Military ranks

[brad]

At the end of the day there are only two ranks of soldier that matter to me: live ones and dead ones.

[anotherdevil]

deep man, deep

[Gauddlike]

There's only two types of soldiers in Xenonauts, livies and deadies, which one are you boy?

[Patupi]

(To paraphrase Monty Python)

"Deady... no Livy WAAAAAHHH!" get's thrown in ravine

[Yevgeniy]

X-COM: A Military Analysis.

Personnel and Ranks.

Ranks in X-COM were very simple when compared to the military of nearly, if not all, countries. Initially there were no provisions regarding the rank structure of combat personnel, with all recruits being named 'Rookie', much to the chagrin of the soldiers, who soon started unofficially to establish more ranks in order to reflect battlefield requirements and were later adopted by the force. While regular militaries have more than 20 ranks (from the lowest private to a 5 star general), X-COM only had 6, [Rookie], Squaddie, Sergeant, Captain, Colonel and Commander, each corresponding to the usual classifications of rank : Enlisted; Non-Commissioned Officers; Company Officer; Staff Officer; and General Officer. In order to cap the number of officers present and to reflect the more usual combat deployments a set ratio of officers to enlisted personnel was established.

http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=X-COM:_A_Military_Analysis#Personnel_and_Ranks' rel="external nofollow">

[anotherdevil]

Maybe the starting rank should just be 'naut' (as in naught, or zero), followed by Xenonaut, supernaut, meganaut, ubernaut etc.

or it could be 'noobernaut' =p

[Nfire3]

How about this list?

Meatshield

Cannon Fodder

Didn't get eaten

Survived the heavy plasma to the groin

Major

Armchair General

[mike10019314]

i was wondering if medals could be added to the game? could be based on preformance like ranks are or player controled.

they could give the recever a small moral boost or just be a way of keeping score.

[Sathra]

The medals idea is under consideration as a polishing thing. If we have time, cool. The good news is that our artist who did all the weapon art has returned after a long hiatus and might be up for doing the art for such a thing. No promises though.

From http://www.goldhawkinteractive.com/forums/showthread.php?104-Getting-attached-to-your-soldiers.

[Viscount]

An observation about military ranks:

Whenever there's a story in the newspaper or TV about some special forces guys, you know the type where the reporter interviews a squad about their everyday life in the war and all that, it seems all of them are always sergeants (and they're all equipped with light machine guns). It doesn't matter whether they're US, Russian, whatever; it seems in real life sergeant is the rank for an experienced field soldier. However in movies and computer games the leader of the squad is always at least a lieutenant. And that's the modest way to go. We've seen some shit where four-man squads of captains and majors are led by a colonels.

So in this sense I feel Xenonauts could go either way; being realistic isn't bad, but going over the top wouldn't be more silly than anything else.

[War Games]

I propose a my look at the structure of squad and ranks.

ORGANIZATION:

Combat Section - main tactical unit.

Staff:

Combat Section leader: Corporal;

Combatants: 3x Private or Private (Veteran) - depending on personal achievements.

Combat Group - consists of two Combat Section.

Staff:

Combat Group leader: Sergeant;

Combat Section leaders: 2x Corporals;

Combatants: 6x Private or Private (Veteran) - depending on personal achievements;

P.S.

The Combat Squad structure includes two Combat Groups, each Combat Group has its own index number (1 or 2).

Combat Squad - consists of two Combat Groups. At each base there is one unit which is assigned a permanent base in the sequence number of the establishment;

For example, when creating a first base - № 1, when you create the following database - № 2, and so on (with the possibility of replacing the numbers to the title);

Staff:

Combat Squad Commander: 2nd Lieutenant or 1st Lieutenant or Captain or Major - depending on the success and achievements of the detachment commanded;

Combat Squad Co-commander: 2nd Lieutenant or 1st Lieutenant or Captain - depending on the success and achievements of the group. Available after when the Combat Squad Commander received promotion rank of 1st Lieutenant;

Combat Squad leader: Master Sergeant or Master Sergeant (Veteran) - depending on personal achievements;

Combat Group leaders: 2x Sergeants;

Combat Section leaders: 4x Corporals;

Combatants: 12x Private or Private (Veteran) - depending on personal achievements.

RANKS:

Rookie - Recruite.

Private - The soldier who ended "Basic Training". The rank is assigned for participation in one combat missions (without increasing the characteristics of both in "Basic Training").

