Starship Scaling Questions


General Discussion


Something seems seriously wrong with Starship scaling at larger sizes, and the stated tonnage and crew complements.

Page 294 has a STARSHIP SCALE table that covers the expected Size, Length, and Weight of Starfinder Starships. This table, when compared to real-world ships just doesn't make any sense.

- Taking "Gargantuan" for this example, and their max stats: 15,000ft long and 8,000 tons, and the largest example ship provided (Battleship) with a maximum crew of 300.
- Compare that against an Arleigh Burke class destroyer which has comparable tonnage (actually closer to 9,000) and the same crew of 300.
- Silhouette comparison (SF Battleship in Black, US Destroyer in Red): http://imgur.com/a/4AKiL

The Arleigh Burke has a length of 500ft which is 3% of the Starfinder Battleship, yet they weigh the same and have the same crew size?

Can someone explain this? Is this a typo in the book where the designer forgot to cube the tonnage?

Why such a small crew complement for such an enormous ship? Even with automation this doesn't make sense.

Community / Forums / Starfinder / Starfinder General Discussion / Starship Scaling Questions All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Starfinder General Discussion