Frontier's Opinion on Federation/Imperial rank system

Lacho78 · Sep 6, 2016

Hi all,

I've been trying to work my way up the Federation ranks and was wondering if FDev has given an opinion on the Imperial and Federation ranking system in the game, surely the way it is now can't be the intended system.

Missions that can take upwards of 30 minutes only give a measly 1 or 2 percent towards the next rank. It feels like the only really viable(/not extremely time consuming) way to rank up is through donation missions (17 Draconis and such), donation missions really take away from the gameplay and immersion since you are basically paying upwards of 300 million credits to enter the top tier of the Federal Ranks. I personally think that ranking up should consist of winging up with Federal/Imperial AI ships (or even other players) and attacking the enemy or in some way hindering the opposite faction's ability to fight.

But that's just my take on it, I'm more interested in hearing what the system is supposed to feel like and compose of from the perspective of an official FDev employee.

racer1 · Sep 6, 2016

It is supposed to take a long time just like the 3 main ranks do. If you're a regular mission runner your rank increases steadily over time.

Stacking data delivery missions with only a small number of destinations is the most efficient route that doesn't cost a fortune.

It would be nice to see rank increase via methods other than missions though.

Rowander · Sep 6, 2016

Ranking now is a much more focused and "realistic" (if you can call it that) than it used to be. After Beta, you could rank to king in about 6 hours played. Now, it takes a serious effort, and some days of heavy mission running, or an indecent amount of cash.

I've done it last week, and it took me 5 days for the last 3 ranks, and that's including around 80 million in donation missions (basically, all the money received from the missions I was running, was used on charity missions).

All in all, it's better than it was, but as Racer1 says, it would be nice to increase ranks via combat, trading or exploring, too.

Helfar · Sep 6, 2016

Have to say I feel your pain, half way through Post Commander, and feeling the grind, BUT it shouldnt; be possible to get from recruit too rear admiral in a week

BigBANGtheory [VR] · Sep 6, 2016

The problem as I see it is that there is little to no relation between the reputation rewards and the effort or skill expended. To draw an over dramatic but probably true example of this you could be trying to gain navy rank for say the Feds, drop into a combat zone take out an Imperial battlegroup in a contested system and receive no more reputation reward than doing a data delivery mission 1 jump away. I think what FDev have done is capped the rate at which you can gain reputation as a knee jerk reaction to too many players gaining the highest navy ranks too soon i.e. they intend to use the ranks in the future (possibly more ships) but they don't want players getting there yet.

I'd be interested to hear the FDev point of view too, they don't like to talk about this area much though I've noticed it gets ignored in Q&A which to me says they know its a weak system. What they should do imho is just admit there's a compromise solution in place atm and paint a picture of how they would like it to be in the future. Then as a player you can decide to postpone your efforts (as I am doing with Engineers until 2.2) rather than hit the wall of frustration.

TBH its not too bad when you've figured out an efficient means to do it, but the gameplay isn't what it should be it does feel very forced and exploitative.

I'm at Rear Admiral & Prince mostly post 2.1 ranking so I know the topic very well

Dipso · Sep 6, 2016

As it stands now its better not to focus on it and just keep doing interesting missions for the right factions and let the naval ranks just come naturally as you progress doing the things you find interesting. Right now I'm just building up my reputation with federal factions in my neighborhood and my naval rank progresses slow and steady as a result of that. Once you get a good reputation with several minor factions you start to see missions that actually pay (relatively) decent especially when you get several missions in the same systems.

In the longer term FD has expressed interest in a more career-like progression through the ranks. (I would imagine with special military mission givers etc...) Maybe we might see more of this if the war that is brewing between feds and empire gets going.

PhanttoM · Sep 6, 2016

It's completely out of whack right now. Especially on the risk/reward and time/rank-gain aspect.

• Taking a oneway A-to-B, shortrange and lowrisk data delivery mission (around 5 minutes) can give you 1% per mission.

• Taking a highlevel combat zone mission with extreme risk to kill over 72 ships (can take between 1-3 hours depending on what ship the player is flying) can give less than 1% per mission.

wenkman · Sep 6, 2016

well i'm currently ranking in the empire, and last rank to baron....

i do it via donations and data delivery and must say it IS dull..... but the feeling of achievement after completing definitely is there....

so, bad thing to do to get the feeling of accomplishment? it's not perfect but does work for me.

Wasp0 · Sep 6, 2016

Took me 15 years to get to Chief Petty Officer (Royal Navy)

So what's a few months guys?

Agony_Aunt · Sep 6, 2016

When the game was launched, i was expecting it would take about a year of working for a faction to reach the top rank if you steadily kept doing stuff for your faction.

Then there were various tweaks, including the one around 1.3 which enabled people to get top rank in a few days, then they dialed it back so top rank took even longer to get. At the same time, they added several more (silly) ranks.

I'm a bit confused by all this. But hey, to my mind, the grind isn't the main problem. Its possible to get up those ranks if you remain dedicated. Its how you can simultaneously hold ranks for both. Yeah, I know the lore reason, but i do hope they revisit this at some point, possibly when they are looking to add Alliance ranks (if ever) and force people to choose where their loyalties lie.

sicksuntzu · Sep 6, 2016

Currently ranking up myself, was thinking about buying the clipper as i get rank for that on my next ding, Thing is there is not much point in getting it as it would be a sideways move from a python, maybe it should be made available at a much lower rank, so it will still have a use.

