NationStates Jolt Archive

This is a OOC Thread by the way .

So , the point of this thread is to discuss the power of a Imperial Star Destroyer (ISD) . I think that many peopel underestimate and doubt the power of a ISD . While a single ISD is enough to mantain security in a entire star system and 8 ISDs is technically more than enough to sucessfully capture a star system , let alone a planet .

Well , you cant post your objections or other points about the mighty Imperial warship ...

Bottom line is that the ISD is one of the baddest Star ships in the star wars universe. It has more guns then any thing the rebels had and carries 72 TIE fighters. The ISD is the ship of choice for most Imperial Captains.

too big, and many nations have way too many of them. (just like mt nations' super dreads)

Really there should be like 3 ISD, and one executor and then thats it -_-

Bottom line is that the ISD is one of the baddest Star ships in the star wars universe. It has more guns then any thing the rebels had and carries 72 TIE fighters. The ISD is the ship of choice for most Imperial Captains.


True . When you say baddest , do you mean lousy or dangerously bad ?

I think he means the one that'll cause the other nations to shit pants.

As for the Star Destroyers? Incredibly useful long-range artillery platforms with enough firepower to beat lesser space navies into submission with just the fighters on hand in a single ship. I'd call it a Battlecarrier-class vessel.

If any SDs wanna duke it out, I sure hope I'm not anywhere in the vicinity.

too big, and many nations have way too many of them. (just like mt nations' super dreads)

Really there should be like 3 ISD, and one executor and then thats it -_-


3 ISDs and 1 Executor would make a unstobbale force to even a heavily armed planet . The exceutors firepower is deadly enough to do the damage .

Well , I wouldnt say 1+ KM is very long . Some nations claim they have 3 mile long cruisers . Take Nova Boozia for example . When in fact , a 3 mile ship can already be a super star destroyer or super dreadnaught . Which both are the same .

The ISD is a bad ass plain and simple. If your future tec nation has the resources you most likely can field more then three. These ships are big but in space size is relative.

Tis actually rather crap. For a vessel its size, its fighter compliment is horridly low, and the amount of weapons (60, IIRC) is rather low, especially considering the small size, and its crew is centered entirely within one rather easy target. Against something properly designed, ISDs drop like flies.

ISD's are great; and in Star Wars are amogst the "badest Mothers out there", in fact in the Star Wars universe if Samuel L Jackson was a warships; he'd be a star destroyer. however on NS Star Wars Tech in general; just dosn't messure up, its too slow and while it's 'bristling' with guns there pretty low powered compared to say Mimbari weapons or even the firepower of Earth Alliance b5 weaponry; crewed by REAL soliders. on NS in ship to ship combat; ISD's don't really have much of a chance; what they ARE good at though is planetary bombardment, an ISD can bomb a planet back into a smoking ruin quite efficently.

I mean even in the SW Cannon; the Empire was never really tested; the Rebels were nothing more than a pest generally and it was only a fluke chance that they won so the Imperial navy was never given a run for its money (that I know of) up against a real navy, crewed by real soldiers an ISD's short cummings are blatently apparent.

I think he means the one that'll cause the other nations to shit pants.

As for the Star Destroyers? Incredibly useful long-range artillery platforms with enough firepower to beat lesser space navies into submission with just the fighters on hand in a single ship. I'd call it a Battlecarrier-class vessel.

If any SDs wanna duke it out, I sure hope I'm not anywhere in the vicinity.


You've got a point there . When it explodes , the radiation levels would be very high and the explosion damage itself is gonna be tremendous .

And a ISD alone can do some real bombardment on a planet until it gets defeated . And the shields are incredible . They can withstand almost anything the rebels threw at it . But I think that a SSD can outbeat Mimbari weapons or even the firepower of Earth Alliance b5 weaponry .

How many singularities or yamato cannon shots do you think it'l take to bring down this technological monster ? Thats if the ISD doesnt bring it down first .

Star Destroyers just look intimidating. They have two large deadzones where they can't hit the enemy: directly below them and to the rear. They have virtually no guns in either direction.

Of course if you want to go "old school" a wave motion gun would take as ISD down fairly quick.

How many singularities or yamato cannon shots do you think it'l take to bring down this technological monster ? Thats if the ISD doesnt bring it down first .
One of the former, and two of the second if you're referring to the Meihmish Yamato. Or one could just crack it with a few missiles, as solid objects tend to not have problems against SW shields.

Yamoto's are focused nuclear bombs that bring down the shields of a star destroyer in a unique way; actually shileds in general; and Point Singularity Projectles are spinning micro black holes; both are just as effecent at killing ISDs it isn't that ISD's are exceptionally bad its just there are things on NS that are so much better.

Empire Warships are weapons of Terror; not weapons of war.

Star Destroyers just look intimidating. They have two large deadzones where they can't hit the enemy: directly below them and to the rear. They have virtually no guns in either direction.

The only reason there's no guns on the bottom is the hangar bays. and the back thats what the other ships are for.

3 ISD's and One SSD could usely do the job however the Rebels were able to destroy a Imerpail Fleet of 11 ISD's and One SSD pluse the Death Star Mk II in Return of the Jedi so the Rebels could match their fire power ( if not surpass it)with the Mon Calamari Star Cruiser and Home One. And with the towers they have a weakness that just stands out. Also the cannyone on either side of the ISD is almost undefened and easy for fighters to use to get behind the ship where yet agian almost no defenses.

One of the former, and two of the second if you're referring to the Meihmish Yamato. Or one could just crack it with a few missiles, as solid objects tend to not have problems against SW shields.

SW Shields can deflect away solid objects as evidenced when it deflected the asteroids comming at it . In the expanded univerrse , it also works against the Yuuzhan Vong rock spitters .

Star Destroyers just look intimidating. They have two large deadzones where they can't hit the enemy: directly below them and to the rear. They have virtually no guns in either direction.

True . But they can launch swarms of TIE Fighters/Interceptors to overcome that .

The only reason there's no guns on the bottom is the hangar bays. and the back thats what the other ships are for.

Even so, it's really quite easy to get underneath them and out of their line of fire, especially with smaller vessels. Once there, just lob a bomb straight into the nice big hangar and the thing goes up nicely.

3 ISD's and One SSD could usely do the job however the Rebels were able to destroy a Imerpail Fleet of 11 ISD's and One SSD pluse the Death Star Mk II in Return of the Jedi so the Rebels could match their fire power ( if not surpass it)with the Mon Calamari Star Cruiser and Home One. And with the towers they have a weakness that just stands out. Also the cannyone on either side of the ISD is almost undefened and easy for fighters to use to get behind the ship where yet agian almost no defenses.


Because the rebels had the Mon Calamari Star Cruisers , which are equavalient and have enough firepower to match the ISD . The Death Star was destroyed by sheer luck of the Proton Torpedo , not overcomed by massive rebel force amounts .

you would have to be a fool to send in an ISD alone anyway. it alway has a small fleet to back it up.

The only reason there's no guns on the bottom is the hangar bays. and the back thats what the other ships are for.


True . A ISD is never alone . They are always in a group with several other ISDs and many cruisers or frigates escorting them .

The 2nd Deathstar wasnt luck it took a ground attack followed by fighters going into the death star with Tie Fighters on their butts to blow it up. The ISD's have major flaws the towers being the main thing however some nations of NS have come out with Towerless ISD's which in effect make them much more effective.

3 ISD's and One SSD could usely do the job however the Rebels were able to destroy a Imerpail Fleet of 11 ISD's and One SSD pluse the Death Star Mk II in Return of the Jedi so the Rebels could match their fire power ( if not surpass it)with the Mon Calamari Star Cruiser and Home One. And with the towers they have a weakness that just stands out. Also the cannyone on either side of the ISD is almost undefened and easy for fighters to use to get behind the ship where yet agian almost no defenses.

the rbeals took out the death star 2 by a chain of events:

1 a-wing crashes into bridge of Executor
2 executor crashes into death star
3 death star blows up

basically fire a single A-wing sized projectile at the bridge and you win

basically fire a single A-wing sized projectile at the bridge and you win

but most NS designers have improved the designs on the executor to add more point defense guns. or at least i did.

Mass Drivers propeled at 0.098c for the the win will tear an ISD to bits

the rbeals took out the death star 2 by a chain of events:

1 a-wing crashes into bridge of Executor
2 executor crashes into death star
3 death star blows up

It would be more like

1 Ground Forces destroy the shiled genrator protecting the Death Star
2 Fighters entering into the death star since it wasnt done it had a opening left
3 SSD hitting the Death Star did some minor damage to the outerlayer however the DS Mk II dwarfs a SSD
4 Fighters blowing up the Main Reactor to the DS Mk II

It would be more like

1 Ground Forces destroy the shiled genrator protecting the Death Star
2 Fighters entering into the death star since it wasnt done it had a opening left
3 SSD hitting the Death Star did some minor damage to the outerlayer however the DS Mk II dwarfs and SSD
4 Fighters blowing up the Main Reactor to the DS Mk II

I haven't seen starwars in a long time.

In X-wing vs Tie, I always hated going up against Victory Class Star Destroyers. They had 2 missile launchers while the ISD only has 1. At least... i think....its been a while. VCSD are also the best at planetary bombardment according to Rebellion the game. Didn't Rogue Squadron take down an ISD by themselves?

Only Reasion i remember is back in the day i use to watch Return of the Jedi once a week i was nerd lol.

star destroyers.... u gotta love them. 6 squadrons of TIE fighters, bombers, and interceptors, enough turbolaser, laser cannon, and ion cannon batteries to slag a planet on its own, and a crew of 37k or so. i beleive these r supposed to be about 3 kilometers long, with the big super star destroyers being 8+ kilometers long and a crew of over 250k people. personally, id say these things are pretty much unstoppable unless u have another star destroyer, or a mon cal cruiser or two. not to mention the fact that they all carry portable garrisons of stormtroopers, at-st and at-at walkers, and all other equipment necessary. i do like the smaller victory II class star destroyers better tho. the things come with a slightly smaller armament than an ISD or ISD mkII, but also have about 80 concussion missile launchers. one salvo from those would take out shields, the second would inflict such massive dmg that very few ships could limp away with.

The problem with the Imperial fleet at Endor was in its composition.

It is vitally important to any force to mix up your ship types. 11 ISD's one SSD and a Death Star, while putting up impressive numbers for total firepower, are vulnerable to attack by smaller, more agile ships. If I had been in the empire's position, I would have included numerous smaller support ships, particularly those designed for anti-starfighter work, like the Tartan class patrol cruiser. I don't think the Lancer class frigate, which is incredibly effective at protecting larger ships from snubfighter attack, was available to the imps at that time.

Right, lets compare...

Imperial Star Destroyer Smallcraft/meter: 0.045
Pale Rider Arms Pygmae Barge Smallcraft/meter: 9

Throw in the fact that the Pygmae + tug has a smaller crew by several orders of magnitude, and we've got a winner in this department.

They had 2 missile launchers while the ISD only has 1
ISDs have no missile weaponry, while the Victory has 80 tubes, as well as a much smaller main armament and only two squadrons of smallcraft. PRA vessels beat out a Victory in missile armament as well, at 0.088 compared to 22.5, and the PRA SCCAMs are FAR more dangerous than those silly little concussion torpedoes.

I'd compare primary armament, but I don't have a ship to compare it to, and this also gets a bit more dicey, as damage yields for both an ISD and PRA vessels are hard to come by.

basically fire a single A-wing sized projectile at the bridge and you win
Sheilds would deflect it duh. They were just down at the time of the accidental kamikazi.

And that is another weakness. On the towers there are two ball shaped Shield Genrator. Just sticking out screaming " BLOW ME UP!" They are fairly easy to get to and destroy with a A-Wing do to its speed.

Question: Why isn;t the shield generator covered by a shield?

ISDs are weak and leave themselves open to all manner of tactically crippling problems. Outboard command towers and Shield Generators, Engine blocks that would be difficult NOT to hit, a fighter bay located in a fundamentally crippling position.

The wedge shape is good, but the rest of it is a clunker of a ship that has no right to be considered technically superior without severe overhauls.

I will have to agree with the last post. ISD and SSD are big, bad and tought, but not unbeatable. With the right tactic and coordination you can bring down these monsters with a much smaller force.

Yup; big, bad and fundamentally flawed. Of course ICly we look down on all technology not truely blessed by the Machine God. When I was gifted some SD's I rennovated them into floating temples of war and bloodlust :D

Question: Why isn;t the shield generator covered by a shield?

It is. That wasn't the shield generator. That was a sensor tower (hence why it looks like sensor tower). The fact that it blew up clued Ackbar in that the shields had fallen. Which took half an hour, or something, of focused firepower by the entire rebel fleet.

Remember that an ISD has some guns sitting in its hanger bay, as well, and that the entire thing is armoured to the hilt. Lobbing a bomb into the hanger bay would frag the hanger, but not the ship. And it'd be difficult if the ISD had its escort fleet. And that's after you take the shields down, of course. Rebel ships had to go UNDER the imperial ray shields to lob a missile in. Remember in ROTJ, the death stars deflector shield was a threat to the X-wings and they had to run.

I agree that an Imperial Star Destroyer is one brilliant vessel that looks and sounds fantastic.
But they are old and outdated as far as Star Wars is concerned and they aren't that powerful.
In the New Jedi Order books- the Bothans have this new assual carriers in the 2nd and 3rd books that out performs a ISD.

Granted, an ISD is preety good. But like the Victory Class Star Destroyer, the ISD is outdated and probably should be replaced by a better model. Super Star Destroyers are a prime example.

I love the ISD but in terms of its abilty to blow large stuff up.... pretty negated.

Question: Why isn;t the shield generator covered by a shield?

Those are sensor domes, not shield generator. And they ARE covered by the shield. The Rebel fleet focused their firepower on the Executor and brought down the bridge shields temporily which allowed the golden BB A-Wing to crash into the bridge. This destroyed the primary navigation center, when combined with the engine damage already visible before the crash led to the Executor plowing into the DS2.

ISDs are weak and leave themselves open to all manner of tactically crippling problems.

Which aren't crippling at all once you actually look at the design.

Outboard command towers

Covered by shields and the bridge itself is a tiny part of the tower. Secondary bridge is deeper within the vessel. With SW lever firepower once the shields go down you're pretty well screwed, the ability to target the bridge is irrelevant since a single HTL will blast the ship to oblivion.

and Shield Generators

Sensor domes, not shield generators.

Engine blocks that would be difficult NOT to hit

Engines need to be exposed to actually work. Besides, they are shielded and no missile/projectile will actually survive the engine wash.

a fighter bay located in a fundamentally crippling position.

Also shielded and an irrelvant target as the ISD would simply rotate to keep it out of LoS of enemy guns.

The wedge shape is good, but the rest of it is a clunker of a ship that has no right to be considered technically superior without severe overhauls.

Yeah, petaton range turbolasers, 3000 Gs of acceleration and petaton range shields. Really clunky.:rolleyes:

I agree with Xessmithia, and even if the docking bays were vulnerable, why not just use two and orientate them so the fighter bays are facing one another and maneuvre so the ships stay close together

Which aren't crippling at all once you actually look at the design.

Bullshite. In the case of the command tower, why did they even think it necessary to construct? It would have been far simpler to just put everything within the same wedge shape and work from there, without having to keep any obvious protrusions and saving money on the bloody hull plating.

Covered by shields and the bridge itself is a tiny part of the tower. Secondary bridge is deeper within the vessel. With SW lever firepower once the shields go down you're pretty well screwed, the ability to target the bridge is irrelevant since a single HTL will blast the ship to oblivion.

Ion Cannons, Ion Cannons, everyone loves Ion Cannons...

Sensor domes, not shield generators.

Blindness or Defenselessness... eenie meenie minie moe...

Engines need to be exposed to actually work. Besides, they are shielded and no missile/projectile will actually survive the engine wash.

But not focused Blaster/Energy weapon fire... or maybe an Ion Cannon blast up the ship's butt would mess with some of the containment mechanisms for the power generator. Shazaam!

Also shielded and an irrelvant target as the ISD would simply rotate to keep it out of LoS of enemy guns.

Which is PHENOMENALLY easy to do against more maneuverable opposition. *cough*

Yeah, petaton range turbolasers, 3000 Gs of acceleration and petaton range shields. Really clunky.:rolleyes:

Compared to some of the stuff that the rest of us can field? You betcher ass. Oh, and 'Petaton' is nyet. Kinda getting annoying that people are using ever increasing prefixes to describe SW cannons.

Bullshite. In the case of the command tower, why did they even think it necessary to construct? It would have been far simpler to just put everything within the same wedge shape and work from there, without having to keep any obvious protrusions and saving money on the bloody hull plating.

Increased visibility for sensors, increased visibility for command crew. As for money, it's not like the civilzation that can build 900km diameter space stations will care about a few hundred extra meters of hull material.


Ion Cannons, Ion Cannons, everyone loves Ion Cannons...

Ion cannons are stopped by shields. The Hoth Ion Cannon was able ot go through them because it was extremely powerfull, not because of a property of Ion cannons.


Blindness or Defenselessness... eenie meenie minie moe...

The domes are still protected by the shields, when they go down you're screwed anyway. Why knock down the sensors when you can blow up the whole goddam ship.


But not focused Blaster/Energy weapon fire... or maybe an Ion Cannon blast up the ship's butt would mess with some of the containment mechanisms for the power generator. Shazaam!

Shields, shields and more shields. Do you purposefully ignore the shields?


Which is PHENOMENALLY easy to do against more maneuverable opposition. *cough*

SW capships are very maneuverable. Or did you miss the scene in ESB where the ISD has a massive rotation rate when its engines misfire randomly, or when the 3km long Home One does a 90 degree turn in five seconds in ROTJ?

Compared to some of the stuff that the rest of us can field? You betcher ass.

ISDs are Destroyer's not Battleships. Nor are they the most powerfull ship in the SW universe either. There are plenty of larger and more powerfull ships than ISDs besides the Executor-class.

Oh, and 'Petaton' is nyet. Kinda getting annoying that people are using ever increasing prefixes to describe SW cannons.

Oh please. ISD reactors have 1e25 Watt reactors, a petaton is 4.2e24 Joules, that means petaton guns and shields. People use lesser numbers in vs debates to be very conservative.

Oh please. ISD reactors have 1e25 Watt reactors, a petaton is 4.2e24 Joules, that means petaton guns and shields. People use lesser numbers in vs debates to be very conservative.

So you're using all your generator power on your weapons and shields for a bit over a petaton each? What ever happened to the 3000 g's of acceleration, which would probably take all that power right there.

ISDs are Destroyer's not Battleships. Nor are they the most powerfull ship in the SW universe either. There are plenty of larger and more powerfull ships than ISDs besides the Executor-class.

Bull. If SW labels are right, then why the hell are Dreadnoughts half the size of an ISD? Lucas doesn't know squat about naval designations, deal with it.

So you're using all your generator power on your weapons and shields for a bit over a petaton each? What ever happened to the 3000 g's of acceleration, which would probably take all that power right there.

ROTS:ICS says that warships can devote most of their reactor output to the guns, shields don't need to use the same amount of energy to operate as they can disperse and they're not always accelerating at max.


Bull. If SW labels are right, then why the hell are Dreadnoughts half the size of an ISD? Lucas doesn't know squat about naval designations, deal with it.

Difference between Star and non-Star labels. Besides, it's a Dreadnaught-class cruiser not a blank-class Dreadnaught. The Dreadnaught-class is equivalent to a Star Frigate.

Bull. If SW labels are right, then why the hell are Dreadnoughts half the size of an ISD? Lucas doesn't know squat about naval designations, deal with it.

