Jedi Council Forums - Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)

Jedi Council Forums » Star Wars Books & Comics » Literature »

Post Reply | Active Topic Notification | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

« 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 » - Previous | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: Fleet Junkie Flagship- The technical discussions of the GFFA (Capital Ships thread Mk. II)
Gladiuus Registered: Nov '03	Date Posted: 9/18/05 9:49am Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II
	Alright, folks, I decided to have a go at setting up an all-fleet message board here: Fleet Junkie Headquarters Let me know what you think. It's an experiment, and I don't want to step on any toes especially since I'm not exactly a regular poster in this thread. When you sign up, PM me (here, on TF.N) with your username over there and I'll give you access to a private forum where all you original fleet junkies can discuss where you want the site to go, or if you think it's even necessary at all.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
FTeik Registered: Nov '00	Date Posted: 9/18/05 10:45am Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II
	EvilleJedi posted: Fteik: be careful of the WEG created costs, if we call into question WEG's pricing we get a much easier justification for a lot of the iconsistancies (IE tie fighter cost, ion cannon cost, the cost capital ships up to star destroyers and beyond) many of these 'pricing' problems go away if we take the weg costs as being too low (there are many incosistancies in utility/firepower of ships in the pricing, modular taskforce cruiser being perhaps the ultimate one in my book, a specialized destroyer sized and decently gunned vessel that is less than the cost of a single gunship!) Without alternatives we have to take, what we can get. However for the firepower-cost-ratio of an ISD in comparison to the Executor we don't need WEG-numbers. Darksaber establishes, that an SSD is "worth 20 ISDs" and from the ITW:OT we get the weapons the Executor carries in comparison to an ISD: 78times as many turbolasers. -----signature----- My first completet story: Pride's Prize: http://boards.theforce.net/message.aspx?topic=22758760 "In the Battle of Coruscant alone, hundreds of millions of battle droids saw action on the ground and in space. " Insider #86 - The story of General Grievous
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
President_Sharky Registered: Jan '04	Date Posted: 9/18/05 11:56am Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II
	Are you kidding me McEwok? The Dreadnaught-class as a "ship of the line"? As of the Clone Wars, the Dreadnaught-class cruisers are dwarfed by just about every warship in use by the CIS and Republic. The Munificent-class Star Frigate is larger than the Dreadnaught. The ships are extremely inefficient and are severely outclassed by a true warship. Case in point, the comic arc Republic -- Dreadnaughts of Rendili tells that the Dreadnaughts are an aging ship design. Not only that, but they have serious design flaws that allow a single starfighter to be able to cripple its entire navigation suite. In addition, FIVE anti-pirate Dreadnaughts were unable to destroy a SINGLE attacking Acclamator-class assault frigate (the RSS Sundiver). What does this tell of the Dreadnaughts potency as a warship? ROTS ICS also tells us of Utapau's defences, which apparently also include Rendili Dreadnaughts. Each one is only one fifth the size of a Trade Federation Battleship, and if it takes a flotilla of Venator-class Star Destroyers (each one much more powerful than an Acclamator) to collapse the shields of a TFBB, it would probably take dozens of Dreadnaughts to destroy even one. Dreadnaughts are glorified police ships, nothing else. Perhaps to minor pirate bands they are a great threat, as they make great "Coast Guard" patrol ships, but when they're pitted against a true warship, they are grossly outclassed. -----signature----- Wipe out the trolls. All of them. Official Fleet Junkie
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
The2ndQuest Title: : -Games -LACWAC -Lit Mod of Death Registered: Jan '00	Date Posted: 9/18/05 1:10pm Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II
	BTW, just as an observation, I think we should just rename this thread and edit the new info in the first post, as there doesn't seme much point in skipping over the details and conversaions about the topic that have been posted as the title discussion goes on. Besides, after the first 15 pages, people probably won't bother reading anything but the first and most current posts anyways -----signature----- K'Kruhk, 140 ABY: "Why haven't I come forth earlier to share my Jedi knowledge with Skywalker? Well, it's kinda a long story, see, I had this freaking sweet hat..." Is your Death Magnetic?
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
AdmiralNick22 Registered: May '03	Date Posted: 9/18/05 2:04pm Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II
	That is fine. You make a good point, The2ndQuest. Go ahead and change the title of the thread and add any links that make it look official. Also, feel free to add my little summary. I had alot fo fun with it. BTW, do we have a title yet? --Adm. Nick -----signature----- Fleet Junkie Founding Father Official Greatest Admiral Ackbar Fan "A peaceful Galactic Alliance is the strongest pillar of a peaceful galaxy." - Luke Skywalker "I will surrender, Admiral, when I can no longer fight!" - Admiral Gar Stazi Antilles/Celchu 08
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Gladiuus Registered: Nov '03	Date Posted: 9/18/05 3:34pm Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II
	So... anyone check out the new boards?
