Buy your Ship

[Preditorian]

Does anyone think that you just automatically get your new uber ship once you reach the level requirement alittle to easy? I mean dang there were only 2 Sovereign Class's that I am aware of in the ST universe and to make that ship which is no push over as easy to attain as to just play for a few months seems kinda weaksause IMO.

If everyone has the top of the line ship that fast then what makes them special?


Call me crazy but to me the higher tier ships needs something like, ship skills, mission accomplished, certain tasks from command, yada yada to be done before you are just given a brand new ship to go out and mingle with your peers. Atleast make them so you can to buy them with some form of currency, ya ya i know money does not exist in the ST universe but there must be something to to make these ships harder to get, right?

Im not for super long grinds, but also not for every noob to the game being in top of the line ships in a few weeks after purchase.

I dont know call me crazy, but as I said above... Weaksause.

[Zepath]

The ships will become available to you as you gain the qualifications to fly them ... and there may be a "merit" cost to them ... merit being a type of prestige currency you earn over time.

I suspect it will be a lot easier for you to get a new ship (and rank for that matter) than most of us would like.

[Admiral-Darren-Wright]

Does anyone think that you just automatically get your new uber ship once you reach the level requirement alittle to easy? I mean dang there were only 2 Sovereign Class's that I am aware of in the ST universe and to make that ship which is no push over as easy to attain as to just play for a few months seems kinda weaksause IMO.

If everyone has the top of the line ship that fast then what makes them special?


Call me crazy but to me the higher tier ships needs something like, ship skills, mission accomplished, certain tasks from command, yada yada to be done before you are just given a brand new ship to go out and mingle with your peers. Atleast make them so you can to buy them with some form of currency, ya ya i know money does not exist in the ST universe but there must be something to to make these ships harder to get, right?

Im not for super long grinds, but also not for every noob to the game being in top of the line ships in a few weeks after purchase.

I dont know call me crazy, but as I said above... Weaksause.

The Ships have a specific skill point system, that is different from the other skill point allocations, its set to be specific so that to get a certain type of ship, you MUST have gained the ships that unlock before the end game one of that line,
if u want a Promy your going to have to get a vigilent and an Akira etc etc first.

And you need a certain number of skill points before you can gain in rank and then you need a certain level of SP invested in that ship tier, before you get your ship. It wont be easy, i think you can trade unique, rare, ultra cool things for your ship, but the actual ship at least till we know more than this you have to earned in rank and skills invested in the particular ship field.

[Preditorian]

"I suspect it will be a lot easier for you to get a new ship (and rank for that matter) than most of us would like."




Thats what im afraid of. :(

[Admiral-Darren-Wright]

The ships will become available to you as you gain the qualifications to fly them ... and there may be a "merit" cost to them ... merit being a type of prestige currency you earn over time.

I suspect it will be a lot easier for you to get a new ship (and rank for that matter) than most of us would like.

I disagree, from what Zinc and the game describers at Pax with the Demo have said, (which isnt all that much) the game is very indepth and involved and you have to do a lot to earn youre skill points, and some ships will require an awful lot of sp's to get !

I think there are too many people in these forums that think they will be in a sovy as an Admiral after 6 months, lol i think thats pretty wishfull thinking and its not going to happen.

This game has been set out properly, it wont be too fast and people no matter how hard the Grind wont be getting to the Full ranks and ships etc for a long long time.

[Zepath]

I disagree, from what Zinc and the game describers at Pax with the Demo have said, (which isnt all that much) the game is very indepth and involved and you have to do a lot to earn youre skill points, and some ships will require an awful lot of sp's to get !

I think there are too many people in these forums that think they will be in a sovy as an Admiral after 6 months, lol i think thats pretty wishfull thinking and its not going to happen.

This game has been set out properly, it wont be too fast and people no matter how hard the Grind wont be getting to the Full ranks and ships etc for a long long time.

Read the Dev's comments in today's chat bro ... 100 hours of play, to reach Admiral, that's pretty much it.

[vobedarkelf]

I would prefer it if when you ranked up to a new teir, you got to select ONE new ship for free, but any additional ships from that teir would require you to 'buy' for a very high price. A player's advancement into better ships should not be hindered by huge price tags, but at the same time, people shouldn't be able to just collect every ship on the list easily.

[Yachiru]

Read the Dev's comments in today's chat bro ... 100 hours of play, to reach Admiral, that's pretty much it.

And Admirial is only half of your skill tree. So, 200 hours. Not a huge amount (or enough) but more then most MMOS out recently (worst offender: CO)

[Admiral-Darren-Wright]

Read the Dev's comments in today's chat bro ... 100 hours of play, to reach Admiral, that's pretty much it.

Cant be .. what have i missed lol EEK

If it is then they may as well just give us them to start with .. theres no point to that, and it makes what Zinc said before mean didelly sqaut ..:mad:

[mirkrim]

I disagree with the whole "free ships" thing, period. IMO after Tier 1, players should ALWAYS have to use merit points to get a new ship. Getting promoted in rank can come with a helpful merit point bonus, but I don't get how a promotion automatically warrants a whole new ship free.

[Zepath]

Darren, if you're a serious gamer ... we found out today that it will take you about 2 months to finish the game and be relying on end-game content.

For some, they will be Admiral before their first month's billing hits.

I wish I were pulling your leg ... but I'm not.

[Admiral-Darren-Wright]

Darren, if you're a serious gamer ... we found out today that it will take you about 2 months to finish the game and be relying on end-game content.

For some, they will be Admiral before their first month's billing hits.

I wish I were pulling your leg ... but I'm not.

Linky linky linky lol

[Zepath]

Linky linky linky lol

VideoGamer.com: What approach are you taking with the pace of levelling?

CZ: It's a skill based game, right? There are hundreds of skills and you're constantly getting skill points within the game and investing those in your character. That is the mechanic that is the advancement mechanic throughout the game. Each one of your skills has nine ranks. You have these skills and each of them has nine ranks.

The idea is that through every 30 minutes of gameplay, you're ranking up one of these skills. You're basically filling in one of these boxes, making one of your skills better every 30 minutes.

On a macro level of things, there are five ranks in the game that a Captain goes through. He starts off as a Lieutenant, then he goes Lieutenant Commander, Commander, Captain, then Admiral. Within each of these five ranks there are 10 classes. You have Lieutenant Class Five, Lieutenant Class Seven, and Commander Class Three. You end up having basically 50 levels throughout the game. Every two hours of gameplay you end up going onto the next level, approximately.