Don't try to argue about star wars ship designations if you don't know what you're talking about. Like the person above me said, the Dreadnaught is simply the class name for a type of medium cruiser type of vessel. At the time of the Dreadnaught class's design, it was the largest and most powerful naval vessel in existance, so the name made sense. Now, many years later, it is an outdated and outclassed ship. You might compare it to the more modern and slightly more powerful Carrack heavy cruiser in terms of size and firepower.

I will admit that some of the desgnations are slightly off as far as we know them, for example, several smaller ships like the Carrack and Dreadnaught classes are referred to as cruisers, while the ISD's are referred to as both destroyers and cruisers from time to time. The only vessels in Star Wars referred to as actual Battleships are the Executor, Sovreign and Eclipse class SSD's.

The Dreadnaught was created by Timothy Zahn not George Lucas anyway.

Increased visibility for sensors, increased visibility for command crew. As for money, it's not like the civilzation that can build 900km diameter space stations will care about a few hundred extra meters of hull material.

I agree, you seen any around? The Empire sure wasn't one of 'em.

Ion cannons are stopped by shields. The Hoth Ion Cannon was able ot go through them because it was extremely powerfull, not because of a property of Ion cannons.

Indeed, but then I shall simply counter by saying that your shield strength estimates are overblown.

The domes are still protected by the shields, when they go down you're screwed anyway. Why knock down the sensors when you can blow up the whole goddam ship.

Because some people like to think that hull armor serves a purpose other than decorative flair.

Shields, shields and more shields. Do you purposefully ignore the shields?

With my Tachyon weapons yes.

SW capships are very maneuverable. Or did you miss the scene in ESB where the ISD has a massive rotation rate when its engines misfire randomly, or when the 3km long Home One does a 90 degree turn in five seconds in ROTJ?

Or where it was a movie? Or where if they were more maneuverable they wouldn't have smacked into each other?

ISDs are Destroyer's not Battleships. Nor are they the most powerfull ship in the SW universe either. There are plenty of larger and more powerfull ships than ISDs besides the Executor-class.

So? You say this as if this changes things. As you say there are vessels larger, I say I have mechanisms capable of knocking THEM down as well.

Oh please. ISD reactors have 1e25 Watt reactors, a petaton is 4.2e24 Joules, that means petaton guns and shields. People use lesser numbers in vs debates to be very conservative.

Link to canon stats please or I say bullshite. As it stands I got a Wikipedia that says only 750KT per Heavy Turbolaser blast.

With my Tachyon weapons yes.
But you're not in the SW continuum, so who cares?

Or where it was a movie? Or where if they were more maneuverable they wouldn't have smacked into each other?
Movies are the HIGHEST form of canon. as far as suspension of disbelief goes, they're not movies so much as historical documents. Why, you gonna believe wiki over the movie? think how silly that sounds.



So? You say this as if this changes things. As you say there are vessels larger, I say I have mechanisms capable of knocking THEM down as well.

And again, what does this have to do with the argument? You couldn't stand up to cultureverse ships for a microsecond, does that mean your ships are bad? No! The point is, that we're talking "in the continuum", and in the continuum, ISDs are frakking big guns in the imperial era. Whether or not they are outclassed later on is irrelevant.

I agree, you seen any around? The Empire sure wasn't one of 'em.

News flash, the DS2 was 900km in diameter and built in secret. My sources, the OT:ITW which states that the DS2 is over 900km in diameter, the model makers saying the DS2 is at least 500miles in diameter and oh yeah, the movie which shows it to be that big.


Indeed, but then I shall simply counter by saying that your shield strength estimates are overblown.

The Hoth Ion Cannon was powered by a reactor from Praetor-class Star Battlecruiser (stated in the OT:ITW), so it had more than enough energy to blast through an ISDs petaton range shields.


Because some people like to think that hull armor serves a purpose other than decorative flair.

The hull armor can stop Light to Medium TLs but not the heavies. On SW ships the hull armour is a delay to keep the ship alive until it rotates so an intact shield section is brought against enemy guns. Only morons think that the ability to destroy a sensor dome when the shields are down is actually worth beans when you can blow up the whole ship. As seen here. (http://www.mcc3d.com/swtech/ISDHTL.mov)

With my Tachyon weapons yes.

Congratulations, I don't care about your magic shield penetrating beams. Of course it's not like an ISD has guns (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v422/Xessmithia/Isd12guns2.jpg) that can shoot backwards or anything.:rolleyes:

Or where it was a movie? Or where if they were more maneuverable they wouldn't have smacked into each other?

So the navigators screwed up once, that doesn't negate this scene where the 3km long Home One turns 180 degrees in under 16 seconds (http://www.mrpoesmorgue.com/usvsd/maneuv/falconturn6.avi) or this ISD rapidly turning with misfired engines. (http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/HateMail/Hailey/IonCannon.avi)



So? You say this as if this changes things. As you say there are vessels larger, I say I have mechanisms capable of knocking THEM down as well.

Good for you, what does that have to do with anything?

Link to canon stats please or I say bullshite. As it stands I got a Wikipedia that says only 750KT per Heavy Turbolaser blast.

Because we all know how canon Wikipedia is.:rolleyes:

The AOTC:ICS states the medium turbolasers of an Acclamator assault ship are 200 gigatons. The ROTS:ICS states that a Venator-class annhilates 40,000 tonnes of fuel per second and can shift all of that energy to a single gun. That gives a 857 teraton yield for a Venator HTL, ISDs have much much larger reactors that annhilate closer to 200,000 tonnes of fuel/second. That's 4.2 petatons max yield.

Done and done.

I agree with Jordaxia. The trek universe is irrelevant here as well as the later SW universe. As for ship designations: SW ships were designated off for effect by George Lucas. He was trying to make a good movie remember. Plus all these technical flaws were added to the movie to make it more beleivable that the rebels could win. SW isn't a movie about future tech, it's about good vs. evil. This makes tech requirements irrelevant. The movie was meant to emulate ancient greek dramas like Oedipus with a futuristic flair and it pulled it off nicely. Adding the tech and the space battles was just for effect. The plot would have been the same had it been set in ancient Greece except instead of Han Solo being a space pirate he would be an actual pirate and Chewie would have been a man. SW isn't about the tech. If you want tech, look at Star Trek.

But you're not in the SW continuum, so who cares?

But I engage against ISDs in NS all the time, that is the consideration that I apply to the whole situation. Comparative. Balanced. And such. Were this dealing with a universe that was SOLELY DOMINATED BY THE GALACTIC EMPIRE IN ITS AWE INSPIRING MAJESTY AND ALL THE REST OF THAT OLD CRAP, then yes, I would agree that the ISD is indeed a very good ship.

Movies are the HIGHEST form of canon. as far as suspension of disbelief goes, they're not movies so much as historical documents. Why, you gonna believe wiki over the movie? think how silly that sounds.

Is there any point in any of the movies where we watch a bunch of guys talking about the exact technical power output of a turbolaser? Keep in mind the movies used 'Parsecs' as a unit of time.

So... yes. Yes I damn well will use Wiki.

And again, what does this have to do with the argument? You couldn't stand up to cultureverse ships for a microsecond, does that mean your ships are bad? No! The point is, that we're talking "in the continuum", and in the continuum, ISDs are frakking big guns in the imperial era. Whether or not they are outclassed later on is irrelevant.

I find myself interested in these 'Cultureverse' ships you speak of and would like to know more.

Oh, and Jord, the original post made no mention of consideration 'In Continuum'. So I don't really care.

Thank you The Appalacians. This whole concept was designed to lookcool. Do you really think George Lucas sat with his producers and said: "Well, do you think the star destroyers have any technical flaws? Because i was thinking about it, and they realy don't have any rear or bottom protection."
NO, he didn't. He just said: "draw me a cool picture and then make a tiny plastic model of it."

But I engage against ISDs in NS all the time, that is the consideration that I apply to the whole situation. Comparative. Balanced. And such. Were this dealing with a universe that was SOLELY DOMINATED BY THE GALACTIC EMPIRE IN ITS AWE INSPIRING MAJESTY AND ALL THE REST OF THAT OLD CRAP, then yes, I would agree that the ISD is indeed a very good ship.

Cool.



Is there any point in any of the movies where we watch a bunch of guys talking about the exact technical power output of a turbolaser? Keep in mind the movies used 'Parsecs' as a unit of time.

So... yes. Yes I damn well will use Wiki.

Sure. I'll just go write up a wikipedia article on the ISD that gives it 13 gigjiggamiggaton yield weapons. Oh wait. That might be wrong. it matters not, because some random pleb writing a wiki article has more weight than the movies.

And as for the parsecs thing, I could easily state a logical, rational explanation why this is. See, the kessel run is an area filled with black holes. By skimming closer to the black holes than anyone had before, Han solo decreased the distance travelled to x parsecs.



I find myself interested in these 'Cultureverse' ships you speak of and would like to know more.

Oh, and Jord, the original post made no mention of consideration 'In Continuum'. So I don't really care.

Eh, it was more of an aside, but I didn't find your argument particularly appropriate.
As for finding info on cultureverse ships - I done a quick google, but I didn't find anything particularly precise - they're not the biggest facet of the novels - but a quick google search of "The Culture" banks will reveal it.

To give a quick summary, we have fleet battles conducted in 12 microseconds, civilian ships that can blow up planets without consideration (and could do it in such a way that, in the case of the Earth, the moon would orbit unaffected - The state of the art is where this comes from)

Sure. I'll just go write up a wikipedia article on the ISD that gives it 13 gigjiggamiggaton yield weapons. Oh wait. That might be wrong. it matters not, because some random pleb writing a wiki article has more weight than the movies.

Considering the fact that, as I said, the movies make no qualitative statement regarding the energy output of their weapons. Considering in this vein that all estimates of overall power would be pure conjecture, you very well could say that. And I could also say that my ships can pump out enough firepower to make the universe explode by virtue of the sheer horror of it all, and nobody would be able to directly contradict me because I've never given an exact estimate of overall firepower.

As a result, one is forced into attempting comparative analysis and the NS assumption that there is at least some form of balance between one FT 'verse and another.

And as for the parsecs thing, I could easily state a logical, rational explanation why this is. See, the kessel run is an area filled with black holes. By skimming closer to the black holes than anyone had before, Han solo decreased the distance travelled to x parsecs.

Indeed you could, but then you'd be using information that isn't in the movies, wouldn't you? Granted of course, Lucas primarily intended Solo to be a braggart who knew big words but not what they meant...

Considering the fact that, as I said, the movies make no qualitative statement regarding the energy output of their weapons. Considering in this vein that all estimates of overall power would be pure conjecture, you very well could say that. And I could also say that my ships can pump out enough firepower to make the universe explode by virtue of the sheer horror of it all, and nobody would be able to directly contradict me because I've never given an exact estimate of overall firepower.

Au contraire. We have the destruction of Alderaan, various asteroid destruction sequences and other information we can objectively get firepower from.

For example the Death Star has more than half the firepower of the Imperial Starfleet as per Jan Dodonna's quote in ANH. If we assume a 3 million ship fleet, and we accept the Death Star's 24 hour recharge rate we get a reactor power of 1e33 Watts, with 1.5 million as the half point that means each ship from a lowly Carrack-cruiser to the Executor has an average reactor output of 7.7e26 Watts. Or every single ship in the petaton range.

Of course that's a generality, the heavier firepower is concentrated in heavier ships such as Star Destroyers and more powerfull ships.

Au contraire. We have the destruction of Alderaan, various asteroid destruction sequences and other information we can objectively get firepower from.

For example the Death Star has more than half the firepower of the Imperial Starfleet as per Jan Dodonna's quote in ANH.

With ya so far.

If we assume a 3 million ship fleet,

Which one would be a lunatic to assume.

and we accept the Death Star's 24 hour recharge rate we get a reactor power of 1e33 Watts,

From the recharge rate alone? It does not follow.

Even so, it's really quite easy to get underneath them and out of their line of fire, especially with smaller vessels. Once there, just lob a bomb straight into the nice big hangar and the thing goes up nicely.


Thats if you can throw it when the shield and dusrasteel or titanium alloy doors are down . And if you can get through swarms of TIE Fighters .

The 2nd Deathstar wasnt luck it took a ground attack followed by fighters going into the death star with Tie Fighters on their butts to blow it up. The ISD's have major flaws the towers being the main thing however some nations of NS have come out with Towerless ISD's which in effect make them much more effective.

But the point of Towers is to give the commandign officers and the Captain or Commander a good view of the battle . Prefrably I wont choose towerless ISDs .

And true enough , I think that the Executor was crippled because of its lack of anti-aircraft weaponary , which I have countered by installing Quad Turbolaser batteries on the Executor and ISDs .


In X-wing vs Tie, I always hated going up against Victory Class Star Destroyers. They had 2 missile launchers while the ISD only has 1. At least... i think....its been a while. VCSD are also the best at planetary bombardment according to Rebellion the game. Didn't Rogue Squadron take down an ISD by themselves?

The Rogue Squadron was a elite bunch of X-Wing Pilots , you cant expect all rebel starfighter pilots to show such eliteness . And if a VCSD were to face off with a ISD , the ISD will win because its bigger , more weaponary , stronger shields etc . The Victory is post-old republic era . The ISD is Empire era stuff . As for planetary bombardment , a VCSD can do the job but a ISD will do more damage .

Yup; big, bad and fundamentally flawed. Of course ICly we look down on all technology not truely blessed by the Machine God. When I was gifted some SD's I rennovated them into floating temples of war and bloodlust :D

I will have to agree with the last post. ISD and SSD are big, bad and tought, but not unbeatable. With the right tactic and coordination you can bring down these monsters with a much smaller force.

That is if you have the skill and coordination . But normally , a X-Wing Squadron will not be enough to take down a ISD which will be firing at them non-stop while launching squadron after squadron of TIEs .

That is if you have the skill and coordination . But normally , a X-Wing Squadron will not be enough to take down a ISD which will be firing at them non-stop while launching squadron after squadron of TIEs .

Unless the x-wing squadron is using jedi shadow bombs.

Ion cannons are stopped by shields. The Hoth Ion Cannon was able ot go through them because it was extremely powerfull, not because of a property of Ion cannons.


Nope , a Ion Cannon at Hoth did TEMPORARILY immobilize the ship .

Don't try to argue about star wars ship designations if you don't know what you're talking about. Like the person above me said, the Dreadnaught is simply the class name for a type of medium cruiser type of vessel. At the time of the Dreadnaught class's design, it was the largest and most powerful naval vessel in existance, so the name made sense. Now, many years later, it is an outdated and outclassed ship. You might compare it to the more modern and slightly more powerful Carrack heavy cruiser in terms of size and firepower.

I will admit that some of the desgnations are slightly off as far as we know them, for example, several smaller ships like the Carrack and Dreadnaught classes are referred to as cruisers, while the ISD's are referred to as both destroyers and cruisers from time to time. The only vessels in Star Wars referred to as actual Battleships are the Executor, Sovreign and Eclipse class SSD's.

You got a point there .



---

Anyway , the Yuuzhan Vong Battlecruisers and Frigates , in fact all YV vessels had Dovin Basals that would render all forms of shields useless . It can also Interdict hyperjumps and absorb energy weapons . Whats more it can FTL Jump and Sub-Space flight .

So , I can infer that the YV were able to sucessfully counter the Imperial Remnant's ISDs .

---

And actually wouldnt it be easier if there is a standard form of starships in NS like all SW or anyother ? If not there will always be contrasting stuff like SC weapon can kill a SW ISD in one shot and so on and so forth .

---

Unless the x-wing squadron is using jedi shadow bombs.

True . But if Darth Vader were still there flying his TIE X1 , I dont think the Jedi would stand a chance at all .

And actually wouldnt it be easier if there is a standard form of starships in NS like all SW or anyother ? If not there will always be contrasting stuff like SC weapon can kill a SW ISD in one shot and so on and so forth.

No. Simple reason being that not everybody on NS wants to play as only one set of Sci Fi. My personal position is that what the frig ever can be used on NS as long as there is BALANCE in how one plays.

Anyway , the Yuuzhan Vong Battlecruisers and Frigates , in fact all YV vessels had Dovin Basals that would render all forms of shields useless . It can also Interdict hyperjumps and absorb energy weapons . Whats more it can FTL Jump and Sub-Space flight .

So , I can infer that the YV were able to sucessfully counter the Imperial Remnant's ISDs .

Exactly, that's why the Yuuzhan Vong were able to overpower both the Imperial Remnants and the New Republic.

Concerning the VSD versus ISD debate:

The two ships are both built toward the same purpose, and share many basic design traits, but you have to keep in mind that they are from two very different eras. The Victory class (as the name suggests) was designed at the conclusion of the Clone Wars to commemorate the Republic/Budding Empire's victory. There were not a tremendous amount built. At that time, as is painfully obvious in the opening scenes of Episode III, turbolaser technology was not anywhere near as advanced then as it became in the original trilogy. Capital ships of that era relied much more on projectile weapons to slug it out. With this in mind, the VSD was designed as a sort of heavy missile cruiser, capable of destroying large ships at long range.

The Imperator class, to use the proper class name, was designed at the height of the Empire. Advances in technology led to the six heavy turbolaser batteries and two heavy ion cannon batteries, along with many more higher powered energy weapons than the VSD. Imperator mark I vessels still retained a few torpedo launchers, but with the mark II upgrade (impstar deuce) all projectile weapons were eliminated, in favor of more, and even more powerful turbolasers.

It is without question that an Imperator would easily defeat a Victory in a one on one fight, since it has more and more powerful weapons, sturdier shields, a larger fighter and bomber complement and is larger, giving it the ability to take a bit more damage. The ISD certainly wouldn't come out unscathed, but the VSD would be scrap metal when it was over.

No. Simple reason being that not everybody on NS wants to play as only one set of Sci Fi. My personal position is that what the frig ever can be used on NS as long as there is BALANCE in how one plays.


You gotta point there . But sometimes people like Mini Miehm make their Yamato Cannons so poweful like a Superlaser .

Exactly, that's why the Yuuzhan Vong were able to overpower both the Imperial Remnants and the New Republic.

Concerning the VSD versus ISD debate:

The two ships are both built toward the same purpose, and share many basic design traits, but you have to keep in mind that they are from two very different eras. The Victory class (as the name suggests) was designed at the conclusion of the Clone Wars to commemorate the Republic/Budding Empire's victory. There were not a tremendous amount built. At that time, as is painfully obvious in the opening scenes of Episode III, turbolaser technology was not anywhere near as advanced then as it became in the original trilogy. Capital ships of that era relied much more on projectile weapons to slug it out. With this in mind, the VSD was designed as a sort of heavy missile cruiser, capable of destroying large ships at long range.

The Imperator class, to use the proper class name, was designed at the height of the Empire. Advances in technology led to the six heavy turbolaser batteries and two heavy ion cannon batteries, along with many more higher powered energy weapons than the VSD. Imperator mark I vessels still retained a few torpedo launchers, but with the mark II upgrade (impstar deuce) all projectile weapons were eliminated, in favor of more, and even more powerful turbolasers.

It is without question that an Imperator would easily defeat a Victory in a one on one fight, since it has more and more powerful weapons, sturdier shields, a larger fighter and bomber complement and is larger, giving it the ability to take a bit more damage. The ISD certainly wouldn't come out unscathed, but the VSD would be scrap metal when it was over.

Excellent Explanation . Point taken .

Exactly, that's why the Yuuzhan Vong were able to overpower both the Imperial Remnants and the New Republic.

