Lit LEGACY is back!

Discussion in 'Literature' started by Volderon, Dec 3, 2012.

  1. Mr Jewjitsu Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Dec 10, 2012
    Correct me if i am wrong, but according to the Warfare Guide there were many jedi baronies during the New Sith Wars. This might not be the only time when there were many smaller governments deciding the fate of the galaxy.
  2. AdmiralNick22 Fleet Admiral of Literature

    Manager
    Member Since:
    May 28, 2003
    star 6
    It was my assumption that the whole reason Master K'kruhk was placed on the new Triumvirate was to serve as a sort of independent mediator during the formation talks of whatever government was to emerge from the talks between the Galactic Alliance Remnant and Fel Empire.

    The Galactic Alliance is fully justified to push for the pre-war borders. Afterall, the whole casus belli of the war was that the Sith sabotaged the Ossus Project and manipulated the greedier members of Moff Council to push Fel into war. The Galactic Alliance kept the peace prior to the war and it appears that the GA and Fel Empire were allies that worked well together. Once the truth of the Ossus Project comes to light, all of those former worlds will flock back to the GA's banners.

    As for your claim that the Fel Empire did more fighting and had more troops, I am not exactly sure how true that is. And there is nothing in Legacy that states that outright. It is also important to note that after the Genocide on Dac that, per issue #36, worlds and sectors across the galaxy donated warships from their fleets to Stazi's forces. The GA's strength grew and grew, while the Fel Empire's forces never seemed to increase and actually suffered heavy losses when the Sith made their big push into Imperial territory at the end of the war.

    --Adm. Nick
  3. AusStig Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 3, 2010
    star 4
    NO.

    The Felpire held space. Stazi did not. He had support, that was all, Fell lost more for two reasons; 1. He had something to lose. 2 The author loved Stazi and relegated Felpire to punching bag.

    The Allience was responsible for the war by not punishing the YV. Is there any in-universe proof of sabotage?

    Stazi was the biggest plot tumor in Legacy and one of the main reasons I got turned off.

    The GA is dead, it's leaders are either dead, collaborators or military dictators. It was a stupid government, that decided the best thing to do was to let the YV use their 'tech' to fix planets. That like the government of China deciding the best way to deal with a locust problem is to let Japan use a plague on them.

    The Alliance has moral authority, but the Felpire has right of conquest and continuation, ie things keep going as they are, which trumps moral authority. As human history proves.

    Long and short, most of tha galaxy is living under the Empire and so most will keep living under the Empire.

    edit: on the jedi thing there is no evidence of that. My reading came from the fact that he was standing with the other leaders; therefore he was a leader.
    Last edited by AusStig, Dec 10, 2012
  4. AdmiralNick22 Fleet Admiral of Literature

    Manager
    Member Since:
    May 28, 2003
    star 6
    Here's the thing. It is John & Jan's story. Period. You don't like it? Great, take a hike and troll in another thread. You constantly pop into Legacy related threads just to complain and say that you don't like the direction the story went. :rolleyes:

    We get it. Move along. ;)

    --Adm. Nick
    Fleab88, RC-1991 and blackmyron like this.
  5. CooperTFN TFN EU Staff Emeritus

    VIP
    Member Since:
    Jul 8, 1999
    star 6
    Yeah, that's kinda like saying Palpatine wasn't that bad of a guy and Lucas forced the narrative in the direction it went because he was in love with Ackbar.

    Oh, wait, that's basically what Jello thinks, isn't it? [face_thinking]
    Last edited by CooperTFN, Dec 10, 2012
    Cronal and AdmiralNick22 like this.
  6. GrandAdmiralJello Moderator Communitatis Litterarumque

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 28, 2000
    star 10
    Nah, I keep my blame in-universe.


    It's all Voren's fault.
  7. Parnesius Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 8, 2012
    star 1
    I'm not so sure they are. Justified, I mean. The Galactic Alliance formally surrendered seven or eight years previously; the precise circumstances leading to said surrender don't really enter into it. Possibly a few worlds not previously sympathetic to Stazi will change their minds, but given the vast majority of Galactic Alliance systems have, with little visible rancour or bitterness, been living under an entirely illegitimate Sith emperor on top of a foreign occupation for the past several years, I would find it remarkable if all those former worlds, many of which were likely liberated by Imperial forces with nary a GARist in sight, were to, as you say, flock back to the Alliance's banners. I would remark upon it to people.

