test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Needed upgrades to Galaxy Class?

17810121342

Comments

  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    kimmym wrote: »
    And I'll say it again. Once you go over 10k, you are already so far over the bar that more DPS is just showing off.

    some of us pvp, were galaxy R dps would barely break 1000, you wouldn't even be able to outpace your targets shield regeneration. haveing more is not just showing off, you might as well not even bother fireing with DPS that low, all your doing is triggering proc heals on your target.
  • nataku302nataku302 Member Posts: 138 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    neo1nx wrote: »
    wow, this galaxy x build is beyond my expectation, of course you remove the hangar for that.
    3 sci power + 3 tac power, all at lt commander level, wonderfull.
    wonder if that is not a little overpowered tho.

    but still i don't like the idea to loose warp plasma so i will be happy with that.

    lt commander tac
    commander eng
    lt commander eng
    lt sci

    and remove the hangar and give us the other cruiser command.

    The Galaxy class has been shown to be able to survive and be a hard hitter in the domain war I think the galaxy class could be separated like the Odyssey class to fill in the roles based on what the player wants the ship to be with a better turn rate. I think the fleet galaxy class or one used for tactical or science should have at least 4 consoles to their roles such as if you want a tactical fleet Galaxy R give it 4 tactical consoles as well as 4 engineering and 2 science vice versa with the engineering one and science one. Science should have 4 engineering console, 4 science and 2 tactical, while the engineering one should have 4 engineering one 3 science and 3 tactical. Btw those who say the galaxy X is more of an heavy armed cruiser should consider the fact that it just adds the lance and a duel mounted cannon that's all. Hell give the galaxy r 2 hangers seeing how the third nacelle blocks got rid of the two hangers on the galaxy class. I like the idea of the bridge officers but it should have at least an ensign univ as well.
  • futurepastnowfuturepastnow Member Posts: 3,660 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    angrytarg wrote: »
    The thig is, everything is so narrowly tailored for cookie cutter builds. Can you get 10k+ without AtbRomplasDEMMarion? Say a phaser build. I don't even care about DPS, I have a 6-8k dps phaser build on my Gal-R and I have fun. But as alexvecci said, the more common the default dps builds become, the more "flak" you get for just playing the game and not breezing through everything in a few seconds. And no, I don't want to go romplas blah to compensate for that ;)

    Short answer: Yes.
  • nikolunusnikolunus Member Posts: 162 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    I have to agree with many that the bridge layout if the main problem with this ship. A Universal LtC spot would be a world a difference. The con layout is fine to me, I have had no problem with it I would like an extra tac spot but that is just a personal want out of it. One of the things that could be very useful for the ship is Giving her 2, or because she does have three shuttle bays, 3 hangers.

    Only 2 usable when the saucer is separated.
    I would like to see some more integrated parts in her like you have with the revamp of the patrol escort. Like a built in 360 phaser. Or Duel beam that has the arc or a normal phaser bank. This would be in line with canon for the class given the two massive phaser strips she sports on the saucer section.

    Another idea using a 3rd hanger space but pre dedicated to something like the Worker Bee's that would ether auto seek out team mates withing a certain range to heal or aid in your own healing.
    Space is vast, it's wonderful and maddening. Yet in that madness is some of the greatest beauty I have ever seen.
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    nikolunus wrote: »
    I have to agree with many that the bridge layout if the main problem with this ship. A Universal LtC spot would be a world a difference. The con layout is fine to me, I have had no problem with it I would like an extra tac spot but that is just a personal want out of it. One of the things that could be very useful for the ship is Giving her 2, or because she does have three shuttle bays, 3 hangers.

    Only 2 usable when the saucer is separated.
    I would like to see some more integrated parts in her like you have with the revamp of the patrol escort. Like a built in 360 phaser. Or Duel beam that has the arc or a normal phaser bank. This would be in line with canon for the class given the two massive phaser strips she sports on the saucer section.