Concerning the VSD versus ISD debate:

The two ships are both built toward the same purpose, and share many basic design traits, but you have to keep in mind that they are from two very different eras. The Victory class (as the name suggests) was designed at the conclusion of the Clone Wars to commemorate the Republic/Budding Empire's victory. There were not a tremendous amount built. At that time, as is painfully obvious in the opening scenes of Episode III, turbolaser technology was not anywhere near as advanced then as it became in the original trilogy. Capital ships of that era relied much more on projectile weapons to slug it out. With this in mind, the VSD was designed as a sort of heavy missile cruiser, capable of destroying large ships at long range.

The Imperator class, to use the proper class name, was designed at the height of the Empire. Advances in technology led to the six heavy turbolaser batteries and two heavy ion cannon batteries, along with many more higher powered energy weapons than the VSD. Imperator mark I vessels still retained a few torpedo launchers, but with the mark II upgrade (impstar deuce) all projectile weapons were eliminated, in favor of more, and even more powerful turbolasers.

It is without question that an Imperator would easily defeat a Victory in a one on one fight, since it has more and more powerful weapons, sturdier shields, a larger fighter and bomber complement and is larger, giving it the ability to take a bit more damage. The ISD certainly wouldn't come out unscathed, but the VSD would be scrap metal when it was over.

On pure technical ability? damn straight the VCD would get royally shafted but it also comes down to the crew of the VCD; a GOOD crew can overcome a superior oponent, better gunners, better pilots, better stratigic commander etc.

You gotta point there . But sometimes people like Mini Miehm make their Yamato Cannons so poweful like a Superlaser .


Actially its not that the Yamoto's are that powerful; its the way they work; the beam itself is in the Petawatt range but the real killer against Star Wars tech is the BIG focused EMP that comes with the beam shot. everyone whines about MM's Yamoto's but no one has ever tried to make an effecitve R+D'd shield against them save for someone wanking out a defence.

Actially its not that the Yamoto's are that powerful; its the way they work; the beam itself is in the Petawatt range but the real killer against Star Wars tech is the BIG focused EMP that comes with the beam shot. everyone whines about MM's Yamoto's but no one has ever tried to make an effecitve R+D'd shield against them save for someone wanking out a defence.

You've got a point there . But I think that a Superlaser would be more effective than a Yamato . Does anyone have a full idea of how MM's Yamato works ? Once we have a clear knowledge about it , we can start a R&D thread to develop a anti-Yamato shield .

"Yamato Cannons" (from Starcraft) are plasma cannons which have the power of tactical nukes. The ships that use them (in starcraft) also use "burst lasers" which are about 1/4 as powerful.

With ya so far.

Excellent.

Which one would be a lunatic to assume.

Would you prefer a larger or smaller fleet? We know the Empire had 25,000 ISDs, 3 million ships including smaller and larger vessels is quite reasonable.

From the recharge rate alone? It does not follow.

The Death Star used 1e38 Joules to blow up Alderaan, one day to build up that amount of energy means a reactor with an output of 1e33 Watts.

Nope , a Ion Cannon at Hoth did TEMPORARILY immobilize the ship .

It did, but it was able to do so because the Ion Cannon blasts were powerful enough to blast through the shields.

Anyway , the Yuuzhan Vong Battlecruisers and Frigates , in fact all YV vessels had Dovin Basals that would render all forms of shields useless . It can also Interdict hyperjumps and absorb energy weapons . Whats more it can FTL Jump and Sub-Space flight .

Dovin Basals are easily countered by extending the artificial gravity field outside the ship. And the shield strip ability only works really well on fighters not cap ships.

The only reason the Vong were a threat is because the New Republic was a bunch of incompetant idiots.

Had the Vong invaded during the reign of the Empire they would have been curbstomped without them making any progress at all.

Actially its not that the Yamoto's are that powerful; its the way they work; the beam itself is in the Petawatt range but the real killer against Star Wars tech is the BIG focused EMP that comes with the beam shot. everyone whines about MM's Yamoto's but no one has ever tried to make an effecitve R+D'd shield against them save for someone wanking out a defence.

Megaton range weapons are useless against SW level shields. SW Ion cannons work on the same principle as a Yamoto cannon and they have to take down the shields of a ship before it can be disabled.

Megaton range weapons are useless against SW level shields. SW Ion cannons work on the same principle as a Yamoto cannon and they have to take down the shields of a ship before it can be disabled.

its the EMP that comes with it that drops the shields, in a very specific way and once the shield is down the ship is screwed; I don't know all the science; but I know he detonates a nuke in the firing chamber and foruses it into a beam. pumping it up with anti-matter to make it a lot more than a megaton. you seem far too over comfident with your shields, care to provide figures to back up your claims?

its the EMP that comes with it that drops the shields, in a very specific way and once the shield is down the ship is screwed; I don't know all the science; but I know he detonates a nuke in the firing chamber and foruses it into a beam. pumping it up with anti-matter to make it a lot more than a megaton. you seem far too over comfident with your shields, care to provide figures to back up your claims?

I already did read the damn thread. However I will post them yet again, an ISD reactor outputs approximately 1.8e25 Watts, if we assume a tenth of that is the shield dissipation rate, which is conservative, shields can dissipate more energy than they use. Which means ISDs have a shile dissipation rate of at least 1.8e24 Watts, with a heat sink capacity larger than that.

Which means it will take hundreds of teratons at least and more likely petatons to take down an ISDs shields. And with its shields up you can't knock out its systems.

I already did read the damn thread. However I will post them yet again, an ISD reactor outputs approximately 1.8e25 Watts, if we assume a tenth of that is the shield dissipation rate, which is conservative, shields can dissipate more energy than they use. Which means ISDs have a shile dissipation rate of at least 1.8e24 Watts, with a heat sink capacity larger than that.

Which means it will take hundreds of teratons at least and more likely petatons to take down an ISDs shields. And with its shields up you can't knock out its systems.

I read the thread; you stated reactor ourput but not how much goes to the shields; and this is based on the asumption of a 3 million ship fleet; which is rather large. given the size of ships (from the humble cutter to the SSD), the large crews and the matirials needed to construct the ships; I think thats an overestimation. *goes to look for links*

I read the thread; you stated reactor ourput but not how much goes to the shields; and this is based on the asumption of a 3 million ship fleet; which is rather large. given the size of ships (from the humble cutter to the SSD), the large crews and the matirials needed to construct the ships; I think thats an overestimation. *goes to look for links*

a 3 million ship fleet isn't that large for a GALACTIC EMPIRE, with populations and (importantly industrial capacity) to boot. Coruscant alone is home to trillions!

if I recall, they have 1 million core systems and a further 50 million colonies, so yeah. It's not as if they have resource issues.

a 3 million ship fleet isn't that large for a GALACTIC EMPIRE, with populations and (importantly industrial capacity) to boot. Coruscant alone is home to trillions!

if I recall, they have 1 million core systems and a further 50 million colonies, so yeah. It's not as if they have resource issues.

true enough; but then its not like Mr Lucas stated the technical specifics of any of the tech; he wrote the films to entertain; its space opera and could have just as easily been set on earth as in space, so its all asumption anyway I guess.

true enough; but then its not like Mr Lucas stated the technical specifics of any of the tech; he wrote the films to entertain; its space opera and could have just as easily been set on earth as in space, so its all asumption anyway I guess.

It is, but if you just go "it's a movie, meh" then there's no fun debating it, is there? At least, I don't enjoy it as much.

true enough; but then its not like Mr Lucas stated the technical specifics of any of the tech; he wrote the films to entertain; its space opera and could have just as easily been set on earth as in space, so its all asumption anyway I guess.

That's also a retarted position. You can't cry "Oh Mr. Lucas never said therefore all the objectively verifiable evidence doesn't mean anything."

This is debate, not pre-school.

And I'll do the math for a smaller, supposedly "more realistic" fleet. We know the Empire had 25,000 ISDs, lets say they have 3 times that many in other classes for 100,000 ships.

That means 1e38 Joules/86400 seconds = 1.16e33 Watts for the Death Star Reactor.

100,000 ships/2 = 50,000 ships.

1.16e33/50000 = 2.3e28 Watts per capital ship reactor. If we average 60 heavy guns per ship we get 91.3 petaton per HTL blast.

Is that more to your liking? Or would you rather stick with the three million fleet?

EDITED to fix math error.

It seems to me to be rather short-sighted to take the offhand statement that the Death Star had the firepower of half the fleet as a valid technical fact. When you consider the way the statement was made, and the context it was made in, it seems to me to be a simple figure of speech by the officers to describe the Death Star's amazing power.

It does not literally have equivalent reactor power to exactly half of the Imperial starfleet.

The Death Star used 1e38 Joules to blow up Alderaan

Where'd you get that figure from?

A few thoughts.

Size: They're not really big ships in the universe they're from. Dr. Saxton's page (http://www.theforce.net/swtc/dagger.html#comparison) has an interesting (if not uncontentious) list of other Imperial Star Ship designs.

Of course, if one is in NS, talking about how one has fleets of ISDs, one might wonder how one maintains them, given that the Galactic Empire had quadrillions or quintillions of citizens to tax, while you only have billions.

Shield domes: As I recall, the present status of this ongoing piece of contention was set by SW:ITW, which says that they're both sensor domes and shield generators. My memory is faulty though, and I don't have that book to hand.

Gun Placement: Does indeed suck. However, it's important to remember that it has more than just its abominably placed heavy guns. It has various underside guns near the docking bay, which you can see in action in the opening of A New Hope.

The Culture:

The GCU in State of the Art is not a 'civillian' ship. The distinction is rather meaningless in the Culture's anarchy, to be fair. The civillian starships of the Culture, however, would be 'cruise ships' referenced in Banks' essay 'A Few Notes From The Culture.'

GCUs are most analogous to Star Trek's Starfleet. They're designed for exploration foremost, but carry armament. The beginning of the Idiran war was fought by GCUs and upgunned GSVs before the true Offensive Units came off the production line.

Godular: The Culture is the civilisation in the novels marketed under the name and Inversions, it's a thirty trillion strong anarchy effectively ruled by machines called Minds. Those that inhabit the Culture's Contact Section (starfleet, to carry the metaphor) and War ships are capable of fighting battles in microseconds, over light years, and blowing up planets with their 'engine wake' when they 'break' too hard. You can learn about the Culture's culture most effectively here. (http://nuwen.net/culture.html)

It seems to me to be rather short-sighted to take the offhand statement that the Death Star had the firepower of half the fleet as a valid technical fact. When you consider the way the statement was made, and the context it was made in, it seems to me to be a simple figure of speech by the officers to describe the Death Star's amazing power.

It does not literally have equivalent reactor power to exactly half of the Imperial starfleet.

It was a military briefing about the technical readouts of the battle station. They know how much firepower it has because it says in the blueprints they stole. The Dodonna quote has been confirmed as true by the Behind the Magic CD as well. The Death Star carries more than half the firepower of the Imperial Starfleet.

Where'd you get that figure from?

Dr. Saxton has a nice derivation of it here. (http://www.theforce.net/swtc/ds/index.html#power) The first number is the absolute bare minimum energy required, at that rate the explosion would take hours. The more realistic figure is in the second last paragraph before the screen shots.

It is derived from the speed at which Alderaan's mass is scattered.

Shield domes: As I recall, the present status of this ongoing piece of contention was set by SW:ITW, which says that they're both sensor domes and shield generators. My memory is faulty though, and I don't have that book to hand.

It says the Executor's sensor domes also housed the local shield projectors, which is why the Executor couldn't immediately restore bridge shields as they were destroyed.

It did, but it was able to do so because the Ion Cannon blasts were powerful enough to blast through the shields.

True .

"Yamato Cannons" (from Starcraft) are plasma cannons which have the power of tactical nukes. The ships that use them (in starcraft) also use "burst lasers" which are about 1/4 as powerful.

Thanks for the insight . I will do some reserach first on countering it before starting to develop a anti-plasma shielding . Anyone has Anti-Yamato shielding tech ?

Dovin Basals are easily countered by extending the artificial gravity field outside the ship. And the shield strip ability only works really well on fighters not cap ships.

The only reason the Vong were a threat is because the New Republic was a bunch of incompetant idiots.

Had the Vong invaded during the reign of the Empire they would have been curbstomped without them making any progress at all.

Yes , the Empire would be able to repel them . But if you read up , the Yuuzhan Vong had also harvested larger dovin basals that were used to pull down the moon at Serpindal and the artifical planets at Duros . Therefore if a ship carries a Dovin Basal of that size , I'm sure it can definately take out a Capital Ship's shields .

Megaton range weapons are useless against SW level shields. SW Ion cannons work on the same principle as a Yamoto cannon and they have to take down the shields of a ship before it can be disabled.

So would MM's Yamato be effective against SW ships ?

Megaton range weapons are useless against SW level shields.

MM used 200 nukes on 1 of my ships (Executor class SSD) and the shields were blasted away.

its the EMP that comes with it that drops the shields, in a very specific way and once the shield is down the ship is screwed; I don't know all the science; but I know he detonates a nuke in the firing chamber and foruses it into a beam. pumping it up with anti-matter to make it a lot more than a megaton. you seem far too over comfident with your shields, care to provide figures to back up your claims?

I have to agree with Xessmithia . If you dont take out a ISD's shields first , you cant knock out its systems .

a 3 million ship fleet isn't that large for a GALACTIC EMPIRE, with populations and (importantly industrial capacity) to boot. Coruscant alone is home to trillions!

if I recall, they have 1 million core systems and a further 50 million colonies, so yeah. It's not as if they have resource issues.

True . 3 Million ships for the GE is not many . In fact it can build much more ships than 3 Million .

true enough; but then its not like Mr Lucas stated the technical specifics of any of the tech; he wrote the films to entertain; its space opera and could have just as easily been set on earth as in space, so its all asumption anyway I guess.

It is, but if you just go "it's a movie, meh" then there's no fun debating it, is there? At least, I don't enjoy it as much.

That's right . If you only think about the movie alone and say its tech is just a for fun thing , there's no point to debate . But besides George Lucas , there are many other SW Film (Cartoon etc) and Book Writers that set their specs .

So would MM's Yamato be effective against SW ships ?

Probably not, the ratio of weapon power to sheild power is off by something like two orders of magnitude.

It would be like shooting a tank with an M-16. Given enough time and ammunition, you might damage something.

MM used 200 nukes on 1 of my ships (Executor class SSD) and the shields were blasted away.


Actually sometimes I find that MM is too overconfident about his tech .

-------

Anyway do you think its possible for my nation to have a fleet of 3800+ Ships of all sorts (Frigates , Cruisers , SDs , SSDs , Gunboats etc , not including starfighters) ? And out of the 3800 , 1454 of them are either Imperial MkIII or Imperial Elite Star Destroyers ?

Yes. it is to much. i only have 50 out of 300+ ships. and that includes all SD and SSD classes as well.

Probably not, the ratio of weapon power to sheild power is off by something like two orders of magnitude.

It would be like shooting a tank with an M-16. Given enough time and ammunition, you might damage something.

Agreed . But somehow last time MM Tech-Wanked to make his Yamatoes effective killers against my ISDs .

Agreed . But somehow last time MM Tech-Wanked to make his Yamatoes effective killers against my ISDs .

Don't take that, call him out on his specs next time. I haven't RPed FT in a long time, but godmodding is the same everywhere.

Yes. it is to much. i only have 50 out of 300+ ships. and that includes all SD and SSD classes as well.

Actually i have been playin NS since like Jan 2005 under Mationsbuds (note s in middle) but I got kicked . Then 2 nations in my region has also surrendered their navies to me .

on the subject of MM; is his tech really immune to ion cannons?

Agreed . But somehow last time MM Tech-Wanked to make his Yamatoes effective killers against my ISDs .
They should be effective against anything, ST, SW, BSG, B5 etc

Don't take that, call him out on his specs next time. I haven't RPed FT in a long time, but godmodding is the same everywhere.

True .

Why do people here in NS think that the orbs on the command tower are sensors? They are not sensors, they are shield generators. Find me one reference that is supported. In all the sites I've visited, the people who worked on the movie say that they were shield generators.

True .


It isn't the disableing of systems, its the way the EMP is carried to teh shields combined with the beam, goddess the exact science eludes me but to be honest MM is no more overcomfident in his tech as you are in SW ISD's.

Why do people here in NS think that the orbs on the command tower are sensors? They are not sensors, they are shield generators. Find me one reference that is supported. In all the sites I've visited, the people who worked on the movie say that they were shield generators.

It is a widely accepted fact that the orbs atop the command tower function as sensor domes and sheild projectors for the star destroyer's dorsal and bridge sheilds. They are not sheild generators.

It is a widely accepted fact that the orbs atop the command tower function as sensor domes and sheild projectors for the star destroyer's dorsal and bridge sheilds. They are not sheild generators.
I stand corrected after reading this exerpt:

The trapezoidal command tower stands near the aft end of this island, capped with two geodesic communication and deflection domes.

Then destroying these projectors is just as effective as cutting power to the generators, leaving the area that it projected over vunerable.

Then destroying these projectors is just as effective as cutting power to the generators, leaving the area that it projected over vunerable.

Yes, however, power can be diverted to backup projectors located in the interior of the ship, or to other projectors, like those on the ventral and aft surfaces of the ship to compensate for the loss of the topside domes.

Though it is correct that one Imperial Star Destroyer may be ample enough to patrol a whole system of planets, this is only for non-rebellious low threat system. Basically the same as saying a that a tank can keep a whole city of ancient Babylon in check.

When it comes to attacking a well armed planet with a great space navy, one star destroyer would get creamed. Plus, they are hardly a one-ship force, they need support ships like cruisers and frigates to be a reasonable defense against a good opposing navy.

Yes they are powerful, but remember Han Solo said: The entire Imperial Navy couldn't destroy an entire planet!

As in, they can scorch and burn the whole surface of planets, but they can not blast them apart.

the rbeals took out the death star 2 by a chain of events:

1 a-wing crashes into bridge of Executor
2 executor crashes into death star
3 death star blows up

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/evil/teu87.gif

Are you Fucking Serious...you forgot some detail there...It was Lando Calrissian & Wedge Antilles who actually destroyed the Death Star...Or did you forget the Chase Scene into the belly of the beast...What was that...Bad Gas on the part of GL?

Yes they are powerful, but remember Han Solo said: The entire Imperial Navy couldn't destroy an entire planet!

Hrm. Since this is the same level of canon as the whole "half the firepower of the Imperial fleet" comment, shouldn't this provide a convincing argument that ISDs have a far lower firepower than originally stated?

As for the whole ion cannons bypassing shields thingamajig, I suggest listening to the EGW&T, which states:
...ships have no defense against them short of reconfiguring their shields - and this would make the shields useless for absorbing standard laser blasts.

Yah that chase seen was cool, and I don't see how he forgot it (bathroom break?), but he brings up a good point.

It did show a simple A-wing destroying a star destroyer, even if the destroyer was weak, distracted, and pulled in by the death star's gravity well.

And we already know that they are not strong enough to obliterate a planet entirely like the death star, (though they can scorch the surface, as I assume happened on Mygeeto).

I think they are powerful, but overrated. Read my last post for more.

It did show a simple A-wing destroying a star destroyer, even if the destroyer was weak, distracted, and pulled in by the death star's gravity well.

Yes. It administered the coup de gace to the Excecutor. However, the Excecutor was under heavy bombardment from the entire rebel fleet, and for some retarded reason, manouvering around near the surface of the Death Star. Under normal circumstances, the A-wing would have been incinerated on the bridge shield, and even if the bridge shield were down, it would 'merely' have killed the ship's command staff. What Piett was doing flying around near the Death Star's surface is anyone's guess.