[SOURCE] (http://www.videogamer.com/pc/star_trek_online/preview-2064-2.html)

You do the math bro. :(

[njdss4]

Cryptic could try to explain getting ships for free as a part of Starfleet/KDF mass building ships as quickly as possible due to the strained relations between the Federation and the Klingons. Each side is preparing for war. That way there are just a bunch of ships waiting for qualified officers to command them.

Still, it does seem a little cheap for us to get ships for free. I would not complain if Cryptic put a high "currency" cost to getting a new ship when we get our promotions. It would help the whole experience feel a bit more realistic.

[Admiral-Darren-Wright]

VideoGamer.com: What approach are you taking with the pace of levelling?

CZ: It's a skill based game, right? There are hundreds of skills and you're constantly getting skill points within the game and investing those in your character. That is the mechanic that is the advancement mechanic throughout the game. Each one of your skills has nine ranks. You have these skills and each of them has nine ranks.

The idea is that through every 30 minutes of gameplay, you're ranking up one of these skills. You're basically filling in one of these boxes, making one of your skills better every 30 minutes.

On a macro level of things, there are five ranks in the game that a Captain goes through. He starts off as a Lieutenant, then he goes Lieutenant Commander, Commander, Captain, then Admiral. Within each of these five ranks there are 10 classes. You have Lieutenant Class Five, Lieutenant Class Seven, and Commander Class Three. You end up having basically 50 levels throughout the game. Every two hours of gameplay you end up going onto the next level, approximately.

[SOURCE] (http://www.videogamer.com/pc/star_trek_online/preview-2064-2.html)

You do the math bro. :(
OOh well i hadnt read this, ooh ..gosh .. Facepalm lol

[nobadee]

I think for a player to progress in tiers they should have to write a formal letter to their congress representatives. Then if they are in favor of the idea they should take it to Washington where the House of Congress sit around debating it for a year before they come to a compromise by passing a bill that allows you to have a part of the ship you wanted.

[Zepath]

While I can appreciate you attempt at the sarcasm Nobadee ... our point is, some of us have waited three years for this game ... we'd like to get at least 6 mo of play before we've hit end-game.

[Yachiru]

While I can appreciate you attempt at the sarcasm Nobadee ... our point is, some of us have waited three years for this game ... we'd like to get at least 6 mo of play before we've hit end-game.

ration your play time to an hour every 5 days? lol "To boldly go..back to that planet we went to yesterday..to destroy that thing again"

[sbrodie]

While I can appreciate you attempt at the sarcasm Nobadee ... our point is, some of us have waited three years for this game ... we'd like to get at least 6 mo of play before we've hit end-game.

One of the great things about MMOs in my opinion is that the game never truly ends. This holds true for STO as well. We'll have plenty of things for you to do at max level. It's not going to be, "I'm an Admiral, and now I have nothing to do but this pile of paper work." That would not be fun, and one of the things that it's our responsibility to do, is make sure you're having fun.

There will always be strange new worlds, new life, and alien civilizations. The universe is a vast, mysterious, and dangerous place...

We'll have more information for you all on this sometime soon.

Stormshade

[Elta_and_Zletha]

It's not going to be, "I'm an Admiral, and now I have nothing to do but this pile of paper work."

Dammit, and I just ordered that pristine cherry oak desk... now what am I supposed to do at end-game? Fly around space!? That's captain mundane stuff =/

[Admiral_Ares]

I just hope there isn't a lot of NPC Admirals... else in a couple of months the Flag Officers lounge is going to be packed.

Seriously I wish they'd add Lt. JG and make Captain the highest player rank. I mean the whol point of Star Trek is that it's a mistake to except promotion.

"...Commanding a starship is your first, best destiny; anything else is a waste of material."

:cool:

[nobadee]

While I can appreciate you attempt at the sarcasm Nobadee ... our point is, some of us have waited three years for this game ... we'd like to get at least 6 mo of play before we've hit end-game.

This is the problem, people sit around anticipating games for years rather than keeping themselves focused on other things. I think people have it in their head that if they take their eyes off the pot it won't boil. If you get emotionally invested in a game that you have no control over and has no dead line to completion you are always going to end up disappointed. You can't expect a game to be all things. That's the problem with MMORPGs now. Everyone hypes the hell out of a game and paces around the forums in ravage anticipation. Then when the game is released they go full after burners into it and after a week goes by they are like...hrmm this isn't what I imagined it would be all that time I was sitting around daydreaming about it...

[shadows802]

"To boldly go..back to that planet we went to yesterday..to destroy that thing again"

Can i borrow this for a sig?

[Admiral_Ares]

This is the problem, people sit around anticipating games for years rather than keeping themselves focused on other things. I think people have it in their head that if they take their eyes off the pot it won't boil. If you get emotionally invested in a game that you have no control over and has no dead line to completion you are always going to end up disappointed. You can't expect a game to be all things. That's the problem with MMORPGs now. Everyone hypes the hell out of a game and paces around the forums in ravage anticipation. Then when the game is released they go full after burners into it and after a week goes by they are like...hrmm this isn't what I imagined it would be all that time I was sitting around daydreaming about it...

Oh yeah... well your avatar is silly. :p




But I did find your statement well thought out and poignant.

[shadows802]

This is the problem, people sit around anticipating games for years rather than keeping themselves focused on other things. I think people have it in their head that if they take their eyes off the pot it won't boil. If you get emotionally invested in a game that you have no control over and has no dead line to completion you are always going to end up disappointed. You can't expect a game to be all things. That's the problem with MMORPGs now. Everyone hypes the hell out of a game and paces around the forums in ravage anticipation. Then when the game is released they go full after burners into it and after a week goes by they are like...hrmm this isn't what I imagined it would be all that time I was sitting around daydreaming about it...

So in reality they have been playing the game for 5-6 years now for free?

[Zepath]

This is the problem, people sit around anticipating games for years rather than keeping themselves focused on other things. I think people have it in their head that if they take their eyes off the pot it won't boil. If you get emotionally invested in a game that you have no control over and has no dead line to completion you are always going to end up disappointed. You can't expect a game to be all things. That's the problem with MMORPGs now. Everyone hypes the hell out of a game and paces around the forums in ravage anticipation. Then when the game is released they go full after burners into it and after a week goes by they are like...hrmm this isn't what I imagined it would be all that time I was sitting around daydreaming about it...

