Elite: Dangerous rank changes
- Thread starter Pyros
- Start date
![[VR] Shadowman](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/16/16608.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
Hmm. We know the top 3 ranks are reserved for those in the Elite Federation of Pilots, so I wonder if Master is perhaps meant as an Elite equivalent for non-EfoP? Not sure how that works, just a thought.
I'm not sure what's your problem here. Obviously a master of something is higher than someone who's merely an expert in the field. Expert = high level of competency or knowledge in something. Master = highest level of competency.
Dangerous and Deadly don't really mean anything in that respect, but surely they sound badass so I have no trouble imagining they're even more masterer than master.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
I would not say I hate them but certainly prefer the originals. Also to me they don't make sense.... master and expert sound better than dangerous in a ladder hierarchy IMO.
Also we have 1 less level now
Apparently, yes and no.
The list I posted initially came out of http://wiki.alioth.net/index.php/Elite_Rankings, but afaik remember and cross check, you are correct as the original Elite didn't have the "below average" rank.
But it wasn't necessarily 9 ranks either. According to Ian Bell website, the Arc version had an extra rank - Very Deadly - just below Elite, raising the total to 10.
Anyway, I room the bold move of creating an alternative ranking system (probably a naïf one
), but my laptop battery ran out
Last edited:
The whole point of the new system is that you DON'T need to have separate rankings and you can work your way up to Elite anyway you choose, separating them out just means everyone will want to get all the rankings and the separation becomes meaningless
Besides, try telling the real power in our world that being a great combat pilot makes you more dangerous than someone with a shed load of money and trading contacts and they'll laugh in your face.
Dangerous or Deadly miners and traders can afford to hire pilots by the bucket load, it wont matter how Elite you are if they have half a dozen escorts in expensive fighters watching their backs.
Besides, try telling the real power in our world that being a great combat pilot makes you more dangerous than someone with a shed load of money and trading contacts and they'll laugh in your face.
Dangerous or Deadly miners and traders can afford to hire pilots by the bucket load, it wont matter how Elite you are if they have half a dozen escorts in expensive fighters watching their backs.
I'm fairly sure Master was an Imperial title in FE2 / FFE http://mufossa.dream-ware.co.uk/ranks.html
Otherwise, I am OK with the new ranks.
Otherwise, I am OK with the new ranks.
Last edited:
The separation somehow looked a lot cleaner and more wholesome, compared to hacking two separate playstyles together, no matter how badly it shows.
I have no problems with the new rankings.
certainly not if their handled like before.
they only make clear how much time a player plays.
unless this has changed , witch is maybe a good idea.
deducting deaths from your level would be a proper one I think.
what I do find open for improvement is how they look.
they are beautiful but to hard to distinguish
'Unknown' sounds alright jabokai...
I don't care much for ranking at all, but if we must have such a thing to differentiate the monkeys from each other, then I prefer the old system, but would like to see 'poor' replaced by novice.
The reason for this is that someone who starts playing the game is not necessarily poor in what he is doing, he is just starting to climb the ranks.
The reason for this is that someone who starts playing the game is not necessarily poor in what he is doing, he is just starting to climb the ranks.
That doesn't sound right. They'd be harmless when they begin and poor would be several ranks higher. I honestly don't know why people have a problem with it as a rank, it's not implying you're poor at playing. You have to put it into context.
If you don't like ranking at all, I fear you're missing the point a little.
Oh, and what I previously neglected to point out was that poor and average are purely descriptive of skill, while novice, expert and master actually sound more like ranks you would hold in an organisation.
Perhaps this reflects a change in how the Elite Federation of Pilots is present in the gameplay, and in the visible politics of the ingame universe.
Previously it was little more than a system of progression.
Perhaps this reflects a change in how the Elite Federation of Pilots is present in the gameplay, and in the visible politics of the ingame universe.
Previously it was little more than a system of progression.
The recently released newsletter #22 brought us some change in the traditional Elite ranks ("Federation of Pilots ranks"):
A few thoughts about the change:
- One less rank (cpt obvious here
- Some "middle tier" ranks disappeared/Competent was quite demoted
- New ranks, especially the "Master" seem to be a bit oddly placed
I agree that some of the rankings are oddly placed. I think it would have made more sense (or it does to me anyway
) to have the rankings as Novice
Harmless
Mostly Harmless
Competent
Dangerous
Expert
Deadly
Master
Elite
I think Novice should be first because to me that would suggest that you have absolutely no experience in a spaceship and are quite frankly hopeless at both piloting and combat.
Expert suggests to me that although you are a good pilot and can handle your ship and weapons quite well but there is still room to improve your overall skills.
It is the rankings of Deadly & Master that I have a problem with though if I am honest. I really don't see what the difference is in these 2 rankings. They just seem too similar to me.
If they mistake an explosives detonator for a Ketchup bottle?How is one a Dangerous Miner
Expert and master do not make any sense in the progression, their positioning before dangerous is forced at best.
Two separate rankings for combat and non-combat make more sense.
The old ranking list was great. Keep it for combat ranking. Maybe replace poor with novice as suggested before.
IMO, only non-combat ranking should have expert and master and keep dangerous for combat ranks where it really belongs.
Being dangerous because I mined x thousand asteroids or dangerous because I crashed x thousand markets, just makes the rank loose it's flavor.
Edit: Forgot about Deadly which has no place whatsoever in a non-combat ranking list.
Two separate rankings for combat and non-combat make more sense.
The old ranking list was great. Keep it for combat ranking. Maybe replace poor with novice as suggested before.
IMO, only non-combat ranking should have expert and master and keep dangerous for combat ranks where it really belongs.
Being dangerous because I mined x thousand asteroids or dangerous because I crashed x thousand markets, just makes the rank loose it's flavor.
Edit: Forgot about Deadly which has no place whatsoever in a non-combat ranking list.
Last edited: