dontdrunkimshoot wrote: »
and the abomination takes it's rightful place in obscurity, and there was much rejoicing. as long as that thing exists, the real galaxy will always have to be made intentionally worse.
reyan01 wrote: »
Definitely - you won't get any argument from me that it needs a Lt-Cmdr Tactical BOFF. Personally, though, I remain convinced that it won't get better than Lieutenant Tac.
Although I will say that I would dearly LOVE to be wrong....
angrytarg wrote: »
SUUUUUEY! *squeals in joy*
Really, I am... happy. Not angry. Maybebecause I am completely fine with a pathfinder layout those ships will probably have. But I am... not angry... XD
shpoks wrote: »
happytarg? :eek: :P : D
willamsheridan wrote: »
If it only has a Lt. Tac (i hope that won´t happen) i hope that we at least get a Sacuer Sep. ability with a useful saucer with good weapons (phasers, torps). It would be disappointing if the new Andromeda/Galaxy (now is that a wordplay for the new Iconian Storyline?) doesn´t have the Seperation ability
wrathofachilles wrote: »
Personally, I would not mind if the t6 galaxy got a eng tinted pathfinder layout with:
Lt. Com. Eng
Lt. Tac (hybrid?)
Lt. Sci (hybrid?)
My biggest problem with the galaxy's that have come before wasn't just underwhelming tactical consoles but that it simply didn't have enough tactical slots for tac team and at least a torp, beam, and attack pattern to be onboard. With two lieutenants set to tac, I think that would be a reasonable compromise of giving it plenty of tactical potential but keeping the strong eng focus.
I agree with the suspicions that they won't let this ship be too tac heavy... probably no 4 tac consoles or lt.com tac on this puppy. Not just because the Gal-X exists and might at some point make an appearance as a t6 do-over, but the sovereign and possibly even the excelsior might make t6 appearances as well. The devs have rather ridiculously made the excelsior a war beast in this game... I imagine because of the lakota from DS9 being upgraded out the whazoo to go toe to toe with the "uber battleship" the defiant. But I imagine that decision failed to consider what could have been done with a much larger galaxy class being upgraded specifically to be the best war ship it could be (not involving the rabbit eared, lance-a-lot makeover). But it's so popular and apparently not vetoed for end game that it will likely make a re-appearance and would doubtful be put in its correct place beneath the galaxy in tactical capability.
So with the potential future sovereign and gal-x and excelsior, they'll probably reserve the lt.com tac and may also reserve the 4 tac consoles. Though making this either by fleet or default have a 3 tac 5 eng 3 sci layout would make it the third cruiser to already have that layout... but there's only so much they can do with their current console/boff layout rules based on ship category. Unless of course they introduce that mythical, mystical, magical "universal console SLOT." Then one could make the ship 4 tac, 4 sci, or 5 eng depending on what they want... but we all know that would be too versatile... too epic. So no. :P
Hmm... if others are right on this ship getting the eng-tinted pathfinder layout, I wonder if the defiant will eventually emerge with the tactical tinted version... that would actually be rather pleasantly symmetrical of them.
royalsovereign wrote: »
You'll still have to have bought the older Galaxy with the separation console, or will have to buy it, based upon the way they've handled similar things to date.
willamsheridan wrote: »
I have the Gal-R, Gal-X, Venture from the Galaxy pack and even the Fleet-Gal-R (not the fleet dreadnought until they fix the lance and release it as T6 ) so i can suse the Galaxy 2-piece set if it can be used on the Andromeda.
ufpterrell wrote: »
I would actually like to see it have a couple Lt Comm slots like the Guardian, then it can at least be flexible in it's seating. I really don't understand why after years of moaning its too eng heavy we have folks asking for a comm eng and lt comm eng? Give me a Lt Comm sci and tac any day of the week over that.
hyperionx09 wrote: »
There is the possibility DD will keep its exclusive seating, with the Ensign Uni turned Lt Uni/Hybrid (like the JHSS lower Hybrid seat), if not the Ensign Tac turned Lt Tac/Hybrid, while the Negh and Andromeda get the Pathfinder-style seating.
While not a perfect example, the Flagship trio also have this setup; both the Fed and KDF flagships share a seat loadout, whereas the Romulan Scimitar has its own unique layout, geared more towards offense.
stardestroyer001 wrote: »
Anyone else excited that the Galaxy costume is finally getting a do-over?!? Hopefully they remember to fix the Gal-X lance too.
yreodred wrote: »
That'd be really lame.
I would prefer a much more versatile and straight forward BOFF layout than the pathfinder version.
There where literary hundreds (maybe thousands) of pages over the years about how to improve the GCS, and most ppl agree that the GCS and Negh Var should have got the same or similar treatment like the D'D or Guardian (I'd prefer Guardian).
If they give it a Pathfinder like station setup, the devs will AGAIN show that they just don't care what ppl wish.
For me it's a make or break situation. If they goof it up like before they'll simply show that they are not interested in making the game good (simple said). Then there's no much reason to stay and watch their DS9/Defiant fanboy fantasy become real again.
Sorry for the harsh words, but that's how i think about it.
lan451 wrote: »
Stats are up.
Bridge Officer Stations: 1 Lieutenant Commander Tactical, 1 Lieutenant Commander Engineering/Command, 1 Commander Engineering, 1 Lieutenant Science, 1 Ensign Universal