You're new to the forums ... so you wouldn't know I'm one of the voices on these boards that keeps warning people to not buy into the hype, and to be careful about having to high expectation for the game.

This game will NEVER live up to the expectations some people have for it ... consequently they are setting themselves up for severe disappointment.

[Flatfingers]

It's not going to be, "I'm an Admiral, and now I have nothing to do but this pile of paper work." That would not be fun, and one of the things that it's our responsibility to do, is make sure you're having fun.

With respect, StormShade, isn't this exaggerating things just a bit? Who has ever asked for Admiral-level gameplay to be solely about shuffling paper?

My hopes for Admiral-level gameplay were that it would support strategic gameplay that rewards big-picture perceptiveness and careful planning. In no way is that a criticism of twitch-mode, tactical-action gameplay -- in fact, I just got done replaying Crysis Warhead tonight and thoroughly enjoyed it (again).

Hoping that Admirals aren't merely Lieutenants with bigger guns is a viewpoint that says it's OK to have plenty of action-oriented tactical content at Lieutenant-Commander ranks, and fleet-oriented operational content at the Commander-Captain ranks, and thoughtful strategic content at flag rank.

Is strategic play for everyone? No, no more than shoot-'em-up play is fun for everyone. Is strategic play fun for some; does strategic planning count as actual "gameplay?" Absolutely. So given that it's a great fit for what we've seen Admirals do in Star Trek, and that it can be fun gameplay, why dismiss the idea out of hand?

Certainly it would require some creative gameplay design... but that's what designers are paid to do. In this case, it would result in gameplay that "feels" right at every rank, and in which each gameplay mode supports both of the others so that everyone can contribute to their character's faction in the way that they enjoy most.

I appreciate that this point is moot, that the design for Admiral-level gameplay in STO is basically set in stone. I'm not expecting any changes based on my suggestions. I mention this solely because it troubles me to see the idea of Admiral-level gameplay based on the fun of thoughtful strategic play caricatured and dismissed by an Official Person as mere "paperwork."

I wouldn't object to something like "we understand that's fun for some people but that's not the direction we're going." That's an explanation that firmly supports the chosen design while still being respectful toward potential paying customers with different playstyle preferences.

Thanks for considering this.

--Flatfingers

[Sumdian]

Atleast make them so you can to buy them with some form of currency,

And that will open up the marked for spammers and currency sellers no thx.

[Yachiru]

Can i borrow this for a sig?

yes you can

[Admiral_Ares]

Hoping that Admirals aren't merely Lieutenants with bigger guns is a viewpoint that says it's OK to have plenty of action-oriented tactical content at Lieutenant-Commander ranks, and fleet-oriented operational content at the Commander-Captain ranks, and thoughtful strategic content at flag rank.

--Flatfingers

I'm sorry but this is the impression that I get, If I'm wrong I hope a dev clears the air. But you only ever get to control a single ship at a time, tactical content. I don't remember ever seeing anything that leads me to think there is any stratigic gameplay at Admiral level.

[Zepath]

When Developers ... particularly Creative Directors and Producers start talking about their game and how great it is ... I think about the following video ...

And before you watch that video, let me tell you first hand, that the Witch Elf was the most useless, under-powered, unimpressive, lifeless, "waste of time" class in any MMO I ever played. And I played her to level 34, convinced she was going to kick in at some point.

A year after launch, the class is still a waste of time.

Paul Barnett on Warhammer's Witch Elf (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ri3w-N_jvPs)

[Peregrine_Falcon]

Is strategic play for everyone? No, no more than shoot-'em-up play is fun for everyone. Is strategic play fun for some; does strategic planning count as actual "gameplay?" Absolutely. So given that it's a great fit for what we've seen Admirals do in Star Trek, and that it can be fun gameplay, why dismiss the idea out of hand?
This was exactly the reason why in The Big Ideas thread I requested that Cryptic consider renaming rank 5 to Commodore.

One of the reasons that I gave was that it allowed Cryptic to save the higher flag ranks (Rear Admiral, Vice Admiral and Admiral) for an expansion that would allow for a strategic type of game play.

Also, in today's IRC dev chat I asked if Admiral level game play was going to be significantly different than lower level game play. The answer that was given was:

<Cryptic_Snix> (http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=29243) "As you earn higher ranks, Starfleet becomes more dependent on you to be the deciding factor in defending the Federation against its greatest threats. As an Admiral, your missions often call upon you to gather a fleet of ships to tackle a challenge rather than a single ship."

So in other words, no. Admiral level game play is not going to be significantly different than lower level game play. The answer that Snix gave was essentially 'As an Admiral you'll be able to play end-game teaming required/raid content.' Which I think is something that we already expected.

Don't get me wrong, I can certainly understand if Cryptic doesn't have the time to shoe-horn strategic game play in before launch. And that's why I asked them to consider making rank 5 Commodore, so that they could add true Admiral level game play in later. If they keep rank 5 as Admiral it literally leaves them no place else to go. IMO Cryptic should keep its options open.

[osena]

it might take too long to reprograme commodore but if you would like when you get Admiral rank just act like your a commodore

[Arokh72]

This was exactly the reason why in The Big Ideas thread I requested that Cryptic consider renaming rank 5 to Commodore.

One of the reasons that I gave was that it allowed Cryptic to save the higher flag ranks (Rear Admiral, Vice Admiral and Admiral) for an expansion that would allow for a strategic type of game play.

Also, in today's IRC dev chat I asked if Admiral level game play was going to be significantly different than lower level game play. The answer that was given was:

<Cryptic_Snix> (http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=29243) "As you earn higher ranks, Starfleet becomes more dependent on you to be the deciding factor in defending the Federation against its greatest threats. As an Admiral, your missions often call upon you to gather a fleet of ships to tackle a challenge rather than a single ship."

So in other words, no. Admiral level game play is not going to be significantly different than lower level game play. The answer that Snix gave was essentially 'As an Admiral you'll be able to play end-game teaming required/raid content.' Which I think is something that we already expected.

Don't get me wrong, I can certainly understand if Cryptic doesn't have the time to shoe-horn strategic game play in before launch. And that's why I asked them to consider making rank 5 Commodore, so that they could add true Admiral level game play in later. If they keep rank 5 as Admiral it literally leaves them no place else to go. IMO Cryptic should keep its options open.

The use of Commodore in Starfleet was discontinued in the 2270's.

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Commodore

[thawn4444]

When Developers ... particularly Creative Directors and Producers start talking about their game and how great it is ... I think about the following video ...