The death star 2 was destroyed from the inside, the executor did nothing more than scorch/incinerate the surface decks of the Battle station .(underestimation intended). and it was a waste of men and materiel 250,000 crew and only a gross of mixed class TIEs. An aircraftcarrier today can field that with a crew of 1000 - 1500

As for ISDs and ISD2s, 75,000 man crew with a fighter complement of 72 mixed TIEs is not really a deterant, especially if you can employ a dedicated strike squadron against the command tower, say 12 B-wings.

The VSD/VSD2 class, now there was a capital ship that could shrug anything off, and had comparable man/squadron power.

Star destroyers are great, especially if the SW tech is rp'd well. However i tend to rp in the, if you designed it yourself and rp'd and developed it, it has much more then a simple, oh i made this "link to movie". "Now i have 1000 of them"

So if you made and developed the design yourself so long as its in the same size range cruiser-battleship. It should totally outperform the SD. Of course if its the USS enterprise or Andromeda ascendent showing up its going down to the SD.

So development beats it, its that simple. There are however good SD's as there are some damn fine players using the Canon, however there are far far more Cardboard ISD's out there, then non cardboard ones.

As for ISDs and ISD2s, 75,000 man crew with a fighter complement of 72 mixed TIEs is not really a deterant, especially if you can employ a dedicated strike squadron against the command tower, say 12 B-wings.

One squad of B-Wings would be torn up by the ISD's Interceptor squadrons. The B-Wing is not a dogfighting vehicle, it's a heavy bomber. Slightly more maneuverable than the Y-Wing, but every bit as slow. There is no way that one squadron of fighters could take down an ISD with its fighter complement. Not even the Rogues.

MM used 200 nukes on 1 of my ships (Executor class SSD) and the shields were blasted away.

That would work if each nuke had a yield of 381 teratons and it was all focused onto the shields.

Why do people here in NS think that the orbs on the command tower are sensors? They are not sensors, they are shield generators. Find me one reference that is supported. In all the sites I've visited, the people who worked on the movie say that they were shield generators.

The OT:ITW and OT:ICS, both high level canon, just below the movies. They overide the rest of the EU and since they don't contradict the movies they stand. The globes are sensors.

Hrm. Since this is the same level of canon as the whole "half the firepower of the Imperial fleet" comment, shouldn't this provide a convincing argument that ISDs have a far lower firepower than originally stated?

There's a difference. Han's quote is from a smuggler in a stressful situation and is a statment of disbelief. General Dodonna's quote is by an informed military professional with access to the technical readouts. While both are absoulte canon, Dodonna's is the more reliable.

As for the whole ion cannons bypassing shields thingamajig, I suggest listening to the EGW&T, which states:
...ships have no defense against them short of reconfiguring their shields - and this would make the shields useless for absorbing standard laser blasts.

The essential guides also say the Executor is 8km long.:rolleyes: Ion cannons are particle beams, they are stopped by the particle shields. You need to overwhelm the shields before you can disable the systems. The EGW&T is wrong.

The essential guides also say the Executor is 8km long. Ion cannons are particle beams, they are stopped by the particle shields. You need to overwhelm the shields before you can disable the systems. The EGW&T is wrong.
ISn't that along the same lines as saying "It's just a movie, so we can safely ignore anything that isn't realistic?" Just because you don't like something that is canon doesn't mean you can ignore it, and one mistake doesn't make the rest of the book wrong.

That would work if each nuke had a yield of 381 teratons and it was all focused onto the shields.

Unless you RP SW realistically, as the piece of crap techbase it is. Lemme guess, you get your stats from the wanktastic GE fanboy, don't you?

ISn't that along the same lines as saying "It's just a movie, so we can safely ignore anything that isn't realistic?" Just because you don't like something that is canon doesn't mean you can ignore it, and one mistake doesn't make the rest of the book wrong.

No, the movies make the book wrong. All sources say SW ships have particle and ray shields. Ion cannons shoot beams of ions, hence the name, ions are charged particles. Thus Ion cannons are particle cannons, particle shields stop particles. This shields stop Ion cannons, therefore to disable a ship you must first take down its shields. The Hoth Ion cannon is powerfull enough to take down an ISDs shields in two shots and disable it.

No magic shield ignoring bullshit requried.


Unless you RP SW realistically, as the piece of crap techbase it is. Lemme guess, you get your stats from the wanktastic GE fanboy, don't you?

:rolleyes:

The OT:ITW, which is an Objective out of Univerise source based directly on the movies says the Executor-class has shields comparable to a medium sized star such as our Sun. Thus it has a shield dissipation rate of ~3.2e26 Watts, and a conservative heat sink capacity of 1e27 Joules, about 3 times the dissipation peak. A more realistic figure would be 10-100 times the dissipation rate.

If each nuke takes 1e-6 seconds to detonate that means that the shield can dissipate 3.2e20 Joules in that time period. An omnidirection weapon like a nuke can put at most 50% of its energy into the shield which means that a nuke must be 152.38 gigatons to just match the shield dissipation rate.

To bring down the shields with 200 nukes, each much have a yield of 2.38 petatons and be detonated simultaenously or the shields will have time to empty the heat sink.

That's conservative realistic SW.

realistic SW.

Oxymoron ahoy.

on the subject of MM; is his tech really immune to ion cannons?

Nope .

They should be effective against anything, ST, SW, BSG, B5 etc

Not always the case . It depends on the shield type that he is firing at .

Why do people here in NS think that the orbs on the command tower are sensors? They are not sensors, they are shield generators. Find me one reference that is supported. In all the sites I've visited, the people who worked on the movie say that they were shield generators.

Yes , they are the reflective shield generators . You can see them at : http://www.phoxim.de/thorsten_plauk_ssd/torsten_plauk_ssd14.jpg

Then destroying these projectors is just as effective as cutting power to the generators, leaving the area that it projected over vunerable.

Point . But there are always back-up generators .

Though it is correct that one Imperial Star Destroyer may be ample enough to patrol a whole system of planets, this is only for non-rebellious low threat system. Basically the same as saying a that a tank can keep a whole city of ancient Babylon in check.

When it comes to attacking a well armed planet with a great space navy, one star destroyer would get creamed. Plus, they are hardly a one-ship force, they need support ships like cruisers and frigates to be a reasonable defense against a good opposing navy.

Yes they are powerful, but remember Han Solo said: The entire Imperial Navy couldn't destroy an entire planet!

As in, they can scorch and burn the whole surface of planets, but they can not blast them apart.

I agree with you that a space navy can take out a ISD , but it must have the necesasary firepower . And ISDs are usually posted to a sector not alone , but with other smaller ships , a orbital yard and usually several Victorys .

And the Imperial Navy can blast apart a planet . Thats if you include the DS in the Navy .

Yah that chase seen was cool, and I don't see how he forgot it (bathroom break?), but he brings up a good point.

It did show a simple A-wing destroying a star destroyer, even if the destroyer was weak, distracted, and pulled in by the death star's gravity well.

And we already know that they are not strong enough to obliterate a planet entirely like the death star, (though they can scorch the surface, as I assume happened on Mygeeto).

I think they are powerful, but overrated. Read my last post for more.

I disagree . They are not overrated . Their firepower is supreme actually .

Yes. It administered the coup de gace to the Excecutor. However, the Excecutor was under heavy bombardment from the entire rebel fleet, and for some retarded reason, manouvering around near the surface of the Death Star. Under normal circumstances, the A-wing would have been incinerated on the bridge shield, and even if the bridge shield were down, it would 'merely' have killed the ship's command staff. What Piett was doing flying around near the Death Star's surface is anyone's guess.

Point noted . It is true . The Executor was already under heavy bombardment when the A-Wing strick and then the Executor ploughed through the DS . The DS was destroyed by 2 factors :
1)Interior Explosion through Proton Torpedo by Luke Skywalker
2)Executor ploughing through the DS

I agree with you that a space navy can take out a ISD , but it must have the necesasary firepower . And ISDs are usually posted to a sector not alone , but with other smaller ships , a orbital yard and usually several Victorys .

And the Imperial Navy can blast apart a planet . Thats if you include the DS in the Navy .

or other super weapons, suncrusher,galaxy gun,ect.

One squad of B-Wings would be torn up by the ISD's Interceptor squadrons. The B-Wing is not a dogfighting vehicle, it's a heavy bomber. Slightly more maneuverable than the Y-Wing, but every bit as slow. There is no way that one squadron of fighters could take down an ISD with its fighter complement. Not even the Rogues.

Point . But the Rogue Squadron are not odinary starfighter pilots . They're the creame of the creame . The elite .

The OT:ITW and OT:ICS, both high level canon, just below the movies. They overide the rest of the EU and since they don't contradict the movies they stand. The globes are sensors.

Nope . They are shield generators .

Unless you RP SW realistically, as the piece of crap techbase it is. Lemme guess, you get your stats from the wanktastic GE fanboy, don't you?

Who ya callin wanktastic GE fanboy ?

No, the movies make the book wrong. All sources say SW ships have particle and ray shields. Ion cannons shoot beams of ions, hence the name, ions are charged particles. Thus Ion cannons are particle cannons, particle shields stop particles. This shields stop Ion cannons, therefore to disable a ship you must first take down its shields. The Hoth Ion cannon is powerfull enough to take down an ISDs shields in two shots and disable it.

No magic shield ignoring bullshit requried.



:rolleyes:

The OT:ITW, which is an Objective out of Univerise source based directly on the movies says the Executor-class has shields comparable to a medium sized star such as our Sun. Thus it has a shield dissipation rate of ~3.2e26 Watts, and a conservative heat sink capacity of 1e27 Joules, about 3 times the dissipation peak. A more realistic figure would be 10-100 times the dissipation rate.

If each nuke takes 1e-6 seconds to detonate that means that the shield can dissipate 3.2e20 Joules in that time period. An omnidirection weapon like a nuke can put at most 50% of its energy into the shield which means that a nuke must be 152.38 gigatons to just match the shield dissipation rate.

To bring down the shields with 200 nukes, each much have a yield of 2.38 petatons and be detonated simultaenously or the shields will have time to empty the heat sink.

That's conservative realistic SW.

True . SW ships have particle and ray shields . So I dont see how MM's Yamato should work against them .

Sometimes even if you launch 200 nukes , if they're not well coordinated , the shields will have time to re-compensate after each nuke or after several nukes .

or other super weapons, suncrusher,galaxy gun,ect.

True . But the Sun Crusher and Galaxy Gun were never really shown their firepower . But nevertheless , they are still very deadly . The Sun Crusher took out the last DS under the command of Kyp Durron . The DS was a prototype at the Maw Cluster , a top secret Imperial Weapons development lab . It was also under fire from the Rebel Fleet under Wedge Antilles but had help from Admiral Daala's last ship , the Gorgon , a Imperial Star Destroyer .

Point . But the Rogue Squadron are not odinary starfighter pilots . They're the creame of the creame . The elite .

True, but not even they can handle the destroyer and its fighter complement. In one of the books of the X-wing series, Rogue squadron was ambushed by a wing of fighters, identical to the complement of and ISD. They lost four pilots, and were on the verge of being destroyed, with several other ships damaged, when they were rescued by two squadrons of friendly TIE Defenders. If an ISD had been present, there wouldn't have been anything left to rescue.

yes but they could blow aplanet to peices if it was used that way.

True, but not even they can handle the destroyer and its fighter complement. In one of the books of the X-wing series, Rogue squadron was ambushed by a wing of fighters, identical to the complement of and ISD. They lost four pilots, and were on the verge of being destroyed, with several other ships damaged, when they were rescued by two squadrons of friendly TIE Defenders. If an ISD had been present, there wouldn't have been anything left to rescue.

You've got a point there . Nonetheless they are still humans . Until the new Rogue Squadron was formed under Kyp Durron and several Jedi also joined him .

yes but they could blow aplanet to peices if it was used that way.

The Galaxy Gun could do that . And the Sun Crusher could also do that , plus take out whole STAR SYSTEMS !!!

yes which is why i said that because they were part of the imperial fleet so the imperial fleet can blow up planets without the deathstar.

yes which is why i said that because they were part of the imperial fleet so the imperial fleet can blow up planets without the deathstar.

True .

Ooh what can I say. ISDs tend to be the jack of all trade ships in SW. They do a bit of every thing, they carry fighters, they can perform planetary assaults and fight in normal space fights. An ISD can perform a BDZ operation within one hour. Which means it turns the surface of an unshielded planet into molten slag. It has 8 turbolasers which are in the single to double digit teraton range (for perspective the most powerful nuke ever made was about 50 megatons) and its sheilds can survive similar weapons for lengthy engagements. In other words an ISD could take all our nuclear weapons ever made and not flinch.

Nukes are outdated in space battles anyways... Nobody should place high regard on nukes in FT space battles.

All depends on the size of the nuke. SCCAM-grade fusion warheads can go into the petaton range, although they do tend to be fire-crackers when compared to the sheer destructive power of PRA antimatter weaponry. All a bit overkill against star destroyers, of course, what with their shields' vulnerability to singularities.

All depends on the size of the nuke. SCCAM-grade fusion warheads can go into the petaton range, although they do tend to be fire-crackers when compared to the sheer destructive power of PRA antimatter weaponry. All a bit overkill against star destroyers, of course, what with their shields' vulnerability to singularities.


High Yeild Anti matter weaponry works very well against Star destroyers *grins wickadly*

Nope . They are shield generators.

Jesus fucking christ, they're not shield generators. The EGTV is wrong. The domes being shield generators are based off of WEG stats that the game designers pulled out of their ass.

The newest, highest level canon information says they are sensor and communication domes with parts of the local shield projectors. No shield generators.

The domes being shield generators is like the 8km Executor. Both are wrong and both have finally been corrected.

Nukes are outdated in space battles anyways... Nobody should place high regard on nukes in FT space battles.

Are you an idiot??? Nukes are still plenty powerful. If you can take a hit from 2-300 high MT range nukes, then you're obviously wanking something to high heaven.

Are you an idiot??? Nukes are still plenty powerful. If you can take a hit from 2-300 high MT range nukes, then you're obviously wanking something to high heaven.
I'm inclined to agree, to be honest. When your guns are an order of magnitude above the impact that made the Chicxulub crater, your wrist is probably getting pretty sore by now.

I use Nukes in space, Nuclear Torpedoes...seemingly the only FT Nation to do so... :(

I use Nukes in space, Nuclear Torpedoes...seemingly the only FT Nation to do so... :(

? I've been using low yield nuclear missiles (70kt or thereabouts) as my common armanent for some time now.

? I've been using low yield nuclear missiles (70kt or thereabouts) as my common armanent for some time now.

Yay!....

Why would the rebels use an Ion cannon instead of a giant Turbo Laser cannon to fire on incoming ISD's if they had enough power to overwhelm their shields? Certainly you see how foolish it would be for them to use the equivalent of a taser to delay an enemy instead of using a sawed off shotgun to completely stop them for good. It's another trap created by starwars fanatics who believe most of the garbage they read about on the internet as it pertains to star wars technology.

The ISD is an alright design, namely being a wedgeshape means having lots of good firing arcs. They have thick armor, they go pretty fast, and their weapons are pretty strong. However, the rear and underbelly of the ship are EXTREMELY vulnerable to being reamed by opposing ships, meaning that basically the faster, more agile ship doesn't have to manuover much to get out danger and start whailing on the ISD as it struggles to get the target back in its firing arcs.

And for anyone who thinks otherwise, yes, the raised command tower shit is a HORRIBLE design flaw. It just acts as a huge fucking target for the enemies guns to hit. Plus mass that could have gone to extra armor plating (yeah, just because the shields are down does not mean the fight is over.) with an imbedded bridge. Does that kind of design look good? Not really, but we're not talking about looks, we're talking about design, and the ISD is just a mediocre one at that.

tag

Why would the rebels use an Ion cannon instead of a giant Turbo Laser cannon to fire on incoming ISD's if they had enough power to overwhelm their shields? Certainly you see how foolish it would be for them to use the equivalent of a taser to delay an enemy instead of using a sawed off shotgun to completely stop them for good. It's another trap created by starwars fanatics who believe most of the garbage they read about on the internet as it pertains to star wars technology.
They're Rebels. On the run. Not many resources compared to the Empire. They take what they can get. But the resources they *did* gather is impressive for an insurgency...

An ImpStar Deuce (Mark Two Imperial Star Destroyer) will take a hell of hull pounding before it goes away, a cannon of that power may have been able to take down its shields but there is no guarantee it would disable it before the bombardment cannons on the ship blew the cannon apart

They're Rebels. On the run. Not many resources compared to the Empire. They take what they can get. But the resources they *did* gather is impressive for an insurgency...
Not really an excuse given the shield bypassing abilities of an ion cannon (if true) would make it volumes more expensive than a laser or a turbo laser. Plus given that the rebels weren't really all that bad off (they had enough support a super laser cannon would have been easily availible), I find it hard to believe a laser canon was hard to come by anyway.

all they would need to ue to get one is find a ship with one and damage it. then rip it out and put it on their base.

Not really an excuse given the shield bypassing abilities of an ion cannon (if true) would make it volumes more expensive than a laser or a turbo laser. Plus given that the rebels weren't really all that bad off (they had enough support a super laser cannon would have been easily availible), I find it hard to believe a laser canon was hard to come by anyway.
I don't see why it would be more expensive. Simply a different means of attacking. For example, using a railgun is cheaper than using a ETC cannon, but the railgun is more advanced and tends to pack a bigger wallop.

Are you an idiot??? Nukes are still plenty powerful. If you can take a hit from 2-300 high MT range nukes, then you're obviously wanking something to high heaven.

Or you're being perfectly consistent within a high-energy, supertech setting (like Star Wars) and not wanking at all.

Why would the rebels use an Ion cannon instead of a giant Turbo Laser cannon to fire on incoming ISD's if they had enough power to overwhelm their shields?

Because planetary Turbolaser cannons are probably highly regulated by the Empire and the Rebels couldn't get one. They went with what they had.

Plus mass that could have gone to extra armor plating (yeah, just because the shields are down does not mean the fight is over.) with an imbedded bridge.

Without shields heavy Turbolaser hits equal death. The exposed bridge is a design flaw, but it's not the "OMG teh Ultimat3 Suck!!1!" people make it out to be.

Also the rear engine section is the most heavily shielded and armored section according to most sources. There are also dozens of point-defense guns along the rear edge of the ISD as the model shows. It's a 25,000 year old clulture, of course they've realized that the rear is vulnerable and taken measures to protect it.

I'd just like to point out that just about every ship in the star wars universe has an exposed bridge. I challenge you to show me one that doesn't.

I'd just like to point out that just about every ship in the star wars universe has an exposed bridge. I challenge you to show me one that doesn't.

Why? I never said they didn't all have external bridges. I just said it's not the fatally crippling flaw everyone thinks it is.

Because planetary Turbolaser cannons are probably highly regulated by the Empire and the Rebels couldn't get one. They went with what they had.


Like giant Ion Cannons weren't?


Without shields heavy Turbolaser hits equal death. The exposed bridge is a design flaw, but it's not the "OMG teh Ultimat3 Suck!!1!" people make it out to be.

This assumes Turbo lasers can get through the thick armor of an ISD in one blast, which I've never seen in the games, the films, or anywhere else.

Also the rear engine section is the most heavily shielded and armored section according to most sources. There are also dozens of point-defense guns along the rear edge of the ISD as the model shows. It's a 25,000 year old clulture, of course they've realized that the rear is vulnerable and taken measures to protect it.

I saw no evidence of this in the films which you so highly regard, and regardless that section should not be the most heavily armored at all, it makes no sense. Any intelligent designer of military grade craft would never armor the rear of said craft if the design explicably called for that craft to be facing the enemy while firing, which is what the ISD was meant to do. If what you say is true, it only shows the incompetence of the empire.