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
GrandAdmiralJello Title: Emperor • EUC • JCC Registered: Nov '00	Date Posted: 9/18/05 4:22pm Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II
	I think the only thing that was impressive about dreadnaughts is that they sport immense firepower for their size--but they're terribly slow, undersheilded, and clunky vessels. That's why they were quickly replaced by much larger and more capable vessels. -----signature----- Roma Æterna\|SPQR Imperium Sine Fine "Moribus antiquis res stat Romana virisque" -Ennius, Annales "Tu regere imperio populos, Romanæ, memento;hæ tibi erunt artes; pascisque imponere morem, parcere subjectis et debellare superbos" -Virgil, Aeneid
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
The2ndQuest Title: : -Games -LACWAC -Lit Mod of Death Registered: Jan '00	Date Posted: 9/18/05 7:59pm Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II
	Well, so far we have 2 votes for all three of the finalists. So, we're just waiting on a few people (to cast a vote for one of the three actually on the list ). -----signature----- K'Kruhk, 140 ABY: "Why haven't I come forth earlier to share my Jedi knowledge with Skywalker? Well, it's kinda a long story, see, I had this freaking sweet hat..." Is your Death Magnetic?
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
MasterControlProgram Registered: Dec '03	Date Posted: 9/18/05 8:06pm Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II - Date Edited: 9/18/05 8:08pm (1 edits total) Edited By: MasterControlProgram
	A Dreadnaught is a ship of the line because that's what all the sources say she is, outside the orbit of SWTC-inspired fanfic. There is no fanfiction on SWTC. Exactly what are you referring to? SWTC's warship-designation arguments are not based on a lucid, judicious and even-handed use of information, but on selective presentation to fit uncanonical frameworks, Cry me a river, envious one. SWTC's warship-designation is the single most coherent, logical observation of SW vessels available on the internet, are certainly more reliable than poorly researched RPG sourcebooks and "Essential Guides" who cut and paste from those sourcebooks. People who fondle 20 sided dice shouldn't be relied upon to represent the definitive, correct minutae of the GFFA. How many Saxton-bashing posts are you going to make in lieu of actual argument? Look, blubbering into one's pillow "It shoulda been meee!" nightly over the fact that Saxton's observations on the GFFA landed him a job as an EU author over oneself shouldn't generate post after post after post on a web board of simpering anti-author sentiment and envy. That's what blogs are for. Buck up. But his canon work can't reinterpret the Dreadnaught directly without creating a fairly blatant continuity contradiction. No one's reinterpreted "Dreadnaught". However, the Executor-class Star Dreadnought has been given its properly place thanks, not to a "fanfic", but a full-on LFL product, "ITW:SWT". The term "dreadnought"has been used to describe ships of a bigger class from one another since the Marvel SWcomics. (You can tell these apart from RPG products by the fact that they didn't come with dice.) 900km is not the canonical size of DS2. Yes, it is. Inside The Worlds Of The Star Wars Trilogy pg. 43: Secretly constructed in orbit around the remote Forest Moon of Endor, the second Death Star is over 900 kilometers (550 miles) in diameter CINEFEX July 1983 issue Interview with Richard Edlund of Industrial Light & Magic, regarding the effects of Return of the Jedi. pp.7-8: " The Deathstar, I think, will be a lot more interesting than the one in the first Star Wars — mainly because it is under construction ... Plus, it will be MUCH bigger. In Star Wars, it was really difficult to establish the scale. It was supposed to be miles in diameter, but with a full sphere it was hard to tell. The NEW one is SUPPOSED TO BE MORE like FIVE HUNDRED MILES in diameter, but since we're not dealing with a sphere all the time, we'll be able to establish landmarks and get a better sense of scale." Oh, and for any lurking "VIPs" : Hi there!!! -----signature----- My Youtube Flicks: http://www.youtube.com/user/MrPoe
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
IceHawk-181 Registered: Mar '04	Date Posted: 9/19/05 6:01am Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II
	The Death Star is ~900km, thanks to the movie scaling. Construction time of the this station is sighted, low-end, at 6 months. Even if it took two years to build, do you understand how many 1.6 Km long Imperators a station 900km in diamater could be used to create? Something on the order of a 1e15 or more if my math is within an order of magnitude, give or take. So 1e10 to 1e15 worth of Destroyers = the DS2. Roughly, with crappy math. I think it is more than plausible that there are hundreds in not thousands of vessels larger than and superior to the Imperator design within the Empire. -----signature----- Proof is an interesting phenomena; there is seemingly always an abundance of it when it need not be presented.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Pelranius Registered: Apr '03	Date Posted: 9/19/05 6:08am Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II
	If someone referred to a Dreadnaught Cruiser as a ship of line, chances are, that person would probably belong to some planetary government's so called navy. -----signature----- Fleet Junkie and Proud! Fics: Destiny's Inferno (TTT/DE AU) And the Skywalker Saga KOTOR Style Updated 7/24/06 see bio for details
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Thrawn McEwok Title: TFN EU Staff Registered: May '00	Date Posted: 9/19/05 6:15am Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II
