My versions of the official ships (ICON)

[Meteo]

Class and Type: Galaxy Class Heavy Explorer
Commissioning Date: 2356
Hull Characteristics
Size: 8
Resistance: 4
Structural Points: 160
Operations Characteristics
Crew/Passengers/Evac: 1,000/300/15,000
[8 Power/round]
Computers: 8 [8 Power/round]
Transporters: 6 personnel, 6 cargo, 8 emergency
[10 Power/round]
Tractor Beams: 1 av, 1 fd, 1 fv [2 Power/rating/round]
Propulsion and Power Characteristics
Warp System: 6.0/9.2/9.6 (12 hours)
[2/warp factor]
Impulse System: .75c/.92c [7/9 Power/round]
Power: 200
Sensor Systems
Long-range Sensors: +2/17 light-years
[6 Power/round]
Lateral Sensors: +2/1 light-year [4 Power/round]
Navigational Sensors: +2 [5 Power/round]
Sensor Skill: 5
Weapons Systems
Type X Phaser
Range: 10/30,000/100,000/300,000
Arc: All (720 degrees)
Accuracy: 4/5/7/10
Damage: 20
Power: [20]
Type II Photon Torpedoes
Number: 275
Launchers: 1 ad, 1 fv, 1 av in saucer
Spread: 10
Arc: Forward or aft, but are self-guided
Range: 15/300,000/1,000,000/3,500,000
Accuracy: 4/5/7/10
Damage: 20
Power: [5]
Weapon Skill: 5
Defensive Systems
Starfleet Deflector Shield
Protection: 60/80
Power: [60]

More significant alterations will appear in my future ships.

[Evan van Eyk]

Maybe you could say what you changed and why? I for one do not see any changes ( don't have the book with me ), but as I assume there are some, I would like to know, why you felt they were necessary.

[Meteo]

They're going to be more significant on future ships, but for the Galaxy, I upped the torp count from 250 to 275, and I changed the C/P/E stat.

[Evan van Eyk]

Mhh, I think the torp number was given in an episode as 250 ( that episode, where Enterprise is "taken" over by a fake XO, who turns out to be an alien officer, that brainwashed the crew into attacking a far weaker species ), but I may be wrong. Concerning the crew this is most certainly up to speculation. We know that Enterprise carries 1012 people onboard, but that would include all civilians as well, it seems to be a safe guess to lower the crewsize a little.

[The Tatterdemalion King]

Looks like it's 275.

Why that requires a repost of the entire stat-block is beyond me...

[Meteo]

Class and Type: Ambassador Class Heavy Cruiser
Commissioning Date: 2322
Hull Characteristics
Size: 8
Resistance: 4
Structural Points: 160
Operations Characteristics
Crew/Passengers/Evac: 700/250/12,000
[8 Power/round]
Computers: 6 [6 Power/round]
Transporters: 4 personnel, 6 cargo, 6 emergency
[8 Power/round]
Tractor Beams: 1 av, 1 fv [2 Power/rating/round]
Propulsion and Power Characteristics
Warp System: 6.0/9.0/9.2 (10 hours) (Refit:6.0/9.2/9.4 for 12 hours)
[2/warp factor]
Impulse System: .75c/.9c [7/9 Power/round]
Power: 175 (Refit: 180)
Sensor Systems
Long-range Sensors: +2/15 light-years
[6 Power/round]
Lateral Sensors: +2/1 light-year [4 Power/round]
Navigational Sensors: +2 [5 Power/round]
Sensor Skill: 5
Weapons Systems
Type IX Phaser
Range: 10/30,000/100,000/300,000
Arc: All (720 degrees)
Accuracy: 4/5/7/10
Damage: 18
Power: [18]
Type II Photon Torpedoes
Number: 250
Launchers: 1 ad, 1 fv
Spread: 4 (Refit: 8)
Arc: Forward or aft, but are self-guided
Range: 15/300,000/1,000,000/3,500,000
Accuracy: 4/5/7/10
Damage: 20
Power: [5]
Weapon Skill: 5
Defensive Systems
Starfleet Deflector Shield
Protection: 55/75
Power: [55]

