I keep hearing about it in reviews of all the epic ships but the Gozanti, and I have no idea what it is. I know all the ships are at 1/270, but how does sliding scale compare to it?

11 minutes ago, Celestial Lizards said:

I keep hearing about it in reviews of all the epic ships but the Gozanti, and I have no idea what it is. I know all the ships are at 1/270, but how does sliding scale compare to it?

They make them be whatever size looks kewl, irrespective of the 1/270 "standard scale."

It means that the epics are NOT in scale with the fighters (which are in scale with each other and the larger transports) and the Epics aren't even in scale with each other! The sliding scale means that while they're smaller than they should be in comparison with the smaller ships, they are made to still look believable when played next to the fighters.

If the Epics were made to the same 1/270 scale as the fighters, they'd be too large to be played.

The Epics, aside from Gozanti, are 1/450, if i remember correctly.

from what I remember, the gozanti and the raider are 1/270 the rebel transport is like 1/390 and the corvette is around 1/427. but don't quote me on that.

19 minutes ago, PanchoX1 said:

from what I remember, the gozanti and the raider are 1/270 the rebel transport is like 1/390 and the corvette is around 1/427. but don't quote me on that .

Quoted.

2 minutes ago, MegaSilver said:

Quoted.

Thank you. Had a seizure this morning. Was having a bad day. This made me laugh, and made me feel better. Well done !

I was pretty sure they're all the right size. If you compare from various movie shots, they seem about the right size.

Sadly, the CR-90 is never in the screen alongside smaller ships, but in Episode V, we see the Falcon docked to the medical frigate, and it's about as wide as that middle spindly part of the frigate. Comparing that to the fact that the Tantive is about 2/3 as long as the frigate makes it seem about the right size when the Falcon mini is compared to it. Also, the windows look about the same size as on the Decimator and any other ship with floor-to-ceiling windows.

The Rebel Transport is the right size - just watch the movie and compare it to an X-Wing!

The Gozanti and C-ROC seem right, compared to the Ghost, which docks with both in the Rebels TV show.

The Raider was made up by FFG, so it can be any size they want!

The "sliding scale" is FFG use of a smaller scale on larger ships to help bring them down to a size that they could appear on the X-Wing mat. I suspect it works a little like the stepped tax brackets where there is a base tax level but then the rate starts to go up after you make a certain point.

4 hours ago, PanchoX1 said:

from what I remember, the gozanti and the raider are 1/270 the rebel transport is like 1/390 and the corvette is around 1/427. but don't quote me on that.

Here my impression has always been that the Raider and Corvette are supposed to be "face-off" ships and thus should both be using the same scale allowing them to be judged side by side. The Gozanti being 1/270 is almost a requirement when you are supposed to be able to dock fighters to it and if you want it to look right they'd better be the same scale.

Seeing as the raider was designed specifically for X-Wing, it'd be pretty amusing if it was not to scale.

1 hour ago, Kieransi said:

The Rebel Transport is the right size - just watch the movie and compare it to an X-Wing!

No, it's not. Look at the bridge pod on the top of the transport model and compare it to the one man cockpit of an x-wing model. The transport bridge is like half the size of the x-wing cockpit. Somewhere out on the inter webs, the model scales are stated. I'll try to find them later.

21 minutes ago, Elavion said:

Seeing as the raider was designed specifically for X-Wing, it'd be pretty amusing if it was not to scale.

It is scaled for X-wing Epic scale.. stated by FFG to be 1/450.. The Gozanti is the odd one out as it would look odd with docked ties if not in 1/270.

1 hour ago, Elavion said:

Seeing as the raider was designed specifically for X-Wing, it'd be pretty amusing if it was not to scale.

It is not, the scale is the same as the CR-90 and GR-75. The only huge ship that is at standard scale is the Gozanti because of the docked TIE Fighters. But again when taking a look at the large and small ships in standard they are also now at a sliding scale. The Scum faction is the worse primary offender. So the whole standardized scale has been abandoned at Wave 5.