And before you watch that video, let me tell you first hand, that the Witch Elf was the most useless, under-powered, unimpressive, lifeless, "waste of time" class in any MMO I ever played. And I played her to level 34, convinced she was going to kick in at some point.

A year after launch, the class is still a waste of time.

Paul Barnett on Warhammer's Witch Elf (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ri3w-N_jvPs)

Zepath, that whole game was "most useless, under-powered, unimpressive, lifeless, waste of time" MMO game.

I still curse Mythic for butchering the Warhammer IP!


oh well, at least I still got the tabletop game to fall back on.


( sorry for derailing the thread. )

[Flatfingers]

This was exactly the reason why in The Big Ideas thread I requested that Cryptic consider renaming rank 5 to Commodore.

I actually thought that was a superb idea when I first saw it proposed, and I like it even more after hearing today that the gameplay for the (current) highest rank would include leading groups of ships.

That's precisely what the Commodore rank was for. So calling the top rank "Commodore" would be a win because:

it follows established historical military usage (for those who care about that sort of thing)
it was a rank used in Star Trek (for those who care about that sort of thing)
it saves the Admiral rank for more strategic gameplay to be implemented in the future ;)
if the code was properly designed, changing "Admiral" to "Commodore" for players is a one-time text search-and-replace operationBasically, this idea is full of win, and I support it enthusiastically.

Which isn't to say I'm ignoring your point, Arokh. Yes, it's true we didn't see the rank of Commodore in use in Star Trek from TNG on... but there are three things to consider:

not seeing it doesn't mean they did away with it
even if they did do away with it, they could easily restore it for wartime use
considering all the other changes Cryptic is making, restoring the Commodore rank seems pretty minorJust another opinion to throw on the fire. :)

--Flatfingers

[Peregrine_Falcon]

The use of Commodore in Starfleet was discontinued in the 2270's.

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Commodore
That I didn't know. Thanks for the info and the link. Perhaps that's why they aren't using Commodore in STO. Perhaps they could use Fleet Captain instead?

I still think that Admiral level gameplay should be focused around fleets and task forces. That's what Admirals do. Admirals do not command individual ships, ever. Yeah I know that it's a game... but why even have the ranks if you're going to ignore what they actually stand for? *sigh* Now I'm doing the same thing that I always get onto other people for, becoming overly hungup over tiny details.

I'm completely ok with Admiral level content mostly being "forced-grouping" or "raiding" content. I even think that makes sense for an Admiral. But what that really means is that the Task Force that my "Admiral" is leading will be composed of a fleet of 30 - 40 ships that are all commanded by "Admirals." I guess it's my prior military experience, but that just makes less sense to me than Warp Drive or all of Star Trek's "alien races" that look exactly like humans only with different bumps on their heads.

[Nestro]

I think currently they are avoiding finacial problems, for example, here in Germany Atari won't ship the boxes, it's Namco Bandai Partners, so if they rush out things a bit i am willing (for the time beeing) to accept that, rather than not having a STO at all.

On the topic: I don't want to buy anything connected with my Fleet Career. Such a great ship as the Sovereign should at least require to pass a great episode mission first.

[Peregrine_Falcon]

I think currently they are avoiding finacial problems, for example, here in Germany Atari won't ship the boxes, it's Namco Bandai Partners, so if they rush out things a bit i am willing (for the time beeing) to accept that, rather than not having a STO at all.
Cryptic is not having financial problems.

CO is bringing in money, and Atari is funding the development of STO. Atari has a lot of money. You can find out more information about Atari by going to their official website and reading the public shareholder information they've put up on the site.

Atari is funding the development of STO. Atari is in no danger of running out of money, thus Cryptic is in no danger of closing. If Namco is shipping boxes in Germany instead of Atari, it's because of licensing agreements and not because Atari can't afford to come to Germany.

[Arokh72]

Cryptic is not having financial problems.

CO is bringing in money, and Atari is funding the development of STO. Atari has a lot of money. You can find out more information about Atari by going to their official website and reading the public shareholder information they've put up on the site.

Atari is funding the development of STO. Atari is in no danger of running out of money, thus Cryptic is in no danger of closing. If Namco is shipping boxes in Germany instead of Atari, it's because of licensing agreements and not because Atari can't afford to come to Germany.


Actually it'd be for the same reason that Namco Bandai is distributing here in Australia as well. Atari was doing very badly in a number of countries (most of Europe and Australia and New Zealand), deservedly so incidentally, for e.g. LoTRO was shipped almost 1 week after release, something no other distributer had a problem with. To cut a long story short Namco Bandai bought out the Atari distribution in those countries it wasn't doing well...well to be frank they were losing money.

[JacobFlowers]

One of the great things about MMOs in my opinion is that the game never truly ends. This holds true for STO as well. We'll have plenty of things for you to do at max level. It's not going to be, "I'm an Admiral, and now I have nothing to do but this pile of paper work." That would not be fun, and one of the things that it's our responsibility to do, is make sure you're having fun.

There will always be strange new worlds, new life, and alien civilizations. The universe is a vast, mysterious, and dangerous place...

We'll have more information for you all on this sometime soon.

Stormshade

Thanks Storm.

But most of us already knew this. And i think most of us who have concerns over the short progression curb does nto stem from a worry 'oh no, i'm an admiral, i have nothing to do' but more as in 'wow... two months... the entire progression experience is worth two months'. I really appreciate your dipping in here to talk with us about this, but it doesn't address our concerns or disappointments.

I know STO is on course to appeal to the hardcore casual player... but I've yet to be convinced this is the best thing for STO in the long run. Can anyone please enumerate on this for me?

Additionally, I do not think this was done with much forethought. Espescially with many in the STO community saying that having "Admiral' in at launch is simply not a good idea... unless of course wiht the next expansion we can all become President of the Federation. :rolleyes:

[Nestro]

Espescially with many in the STO community saying that having "Admiral' in at launch is simply not a good idea... unless of course wiht the next expansion we can all become President of the Federation. :rolleyes:


Yea... *sigh* i'd rather like to stay captain until they close the servers than seeing billions of admirals and no possibility to improve in rank anymore.

[JacobFlowers]

This was exactly the reason why in The Big Ideas thread I requested that Cryptic consider renaming rank 5 to Commodore.

