Rank Insignias

by **reaper** on Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:41 pm

the rankings wrong
2 stripes is Corporal
3 is Sergeant
4 is Lieutenant

by **gavin_sidhu** on Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:32 am

i dont think many people care really. i always forget what rank i am, i just describe its picture.

Heres an idea, in the emotions section of the forum there should be a smilee of each of the ranks.

by **MeDeFe** on Wed Aug 09, 2006 3:45 pm

I only know that I've got too many points for my rank, and that it will take half an eternity for me to get the necessary games for a promo.

by **OnlyAmbrose** on Sun Jul 01, 2007 4:28 pm

<Subject>:

* Make the ranks a bit more accuarte

<Body>:

Suggestion/specifics: Not that it makes a huge difference, but in real militaries I don't think there's such a thing as a "Sergeant 1st class" or "Corporal first class". So... Why not Change those ranks to real ones? For instance, make the regular corporal (with 2 stripes) into Lance Corporal, then make the one with 2 stripes and a diamond Corporal. For the sergeants, keep the regular 3-striped one as it is, and simply make the 3-stripes-with-diamond into First Sergeant or even Master Sergeant.

Why it is needed: It's not really a big deal, it would just be cooler if the ranks were accurate. "First class" just gets a bit redundant.

On the other hand, this would be ridiculously easy to change, so it's not like it's taking time from where you could be doing something more productive.

Priority: 1.

by **BobHacket** on Sun Jul 01, 2007 4:36 pm

Such a good point, if the ranks were correct maybe it would make the site seem more sophisticated... :lol:

by **OnlyAmbrose** on Tue Jul 03, 2007 6:53 pm

b-b-b-bump

by **lackattack** on Tue Jul 03, 2007 7:49 pm

Okay, I'm adding a poll

by **pancakemix** on Tue Jul 03, 2007 7:57 pm

I really don't care if I'm a Corporal or a Corporal First Class as long as everyone knows my score falls between 1200 and 1400.

by **sully800** on Tue Jul 03, 2007 8:35 pm

OnlyAmbrose wrote:Why it is needed: It's not really a big deal, it would just be cooler if the ranks were accurate. "First class" just gets a bit redundant.

The redundancy is there for a reason: To help people remember the order of the ranks! While the real titles of 'lance corporal' or 'master sergeant' may provide some uniqueness, it also makes the scoring system less intuitive because it doesn't follow a pattern.

Keep in mind that while CC's ranks are based on military ranks, they do not replicate any sytem exactly, nor are they meant to. While brigadier is a military title, I don't believe its a stand alone rank in any branch (its used in cases such as 'brigadier general' to my understanding). And the symbols themselves are a conglomerate of actual insignia that match the titles, mismatched insignia and titles, as well as some completely original insignia.

I am in favor of retaining the 'first class' titles because it provides uniformity which makes the ranks easier to learn and remember.

by **Edward** on Tue Jul 03, 2007 10:08 pm

The real rank names you are using are from what? Military, Navy, Marines? And I think there are differences between British ranks and American ranks. I had a link to a web site that had detailed info on the many kinds of ranks but I lost it.

by **OnlyAmbrose** on Wed Jul 04, 2007 1:47 am

Edward wrote:The real rank names you are using are from what? Military, Navy, Marines? And I think there are differences between British ranks and American ranks. I had a link to a web site that had detailed info on the many kinds of ranks but I lost it.

So far as I know, Lance Corporal is only a rank in the Marine Corps- it comes before Corporal and after PFC. Could be wrong about it being exclusive to the USMC, but Navy and Marine ranks are the only ones I know. But then, it's the only other type of "corporal" that I'm aware of, so it seems to fit fine.

As to the whole redundancy issue, the rank insignia themselves demonstrate which is higher. No one is going to mistake the difference between two-chevrons and two-chevrons-plus-a-diamond. The names just add authenticity.

Sure, some of the ranks are fake, and others are left out, but besides the two in question, they're all at least based on real ranks.

Again, this isn't a huge issue, I just think it would be cool.

by **SirSebstar** on Wed Jul 04, 2007 2:18 am

OnlyAmbrose wrote:
Suggestion/specifics: Not that it makes a huge difference, but in real militaries I don't think there's such a thing as a "Sergeant 1st class" or "Corporal first class". ..................t[/b].

[

ehb yes, there is such a thing, In the Dutch Royal Airforce and in the regular army (but not in the navy or marines)to be exact. Sergeant, Sergeant 1st Class, and Corporal 1st class is really existing ranks.

by **Spritzking** on Wed Jul 04, 2007 2:33 am

yeah sebaster is right. i have a friend that is actually sergeant first class

why not surrender to the dutch system? We have a lot more then just some ranks and tullips.

by **AK_iceman** on Wed Jul 04, 2007 3:18 am

Doesn't really matter much to me, but we spent quite a bit of time putting the current rank system together, so I'd like to leave it as is for a while longer. Maybe when we do the next rank update we can change the names again, but IMO there's more important updates that can be worked on in the meantime.

by **MeDeFe** on Wed Jul 04, 2007 4:02 am

We already had this discussion.

This Is A Online Gaming Site That Has No Relation Whatsoever To Real World Armies And Military Ranks.

There is no "more" or "less" accurate. We could also assign ranks by alphabetical order, it wouldn't make any difference. Come to think of it, it would be really easy to remember the order in which they come if the ranks were simply called "A", "B", "C" and so on. And we could have a special rank "1" for whoever's highest on the scoreboard.
Yes, maybe I should make a suggestion on the forum and see what people think.

by **OnlyAmbrose** on Wed Jul 04, 2007 7:00 pm

AK_iceman wrote:Doesn't really matter much to me, but we spent quite a bit of time putting the current rank system together, so I'd like to leave it as is for a while longer. Maybe when we do the next rank update we can change the names again, but IMO there's more important updates that can be worked on in the meantime.