    Another idea using a 3rd hanger space but pre dedicated to something like the Worker Bee's that would ether auto seek out team mates withing a certain range to heal or aid in your own healing.

    she doesn't have a 360 degree phaser array. the two big ones are probably 300. A hanger would work but the boff layout has to change. at minimum what you suggest. But i prefer all universal
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    she doesn't have a 360 degree phaser array. the two big ones are probably 300. A hanger would work but the boff layout has to change. at minimum what you suggest. But i prefer all universal

    arrays have a firing arc of anything they have line of sight with, pretty much only the secondary hull creating blind spots limits its fireing arc. arrays also use there energy for 1 big shot at a time, not 8 little ones, unless its firing to disable or point defense. arrays in game, and the engine's ability to portray them, could not be more wrong or disappointing.
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,008 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    arrays have a firing arc of anything they have line of sight with, pretty much only the secondary hull creating blind spots limits its fireing arc. arrays also use there energy for 1 big shot at a time, not 8 little ones, unless its firing to disable or point defense. arrays in game, and the engine's ability to portray them, could not be more wrong or disappointing.

    True. I'd love to see the hardpoints changed so the more "beams" you slot on your ship, the longer the beam intervall for one single shot get, maybe having at max two forward beams firing (ventral and dorsal, if possible). The multiple, rapid firing beams sould be reserved for skills, like disable subsystem, beam rapid fire or fira at will (and fire at will should serve as a point defense mechanic first and foremost, not a huge AoE facemelter).

    But speaking of this, the way arrays are portrayed in the game is wrong from the start. The devs just called them that because "it was a term in the shows", but what we use as "beam arrays" are essentially only single beam banks/emitters. It's the most basic weapon found throughout trekverse. Starfleet should have exclusive "beam arrays" which can be fitted on the larger vessels with benefits to accuracy and firing arc and like a DHC could only fit on certain types of ships.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    angrytarg wrote: »
    ...
    But speaking of this, the way arrays are portrayed in the game is wrong from the start. The devs just called them that because "it was a term in the shows", but what we use as "beam arrays" are essentially only single beam banks/emitters. It's the most basic weapon found throughout trekverse. Starfleet should have exclusive "beam arrays" which can be fitted on the larger vessels with benefits to accuracy and firing arc and like a DHC could only fit on certain types of ships.

    Indeed, it feels just strange that Starfleet ships didn't get a comparable counterpart to Klingon heavy cannons weapons. I think it would havew been cool, if Starfleet Beam arrays wouldn't be individual weapons but one single array, the more single weapons you add the stronger the whole array.
    But of course that would be almost a Starfleet cruiser/science vessel uniqueness...
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,008 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    yreodred wrote: »
    Indeed, it feels just strange that Starfleet ships didn't get a comparable counterpart to Klingon heavy cannons weapons. I think it would havew been cool, if Starfleet Beam arrays wouldn't be individual weapons but one single array, the more single weapons you add the stronger the whole array.
    But of course that would be almost a Starfleet cruiser/science vessel uniqueness...

    Which would be completely fine if the Klingons would have their unique strengths (I'd think about ground advantage and special torpedoes) and Romulans as a third faction would have theirs (stealth and heavy cannons). Of course, that would've required a game that wasn't tailored at the most basic red/blue faction PvP from the beginning... ;)
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • macroniusmacronius Member Posts: 2,526
    edited July 2014
    Given a choice between more tac slots and more tac boffs ... There is no choice. There is no way an extra tac consoles makes up lost DPS from an extra attack pattern or FAW or THY.
    "With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

    - Judge Aaron Satie
  • edited July 2014
    This content has been removed.
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    I find it surprising that the most underperforming ship in the game is up to Cryptics standard of game content. ;)
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • nikephorusnikephorus Member Posts: 2,744 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    yreodred wrote: »
    I find it surprising that the most underperforming ship in the game is up to Cryptics standard of game content. ;)

    Yeah maybe they should just remove it. :cool:
    Tza0PEl.png
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,008 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    yreodred wrote: »
    I find it surprising that the most underperforming ship in the game is up to Cryptics standard of game content. ;)

    And I do think this confused a lot of newbies :D
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • dontdrunkimshootdontdrunkimshoot Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    angrytarg wrote: »
    And I do think this confused a lot of newbies :D

    confuses everyone who thinks the galaxy is 'fine' :rolleyes:
  • neo1nxneo1nx Member Posts: 962 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    neo1nx wrote: »
    proove it, show me the build that allow the galaxy retrofit to outtank a star cruiser both in pve and pvp.

    you can make 2 build if you want.