	FTeik: The point you obviously missed is: How can it be a ship of the line, if there were no battles for ship of the lines? And your evidence that there were no major battles (as opposed to no Galactic-scale wars) is...? Presumably they were "ships of the line" inasmuch as they were deemed appropriate as the premier warships of their age, and a core around which to build combat forces if war did break out - the same reason that anyone else has ships of the line in peacetime, in other words... Does that article on the Mandos give the date of the Mandalorian Dreadnaughts that inspired the design, btw? Typical rhetorical blunder: "Saxton is a nice guy, a competent man, BUT ..." No; a genuine, sincere respect for Saxton and for a lot of what SWTC has done, designed to emphasise that I'm not simply trashing uncritically or out of hand. I'm sure my phrasing is less than perfect - that's just a part of the human condition: but I'm doing my best to make clear where I'm coming from on this... which is that SWTC (presumably accidentally) manipulates its sources to fit its interpretive frameworks... A correction of the correction? That would be counter-productive. No, it would be the removal of errors and the refining of the evidence. Thank you for insulting me, everybody else here, who agrees with Saxton and the people at LFL, who hired him and edited his writings, that we "didn't look into these arguments to deeply". After all McEwok knows more than everybody else and is not a dishonest hypocrite, who wants us to value everything WEG created as gold - although those sources themself admit to be incomplete, probably flawed (since they're supposed to be "in-universe"-documents) and don't fit the movies and the selective conditions they give us - and to ignore every other source like the ICSs or ITWs.[/i] No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm urging an inclusive approach, embracing as much as possible the spirit and the letter of the movies, WEG, novels, and ICS/ItW alike, based on a balanced, rational approach to the evidence, and the possibilities of meaning inherrent in the various "sources". I probably have a knee-jerk reaction against ICS/ItW for the way that badly-thought-out fanboy stuff was allowed to override established canon (though, as I said, stuff like that happens); but I have two valid criticisms here, one for the fanboy use of the material, and the other for the material itself: We don't actually know much about the Mandy-II: it exists (at least under construction), it's very large, and it can supposedly match about 200 VenStars, in some circumstances. About the Procurator and the Mandy-class, we know even less. For neither class do we know numbers, speed, manoeuvrability, crew compliment, weapons outfit... you get the idea. The problem that the Mandy-II causes is not just with WEG CPOV stuff, but with remarks and implications throughout the novels. The Dreadnaught is repeatedly identified as a major warship of the pre-Clone-Wars period. This isn't a contradiction per se, but it does define how we should interpret the Kuati behemoths. In laymans terms, I'm trying to fit as much as possible in. Last time I looked, that was part of LFL's official canon policy. There is no contradiction: The Dreadnought-Cruiser is the strongest ship the UN-like OldRepublic employs in its police-force. In its Navy. In its Judicial Forces. In the Outland Regions Defence Force. Any references to these as "police", please? And are these sufficient to allow the sort of police/navy dichotomy you're creating in your own usage? Once the clone-wars begin they're assigned frigate-duties in support of Victories and Venators (if they are used at the front-lines at all). Yep. The first Star Destroyers supercede the Dreadnaught. We know this. The Dreadnought-Cruiser being ships of the line is hyperbole by Rebel-Alliance propagandists, who don't even know on which side the clones of the clone-wars fought and who are completely ignorant of the role Venators and Acclamators played. Source for the "clones" thing? I don't want to commit myself to criticism until we know how the evidence is all fitted together... and, as ever, my inclination is to look at the actual remarks and find an inclusive explanation, rather than resort to a mantra of "they don't know what they're talking about"... And the VenStar is ignored as the RASB and ISB are concerned merely with ships still in widespread service. The Acclamator is presumably in low-volume use, but her ommission doesn't bother me, inasmuch as the ISB implies, but doesn't analyse, her natural heir, the Vindicator... shrug, so what? Several reasons or a combination of them are possible: a) As protection in case of corporate-warfare (which became widespread during the last decades of the OldRepublic), b) the officials of Kuat are smarter, than the officials of the OldRepublic, c) the OldRepublic could do without ships bigger than a Dreadnought-Cruiser, because it was confident, that in case of emergencies it could rely on the strong Navies of its member-states (like already said, the OR looks a lot like the UN, but while the UnitedNations lack air-craft-carriers or even decent destroyers, its members like the UnitedStates, GreatBrittain and so on have them). Um, since when did the UN have its own navy? Battleships and carriers have operated under a UN mandate, y'know? And there are other reasons, or a combination of them, that might apply as well: d) Kuati egos e) A misguided "bigger is better" design policy f) A defensive strategy for a single system, rather than flexible patrol requirements g) Employment for construction workers and crewers h) fossilization of tactical thinking over a thousand years of peace And this prevents the member-states of the OR to have stronger ships/real militaries than the FederalState ... how? Or the need for the empire to arm up to keep them in line? Technically, of course, it doesn't; but it doesn't mean they do... and the scale and role of the