test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

New Ship Prefixs: NCX and EX

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
well, guys, i think it's time our ships get new Prefixs.
NCX and EX Exist In Soft Canon Books, Why Don't have New Prefixs for STO? after all it's soft Canon STO.
let us know of Dev could comment on this for adding to Ships prefix?

anyone, would you rather have NCX or EX than NX and NCC?
Post edited by Unknown User on
«134

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    No thanks.

    No more non-canon BS, please.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    No thanks.

    No more non-canon BS, please.
    excuse me?
    idk if you have NOTICED, our Star Trek Online IS soft canon, and by the rights of Cryptic and CBS, they can choose this for OUR STO.

    please check the facts and proof of our STO's canon is. before you think it's non canon... jeez

    we got NX classes and it's soft canon another many more on way too :P
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    NCC covers ships on active commission whilst NX is for experimental vessels (ie vessels under construction if even registered and prototypes). Leaving other 'soft canon' sources aside - and which ones are you referring to, by the way? - the two hard canon prefixes cover every vessel in Starfleet.

    I must admit that I don't see the need either from a canon point of view or a gameplay one and I'm interested in why the OP thinks this is worth adding.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Haegr wrote:
    NCC covers ships on active commission whilst NX is for experimental vessels (ie vessels under construction if even registered and prototypes). Leaving other 'soft canon' sources aside - and which ones are you referring to, by the way? - the two hard canon prefixes cover every vessel in Starfleet.

    I must admit that I don't see the need either from a canon point of view or a gameplay one and I'm interested in why the OP thinks this is worth adding.

    have you seen VOY episodes "Future's end" part one and two? they had NCX Prefix

    and Star Trek Phoenix also has it.
    http://www.stphoenix.com/
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    superlink1 wrote: »
    ....

    we got NX classes and it's soft canon another many more on way too :P

    Wrong, hard canon is what was in the films and on TV... NX01 was on TV in ST:Enterprise with the quantum leap captain and her sister ship NX02 , so NX is hard canon.

    Though I'd be intrested to learn what the others were supposed to be used for in the books??

    And I don't see why we could not have more prefixs added, makes things a little different, a little more personal :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    jockey79 wrote: »
    hard canon is what was in the films and on TV... NX-01 was on TV in ST Enterprise with the quantum leap captain and her sister ship NX02 , so NX is hard canon.

    Though I'd be intrested to learn what the others were supposed to be used for in the books??

    And I don't see why we could not have more prefixs added, makes things a little different, a little more personal :)

    as you may have not noticed as well... NX-01 is in game already and it's soft canon too you might well have to take the fact NX-01 is diffrent from rest of other ships and it is soft canon plus hard canon
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    superlink1 wrote: »
    well, guys, i think it's time our ships get new Prefixs.
    NCX and EX Exist In Soft Canon Books, Why Don't have New Prefixs for STO? after all it's soft Canon STO.
    let us know of Dev could comment on this for adding to Ships prefix?

    anyone, would you rather have NCX or EX than NX and NCC?

    I've not heard of those prefixes before. I don't have an opinion just yet. I'd like to know the context. Can you suggest a novel where these were in use?

    I was also recalling (not for the registry - but for the starships name) UTS >source<. Which might work well for an NPC starship. But not, IMO, for our current Captains.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I've not heard of those prefixes before. I don't have an opinion just yet. I'd like to know the context. Can you suggest a novel where these were in use?

    I was also recalling (not for the registry - but for the starships name) UTS >source<. Which might work well for an NPC starship. But not, IMO, for our current Captains.

    please read the second post (regarding Hag's post)

    that's where they come from. but unfortunely for me i don't have ST books i never ever owned one but i read daily at Borders.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    superlink1 wrote: »
    have you seen VOY episodes "Future's end" part one and two? they had NCX Prefix

    and Star Trek Phoenix also has it.
    http://www.stphoenix.com/

    Phoenix is *fanfiction*

    I cant remember seeing any Starfleet Vessels with the registry NCX

    I suggest you read this page:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfleet_ship_registry_and_classes_in_Star_Trek
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    After reading over that article I could see some justification for interesting ship prefixes based on ship class.

    The Raven and SS Vico for example were both research vessels and both used the NAR prefix. Although not starfleet designations I could see people using something similar in a RP role. I could see a justification behind starfleet pressing into service a former research vessel, or a former independent human research vessel joining star fleets ranks in a temporary basis in defense of some planet.

    With the new Vulcan and Andorian ships to hit the game shortly I could see unconventional registry prefix's added to the game for these non starfleet built ships.

    Im pretty much ok with anything as long as there is a plausible explanation of why its there or what function it serves.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Phoenix is *fanfiction*

    I cant remember seeing any Starfleet Vessels with the registry NCX

    I suggest you read this page:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfleet_ship_registry_and_classes_in_Star_Trek

    and you missed this one on that page.

    NCX-300 USS Proxima Proxima Refit Federation Battleship
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Well...

    I can't seem to find any reference to Starfleet vessels having either NCX or EX, closest I could find is ECS, meaning Earth Cargo Ship, hardly fitting for a war/exploration ship. I also cannot find any reference to the Aeon (Future's End) being NCX, most seem to agree it is registered under UTS. The Relativity (another time ship) was NCV-474439-G, but that isn't something we would likely see in 25th century Starfleet, there not being any time ships as such. NAR is used, but only on civilian vessels, might come in handy if they ever put in a non-aligned faction.

    Apart from the canon NX (experimental) and NCC there is NXP, but that is a pathfinder vessel, or proof-of-concept ship for some new technology, and never intended for actual use. There are several other canon registry letters, such as NSP for the Vulcan merchant fleet, but really, I can't see just slapping on some random letters just for the heck of it.