Why? I never said they didn't all have external bridges. I just said it's not the fatally crippling flaw everyone thinks it is.

That's what I'm trying to point out too. Everyone goes on about the exposed bridge of Star Destroyers because in the movie an A-Wing crashed through the viewports and killed the Executor's bridge crew. It could have just as easily been a TIE bomber crashing through the viewports of Home One's bridge, killing Admiral Ackbar and causing it to crash into the Death Star instead.

Like giant Ion Cannons weren't?

Maybe the Empire regarded Ion cannons as less dangerous than Turbolasers. More likely the Ion cannon was the only heavy ground-to-orbit artillery the Rebels could get for Echo base.


This assumes Turbo lasers can get through the thick armor of an ISD in one blast, which I've never seen in the games, the films, or anywhere else.

They can. Watch this clip (http://www.mcc3d.com/swtech/ISDHTL.mov) to see Rebel a rebel HTL blast go through an ISDs armor and cause heavy fatal damage before a second blast finishes it off.

I saw no evidence of this in the films which you so highly regard, and regardless that section should not be the most heavily armored at all, it makes no sense. Any intelligent designer of military grade craft would never armor the rear of said craft if the design explicably called for that craft to be facing the enemy while firing, which is what the ISD was meant to do. If what you say is true, it only shows the incompetence of the empire.

The heaviest armor is actually on the dorsal terrace structures. I was merely pointing out that the engines aren't the super-giant weak spot NSers seem to think.

That's what I'm trying to point out too. Everyone goes on about the exposed bridge of Star Destroyers because in the movie an A-Wing crashed through the viewports and killed the Executor's bridge crew. It could have just as easily been a TIE bomber crashing through the viewports of Home One's bridge, killing Admiral Ackbar and causing it to crash into the Death Star instead.

Indeed it could have been.

Maybe the Empire regarded Ion cannons as less dangerous than Turbolasers. More likely the Ion cannon was the only heavy ground-to-orbit artillery the Rebels could get for Echo base.

Less dangerous? They can disable massive warships but are less dangerous than Turbo lasers that atleast shields can stand up against?


They can. Watch this clip (http://www.mcc3d.com/swtech/ISDHTL.mov) to see Rebel a rebel HTL blast go through an ISDs armor and cause heavy fatal damage before a second blast finishes it off.


404.


The heaviest armor is actually on the dorsal terrace structures. I was merely pointing out that the engines aren't the super-giant weak spot NSers seem to think.


But still are a massive weakspot anyone with a more nimble ship can exploit.

While they have the power to disable ships, Ion cannons do no structural damage, aside from minor electrical fires and scrambled computers. The ship can recover fully from and Ion strike rather quickly. Turbolasers tend to melt and vaporize armor plating and thoroughly destroy the ship and its crew.

You do the math.

Less dangerous? They can disable massive warships but are less dangerous than Turbo lasers that atleast shields can stand up against?

A TL with that level of power behind it would have destroyed the ship. Ion cannons aren't magic shield penetrators, they're particle beams and are stopped by shields just like Turbolasers.

And as I said, the most likely possibility is that the Ion cannon was all the Rebels could get for Echo base. They probably would have used a heavy TL if they could have gotten one.


404

Go ht tp://www.mcc3d.com/swtech/ and get the file ISDHTL.mov.

But still are a massive weakspot anyone with a more nimble ship can exploit.

Which is where the dozens of PD guns I mentioned earlier come in. And SW capships aren't the beached whales people think they are either. I posted clips showing impressive maneuverability for capships earlier in the thread.

While they have the power to disable ships, Ion cannons do no structural damage, aside from minor electrical fires and scrambled computers. The ship can recover fully from and Ion strike rather quickly. Turbolasers tend to melt and vaporize armor plating and thoroughly destroy the ship and its crew.

You do the math.

Ion cannons are particle beams, they do damage. Just not as much as turbolasers.

While they have the power to disable ships, Ion cannons do no structural damage, aside from minor electrical fires and scrambled computers. The ship can recover fully from and Ion strike rather quickly. Turbolasers tend to melt and vaporize armor plating and thoroughly destroy the ship and its crew.

You do the math.


Turbolasers have to go through shields and armor plating first, for all their power they still must get through the defenses to be worth anything. Ion Cannons on the otherhand, go through shields and disable a ship utterly. Had the rebels some decent ships in the area it is entirely possible they could have annihilated the disabled ISDs.


A TL with that level of power behind it would have destroyed the ship. Ion cannons aren't magic shield penetrators, they're particle beams and are stopped by shields just like Turbolasers.

No by all evidence we have thus far they go through shields.

And as I said, the most likely possibility is that the Ion cannon was all the Rebels could get for Echo base. They probably would have used a heavy TL if they could have gotten one.
Not really. It makes little sense to use planetary defense weapons like Trubo lasers because A) they still take time to get through the shields of encrouching enemy fleets, so being the nice insurgent you are you don't have the force projections capabilities to do this before said enemy fleet smashes the living hell out of you, which leads to B) you need something like an Ion Cannon so you can escape. It makes little sense to have Ion Cannons if a TL can do as much damage as you claim they could do backed by that much power; they wouldn't need an ion cannon then because they, and anyone else could vaporize the besieging fleet before troops ever landed.


Go here and get the file ISDHTL.mov.


Still 404.


Which is where the dozens of PD guns I mentioned earlier come in. And SW capships aren't the beached whales people think they are either. I posted clips showing impressive maneuverability for capships earlier in the thread

If an ISD can move like that then I would hate to see the manouverability of smaller capships with enough shielding and armor to stop piddly PD guns.

Ion cannons are particle beams, they do damage. Just not as much as turbolasers.

I quote from "A guide to the Star Wars Universe: Second Edition"


ion cannon

An ion cannon fires bursts of ionized energy that cause damage to a target's mechanical and computer systems by overloading and fusing circuitry. Unlike blaster bolts, ion cannons cause no structural damage. They do, however, neutralize ship weapons, shields, engines and other vital systems. Ship-mounted ion cannons come in a variety of low power ratings, while those designed to serve as planetary defenses have the highest power ratings available. Planetary ion cannons are mounted in multistory, spherical towers that have their own power supplies. These tower cannons hurl devastating bursts of ionized energy into space to ward off hostile vessels. One of these weapons protected the Rebel base on Hoth from the orbital assault.
source: [ESB]

No by all evidence we have thus far they go through shields.

Occam's Razor, Ion cannons involve a magic shield penetrating principle or the Hoth Ion cannon had enough power behind it to knock down an ISDs shields. Both are equally valid but the second one involves no extra terms so it is the correct one.


Not really. It makes little sense to use planetary defense weapons like Trubo lasers because A) they still take time to get through the shields of encrouching enemy fleets, so being the nice insurgent you are you don't have the force projections capabilities to do this before said enemy fleet smashes the living hell out of you,

Ground based weapons have more powerful reactors so they have more firepower. According to fluff a planetary Turbolaser can kill an ISD in 2-3 shots.

which leads to B) you need something like an Ion Cannon so you can escape. It makes little sense to have Ion Cannons if a TL can do as much damage as you claim they could do backed by that much power; they wouldn't need an ion cannon then because they, and anyone else could vaporize the besieging fleet before troops ever landed.

Which is why there are more powerfull ships than ISDs. This is also one of the reasons why the Empire built the Death Stars.


Still 404.

The file is there, re-check my last post as I edited it for the site to appear. It does work in my Firefox when typed into the browser window.

If an ISD can move like that then I would hate to see the manouverability of smaller capships with enough shielding and armor to stop piddly PD guns.


The only ships that can get back there are either fighters or have too little firepower to get through the shields. And in any major fleet engagment there will be other vessels to screen for eachother.

I quote from "A guide to the Star Wars Universe: Second Edition"

I know what the fluff says. But Ion cannons shoot ions, that's why they're called Ion cannons. It's physically impossible for a particle beam to not do physical damage. With Ion cannons the charge it gives the ship is greater than the damage it does so the end result is a disabled ship with a scorched paint job.

Occam's Razor, Ion cannons involve a magic shield penetrating principle or the Hoth Ion cannon had enough power behind it to knock down an ISDs shields. Both are equally valid but the second one involves no extra terms so it is the correct one.

Er, em, no. Occam's Razor only applies when trying to explain something through logic without any evidence. However, all evidence suggests that Ion Cannons can penetrate through the shields of enemy ships whereas Turbo Lasers take a few shots.


Ground based weapons have more powerful reactors so they have more firepower. According to fluff a planetary Turbolaser can kill an ISD in 2-3 shots.

Why not link us to some of this fluff?

Which is why there are more powerfull ships than ISDs. This is also one of the reasons why the Empire built the Death Stars.


Yeah you see this statement makes no sense and has no relevance to the current discussion; it is you grasping at straws and sidestepping the argument instead of acknowleding the simple fact the rear and underbelly of an ISD is a horrible weak point.



The file is there, re-check my last post as I edited it for the site to appear. It does work in my Firefox when typed into the browser window.


Alrighty.



The only ships that can get back there are either fighters or have too little firepower to get through the shields. And in any major fleet engagment there will be other vessels to screen for eachother.

This still seems to blatantly ignore the fact that geurilla tactics will annihilate an ISD when it is attacked from different vectors. Even without an ambush ISD's will be crushed utterly if their phalanx tactics fail. This is not Greece circa 100 AD, this is a suppossedly hyper-advanced star empire with poor military designers.

And this is getting rediculous. I'm starting to refute points already made earlier in the thread. I'm not going to repeat myself, go looking through the thread instead.

I'm not bothering with this anymore.

EDIT: Okay maybe I'll bother a bit more.

I know what the fluff says. But Ion cannons shoot ions, that's why they're called Ion cannons. It's physically impossible for a particle beam to not do physical damage. With Ion cannons the charge it gives the ship is greater than the damage it does so the end result is a disabled ship with a scorched paint job.

Well it's impossible to impart that kind of charge without having a little bit of collateral. The fact remains the only damage doen by an ion beam is only indirectly caused by it. Melted wires, fused switches, brnt paint and damaged console screens. When put next to a turbolaser, the ion cannon seems like a useful tool, but not really a devastating weapon. There's a reason why ISD's have 6 Heavy TL batteries and only 2 heavy ion batteries.

And this is getting rediculous. I'm starting to refute points already made earlier in the thread. I'm not going to repeat myself, go looking through the thread instead.

I'm not bothering with this anymore.

EDIT: Okay maybe I'll bother a bit more.
Er, of course you blatantly ignore the fact you've only SAID things without actually proving them. Throwing forth statements without evidence and demanding we accept your arguments based on simple conjecture.

Well it's impossible to impart that kind of charge without having a little bit of collateral. The fact remains the only damage doen by an ion beam is only indirectly caused by it. Melted wires, fused switches, brnt paint and damaged console screens. When put next to a turbolaser, the ion cannon seems like a useful tool, but not really a devastating weapon. There's a reason why ISD's have 6 Heavy TL batteries and only 2 heavy ion batteries.

I wasn't saying they do heavy damage, I was just saying they do physical damage, even if not much.

I wasn't saying they do heavy damage, I was just saying they do physical damage, even if not much.

negligible damage. all the effects of an ion beam are either unimportant, or can be fixed or rerouted to an undamaged console in the space of a few minutes.

Er, em, no. Occam's Razor only applies when trying to explain something through logic without any evidence. However, all evidence suggests that Ion Cannons can penetrate through the shields of enemy ships whereas Turbo Lasers take a few shots.

Page 9 of the ROTS: Incredible Cross-Sections states that "Ion cannons fire bolts of plasma that disrupt electrical systems". So we have a canon source for Ion cannons firing particles. Which means they'll be affected by particle shields.

From www.theforce.net/swtc this is also said.

Some sources indicate that ion cannon shots can pass freely through shields [eg. Star Wars Roleplaying Game: 2nd edition]. However this can't be entirely true, or else marauding starfleets could inflict untold havoc upon planets sheltering under global shields. The conquest of Coruscant would have been much more straightforward [X-Wing: Wedge's Gamble]. Furthermore it seemed that the rebel shield over Hoth had to be lowered to allow the egress of departing ships and the ion cannon shots against the Imperial blockade [The Empire Strikes Back]. The fact that the star destroyer Tyrant was struck and disabled without any sign of effective shielding means that the ship's shields were very much weaker than the rebels' shield.

Given the new and most accurate information from the ROTS:ICS it is clear that Ion cannons fire ions in the form of plasma. Since they are particles they would be stopped by particle shields. This Ion cannons are not shield penetrating.


The Star Wars Techincal Commentaries is an excellent objective look at SW. I'd also suggest the DK line of books such as the Inside the Worlds and Incredible Cross-Sections.



Yeah you see this statement makes no sense and has no relevance to the current discussion; it is you grasping at straws and sidestepping the argument instead of acknowleding the simple fact the rear and underbelly of an ISD is a horrible weak point.

Yes the underside and rear are weak points. What I was trying to say was that despite these weaknesses the Empire still fields vessels that are more durable than an ISD so as to defeat stronger planetary defenses, and that the Death Star was the ultimate end to those goals.


This still seems to blatantly ignore the fact that geurilla tactics will annihilate an ISD when it is attacked from different vectors. Even without an ambush ISD's will be crushed utterly if their phalanx tactics fail. This is not Greece circa 100 AD, this is a suppossedly hyper-advanced star empire with poor military designers.

Yes, attack with enough firepower to overwhelm its shields and the ISD will be destroyed. If that happens to take the form of a swarm of a thousand fighters, a hundred Correlian Corvettes, a pair of MonCal cruisers or a Death Star does not matter.

If you do not attack with enough firepower to overwhelm its shields it will not be destroyed no matter how many different vectors you attack from. You won't do any more damage to an Abrams by shooting at it with three .22s from different vectors than with one .22. But if you get an ATGM or two then you can destroy it.

In universe the only ships that can outmaneuver an ISD simply do not have enough firepower to get through the shields, even if attacking from a weak point. Starfighters can at best annoy an ISD and force it to keep its shields up all over rather than just the vector an enemy capital ship is attacking. And most light vessels can be dealt with by the light and medium guns which are far more numerous than WEG stats claim.

On NS there are god knows how many super maneuverable ships with enough firepower to get into an ISDs weak point and kick its ass. I've been arguing for ISDs In Universe role, not their NS role. I believe than ISDs can be good ships for the destroyer role in NS fleets, but they aren't the be all and end all on NS or in universe.

If I was giving out that impression, I was obviously not explaining myself clearly.

And now I really am tired of this. Go hang out at SD.net to learn lots of fun stuff about Star Wars.

Page 9 of the ROTS: Incredible Cross-Sections states that "Ion cannons fire bolts of plasma that disrupt electrical systems". So we have a canon source for Ion cannons firing particles. Which means they'll be affected by particle shields.

From www.theforce.net/swtc this is also said.

Er, no. Rebels being rebels need to be able to escape when pinpointed. Even if they had hundreds of turbolaser batteries ISD shields would have still held out, and their weapons still able to target and annihilate escaping craft. So the fact that they chose ship disabling weapons to facilitate their escape means that either Ion Cannons are not affected by particles shields or can pass much more easily through them.


Given the new and most accurate information from the ROTS:ICS it is clear that Ion cannons fire ions in the form of plasma. Since they are particles they would be stopped by particle shields. This Ion cannons are not shield penetrating.

Yet, they still passed easily through them.

Yes the underside and rear are weak points. What I was trying to say was that despite these weaknesses the Empire still fields vessels that are more durable than an ISD so as to defeat stronger planetary defenses, and that the Death Star was the ultimate end to those goals.


No, the Death Star was an expensive and stupid plot device no sane empire would have ever tried to develop. Also this is of course irrevelant due to the fact we are speaking about the design specifics of an ISD, not the fucking death star.


Yes, attack with enough firepower to overwhelm its shields and the ISD will be destroyed. If that happens to take the form of a swarm of a thousand fighters, a hundred Correlian Corvettes, a pair of MonCal cruisers or a Death Star does not matter.

You don't know what armor is do you?

If you do not attack with enough firepower to overwhelm its shields it will not be destroyed no matter how many different vectors you attack from. You won't do any more damage to an Abrams by shooting at it with three .22s from different vectors than with one .22. But if you get an ATGM or two then you can destroy it.

No, if we were going to use equivalents it would be three guys with RPG-7's attacking from different angles utterly annihilating the tank even if it took a while.

In universe the only ships that can outmaneuver an ISD simply do not have enough firepower to get through the shields, even if attacking from a weak point. Starfighters can at best annoy an ISD and force it to keep its shields up all over rather than just the vector an enemy capital ship is attacking. And most light vessels can be dealt with by the light and medium guns which are far more numerous than WEG stats claim.


This of course assumes one cannot simply drain away ISD shielding or that there exist no ships with enough manouverability to damage the ship (which appeares blatantly false once one takes a look at the various films and video games).

On NS there are god knows how many super maneuverable ships with enough firepower to get into an ISDs weak point and kick its ass. I've been arguing for ISDs In Universe role, not their NS role. I believe than ISDs can be good ships for the destroyer role in NS fleets, but they aren't the be all and end all on NS or in universe.

ISDs should be used as fucking command ships due to their size and armaments, but SW wankers use masses of them and devalue them by doing so. Even in Universe ISD's are mediocre designs at best.

If I was giving out that impression, I was obviously not explaining myself clearly.

And now I really am tired of this. Go hang out at SD.net to learn lots of fun stuff about Star Wars.


SD.net is full of idiot canon nerds who cannot see the forest for the trees and that idiot Wong whose love of starwars has apparently driven him insane.

When an ion cannon blast strikes shields, and if it is, powerful enough it causes massive feedback in the shield generators and knocks them out.

Ooh what can I say. ISDs tend to be the jack of all trade ships in SW. They do a bit of every thing, they carry fighters, they can perform planetary assaults and fight in normal space fights. An ISD can perform a BDZ operation within one hour. Which means it turns the surface of an unshielded planet into molten slag. It has 8 turbolasers which are in the single to double digit teraton range (for perspective the most powerful nuke ever made was about 50 megatons) and its sheilds can survive similar weapons for lengthy engagements. In other words an ISD could take all our nuclear weapons ever made and not flinch.

Precisely . Nukes should be totally useless in a FT war .

An ImpStar Deuce (Mark Two Imperial Star Destroyer) will take a hell of hull pounding before it goes away, a cannon of that power may have been able to take down its shields but there is no guarantee it would disable it before the bombardment cannons on the ship blew the cannon apart

Correct .

I'd just like to point out that just about every ship in the star wars universe has an exposed bridge. I challenge you to show me one that doesn't.

I disagree . The Carrack Class Light Cruiser does not have a fully exposed bridge .

I notice you continue to assume I use starwars classification. I don't. I use BFG classification, which is itself very closely based on the "steam, steal, and shellfire" era of naval warfare, in which a destroyer was an escort and a cruiser was a line ship of hugely greater size. I aslo roleplay with big ships, and not to many of them. Chronosia, for example, who has a similar army/navy ratio and crew size to myself, fields a thousand ships per billion in his population. With 1.2 billion, my fleet, complete with every fighting ship, transport, station, and spy ship does not exceed 600 ships.

On the subject of the ISD, it's a decent ship, but not the anhilaltor some noobs make it out to be. In particular, it's quite easy to cross the T on them, and they commit alot of space to ground troops that Id use for bigger guns. In relation to my cruisers, one is quite an oponent, but a pack, though deadly, is not as effective as the same tonnage in smaller ships.

I disagree . The Carrack Class Light Cruiser does not have a fully exposed bridge .

This looks like a pretty exposed bridge to me:
http://premium1.uploadit.org/MaxOutrider/ShipImages/Carrack-Cruiser.jpg

[ If an ISD got into range, it might actually stand a good chance.

