it is that it would have faction based gear that wouldn't be available to another faction but you would be demoted in your faction rank if you choose to spend those points that put you at that higher rank.

    Is an idea anyways to solve this problem lol.
  • Options
    matixzonmatixzon Member Posts: 120 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    Considering that Max level probably needs something different, If it were by me, max rank would be Commodore for Fed, Colonel for KDF, and something else (Procommander?) for Roms.
    @mawexzon

    I like cats :cool:.

    UGC Campaign: The Coldblooded Scrolls
  • Options
    naeviusnaevius Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    badname834854 wrote: »
    Max level should be Captain anyways - having a gazillion admirals is just silly and easily fixed.

    From a story point of view, you are the only protaganist, and the other players don't exist. So there aren't 'gazillions'. But having an Admiral commanding one ship and beaming down to scan rocks is still silly :D
    _________________________________________________
    [Kluless][Kold][Steel Heels][Snagtooth]
    [Louis Cipher][Outta Gum][Thysa Kymbo][Spanner][Frakk]
    [D'Mented][D'Licious]
    Joined October 2009. READ BEFORE POSTING
  • Options
    zeuxidemus001zeuxidemus001 Member Posts: 3,357 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    naevius wrote: »
    From a story point of view, you are the only protaganist, and the other players don't exist. So there aren't 'gazillions'. But having an Admiral commanding one ship and beaming down to scan rocks is still silly :D

    Yeah they do need to choose one or the other because from that perspective this is nothing more than a console game with content being injected a few times a year.
  • Options
    dhamahrdhamahr Member Posts: 17 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    As a new player I noticed the Rank System was a little messed up. If STO is trying to do normal ranks etc then they need to rename a few ranks. Since I was in the Navy here are Navy Ranks.

    Ensign
    Lieutenant (junior grade)
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant Commander
    Commander
    Captain
    Rear Admiral (lower half)
    Rear Admiral
    Vice Admiral
    Admiral
    Fleet Admiral
    Admiral of the Navy
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    sfc#5932 sfc
    sfc#5932
         Member Posts: 992 Bug Hunter
    edited July 2013
    If it's a problem, Subadmiral = 40 and 50.
  • Options
    poisonpoison Member Posts: 255 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    It should really be Khre'Riov I, II and Enriov. Or Commander-General I, II & Vice Admiral if we must use English.
    jfsig02.png
  • Options
    originpioriginpi Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited July 2013
    naevius wrote: »
    From a story point of view, you are the only protaganist, and the other players don't exist. So there aren't 'gazillions'. But having an Admiral commanding one ship and beaming down to scan rocks is still silly :D

    Its not that silly when you consider that that admiral can command any ship they damn well please including ones captured from the enemy, and can call in other ships for help when they need it.

    Scanning rocks and taking water samples sure is silly though.
Sign In or Register to comment.