Private (Veteran) - The soldiers served with rank of Private at least one year and has 100 combat missions;

Corporal - Combat Section leader. The rank is assigned by player to the soldier in rank of Private in the presence of at least 20 combat missions (promotion to the rank Corporal can be assigned Private (Veteran));

Sergeant - Combat Group leader. The rank is assigned by player to the soldier in rank of Corporal in the presence of 60 combat missions;

Master Sergeant - Combat Squad leader (one in Combat Squad). The rank is assigned by player to the soldier in rank of Sergeant in the presence of at least 200 combat missions;

Master Sergeant (Veteran) - The rank is assigned to the soldiers served with rank of Master Sergeant at least one year and has 400 combat missions;

2nd Lieutenant - Soldiers assigned by player to the position in the Combat Squad Commander and Combat Squad Co-commander. (Selected soldiers undergoing officer training, such as one week).

Ability appoint a Co-commander appears only after receiving the commander of combat squad rank of 1st Lieutenant;

1st Lieutenant - This rank officer gets for successes and achievements detachment in which he is serves and commanding;

Captain - This rank officer gets for successes and achievements detachment in which he is serves and commanding (is maximum for the Co-commander of Combat Squad);

Major - This rank receives the commander of Combat Squad for the successes and achievements detachment, which he commanded (is maximum for the Commander of Combat Squad).

Sorry for my bad english, i'm used a translator.

[Adrian]

I'd propose keeping it simple. A recruit rank for new, unexperienced men, the rookie of the original game. Then, like X-Com, combat experience would give them a promotion. Anything after that is pyramidal and based on numbers with promotions only made as an opening occurs. An interesting addition would be to allow the player to choose who fills that slot. So, for instance, when you get in new recruits you are alerted by the game that promotions are available, a promotion button will appear over their stats which you press to move them onto the next rank.

I'd propose you don't use corporal as the title for the rank after a basic recruit as it implies some level of command whereas the promotion to this rank denotes combat experience. This way you can have a squad of hardened veterans without all of them being commanders.

If you want to give the impression that these recruits are soldiers who have already distinguished themselves I wouldn't use Private or Corporal as ranks. I would use Recruit and Xenonaught. A Xenonaught being someone who has proved themself in combat and are a respected part of the team.

[Max_Caine]

War Games, what is the reason that you have made this proposal? Why are you unhappy with the current rank structure? What benefits do you feel your complicated rank structure brings to the game? Admittedly it doesn't "make sense" that there are umpty-tumpty sargeants when they rank up enough, but how would you demonstrate the difference between a rookie, a regular and a veteran otherwise? And the difference between a veteran and a long-term veteran? Because if your rank structure brings no tangible benefit, then why have it in the first place?

[crusherven]

Keep it simple IMO. I'd prefer to see mostly enlisted ranks and very few officers, but any linear rank structure that reflects experience and doesn't get top-heavy will be fine. If we wanted realism, the vast majority of our troops would remain some version of private or specialist or lance-corporal throughout the entire game with a few sergeants and an officer or two. I liked the system in XCOM and anything similar will make me happy.

[Kaguya]

+1 for keeping it simple. EU had it done nice and simple, realistic or not. Definitely like limits on all the ranks it has.

If there's anything to improve, it might be manual promotions, but that's not mandatory to me atleast.

[Gauddlike]

I would base promotions on combat experience.

When you have an opening at a rank the experience of all the troops at the lower rank is looked at and the highest is used.

When they get promoted their experience is set back to whatever the minimum for that rank is.

Mainly this is just to prevent that squaddie you left in a base somewhere ending up as your commander even though he has only ever been on one mission.

The troops you use the most will be likely to end up as your higher ranks, even if they were rookies to start with.

[War Games]

War Games, what is the reason that you have made this proposal? Why are you unhappy with the current rank structure? What benefits do you feel your complicated rank structure brings to the game? Admittedly it doesn't "make sense" that there are umpty-tumpty sargeants when they rank up enough, but how would you demonstrate the difference between a rookie, a regular and a veteran otherwise? And the difference between a veteran and a long-term veteran? Because if your rank structure brings no tangible benefit, then why have it in the first place?

Yes, the current system is not interesting - for three months of game time (about 20 missions per soldier) - I got six captains.

I proposed structure which is not complicated, because it contains a specific number of positions that are key.

Any officer rank has the responsibility for subordinates and position. In my structure such positions two - Co-commander and Commander.

Any positions of junior commanders and team leaders - thegas key positions in tactical combat commands. In my structure such positions also have.

Ordinary soldiers - have the primary load, they are the pool for future junior commanders and team leaders, the best of them - may be elevated by player.