Dreadnaught is indicated not only by WEG, but also by EU references... but that is just a personal opinion. My objection the flaws in SWTC's logic can't allow me to dismiss the canon material based on it - like I said, I have to accept that the ICS ships are canon now... sigh However, on a happier note, the mere size and alleged self-defensive capability of the Mandy-IIs doesn't mean they're actually useful or effective ships. And how does this explain the poor performance of ISDs at the battle of Hoth and their continued service in the destroyer-role? Well, the established sources say that ISDs are big ships, and Hoth can be explained entirely comfortably without contradicting that idea. The temporary damage to Tyrannic came because she was lured into a position where she was sitting square across the path of fire from an ion canon that the scouts had missed. And there's no guarantee that a larger ship would have fared better. Similarly, the "destroyer-role" use of ISDs is merely one fan interpretation of their role; you're taking a non-canonical theory (Star Destroyers are "destroyers"), fitting facts to fit it, and dismissing the evidence that doesn't work. I'm looking at all the canon evidence, at the theories and claims presented therein, and trying to fit all the evidence together around them. Don't create unneccessary contradictions. No, no and no. They are not expansive or a huge resource-drain as evidenced by the construction of the DeathStars. No? We'll get onto the length of time it takes to build a DS later, I guess.... They are not expansive, if you look at the sums private corporations have to spend to become member of the CorporateSector. And what's your guarantee that the "credit" of the CSA sponsorship is valued the same as the "credit" of the ImpStar's cost? The reason for their existance is the need to overpower forces, who have their own ISDs (mutinous forces of the empire), local rebel-forces, who have their own strong hardware (MonCalamari-Cruisers or the Dornean Navy) the need to wear down planetary shields and the need to resist planetary artillery. They are also not unwieldy or complicated. As i and others have shown several times, volume and firepower increase much more than costs or crew-demands. And who, precisely, is in command of these forces? What's to stop them mutinying? Where's your evidence that they're better against planetary shields and ion canon? Where's your evidence that they're simpler to operate? Where's your evidence for their speed and manouevrability? Where, in fact, is your evidence for their existence... It's a heap of inference, based ultimately on brain-bugs. That said, superships do exist - witness the Eye of Palpatine, the Ex-class and the Eclipse. I'm merely questioning whether they're actually tougher, rather than merely larger, and also asking whether they ever exist in sufficient numbers to operate in squadron-strength units, rather than as king-pieces for Star Destroyer fleets... Where is the hypothesis in that? Even if there is only a small handful of massive ships, you have to give them a place in the OoB and there can't be a small handful of them, because the necessities of an empire with one million major worlds, fifty million colonies on a technological level, that provides even small groups like the Rebel-Alliance at Hoth with defenses against a small fleet of ISDs or the Hutts with the ability to build their own superlaser demands them. Your so-called hypothesis IGNORES the needs, the abilities, the financial and industrial power and the political will of the GalacticEmpire. No, it reevaluates the financial and industrial power of the Empire, asks sensible questions about warship design and weaponry, and bases its interpretation not on assumptions and brain-bugs, but on an inclusive approach to canonical evidence. It also ignores the small fact, that after twenty years the NewRepublic obviously came to the SAME conclusion. Building lots of ImpStars and a few larger battlecruisers and command ships, yep... 1) IIRC, the TechnicalJournal of the ImperialForces suggests, that the empire to give each of its sector-groups an SSD as flagship. The what? The Shane Johnson one? I don't see that - maybe I'm missing something. But I do see a reference to the ImpStar's reactor as the "largest such generator ever constructed". What did ItW say about the Yavin and Hoth reactors, again? 2) There is no problem with the SectorGroup containing nothing more, than an ImpStar. What we suggest is, that the larger ships are concentrated in the ImperialNavy, the reserve and Oversector-Commands (BlackSwordCom with at least three SSDs). Black Sword is a secret strategic reserve, and one of the "three" identified SSDs, the Big Tim herself, was apparently merely being fitted out at N'zoth prior to commissioning. Several ways you can interpret the numbers, though. Apart from that, the problem is that most of the SSDs we see are on the Rim anyway, and as deployed in combat, they always form solitary king-pieces at the heart of Star Destroyer fleets... Careful, SSDs start at 2.200 meters of lenght. There's one "Rebel slang" reference to Allegiance as an SSD, you mean? Once again, see the cost-crew-firepower-ratio, which is in favour of the bigger ships. Based on what? The bridges aren't much larger, too. No, but then again, an ImpStar is designed to be able to serve as a fleet command-ship. The fact that the same nerve-centre is used doesn't make the two designs analogous... And you're distribution curve exists. The EU gave us enough examples. I count about... twelve. Of which none sit between 2 and 7 miles on the keel. Very, very roughly, that's about a tenfold size-jump - between perhaps 4xImpStar and 40xImpStar by volume. With the exception of the Ex-class, produced at the height of Imperial megalomania, and the Mandy-II, which is still shady, the bigger ships (Eye of Palpatine, Sovereign-class, Eclipse-class) are, where known, very limited production, and all of them are designed around super-heavy planetary-assault weapons. And this explains what (?) if they are spread over the entire galaxy? I was critiquing the "at least 50,000" figure - we don't know how many non-Imperial big ships there were, and there's no reason to assume that the Empire was merely matching its enemies for numbers. Think of them like USN Fleet carriers? What gives you the idea, that ISD-IIs were badly-built? That phrase about "x design flaws waiting to happen"? The exponential expansion of fleet numbers? And the generally poor quality of the personell used to crew them? And why can't Chimera and Right to Rule simply have been upgraded? And why should they have been upgraded into badly-built-ships? No, no - of course they're upgraded; what I'm suggesting is that an ImpStar-I spaceframe is built more ruggedly and durably than the average ImpStar-II... it's just a hypothesis I'm throwing out, nothing more... Which AGAIN speaks in favour of the larger ships in terms of cost-crew-firepower-ratio. Could you please make up your mind? Not at all. If you can afford only one or two, you might as well build 'em big; if you have a navy, a combination of smaller and more flexible units makes more sense... You mean whining around, ignoring stuff, that isn't to your liking and spamming this board, wikipedia and god knows where else you're active? No, I mean criticism. You don't seem to operate well with disagreement. But we do know, that the empires fleet seen in DarkEmpire stomped the numerically superior NR. We do know, that the majorty of those ships were called back from their Pre-Endor-assignments by Palpatine. No. We. Don't. We know that the major fleet commanders declared for Palpatine. We have no idea of the numerical balance. We know that the NR's major fleet assets were on the Rim, and there's no evidence that they were ever effectively neutralized. Why should he call back glorified Star Destroyers, large transports or communications-ships, but not the most powerful vessels the ImperialNavy has available? Circular argument. It assumes that Star Destroyers aren't "the most powerful vessels" in the first place. It postulates larger off-camera ships. We also know from HoT, that only a small fraction of the empire ever fought the Rebel-Alliance and the NewRepublic, so how can you assume, that an SSD and a few ISDs are truly representative? The rest of them are dealing with brushfire wars and police duties. Or are you saying that your postulated Star Cruisers and Star Dreadnoughts are "police-force" vessels, like the Dreadnaught? Perhaps "Dreadnaught/Dreadnought" means "space police-car"? Since the DeepCore is resource-poor the majority of them. Define "resource-poor"? Do you know how World Devastator molecular furnaces work? Do you know whether strategic materials were built up there before Endor? No, you don't. You're just hypothesizing, and, as with so much else, your hypothesis is designed around a preconcieved lust for bigger toys. Enough to retake the galaxy. No. Major Imperial fleets allied themselves with Byss, including some who withdrew to the Core at the start of DE before being reassigned. Ask yourself, what is more likely: One huge step or a number of smaller steps? DS2 - 900km diameter sphere; internal volume, 300,000,000km? DS1 - 120km diameter sphere; internal volume, 900,000km? Eclipse - 20km-long arrowhead; internal volume, 100km? Ratio: 3,000,000:9,000:1 Ask yourself, what is more likely: one huge step, or a number of smaller steps. Surely, since there's one DS2, and two DS1s, we must imagine a rational series of classes of increasing commonality and decreasing size down to minnows like Eclipse. In fact, considering how much of the face of Byss some of the ships we see in orbit occupy, they must be hundreds of kilometers long, at least!! You'll find that the truths we cling to depend very much on our point of view... And Executor CAN'T represent a massive rampup, because there existed other ships of its type (Star Dreadnoughts) decades prior. Do we know that they compared in usage, armament, speed, manouvrability? No. Her bridge-shields got down AFTER at least three MonCal-Cruisers, which were a lot larger and stronger than the EU gives them credit concentrated their fire on the Executor. And if this could happen to Executor, an ISD would be worse off. We know this why? DS2 is 900 kilometers in diameter according to ITW:OT Quote? (never mind, MCP obliged) and "more than 500 miles in diameter" according to Richard Edlund, responsible for the SpecialEffects in ROTJ. Not a canonical statement. ROTJ itself shows a DeathStar, that is 10-11times smaller than Endor, which must have a certain size to be habitable and to have standard-gravity. IAnd no evidence has yet been advanced to validate the elision of the narrative accuracy of the movies with literal visual accuracy. Sources? Quotes? DFRSB, and SW Gamer #9. Working on getting hold of quotes. Source? Quote? GalaxyGuide5 tells us, that Bevel Lemelisk only started working on the design for the second DeathStar AFTER ANH. I know. That quote is on the page I linked to. But the in-universe context is... what, exactly? An unreliable Rebel source? Or what? What has thirty years of development to do with the actual construction-time? And why took it thirty years to design a 160 kilometer wide battlestation, but less than three years to design a 900 kilometer one (since the design started only after the destruction of DS1 as according to GalaxyGuide5? As according to GG5, yes. Again, in-universe context? Again: Quotes? Sources? Minimalist reading of TotBH quotes, contrasting Saxton's maximalist one. Both are possible. But I think the minimalist one sits better with the observed scale of galactic tech, and the apparent twenty-year