It's not a new system, just a change in names.

MeDeFe wrote:We already had this discussion.

This Is A Online Gaming Site That Has No Relation Whatsoever To Real World Armies And Military Ranks.

There is no "more" or "less" accurate. We could also assign ranks by alphabetical order, it wouldn't make any difference. Come to think of it, it would be really easy to remember the order in which they come if the ranks were simply called "A", "B", "C" and so on. And we could have a special rank "1" for whoever's highest on the scoreboard.

Does it really matter, mathematically, what the ranks are? No, of course not. We could reverse it and it would mean the same thing.

Ranks are there for an element of fun. And according to this poll, a majority of players would find it more fun with less redundancy and more creativity.

by **sully800** on Wed Jul 04, 2007 9:02 pm

The thing that I really don't like (at least in how you described it) is that staff sergeant is above regular sergeant, but lance corporal is below regular corporal. If I am misreading the poll question forgive me, but I think that this would be exceessively confusing.

I don't mind changing first class to 'lance' or 'staff' as the case may be, but I think those should always be the higher of their respective ranks, and match with the red/blue diamond on top of the chevrons. Having a mix of higher and lower ranks as I think you are suggesting would create a lot of confusion, even if it mirrors the actual military ranks.

by **OnlyAmbrose** on Sat Jul 07, 2007 1:54 pm

sully800 wrote:The thing that I really don't like (at least in how you described it) is that staff sergeant is above regular sergeant, but lance corporal is below regular corporal. If I am misreading the poll question forgive me, but I think that this would be exceessively confusing.

I don't mind changing first class to 'lance' or 'staff' as the case may be, but I think those should always be the higher of their respective ranks, and match with the red/blue diamond on top of the chevrons. Having a mix of higher and lower ranks as I think you are suggesting would create a lot of confusion, even if it mirrors the actual military ranks.

Not really confusing- it's just how it is. USMC ranks (which is what I was basing my suggestion off of) are as follows (ranks I propose we use are bolded)-

JUNIOR ENLISTED
E-1....Private
E-2....Private First Class
E-3....Lance Corporal

NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICERS
E-4....Corporal
E-5....Sergeant
E-6....Staff Sergeant
E-7....Gunnery Sergeant
E-8....Master Sergeant / First Sergeant
E-9....Sergeant Major / Master Gunnery Sergeant

Not very confusing at all to simply have Lance Corporal be below Corporal and Sergeant to be below Master Sergeant (or whatever type of sergeant)

And who knows? People might learn something!

Anyways, I think the poll results speak for themselves

by **alex_white101** on Sat Jul 07, 2007 2:09 pm

who cares just gain enough points and become conqueror then u dont have to worry about rank names :lol:

by **Rocketry** on Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:04 pm

i wouldent find this rank system hard to follow. a lance corporal is obviously better than a corporal. any idiot could tell that.........

i voted yes

by **OnlyAmbrose** on Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:21 pm

Rocketry wrote:i wouldent find this rank system hard to follow. a lance corporal is obviously better than a corporal. i voted yes

ROFL

Lance Corporal is WORSE than corporal, mate

Hope that doesn't change your vote :lol:

edit- for clarity on this page, here's the order again:

(ranks I propose we use are bolded)-

JUNIOR ENLISTED
E-1....Private
E-2....Private First Class
E-3....Lance Corporal

NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICERS
E-4....Corporal
E-5....Sergeant
E-6....Staff Sergeant
E-7....Gunnery Sergeant
E-8....Master Sergeant / First Sergeant
E-9....Sergeant Major / Master Gunnery Sergeant

by **Rocketry** on Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:28 pm

OnlyAmbrose wrote:
Rocketry wrote:i wouldent find this rank system hard to follow. a lance corporal is obviously better than a corporal. i voted yes

ROFL

Lance Corporal is WORSE than corporal, mate

Hope that doesn't change your vote

edit- for clarity on this page, here's the order again:

(ranks I propose we use are bolded)-

JUNIOR ENLISTED
E-1....Private
E-2....Private First Class
E-3....Lance Corporal

NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICERS
E-4....Corporal
E-5....Sergeant
E-6....Staff Sergeant
E-7....Gunnery Sergeant
E-8....Master Sergeant / First Sergeant
E-9....Sergeant Major / Master Gunnery Sergeant

umm yeah....joke....demonstrated by the sarcasm in "obviously"

so my vote reamins the same

i will edit to make it clearer

by **OnlyAmbrose** on Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:58 pm

got it, my bad

by **Rocketry** on Sat Jul 07, 2007 6:12 pm

OnlyAmbrose wrote:got it, my bad

no prob lol

by **Tom2891** on Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:58 am

I don't get why the lieutenant insignia is a major (for premium) and lt. col (for free) insignia. Also the rank of cook is weird...i think it should be changed...a cook really isn't a rank, more of an MOS.

Another idea...to allow players to hold rank longer, I think once you achieve a rank you enter a climb towards the next rank. You can earn and lost points but you lose points enough to bring you back to the beginning of the climb but you won't lose your current rank. Just an idea.

Rank Insignias

ranking

Improved Rank Names

Re: Improved Rank Names

From what armed forces are you taking this info.

Re: From what armed forces are you taking this info.

Re: Improved Rank Names

Rank Insignias

Who is online