12 hours ago, Mikael Hasselstein said:

I think we're just feeling despondent lately. FFG clearly loves the Rebels more, giving them all kinds of good stuff, when we used to get those. At this point, many of us are just waiting for FFG to bring out Scum, which will then eclipse us as even the second favorite, the way it went with X-Wing.

I believe you are suffering from a textbook case of "six months since last release" syndrome.

I recommend applying coffee until symptoms subside.

3 hours ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

You mean imagine my table under it. . . I'd have 9 feet on either side of said table that is just SSD. . .

Um, you Imps get a Quasar. . .

Yes, and she's the most awesome-looking ship in the Star Wars universe, isn't she.

...okay, I'm starting to warm up to her, and I did put one on pre-order. However, I'm not sure she's going to turn the tide of the Rieekan Aces scourge.

2 hours ago, svelok said:

I believe you are suffering from a textbook case of "six months since last release" syndrome.

I recommend applying coffee until symptoms subside.

Doctor's orders are doctor's orders.

21 hours ago, FoaS said:

Gonna get out my micrometer tonight and go to town taking ALL the measurements.

Is that like a man tool?

31 minutes ago, Mikael Hasselstein said:

Doct or's orders are doctor's orders.

Your quote made me aware of my typo and then immortalized it beyond my ability to edit.

I, too, am treating that with coffee myself.

33 minutes ago, Mikael Hasselstein said:

...okay, I'm starting to warm up to her, and I did put one on pre-order. However, I'm not sure she's going to turn the tide of the Rieekan Aces scourge.

Rieekan Aces aren't showing up all that much in store tournament data so far. If it's still top dog, it's at least not something most people are bothering to bring.

25 minutes ago, Eggzavier said:

Is that like a man tool?

A man does not speak of another man's man-tool?

40 minutes ago, svelok said:

Your quote made me aware of my typo and then immortalized it beyond my ability to edit.

Fixed it!

It's like it never happened... except that we're talking about it now.

41 minutes ago, svelok said:

Rieekan Aces aren't showing up all that much in store tournament data so far. If it's still top dog, it's at least not something most people are bothering to bring.

I have not been tracking the data all that closely, even though the compiler of that data was at my own Store Championship. (I just handed and forwarded him all the lists, without really looking at them.) I would certainly like for the meta to shift away from the embarrassment that is seeing the Empire removed from the top tables.

2 hours ago, Mikael Hasselstein said:

Fixed it!

It's like it never happened... except that we're talking about it now.

Except now you're talking about a mistake that never happened, making the conversation about the mistake the actual mistake, at least to any observer who did not see the original mistake that is no longer a mistake.

...wait...

On 5/30/2017 at 7:57 PM, fistfulofforce said:

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.

You really don't. It sounds cool until you realize just how big the ships actually are. You'd need to make the small ships so tiny as to not have any detail and the big ships so large you have effectively no play area, and that's just the stuff through wave 4. The Hammerhead is so small it should fit entirely within the side ridges of an ISD, the CR90 should be less than half its current size, etc. If you wanted to keep either ship at its current scale the ISD would have to be 2-3 times larger than it is now.

At the current scale, you could drop a super star destroyer into the game at about 18 inches and it would appear positively gigantic next to everything else while still being playable.

Sry. I couldn't get this to work and then I forgot about it and then I just didn't get to it. Here is the updated chart with the AFMII with the correct numbers.

12 minutes ago, Rune Taq said:

Sry. I couldn't get this to work and then I forgot about it and then I just didn't get to it. Here is the updated chart with the AFMII with the correct numbers.

Earlier in the thread, I think you'd posted the Resurgent-class came in at 13.2" using this curve? And the Executor, as a result, a whopping 5'?

What if you fudged a number for the Resurgent, as if it was a real data point rather than a needs-to-be-plotted one, and set it at 12"? I assume the curve changes minimally, but where does the Executor come out, then?

10 hours ago, xanderf said:

Earlier in the thread, I think you'd posted the Resurgent-class came in at 13.2" using this curve? And the Executor, as a result, a whopping 5'?