construction timeframe of DS1. And even if, the opening trailer of ROTJ tells us, that the empire has begun with the construction of a new DeathStar. We know it only begun AFTER ANH. So the maximum time-frame it took for 60percent of DS2 to be complete is three years. Even if that is the case the empire is still able to build the equivalent of 1.6 BILLION ISDs every year and not 4.2 BILLION as it would be if DS2 was build in six months. No explicit timeframe for "begun construction". You could as well use Leia's memories of her mother to invalidate RotS... Did he? Where is this said? And what exactly is said? Nothing is said about the origins of the ~2km SD design; there are multiple interpretations - I'd say that it's more plausible to infer from their absence from all references before DE that they weren't deployed than it is to infer that we simply don't see them. Or - as suggested by the DESB - they could be ships called back. The deep core is a resource-poor enviroment and the secretive nature of the imperial holdings located there doesn't help either. See above. The battle of Endor was a battle against an by comparison insignificant rebel-force (you also ignore the presence of the DeathStar there), Making it a skirmish between pickets (including the Ex, given the size-discrepancy between her and the battlemoon)... Coruscant is not only guarded by one SSD and 24 ImpStar, but also the Whelm and AzureHammerCommand and Josef Grunger wanted to bring one of the three major shipyards of the galaxy under his control before making his bid for power (if that was truly his intention, to become the next emperor). There would seem to be layered defences - in at least three deployments, inasmuch as Black Sword is also tasked to be guarding the Core agains the Rim. And a shipyard is a strategic resource... Grunger presumably wants an industrial base, not a fleet that'll take months or years to build. He has a fleet already. They DID notice. They simply didn't know, where the ships went. Evidence? Just because a sector-fleet is guarding Byss doesn't mean, that there are not other ships and fleets in the system. True. But the reference to "a whole sector fleet" concentrated in the system implies that this is the main defence, and a remarkable thing. BlackSwordCommand, AzureHammerCommand, DeathSquadron, Giel's Armada, the free-moving fleet from WEGs "Goroth:Slave of the Empire". I discussed the "[colour + weapon] Command" designations in the next sentence (your lack of spaces is uncanonical, btw; I might cheekily draw a parallel with SWTC's lack of capitalization on "Star Destroyer" )... Thrawn McEwok posted: The "[colour + weapon] Command" formations seem to represent the beginnings of a strategic OOB seperate from sector organization, but technically, they don't even have to do that. The designation of Giel's fleet is unknown (could it be Azure Hammer?). And the precise reference to G:SotE has never been supplied. You are wrong for several reasons: First the sources you hang on are already contradicted by the Prequals (Acclamator-cousins being warships in the clone-wars, which are larger than Dreadnought-Cruiser and the introduction of the Venator, what does this tell us about the importance of the Victory?), For raw tonnage, an Acclamator is probably not much heavier than a Dreadnaught... And the reason why the VenStar is never mentioned is that it was phased out - the VicStar was a more durable design. second, those sources are biased, since they portray the rebel POV (and would therefor ignore everything that doesn't paint the Old Republic or its member-states as peaceful and with low spendings for the military), The ISB, apparently extracted verbatim from Imperial documents, criticises the Old Republic quite roundly. third, those sources are incomplete by their own admission, True. So? fourth, they describe the GFFA-equivalent of the coastguard in regions of the galaxy, where the rebels would encounter imperial forces - the outer rim, a territory far away from the true centres of power, Which is why the USN's carrier battlegroups are anchored at Washington, Galveston and San Diego... oh, wait. fifth, the role ISDs play in the OT and their performance against planetary shields and planetary artillery makes them unfit to be the prime battleship of the empire (F..K, how often do i have to point this out? Movies TOP EU and those instances SHOW, that the EU is wrong in its ideas about the ISD), No, movies show certain incidents. You choose to interpret these in ways that imply contradictions. Why? sixth, even the EU acknowledges, that the majority of the Imperial Forces was NEVER fighting the Rebel-Alliance (see HoT), Agreed, they were stamping out brushfire wars and stopping pirates and providing cover/protection for civilians. These are, of course, the roles in which you use your largest and most powerful battleships. seventh, according to WEG's own DESB, the EC and other sources the ImperialForces steamrolled over the NR and its military during the time of DarkEmpire despite being said to be outnumbered by NR-intelligence. Consequently their advantage wasn't in numbers, but in tonnage and individual firepower, Quotes, please? Bear in mind that Deep Core forces were supplimented by the rest of the Imperial military, revitalized by its recent run of victories - achieved, I note, without Deep Core assistance. eigth, i have to wonder at your hypocrisy: You want us to value everything said by WEG without questioning, but to ignore the movies, the ICSs and ITW:OT. No, I want to reconcile everything as much as possible, doing my best to maintain the spirit and the letter of the meaning in [b]all cases... even with ICS/ItW... Sorry, but that door swings both ways. If you want to throw out the DK-books, who is going to prevent me from ignoring WEG and claiming, that they're incompetent reaserched articles by