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

Isn't there an erase-function?

 

I said "36 ISDs PLUS Executor".

 

The Executor may only be "worth 20 Star Destroyers" though.

Even the most extreme estimates of its firepower generally aren't above 100 ISDs.

 

I always considered the "worth 20 Star Destroyers" to refer to the cost of the ship.

And since Executor is capable of moving in concert with the ISDs despite its much larger mass, it must be capable of producing the energy to do so. Energy, that can also be released through the cannons, if the need arises.

 

Nothing on Home One? Anything interesting in the MC80 entry?

--Adm. Nick

 

Its maximum acceleration is half that of an ISD though.

For the 20-odd Executors created to cause worries about nearly bankrupting the Empire - they have to cost a lot more each than 20 ISDs would. The cost of 1000 ISDs, each, would make more sense.

For it to cost as much as 20, but have the "combat value" of 100, seems implausibly efficient when it comes to the Empire.

 

Maybe it mainly used weapons developed for the mass-produced Imperials and other Star Destroyers, thus lowering costs? Apart from the size, there doesn't seem to be anything revolutionary about its design. The Malevolence was more radical in nature.

 

Problem is - it's consistently portrayed as overpriced rather than cheap in the EU at least.

 

The EU isn't canon, remember?

 

What does the new FFG book say about Executors, if anything?

 

And mass-wise it is closer to 300 ISDs than 100.

Wonder how there can be more than a dozen Executors, if only one of them nearly bankrupted the Empire? Or how Delvardus, with only a handful of sparsely settled systems under his control managed to build one. Not to forget, that the Empire managed to build 60% of DeathStar II in a timeframe of four years without any impacts on the economy, so the components - which would be larger and more costly, since more rare - for those on the DS for Executor can't be the driving factor behind cost.

It is much more likely, that - as hinted in the EGTW - that Palpatine used the Executor-budget to hide other things.

You just have to look at the real world to see how that is possible (compare the cost of a modern destroyer and an aircraft carrier (although here the combat-power originates with its fighter-wing, so a bad analogy for SW or the largest container-ships with crews of 18 people to a more average freight-ship).

 

Where exactly? As already stated, that claim can't be held up, if you look at the EU as a whole.

 

How can 20 Executors nearly bankrupt the Empire who also builds the Eclipse class, Death Stars and Worldships? That sounds less like a true fact and a bit of propaganda from those in the navy opposed to the Executor class

 

That's about right. Compare the amount of armaments on an ISD to a Venator. Plus Venators were mostly designed as starfighter carriers, while the ISD is a destroyer/carrier mix.

It'd be pretty hard to bankrupt the empire, or a several planets spanning government in Star Wars in general. The multi-sector Hutt Empire is going strong for centuries despite running on the outdated slave-based economy. Hapans were just fine despite being isolated and hell Pellaeon's Imperial Remnant even fielded about 4-5 SSD type of vessels, most being Executors as far as I can recall.

Its not just the Eclipses, Death Stars and Worldships too, don't forget all those Maw superweapons, ranging from the Sun Crusher, Galaxy Gun to Orbital Nightcloaks, Omega Forest and the Metal Crystal Phase Shifters.

 

Wow someone is using logic and critical thinking skills rather than taking one sentence in of the ROTJ novel as absolute

 

Nothing about Home One. MC80 entry isn't anything really new. "Mon Cala" is cited to be a "simple" version of Mon Calamari.

 

Anything on the Mon Cal shipyards or their output ability? I am also curious how much Ackbar figures into the book.

--Arm. Nick

 

Blade Squadron doesn't have much on Executor, other than saying Vader swapped it with Devastator as his flagship (it says it's a "new flagship", but that can mean it's just the newest flagship because it was reclassified when Vader took over, or that it's the newest ship in the fleet that's eligible to be a flagship).

It appears Devastator is the ship depicted in the deleted scene where the B-Wings are flying past it as it's hit and exploding.

 

FFG has been shying away from putting "famous characters" in the books, unlike the other two RPGs - but Ackbar actually figures prominently, specifically in going over "Project Shantipole", and Ackbar's promotion to Admiral.
The shipyards - "The ring [of shipyards] has since become an enormous facility with millions of designers, workers and builders."

 

Both have 8 primary turrets - but the Venator's are 2 barrelled (as are the ISD-I's) and the ISD-II's are eight-barrelled.

Possibly. Early on it was "that one ship nearly bankrupted the Empire" (Darksaber) later on (TEGTW) it was the whole Executor fleet that was causing worries that if the building went on it would bankrupt the Empire. Maybe as a "straw that broke the camel's back".

 

Its a really easy fix, the Jedi Cruiser is just no longer a Star Destroyer in new canon and it is better for it.

It was likely already started for him by the Empire before the collapse.

It's service and manufacturing based, just like the Empire, which also has a massive slave labor pool

 

The ship's name was Night Hammer (before Daala added the K) and Delvardus originally controlled what was the Night Hammer Oversector.

Might be that he took the incomplete ship with him when he fled into the Core - a bit like the Eclipse designers did after the Rebels took Kuat.

Regarding the Praetor II:

it seems to have jumped in size again. From 3x length (TEGTW) to "nearly 4x length" (beta)

to "nearly 5x length".

 

Which were handed out like trinkets, even.

 

Pretty much, though George used Attack Cruiser the most in his script (with cruiser and battle cruiser here and there to describe the same ship). I can't recall "Jedi Cruiser" being used though. Perhaps that's a CW thing? Grievous' ship is referred to as a Trade Federation Cruiser, cruiser and battle cruiser.

Funnily, he describes a Star Destroyer being flanked by Imperial Attack Cruisers during the iconic Tarkin, Vader and Palpatine scene. I guess we can say the Star Destroyer wasn't shown onscreen.

 

TCW used it a lot, as afaik did the old Starwars.com site.

 

I think its something that came about with TCW- so just like with a lot of other things, TCW says its that way, so every other part of the EU must comply. The Warfare guide used that term for the Venator as well. Its also been cited as a reason for sidelining Venators after the Clone Wars were over, due to their association with the Jedi. Bit of a silly term, but that's TCW for you.

Thank you for all the info from the new RPG, I've gotta pick it up soon. Too bad it sounds light on Rebel ships, but EotE had quite a few supplements, so there's hope. Just curious, was there a Praetor picture in there, or was it only that vague shot from afar?