    It's still growing from a comparatively miniscule base. Fel's forces numbered a great many systems (including some dashed important planets), constituing a sizeable chunk of the galaxy's north, openly in arms agaisnt the Sith, numerous multiple large fleets and, presumably, similarly numerous armies. Taking Bastion by force was, you'll recall, a prospect from which Krayt's empire recoiled at the height of their power.

    Stazi, by contrast, fielded one fleet - even if it was larger than any other fleet, you'll surely agree that even by the Battle of Coruscant it still must have numbered far fewer vessels and personnel than Fel's navy - a few secret bases, and a significant degree of sympathy in the Southern Rim, albeit not openly declared.

    Also, it's worth observing that while, as you say, defections and donations must have made up the majority of Stazi's gains, Fel, in addition to the same (recall Yage's defection), possessed numerous naval shipyards, capable of functioning openly, and must therefore have been able to repair or replace his losses to a far greater extent.

    Really, it's quite the obvious conclusion that Fel's forces were far greater in number and power than Stazi's, and it follows logically that they did more fighting across more systems, and consequently, that the Empire would enjoy a significant expansion of territory and population, much as the Remnant did following the Yuuzhan Vong War.
    AusStig likes this.
  8. AusStig Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 3, 2010
    star 4
    But he takes away from the elements of the story that were set up at the start. It's like if Star Wars decided to replace Lando with Leia.

    And you but into threads and say how awesome he is. I am entitled to my opinion just as you are yours.


    Also I hated the GA from it founding so a new series without them got my interest, but they ended up taking over, the writer even said he didn't intend for him to come back.


    Legacy taught me to be always cynical about new Star Wars.

    edit: Speaking of new Star Wars, anyone know when more information will come out?

    Is there a Star Wars con coming up?
    Last edited by AusStig, Dec 10, 2012
  9. Skaddix Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 3, 2012
    star 4
    Pretty Good Argument.
    AusStig likes this.
  10. AdmiralNick22 Fleet Admiral of Literature

    Manager
    Member Since:
    May 28, 2003
    star 6
    Obvious conclusion? Not really. Stazi's forces consisted of the bulk of the GA Core Fleet, which was tasked with guarding the Galactic Core prior to the war. He had a sizable fleet and one that Fel wanted very much to get on his side. Factor in that after the Genocide of Dac that worlds across the galaxy started donating ships to Stazi's forces. The series showed, with each appearance, the increasing power of the GA Remnant, while Fel's power continued to diminish. Don't forget that prior to the decision to attack Coruscant that the allied forces were holed up at Bastion waiting for the final blow to be struck. Borosk had fallen (the key fortress world in Remnant Space) and his remaining worlds were under attack.

    Lastly, the one thing you are all overlooking is the value of the most powerful force of all- TRUTH. The facts of the Sith-Imperial War are plain and simple. The Galactic Alliance rightly supported the Ossus Project, which was the Jedi's hope to restore worlds ravaged by the Vong War and rehabilitate the Vong's imagine. The GA stood by the Jedi and the Vong when the Ossus Project was (unbeknownst to the galaxy) sabotaged by the One Sith. Fel, despite his desire to avoid war with the GA, was too weak to prevent his Moffs from forcing him into the war on the Sith's side.

    Assuming that the truth is made plain to the galaxy following the war, I guarantee that worlds would flock back into the Alliance.

    --Adm. Nick
  11. SithStarSlayer Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 23, 2003
    star 6
    Wish I had that Solo-meme handy.;)
  12. KansasNavy Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 10, 2001
    star 4
    Let me add on to this that Stazi was carrying out a state-less strategy, whereas Fel followed the more conventional model of holding physical geography (astrography?). Holding territory alone doesn't necessarily signify strength (and can be a liability). I think Essential Warfare made several good examples of how stateless insurgencies can punch way out of their weight class. And (to use a concept from counter-insurgency) how controlling physical geography and controlling the human geography are two entirely different things.