ignorant or biased NR-historians/propagandists? That, I think, is what you're doing anyway. But, I'm not wanting to "throw out" ItW or ICS, far from it; while I can raise a wryly amused eyebrow at the disregard for established canon that they display in some passages, I accept their canonical status, and I seek to find ways to allow everything to be part of a wider truth. EJ: if we call into question WEG's pricing we get a much easier justification for a lot of the iconsistancies (IE tie fighter cost, ion cannon cost, the cost capital ships up to star destroyers and beyond) many of these 'pricing' problems go away if we take the weg costs as being too low (there are many incosistancies in utility/firepower of ships in the pricing, modular taskforce cruiser being perhaps the ultimate one in my book, a specialized destroyer sized and decently gunned vessel that is less than the cost of a single gunship!) Personally, I'd explain the differences in terms of iinflation and revaluation... does that work? I will agree to disagree with you ewok on the point that large ships are not more useful, but again, thats my personal opinion. That's fine. We can agree to disagree? I still think the biggest reason large ships are useful is in territory holding of strategic areas and in combined usage with support ships and interdictors. A large ship with its expected increase in shielding and reserves for weapons provides the hammer to crack open the enemies surface defenses and its larger vessels, leaving the smaller warships to worry less about total damage inflicted on them. IMO it would be unwise to initate a battle that while you will win, that you will have to repair afterwards. A large ship provides the umbrella that draws fire from the support ships. I guess I agree with you up to a point - that's what SSDs are used for!! But individually heavier guns are going to be much heavier, and slower to aim and reload, and I'm not really sure there's any evidence for heavier shields on larger ships, either... FTeik: Darksaber establishes, that an SSD is "worth 20 ISDs" Misrepresentation - or, at the least, a debatable interpretation. I always took that reference (end of Ch. 20) to refer to military, not monetary, worth. Also, it's coupled with an 8km length reference, which presumably you'd reject as a typo, or as character ignorance? and from the ITW:OT we get the weapons the Executor carries in comparison to an ISD: 78times as many turbolasers. Again, misrepresentation, or debatable interpretation. The "5000" reference offers no indication of the calibre of weaponry. P_S: Are you kidding me McEwok? The Dreadnaught-class as a "ship of the line"? It's what the sources say? As of the Clone Wars, the [i]Dreadnaught-class cruisers are dwarfed by just about every warship in use by the CIS and Republic. The Munificent-class Star Frigate is larger than the Dreadnaught.[/i] The Munificent Class Communications Frigate is longer than a dreadnaught, but has a much less compact hull. The ships are extremely inefficient and are severely outclassed by a true warship. Case in point, the comic arc Republic -- Dreadnaughts of Rendili tells that the Dreadnaughts are an aging ship design. Not only that, but they have serious design flaws that allow a single starfighter to be able to cripple its entire navigation suite. In addition, FIVE anti-pirate Dreadnaughts were unable to destroy a SINGLE attacking Acclamator-class assault frigate (the RSS Sundiver). What does this tell of the Dreadnaughts potency as a warship? That old, unrefitted Dreadnaughts in planetary-defence navies suffer seriously because of technical problems with the initial design, and badly-trained crews, perhaps? You can counter by noting that three Carracks and a Dreadnaught do their job against the Invisible Hand in the RotS novellization... ROTS ICS also tells us of Utapau's defences, which apparently also include Rendili Dreadnaughts. Oh, quote? Each one is only one fifth the size of a Trade Federation Battleship, and if it takes a flotilla of Venator-class Star Destroyers (each one much more powerful than an Acclamator) to collapse the shields of a TFBB, it would probably take dozens of Dreadnaughts to destroy even one. Dreadnaughts are glorified police ships, nothing else. Perhaps to minor pirate bands they are a great threat, as they make great "Coast Guard" patrol ships, but when they're pitted against a true warship, they are grossly outclassed. I'm still not convinced. Compared with Star Destroyers, they're small and old, yes. No-one's denying that. But if you want the average person's idea of a big ship before the Clone Wars, look no further. If you want a typical "cruiser", look no further. As to weaponry, the VenStar has eight heavy TLs in two sided batteries of four guns; the Dreadnaught has ten TL batteries, in bow and stern groups of five. I'd say they could measure quite well in simple firepower... And this gets us onto the question of exctly how the gun armament on big ships is organized. I know there's a tendancy now to identify the big, visible sided turrets as the main weapons, and I have a vague idea this comes out of the OT:ICS; but what, exactly, do the various ICS books say about this...? MCP: There is no fanfiction on SWTC. Exactly what are you referring to? SWTC is fanfic. It is not official. Any fan claim based on SWTC is likewise fanfic. Just like ASVS. Cry me a river, envious one. chuckles I'm not envious. I'm simply calling out bad arguments for what they are. SWTC's warship-designation is the single most coherent, logical observation of SW vessels available on the internet, are certainly more reliable than poorly researched RPG sourcebooks and "Essential Guides" who cut and paste from those sourcebooks. That's your POV. Needless to say, I disagree - firstly, on your preference, and secondly that "coherent, logical observation" is the