Putting aside that the "reactivation" of MACO in STO is a stupid and downright offensive piece of plot in favour of ENT fanservice (The Federation is beyond "military" units) I always figured that Starfleets STF, the Klingon Honour Guard and Task Force Omega would use the "accolade" ranks like "Initiate", "Recruit", "Veteran"/"Operative", "Specialist", " Team Commander"/"Shadow Op" since their members are basically all high-ranked officers from their affiliated faction's fleet/navy.
In times of war, you need a fighting force. How is reactivating the MACOs in the face of not only the Borg threat, but the Klingon threat stupid of Starfleet? You can't win a war with diplomacy alone, and I'm sure you know this. The MACOs were highly specialized ground troops that were highly effective when they were a thing back in ENT, why not bring them back for an even greater threat: the Borg?
I get Roddenberry's utopian vision of the future, but while it CAN be plausible, it's still silly for the Federation to be beyond 'military' units. Surely they think having Tactical Officers is a good idea, and most Tactical Officers are trained in ground combat, including hand-to-hand combat, formations, battle tactics etc.
Another problem with this game's current ranking structure is the realism associated with it.
Does anyone really believe that hordes of Vice Admirals are running around on New Romulus tagging Epohhs? Does anyone really think that is what Vice Admirals do with their time?
This, to me, is a big problem of the game: the game refers you by your level-up rank, which is IMO a mistake. I wear Captain pips, I'm the Captain of a Starship, I have the title Captain above my head. I expect to be called a Captain and not Vice Admiral. But it's something that's hardcoded into the game that people just have to shrug or ignore and instead play it as if they're Captains or Commanders or something. After all, the ranks are there for you to choose from.
In times of war, you need a fighting force. How is reactivating the MACOs in the face of not only the Borg threat, but the Klingon threat stupid of Starfleet? You can't win a war with diplomacy alone, and I'm sure you know this. The MACOs were highly specialized ground troops that were highly effective when they were a thing back in ENT, why not bring them back for an even greater threat: the Borg?
I get Roddenberry's utopian vision of the future, but while it CAN be plausible, it's still silly for the Federation to be beyond 'military' units. Surely they think having Tactical Officers is a good idea, and most Tactical Officers are trained in ground combat, including hand-to-hand combat, formations, battle tactics etc.
It's just a philosophical point of view. There's nothing wrong with forming a special task force, a kind of Starfleet SWAT. The MACO armour in game even looks fine with it's bright colours. The problem I have is that they call them MACOs in memory of Earth's military which caused a nuclear world war and death of millions of people. It wasn't the MACOs, but the Federation is meant to be beyond "military" per se, their peacekeeping functions are more akin to a paramilitary police unit (roughly, there is no real life counterpart to the idea of Starfleet. The closest I found at least in it's "military" function was something akin to the post war German Federal Police until the late 90s). Having your Starfleet officers form a "Military Assault Commando" unit is just ridiculously backwards in terms of Star Trek lore. There's nothing wrong with the Task Force itself, at some point you need specialized security and tactical personnel.
It's really just the name which has no in-lore justification, it's just fanservice because we had MACOs on-screen (they were never affiliated with Starfleet, not even with Earth's space program, they were classic military marines). Also keep in mind STOs "MACO" is not a military force of it's own with enlisted and commisioned personel ranking von private to colonel, it's formed of high ranking Starfleet officers (all are at least commanders) thus my idea that they had a unique "secondary" rank like "Initiate" or "Veteran". It also sounds less militaristic
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Traditionally, the main compliment of soldiers aboard a ship were Marines, I mean...it's even in their title. Back in the age of sail, they were used to repel boarders, or board a ship themselves, and used their rifles to shoot enemy personnel.
As ships advanced and progressed, so did the role of Marines. They were made into a land assault force that was normally delivered by ship to shore, and they even performed specific duties on their ship rather then just being Soldiers. On Iowa-class Battleships, Marines manned the 5 inch starboard and port guns during engagements.
Throughout the late 19th and 20th centuries, Marine detachments served aboard Navy cruisers, battleships and carriers. Marine detachments (generally one platoon per cruiser, a company for battleships or carriers) served their traditional duties as ship's landing force, manning the ship's weapons and providing shipboard security. Marine detachments were augmented by members of the ship's company for landing parties.