:

[/COLOR][/B]


I've suggested that they not launch with Admiral for a long time in other threads. My idea however was not to use commodore (i never thought about that!) but having Captain be level cap. Its a lot more believable having a bunch of CAPTAINs flying around, than Admirals.

But yes, I agree with you. They are shooting themselves in teh foot by including Admiral at launch. It is a position of such esteem that its very gameplay style should be different and further developed. It really has a lot of potential, for example:


Admirals Could give missions to other players
Admirals could have the ability to command NPC fleets
Admirals could manage Fleet-Owned Space Stations
Admirals could have special command abilities, such as ordering player ships into different formations prior to attack
You could have full fledged Admiralty Ranks (Rear Admiral, Admiral, Fleet Admiral, etc) a potential for 30 additional 'levels'
Have special management abilities when we finally get sandbox elements that may or may not be given to us afte launch


Lots of potential. No idea why they're including it at launch.

And as to the OP's post. I too think it is a bit weak sauce. I was hoping this wouldn't be another MMO that follow's in CO's mold.

[duckforceone]

well from what i have gathered in what i have read from cryptic, it seems that your ship, is only a small percentage of what you can do... so they say that going from lvl 4 ship to 5, is a difference in 10% at most... with your bridge officers and skills and equipment making all the bigger differences...

So it doesn't seem like when you attain admiral, that you are given an uber ship... you just get a small upgrade but a new model...

[Preditorian]

Off Topic: I agree that the decision to limit the ranks to the ones that were selected and make the Admiral which is equivalent to a 4 Star Army General as its highest rank ultimately sets the whole "end-game" aspect of the game up for failure.

Its not practical at all and if Cryptic has any sense they would heed the warning that players are giving them on the limitations of the ranking structure and allow for expansion.

That being said its not like we can argue the matter because its not like we have played the game or anything.


On Topic: If the game is released with ships being "given" when the Skill points are met and the rank is acquired the I see this as a slap in the face to the people who like to work for what they got and know that it was not that easy to obtain such a thing.

You should be sick to death of the ship your in and quiet uber in it before you reach the requirements of advancement. But that's just me.

[Yachiru]

While I agree that "Fleet Captain" sounds like it fits what the devs have in mind a whole lot better, heres how I chose to comfort my lil mind: say there are 50k players. Say by the end of the server life 40k have made admiral. Thats a whole lot of brass, BUT there will be something like 2.5 million NPC ships that are technically part of the federation ranks. The ratio of brass to ship will be pretty normal if you look at the big picture.

[vobedarkelf]

I am going to add my voice to the 'no admiral rank' side. I have been avoiding this topic because I really thought Cryptic would have changed it by now. Admiral is a rank only obtained by the most decorated and successful Starfleet personnel. While Starfleet does have quite a few of them, STO should not be handing out this rank so casually.

I agree with the others that the rank list needs to be reworked somehow. The "Fleet Captain" suggestion sounds nice, though I would suggest calling it "Flag Captain" instead. I just think that sounds a bit better, and sound more like the kind of Title Picard would have held, being captain of their flagship.

[cipher_nemo]

There is one important point many posters in this thread are forgetting:

The other player isn't part of your story.

It's the same with all other MMOs. If you saved the fair maiden in distress, you're the hero, not someone else. If you manage to command one of those limited-run Sovereign class ships, then your character is the "hero". Got promoted to Admiral? You're the top brass now. It doesn't matter if we have thousands of Admirals flying ships around in STO, because for your story, they only exist a handful at a time.

Very few MMOs claim to have a "persistent" world in which every other player affects something in the world permanently.

[Tanktreads]

It takes 100 hours of game play to go straight to admiral? then dont just power level! Go explore, go have fun for god's sake if some one wants to get to Admiral as fast as they can then complains that it didn't take longer that is THEIR fault imho. You can do any number of things in an MMO like in EQ 90% of my time for playing for 2 years I fished and chatted with my guild... made it to lvl 49 out of 60. Could I have just leveled? sure! did I NO! because that was not how I wanted to play EQ... so be smart if power gaming is going to make you sad don't power game.

P.S. Commodore is a great idea just write it in the game history that star fleet reinstated the rank out of necessity of the modern times

[vobedarkelf]

It takes 100 hours of game play to go straight to admiral? then dont just power level!

Not to pick on the above poster here, but I think some people are missing the point of the advancement system. It is about gaining skill points far more than it is about increasing rank. A lot of people seem to be looking at "Admiral" rank and associating it with being "level 80 in WOW". At which point the advancement basically stops, and leaves players to slog through boring end-game content on a 'daily' basis.

In STO, Admiral rank is only a milestone you pass eventually, not your ultimate goal. The game doesn't suddenly end when you reach Admiral. And if I understand the system correctly, you cannot really "power level" up to it. You will gain skill points by doing missions, and gain roughly 1 point per half hour. That rule will not change if you are a power gamer or casual gamer. Sure, a power gamer may spent 8 hours or more each day on the game, in which case, he gains 16 points total. A casual gamer may not spend as much time on the game, but when he puts in a total of 8 hours, he will still have gained 16 points just like the power gamer.

I think this is brilliant. You cannot say this in other games. In other games, when dealing with an experience bar, powergamers can just focus heavily on their experience gain, to maximize their advancement over the cours of an hour, where as a casual gamer may not focus so heavily on experience during that same hour. This is the reason why WOW and other games have implemented "rest" bonus. To help the casual players make noticable progress when they play.

[Flatfingers]

There is one important point many posters in this thread are forgetting:

The other player isn't part of your story.

I get the specific point you're making here, cipher_nemo, and I think it's not wrong as far as it goes... it just doesn't go far enough to deliver a truly accurate picture of the MMORPG experience.

What you're not factoring in is the "massively multiplayer" part. A MMORPG isn't just places and objects and NPCs -- by definition, a MMORPG contains many other players constantly interacting with each other, both directly and indirectly.

You may be able to be the hero of one story without interacting with other players directly. But you cannot escape indirect interactions with other players. What they do will affect your overall, long-term play experience in a MMORPG. Otherwise it's not a MMORPG; it's just a big online single-player game.

And that's only if you deliberately tried to avoid all direct contact with other players. For the vast majority of the people who come to a MMORPG, they're going to be interacting directly with other players all the time. This guarantees that what other people do in-game will impact their personal story to some degree, because other people are part of the gameworld.

So the long-standing concern that seeing most other players with the highest rank (as previously discussed in the notorious 100 Billion Captains (http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=3799) thread) isn't something I think can be so easily dismissed. In a MMORPG, what other players do is a core element defining the gameworld, just like places and objects and NPCs.