right way to go about this. Are these plants to be categorized by external observers in a manner inspired by Karl Linnaeus? Or should we actually look at the terms used, as they are used? Come to that, what, exactly, is wrong with the corvette - frigate - cruiser - Star Destroyer - Super Star Destroyer system, still canonically defined as the formal Imperial classification? People who fondle 20 sided dice shouldn't be relied upon to represent the definitive, correct minutae of the GFFA. No, because they're just your bitches, right? And I mean, people whose chief pleasure in life seems to be trying to verbally rape these fanboy üntermenschen are so much less perverse, aren't they... As someone who's never played an RPG in my life, I have to confess, a momentary smile snuck across my face, until I reminded myself that you're trading in cheap stereotypes... How many Saxton-bashing posts are you going to make in lieu of actual argument? Look, blubbering into one's pillow "It shoulda been meee!" nightly over the fact that Saxton's observations on the GFFA landed him a job as an EU author over oneself shouldn't generate post after post after post on a web board of simpering anti-author sentiment and envy. That's what blogs are for. Buck up. Ad hominem in place of actual argument. So noted. I've said already - power to the man. I like SWTC, and even where I disagree with it, it's a darn useful resource. Does such a complex approach cause comprehension problems for you, or do you just have nothing better to do than misrepresent me here? No one's reinterpreted "Dreadnaught". However, the Executor-class Star Dreadnought has been given its properly place thanks, not to a "fanfic", but a full-on LFL product, "ITW:SWT". The term "dreadnought"has been used to describe ships of a bigger class from one another since the Marvel SWcomics. (You can tell these apart from RPG products by the fact that they didn't come with dice.) checks his Star Wars novels for dice Mnope. And, any quotes, please? I've heard this claim made before, but never seen any evidence forthcoming. Much like Goroth: Slave of the Empire is bandied around as "proof" of larger ships in strategic fleets, without any quotes being used to back it up. pg. 43: Secretly constructed in orbit around the remote Forest Moon of Endor, the second Death Star is over 900 kilometers (550 miles) in diameter Oh, good. Thanks. Okay, that's one reference. I'm still not sure whether 160km or 900km is going to win out, though. I assume you wouldn't accept any references to 8km SSDs as proving that the term is "canonical". Oh, and for any lurking "VIPs" : Hi there!!! Poe, any VIP who calls you a friend either has a vile sense of humour, or is a very, very poor judge of character... I pity them. - The Imperial Ewok -----signature----- A/T = OTP "To write one Solo twin as an angstbunny, Master Skywalker, might be considered unfortunate. To write BOTH that way looks like carelessness."
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Excellence Registered: Jul '02	Date Posted: 9/19/05 6:15am Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II
	You're joking. Death Star II is now 900km? I must have missed that. Now bigger than Centerpoint's 150km. Why so large? How wasn't 160 klicks big enough? -----signature----- My utilisation of complex locution to ask what's more pathetic, fans who worship their movie actors, or the actors who couldn't give a damn, is more a reflection of my own superincumbent mental actuity than any circumscribed lexicon. Don't you agree?
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Pelranius Registered: Apr '03	Date Posted: 9/19/05 6:26am Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II
	I think "Fan Supposition" would be a better term for the SWTC. The Munificent might mass less than the Dreadnaught (considering that a large part of the Munificent's interior is hollow) Some of the design flaws Nawara Ven mentioned in SotP were things like breaking down turbolifts (not usually fatal under any reasonable definition of the word) As for the RotS ICS Utapuan Dreadnaught quote: Page 22 "Their biggest anti pirate Rendili Dreadnaught is one fifth the sze of a Trade Federation Battleship" The Death Star II would be 900km, if you scale it according to Endor and to the Executor hitting it. -----signature----- Fleet Junkie and Proud! Fics: Destiny's Inferno (TTT/DE AU) And the Skywalker Saga KOTOR Style Updated 7/24/06 see bio for details
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
IceHawk-181 Registered: Mar '04	Date Posted: 9/19/05 8:30am Subject: RE: Fleet Junkie-class thread Mark II
	G-level Canon is a lovely thing is it not? I especially like how it overrides all other levels of Star Wars lore. Based on relatively accurate scalling of G-level material the Second Death Star is approximately measured at some 900km in Diameter. If you missed the proper size of the Death Star, you can always pop in ROTJ and look at it. The truth of the matter is simple, either Lucas re-edits the ROTJ images or the G-Level Canonical Diameter for the DSII is 900km. There are physical laws, even to a sci-fi universe, and these laws stipulate an approximate size for Endor to ensure relatively standard gravity. The Death Star is a certain size compared to Endor, which must be a certain size itself, ergo the Death Star can be scaled....and has been. 900 km is the approximate ROTJ established G-Level Canon. Accept it, dont accept it, it doesn't matter. The great thing about Canon Designations are that they are, well, Canon. -----signature----- Proof is an interesting phenomena; there is seemingly always an abundance of it when it need not be presented.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

« 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 » - Previous | Next | Reload

Jedi Council Forums » Star Wars Books & Comics » Literature »