The difference between Private and Private (Veteran) in follows:

Private - rank who receives a rookie after the first fight, or after ended the "Basic Training".

Private (Veteran) - the rank that has the same Private, not receiving the promotion, but having a good combat experience.

The difference between Master Sergeant or Master Sergeant (Veteran) in follows:

All the exact same as in the cases of Private and Private (Veteran), but then there is the idea of ​​an old military veteran.

Master Sergeant (Veteran) is the maximum for any xenonaut except for officers (which in the detachment only two).

In my proposal - promotion for the officers depends on the successes and achievements detachment in which he is serves and commanding - Ie will display the player's real progress in the game.

Developers will have to think about what conditions are optimal for this purpose.

Ranks Corporal, Sergeant and Master Sergeant (in my proposal) gives player as soon as certain conditions are fulfilled.

Ranks Private, Private (Veteran) and Master Sergeant (Veteran) (in my proposal)is assigned automatically as soon as certain conditions are fulfilled.

Master Sergeant (Veteran) - will be only one on the whole detachment.

Sorry for my bad english, i'm used a translator.

[Gauddlike]

I am not sure what you mean by detachment.

For example:

Do you mean you would only be able to put one Master Sergeant (V) on your dropship?

Or did you mean you would only ever have one?

That feels like a very complicated mechanism that is actually less varied than the one you want to replace.

You would be very likely to end up with almost everyone at the same rank with no real visible progression for your troops.

[Gorlom]

Yes, the current system is not interesting - for three months of game time (about 20 missions per soldier) - I got six captains.

I proposed structure which is not complicated, because it contains a specific number of positions that are key.

I disagree with you. I find your structure is both complicated and not very interesting. I have never done military service so that might be one reason I don't find it interesting.

Imo the promotions should be in recognition of service and more akin to levels then positions within a chain of command. Everyone is takeing orders from the unknown commander in the sky anyways so what is the point of haveing a pyramid structure for the ranks?

I like the system where you can have 6 captains.

Would the possibility of getting 6 "high ranking" guys be more acceptable if they were called something more fantasy/scifi oriented?

Maybe a throwback to ranks used in the midevil times? Page, squire, flag bearer, footman, armsman, knight, lancer, curassier or whatever you could come up with.

Other suggestions: (not neccisarily in order) Millitia, Peacekeeper, Enforcer, Earthguard, Bouncer, Protector, Saviour.

[War Games]

I am not sure what you mean by detachment.

For example:

Do you mean you would only be able to put one Master Sergeant (V) on your dropship?

Or did you mean you would only ever have one?

That feels like a very complicated mechanism that is actually less varied than the one you want to replace.

You would be very likely to end up with almost everyone at the same rank with no real visible progression for your troops.

I mean one Master Sergeant or Master Sergeant (Veteran) per Combat Squad (on Base).

See my first post about the proposed structure.

In the group, which you form for mission, may include any of the soldiers (any rank) who will be available in Combat Squad (on Base).

Progressive merits of any soldier from your unit - a medal and characteristics.

Rank - should determine the function its owner.

Otherwise we get a subdivision of the generals and officers.

[War Games]

I disagree with you. I find your structure is both complicated and not very interesting. I have never done military service so that might be one reason I don't find it interesting.

Imo the promotions should be in recognition of service and more akin to levels then positions within a chain of command. Everyone is takeing orders from the unknown commander in the sky anyways so what is the point of haveing a pyramid structure for the ranks?

I like the system where you can have 6 captains.

Would the possibility of getting 6 "high ranking" guys be more acceptable if they were called something more fantasy/scifi oriented?

Maybe a throwback to ranks used in the midevil times? Page, squire, flag bearer, footman, armsman, knight, lancer, curassier or whatever you could come up with.

Other suggestions: (not neccisarily in order) Millitia, Peacekeeper, Enforcer, Earthguard, Bouncer, Protector, Saviour.

Your proposal is clear ...

Can be added the elves and goblins - that would get the game, which so many now.

[Gorlom]

Ooooh sarcasm.

meh

[Buzzles]

Yes, the current system is not interesting - for three months of game time (about 20 missions per soldier) - I got six captains.

Did you happen to notice the Lieutenant rank was skipped at all?

[War Games]

Did you happen to notice the Lieutenant rank was skipped at all?

After Sergeant - promotion to the Captain ...

[Xitax]

Has anyone floated the idea of requiring an "OCS" training course to advance a soldier to officer rank?