    As for the Pheonix - not even soft-canon, sorry.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Okay, so there is one ship in another video game (a crappy one at that) with the aforementioned prefix. Funny it doesn't show up in the lists on Memory Alpha and Beta. Why are you interested in these particular ones, and what do they even mean?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    The only other canon prefix we need is ....


    I.S.S. !
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    superlink1 wrote: »
    as you may have not noticed as well... NX-01 is in game already and it's soft canon too you might well have to take the fact NX-01 is diffrent from rest of other ships and it is soft canon plus hard canon

    The NX-01 is hard canon.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Yeah, best case that can be made for any of these is ISS, and honestly, I personally would prefer not to have them in game. I have enough problems with the ragtag freedom fighters of Smiley transforming into a cutting edge conquering military who can suddenly transport entire fleets into another reality within a few decades. I mean, even taking the huge leap to them reverting to their evil ways they could hardly afford to send entire fleets into another reality when at least the Klingons are still around in their own, not to forget the Bajorans, Romulans, Breen, et. all.

    That said, I would support ISS in game, since we already have the uniforms and such, since nothing will force me to use them. I can't say the same for the rest of these quasi-soft canon and barely mentioned prefixes.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    superlink1 wrote: »
    and you missed this one on that page.

    NCX-300 USS Proxima Proxima Refit Federation Battleship

    Proxima is not even a canon ship.
    Only wiki that is even remotely reliable for canon info is memory alpha.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    ISS prefix please :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    superlink1 wrote: »
    and you missed this one on that page.

    NCX-300 USS Proxima Proxima Refit Federation Battleship

    Which is from a game (Star Trek - Legacy to be exact)

    The "real" Proxima was the USS Proxima NCC-2001 : http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/USS_Proxima_(NCC-2001)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    saying the NX-01 is soft canon. buddy you need to re read and re watch tv shows. theres nothing soft canon about it. It was in a Star trek TV show.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    superlink1 wrote: »
    as you may have not noticed as well... NX-01 is in game already and it's soft canon too you might well have to take the fact NX-01 is diffrent from rest of other ships and it is soft canon plus hard canon
    The NX-01 is hard canon.
    saying the NX-01 is soft canon. buddy you need to re read and re watch tv shows. theres nothing soft canon about it. It was in a Star trek TV show.


    honey, i watch the shows, and i know exactly what i'm talking about.

    NX-01 IS also Soft Canon even if it is Hard Canon, but NX-01 is in game as replica so it is SOFT CANON
    end of the subject.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    No thanks.

    No more non-canon BS, please.

    The great thing about a game like this is that something that is non-canon is made canon via the game. Remember at one point in time the Galaxy class ship was not canon. In fact the old Connie was not canon at one point. The only way is for someone to create it and then decide to make it part of the Star Trek Universe. The last thing that the franchise wants is to be stuck in one point with zero innovation.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    saying the NX-01 is soft canon. buddy you need to re read and re watch tv shows. theres nothing soft canon about it. It was in a Star trek TV show.

    The OP doesn't know what he's talking about.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    Okay, a few things, the only Starfleet registries seen have the prefix NCC, NX, or (In the 29th century) NCV for timeships. Note STO takes place in the very early 25th century, and no standard ships have inbuilt time machines, so only NX and NCC should really be used.

    The only Starfleet ships, in canon, to use anything other than NX or NCC were ships in the 'Enterprise' era, before the UFP was founded, where the prefix denoted the class.

    NAR, NDT, NFT, NGL, and NSP are all Federation, yet NOT Starfleet prefixes. I.e. Civillian, Federation Freight, Vulcan etc.

    Off Topic:

    And MelineAaele, you say the 'real' Proxima was the USS Proxima NCC-2001, yet you quote Memory Beta, which uses non-canon roleplay as a source, and even then it says the ship is destroyed. (We do hear about another USS Proxima in "DS9: In Purgatory's Shadow" being lost, no canon class or registry is stated, but the Star Trek Encyclopedia atates it's a Nebula class NCC-61952)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    TRIBBLE

    Stands for, uh, "Extremely Experimental Explorer".
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    jburke4 wrote: »
    The great thing about a game like this is that something that is non-canon is made canon via the game. Remember at one point in time the Galaxy class ship was not canon. In fact the old Connie was not canon at one point. The only way is for someone to create it and then decide to make it part of the Star Trek Universe. The last thing that the franchise wants is to be stuck in one point with zero innovation.

    Innovation is good. The only problem I have with extra prefixes is meaning. NCC and NX already cover the normal and experimental ships. Why would Starfleet even need another prefix? While certain civilian crewed ships may have other prefixes, starfleet generally likes to keep with these first two.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    superlink1 wrote: »
    honey

    That is a man, a very delicious man, but a man none the less. Honey.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    superlink1 wrote: »
    honey, i watch the shows, and i know exactly what i'm talking about.

    NX-01 IS also Soft Canon even if it is Hard Canon, but NX-01 is in game as replica so it is SOFT CANON
    end of the subject.

    honey? i thought we where keeping our pet names and secret love affair a secret......damn. Its not Soft. you mean in game its soft. and ive seen a few people asking you what these rediculous Prefixes stand for as well.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I will never understand the aversion that some folks have to any innovation or expansion of the Star Trek Universe in the name of canon unless it comes directly from a small handful of people in Hollywood. If there is no expansion of the Star Trek universe it will die, proof of this fact is TNG, Voyager, DS9, Enterprise...... would folks be happier if there was nothing other than TOS using the old Connie and etc?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited November 2010
    I also can't find any of these prefixes on Memory Beta, the best source for soft-canon trek (IE, books and games, officially licensed stuff).

    No thanks on stuff from crappy fan fiction.
Sign In or Register to comment.