Should ARMA III have a better ranking system?

[ArmyCorps 10]

Hello!

So, i've been thinking over this idea for quite awhile and wanted to share it with you guys. Should ARMA III have a better ranking system? Such as, in the editor, in the field "Rank" you have a limited number of ranks: Private Corporal Sergeant Lieutenant Captain Major and Colonel, these are the ranks available in ARMA 3 and other ARMA's. So what i've been thinking of is, What if i wanted to make an advanced Chain of Command for my missions? So instead of "Lieutenant" i could be a 2nd or 1st Lieutenant. Sergeant, Staff Sergeant etc.. What do you guys think? Should it stay the same? Or would you like to see an advanced rank system?

[NeMeSiS 11]

In practice it is only used to make sure who gets command if the leader dies, and back in OFP groups lead by high ranks would flee less often, possibly still the case, though I haven't checked it.

Considering that is the only purpose of the rank feature, I don't think we need any more.

[-Coulum- 35]

until real chain of command is implemented ie. where a platoon leader leads several squad leaders, who lead several team leaders who lead a couple soldiers, I see no real need for more ranks. Of course I wouldn't complain if there were, but it honestly I rarely touch the ranks of units in the editor anyways.

[viper[cww] 14]

Since the campaign primarily evolves around a british soldier, they should use the proper british ranking system imo.

[johncage 30]

where'd you get that information?

[kocrachon 2]

;2345864']Since the campaign primarily evolves around a british soldier' date=' they should use the proper british ranking system imo.[/quote']

But the game is Based on NATO forces, which has a lot more US Rank influence in it... And the game has a general more US influence over all. Most of the known assets have US background to them, such as the guns being similar to the Remington ACR, and the comanche, etc etc.

[viper[cww] 14]

where'd you get that information?

During the singleplayer campaign, the player will take the role of a British Special Forces soldier, Captain Scott Miller. Initially, the player must survive on their own after friendly forces are defeated in a failed NATO operation. During the campaign, the player will face everything from lone wolf infiltration missions to the commanding of large scale armored operations. The player will be able to choose different objectives and weaponry (such as UAVs, artillery, and air support) according to their play style.

Taken from the wiki which has been available since ArmA 3 was announced, have you been hiding under a rock?

But the game is Based on NATO forces, which has a lot more US Rank influence in it... And the game has a general more US influence over all. Most of the known assets have US background to them, such as the guns being similar to the Remington ACR, and the comanche, etc etc.

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/197171_10151527368327629_266186290_n.jpg

NATO is a lot more then just US, US makes up a small part of many many countries within NATO, FYI I am British not European (If that's what you were getting at regarding my last comment).

______

At least I do hope BIS will be focusing on s different primary nation for ArmA 3, god knows they've used the US enough as is. Which leads me on to the units themselves, are they actually noted as being US? I think they're labelled as Blue in the editor. Equipment means nothing since it's the future.

Edited March 19, 2013 by VIPER[CWW]

[jsmuk 13]

There's a nice little feature in VBS2 that I'd love in ArmA3. Custom ranks per unit (or faction I can't tell). Basically if you select (for example) a British unit you can chose from British ranks, if you select another country you get a different selection of ranks.

I think this would help everyone, especially if its easy to customise so addon makers can chose whatever rank structure they like.

[Ragingbear505 10]

;2345937']During the singleplayer campaign' date=' the player will take the role of a British Special Forces soldier, Captain Scott Miller. Initially, the player must survive on their own after friendly forces are defeated in a failed NATO operation. During the campaign, the player will face everything from lone wolf infiltration missions to the commanding of large scale armored operations. The player will be able to choose different objectives and weaponry (such as UAVs, artillery, and air support) according to their play style.

Taken from the wiki which has been available since ArmA 3 was announced, have you been hiding under a rock?

NATO is a lot more then just US, US makes up a small part of many many countries within NATO, FYI I am British not European (If that's what you were getting at regarding my last comment).

______

At least I do hope BIS will be focusing on s different primary nation for ArmA 3, god knows they've used the US enough as is. Which leads me on to the units themselves, are they actually noted as being US? I think they're labelled as Blue in the editor. Equipment means nothing since it's the future.

Well I wouldn't say a small part. The US represents about 70% of NATO's funding and about 40% of its armed forces. Still I was under the impression that Arma 3 was a Euro-centric conflict with the US acting in a supporting role. According to the Wiki Bluefor is the US 7th Infantry Division (7th US Army Europe). Of course that's just the lore tidbit for the campaign. Given the future tech it's pretty hard to definitively distinguish much of anything we've seen so far as specifically American.

[zoog 18]

Hello!

So, i've been thinking over this idea for quite awhile and wanted to share it with you guys. Should ARMA III have a better ranking system? Such as, in the editor, in the field "Rank" you have a limited number of ranks: Private Corporal Sergeant Lieutenant Captain Major and Colonel, these are the ranks available in ARMA 3 and other ARMA's. So what i've been thinking of is, What if i wanted to make an advanced Chain of Command for my missions? So instead of "Lieutenant" i could be a 2nd or 1st Lieutenant. Sergeant, Staff Sergeant etc.. What do you guys think? Should it stay the same? Or would you like to see an advanced rank system?

You can create all of these extra ranks by renaming the slots in multiplayer. Like others mentioned, the ranks in the editor are just about how AI takes command and who listens to whom (as far as I know). You can make a complete custom chain of command using the Name option of the playable units which will be displayed in the slot screen. When using this system, anything is possible :) We do it with our custom missions as well. You can make a whole brigade if you want, with HQ, platoon commanders, staff sergeants, 1st lieutenant, 2nd lieutenant and whatever else you need. The editor ranks are just about how the AI works under the hood IMO.

Edited March 19, 2013 by zoog

[LordJarhead 1726]

Actually dont we have a ranking system by showing the little symbols on their unit icon?

LJ

[Lauxman 10]

British military rank system makes no sense. Every regiment has their own style. In the US Army, a Private is a Private. In the British Army, a Private can be a Sapper, a Lancer, a Guardsman, who knows. Plus how do you know whether to call the Company Sergeants Major "Sir" or "Sergeant-Major"?

[andersson 285]

;2345937']' date='... FYI I am British not European.[/quote']

Sorry for OT, but as British you are European and UK is in addition also a part of the EU (the flag on the picture).