    Originally Posted by sarcasmdetector
    .....


    once again bloked by question left unanswered
  • stardestroyer001stardestroyer001 Member Posts: 2,615 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    askray wrote: »
    Since there is a lot of outpouring over the closing of the last thread, I've decided to remake this thread for the time being.

    Just got back from leave... what happened to the first thread? And why not simply reopen it...?
    stardestroyer001, Admiral, Explorers Fury PvE/PvP Fleet | Retired PvP Player
    Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
    My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
  • jellico1jellico1 Member Posts: 2,719
    edited July 2014
    when and if cryptic decides it wants to make some money it will buff the galaxy intrepid and nebula to the posititions those ships should be in.

    myself as well as a great number of posters here are members of large fleets

    new members come to us and ask for advice on what ships to buy...many times on the fed side the galaxy comes up

    you may be assured our advice to our new members is to steer them into ships that are effective and not waste there zen on ships that are 3rd class

    The galaxy intrepid and nebula are not effective for there 2500 zen cost

    If cryptic wants to make more money...they need to listen to us veteran players..They need to make these ships competive to gain our support when advising new players what to buy

    If the ships are made to be competive...we will support them and reccomend them

    As they currently stand .........I think not ............across the board of many fleet leaders and advisors to new players
    Jellico....Engineer ground.....Da'val Romulan space Sci
    Saphire.. Science ground......Ko'el Romulan space Tac
    Leva........Tactical ground.....Koj Romulan space Eng

    JJ-Verse will never be Canon or considered Lore...It will always be JJ-Verse
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    Just got back from leave... what happened to the first thread? And why not simply reopen it...?

    It was ninja closed and we never heard why. After such a backlash over closing similar threads Askray opened this one. WHich we do thank him for.
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,008 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    jellico1 wrote: »
    when and if cryptic decides it wants to make some money it will buff the galaxy intrepid and nebula to the posititions those ships should be in.

    myself as well as a great number of posters here are members of large fleets

    new members come to us and ask for advice on what ships to buy...many times on the fed side the galaxy comes up

    you may be assured our advice to our new members is to steer them into ships that are effective and not waste there zen on ships that are 3rd class

    The galaxy intrepid and nebula are not effective for there 2500 zen cost

    If cryptic wants to make more money...they need to listen to us veteran players..They need to make these ships competive to gain our support when advising new players what to buy

    If the ships are made to be competive...we will support them and reccomend them

    As they currently stand .........I think not ............across the board of many fleet leaders and advisors to new players

    Yeah, I suggested that a few times and pages ago as well. The Gal, intrepid and Defiant need a fleet refit with a (semi) universal LTC and ENS and a (semi) universal console slot in order to make sure you can choose wether you want to use the original T4 (or retrofit) layout at endgame or the updated refit T4 layout which is more sci heavy for the venture and more eng heavy for the bellerophon and sao paolo. I would be happy with this.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    angrytarg wrote: »
    Yeah, I suggested that a few times and pages ago as well. The Gal, intrepid and Defiant need a fleet refit with a (semi) universal LTC and ENS and a (semi) universal console slot in order to make sure you can choose wether you want to use the original T4 (or retrofit) layout at endgame or the updated refit T4 layout which is more sci heavy for the venture and more eng heavy for the bellerophon and sao paolo. I would be happy with this.

    I agree, almost everyone starting to play STO wants to fly one of the 3 "hero" ships and gets utterly dissappointed. I think for each one of us who discuss and fight to get a playable T5 Galaxy, Intrepid and Defiant there are a LOT of disappointed people who have stopped playing STO or are at least very disappointed by the way Cryptic made those ships.

    I can understand the "logic" behind it to a certain degree (making the "hero" ship not fully competitive), but i think other ships would be bought anyways, since most players have several Characters and don't stay with one ship forever.


