Just now, FoaS said:

Welp *flips table* Didn't realize it was a medium base...

To be fair, I look at it and have a hard time believing its length is its longest dimension, anyway

36 minutes ago, Rune Taq said:

Star wars Wiki said CR90 126.68m. But I've seen 150. Is 150 correct? They are similar size in armada. My in universe sizes are just different.

150 is the Legends length, starting in the 80's.

126.68 is the Disney length, and changed when they started calling it an Alderaan Cruiser.

its possible that the Alderaan cruiser is a 126.68m variant of the stock 150m Corellian Corvette.

5 minutes ago, FoaS said:

Welp *flips table* Didn't realize it was a medium base...

I suppose the base sizing is more of a conscious decision of game balance rather than a sizing thing. Though whether or not this scaling holds true for it is still up in the air.

Is it possible we can get the equation for that curve?

You can try... I just used excel to plot a best fit curve. I don't think I can back calc it without a lot of time put into it. I'm an engineer, computers do my math for me these days... Haha

for reference: v1 of my own math formula:

x = ((y/2) * sqrt(y) / 9.96) / y * 100;
where y is length of ship in meters and x is length of miniature in mm.

I could be mistaken but I believe if you right click the trend line and press "format trendline" there should be an checkbox for "display equation on chart"

4 minutes ago, pwnertrainee said:

I could be mistaken but I believe if you right click the trend line and press "format trendline" there should be an checkbox for "display equation on chart"

I thought there might be a function like that but I have never tried it. I'll check that tonight as well.

Thanks

1 hour ago, pwnertrainee said:

That is until the quasar comes out which is a medium ship that's 340m long according to wookiepedia

1 hour ago, FoaS said:

Welp *flips table* Didn't realize it was a medium base...

I thought that that length was for the Legends Quasar? Wasn't that smaller then the Rebels one?

6 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

I thought that that length was for the Legends Quasar? Wasn't that smaller then the Rebels one?

Yes the rebels Quasar is bigger. Idk how much bigger.

Has anyone tried putting an AFMKII in the microwave for a little bit to if it might shrink down some?

what the crap

dumb

Just now, BrobaFett said:

Has anyone tried putting an AFMKII in the microwave for a little bit to if it might shrink down some?

Has anyone tried putting an AFMKII in the microwave for a little bit to if it might shrink down some?

Has anyone tried putting an AFMKII in the microwave for a little bit to if it might shrink down some?

It was an awesome suggestion once.

But Three Times? Gotta love those forum hiccup-hiccup-hiccups.

5 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

It was an awesome suggestion once.

But Three Times? Gotta love those forum hiccup-hiccup-hiccups.

Hah it hasn't happened to me much, but when it does.... It does in style.

I think the ship length should be the independent axis, since those are dictated to us by an "authority", and the ratios are derived. Then this graph will start to look like... a logarithm!

4 hours ago, Rune Taq said:

You can try... I just used excel to plot a best fit curve. I don't think I can back calc it without a lot of time put into it. I'm an engineer, computers do my math for me these days... Haha

Excel will give you the equation, right click into the line properties.

16 hours ago, Rune Taq said:

BTW the AFMKII is the only ship way outside of the best fit scale curve. SHOCKER!! I KNOW.

But.... If it was closer to the scale curve it would have been LARGER. The problem is not the size of the miniature, the problem is the amount of detail/design. The ship is supposed to be big in the Star Wars Universe.

EDIT:
I was checking it, and I think the number in the chart is wrong. The AF Mk2 miniature is about 11cm long. And the ship is 700m long. That means the scale of the miniature is around 1/6300 (Which still is smaller than the curve says it should be).

2 hours ago, Darthain said:

Excel will give you the equation, right click into the line properties.

I did it for mine (approximated off the numbers on Rune's), and it gave y=2000.3ln(x)-7223. y=scale, x = ship length (cannon).

Yes I could have rounded the ".3". No I didn't want to :-P

3 hours ago, melminiatures said:

But.... If it was closer to the scale curve it would have been LARGER. The problem is not the size of the miniature, the problem is the amount of detail/design. The ship is supposed to be big in the Star Wars Universe.

EDIT:
I was checking it, and I think the number in the chart is wrong. The AF Mk2 miniature is about 11cm long. And the ship is 700m long. That means the scale of the miniature is around 1/6300 (Which still is smaller than the curve says it should be).

I will check it and correct it. Thank you

Here is my table.

Here is the graph with the SSD and Resurgent plotted to fit on the trend line.

I can't get the edited first graph to upload. I'll have to deal with it tomorrow. Sorry armada maniacs.

@Rune Taq

A sixty inch Super Star Destroyer?

With five potential titles?

I'm going to need more shelves.

I wish the minis were more in scale with each other. This just shows how off they are and I hadn't noticed they were all over the place.