As to the ranking process itself well i kind of agree it should take a while, but i also feel that if someone is ready to put in the grind and do say a solid week or two of mission stacking data runs and such then fair play to them. What would be nice is a more interesting way to farm ranks, maybe a naval CG, or tie it in to the (hopefully soon coming) alien invasion or the impending war with rep vs emp. These activities could generate a kind of ranking bonus multiplier, the reasoning being in times of war and conflict more people die, so more people are promoted say vs peace time.

I know i would find it a lot more fun to be waging a war or fighting of green meanies.

Rowander · Sep 6, 2016

PhanttoM said:
It's completely out of whack right now. Especially on the risk/reward and time/rank-gain aspect.

• Taking a oneway A-to-B, shortrange and lowrisk data delivery mission (around 5 minutes) can give you 1% per mission.

• Taking a highlevel combat zone mission with extreme risk to kill over 72 ships (can take between 1-3 hours depending on what ship the player is flying) can give less than 1% per mission.

I don't know about the combat zone missions, but data delivery missions DEFINETLY don't give 1% per mission, not even close. From Count on, it's more like 1% per 5-6 missions. The missions that give the best boost to ranking right now are donation missions. 1 Million = around 80% of a 1%. So you have a choice now:

1 - Grinding delivery/data missions in clusters of systems with good mission sinergy
2 - Paying upwards of 100 million per rank increase (in the last ranks)
3 - Mix and match 1 and 2, while at the same time doing some other things or different missions to break monotony.

After 1 week with option 1 for the empire, I'm going for option 3 for the federation. Slower, but more fun. Maybe it takes a month instead of a week now, but there's no hurry!

Lacho78 · Sep 6, 2016

I agree with all of you saying that it should take a long time, the Corvette and Cutter are nothing to laugh at and shouldn't be something achievable in a few days. But the process of getting to that rank is SO dull, it typically consists of taking data or cargo from one place to another...which gets repetitive very quickly. If I were to suggest anything I would say to make the ranking system somewhat of a story, or at least the closest thing E

is going to get to a story. You start as the errand boy taking cargo and data from one place to another, after ranking up a bit you are trusted with retrieving valuables or classified information from destroyed convoys, then you start getting sorted into wings and sent on recon missions, then sent to wars, so on and so forth. I feel it would add life to the galaxy and give more of an incentive to take a side and level up with them. Let me know your opinions

.

fennster · Sep 6, 2016

Rowander said:
I don't know about the combat zone missions, but data delivery missions DEFINETLY don't give 1% per mission, not even close. From Count on, it's more like 1% per 5-6 missions. The missions that give the best boost to ranking right now are donation missions. 1 Million = around 80% of a 1%. So you have a choice now:

1 - Grinding delivery/data missions in clusters of systems with good mission sinergy
2 - Paying upwards of 100 million per rank increase (in the last ranks)
3 - Mix and match 1 and 2, while at the same time doing some other things or different missions to break monotony.

After 1 week with option 1 for the empire, I'm going for option 3 for the federation. Slower, but more fun. Maybe it takes a month instead of a week now, but there's no hurry!

Depends on the ranking your actual gaining the percentage in, lower ranks take less missions.

Thetele · Sep 6, 2016

The military ranking was perfect in 1.0 and 1.1 version of elite you could easily grind it in short time if you really wanted but if you didn't grind it took couple week of doing random missions. But Frontier needed to changes that and make it slow. The balance was perfect between those who didn't care that much and those who wanted it fast as it didn't make either of those feel that the progress was too slow.

Frontier should re do military ranking system and way to get rank but as it takes time they should go back to 1.0 and 1.1 version of the ranking system until they have new better way to do the hole ranking system.

Schlack · Sep 6, 2016

1st world problem

Why don't you try increasing rank with the Alliance?

Helfar · Sep 6, 2016

OI get off the boards! shouldn't you be in Leesti???

Vorxian · Sep 6, 2016

Agony_Aunt said:
I'm a bit confused by all this. But hey, to my mind, the grind isn't the main problem. Its possible to get up those ranks if you remain dedicated. Its how you can simultaneously hold ranks for both. Yeah, I know the lore reason, but i do hope they revisit this at some point, possibly when they are looking to add Alliance ranks (if ever) and force people to choose where their loyalties lie.

This I cannot agree more with this, you're right.

It's like being a high ranking far left wing, and high ranking far right wing activist at the same time. Doesn't compute at all.

Think it should be as you move up in say the Feds, your Imperial rank would go down at equal pace. Likewise if you want up in imperial ranks, your fed colleagues will demote you just as quickly. Makes so much more sense - pick a side and stick with it.

Other middle rogue organisations can be insignificant to the feds or imperials, so possibly you could be king in imperial and gain ranks in Independent without issue. Or it may be that all three affect each other... whatever the case imperials and feds should always be polar opposites.

tarragon · Sep 6, 2016

I bet today squires and serfs and ensigns are grateful, ranking will require so much effort as opposed to old days of cheap donations. What fun is it to grind mission after mission to see those 0.1% gains.

Helfar · Sep 6, 2016

Vorxian said:
This I cannot agree more with this, you're right.

It's like being a high ranking far left wing, and high ranking far right wing activist at the same time. Doesn't compute at all.

Think it should be as you move up in say the Feds, your Imperial rank would go down at equal pace. Likewise if you want up in imperial ranks, your fed colleagues will demote you just as quickly. Makes so much more sense - pick a side and stick with it.

Other middle rogue organisations can be insignificant to the feds or imperials, so possibly you could be king in imperial and gain ranks in Independent without issue. Or it may be that all three affect each other... whatever the case imperials and feds should always be polar opposites.

Funnily enough When i finish grinding fed rank I may grind my empire rank after to get the cutter before someone realises you have commanders holding both King and Admiral ranks.