Which is why I think you could still have a Star Destroyer in Epic games. People will be complaining no it won't fit the scale to my response is "what scale?" You can still set it up to be say 2.5 times as long as the CR-90. Sure it won't fit in the hangar bay but neither does the CR-90 in Armada fit inside the ISD in Armada. Heck if you could have an X-wing scale then maybe you could take the Armada scale CR-90 and put it inside the X-wing scale Star Destroyer.

2 hours ago, Kieransi said:

I was pretty sure they're all the right size. If you compare from various movie shots, they seem about the right size.

Didn't FFG themselv say they are not in thes same scale as the rest in an article about the first epic ship?

3 hours ago, PanchoX1 said:

No, it's not. Look at the bridge pod on the top of the transport model and compare it to the one man cockpit of an x-wing model. The transport bridge is like half the size of the x-wing cockpit. Somewhere out on the inter webs, the model scales are stated. I'll try to find them later.

Ok, I've done some quick measurements and checked the "official" lengths of the T-65 and the GR-75 Transport. Summarised below;

Ship Model Length (mm) "Actual" Length (m) Scale

T-65 X-Wing 46.5 12.5 m 1:268

GR-75 Transport 229 90 m 1:393

The small and large base ships are approximately 1:270. As others have pointed out the epic ships aren't to the same scale, they'd be (sadly) unusable in most normal game venues. The GR-75 model should be 333mm (approx) long. I don't have a CR-90 sadly but the model should be over 550mm long.... for those that aren't metrically inclined, that's just shy of 22 inches.

52 minutes ago, boomaster said:

Ok, I've done some quick measurements and checked the "official" lengths of the T-65 and the GR-75 Transport. Summarised below;

Ship Model Length (mm) "Actual" Length (m) Scale

T-65 X-Wing 46.5 12.5 m 1:268

GR-75 Transport 229 90 m 1:393

The small and large base ships are approximately 1:270. As others have pointed out the epic ships aren't to the same scale, they'd be (sadly) unusable in most normal game venues. The GR-75 model should be 333mm (approx) long. I don't have a CR-90 sadly but the model should be over 550mm long.... for those that aren't metrically inclined, that's just shy of 22 inches.

So a 23" Star Destroyer model ( a little < 2') would fit perfectly in Epic

Huh. Pretty sure the scales are mentioned in their respective release articles by FFG..

Anyway Tantive, Raider and Reb Transport's scale is smaller than the standard 1/270. Around 1/400+ and was done intentionally as they'd be too big to play at 1/270. (E.g Reb transport will be 33 cm and Raider 56 cm).

Honestly though I don't mind them releasing a 56 cm long raider/tantive.. must be majestic.

Gozanti and it's cousin C-ROC on the other hand stayed true to 1/270 and hence are the epic ships in scale with small/large ships.

7 hours ago, Marinealver said:

But again when taking a look at the large and small ships in standard they are also now at a sliding scale. The Scum faction is the worse primary offender. So the whole standardized scale has been abandoned at Wave 5.

Do you have a source for that? Because FFG has kept _every_ Large and Small ship at the 1:270 scale since Wave 1. Anything that's "wrong" is wrong in the canon, with the official numbers given by Lucasfilm.

7 hours ago, Marinealver said:

Which is why I think you could still have a Star Destroyer in Epic games. People will be complaining no it won't fit the scale to my response is "what scale?" You can still set it up to be say 2.5 times as long as the CR-90. Sure it won't fit in the hangar bay but neither does the CR-90 in Armada fit inside the ISD in Armada. Heck if you could have an X-wing scale then maybe you could take the Armada scale CR-90 and put it inside the X-wing scale Star Destroyer.

It's not that you couldn't shrink it down enough to fit it on the table. It's that a single Star Destroyer ought to be able to take out 300 points of anything on its own. Not to mention bringing over a hundred TIEs along with it. X-Wing is a skirmish game, and a Star Destroyer is _not_ a skirmish unit.