[Meteo]

Class and Type: Excelsior Class Heavy Cruiser
Commissioning Date: 2284
Hull Characteristics
Size: 7
Resistance: 3
Structural Points: 140
Operations Characteristics
Crew/Passengers/Evac: 567/200/7,000
[7 Power/round]
Computers: 4 [4 Power/round]
Transporters: 4 personnel, 6 cargo, 6 emergency
[8 Power/round]
Tractor Beams: 1 av, 1 fv [2 Power/rating/round]
Propulsion and Power Characteristics
Warp System: 6.0/9.0/9.2 (9 hours)
[2/warp factor]
Impulse System: .75c/.9c [7/9 Power/round]
Power: 160
Sensor Systems
Long-range Sensors: +1/15 light-years
[6 Power/round]
Lateral Sensors: +2/1 light-year [4 Power/round]
Navigational Sensors: +1 [5 Power/round]
Sensor Skill: 4
Weapons Systems
Type VIII Phaser
Range: 10/30,000/100,000/300,000
Arc: All (720 degrees)
Accuracy: 5/6/8/11
Damage: 16
Power: [16]
Type FP-4 Photon Torpedoes
Number: 200
Launchers: 2 av, 2 fv
Spread: 1 (2 on a 1-2 result of a 1d6 roll)
Arc: Forward or aft, but are self-guided
Range: 9/27,000/80,000/250,000
Accuracy: 4/5/7/10
Damage: 20
Power: [5]
Weapon Skill: 4
Defensive Systems
Starfleet Deflector Shield
Protection: 48/70
Power: [48]

[Evan van Eyk]

Mhh, when posting these could you please include the reasons for the changes? Otherwise it is difficult to discuss them. Additionally out of copyright reasons I think it would be better to only post the changes and not the whole set of stats.

Class and Type: Ambassador Class Heavy Cruiser
Crew/Passengers/Evac: 700/250/12,000

While I understand the change from 900 crew to 700 because it was given as the crew size in Yesterday's Enterprise, this need not bee the standard ship complement. Given the vessels heritage it is rather likely that you have to fulfill certain requirements when applying for a post and maybe that explains the gap. Or modern updates, etc. might have reduced the necessary crew size of Enterprise.

Computers: 6 [6 Power/round]
Transporters: 4 personnel, 6 cargo, 8 emergency

These changes I don't get. Why should a vessel 40 years older have the same amount of computer capacity as a Galaxy-Class? Especially given the fact that it is smaller and slower. Additionally why raise the number of emergency and cargo transports when you reduced the crew size? You gave it more emergency transporters than a Galaxy-Class. Considering that the transporter technology is far more advanced in a Galacy-Class, meaning it takes up less room and is more effecient I find this number inconsistent.

Warp System: 6.0/9.0/9.2/9(10 hours) (Refit:6.0/9.2/9.4 for 12 hours)

I would have understood if the refit matched the Galaxy-Class more, but why raise the standard travel velocity to 6? After all the old engines are supposed to be less effecient than modern ones.

Long-range Sensors: +2/15 light-years
[6 Power/round]
Lateral Sensors: +2/1 light-year [4 Power/round]
Navigational Sensors: +2 [5 Power/round]

Again, why raise it to a level of a Galaxy-Class? I think there should be a difference in effeciency to represent the time gap.

Class and Type: Excelsior Class Heavy Cruiser
Commissioning Date: 2285
perations Characteristics
Crew/Passengers/Evac: 567/200/7,000
[7 Power/round]
Computers: 4 [4 Power/round]
Transporters: 4 personnel, 6 cargo, 6 emergency

Why did you change the year of commissioning? What source makes you believe it was built in 2285? I can only remember the 2284 given in the TNG Corebook. Additionally I do not understand why you lowered the number of people onboard.
The DS9 Technical Manual gives the crew as 770/130/ 9800

Again I am wondering why you raised the transporter capacity to a Galaxy-Class level.