What if you fudged a number for the Resurgent, as if it was a real data point rather than a needs-to-be-plotted one, and set it at 12"? I assume the curve changes minimally, but where does the Executor come out, then?

I will try to find some time this weekend and play with it. I may have done that already on my own but the best fit curve didn't change much. I don't remember exactly so I'll check it out again.

Hey everyone. I am strapped for cash for a month or 2 so I can't buy my new ships yet. Could someone give me the length measurement of the MC75 for my handy dandy sliding scale chart? millimeters would be preferable but I can convert if needed.

On 31.5.2017 at 4:57 AM, fistfulofforce said:

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.

is what I did.

others too:

On 21.7.2017 at 3:30 AM, xanderf said:

Earlier in the thread, I think you'd posted the Resurgent-class came in at 13.2" using this curve? And the Executor, as a result, a whopping 5'?

What if you fudged a number for the Resurgent, as if it was a real data point rather than a needs-to-be-plotted one, and set it at 12"? I assume the curve changes minimally, but where does the Executor come out, then?

Funny enough my Resurgent class Star Destroyer is 13":

11 hours ago, Rune Taq said:

Hey everyone. I am strapped for cash for a month or 2 so I can't buy my new ships yet. Could someone give me the length measurement of the MC75 for my handy dandy sliding scale chart? millimeters would be preferable but I can convert if needed.

Well I guess I'll just wait till I buy my wave 7 stuff. I will try to post my updated graphs tomorrow. I made some updates a month ago just never got to post it. I have the Radus and Resurgent on there now. If we don't get an SSD I think we will get those. The Radus was built at the end of the GCW so it technically doesn't have to be a resistance ship. ?

Thanks for giving us the best fit curve equation.

Really interested to see how this pans out of the newer ships. Quasar on there?

AFMK2 is now described as correct on the graph? Do you want to add this as an edit to the first page?

Is it possible to sharpen the graph/function even more so that the large end becomes even smaller but the rest of the data points remain very close and on each side of the next-best fit?

Do these help with size?

https://imgur.com/a/FId2i

https://imgur.com/a/NL0wL

From art of rogue one

13 minutes ago, stev said:

Do these help with size?

https://imgur.com/a/FId2i

https://imgur.com/a/NL0wL

From art of rogue one

Intriguing! There is a fin below the engines that the Armada model lacks.

7 minutes ago, TheBigLev said:

Intriguing! There is a fin below the engines that the Armada model lacks.

Just an fyi this is from art book which means it can be tad different from movue model

3 hours ago, stev said:

Just an fyi this is from art book which means it can be tad different from movue model

Fair enough! I think it like it more with the fin..

Not knowing jack about how it would sit on that curve, I'd say some kind of "Epic Play" equivalent with an SSD and a Viscount Star Defender could feasibly work with ship sizes just above the X-Wing Raider and CR-90. Not to small, not too large to be playable?

10 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

Thanks for giving us the best fit curve equation.

Really interested to see how this pans out of the newer ships. Quasar on there?

AFMK2 is now described as correct on the graph? Do you want to add this as an edit to the first page?

Is it possible to sharpen the graph/function even more so that the large end becomes even smaller but the rest of the data points remain very close and on each side of the next-best fit?

Yes I have added the quasar and hammerhead. I need the measurement of the model to add the MC75.

I will edit the first page when I upload the new graphs

It would be possible to adjust the function. I don't want to put the effort into making this one more complicated. However if someone were to create it I could incorporate it.

I'm still convinced that it isn't just a length thing.

I think that if we weighted length, width and height as the x-value instead of just length, I think a more accurate curve could be found.

8 minutes ago, FoaS said:

I'm still convinced that it isn't just a length thing.

I think that if we weighted length, width and height as the x-value instead of just length, I think a more accurate curve could be found.

Absolutely agree. This would also explain the mc30 being off and others. If I find time I'll play with it. But I think the hardest part will be finding the info needed. Not many sources give the width and height.

I might still have a spreadsheet on my home computer with some measurements. I'll get back to you after work.