There is no escape. :p

--Flatfingers

[Haggard]

This was exactly the reason why in The Big Ideas thread I requested that Cryptic consider renaming rank 5 to Commodore.

One of the reasons that I gave was that it allowed Cryptic to save the higher flag ranks (Rear Admiral, Vice Admiral and Admiral) for an expansion that would allow for a strategic type of game play.

Also, in today's IRC dev chat I asked if Admiral level game play was going to be significantly different than lower level game play. The answer that was given was:

<Cryptic_Snix> (http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=29243) "As you earn higher ranks, Starfleet becomes more dependent on you to be the deciding factor in defending the Federation against its greatest threats. As an Admiral, your missions often call upon you to gather a fleet of ships to tackle a challenge rather than a single ship."

So in other words, no. Admiral level game play is not going to be significantly different than lower level game play. The answer that Snix gave was essentially 'As an Admiral you'll be able to play end-game teaming required/raid content.' Which I think is something that we already expected.

Don't get me wrong, I can certainly understand if Cryptic doesn't have the time to shoe-horn strategic game play in before launch. And that's why I asked them to consider making rank 5 Commodore, so that they could add true Admiral level game play in later. If they keep rank 5 as Admiral it literally leaves them no place else to go. IMO Cryptic should keep its options open.

I've posted this suggestion in a few other threads, but here it is again:

I'd like to see the devs take this idea a step further and divorce character advancement from Starfleet rank (or the faction equivalent) entirely. Name the "mechanical" ranks something like Green - Regular - Veteran - Elite - Legendary, and make each rank a prereq to add a Starfleet Rank you qualify for. This promotes flexibility in character concept without forcing players to have characters of a certain rank. You could even make the default SF rank title advance and players who don't care wouldn't even see a difference from the current proposed system.

By this system all Admirals would have had Legendary achievements (since that would be the minimum mechanical rank needed to unlock the SF rank of Admiral) but you could still easily play as a Legendary Captain at endgame (Kirk between Admiral stints, probably Picard for the latter part of TNG's run).

Since any sort of chain of command is going to be voluntary or fleet/guild based anyways, deemphasizing Starfleet rank as a measure of character achievement is just a good idea.

[sir_theodorik]

I get the specific point you're making here, cipher_nemo, and I think it's not wrong as far as it goes... it just doesn't go far enough to deliver a truly accurate picture of the MMORPG experience.

What you're not factoring in is the "massively multiplayer" part. A MMORPG isn't just places and objects and NPCs -- by definition, a MMORPG contains many other players constantly interacting with each other, both directly and indirectly.

You may be able to be the hero of one story without interacting with other players directly. But you cannot escape indirect interactions with other players. What they do will affect your overall, long-term play experience in a MMORPG. Otherwise it's not a MMORPG; it's just a big online single-player game.

And that's only if you deliberately tried to avoid all direct contact with other players. For the vast majority of the people who come to a MMORPG, they're going to be interacting directly with other players all the time. This guarantees that what other people do in-game will impact their personal story to some degree, because other people are part of the gameworld.

So the long-standing concern that seeing most other players with the highest rank (as previously discussed in the notorious 100 Billion Captains (http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=3799) thread) isn't something I think can be so easily dismissed. In a MMORPG, what other players do is a core element defining the gameworld, just like places and objects and NPCs.

There is no escape. :p

--Flatfingers

I see your point of view, but what if Captain was the highest rank, would that solve the problem you have? Is the problem you have with the NAME of the final rank?

[vobedarkelf]

I'd like to see the devs take this idea a step further and divorce character advancement from Starfleet rank (or the faction equivalent) entirely.

Oh I like that Idea even better. The whole rank system hasnt really made that much sense, no matter how much Cryptic has tried to justify it. Just make everyone "Captain" rank, and name the advancement milestones differently.

This reminds me of early Champions Online. Originally, character creation involved selecting your origin, such as Mutant, Mystical, Extraterrestrial and so on. This determined your starting stats. During beta someone made the suggestion of changing Origins to "characteristics", and letting the concept of "Origin" fall into the Roleplay and backstory side of things. Everyone loved this idea, as well as the devs, so they changed it.

[ChicksDigHarleys]

It's probably been said in another thread, but I doubt Picard had to buy his Sovereign when his Galaxy was destroyed. He did however, probably have to spend influence.

I have to *sigh* everytime I hear someone suggest content be limited, whether it's certain classes, items, ranks, etc. Only the people who play the most will ever get those end game rewards, and then what's the point of anybody else even playing?

I think they should limit players to Captain, and just have more steps in Captain. Admirals just aren't starship captains. I'm in the "100 hours to Admiral isn't enough" camp. Why not just change the skills around a bit so you don't reach Admiral AND cap your skills at the same time around that 200 hour mark?

[cipher_nemo]

I get the specific point you're making here, cipher_nemo, and I think it's not wrong as far as it goes... it just doesn't go far enough to deliver a truly accurate picture of the MMORPG experience.

What you're not factoring in is the "massively multiplayer" part. A MMORPG isn't just places and objects and NPCs -- by definition, a MMORPG contains many other players constantly interacting with each other, both directly and indirectly.

(...)

In a MMORPG, what other players do is a core element defining the gameworld, just like places and objects and NPCs.

While there's certainly a lot of truth to what you state, you seem to be pushing for a "persistent" world feel for STO. That, in all honesty, isn't going to happen. While I'd love to have it feel more persistent (most of us probably would), I know the technical challenges of this are overwhelming and Cryptic is not going that direction. UO did it way back in the days and eventually paid for it with the bandwidth-hog the UO server(s) became (especially in the days of dial-up and slow A-DSL for consumers as the only options). Even player housing in most MMOs these days are inside of "instances". A good example of an exception to this MMO trend of "instances" is Mortal Online.

And due to the leveling/reward system inherent in MMOs, keeping everyone from getting to Admiral in a month or two is fighting an uphill battle.

As we've all seen in MMOs, the trend is towards social-interaction as the "massively" component and gameplay as "instanced" content (from raids to smaller groups). And STO is no exception there. They've mentioned that players will get that MMO aspect from social hubs like the starbase next to Earth (not their extact statement, but conveys their meaning). From what we know so far, exploring space and doing missions is going to feel more like running an "instance". We may run into others while traveling via the map screen (sector view??), but we may not when running missions or exploring space created by the Genesis system.

