Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 1 Ship Registry Numbers?
12-31-2010, 06:47 AM
Why can we only use ship register numbers from 91002 to 99999? Why not any number? Is it some kinda copyright thing?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
12-31-2010, 06:51 AM
I was wondering that myself. I thought we would have been able to use a wider variety of numbers than we actually can
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
Actually, you can use higher numbers - just add some digits. For example, one of my ships has a six-digit number: NCC-912104.

Some months ago I also saw someone whose registry didn't start with '9' but he couldn't exactly explain how he accomplished it (because he assumed it was common knowledge and he also was unfriendly).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
12-31-2010, 06:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Borg9
Why can we only use ship register numbers from 91002 to 99999? Why not any number? Is it some kinda copyright thing?
Yep, CBS only allowed that range of numbers. Avoids problems for any future series. I was mentioned in a post I'm not going to search for, but have at it if you want.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5
12-31-2010, 07:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnBludd View Post
Yep, CBS only allowed that range of numbers. Avoids problems for any future series. I was mentioned in a post I'm not going to search for, but have at it if you want.
Yeah you have to go digging back into the early days of the forums to find it, but basically CBS reserved a large swath of registries for their own use. We got what they didn't want
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
12-31-2010, 07:20 AM
I have to agree that the limitation on registry numbers is rather stupid. It's not like our characters and our ships would have any chance to be recognized as canon or even soft canon, after all.

Limiting the registry numbers is like giving us a range of pre-determined names for our characters and ships, yet there we can choose freely as it would be rather idiotic to do otherwise. So why the difference? Why not just "lock out" the registry numbers used by the popular official ships, just as it is done with their names?

This topic should be revisited some time when Cryptic talks to CBS again, imho.

Lower the registry threshold to NCC-2001!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
12-31-2010, 07:30 AM
The only time you really notice a registry is if you get real close up to that ship, so usually it will only be the captain who see's it (aside from screenshots).

I wouldn't mind a new registry prefix that we can use that allows us to use lower numbers: NCS:23018 (Number of Cryptic Ship/Studio)

Avoids conflicting canon prefixes, and allows players to put what ever number they want (above four digits I think would be best).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
12-31-2010, 07:46 AM
Mmm. I'd rather stay within canon in terms of prefixes. Also, let's not forget that Starfleet prefixes are interchangable with the number remaining the same (example: the Excelsior going from NX-2000 to NCC-2000), so that wouldn't really be a solution to the core problem if CBS remains adamant.

I just don't grasp the reason behind locking out that many numbers when it isn't done for character or ship names as well. I'm sure this is something that can be re-discussed for a better solution.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9
12-31-2010, 08:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valias
Mmm. I'd rather stay within canon in terms of prefixes. Also, let's not forget that Starfleet prefixes are interchangable with the number remaining the same (example: the Excelsior going from NX-2000 to NCC-2000), so that wouldn't really be a solution to the core problem if CBS remains adamant.

I just don't grasp the reason behind locking out that many numbers when it isn't done for character or ship names as well. I'm sure this is something that can be re-discussed for a better solution.

Have you seen how many "Enterprizes" are out there? That's bad enough without a bunch of NCC-1701's too.

Or even NX-74205 (Defiant), NCC--75633 (Sao Paulo, or Defiant II), NCC-74656 (Voyager), NX-59650/NX-74913 (Prometheus)

Any number of "canon" ships that CBS doesn't want us imitating. though I agree, I'm not sure why they haven't locked out the names. But it does make it easier, since your ship is "new" it shouldn't have an earlier registry than those ships I mentioned. So setting the limit at 90000 just makes it easier.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 10
12-31-2010, 08:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuatela
Have you seen how many "Enterprizes" are out there? That's bad enough without a bunch of NCC-1701's too.
That's why I am in favor of just locking out "canon" registry numbers - just like it is already done with canon ship names such as "Enterprise".

The fact that you can still do create an "Enterprize" is what makes the registry limitation look so stupid. Why can people do names such as these but not an NCC number like, say, 61282?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuatela
But it does make it easier, since your ship is "new" it shouldn't have an earlier registry than those ships I mentioned. So setting the limit at 90000 just makes it easier.
I disagree by many of the ships we're flying not being new. I really do not think that Mirandas and Excelsiors are still in production, so their registry number should be much lower. My Vulcan's Excelsior actually has the backstory of having been an old Academy training ship until it was pushed into active service again, which is why I'd like a lower registry number for her (preferrably something between 2001 and 3000) to accompany this part of my story.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:14 AM.