Something that people seem to be missing, a sliding scale isn't just "things are at different scales", it means that the scale changes according to a predictable formula. As the canon size of the ship increases, the scale changes by a proportional amount so that, if you plotted the scale of various minis in relation to their canon size on a graph you could connect the dots and get a line that would allow you to predict what size the mini would be for a ship of any given length, even though they wouldn't be in the same scale.

I don't know if the epic ships in X-Wing are on an actual sliding scale, or if people have been just using the term wrong, but it does not mean simply that the epic ships are in a different scale.

12 hours ago, Kieransi said:

I was pretty sure they're all the right size. If you compare from various movie shots, they seem about the right size.

Sadly, the CR-90 is never in the screen alongside smaller ships, but in Episode V, we see the Falcon docked to the medical frigate, and it's about as wide as that middle spindly part of the frigate. Comparing that to the fact that the Tantive is about 2/3 as long as the frigate makes it seem about the right size when the Falcon mini is compared to it. Also, the windows look about the same size as on the Decimator and any other ship with floor-to-ceiling windows.

The Rebel Transport is the right size - just watch the movie and compare it to an X-Wing!

The Gozanti and C-ROC seem right, compared to the Ghost, which docks with both in the Rebels TV show.

The Raider was made up by FFG, so it can be any size they want!

The CR-90 is also a victim of being "bigger on the inside". If you consider all the space that was shown in ANH, but then compared to it's outside shots it doesn't seem like the exterior is large enough to allow for all that space. We have Leia hiding in a relatively spacious cargo hold putting the plans in R2. Then R2 and 3P0 get in the escape pod. We do not hear any of the blaster fire that was raging on other parts of the ship. If the CR90 was properly scaled with the Fighters in this game, then they should have found Leia fairly quickly, as well as the droids.

Both the Raider and the CR-90 are 150 meters long. TIE fighters are just a hair under 9 meters. If the Raider and CR-90 were properly scaled, they would be almost as long as 17 TIE fighter models placed touching each other. Coincidentally, TIE models are exactly 1" long. The Raider would need to be 4-5 inches longer, and a good deal wider, to be properly scaled.

Is this: Sliding Scale graph maybe where the phrase has been adopted from...I know it's not a popular idea with some, but I've used it for all of my 3D-printed Epic stuff, even down to the Senators shuttle (which looks ok against the GR-75, but even sillier against the Goz ) - most of what I've made or have files for is from 80m to about 160m, but I may try a Star Galleon at 300m [around 48cm long], as it's a fairly simple shape and I'm still having probs with the Nebulon files I have

There's some truth to the sliding scale (i.e. Not faithful to exact 1/270) though. For instance, A-wings are supposed to be smaller whereas Y-wings are supposed to be larger. Put them side by side with an X-wing and you'll immediately notice the weird scaling. Slave 1 is supposed to be smaller as well.

So, gentlemen, this is a behaviour we do not tolerate nor condone in the service of the empire. There is no uniformity in diversity. We believe in one true design: Twin Ion Engine Fighters, brought to you by Sienar Fleet Systems Ltd.

13 hours ago, Marinealver said:

So a 23" Star Destroyer model ( a little < 2') would fit perfectly in Epic

An Imperial I Class Star Destroyer is 1600m in length at 1:270 it would be 5.925m (or 5,925,000mm) long. There are a number of groups that have ISD mats to play on. At 1:400 scale it would be 4m (still the size of my dining room). A 23" model (I can work in feet, inches and mm. I grew up wargaming in the '80's so GW taught me all about imperial measurements...) will be approximately 1:2700 scale. How long is the CR-90 model, I don't own one?

2 hours ago, Grivoire said:

There's some truth to the sliding scale (i.e. Not faithful to exact 1/270) though. For instance, A-wings are supposed to be smaller whereas Y-wings are supposed to be larger. Put them side by side with an X-wing and you'll immediately notice the weird scaling. Slave 1 is supposed to be smaller as well.