Instance play does have advantages (ie: no 'griefing' or 'ganking'), but of course it comes at the cost of that MMO feeling we're used to getting.

[Cepheus]

I'd like to see the devs take this idea a step further and divorce character advancement from Starfleet rank (or the faction equivalent) entirely.



Not a bad idea at all. Honestly, when have we seen a ship captained by a lower rank than Captain for more than an episode in an emergency situation (Data and USS Sutherland for example). Definitely something to consider.

[vegetta]

double post FTL (Sorry)

[vegetta]

Humph

I thought this was going to be a thread about buying a physical model of your ship.......

[Elta_and_Zletha]

Humph

I thought this was going to be a thread about buying a physical model of your ship.......

Your avatar in conjunction with your post made me ROFL :D

[TSS]

I wish it was possible to have the best of both worlds.

If you get promoted to captain, you should get your own ship. However, there's a limited amount of ships, and one ship isn't as good as the next one. Even one sovereign is different from the next. And you going to assign the best ship to the best captain.

I'd propose that everybody gets a ship once promoted, however they will get version -A of it. The first design, with a few weaknesses and inefficiencies. Then by spending merit point (or some sort of "influence" gained by doing federation stuff) you can buy refits of the ship, upgrade to a Enterprise-B if you will.

-A to -B won't give much (like 5% effectiveness increase) but by the time you get to -J, that's a 50% increase, or whatever the balance might be.

Personally i hate the idea to see a casual player flying around in the best ship of the fleet. In real life, would starfleet give it's best ship to a captain that's "only able to be a captain a few hours a week"?

To prove my point ii'll refer to the episode tapestry. What, exactly, happened to Picard when he chose to not give his all and follow amore "casual" life instead?

[JPJappic]

I see your point of view, but what if Captain was the highest rank, would that solve the problem you have? Is the problem you have with the NAME of the final rank?

I would have to agree that personally my problem is the name of the final rank. Players should not be Admirals.

With that being said I still strongly believe that Cryptic is just using it to hide their leveling system. YES, it is still a leveling system. We've been given examples of Captain 1, Captain 2, Captain 3, etc. and then eventually you get the max and can essentially level to the next tier. In some respects it is like the inverse of WoW.. in order to get to certain things in STO it sounds like you have to spend skill points you get from accomplishing missions. Whereas in WoW and most other games you get skill points for leveling. Essentially it's the same system. Honestly if they don't use some other form of naming system as has been suggested already in this thread (which i fully support and will push for) they should just use numbers.. it's the same thing... i'd rather have a level 50 Human Engineer than an Admiral Human Engineer which doesn't make sense lore wise (in regards to the numbers of admirals in game) and has no meaning to the actual game play. They're forcing ranks on us in order to be able to achieve certain aspects of the game and this is something that's not going to be liked upon the Trekkies who are probably going to be the only ones that stick around after a few months.

I was talking to my friend who has been in the Champions Online closed and open beta and currently plays the game and he is estimating that 2/3 of the people that were playing Champions in September have left. Though personally I love Champions there's nothing much to the actual game. There's nothing that really wows people and there are way too many things missing in the actual visual mechanics of the game (especially when it comes to Super Groups / Guilds). Heck, Cryptic has continuously said that STO will not be the same as CO but the more we learn about it, the more i'm fearing it will be. It was mentioned yesterday in the dev chat that a variation of sidekicking (a great feature in Champions) will be included in the game.

One of the great things about MMOs in my opinion is that the game never truly ends. This holds true for STO as well. We'll have plenty of things for you to do at max level. It's not going to be, "I'm an Admiral, and now I have nothing to do but this pile of paper work." That would not be fun, and one of the things that it's our responsibility to do, is make sure you're having fun.

This worries me a little bit and I wonder how repetitive the missions at high rank will actually be. This is a problem currently in Champions Online for level 40 players.

[Flatfingers]

I see your point of view, but what if Captain was the highest rank, would that solve the problem you have? Is the problem you have with the NAME of the final rank?

I actually don't have a problem with 100 billion Captains... as long as that's not the highest rank available to player characters.

It's a question of finding a gameplay design that, when you get a lot of people doing it, will be fun as gameplay while still tending to "feel" like (my perception of) Star Trek.

Trying to satisfy all these constraints, I come up with a design that says it's OK for there to be a lot of Captain-rank player characters running around -- that satisfies the "fun" and "feels close enough to Star Trek" goals when a lot of people do it -- but that there shouldn't be nearly as many Admirals, and they shouldn't be designed to act just like Lieutenants, leaping into tactical action, duel-wielded phaser pistols blazing.

So no, it's not just the name -- it's my perception of where the gameplay value is in the rank, and what the people who've held that rank have been seen to do (and not do!) in Star Trek. If the gameplay can be designed to be fun and leads to a gameworld full of players acting in ways that seem reasonably close to what was seen in Star Trek, then why not do that?

Based on what Cryptic has said, though, they're not going that way. So now it's a matter of adapting to that reality... and I think the suggestion to search-and-replace "Admiral" to "Commodore" (or "Fleet Captain") is the best that can reasonably be done at this point. It retains all the gameplay that Cryptic has created, while preserving the Admiral rank for future gameplay that can be designed so that it's something that doesn't lead to "100 billion Admirals."

Of course that means 100 billion Commodores, but hey, you do the best you can with what you're given. :)

Does this explain where I'm coming from? I don't mind if you disagree; I just want to be sure I'm communicating what it is I'd actually prefer to see and why.

While there's certainly a lot of truth to what you state, you seem to be pushing for a "persistent" world feel for STO. That, in all honesty, isn't going to happen.

You don't think so?

I wouldn't say I'm "pushing" for STO to be a persistent-world game, exactly, although I certainly wouldn't mind that. It's more that I'm assuming it will be, given that it's been described as a MMORPG.

If you feel that's not the case, that Cryptic are not making a MMORPG and that STO has been designed to be more all instances and no common areas beyond social hubs (like a co-op Call of Duty or Team Fortress/Left 4 Dead-style game), can you give me some idea of what leads you to that conclusion?

I'm not disagreeing; I'm saying that if Cryptic has confirmed something like that, I'd really like to know about it!

As we've all seen in MMOs, the trend is towards social-interaction as the "massively" component and gameplay as "instanced" content (from raids to smaller groups).

Interesting. I've long thought that the trend was in the other direction -- that instancing, by giving smaller and smaller groups their own pocket universes, was actually moving players away from social interaction.