So, why wouldn't Starfleet maintain a Marine Force specialized in shipboard security and ground engagements considering everything that happened in the Dominion War, especially considering the Siege of AR-558, where I'm sure a detachment of heavily armed Marines would have been much better at taking and holding that facility then what was apparently Starfleet Officers.
The current in-game ground combat reflects this. Engineers are now able to beam in fortifications and turrets for offensive and defensive support, even planting explosives like a Combat Engineer.
Everyone's weapons are quite heavier then simple Phaser Type 2s (Larger hand Phaser) and Type 3 (Phaser Rifles), and by DS9, Phaser Rifles were standard issue, when back in TOS, Spock had to make a special request for one. We're even utilizing Armor when previously, none was given to anyone expecting to conduct ground operations.
No, I don't see a problem with wanting to classify yourself as a Starfleet Marine/MACO.
MACO in ENT was under the command of a Major, and we even have other "Army" ranks present in TOS/TMP, so there's no reason to think that Starfleet didn't maintain a "ground force" as it were. I don't view Starfleet as the Navy of the Federation, I view it as the combined arms.
America has 5 branches of the Military, but they're all united under 1 command for combined arms exercises. I think that Starfleet operates in the same way.
That's all fine and dandy, but Starfleet has no soldiers nor marines since they are no military. All of the functions you describe are fulfilled by Starfleet tactical (which is also a branch of Starfleet) and security officers. They certainly do perform ground operations, but all of that is Starfleet and Starfleet officers. And at some point they created a STF and gave them armour and called them MACO (though it would be as if they'd call Starfleet intelligence Gestapo because they're so good at it...) though this unit still consists of Starfleet officers and is presumably an organ of Starfleet tactical.
Well, I can't argue with STOs lore though I'm sure the reason we have alien looking armour, miniguns and turrets is not that Starfleet invested in better ground gear but rather "how do we squish Star Trek into generic fantasy MMO game mechanics and make it look nothing like it in case they pull the license?"
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Regarding ground forces and ground ranks in Star Trek:
Ground forces and ranks are seen, chronologically, on screen beginning with MACOs of the Enterprise/Earth Starfleet era and ending with Colonel West (played by Rene Auberjonois). MACOs are specifically portrayed as a ground forces and use a similar rank structure to Western ground forces. Colonel West was never explicitly stated as part of a ground force or ground service branch and his position and rank was never fully explained (or used, reference above). However, the appearance of Colonel West sparked the long running and still ongoing debate on the existence of "marines" in Starfleet. No canonical evidence has proven or denied the existence or possible existence of a specific branch in Starfleet for ground forces.
The MACOs seen in Enterprise are not, as has been stated before, a part or under the direct authority of the Earth Starfleet. Whether or not the organization continued to exist after the formation of the Federation, and the transfer of command and control of Starfleet from Earth to the Federation, is unclear. It is possible that MACOs still existed, either still under Earth command (as Earth/Human specific security forces and separate from Starfleet forces) or that like Starfleet, MACOs moved to the jurisdiction of the Federation. With the latter possibility, MACOs would not likely been seen on screen or mentioned often as the show centers on Starfleet and its exploits and the lack of need for ground forces en masse prior to the Dominion War. However, as MACOs did not show up in the Dominion War, it is likely a good assumption they no longer existed (I realize they were not created until Enterprise, but this is an explanation for the RP crowd and a reasonable way to retcon). Furthermore, the existence of Starfleet "marines," as postulated by the appearance of Colonel West, is also unlikely to have remained, at least after the TOS movie era, as no evidence either by mention of command or rank structure is made during the Dominion War. It is safe to assume that by the Dominion War, ALL space and ground operations were organized and commanded by Starfleet under the single "naval" rank and command structure. Summarizing, using the Dominion War as the last full-scale military action referenced on screen, it would appear that there are no longer any separate ground command or rank structures still in use by the Federation.
HOWEVER, the lack of canonical evidence does not disprove such forces, it simply doesn't prove them either.