However, its weaponry is all close-range, so it'd have to walk through the envelope of every other weapon the enemy uses to get there.

Which means the enemy is untouched, while the ISD isn't. And, if I remember right, point-defense is really more of an afterthought for all Star Wars ships, for use against antimatter missiles and fighters. ]

I notice you continue to assume I use starwars classification. I don't. I use BFG classification, which is itself very closely based on the "steam, steal, and shellfire" era of naval warfare, in which a destroyer was an escort and a cruiser was a line ship of hugely greater size. I aslo roleplay with big ships, and not to many of them. Chronosia, for example, who has a similar army/navy ratio and crew size to myself, fields a thousand ships per billion in his population. With 1.2 billion, my fleet, complete with every fighting ship, transport, station, and spy ship does not exceed 600 ships.

On the subject of the ISD, it's a decent ship, but not the anhilaltor some noobs make it out to be. In particular, it's quite easy to cross the T on them, and they commit alot of space to ground troops that Id use for bigger guns. In relation to my cruisers, one is quite an oponent, but a pack, though deadly, is not as effective as the same tonnage in smaller ships.


I totally disagree with you . I think that several ISDs will be more than enough to eliminate one of your big ships . And if you say those that assume ISDs are anhiliators are noobs , you'll be insulting every SW fan and everyone who supports and uses SW ships . So watch your tongue and no flaming pls.

Wait. You think that ISDs can beat a ship four or five times thier size? The ones with the hundred meter torpedoes, teleporters and individual turrets half the size of your ship? The things are a match for an entire battlefleet.

You can't compare SW with BFG, BFG is on a scale larger then SW.

Wait. You think that ISDs can beat a ship four or five times thier size? The ones with the hundred meter torpedoes, teleporters and individual turrets half the size of your ship? The things are a match for an entire battlefleet.


Nope . I said several . I mean 8 to 10 .

Ok, I have my two cents to pitch in. Hey, I'm a Star Wars Fan So I'm pitchin in.

First, The intention of the Imperial Star Destroyer is simply psychological in function. Take Episode IV when the consolate/Rebel ship is run down and captured. Quite simply this was a demostration. Psychology and philosophy behind this is simple. Big Ship takes after little ship, runs it down, makes an example and put the thought in the Rebels' collective conciousness that "They're too big! We can't take them!" While certainly slow and obviously cumbersome they did pack a punch when the shot counted and if you were on the side of the Rebels, you didn't want that damned shot to count.

Second, anything "imperial" is always going to be very large, very grand. From theme music to wardrobe, they don't like to be thought of as small. Call it an ego thing. Even if they don't have the punch to back the trashtalk they still like to create an illusion. Sure most of the crew is all gathered in one spot but did the movies, books, games, etc really take us through the ship inch-by-inch? Not really. So let's assume that this thought pattern is correct then we can refer to point one by further illustrating that the point was more illusory than factual. The idea? Create the illusion of having an army far larger than what you actually have at all costs.

Third. The fact that it's cumbersome and slow isn't necessarily the point. The point scale racks up on it's number of brown trousers moments. Imagine being in the rebel ship just when one of those things shows up and TIE fighters come swarming out of that. After the fact, it's all panicked attempts with undertones of lost hope. Trying to outrun the thing is actually pointless...it can catch up to you once the momentum is there and couple that with a tractor beam...count the times you have the wood put to you in that moment. Secondly, what you're going to have to rely in is maneuverability in order to escape this one....that is, only counting IF the TIE fighters don't descend on you like a month of Sundays. But, in forgetting all that let's just say you and your Rebel Crew have said this IS a good day to die and you simply decide to go down swinging. Can you point out the exact spot where the vast majority of the crew is residing at the given moment of time to take them out rendering the ISD useless? That takes intel. Intel that insurgents don't have.

Final point in defense of the naysayers on ISDs. The Imperial Star Destroyers, much like other imperialists, are essentially non-functional for most reasons.
1. Insurgency spreads and with the spread of insurgency (aka the Rebellion) it will only encourage more and more of the same. One could argue the point with the allusion of the ant crawling up the leg of an elephant with the intention of rape but the one thing that most bigger star systems don't know is that many smaller ones will end up banding together to take the Big One down.
2. Bigger ships mean many more weak points but again, to take advantage of them requires intel that they may or may not have
3. With the breakdown of the illusion of grandeur comes heavier controls and, as with any dictatorship, heavier controls will encourage rebellion and further demostrate that the dictatorship is losing it's grip on the control of the populace. With the illustration that now more control is necessary to control the insurgency which is already well out of the control range of the Empire, it's obvious that, by now, the insurgency already holds all the intel it needs. By now, not even The Death Star, much less and ISD is effective any longer.

Pros, cons, whatever your flavor is, the fact remains that the Imperial Star Destroyer is one of the most frightening in appearance and it's psychological value rates high on the Brown Trousers Scale.

I never said an ISD squadron couldn't down a cruiser, but the same tonnage of say... VSDs can use high manouverability and dispersal of assets to confound my clumsy guns, have the same firepower in many small weapons, which by its nature is more effective against Void Shielding. And with an agile ship, it becomes extremely easy to cross my T. In general, five ISDs makes a cruiser captain attempt to disengage, but ten VSDs makes him shit his pants as well.

Ok, I have my two cents to pitch in. Hey, I'm a Star Wars Fan So I'm pitchin in.

First, The intention of the Imperial Star Destroyer is simply psychological in function. Take Episode IV when the consolate/Rebel ship is run down and captured. Quite simply this was a demostration. Psychology and philosophy behind this is simple. Big Ship takes after little ship, runs it down, makes an example and put the thought in the Rebels' collective conciousness that "They're too big! We can't take them!" While certainly slow and obviously cumbersome they did pack a punch when the shot counted and if you were on the side of the Rebels, you didn't want that damned shot to count.

Second, anything "imperial" is always going to be very large, very grand. From theme music to wardrobe, they don't like to be thought of as small. Call it an ego thing. Even if they don't have the punch to back the trashtalk they still like to create an illusion. Sure most of the crew is all gathered in one spot but did the movies, books, games, etc really take us through the ship inch-by-inch? Not really. So let's assume that this thought pattern is correct then we can refer to point one by further illustrating that the point was more illusory than factual. The idea? Create the illusion of having an army far larger than what you actually have at all costs.

Third. The fact that it's cumbersome and slow isn't necessarily the point. The point scale racks up on it's number of brown trousers moments. Imagine being in the rebel ship just when one of those things shows up and TIE fighters come swarming out of that. After the fact, it's all panicked attempts with undertones of lost hope. Trying to outrun the thing is actually pointless...it can catch up to you once the momentum is there and couple that with a tractor beam...count the times you have the wood put to you in that moment. Secondly, what you're going to have to rely in is maneuverability in order to escape this one....that is, only counting IF the TIE fighters don't descend on you like a month of Sundays. But, in forgetting all that let's just say you and your Rebel Crew have said this IS a good day to die and you simply decide to go down swinging. Can you point out the exact spot where the vast majority of the crew is residing at the given moment of time to take them out rendering the ISD useless? That takes intel. Intel that insurgents don't have.

Final point in defense of the naysayers on ISDs. The Imperial Star Destroyers, much like other imperialists, are essentially non-functional for most reasons.
1. Insurgency spreads and with the spread of insurgency (aka the Rebellion) it will only encourage more and more of the same. One could argue the point with the allusion of the ant crawling up the leg of an elephant with the intention of rape but the one thing that most bigger star systems don't know is that many smaller ones will end up banding together to take the Big One down.
2. Bigger ships mean many more weak points but again, to take advantage of them requires intel that they may or may not have
3. With the breakdown of the illusion of grandeur comes heavier controls and, as with any dictatorship, heavier controls will encourage rebellion and further demostrate that the dictatorship is losing it's grip on the control of the populace. With the illustration that now more control is necessary to control the insurgency which is already well out of the control range of the Empire, it's obvious that, by now, the insurgency already holds all the intel it needs. By now, not even The Death Star, much less and ISD is effective any longer.

Pros, cons, whatever your flavor is, the fact remains that the Imperial Star Destroyer is one of the most frightening in appearance and it's psychological value rates high on the Brown Trousers Scale.


I have to agree that anything to do with Imperial is very grand . Secondly I also have to agree that the ISD terrorizes the Rebels , a Psychological warfare . But still it has the necesasary firepower to back it up .

I never said an ISD squadron couldn't down a cruiser, but the same tonnage of say... VSDs can use high manouverability and dispersal of assets to confound my clumsy guns, have the same firepower in many small weapons, which by its nature is more effective against Void Shielding. And with an agile ship, it becomes extremely easy to cross my T. In general, five ISDs makes a cruiser captain attempt to disengage, but ten VSDs makes him shit his pants as well.


This time I have to agree with you .

I never said an ISD squadron couldn't down a cruiser, but the same tonnage of say... VSDs can use high manouverability and dispersal of assets to confound my clumsy guns, have the same firepower in many small weapons, which by its nature is more effective against Void Shielding. And with an agile ship, it becomes extremely easy to cross my T. In general, five ISDs makes a cruiser captain attempt to disengage, but ten VSDs makes him shit his pants as well.
Question: If you're using 40K-esque vessels, don't you WANT them to cross your T? Although you're now presenting a larger target, you also bring a very large number of broadside batteries into play. Admittedly, spinal weapons such as a nova cannon are no longer viable, but the sheer volume of fire coming from those batteries should make up for it nicely. Hell, ideally, a BFG vessel should fight in a looping motion, letting its spinal guns fire, presenting one broadside, then the other, then the spinals again once they've reloaded.

that is, only counting IF the TIE fighters don't descend on you like a month of Sundays.
Frankly, TIE fighters are a rather horrid design. Overly large profile, lightly armed, and not really that fast or maneuverable, especially when compared to a well-designed drone. Hell, any manned vessel is rather horrid compared to a well-designed drone. Add on the fact that an ISD only carries 72 of the things, and the fight gets rather one-sided rather quickly.

To cross the T by the napoleononic definition I work with is showing your broadside to the enemies much weaker chase armament, not the other way around, and while BFG prow armament is hardly weak, its not the best weapon to take a snapshot with. As for crossing my stern... I'm glad I use so many escorts.

Ok, a lot of ground for me to cover, but here goes my sermon; so everyone listen in! ;)

---

First, everyone has to understand that the Star Destroyer MkI and MkII were based upon the evolution. That evlution of the Venator and Victory class Star Destroyers. A weapon is designed according to the need of the battlefield. Its perameters based upon battlefield experiance. When Imperial Commanders were fighting at Endor, they were doing so with a paradigm mindset and tactical needs according to the doctrine of heavy weapons platforms backed with fighter compliments.

This in turn reflects upon the battles of the Clone Wars. The Clone Wars were in a sense similar to the battles upon the seas between the 1500s-1940s. You lined up your capital ships, tried getting a better position manuever, and then wailed at your enemy until he was dead or retreated. Thus Venators provided a powerful addition to the Grand Army by having eight heavy turbolaser cannon batteries, proving to be a extremely useful weapons platform (some captains even opened their fighter bays and let their Clone vehicles fire out with their weapons, adding to their firepower).

The Imperial Fighting Doctrine was based upon Old Republic Grand Army Doctrine. Many of the officers from the Old Republic were transfered into the Imperial Fleet (the Emperor could hardly afford to kill off all the most brilliant and best fleet officers now that the Idependant Star Systems were defeated leaving him no other pool of effective fleet commanders). Thus we are provided with Old Republic paradigm within the new Imperial navy.

In addition to this old paradigm of capital ships being heavy weapons platforms combined with effective fighter squadrons came the Emperor's ideal of 'Rule by Fear'. Imperial fleet engineers decided to take the already proven and effective design of the Venator and the Victory (based upon results from the Clone Wars) and combine it with that ideal of Rule by Fear. From that was born the Imperial Star Destroyer.

Not only did it dwarf the Victory and Venator classes, but it provided a far heavier weapons base, larger fighter compliment, heavier shielding and hull, and provided the Imperial Fleet with the final addition to their doctrine. The Star Destroyer, or Imperator, was the epitome of Imperial Strategic and Psychological Doctrine: Rule By Fear and Fight by Maximum Power (provided by the largest capital ship then in existance, ie the ISD).

A better way perhaps to understand the developement of the ISD is to study the developement of Nazi Germany's Panzers. From the Panzer I to the Panzer VI known as the Tiger. Their developement of tanks was based upon what they encountered on the field of battle. The same happened for the Empire.

The inovative tactics of using heavier armed and more manueverable fighters as well as a newer class of starship (Mon Calimari) allowed the Rebel Alliance and then the New Republic to challenge and thus utterly wipe out several decades worth of Imperial Doctrine. Admiral Ackbar took his cruisers into closer range of ISDs, not only making them less likely to be targeted by the DSII but also because ISDs perform at their best only when at a distance and as a weapons platform. Thus Ackbars more flexible stratgey both confused Imperial ship commanders and provided them with an unprecedented situation; for their experiance and doctrine gained from the Clone Wars did not provide them with any viable alternative.

However, the main reason many NSers think the ISD of weak (which it is not if you know how to use them correctly; I refer to the Thrawn Trilogy of books, and important read to any SW buff), is because of the way in which many nations use them. Many nations believe that unless they have a massive number of ISDs (say 3,000) then they cannot win. Thus their tactics come down to being worse than Soviet Army commanders during WWII.

Quantity over Quality, is the best way to describe the effects which have led most FT nations on NS to disdain the use of them. However many nations have gone further into designing better models of ISDs(my hats off to you blokes), hence the now being seen 'toweless' ISDs. Very inovative in it of itself and becoming highly popular.

The towers in question were sensor as already stated beyond redundance, however they did control the ability of the Star Destroyers to successfully project their shields. The shields themselves were generated from a dozen locations; however the sensor arrays allowed for the commander to shift these accordingly in battle and to strenghten one while weakening another. Thus the destruction of a tower left the commander without the ability to use his shields, and at the same time be able to see if any failed.

So the ISD is not weak because it was used 'stupidly' by its commanders or simply because of its design. No weapon is 'stupid'. It is simply that those who used it were not prepared for the type of situations which the Battle of Endor presented. So when you read those battles with hundreds of ISDs invovled, simply be aware that they are not weak but simply being used wrong (and are largely underestimated by those who think that just because their ship is 10 kloms larger means its better).

A man with a broken off chair leg can still win against a man with a pistol, all that matters is the tactical capabilities and understanding the commander has of his weapons, or in our case, the Imperial Star Destroyer.

I have to agree that anything to do with Imperial is very grand . Secondly I also have to agree that the ISD terrorizes the Rebels , a Psychological warfare . But still it has the necesasary firepower to back it up .

The ISD isn't at all frightening. It slow, armed in a mediocre manner at best, and has crappy defenses.

How is an ISD going to stop an Honorverse level broadside? How will it stop a Legacy-style fighter swarm? How will it stand up to a Supermonitor? How would it deal with a Posleen Battleglobe? It doesn't have the sheer NUMBER of powerful guns to take out a Globe, or a Supermonitor, it doesn't have the PD to stand up to the broadsides of an Honorverse SD(p). It has almost NO advantages other than its being well known.

Mini, remeber that this is STAR WARS universe. Not Honorverse or any of that other crap. You already know it can't measure up to that. Why even bother? This is a SW issue. Not Honorverse or anything else.

The ISD isn't at all frightening. It slow, armed in a mediocre manner at best, and has crappy defenses.

How is an ISD going to stop an Honorverse level broadside? How will it stop a Legacy-style fighter swarm? How will it stand up to a Supermonitor? How would it deal with a Posleen Battleglobe? It doesn't have the sheer NUMBER of powerful guns to take out a Globe, or a Supermonitor, it doesn't have the PD to stand up to the broadsides of an Honorverse SD(p). It has almost NO advantages other than its being well known.

And none of them could stand for a microsecond against a culture warship. So it doesn't mean crap. this is about SW, not anything else.

Mini, remeber that this is STAR WARS universe. Not Honorverse or any of that other crap. You already know it can't measure up to that. Why even bother? This is a SW issue. Not Honorverse or anything else.
No. This is an NS issue. Star Destroyers regularly face Honorverse craft, BFG vessels, and custom ships of all types. While Star Destroyers do rule the black in the SW universe, this is NOT the Star Wars universe. This is NationStates, and there are quite a few things far bigger and nastier than a simple Star Destroyer out there.

Since the design is... rather subpar I don't see why it matters if the ISD is psychological or not.

Here's your answer Mini: They're cheap and easy to mass-produce.

The ISD isn't at all frightening. It slow, armed in a mediocre manner at best, and has crappy defenses.
To what? A War-TARDIS would be able to destroy the entire Imperial fleet in a single moment. On the other hand a star destroyer is very fast, powerful, and well defended compared to stuff that really exists.

---
Battlefleet Gothic: This may be of interest (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=10911764#post10911764) At present, 'Warsie' estimates of ISD reactor output are around 1e25 watts. In comparison, a space marine strike cruiser is, so far, around 1e23 watts. That'd mean that the ISD is 100 times more powerful. An IoM battleship, generously, around 5e23. So, twenty would be needed to match the output of an Imperial Star Destroyer.

A Star Wars equivalent to an Imperium of Man cruiser in firepower would be the Rand Ecliptic (http://www.theforce.net/swtc/dagger.html#rand) class Star Frigate.

To what? A War-TARDIS would be able to destroy the entire Imperial fleet in a single moment. On the other hand a star destroyer is very fast, powerful, and well defended compared to stuff that really exists.

---
Battlefleet Gothic: This may be of interest (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=10911764#post10911764) At present, 'Warsie' estimates of ISD reactor output are around 1e25 watts. In comparison, a space marine strike cruiser is, so far, around 1e23 watts. That'd mean that the ISD is 100 times more powerful. An IoM battleship, generously, around 5e23. So, twenty would be needed to match the output of an Imperial Star Destroyer.

A Star Wars equivalent to an Imperium of Man cruiser in firepower would be the Rand Ecliptic (http://www.theforce.net/swtc/dagger.html#rand) class Star Frigate.

What's the amount of PD on an ISD? Basically nil, correct? Now, what is the primary armament of my preferred tech(Honorverse)? Missiles, that's right. A single SD(p) has a broadside strength of 100 missiles, and a cyclic of about 20 seconds. That's 300 rounds a minute. There are twenty SD(p)s in 8th Fleet, on the other hand there are 12 ISDs in the Kuat Defense Force. That's without factoring in energy weapons, energy torps, or various other non-missile armament.

So, the point of this thread is to discuss the power of a Imperial Star Destroyer (ISD).

[ Could be taken either way. But, why stick it on the NS forums if you're going to restrict your arguments to how good the ISD is, in its own universe?

You don't compare, say, an F-16's performance to another aircraft in the same fleet. You compare it to something like an MiG-29. So why discuss the effectiveness of a space navy ship against its own known enemies? Throw a wrench in the works, a different angle, and that's how you improve. ]

Well , you can* post your objections or other points about the mighty Imperial warship ...

[ Last, that seems like this is rather inviting to discussion, but does not limit to SW. ]

*Edited.

What's the amount of PD on an ISD? Basically nil, correct? Now, what is the primary armament of my preferred tech(Honorverse)? Missiles, that's right. A single SD(p) has a broadside strength of 100 missiles, and a cyclic of about 20 seconds. That's 300 rounds a minute. There are twenty SD(p)s in 8th Fleet, on the other hand there are 12 ISDs in the Kuat Defense Force. That's without factoring in energy weapons, energy torps, or various other non-missile armament.
*Counts the amount of missiles on Joseph. Comes to a total in the low six digits*

In comparison, a space marine strike cruiser is, so far, around 1e23 watts. That'd mean that the ISD is 100 times more powerful. An IoM battleship, generously, around 5e23.
Where are you getting this? GW is notoriously bad at putting out reliable descriptions of their weapons, let alone specs on their ships. Hell, the closest thing I've seen to specs by GW is a lasgun rated in the megathoule range.