    And like Nick said, I'd imagine most worlds would want to go back to the GA because the whole nightmare was brought on by the Empire to begin with. The Empire may even lose territory since some of the worlds the Empire-in-Exile held may have only allowed it because they were the better of two evils... just sayin'

    I'd like to see the GA actually behave like a benevolent, if flawed, republic instead of the baffoonerous caricature it has become. The fact that many people root for the Empire these days is telling. At least tone down the dysfunction to the Bantam-era NR.
    RC-1991 and AdmiralNick22 like this.
  13. GrandAdmiralJello Moderator Communitatis Litterarumque

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 28, 2000
    star 10
    To be fair, most people don't really know what they're rooting for when they characterize themselves as pro-Empire. :p
    Cronal and KansasNavy like this.
  14. KansasNavy Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 10, 2001
    star 4
    I think I saw this a few pages back somewhere, but it was mentioned that it'd be cool to see a Corellian Hegemony (with better execution than LotF). A loose alliance of worlds that want to stay out of the influence of Coruscant and Alsakan (err... Bastion). If done right, I think it'd be a cooler third party than the Hapans or Chiss or Hutts; all of which have become blahzay-blah IMO.
  15. AdmiralNick22 Fleet Admiral of Literature

    Manager
    Member Since:
    May 28, 2003
    star 6
    Great point, @KansasNavy. The Essential Guide to Warfare does send quite a bit of time discussing how the stateless strategy can be exceptionally successful. The Rebellion did it and won. The GA Remnant had deep space shipyards (The Black Deboubt) and worlds like Utapau that offered them save haven. Plus key support from major worlds like Dac. Per the Legacy Era Campaign Guide, the GA Remnant had a network of worlds and supporters that supplied supplies, weapons, recruits, and support. And that was pre-Battle of Raltiir. By Legacy #36, Stazi's forces were flush with surplus GA warships provided by former Alliance worlds.

    The Fel Empire, on the other hand, was tied down with worlds & borders to defend. Hence why by the end of the war worlds like Borosk and Vinsoth had fallen to the Sith and Imperial space was under siege. Fel had to defend each world and suffered loses because of it. Stazi's forces benefited from the fact that they, like the Rebel Navy of old, could operate without the need to defend hard targets.

    --Adm. Nick
  16. GrandAdmiralJello Moderator Communitatis Litterarumque

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 28, 2000
    star 10
    Wellll.... yes and no. I mean, stateless = effective (to an extent), sure. But that's small comfort to the guys who are being oppressed by the Sith on a daily basis. It's sort of a "what has de Gaulle done for us lately?" sort of thing. The Emperor, on the other hand, is actively protecting worlds. Yes, that pins him down and perhaps grants him less flexibility.


    But that also means he's there and visible to people who don't want to be oppressed. I'd have thought that sort of guardian role would be important, Nick.
  17. AdmiralNick22 Fleet Admiral of Literature

    Manager
    Member Since:
    May 28, 2003
    star 6
    Stazi risked everything to save the people of Dac. There is no better example of being a guardian than that.

    I am not trying to downplay the role of Fel's forces at all. But it is worth pointing out that both factions fought daily against the Sith, even if their actions were different. Stazi, by the very nature of his stateless strategy, was essentially always on the offensive. Fel, by the very nature of the fact that he held territory, was essentially always on the defensive.

    Both ways were about active opposition against the Sith, just with different methods dictated by the state that each group was in.

    --Adm. Nick
    Last edited by AdmiralNick22, Dec 11, 2012
  18. GrandAdmiralJello Moderator Communitatis Litterarumque

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 28, 2000
    star 10
    Yeah, but what I'm saying is that being on the defensive is more comforting to people in their day to day lives. Would you rather have a soldiers and police protecting you on a daily basis, or would you rather have some hope that maybe -- hopefully -- some guy will come swooping out of the sky to save you?

    I'm not trying to disparage what the Stazis did at all, either. I'm just saying that there's a basis to the argument that people may have justifiably relied on an active and present military force rather than one that's out waging war.

    Here's a comparison that might make sense to you: Fel is Admiral Adama (they even look alike) and Stazi is Admiral Cain (minus the insanity). Perhaps the latter was a more effective war-fighter, but the former had bigger responsibilities.