As has been postulated already, it is likely that the designation of MACO, in the time of STO, is more a special certification or special forces group. These forces would fall under the Starfleet command structure and would still use the same ranks as other Starfleet personnel. A good example: the US Navy SEALs. The SEALs are a special forces group, made up of some of the "best of the best" but fall under Navy command and use the naval rank structure (with the exception of Marines, which I believe, but may be wrong, are able to serve with the SEALs). I personally believe this was the intention of Cryptic- to use the MACO designation as a sort of "Starfleet SEALs." I also like the idea as such, and being this way, the need for further ranks (either commissioned or enlisted) is unnecessary.
Omega, being a cross faction group, likely uses NO independent rank structure. Ranks as a title are likely carried over from the home branch of the operative. Real command structure is likely to be more dependent on position than rank. I don't know of any real world examples of a multinational special forces unit, but a good example might be made of how Tom Clancy's fictional Rainbow group operates.
The Klingon Honor Guard probably, like the MACOs, is a special forces unit and also uses the same rank structure as the rest of the Klingon military.
Once again, based on the evidence at hand, there really is no call for new ranks and titles for commissioned personnel.
On the subject of enlisted ranks:
There is plenty of evidence of enlisted ranks within Starfleet seen from TOS through Enterprise. The title of "crewmen" would be analogous with the naval enlisted rank of Seaman. Chief O'brien is specifically stated as being enlisted and other enlisted ranks have been created and/or seen on screen throughout every series (crew without rank "pips" on TNG through Voyager are considered enlisted). Evidence continues to indicate that Starfleet maintains an enlisted rank structure. However, the game currently only allows for a common (likely Crewman) rank with no "pips" and Chief Petty Officer (with specific rank insignia) as enlisted ranks and appropriate insignia (or lack thereof). Why someone would WANT to use more enlisted ranks (or any, for that matter) in the current iteration I have no idea, but that isn't the point.
If such rank insignia can be added easily, why not. It doesn't bother me either way. Same with the ground ranks and titles. I don't see the point and there is no indication of a need or reason for them, but it doesn't become a game breaker for me. I rarely pay attention to others' titles and ranks anyway, outside my own fleet and friends. Provisional ranks and insignia seen in Voyager would be cool though, and are canon.
Some ideas using current items:
With the current level of customization, there are workarounds for designating enlisted/commissioned ranks and/or Starfleet "naval" vs "ground" ranks.
-Use different uniform options for ground vs. fleet and/or enlisted vs. commissioned. Obviously easier for Feds, but still doable in KDF and Romulan.
-Use different color "pips" for enlisted vs commissioned and/or fleet vs. ground. Another useful way, effective with similar uniforms and more so with differing. (Fed centric).
-Use different combadges or insignia. Insignias could differentiate between divisions, branches, and commission/enlistment.
Really there is a lot of room for the creative person/group. Until you get what you want, there are substitutes. If it really is important to you, keep lobbying for it, regardless or what anyone (including me) says!
EDIT: On another note- Starfleet may be peaceful by charter and non-military in nature, but they are military in structure and serve as military forces. Despite its peaceful purpose, Starfleet has the capability of a full fledged military force- else the Federation would have been run over long ago. To say ground forces can't exist because of Starfleet's "peaceful" charter and nature is to overlook the structure and command grounded in military ideals.
Trekking online since January 2010!
7thJointTaskForce Third Reserve Flotilla House of Sigma
EDIT: On another note- Starfleet may be peaceful by charter and non-military in nature, but they are military in structure and serve as military forces. Despite its peaceful purpose, Starfleet has the capability of a full fledged military force- else the Federation would have been run over long ago. To say ground forces can't exist because of Starfleet's "peaceful" charter and nature is to overlook the structure and command grounded in military ideals.
I agree with everything you wrote, it all boils down to the fact that we simply don't know what happened to the MACOs after the Federation was founded for the simple reason that they did not exist prior to ST:ENT and they don't make a lot of sense there either, but that's not the topic.
But if you're above comment is pointed at me I like to clarify that I never said there can be no ground forces because Starfleet isn't a military. I just said that their ground personal doesn't actually differ from their space personal (in "my personal lore" I even have a different set of uniforms for ground personnel on extended landing missions and the like and a different set of "combat" uniform inspired by the "Elite Force" games). Regarding their military function I even gave the best RL example of a paramilitary police force (civil command, rank structure, combatant status, military and civil jurisdiction, security etc.) I could come up with although there certainly is no RL equivalent of what Starfleet is supposed to be.