*Grins slightly*

Wrong window, Azaha. :D

Oh, and Ctan, what exactly was the point of that link? I can't really find anything related to the conversation at all...

*Counts the amount of missiles on Joseph. Comes to a total in the low six digits*

[ ...Joseph?
O.o

Can you...elaborate? Or something? ]

Length: 12000 meters
Width: 1400 meters
Height: 1400 meters
Crew: 12 pilots, 160 gunners, all with QUETZAL assist
Marine Compliment: 40,000 Otagian Regulars, automated defenses
Armament: Spinal 8000mm triple MAC, 16 rotary drum Super SCCAM launchers (108x6000), 40 2000mm MAC quad turrets, 120 1500mm MAC quad turrets, 1200 FireStorm CIPWS, 1200 PD SCCAM launchers
Carrier Capacity: 12 100x200x100 docking bays, 1500 Stingship II fighters, 8 rotary drum Paris II bays (108x3000)
Hull: 250mm ablative monomesh armor, 120mm super-conducting plating, 10mm SFS, 4500mm carbon-reinforced durasteel plating
Shields: Otagian mirror shields, Rhunate Accumulator Shields (triple redundancy), Facehuggerian accumulator shields
Power Plant: 4 MAMA reactors, 12 fusion reactors
Drives: Gravitic impellor, Sepulchers for 12 Mobius Guilders
Other: Full FTLi suite, ECM/ECCM suites

At 12 kilometers, Joseph is one of the largest vessels in the Otagian fleet. As one of the 13 Super Dreadnoughts commissioned by QUETZAL, Joseph acts as a command ship for any fleet it is deployed to. The armament on Joseph is easily the heaviest thus far in the Otagian arsenal, with over ten million SCCAM tubes, three magnetic accelerator cannons capable of launching shells weighing over 15,000 tonnes at relativistic speeds, and hundreds of smaller weapons. All together, Joseph is easily capable of devastating entire worlds.

Paintjob- Designed to wreak havoc with the opponents mind, the Joseph is painted in a garishly bright array of colors: red and yellow and green and brown and scarlet and black and ochre and peach and ruby and olive and violet and fawn and lilac and gold and chocolate and mauve and cream and crimson and silver and rose and azure and lemon and russet and grey and purple and white and pink and orange and blue. Whoever sees it is driven into song unto brain-death.* Truly, Joseph is a sight to behold.

Spinal MACs- The largest individual weapons on Joseph, a trio of 8000mm magnetic acceleration cannons run through the core of the vessel. A full 11 kilometers in length, the weapons accelerate their massive 8 meter by 60 meter DU shells to C-frac velocities, enough to crack the armor of even the largest enemy vessel. While the weapon is technically capable of firing ordinance, solid penetrators are virtually guaranteed to be more effective.

Rotary SCCAM drums- Possibly the most potent weapon systems aboard Joseph, the SCCAM drums run the entire length of the vessel. Each launcher consists of 648,000 tubes, with half of those facing outwards at a time. The rest are rotated inwards, reloading while the rest fire, ensuring a near constant barrage of deadly SCCAM torpedoes.

MAC Turrets- The main weapons of Joseph, the MAC turrets give the vessel excellent punch against enemy vessels. The 2 meter and 1.5 meter slugs are easily capable of ripping straight through many smaller vessels, and can fire a wide variety of ordinance.

Point Defense Systems- The FireStorm Close In Plasma Weapon System is the first line of defense for Joseph, along with a large number of point defense SCCAMs. Both are completely controlled by QUETZAL, and thus are capable of picosecond response times. Combined, the two systems guarantee that any attacker will be hard-pressed to even scratch the shields of this vessel.



*-may or may not be factual
That.

What's the amount of PD on an ISD? Basically nil, correct? Now, what is the primary armament of my preferred tech(Honorverse)? Missiles, that's right. A single SD(p) has a broadside strength of 100 missiles, and a cyclic of about 20 seconds. That's 300 rounds a minute. There are twenty SD(p)s in 8th Fleet, on the other hand there are 12 ISDs in the Kuat Defense Force. That's without factoring in energy weapons, energy torps, or various other non-missile armament.
It'd be absurd not to have PD when there are fighters around in big numbers. I'd say there's at least twice the number of laser cannons as turbolasers on a standard Impstar especially after Yavin (that means 120 lasers to 60 turbolasers). Makes sense, really. Laser cannons are tiny compared to the 1.6 km Star Destroyer. Unless you look reeeally closely, you aren't gonna see 'em.

Except that- by canon- they have no PD. I've seen dozens of stat blocks for the things, and they never list laser cannons as a weapon. Also, I don't think I've ever seen anything but an actual turbolaser shoot at fighters flying by a Star Destroyer (in movies).

Very well. That's my ISD stats then. :p

Damn Imperial Engineers. *crushes the throats of the lot of them*

I could say they rely on their fighters (although cheap and shieldless, TIEs are highly maneuverable and speedy) or escorts to counter enemy fighters.

*coughs loudly in the middle of the debate hall and pointing at his last comment*

"Sorry...forgot to take my medicine."

My last post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11017289&postcount=191) deals with why you will find what you find on an ISD up to this point.

Their are a number of other options for capship defence than just PD arrays. You could use drones of various types, ECM/ECCM, fighters and micro-missiles to name a few -- I use all of these for my vessels instead of PD arrays. I also possess a ship specifically designed for intercepting and destroying fighters and missiles.

I think debating how effective a ISD is almost futile. Since it seems to work fine in the films (plot device or not) and I view NS stuff people use (whether made up or taken from whatever source) as more or less the same.

Doing otherwise just causes problems for everyone involved.

Basically nil, correct?
Not really. Something like a hundred guns, most of which are capable of hitting incoming missiles. Star Wars is very keen on the whole "laser guns > missiles" approach - Did you know, Star Destroyers, and some of their predecessors actually have missile launchers, they're just not used against anything resembling a moving target?. That's not including the ability of a massive warship to just set its tractor beams towards an incoming missile volley and set them to 'repel' - having a comparatively small mass, as in a missile doesn't help one too well there - nor the abilities of its shields (which are, according to all sources, fairly formidable).
Now, what is the primary armament of my preferred tech(Honorverse)? Missiles, that's right. A single SD(p) has a broadside strength of 100 missiles, and a cyclic of about 20 seconds. That's 300 rounds a minute.
Mmm. And and ISD has 120 various guns, many of which are basically anti-fighter/missile (What do you think the secondary guns are for {They can run all reactor power through one heavy gun in capship combat, secondary guns are basically useless in such a situation} ? Show?) which can fire every two seconds. That comes to, say, 1800 PD shots per minute. 1/6th accuracy would be quite impressive by Star Wars standards, mind, but it's far from impossible. And that's discounting all the other options a Star Destroyer would have - not least just outrunning the enemy, given that it can accellerate about 50 times faster than honorverse ships, which, last I checked, went about 600 gravities, compared to the Star Destroyer's 3000.
There are twenty SD(p)s in 8th Fleet, on the other hand there are 12 ISDs in the Kuat Defense Force.
... And Star Dreadnoughts called Mandators that are roughly equivalent in size (though rather slower than) to the Excecutor, and hundreds of other warships. Kaut doesn't use that many ISDs, mostly because they're trans-galactic range warships, which is a bit pointless, as Kaut has no real desire to project force, so it tends to save money by using things like Mandators which limit their operations to its sector.
That's without factoring in energy weapons, energy torps, or various other non-missile armament.
All of which the ISD could stay out of range of indefinately, given that, again, last I heard, honorverse energy range was fairly limited, and the ISD goes twenty times faster than their ships do. Its own weapons have a theoretical range of 10 light seconds, though of course, practical range is far less (can't very well have the enemy dodging - though honorverse, lacking FTL sensors that'd be able to see the bolt coming, would have difficulty with that). And of course, the ISD has greater strategic mobility, not having to limit its FTL entry to a system to beyond a certain radius of the star. And that's not to mention the OMG Petaton armament that warsies would be quite able to one-shot Honorverse ships if it weren't for Weber's Wedges violating Conservation of Energy in the way a pack of dogs chasing a bitch in heat wish to...
Oh, and Ctan, what exactly was the point of that link? I can't really find anything related to the conversation at all...
It's related to the suggestion that Battlefleet Gothic ships are more than a match for an ISD, which they're sadly, really not (in general).
Where are you getting this? GW is notoriously bad at putting out reliable descriptions of their weapons, let alone specs on their ships.
You know, it was in the link. It's from nova and bombardment cannon descriptions in the Black Library books, where the sizes of shells and the speed (25%C) they fire at are specified. From that, you can estimate the minimum power of the ship.
Except that- by canon- they have no PD. I've seen dozens of stat blocks for the things, and they never list laser cannons as a weapon. Also, I don't think I've ever seen anything but an actual turbolaser shoot at fighters flying by a Star Destroyer (in movies).
It's not very well PD'd in comparison to say, a trade federation core ship, this is correct. However, let's not forget that when the ISD appears in the films, it's mostly not cutting loose. We don't see them at the battle of Yavin, at Hoth, we mostly see them chase the Falcon (which they're meant to be bringing in alive) and in RotJ, the Emperor (that military mind who makes Hitler look like a strategic genius; honestly, who uses themselves as bait in a trap, twice?) had issued hamstringing orders to Piett's fleet: They weren't allowed to fire directly on the rebels for crying out loud. Though later on in the battle of Endor (when the ships' captains have said 'screw these orders, we're losing'), they do manage to hit a few fighters.

In books and various other secondary sources, they do demonstrate an ability to hit fighters (so long as the fighters aren't piloted by anyone important) even thoush such ability really sucks. Of course, their primary defence is definately shields. It's not going to provide anything like perfect coverage; that's what happens when you rely on energy shields.

As Khurgan has said, practically everything about 40K reamains a technical mystery. I never used it because it had more wierd-sounding energy measurements. I used it because I wanted a mid-WW2 style fleet. I used it because there's something so touching about several million disposable guardsmen with their t-shirts and flashlights. I chose it because Warlord titans look awesome.

Ultimately, my balance relies on common sense. If they shoot a fleets worth of guns at one sindle ship, you die. End of story. No arguements. Full freakin' stop! Don't worry about wether or not a 2400mm gravetic watsit can break through an obscure anime's directional shield system. Just lose the damn ship.

As Khurgan has said, practically everything about 40K reamains a technical mystery. I never used it because it had more wierd-sounding energy measurements.

Actually, the only one that springs to mind is the 'thule' things like watt, league, ton(force) and so on used in 40K's stuff do exist.

This is to simply expand on The Ctan's post with some particular details.

What's the amount of PD on an ISD? Basically nil, correct?

ISDs do have PD, in fact it is quite good. In the Thrawn Duology second rate pirate ships would have been able to shoot down the ISD Chimaera's concussion missiles if they weren't hid by a fighter formation. And that was at range of several thousand kilometers at most, not the light minute range HHverse missiles fire at.

In TPM a TF battleship PD was successfully targeting and hitting 1 meter astromech droids from 50 km range. In ANH the Death Star's heavy turbolaser cannons were missing fast moving fighters by mere meters.

Now, what is the primary armament of my preferred tech(Honorverse)? Missiles, that's right. A single SD(p) has a broadside strength of 100 missiles, and a cyclic of about 20 seconds. That's 300 rounds a minute. There are twenty SD(p)s in 8th Fleet,

Honorverse missiles are primarily megaton range laserheads. Every missile could strike an ISD and never scratch the shields.

on the other hand there are 12 ISDs in the Kuat Defense Force. That's without factoring in energy weapons, energy torps, or various other non-missile armament.

A single ISD could take down an HHverse fleet, with it's order of magnitude greater acceleration, FTL sensors, tactical FTL and ability to one shot a superdreadnought from 10 light minutes away.

This is to simply expand on The Ctan's post with some particular details.



ISDs do have PD, in fact it is quite good. In the Thrawn Duology second rate pirate ships would have been able to shoot down the ISD Chimaera's concussion missiles if they weren't hid by a fighter formation. And that was at range of several thousand kilometers at most, not the light minute range HHverse missiles fire at.

In TPM a TF battleship PD was successfully targeting and hitting 1 meter astromech droids from 50 km range. In ANH the Death Star's heavy turbolaser cannons were missing fast moving fighters by mere meters.



Honorverse missiles are primarily megaton range laserheads. Every missile could strike an ISD and never scratch the shields.



A single ISD could take down an HHverse fleet, with it's order of magnitude greater acceleration, FTL sensors, tactical FTL and ability to one shot a superdreadnought from 10 light minutes away.


I agree that the Death Star's turbolasers were missing the Rebel starfighters because they were moving too fast . However the Rebels were eventually overcome by TIEs and also Darth Vader's TIE X-1 . But they still managed to win with a single proton torpedo ... sheer luck .

And I also agree that Honoverse missiles would do no damage to a ISD at all .

ISDs do have PD, in fact it is quite good. In the Thrawn Duology second rate pirate ships would have been able to shoot down the ISD Chimaera's concussion missiles if they weren't hid by a fighter formation. And that was at range of several thousand kilometers at most, not the light minute range HHverse missiles fire at.

In TPM a TF battleship PD was successfully targeting and hitting 1 meter astromech droids from 50 km range. In ANH the Death Star's heavy turbolaser cannons were missing fast moving fighters by mere meters.
You do realise that NONE of those are ISDs, correct? And that, frankly, no official source says that ISDs have point defense cannons. Hell, all I ever see is either 60 Turbos, 60 Ions, and 10 tractors or 50 heavy turbolaser cannons, 50 turbolaser batteries, and 20 ion cannons.

You know, it was in the link.
Care to be more specific? There's probably about ten pages of text there, and I'm really quite lazy when it comes to delving through reams of irrelevant (albeit well written) information.

I agree that the Death Star's turbolasers were missing the Rebel starfighters because they were moving too fast . However the Rebels were eventually overcome by TIEs and also Darth Vader's TIE X-1 .
See, this kinda proves my point. Ineffectual PD, leaving the GE's markedly inferior fighters to deal with the problem. And with the pathetic amount of the things that an ISD carries...

And I'm getting the impression that Mation is agreeing with everything in his favour. He probably hasn't read any honorverse wahtsoever, and had no specific view on the effectiveness of BFG ships until I expressed mine. And I think this is turning into "I win because mine are uber-joule range, not wank-joule! Passwords please!" thread, so I call upon the great big iron jackboot of Common Freaking Sense!

Thank you

You do realise that NONE of those are ISDs, correct? And that, frankly, no official source says that ISDs have point defense cannons. Hell, all I ever see is either 60 Turbos, 60 Ions, and 10 tractors or 50 heavy turbolaser cannons, 50 turbolaser batteries, and 20 ion cannons.


Care to be more specific? There's probably about ten pages of text there, and I'm really quite lazy when it comes to delving through reams of irrelevant (albeit well written) information.


See, this kinda proves my point. Ineffectual PD, leaving the GE's markedly inferior fighters to deal with the problem. And with the pathetic amount of the things that an ISD carries...


Again, I have to say that my post (heres a link) (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11017289&postcount=191) details FUCKING WHY you won't find point defense, and a whole lot of other things on an ISD if any of you actually took the time to read my post. (I took a half-hour to read all yours, you'd think common sense would sink in)

Especially when its stamped on a jackboot, but the thing is, we know why the ISD has no PD, but that doesn't make any differance to the fact that it doesn't have any. Good post though, I would of said so earlier if my compy hadn't screwed up.

And Xessmithia, SW ships don't seem to have any tactical FTL. Give me one instance of a SW ship bunnt-hopping. Not to mention that when I give the slightest shred of a damn what kind of ton my wreck-yous and kill beams (Rediculoulsy Excessive Calibre Kinetic Energy Weapons=RECKEW, Concentrated Ion Lance=CIL) use, look out the window for the four horsemen.

Especially when its stamped on a jackboot, but the thing is, we know why the ISD has no PD, but that doesn't make any differance to the fact that it doesn't have any. Good post though, I would of said so earlier if my compy hadn't screwed up.

And Xessmithia, SW ships don't seem to have any tactical FTL. Give me one instance of a SW ship bunnt-hopping. Not to mention that when I give the slightest shred of a damn what kind of ton my wreck-yous and kill beams (Rediculoulsy Excessive Calibre Kinetic Energy Weapons=RECKEW, Concentrated Ion Lance=CIL) use, look out the window for the four horsemen.


Thnx. But it wouldn't be hard for a nation to take the design of the ISD and improve on it. As people did by making 'towerless' models. Simply add point defense cannons. It wouldn't be too much, only increasing the crew requirement of gunners and space. So why complain about something that can be fixed?

That.

[ Oh, you mean a non-canon ship? No wonder I couldn't find any reference to it.

As for fixing it on another class, why not? You've got cash, and time. But we're not talking about non-canon ships, as far as I know.

@CoreWorlds: Of course it would be absurd not to have PD. However, naming a cruiser a "destroyer" is rather absurd, too. Putting wings on a space fighter is absurd. Using solar panels for power plants for any distance beyond 230 million kilometers is also absurd (ref (http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/03sept_spacepower.htm))--especially when you have a TIE fighter with two turbolasers that need a big portion of the juice. You can see where I'm going. Anyway, the Imperial II-class (which is the only one on Wookiepedia with an armament resembling specifics) only says there is "numerous" light turbolasers and ion cannons (ref (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Imperial_II-class_Star_Destroyer)). Can't really argue on the basis of that, but it could, based on the number of other weapons it lists, be ascertained that there is only twenty to thirty of these.

On missile penetration, I give you penaids. Plus, there are only ten "Phylon Q7 tractor beam projectors" on an Imperial II (ref (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Imperial_II-class_Star_Destroyer)). Care to tell me how they would cover enough ground to repel missiles? Especially ones that are constantly moving, ducking, diving, rolling, etc?

Honorverse x-ray lasers have enough punch to literally claw their way through antikinetic and antiablative armour, five meters thick. Given the level of armour technology in the Honorverse (Weber never elaborates on starship armour, but I can assume it is highly durable, as Marines can wear a main battle tank covered by "armorplast," which can withstand 5-7mm rounds travelling at 30,000 mps--even 20mm and perhaps 30mm), that's quite a power level.

On a side note, the Imperial II has a top acceleration of 2,446 gees. Or six, depending on which source you use. Not to mention that it uses ion engines, which leads me to believe six is a more accurate number, given that ion thrusters are low-thrust assemblies (ref (http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3c2.html#ion)). ]

This is why the Empire developed Lancer Class Frigates, if they are combined they make the ISD much more effective

This is why the Empire developed Lancer Class Frigates, if they are combined they make the ISD much more effective

[ Why waste money on purpose-built ships?

Why not try to get more bang for your buck and make generalist ships, that can be used for multiple roles?

Plus, the Lancer-class is a shoddily-armed and armoured ship--equivalent to a shuttlecraft in HH terms. When an enemy battlegroup sees that most antimissile and antifighter fire is coming from those ships, they'll target them, instead. And, sorry, but I really don't think any missile salvo (Honorverse or otherwise) will fail in taking out a good portion of them. It's like the gunboats from the Starfire series. ]

Why not try to get more bang for your buck and make generalist ships, that can be used for multiple roles?