    Stazi was a soldier. His job is to win wars. Fel was a sovereign: his job was to protect his people.
    Last edited by GrandAdmiralJello, Dec 11, 2012
  19. Sinrebirth SWC and EUC Forum Moderator

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 15, 2004
    star 7
    I'm inclined to agree with Jello here. Stazi could certainly avenge his people; Fel would expend resources defending them in the first place. Which is more effective? I cannot see the people of the galaxy being to harsh on Fel. He tried to redeem his Empire, and make up for its error.
  20. AusStig Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 3, 2010
    star 4

    yes you are.

    Stazi was nothing but a pirate for seven years where as Fell was actually fighting the Sith, he was undermining them, he was much more important than you give him credit. With out him there would be no Alliance, he pressed on even after Stazi attempted to murder his unarmed ambassador, he pressed on even when the jedi refused to join the fight. Without his actions the Allies would have remained disjointed and ineffective.

    The reason Fel wanted Stazi in his camp is that they were after the same resources. You may not understand this but even a few ships can make a difference, Stazi had a pirate fleet, very good for hitting supply lines, something the Sith and Fel both have.

    Nick the Allies gathered at Bastion because it is the capital, you only need to take that to win the war. Holding territory makes you a target, but it also gives people a place to rally and flee too, something you don't get with a moving fleet.

    Also the 'Truth' is one of the most subjective and useless things. No one knows the truth of the first war, even if it came out who would believe it? The word of some YV, thats like neo-nazis saying they didn't do the holocaust. Cade? Assuming he even says anything, is a drug addict and a criminal.
  21. AdmiralNick22 Fleet Admiral of Literature

    Manager
    Member Since:
    May 28, 2003
    star 6
    Are you done with your anti-GA/Stazi rant yet? Cause if not, please take it elsewhere. If you want to have a conversation, take a peek at how Jello & I discuss things. We both (Jello & I) actually agree on most points, and when we don't we actually use examples from the story and not just our opinions. You method is simply complaining about how much you hate the GA, hate Stazi, and hate that the creative team didn't take the story in the direction you want it.

    For the last time. WE GET IT. Move along. [face_waiting]

    Maybe you should re-read Legacy? Cause even Captain Mingo Bovark is impressed by Gar Stazi and notes that he is highly respected in the Fel Empire due to his SEVEN YEAR WAR against the Sith. Oh, and while you are at it, maybe you will also figure out that Roan Fel's actual fight against the Sith starts in 137 ABY, when he takes Bastion and Imperial Space. Prior to that? He was on the run and doing exactly what Stazi did- gathering loyal allies and preparing to fight.

    But hey, keep making claims not backed by the actual series if you want. But do it elsewhere.

    The Rebel Alliance disagrees with you. ;)

    Oh, I see what you are doing. You are equating the Vong of 29 ABY with the reformed Vong of 137 ABY. Which is total and utter bullpants. Period. Are todays Germans guilty for the crimes of Nazi Germany? Of course not. To simply lump the Vong into the sins of their forefathers is simply and utterly ridiculous. :rolleyes:

    --Adm. Nick
    Last edited by Havac, Dec 11, 2012
  22. Foltliss Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 19, 2010
    star 2
    This. This is truth.

    How can someone argue that the Vong are all evil (*coughracismcough*) but defend the Empire, who joined forces with the Sith to wipe out a species and destroy a galaxy-wide chance to make peace, atonement, and closure for the crimes committed by their ancestors? That's only the Empire's most recent utter atrocity. Unless you count Emperor Fel going insane and planning to destroy all life on Coruscant in the off-chance it'll kill the Sith. When is the last time the Yuuzhan Vong did something on the same scale as either of those acts? Over a century ago. Very few people still living are old enough to remember those times. The analogy with Nazi Germany is under-exaggeration, if anything. At least that happened roughly seventy years ago.
    Last edited by Havac, Dec 11, 2012
    AdmiralNick22 likes this.
  23. Parnesius Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 8, 2012
    star 1
    Stazi had that part of the Core Fleet that had survived Caamas, that was willing to disobey the Supreme Commander's orders, and that successfully managed to escape the battle, plus whatever he may have obtained since then, minus whatever he may have lost. The force we innitially see certainly doesn't look terribly imposing.