I'm not even opposed to the special force, I do even like it's design - there's just no reason, aside from fanservice, they'd call that unit MACO. That's all I'm saying
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
This conversation has gone way off the track.. All I was asking for were enlisted and Officer ranks for a MACO/Marine type division for Fleets to use for RP purposes. :-)
The ranks are there, and, while there is no clear indication that MACO as an organization is divergent from Starfleet, nothing that adds (essentially) cosmetic items to the game, as a reward for completing portions of the game, is a bad thing. No game imbalance, no accolades giving tiny bonuses, just a title, rank insignia, and uniform option... I would support this.
Also: For starfleet security, some of the ranks, such as sergeant, still exist. It wouldn't be too hard to adapt to a suggestion such as this.
As one last note, some member planets of the Federation still maintain ground military forces, such as the Andorian Imperial Guard. Perhaps a compromise would be to include some of their ranks, especially since after reaching officer ranks, many of them are identical?
Comments
In times of war, you need a fighting force. How is reactivating the MACOs in the face of not only the Borg threat, but the Klingon threat stupid of Starfleet? You can't win a war with diplomacy alone, and I'm sure you know this. The MACOs were highly specialized ground troops that were highly effective when they were a thing back in ENT, why not bring them back for an even greater threat: the Borg?
I get Roddenberry's utopian vision of the future, but while it CAN be plausible, it's still silly for the Federation to be beyond 'military' units. Surely they think having Tactical Officers is a good idea, and most Tactical Officers are trained in ground combat, including hand-to-hand combat, formations, battle tactics etc.
This, to me, is a big problem of the game: the game refers you by your level-up rank, which is IMO a mistake. I wear Captain pips, I'm the Captain of a Starship, I have the title Captain above my head. I expect to be called a Captain and not Vice Admiral. But it's something that's hardcoded into the game that people just have to shrug or ignore and instead play it as if they're Captains or Commanders or something. After all, the ranks are there for you to choose from.
It's just a philosophical point of view. There's nothing wrong with forming a special task force, a kind of Starfleet SWAT. The MACO armour in game even looks fine with it's bright colours. The problem I have is that they call them MACOs in memory of Earth's military which caused a nuclear world war and death of millions of people. It wasn't the MACOs, but the Federation is meant to be beyond "military" per se, their peacekeeping functions are more akin to a paramilitary police unit (roughly, there is no real life counterpart to the idea of Starfleet. The closest I found at least in it's "military" function was something akin to the post war German Federal Police until the late 90s). Having your Starfleet officers form a "Military Assault Commando" unit is just ridiculously backwards in terms of Star Trek lore. There's nothing wrong with the Task Force itself, at some point you need specialized security and tactical personnel.
It's really just the name which has no in-lore justification, it's just fanservice because we had MACOs on-screen (they were never affiliated with Starfleet, not even with Earth's space program, they were classic military marines). Also keep in mind STOs "MACO" is not a military force of it's own with enlisted and commisioned personel ranking von private to colonel, it's formed of high ranking Starfleet officers (all are at least commanders) thus my idea that they had a unique "secondary" rank like "Initiate" or "Veteran". It also sounds less militaristic
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Traditionally, the main compliment of soldiers aboard a ship were Marines, I mean...it's even in their title. Back in the age of sail, they were used to repel boarders, or board a ship themselves, and used their rifles to shoot enemy personnel.
As ships advanced and progressed, so did the role of Marines. They were made into a land assault force that was normally delivered by ship to shore, and they even performed specific duties on their ship rather then just being Soldiers. On Iowa-class Battleships, Marines manned the 5 inch starboard and port guns during engagements.
Throughout the late 19th and 20th centuries, Marine detachments served aboard Navy cruisers, battleships and carriers. Marine detachments (generally one platoon per cruiser, a company for battleships or carriers) served their traditional duties as ship's landing force, manning the ship's weapons and providing shipboard security. Marine detachments were augmented by members of the ship's company for landing parties.