    Changing (or adding updated variants) in one of the several ways described here in this thread would turn those ships from being "disappointing" to "good". I don't say they need to become "great" or "top of the line", but at least "acceptable".
    We shouldn't forget that they aren't the newest ships around (and STO isn't very canonical), but in the least they should be fun to fly and not feel like a torment.


    Personally i find it simply frustrating and tiresome trying to make the G-R fun to fly.
    Heck i would be already happy if they would just give the G -X the ability to look like the USS Venture (DS9).
    Or they could just let us remove that darn third nacelle and those little cannons on top of the saucer. I could live with the Lance under the saucer, at least it doesn't ruin the whole design of the Galaxy. (I don't think that this would be too much to ask for IMO)
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • xegiduaxegidua Member Posts: 36 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    Wait, are you telling me that the Galaxy, Defiant and Intrepid aren't viable late-game ships?

    I might be about to become one of the people who quits when they realise that, then... I'm here for semi-canon gameplay, not some huge monstrous cruiser thing with no real resemblance to the TV/Film universe
  • angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,008 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    xegidua wrote: »
    Wait, are you telling me that the Galaxy, Defiant and Intrepid aren't viable late-game ships?

    I might be about to become one of the people who quits when they realise that, then... I'm here for semi-canon gameplay, not some huge monstrous cruiser thing with no real resemblance to the TV/Film universe

    It depends what you consider "viable". The ships are of course workable and you can complete every content with them. The problem is that they are "old" in terms of STOs design philosophy which originally followed the trinity of warrior mage and rogue. Present STO is build around hybrid ships that can do anything these archetype classes could do, making gameplay using the "hero ships" very limited.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • darthconnor1701darthconnor1701 Member Posts: 172 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    At this point I really have ditched the idea of trying to get cryptic/PW to understand the need to redo older ships with newer designs or different configurations.

    Now I think when/if they make tier 6 ships (if they decide not to they should just redo tier 5 fleet ships) they need to design a system that allows us to pick the ship hull and add power bonuses we want with the boff and console layouts we want from ships we have previously purchased so we can fly want we want the way we want. After the dreadnaught revamp my confidence in the Devs to redo ships the way we the players want them has been diminished I guess I say ever so much. So unless they actually decide to remake the way ships (at least fleet or tier 6 level if they add it) is redone think I'll just keep my money and use what I already have paid for.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    angrytarg wrote: »
    It depends what you consider "viable". The ships are of course workable and you can complete every content with them. The problem is that they are "old" in terms of STOs design philosophy which originally followed the trinity of warrior mage and rogue. Present STO is build around hybrid ships that can do anything these archetype classes could do, making gameplay using the "hero ships" very limited.

    The funny and sad thing (at the same time) is, that especially the Galaxy Class is supposed to be the god of all multi mission ships. (at least in "real" trek)
    That's what is making me so unhappy about STOs ships. Most a put into "roles" they just don't belong, such as the Prometheus being a cannon sporting glasscannon, instead being a ship more like a (beamboat) Avenger.
    They where put into those roles at a time where the Stone/Paper/Scissor system was seen as the only way a MMO could work.
    Luckily some devs have realized how fundamently wrong it is to put Star Trek ships into such a mold.
    Newer ships they release don't follow that un-holy trinity anymore, but the sad thing is the ships ppl. care most about are still locked in those unlucky roles.


    If i had something to say at cryptic, i would make sure they release a 3 part bundle featuring the three "hero" ships with new BOFF and Console layouts.
    As many here have said before, those ships wouldn't have to be top of the line, they just need to be more flexible.
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • jtoney3448jtoney3448 Member Posts: 642 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    Ive been using my Fleet galaxy r a lot more recently since they added ship swapping at drop of a hat. She often does far more dmg then normal pubbies in que, but lets just say that is a bar set pretty low. Most of them dont break 5k dps, seeing my G-R run past and obliterate a group of probes that an escort is struggling with makes me almost go hey its not so bad!