So, gentlemen, this is a behaviour we do not tolerate nor condone in the service of the empire. There is no uniformity in diversity. We believe in one true design: Twin Ion Engine Fighters, brought to you by Sienar Fleet Systems Ltd.

The scale Y-Wing is longer than the X-Wing and the "actual" Y-wing is around 4m longer than an X-wing.

8 hours ago, ianmiddy said:

Is this: Sliding Scale graph maybe where the phrase has been adopted from...I know it's not a popular idea with some, but I've used it for all of my 3D-printed Epic stuff, even down to the Senators shuttle (which looks ok against the GR-75, but even sillier against the Goz ) - most of what I've made or have files for is from 80m to about 160m, but I may try a Star Galleon at 300m [around 48cm long], as it's a fairly simple shape and I'm still having probs with the Nebulon files I have

2 hours ago, boomaster said:

An Imperial I Class Star Destroyer is 1600m in length at 1:270 it would be 5.925m (or 5,925,000mm) long. There are a number of groups that have ISD mats to play on. At 1:400 scale it would be 4m (still the size of my dining room). A 23" model (I can work in feet, inches and mm. I grew up wargaming in the '80's so GW taught me all about imperial measurements...) will be approximately 1:2700 scale. How long is the CR-90 model, I don't own one?

The scale Y-Wing is longer than the X-Wing and the "actual" Y-wing is around 4m longer than an X-wing.

So, according to Ianmiddy's graph, an ISD would be about 30" long? (Clearly, we need to use Imperial measure here.)

That wouldn't be too bad at all on a table top. . .

11 hours ago, Forgottenlore said:

Something that people seem to be missing, a sliding scale isn't just "things are at different scales", it means that the scale changes according to a predictable formula. As the canon size of the ship increases, the scale changes by a proportional amount so that, if you plotted the scale of various minis in relation to their canon size on a graph you could connect the dots and get a line that would allow you to predict what size the mini would be for a ship of any given length, even though they wouldn't be in the same scale.

I don't know if the epic ships in X-Wing are on an actual sliding scale, or if people have been just using the term wrong, but it does not mean simply that the epic ships are in a different scale.

Correct.

6 hours ago, Grivoire said:

There's some truth to the sliding scale (i.e. Not faithful to exact 1/270) though. For instance, A-wings are supposed to be smaller whereas Y-wings are supposed to be larger. Put them side by side with an X-wing and you'll immediately notice the weird scaling. Slave 1 is supposed to be smaller as well.

So, gentlemen, this is a behaviour we do not tolerate nor condone in the service of the empire. There is no uniformity in diversity. We believe in one true design: Twin Ion Engine Fighters, brought to you by Sienar Fleet Systems Ltd.

It's not the scale for the A, X, B, Y wings (or any small or large base ships) that is varying, it's what folks accept as the length of the ships that is varying. Once FFG decides on an "official" length for a ship they calculate the size of the model at 1:270. This doesn't vary. (Now, whether they use the correct value as thier 'official' value is up for debate I suppose).

So far there seems to be 3 points on FFG's sliding scale; 1:270 for all small and large base ships, 1:450 for the large Epic ships and 1:390 for the GR75. I wish they had used a sliding scale when they calculated the size of the Ghost model. I can understand using 1:270 for the Gozanti since it needs to be able to dock 4 Tie fighters and not look stupid (and I think it looks fine as is) but technically it should have been on a slightly different scale.

Edit: Some additional thoughts. 1:270 is a bottom end point for the sliding scale. That is to say, all ships below some as yet unknown length are set to 1:270. So far the bottom cutoff value seems to be somewhere between 70m and 90m since the Gozanti and Ghost are still on the 1:270 scale but the GR75 is on a 1:390 mid-point value on the scale graph.