    You'll recollect that Stazi's fleet was hunted for an extended period of time by Krayt's Outer Rim Third Fleet - not depicted as a particularly huge or special military force - and that in engagements with this and other enemy fleets, Stazi's forces were depicted to be at risk of complete destruction.

    Similarly - and I'm working from memory here, so correct me if I'm mistaken - when cooperating with Fenel's Second Bastion Fleet - which by its name, like the Outer Rim Third Fleet, would seem to imply that these represent quite ordinary formations - Stazi's fleet was not depicted as more powerful. At minimum, the interactions of the commanding officers suggested the allied forces were about even; quite possibly the Second Bastion Fleet outgunned the GAR.

    Regardless, the depictions of these engagements quite simply do not support the notion that the GAR was at any point of equivalent or even comparable power to the military forces at Fel's disposal. Fel must necessarily have had sufficient forces to defend his trritory from the full might of Krayt's Empire. A significant part of that may well have been space stations and fortifications, but it must have also included a goodly number of ships detailed to defensive duties. Fenel's fleet, to me at least, gave the distinct impression of being only one of several at Fel's disposal. And all that's without considering the matter of terrestrial forces, which Fel at the least possesses and Stazi appears to lack.

    Now, to losses and gains. Firstly, I'll reiterate that by all the evidence, Fel's empire and Stazi's fleet are operating on the entirely different scales the terminology would suggest. Stazi might well double or triple his fleet after Dac, but it would still possess a fraction of the strength you would expect from a galactic power capable of engaging a galaxy-spanning Sith Empire in open warfare.

    Also, I think you grossly overestimate the losses suffered by Fel. My recollection is of precisely three worlds mentioned as having fallen to the Sith: Agamar, Vinsoth and Borosk. An agriworld (depicted as lightly or undefended, which does not say much for its significance), a system that, besides its position on a minor hyperlane, appears to entirely lack importance, and a (hardly the) fortress world. If genuinely vital worlds, such as Yaga Minor or Muunilinst, were under threat, I think Fel would have mentioned them. Legacy: War doesn't show the Empire-In-Exile on the brink of destruction, merely on the back foot - and still stronger than the GAR by orders of magnitude.


    Now, as to what follows, know that it is entirely without ill intent - indeed, I honour your humanism - when I say that this:

    ...is just the most adorable thing I've seen on the internet in positively ages. It is a sentiment to warm the cockles of the flintiest heart. I mean, I disagree, but I feel the better for seeing it.

    I feel you’re skipping over the part of the argument where you explain why this should be the case. Even assuming most believe the claims of Stazi and the Jedi, why should they care? That war was concluded years ago. The Alliance lost and surrendered. The Empire-In-Exile has done at least as much as the GAR to liberate these worlds (I would argue more) from the Sith, and contains none of the conspirators behind the failure of Ossus.

    Understand that I’m not arguing the GAR will or should be limited to a rimward rump state while the Empire gets the galaxy. In the absence of further evidence, I think an approximately even split through the Core seems a reasonable assumption. But I don’t believe I understand your contention that the majority of the galactic populace, which seems apathetic at the best of times, will choose loyalty to a dead government over their liberators and protectors.
    AusStig likes this.
  24. GrandAdmiralJello Moderator Communitatis Litterarumque

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 28, 2000
    star 10
    Yeah, Nick's commitment to freedom, democracy, and Ackbar is pretty much adorable. He's kind of the Lit forum mascot.
  25. Parnesius Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 8, 2012
    star 1
    See, I’ve always assumed that the Empire-In-Exile was only the core of the Second Empire prior to the Sith-Imperial War, and that there’s a fair bit more surrounding territory also loyal to Fel that simply hadn’t been liberated yet. Otherwise, Fel’s total defeat of the Alliance looks incredibly embarrassing for the latter party.

    Who?

    Taking upon oneself the protection of thousands of inhabited worlds, and, as far as can be seen, largely succeeding?

    Depriving the enemy of a super star destroyer while ensuring the local civilians, with whom one is not allied and indeed a few years ago were enemies, are not subjected to brutal reprisals?
    AusStig likes this.