UST NCC issues

[AslanC]

I am trying to figure out my NCC system (much like I had to devide a Stardate system) for my campaign.

I have written the following. It is a rough draft.

Thoughts and feedback would be appreciated. though.

A Word on NCCs

Much like Stardates, nothing generates for fan discussion that the purpose and sequencing of NCCs. FASA took the ideal that each Starship class had a similar numbering scheme (IE; all Constitutions are 17XX), but that doesn’t hold up due to on screen evidence that showed us Connies with NCCs as low as the USS Eagle’s NCC-956 and as high as the USS Intrepid’s NCC-1831.

At first I figured since this was Ultimate Star Trek I could just retconn the whole thing and make it work. But then I started wondering why the USS Excelsior would be NX-2000 and other ships could be later 2100 and 2200. Confusing just a tad and required heavy handed reasons. Not making me happy it was.

So I decided to use the linear timeline of NCCs. Using the Daedelus in 2162 as NX-001 and the Excelsior or NX-2000 in 2249 as the guide. I get 87 years of time, leading to 23 ships a year if production is constant, giving us 2000 ships commissioned in that time frame. Obviously it would be in consistent, less ships to start, more during war time or other expansions, etc…

So with a rough guideline I add in this variable; the USS Constitution (NX-1700) is commissioned in 2225, a difference of 63 years since the Daedelus. That averages out to about 27 ships a year, leaving 300 more to be commissioned by 2249. With 300 more ships to be commissioned in the next 24 years (taking us to 224) that gives us about 13 ships year.

If we take 23 ships a year from 2162 to say 2200 we will be at NCC-874. That means to jump the next 826 ships by 2225 we need to see production increase to 33 ships a year. Again these are not absolute numbers, just guidelines. We have wars in this period that would require more ships built in those years, and less in the non-war years.

Still giving this basic numbering we can, through a little basic math, figure out roughly when a ship would be commissioned. Case. A ship with the NCC-1821 would be commissioned roughly in 2233. Again this is not exact science, but certainly something that can be used as a guideline. Since we know from the timeline that the USS Miranda (NCC-1800) entered service in 2234, it is acceptable to believe she was commissioned in 2232, giving two years for construction and deployment. Those deployments might go faster during wartime and slower during peacetime.

So in conclusion, while not an exact science, it does give a basic idea and as they say “Is close enough for government work.”.

Now comes the timeline of ships.

2161 – 001
2200 – 874
2225 – 1700
2249 – 2000

=-=-=-=-=-=-=

After 2249 I go with 13 ships a year as the construction rate. Starfleet has just come off the genesis war as well, so I might alter those numbers. Not %100 sure which way to go. If I do I will have to adjust certain NCCs from the timeline, etc... Still your thoughts are appreciated.

[Capt. K. Vaughn]

Aslan, are you keeping your alternate universe theme for this campaign?

[AslanC]

Yes I am, this is for the Ultimate Star Trek campaign. Why do you ask?

[Capt. K. Vaughn]

As it would influence how I respond, just wanted to make certain you had not suddenly converted to keeping the TV timeline since last we had talked.

But since you have given me the url, I plan to pop off and do some reading now.

I think the system works nicely and as you stated you can tweak it as needed. I'll be interested to see what wars you have listed in your timeline if you have that up.

[Lancer]

As this is an alternative universe you could just assign another NX or NCC number to the Excelsior that allows you to keep high production rates during wartime.
Just making the Excelsior NX-2200 or NX-2300 could give you the post-war catching-up-on-ship-commissioning rates that might fit your game.

That aside, you could decide that Starfleet changed the NCC numbering scheme sometime in the past, i.e. the initial projections called for NCC-001 to NCC-999, but once the need for more ships became apparent the whole scheme was change to four-digit numbers. In that case Starfleet might have started to use four-digit NCC codes right after the decision was made, leading to a gap between the mid to high 3-digit figures and NCC-1000+.

That could give you a lower commissioning rate for the earlier decades and a higher number of commissionings per year at a later stage, e.g. once the various wars call for more ships and Starfleet decides to use the four-digit NCC codes.

[AslanC]

Interesting thoughts guys

Sae Tyger (in email) pointed out that I should in fact note that I have fixed the Connies, but giving all the original 13 a sequential number run.

Not sure how that affects what you suggested Lancer.

[Lancer]

Originally posted by AslanC
Sae Tyger (in email) pointed out that I should in fact note that I have fixed the Connies, but giving all the original 13 a sequential number run.

Not sure how that affects what you suggested Lancer.

To be frank, neither am I.

OTOH, it may not change a thing if the Connies were all commissioned at once, i.e. as a 13 ship production run, while other ship classes were commissioned one at a time over a longer periode of time.

Have to think about this some more... or maybe you should think about it some more. After all, it's your game.