I’ve run the measurements against the various illos in the book (some ov them have independent issues, too) and have come to the conclusion that there needs 2 b at least another 0 in the map scale’s legend.
Let me know if I’m wrong, please.
RC
1 Like
Are you asking about the main space station?
I have found a lot of discrepancies in maps, deck plans, etc. For example, my players have a Scarab Class ship, and the plans in the core book don’t match the module descriptions in the ship-building chapter. Since words are easier to change than pictures, and since the changes were relatively insignificant (eg: number of stasis beds) I rewrote the module descriptions to match the deck plans when building the “owner’s manual” for my players.
For me, the answer is “add that 0” if that makes you more comfortable as a GM. I guarantee that nobody will notice or challenge it in your games.
May the Dancer inspire your sessions!
I’m having this issue with the Coriolis crosssection map of the ring and the core, I believe (AFTBRN).
1 Like
You mean the scale of the maps?
Mmmm… yes! I guess 
To be frank, I also find the scale of the map smaller for my taste. This is also valid for other maps in the other books. Fortunately, I am not forced to use this scale and can increase or decrease it according to my taste. I try to adhere to what the authors came up with and only modify it if it really does not make sense.
Let’s not forget that Coriolis was a ship and the setting is sci-fi with fantasy elements, not hard-core sci-fi that takes the orbital mechanics, astrophysics and other things into account. Because most of the planets wouldn’t exist or be habitable 
1 Like