Rank Insignias

by **Qwert** on Wed May 07, 2008 9:12 am

You have" new ranks"

topic

by **Thezzaruz** on Wed May 07, 2008 10:20 am

qwert wrote:You have" new ranks" topic

We know, it was linked to that thread within a few hours. And that being 5 days ago I don't see your need for a bump...

by **flyboy86** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 4:42 pm

I'm very new here, But just a suggestion.....I'm a military member, and the rank structure is very confusing to someone actually used to real military rank. Silver is a higher rank than gold, not the other way around, which you have. The rank you have for cadet is actualyl a Lieutenant rank, and the rank you have for Lieutenant is actually a Major or Lt. Col. The rank you have for Brigadiar is actually the rank of a Colonel, and the rank you have for General is acually just a Briggadiar general.

I know it'd take a lot to change it, and people are used to it this way, but for anyone with military experience, it can be confusing.

by **The Neon Peon** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 5:40 pm

Well, lets just say this is not the army for a reason.

by **Stephan Wayne** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 5:44 pm

hell i think it just looks fancier the higher you go
no other reasons be hide it or maybe lack did not want to get suided by the army as well

by **BaldAdonis** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 5:49 pm

flyboy86 wrote:I'm very new here, But just a suggestion.....I'm a military member, and the rank structure is very confusing to someone actually used to real military rank. Silver is a higher rank than gold, not the other way around, which you have. The rank you have for cadet is actualyl a Lieutenant rank, and the rank you have for Lieutenant is actually a Major or Lt. Col. The rank you have for Brigadiar is actually the rank of a Colonel, and the rank you have for General is acually just a Briggadiar general.

I know it'd take a lot to change it, and people are used to it this way, but for anyone with military experience, it can be confusing.

Silver's not higher than gold, just a different member (paying vs. not).
It doesn't take much to change, and the ranks have gone through a few changes already to bring them to where they are. There was a thread a while back with the suggestion for a lot more ranks, as well as images to go along with them. Have a look for that if you're interested. But from what I understand, they're not meant to reflect military ranks, just to borrow things that look cool (I mean, is there a rank that gives you a crown?)

by **flyboy86** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:07 pm

I know its not 100% military, but its very close. All the descriptions are definitely militray, and the insignias that go along with them do not match at all. A lieutenant should have a single bar, a captain should have two bars, a major should have the oak leaf, a colonel is an eagle, and generals are stars. Also, the premium memberships vs. free seems a little backwards. For example if you're a cadet with a premium membership its a gold bar, which in the military that is a lower rank than a silver bar which is the insignia for a free membership. Its just very conflicting from what I see at work every day lol

by **hecter** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:13 pm

Well, this isn't the US ranking system, it's the CC one... I kinda like it this way. The better you get, the fancier it gets.

by **porkenbeans** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:13 pm

flyboy86 wrote:I'm very new here, But just a suggestion.....I'm a military member, and the rank structure is very confusing to someone actually used to real military rank. Silver is a higher rank than gold, not the other way around, which you have. The rank you have for cadet is actualyl a Lieutenant rank, and the rank you have for Lieutenant is actually a Major or Lt. Col. The rank you have for Brigadiar is actually the rank of a Colonel, and the rank you have for General is acually just a Briggadiar general.

I know it'd take a lot to change it, and people are used to it this way, but for anyone with military experience, it can be confusing.

Something like my sig. ?

by **The Neon Peon** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:13 pm

flyboy86 wrote:I know its not 100% military, but its very close. All the descriptions are definitely militray, and the insignias that go along with them do not match at all. A lieutenant should have a single bar, a captain should have two bars, a major should have the oak leaf, a colonel is an eagle, and generals are stars. Also, the premium memberships vs. free seems a little backwards. For example if you're a cadet with a premium membership its a gold bar, which in the military that is a lower rank than a silver bar which is the insignia for a free membership. Its just very conflicting from what I see at work every day lol

Once again, THIS IS NOT THE MILITARY. If you want to see military ranks, I suggest you enlist again. (or for a longer period of time). Some of the names were taken because there are no other good forms of ranks to use.

by **flyboy86** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:15 pm

porkenbeans wrote:
flyboy86 wrote:I'm very new here, But just a suggestion.....I'm a military member, and the rank structure is very confusing to someone actually used to real military rank. Silver is a higher rank than gold, not the other way around, which you have. The rank you have for cadet is actualyl a Lieutenant rank, and the rank you have for Lieutenant is actually a Major or Lt. Col. The rank you have for Brigadiar is actually the rank of a Colonel, and the rank you have for General is acually just a Briggadiar general.