    And then I wake up and remember if I had been that escort those probes would have been vaporized by looking at them lol. Sad truth is that the G-R/Intrepid/Defiant are so stuck into that focused mold it seriously hampers them at endgame.

    In my G-R id rather have an extra sci or tac boff station over a 3rd ensign even after the engineering team unlink its still unessarly eng heavy. The intrepid is prolly the least affected by it as sci has wide range of really useful skills, but it still bumps up against competing global cooldowns.

    The Defiant with all cannons runs face first into that like its a brick wall. The ONLY way to make use of all the tac stations on the defiant is to run more then just cannons, which isnt something everyone wants to do, its shoehorning players into stuff. The Kumari is in just as bad a spot on this front as its massively tac heavy, it how ever has 5 forward weapons making it easier to slot a variety of different weapons. If the devs want the defiant to remain a tac heavy ship, it needs 5 forward weapons to offset it. Though it would lack the "Toughness" the defiant from the show was known for. Honestly a good "defiant" layout would be almost a carbon copy of the scimitar, minus the hanger bay. 5 forward weapons 2 aft, 4 eng 1 sci 5 tac console, Cmd Tac, LTC Tac, LTC Eng, LT Sci. Tough but low sci, with lots of forward firepower.

    G-R just needs a 4/3/3 layout with boff D'D layout, as i believe this is closest thing to the Galaxy from the series and closest thing to multiroll mission ship. The Intrepid would rock with a, 3eng/4sci/3tac layout, with CMD sci, LTC tac, LTC eng, LT Sci.

    I think these layouts represent their onscreen depictions. Defiant was Firepower first, surviability second, idea of being in a exploration roll almost non exsistant. Galaxy was a balance between engineering leap forward, exploration, and front line battleship. The Intrepids, was all about exploration, but was tough, with speed and firepower to match its toughness.
  • briggers810briggers810 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    yreodred wrote: »
    That's what is making me so unhappy about STOs ships. Most a put into "roles" they just don't belong, such as the Prometheus being a cannon sporting glasscannon, instead being a ship more like a (beamboat) Avenger.

    If i had something to say at cryptic, i would make sure they release a 3 part bundle featuring the three "hero" ships with new BOFF and Console layouts.
    As many here have said before, those ships wouldn't have to be top of the line, they just need to be more flexible.

    I would agree with you about the Prometheus being fitted into a role it doesn't need to be in (cannon sporting glasscannon). As the Prometheus is one of my favourite canon ships from the show (even though it doesn't appear much), along with the Akira, Defiant and Sovereign classes.

    I would agree that it would be good for Cryptic to release a 3 part bundle of updated Defiant, Galaxy and Intrepid designs.



    I remember reading in this thread someone saying it would be a good idea to use the BOFF and console layouts from the Refit designs on the fleet vessels and such, which I think is a good idea.

    In the case of the Galaxy, as this is a mult-mission ship, I would think that this BOFF arrangement would be good (having a floating universal Lt.CMDR) which would give the following:
    CMDR Engineering
    Lt.CMDR Universal
    Lt. Tactical
    Lt. Engineeering
    Lt. Science
    As this way if the ship is needed for combat missions then the Lt.Cmdr would be a Tactical Slot, if it's needed for a Sciency type mission it can be a Science Slot, and then for the default slot it can be a Lt.Cmdr Engineering.
  • jtoney3448jtoney3448 Member Posts: 642 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    Cept thats 13 boff powers, and t5 only have 12.
  • yreodredyreodred Member Posts: 3,527 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    The devs changed the D'Ds BOFF layout after ppl where complaining about it for being poorly, i don't unterstand why this isn't possible with the G -R...
    "...'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' ... The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged. I fear that today--" - (TNG) Picard, quoting Judge Aaron Satie

    A tale of two Picards
    (also applies to Star Trek in general)
  • admiralq1732admiralq1732 Member Posts: 1,561 Arc User
    edited July 2014
    yreodred wrote: »
    The devs changed the D'Ds BOFF layout after ppl where complaining about it for being poorly, i don't unterstand why this isn't possible with the G -R...

    one word gecko
Sign In or Register to comment.