So, why wouldn't Starfleet maintain a Marine Force specialized in shipboard security and ground engagements considering everything that happened in the Dominion War, especially considering the Siege of AR-558, where I'm sure a detachment of heavily armed Marines would have been much better at taking and holding that facility then what was apparently Starfleet Officers.
The current in-game ground combat reflects this. Engineers are now able to beam in fortifications and turrets for offensive and defensive support, even planting explosives like a Combat Engineer.
Everyone's weapons are quite heavier then simple Phaser Type 2s (Larger hand Phaser) and Type 3 (Phaser Rifles), and by DS9, Phaser Rifles were standard issue, when back in TOS, Spock had to make a special request for one. We're even utilizing Armor when previously, none was given to anyone expecting to conduct ground operations.
No, I don't see a problem with wanting to classify yourself as a Starfleet Marine/MACO.
MACO in ENT was under the command of a Major, and we even have other "Army" ranks present in TOS/TMP, so there's no reason to think that Starfleet didn't maintain a "ground force" as it were. I don't view Starfleet as the Navy of the Federation, I view it as the combined arms.
America has 5 branches of the Military, but they're all united under 1 command for combined arms exercises. I think that Starfleet operates in the same way.
Well, I can't argue with STOs lore though I'm sure the reason we have alien looking armour, miniguns and turrets is not that Starfleet invested in better ground gear but rather "how do we squish Star Trek into generic fantasy MMO game mechanics and make it look nothing like it in case they pull the license?"
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Regarding ground forces and ground ranks in Star Trek:
Ground forces and ranks are seen, chronologically, on screen beginning with MACOs of the Enterprise/Earth Starfleet era and ending with Colonel West (played by Rene Auberjonois). MACOs are specifically portrayed as a ground forces and use a similar rank structure to Western ground forces. Colonel West was never explicitly stated as part of a ground force or ground service branch and his position and rank was never fully explained (or used, reference above). However, the appearance of Colonel West sparked the long running and still ongoing debate on the existence of "marines" in Starfleet. No canonical evidence has proven or denied the existence or possible existence of a specific branch in Starfleet for ground forces.
The MACOs seen in Enterprise are not, as has been stated before, a part or under the direct authority of the Earth Starfleet. Whether or not the organization continued to exist after the formation of the Federation, and the transfer of command and control of Starfleet from Earth to the Federation, is unclear. It is possible that MACOs still existed, either still under Earth command (as Earth/Human specific security forces and separate from Starfleet forces) or that like Starfleet, MACOs moved to the jurisdiction of the Federation. With the latter possibility, MACOs would not likely been seen on screen or mentioned often as the show centers on Starfleet and its exploits and the lack of need for ground forces en masse prior to the Dominion War. However, as MACOs did not show up in the Dominion War, it is likely a good assumption they no longer existed (I realize they were not created until Enterprise, but this is an explanation for the RP crowd and a reasonable way to retcon). Furthermore, the existence of Starfleet "marines," as postulated by the appearance of Colonel West, is also unlikely to have remained, at least after the TOS movie era, as no evidence either by mention of command or rank structure is made during the Dominion War. It is safe to assume that by the Dominion War, ALL space and ground operations were organized and commanded by Starfleet under the single "naval" rank and command structure. Summarizing, using the Dominion War as the last full-scale military action referenced on screen, it would appear that there are no longer any separate ground command or rank structures still in use by the Federation.
HOWEVER, the lack of canonical evidence does not disprove such forces, it simply doesn't prove them either.
As has been postulated already, it is likely that the designation of MACO, in the time of STO, is more a special certification or special forces group. These forces would fall under the Starfleet command structure and would still use the same ranks as other Starfleet personnel. A good example: the US Navy SEALs. The SEALs are a special forces group, made up of some of the "best of the best" but fall under Navy command and use the naval rank structure (with the exception of Marines, which I believe, but may be wrong, are able to serve with the SEALs). I personally believe this was the intention of Cryptic- to use the MACO designation as a sort of "Starfleet SEALs." I also like the idea as such, and being this way, the need for further ranks (either commissioned or enlisted) is unnecessary.