Warp System: 6.0/9.0/9.2 (9 hours)

Given the fact that the Excelsior is almost 100 years old during TNG, I don't think her travel velocity could possibly match that of a Galaxy-Class.

Long-range Sensors: +1/15 light-years
[6 Power/round]
Lateral Sensors: +2/1 light-year [4 Power/round]
Navigational Sensors: +1 [5 Power/round]
Sensor Skill: 4

Now you see me completely lost. I don't think it is plausible that there is no change in 80 years considering Lateral sensor systems. Maybe you should raise the bonus of the Galaxy-Class to +3 instead, to represent technological development.
Why did you chose to lower the Sensor Skill rating? Since "Sensors" is only specialization I find it hard to assume that a bridge officer of Starfleet should not have 5 in this skill.

Weapons Systems
Type VIII Phaser
Range: 10/30,000/100,000/300,000
Arc: All (720 degrees)
Accuracy: 4/5/7/10

There is no change in weapons' accuracy for 80 years? I don't think this is plausible.


Well, that said, I am really curious for your reasons of the changes.

[Meteo]

I'm okay with 700.

And I gave the Galaxy 8 Emergency Transporters earlier. I however decided to let it mirror the Technical Manual Version. I have yet to revise the Ambassador in this way.

I'll revise the Computers too.

I'm okay with the Warp speed, and I would just have Max Cruising and Max for X hours.

The Galaxy has +2/17 on it's long-range sensors.

I altered the Excelsor Crew based on a Enterprise-B Generations Micro Machine Package. And I'll change the Introductory date.

The DS9 Tech Manual has a lot of glitches in it, and doesn't display some of the ships correctly.

And I forgot about the Accuracy for the Type VIIIs/FH-11s. I'll change that too.

A Galaxy can cruise at Warp 9.2, and go for 12 hours at Warp 9.6.

A Galaxy, by Tech Manual standards, has 6 Personnel, 8 Cargo, and 6 Emergency transporters.

I've still left the Excelsior with somewhat primitive Sensor Capacity.

And what do you think of the Torpedo Stats for the Ambassador and Excelsior?

[The Tatterdemalion King]

So what problems in your games led you to revise the numbers?

[Meteo]

For one thing, most of the ships are treated as basically the same torpwise.

It's one thing to have a Galaxy have some high-spread torp launchers that were new, but would this apply to every ship? And do you treat multiple torp launchers in each arc the same as one high or medium spread launcher? Doesn't make sense if the number of launchers will be displayed, unlike the Beam Weapons.

I also treat the Excelsior's new launchers as a 1 per 4 seconds firing rate weapon, which occasionally appears to be the case, with sometimes 3 and rarely 4 torpedoes coming out of two launchers.

I also gave the Early Ambassador an early "Mk I" Spread-Capable launcher with a rating of 4, and decided to do an upgrade to simulate normal TNG Versions.

My older ship redoes are continuing to be the more prominent, as I try to really make them work in a more primitive, sometimes cinematic way, to really make them stand out...

...Not every ship should be in the same, vaguely Galaxy-ish line, after all.

[The Tatterdemalion King]

...Not every ship should be in the same, vaguely Galaxy-ish line, after all.

So how does it affect your game?

[Meteo]

...The older ships get somewhat more primitive.

[Dan Gurden]

Put another way, perhaps instead of reposting all the unchanged stats along with your preferred updates/suggestions, you would be better simply posting the alterations you made along with a brief description of the changes?

Maybe the formula/info you used to help develop the new material.

Should save you some time, and be less dodgy with respect to the repost of the original authors IP under copyright?

By presenting it this way its all rather dry and flavourless, and the numbers do not stand out on their own, so even when people agree with the ideas (and I do) you end up not actually seeing the changes and its rather difficult to offer an opinion and support/critique/advice.

I personally see the stats as the TNG/Modern versions based on various upgrades, however for games set in different periods an alteration should be listed (perhaps you should add a date to your new stats to show when these would be used)?

[The Tatterdemalion King]

...The older ships get somewhat more primitive.

Any examples from actual play?