|
Make the maximum rank limit to 36 maximum ranks other than currently 19 which is about twice as many ranks. |
|
|
Group related, forgot to add that on. |
|
|
Whoa, whoa, whoa. 36 is probably WAYYYYY too strong.
We need a divisions tab, nonetheless. |
|
QymeJoin Date: 2010-12-12 Post Count: 4724 |
Whoa, whoa, whoa. 36 is probably WAYYYYY too strong. [2] |
|
|
I'd say make it unlimited. If you want, say 100 ranks, I say go for it. It's your decision.
- Sir Decaying of the Souls |
|
|
idk why there is a limit its stupid
someone tell me why there is a limit
the second one |
|
WahhhyJoin Date: 2014-09-18 Post Count: 921 |
Whoa, whoa, whoa. 36 is probably WAYYYYY too strong. [3]
You should make a new group for that. |
|
|
36 Maximum Ranks would normally trump most modern armies and corporations. A chain of command usually keeps simple with between 8-10 ranks. In fact, the modern US Army has currently 19 ranks, from E-1 to E-9, and O-1 to O-10. |
|
WahhhyJoin Date: 2014-09-18 Post Count: 921 |
@Dynerov
He's trying to make a rank for every job possible. |
|
|
Most USM groups replace the ranks from simply E-1 to E-1/E-2 |
|
|
then war clannies will get stronger |
|
InsomnianJoin Date: 2012-04-28 Post Count: 463 |
I saw someone's suggestion on this. I think making a division would be good, maybe be able to make some ranks in those divisions, but I think 36 ranks could possibly be a bit too much. However, change it up a bit and I support.
|
|