But maybe we're talking about two different kinds of social interaction. Small groups are probably better for getting to know individuals, but global common areas seem like a requirement to truly have the feeling of being part of a "massively multiplayer" experience.

Instance play does have advantages (ie: no 'griefing' or 'ganking'), but of course it comes at the cost of that MMO feeling we're used to getting.

Exactly.

I see the common-area, persistent-world aspect of MMORPGs as being the single most unique selling point they have. Commonality and persistence of the playing field are requirements for enabling the "massive" feeling of these games. Design a game that nibbles away too much at either of those features, for whatever plausible reason, and you lose the massive social experience that is your competitive edge versus the online squad-based games.

Which brings me back to 100 billion Admirals. :p

--Flatfingers

[T-Rex]

Cryptic could try to explain getting ships for free as a part of Starfleet/KDF mass building ships as quickly as possible due to the strained relations between the Federation and the Klingons. Each side is preparing for war. That way there are just a bunch of ships waiting for qualified officers to command them.

Still, it does seem a little cheap for us to get ships for free. I would not complain if Cryptic put a high "currency" cost to getting a new ship when we get our promotions. It would help the whole experience feel a bit more realistic.

I for one would like to avoid the gold farming insentivs .:)

[syberghost]

Becoming Admiral in this game is like becoming a black belt in Karate. People who don't know anything about it assume black belt is the end goal. People who do know that once you've achieved black belt, you are done with the basics, and can begin learning martial arts.

After 100 hours of developing your character to Admiral, you can start playing this game.

[Savant74]

Does anyone think that you just automatically get your new uber ship once you reach the level requirement alittle to easy? I mean dang there were only 2 Sovereign Class's that I am aware of in the ST universe and to make that ship which is no push over as easy to attain as to just play for a few months seems kinda weaksause IMO.

If everyone has the top of the line ship that fast then what makes them special?

Im not for super long grinds, but also not for every noob to the game being in top of the line ships in a few weeks after purchase.

STO is taking place nearly 30 years after nemesis, so that means they've had 30 years to churn out Sovereign class ships. Also, it's an outdated ship - as the tier page shows there are a couple of better models available by the time the game starts.

But as for levelling up, 3-4 months to get to Admiral would be far better than 100 hours, that's just crazy. The entire fleet is going to be full of admirals after the first month at that rate...

[Flatfingers]

People who do know that once you've achieved black belt, you are done with the basics, and can begin learning martial arts.

After 100 hours of developing your character to Admiral, you can start playing this game.

I would suggest that a serious real-world mental and physical discipline is not the same thing as an entertainment product.

When I plunk down my cash for a game I think I have a reasonable expectation of being entertained fairly quickly, not 100 hours later.

I don't mind waiting a bit to get to a part of the game that I can particularly enjoy. But the first part shouldn't feel like work.

--Flatfingers

[cipher_nemo]

When I plunk down my cash for a game I think I have a reasonable expectation of being entertained fairly quickly, not 100 hours later.

I don't mind waiting a bit to get to a part of the game that I can particularly enjoy. But the first part shouldn't feel like work.

That's obviously a bit over-exaggerated (and you know it). ;)

As for feeling like work, I agree. I don't think we're going to have that problem with STO. Just re-watch the old Las Vegas Webcast of Jack Emmert introducing STO to the crowd there. He wants STO to be fun for the busy, working adult. He wants to produce a game he enjoys, and he has a family and a full time career. I have no doubt that this is what the Cryptic team wants to release.

But whether they actually do that or not is a discussion that would be better served after STO's release.

But as for levelling up, 3-4 months to get to Admiral would be far better than 100 hours, that's just crazy. The entire fleet is going to be full of admirals after the first month at that rate...

And who said the game isn't fun because of how long it takes to become an Admiral? An Admiral is just a title. It's meaningless by itself, inside of a game.

[sir_theodorik]

I actually don't have a problem with 100 billion Captains... as long as that's not the highest rank available to player characters.

It's a question of finding a gameplay design that, when you get a lot of people doing it, will be fun as gameplay while still tending to "feel" like (my perception of) Star Trek.

Trying to satisfy all these constraints, I come up with a design that says it's OK for there to be a lot of Captain-rank player characters running around -- that satisfies the "fun" and "feels close enough to Star Trek" goals when a lot of people do it -- but that there shouldn't be nearly as many Admirals, and they shouldn't be designed to act just like Lieutenants, leaping into tactical action, duel-wielded phaser pistols blazing.

So no, it's not just the name -- it's my perception of where the gameplay value is in the rank, and what the people who've held that rank have been seen to do (and not do!) in Star Trek. If the gameplay can be designed to be fun and leads to a gameworld full of players acting in ways that seem reasonably close to what was seen in Star Trek, then why not do that?

Based on what Cryptic has said, though, they're not going that way. So now it's a matter of adapting to that reality... and I think the suggestion to search-and-replace "Admiral" to "Commodore" (or "Fleet Captain") is the best that can reasonably be done at this point. It retains all the gameplay that Cryptic has created, while preserving the Admiral rank for future gameplay that can be designed so that it's something that doesn't lead to "100 billion Admirals."

Of course that means 100 billion Commodores, but hey, you do the best you can with what you're given. :)

Does this explain where I'm coming from? I don't mind if you disagree; I just want to be sure I'm communicating what it is I'd actually prefer to see and why.


I think I see what you mean. I guess I had assumed Admiral rank would be reserved for really good PvPers or PvE guild leaders and that sort of thing and I'll admit I was surprised when that was not the case, but until you explained it like you just did it didn't bother me at all. In every MMO I've played even most of the casual players could identify the major players on the server, the movers and shackers of PvE or PvP guilds due to their being some kind of designation (an extremely rare item they wear, title next to name, etc).

What STO has done as merge the Level numbers we are used to seeing with the Titles that allows players to distinguish themselves and stand out from the crowd of alts and uber casual max-level characters. By merging the Level indicator with the Title indicator, they have inadvertantly offended everyone who wants an opportunity to stand out from the crowd. Most of the Senior Members here on the forums want that opportunity, to be the best of the best.

You've convinced me, Flat. I hope they change the normal "max level" to Captain and leave Admiral as a Title reward for legendary feats of awesomeness we can use to stand out from the crowd; but I won't call this a deal killer for me if they don't change it. I hope whatever game mechannic they use to allow us to stand out from the crowd makes sense.