I know it'd take a lot to change it, and people are used to it this way, but for anyone with military experience, it can be confusing.
Something like my sig. ?

yes!!

by **flyboy86** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:19 pm

The Neon Peon wrote:
flyboy86 wrote:I know its not 100% military, but its very close. All the descriptions are definitely militray, and the insignias that go along with them do not match at all. A lieutenant should have a single bar, a captain should have two bars, a major should have the oak leaf, a colonel is an eagle, and generals are stars. Also, the premium memberships vs. free seems a little backwards. For example if you're a cadet with a premium membership its a gold bar, which in the military that is a lower rank than a silver bar which is the insignia for a free membership. Its just very conflicting from what I see at work every day lol

Once again, THIS IS NOT THE MILITARY. If you want to see military ranks, I suggest you enlist again. (or for a longer period of time). Some of the names were taken because there are no other good forms of ranks to use.

first of all don't assume I'm enlisted.

I'm not suggesting using the US military ranks completely, but the fact is that you have already chosen to use both the names and insignias of the US military, and its very odd that the name doesn't match the insignia. For example why do you have the insignia of a Major for a Lieutenant? And a Lieutenant for a Cadet? And a Colonel for a Brigadiar general?

by **Timminz** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:40 pm

The owner/creator of the site is Canadian. We don't know shit about military.

by **MrBenn** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:42 pm

BaldAdonis wrote:...There was a thread a while back with the suggestion for a lot more ranks, as well as images to go along with them. Have a look for that if you're interested. But from what I understand, they're not meant to reflect military ranks, just to borrow things that look cool (I mean, is there a rank that gives you a crown?)

This one

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=47578

by **MrBenn** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:46 pm

flyboy86 wrote:...A lieutenant should have a single bar, a captain should have two bars, a major should have the oak leaf, a colonel is an eagle, and generals are stars...

Did you realise that different countries had different insignia? :arrow:

http://www.morh.hr/osrh/data/comp/all_ranks.jpg

by **flyboy86** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:59 pm

MrBenn wrote:
flyboy86 wrote:...A lieutenant should have a single bar, a captain should have two bars, a major should have the oak leaf, a colonel is an eagle, and generals are stars...

Did you realise that different countries had different insignia? http://www.morh.hr/osrh/data/comp/all_ranks.jpg

yes, I understand that different countries have different insignias, of course. I'm an officer in the US military, of course I know that. The fact of the matter though, is that this site chose to use both the names and insignias of US military ranks. The only thing I'm pointing out is that the name doesn't match the insignia.

by **MrBenn** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 7:43 pm

I'll concede the point that the names and insignia are a bit of a mish-mash. Personally I'd prefer the ranks to make more progressive sense, and I'm an advocate of increasing the number of ranks... having said that, it would appear to be a bit of a dead duck suggestion, judging from the general lack of support.

by **Night Strike** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:03 pm

I think the purpose of the ranks are designed to borrow pictures and terms from the US military, but purposefully mix and match them so it doesn't appear to be copied from any one nation. People from around the world play on this site, so there's not much of a reason to push the US military on even more people.

by **SuicidalSnowman** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:20 pm

flyboy wrote:first of all don't assume I'm enlisted.

flyboy wrote:I'm an officer in the US military, of course I know that.

by **porkenbeans** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:23 pm

If the ranks were acorns and jellybeans, I dont think he would have any problems with them. Its that they are in fact miss-matched US military ensignas and ranks. -His grip is legitimate.

by **lancehoch** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:30 pm

porkenbeans wrote:If the ranks were acorns and jellybeans, I dont think he would have any problems with them. Its that they are in fact miss-matched US military ensignas and ranks. -His grip is legitimate.

I believe lack has said in the past that it was not based at all on the American military.

by **flyboy86** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:37 pm

I am by no means pushing the US military. The site creators CHOSE to use CLEARLY use US military rank and insignias. Thats great, fine. My only problem is that they mix-matched the name with the insignia. Its like using a picture of a banana, but calling it an apple, then using a picture of an orange, but calling it a grape.

by **porkenbeans** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:37 pm

lancehoch wrote:
porkenbeans wrote:If the ranks were acorns and jellybeans, I dont think he would have any problems with them. Its that they are in fact miss-matched US military ensignas and ranks. -His grip is legitimate.

I believe lack has said in the past that it was not based at all on the American military.

I dont give a crap what he said. They are Us military, just miss-matched.

by **lancehoch** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:44 pm

porkenbeans wrote:I dont give a crap what he said. They are Us military, just miss-matched.

Well, he kinda runs the site, so what he says is just a tad bit important.

by **keiths31** on Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:51 pm

The symbols used are used by many Forces around the world other than the USA. They are not USA exclusive.

I wouldn't get too upset or worried about the ranks and names. If we did I could say the Crown used shouldn't be used for a Colonel but for a Warrant Officer...the Cadet bar is actually for a 2nd Lieutenant...and the Sword should be accompanied by a Crown for a Brigadier-General, instead of Major and Colonel respectivly.

The system used on CC is arbitrary...nothing to get worked up about. CC is based "loosely" on war and military...and the ranks are also based "loosely" on military ranks.