Omega, being a cross faction group, likely uses NO independent rank structure. Ranks as a title are likely carried over from the home branch of the operative. Real command structure is likely to be more dependent on position than rank. I don't know of any real world examples of a multinational special forces unit, but a good example might be made of how Tom Clancy's fictional Rainbow group operates.
The Klingon Honor Guard probably, like the MACOs, is a special forces unit and also uses the same rank structure as the rest of the Klingon military.
Once again, based on the evidence at hand, there really is no call for new ranks and titles for commissioned personnel.
On the subject of enlisted ranks:
There is plenty of evidence of enlisted ranks within Starfleet seen from TOS through Enterprise. The title of "crewmen" would be analogous with the naval enlisted rank of Seaman. Chief O'brien is specifically stated as being enlisted and other enlisted ranks have been created and/or seen on screen throughout every series (crew without rank "pips" on TNG through Voyager are considered enlisted). Evidence continues to indicate that Starfleet maintains an enlisted rank structure. However, the game currently only allows for a common (likely Crewman) rank with no "pips" and Chief Petty Officer (with specific rank insignia) as enlisted ranks and appropriate insignia (or lack thereof). Why someone would WANT to use more enlisted ranks (or any, for that matter) in the current iteration I have no idea, but that isn't the point.
If such rank insignia can be added easily, why not. It doesn't bother me either way. Same with the ground ranks and titles. I don't see the point and there is no indication of a need or reason for them, but it doesn't become a game breaker for me. I rarely pay attention to others' titles and ranks anyway, outside my own fleet and friends. Provisional ranks and insignia seen in Voyager would be cool though, and are canon.
Some ideas using current items:
With the current level of customization, there are workarounds for designating enlisted/commissioned ranks and/or Starfleet "naval" vs "ground" ranks.
-Use different uniform options for ground vs. fleet and/or enlisted vs. commissioned. Obviously easier for Feds, but still doable in KDF and Romulan.
-Use different color "pips" for enlisted vs commissioned and/or fleet vs. ground. Another useful way, effective with similar uniforms and more so with differing. (Fed centric).
-Use different combadges or insignia. Insignias could differentiate between divisions, branches, and commission/enlistment.
Really there is a lot of room for the creative person/group. Until you get what you want, there are substitutes. If it really is important to you, keep lobbying for it, regardless or what anyone (including me) says!
EDIT: On another note- Starfleet may be peaceful by charter and non-military in nature, but they are military in structure and serve as military forces. Despite its peaceful purpose, Starfleet has the capability of a full fledged military force- else the Federation would have been run over long ago. To say ground forces can't exist because of Starfleet's "peaceful" charter and nature is to overlook the structure and command grounded in military ideals.
7th Joint Task Force
Third Reserve Flotilla
House of Sigma
I agree with everything you wrote, it all boils down to the fact that we simply don't know what happened to the MACOs after the Federation was founded for the simple reason that they did not exist prior to ST:ENT and they don't make a lot of sense there either, but that's not the topic.
But if you're above comment is pointed at me I like to clarify that I never said there can be no ground forces because Starfleet isn't a military. I just said that their ground personal doesn't actually differ from their space personal (in "my personal lore" I even have a different set of uniforms for ground personnel on extended landing missions and the like and a different set of "combat" uniform inspired by the "Elite Force" games). Regarding their military function I even gave the best RL example of a paramilitary police force (civil command, rank structure, combatant status, military and civil jurisdiction, security etc.) I could come up with although there certainly is no RL equivalent of what Starfleet is supposed to be.
I'm not even opposed to the special force, I do even like it's design - there's just no reason, aside from fanservice, they'd call that unit MACO. That's all I'm saying
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Starfleet_ranks
The ranks are there, and, while there is no clear indication that MACO as an organization is divergent from Starfleet, nothing that adds (essentially) cosmetic items to the game, as a reward for completing portions of the game, is a bad thing. No game imbalance, no accolades giving tiny bonuses, just a title, rank insignia, and uniform option... I would support this.
Also: For starfleet security, some of the ranks, such as sergeant, still exist. It wouldn't be too hard to adapt to a suggestion such as this.
As one last note, some member planets of the Federation still maintain ground military forces, such as the Andorian Imperial Guard. Perhaps a compromise would be to include some of their ranks, especially since after reaching officer ranks, many of them are identical?