Plus, the Lancer-class is a shoddily-armed and armoured ship--equivalent to a shuttlecraft in HH terms. When an enemy battlegroup sees that most antimissile and antifighter fire is coming from those ships, they'll target them, instead. And, sorry, but I really don't think any missile salvo (Honorverse or otherwise) will fail in taking out a good portion of them. It's like the gunboats from the Starfire series. [/size]]

The reason that nations military's develope purpose-built ships for a specific role is because a 'generalist ship' is not able to effectively defeat the enemy that is in that specified role. The ISD was purpose built for fear and to be the ultimate capital ship. When it was found, after the battle of Yavin, that fighters could be so decisive many Imperial analysts found the need for a comprehensive and effective counter to Rebel fighters.

Thus the Lancer was designed. The Lancer was designed and built by Kuat Drive Yards, which borrowed from existing KDY hull designs.

The ship itself was not effective in chasing fighters that flew out of its effective range, and it was equip with no turbolasers meaning that it was virtually like trying to shoot a train witha bb-gun when facing capital ships. Other than these design flaws, it was found to be highly effective.

Later versions would be equipt with better engines and others shifted the design of the hull, away from the original which was based off the Katana Dreadnought.

For a commander to use, correctly, Imperial Star Destroyers and Lancers (with fighters and other types of smaller craft) in concert against an enemy armed with 'generalist ships' will not end in defeat. It is that reason which many nations have developed specified ships. An example being when CoreWorlds created SDs armed only with Ion cannons. They were meant to be a highly effective anti-capital ship, ship.

[ That doesn't make any sense at all, if you don't mind me saying so.

Again, I make my point that the Lancer class will be targetted in their first engagement from the moment the enemy figures out where the antimissile and antifighter fire is densest, and first from the moment they are seen, from then on. A bunch of capital ships pouring their missile strength into a bunch of small ships with thin armour means they die. Fast.

On the other hand, if you simply add more PD to an Imperial II (make it the Imperial III?), you fix the problem, and the ship can actually withstand fire from other capital ships.

As for CoreWorld's ion-armed SD: I'm sure the weaponry is impressive, but that won't mean crap if I stay out of the cannons' range and hit him with missiles the entire time--or whichever amounts to my long-range armament. The mark of a good ship is if it's survivable under any conceivable circumstance, not if such-and-such variables are all present. If it isn't, it represents money that could be better spent designing ships that can be more widely-used. ]

You're saying that when faced with a fleet of ISDs, etc along with Lancers; that you would target the Lancers first? Ignore all other factors in order to destroy an anti-fighter analog...that is very stupid.

You cannot just ignore all other factors of a battle to remove a single, and by some commanders, mediocre threat.

And how do you not get the point? It is very simple. A ship designed to be an anti capital ship will most likely defeat a capital ship designed to be a 'all around' capital ship. That is why we have Air Craft carriers and Destroyers, not a mix of the two. Get it?

An ISD is a weapon of Terror, not a weapon of war. as stated the ISD and late SSD were the ultimate symbol of terror; if the Rebels actually had a decent war fleet ISD's would have fallen like flies.

if we Compare the ISD with say; the Sharlin Minbari warcruiser; the Sharlin has 18 Gravitic Neutron Cannons (the BIG guns rated at around 2EW-5EW+ acording to Cannon), 18 Gravitic Fusion Beam Cannons (Rated at a LOW end of 400,000TW+ slightly lighter guns), 24 EM Neutron guns (more big guns rated at up to 2EW), 24 EM Fusion Beam guns (more lighter guns unknown rating), 42 Electro-Pulse Guns (each pulse about a 25megaton bomb), 4 Missile Launchers(2000 metric tons of missiles), 1 antimatter Cannon.

now in a one of one firefight; between an ISD and a Sharlin; asuming all weapons are targeting the ISD in a single Salvo and we factor our the pulse beam guns and missiles; the Sharlin can bring 196 EW's to bare on the ISD. now assuming it can sustain this level of beam for more than a second (and Cannon supports it can) lets say 7.2 seconds; thats 1389.6EW's of power. now as stated earlier; the shield output of an ISD is 1e23Watt or 500EW's. the Sharlin has more than enough firepower to obliterate an ISD in a single Salvo.

[ Well, this is just great. I had a perfectly good post, and then Jolt logs me out. -.-

I'll retype it, but I just wanted to make sure you knew I hadn't given up. ;) ]

[ Considering that it thins my salvo density to the point of unlikeableness, no, it is not stupid to kill the antimissile/antifighter platforms first, even if ignoring the big guns means they get off a shot or two before their buddies get obliterated. I never said that the Lancer was not a threat, and if anyone in Star Wars says so, they're complete idiots. If it can thin out a missile salvo like I assume it can, then it certainly is a threat, because that means more salvoes to kill the big guns backing them up.

And the problem with comparing wet-navy tactics with space-navy tactics is this: in wet navies, aircraft present a distinct advantage over naval guns and cruise missiles (as in, extended range, smarter controllers, etc).

But in space navies, the fighter becomes useless. It requires both cumbersome life-support, and more delta-v than a missile bus. So, it appears that missile busses hold an advantage. Do we want to center our tactics around missiles? No, because adding a few more launchers does not do all that much more damage, and a determined ship will still get through a missile envelope to get into the more powerful energy envelope, which destroys a ship rather quickly. Given Star Wars' affection for energy weapons, you should realize that. So, do we then want to center our fleet around energy weapons? No, because they have a shorter range than missiles. A ship with missiles will simply keep the range open, and pound the energy-armed ship with missiles until it blows up (this, by the way, is the reason most critics of ISDs say they do not work).

So what do we, as experienced naval designers, conscious of our budget and built-in weaknesses of each type of armament, do? We balance our ship types out, making sure they can survive under any conceivable situation.

Think of it this way: to eliminate a ship with more PD (like the Imperial III I mentioned), but which is also larger, and armed with offensive armaments, is harder than beating down a much lighter ship. To kill the PD, you need to take damage. Damage for the enemy, of course, is always a good thing. ]

The Imperator Mk III already exists, it is essentially an Imperator Mk II with a few more proton torpedo launchers and a cloaking device.

[ Imperial IV, then.

The name doesn't really matter, though. ]

Again, I have to say that my post (heres a link) (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11017289&postcount=191) details FUCKING WHY you won't find point defense, and a whole lot of other things on an ISD if any of you actually took the time to read my post. (I took a half-hour to read all yours, you'd think common sense would sink in)
Oh, I read it. It's just that it appears Xess didn't, or is choosing to ignore it, so I wanted to make a rebuttal to his (rather inane) argument.

But in space navies, the fighter becomes useless. It requires both cumbersome life-support, and more delta-v than a missile bus.
I prefer to compare fighter-craft to missiles instead of the busses. Properly designed, it needs no life support, meaning it can handle higher acceleration, and gives more room to thrusters and weaponry. Add in the fact that it can act as a makeshift missile (overload/detonate whatever generator you're using on the thing), and they make a rather nice all-purpose craft. Think of them like a missile with a set of cannons strapped onto the front of it.

Oh, I read it. It's just that it appears Xess didn't, or is choosing to ignore it, so I wanted to make a rebuttal to his (rather inane) argument.


I prefer to compare fighter-craft to missiles instead of the busses. Properly designed, it needs no life support, meaning it can handle higher acceleration, and gives more room to thrusters and weaponry. Add in the fact that it can act as a makeshift missile (overload/detonate whatever generator you're using on the thing), and they make a rather nice all-purpose craft. Think of them like a missile with a set of cannons strapped onto the front of it.


Thnx Khurgan.

Also, the Empire realised that life-supper, etc, would be weighing down a fighter and that is why the Tie fighter doesn't have one; all pilots wore suits with air supplies.

I believe Thrawn used a particular effective missile globe against Grand Admiral Zarjin (however you spell it) when he tried rebelling against the emperor.

But in my experiance, laser weaponry have a great range than missiles; not to mention rather more cost effective in the long run.

Not really. Something like a hundred guns, most of which are capable of hitting incoming missiles. Star Wars is very keen on the whole "laser guns > missiles" approach - Did you know, Star Destroyers, and some of their predecessors actually have missile launchers, they're just not used against anything resembling a moving target?. That's not including the ability of a massive warship to just set its tractor beams towards an incoming missile volley and set them to 'repel' - having a comparatively small mass, as in a missile doesn't help one too well there - nor the abilities of its shields (which are, according to all sources, fairly formidable).Mmm. And and ISD has 120 various guns, many of which are basically anti-fighter/missile (What do you think the secondary guns are for {They can run all reactor power through one heavy gun in capship combat, secondary guns are basically useless in such a situation} ? Show?) which can fire every two seconds. That comes to, say, 1800 PD shots per minute. 1/6th accuracy would be quite impressive by Star Wars standards, mind, but it's far from impossible. And that's discounting all the other options a Star Destroyer would have - not least just outrunning the enemy, given that it can accellerate about 50 times faster than honorverse ships, which, last I checked, went about 600 gravities, compared to the Star Destroyer's 3000.... And Star Dreadnoughts called Mandators that are roughly equivalent in size (though rather slower than) to the Excecutor, and hundreds of other warships. Kaut doesn't use that many ISDs, mostly because they're trans-galactic range warships, which is a bit pointless, as Kaut has no real desire to project force, so it tends to save money by using things like Mandators which limit their operations to its sector.
All of which the ISD could stay out of range of indefinately, given that, again, last I heard, honorverse energy range was fairly limited, and the ISD goes twenty times faster than their ships do. Its own weapons have a theoretical range of 10 light seconds, though of course, practical range is far less (can't very well have the enemy dodging - though honorverse, lacking FTL sensors that'd be able to see the bolt coming, would have difficulty with that). And of course, the ISD has greater strategic mobility, not having to limit its FTL entry to a system to beyond a certain radius of the star. And that's not to mention the OMG Petaton armament that warsies would be quite able to one-shot Honorverse ships if it weren't for Weber's Wedges violating Conservation of Energy in the way a pack of dogs chasing a bitch in heat wish to...

It's related to the suggestion that Battlefleet Gothic ships are more than a match for an ISD, which they're sadly, really not (in general).

You know, it was in the link. It's from nova and bombardment cannon descriptions in the Black Library books, where the sizes of shells and the speed (25%C) they fire at are specified. From that, you can estimate the minimum power of the ship.

It's not very well PD'd in comparison to say, a trade federation core ship, this is correct. However, let's not forget that when the ISD appears in the films, it's mostly not cutting loose. We don't see them at the battle of Yavin, at Hoth, we mostly see them chase the Falcon (which they're meant to be bringing in alive) and in RotJ, the Emperor (that military mind who makes Hitler look like a strategic genius; honestly, who uses themselves as bait in a trap, twice?) had issued hamstringing orders to Piett's fleet: They weren't allowed to fire directly on the rebels for crying out loud. Though later on in the battle of Endor (when the ships' captains have said 'screw these orders, we're losing'), they do manage to hit a few fighters.

In books and various other secondary sources, they do demonstrate an ability to hit fighters (so long as the fighters aren't piloted by anyone important) even thoush such ability really sucks. Of course, their primary defence is definately shields. It's not going to provide anything like perfect coverage; that's what happens when you rely on energy shields.


Honorverse SHIPS have bad acceleration, on the other hand, Honorverse MISSILES, especially full up MDMs, can hit a good bit more than 3,000 gravities of acceleration. I meant Kuat on NS. It has 12 ISDs, 7 GolanVs, and various and sundry light units. So sayeth Sith. Honorverse Energy range is limited to 30k km. Against OTHER Honorverse ships. On the other hand, a beam weapon is a beam weapon(for the most part). Grasers are only limited because they get stopped by sidewalls.

NO stat block I have ever seen contains PD armament. No CMs, no PD clusters, no light lasers, no ECM. Nothing for combatting missiles at all. For a reason. Because they aren't DESIGNED to fight a heavily missile armed opponent. For one thing, SW missiles SUCK, horribly. They have no accuracy, and crap range. On the other hand, Honorverse missiles are EXTREMELY long ranged. A fully upgraded Apollo Missile engaged several SD(p)s(effectively) from all the way across a system, while still being able to maneuver. I could simply stay out on the Hyper limit, and bombard whatever opponents there were in the system from extreme range, with frightening accuracy. If, an ISD were to attempt to engage a single SD(p), and it didn't manage to make it into effective energy range, there'd be no way for the ISD to win that fight. For example, the SD appears at the edge of the system, the ISD is approximately at the location of Earth in our solar system. It would take quite some time to even GET to the SD, which could be engaging the ISD the entire time it was moving, with accuracy that would make any Warsie cry.

[ MDMs have a preburnout range of 3.5LM. Energy weapons, when (as you stated) they don't have a sidewall to interdict them, have a maximum effective range of 300,000 km. (EDIT: Check out my Wookipedia reference--there's a listing of light turbolasers/ion cannons)

Pilot-mounted life support makes some sense, although I should mention something that I forgot to: fighters have a lower speed, considering the pilot would die if the acceleration felt got beyond about three gees (when you begin graying out). Acceleration suits can dampen it, and you can further dampen it if you have some place to dump the inertia (like a wedge), but in any case that I've heard (excluding low-accel engines), acceleration usually has to be lowered so the pilot can survive for the time it takes to get the missiles off.

As for energy range, perhaps I should have said effective range. If you have an enemy maneuvering about, it is extremely hard to predict where he will be next, which is essential, because lasers cannot be guided, and if you want a big enough punch behind them, can't be fired continuously, else the generator assemblies overheat and explode. ]

[ Imperial IV, then.

The name doesn't really matter, though. ]

Well, my Imperator's are more like Mk IV's V's and VI's. However, I changed them from being ISD's to ITSD's. Imperator Class Towerless Star Destroyer.

I found several flaws in the ISD designs.

1) Towers. What gives? It's an easy "hit me" part for the ship, other than the big and obvious engines (another part I'll point out). ISD's are easily destroyed just by having the bridge on the tower hit, and they need to revert to an auxilary bridge in the lower part of the ship. That's what the TSD's fix.

2) Sensor/Shield balls (a classic debate). The two round spheres on the top of the towers. Another thing I never understood. Those are eradicated as well in the TSD designs.

3) 1 Shield/Hyperdrive generator. A very bad idea. You never want one power source. The TSD's have three generators each, that way if one is destroyed there will be two more to rely on for power.

4) Engines stick out. Another bad idea. It leaves them exposed, easily destroyable. On the TSD's, they're in the inside of the ship rather than the outside (a reason why TSD's are longer than regular Star Destroyers). The only thing exposed of the engine is a see-through cylinder where the engine exhause comes out. It could be destroyed without any minor side effects.

[ MDMs have a preburnout range of 3.5LM. Energy weapons, when (as you stated) have a sidewall to interdict them, have a maximum effective range of 300,000 km. (EDIT: Check out my Wookipedia reference--there's a listing of light turbolasers/ion cannons)

Pilot-mounted life support makes some sense, although I should mention something that I forgot to: fighters have a lower speed, considering the pilot would die if the acceleration felt got beyond about three gees (when you begin graying out). Acceleration suits can dampen it, and you can further dampen it if you have some place to dump the inertia (like a wedge), but in any case that I've heard (excluding low-accel engines), acceleration usually has to be lowered so the pilot can survive for the time it takes to get the missiles off.

As for energy range, perhaps I should have said effective range. If you have an enemy maneuvering about, it is extremely hard to predict where he will be next, which is essential, because lasers cannot be guided, and if you want a big enough punch behind them, can't be fired continuously, else the generator assemblies overheat and explode. ]

MDMs can have unlimited range with the Apollo upgrade from At All Costs. It cuts the salvo density by 20%, but with the FTL controls it provides, they can literally engage a target in Manticore orbit, all the way out from beyond the Wormhole Junction, and get a perfect hit. 8th Fleet engaged the largest undamaged portion of the Peep invasion fleet, and trashed it in just a few minutes. NOTHING(yet) can match the effective engagement range of an Apollo Missile. Personally, I'd take the reduced salvo density in a straight Honorverse RP, where the increased accuracy would actually matter. As it is, I'll take the other 20 missiles.

EDIT: Is that supposed to be "when they have", or "when they DON'T have" a sidewall to interdict them. Because it clearly states that maximum effective range of an energy weapon against sidewalls is 30k km, just as it is for laserheads.

[ "When they don't." Fixing. Although I have another source that says it's three hundred, not thirty. ;3 X-ray lasers are limited by the fact that they're created by an explosion, in my understanding.

Real-time range for Apollo-equipped missiles is 1.13 LM (AAC states that the P5 suites have a 68c speed). That's still a lot of guesswork at those kinds of extended range, though it makes it a little easier.

@Huntaer: All good ideas. I think the conning tower was simply an "Ooo...cool" move by Lucas and his buddies. Kind of like the whole "parsec" thing he used to measure speed in. ]

Well, my Imperator's are more like Mk IV's V's and VI's. However, I changed them from being ISD's to ITSD's. Imperator Class Towerless Star Destroyer.

I found several flaws in the ISD designs.

1) Towers. What gives? It's an easy "hit me" part for the ship, other than the big and obvious engines (another part I'll point out). ISD's are easily destroyed just by having the bridge on the tower hit, and they need to revert to an auxilary bridge in the lower part of the ship. That's what the TSD's fix.

2) Sensor/Shield balls (a classic debate). The two round spheres on the top of the towers. Another thing I never understood. Those are eradicated as well in the TSD designs.

3) 1 Shield/Hyperdrive generator. A very bad idea. You never want one power source. The TSD's have three generators each, that way if one is destroyed there will be two more to rely on for power.

4) Engines stick out. Another bad idea. It leaves them exposed, easily destroyable. On the TSD's, they're in the inside of the ship rather than the outside (a reason why TSD's are longer than regular Star Destroyers). The only thing exposed of the engine is a see-through cylinder where the engine exhause comes out. It could be destroyed without any minor side effects.

So how does your ship generate thrust? If your thrusters are internal, much of the forward force they generate will be negated by the thruster wash dfelecting off of internal walls on its way to the exhaust. Basic Newtonian physics shows that unless you have some revolutionary way of channeling your thruster wash, you need an external thruster in order to provide motive force.

On another note, I believe the sheild projector domes were placed on the outside of the ship to cut down on interference with the shield projection from the ship's decks and armor.

[ "When they don't." Fixing. Although I have another source that says it's three hundred, not thirty. ;3 X-ray lasers are limited by the fact that they're created by an explosion, in my understanding.

Real-time range for Apollo-equipped missiles is 1.13 LM (AAC states that the P5 suites have a 68c speed). That's still a lot of guesswork at those kinds of extended range, though it makes it a little easier.

@Huntaer: All good ideas. I think the conning tower was simply an "Ooo...cool" move by Lucas and his buddies. Kind of like the whole "parsec" thing he used to measure speed in. ]

Well, it's not QUITE realtime at that range then... Point is, they have REALLY long ranges, and the ability to use it effectively. The major issue I see with Apollo is that the opponent on NS would be forced to accept YOU RPing your missiles all the way in, as opposed to his simply saying how many hit. That basically defines godmod. So, I stick to the standard Ghost Rider and Keyhole suites. Who needs obscene accuracy when you can toss out broadsides like those an Invictus or Medusa B can pull?

[ I believe he means the entire exhaust setup is not exposed, like it apparently is in the films.

@Miehm: Not really. You could simply say they were countering his moves precisely. Although, yeah, that is a bit of powerplaying. ]

[ I believe he means the entire exhaust setup is not exposed, like it apparently is in the films.

@Miehm: Not really. You could simply say they were countering his moves precisely. Although, yeah, that is a bit of powerplaying. ]

I guess he could put some sort of shroud over it, but I don't imagine that would be terribly effective at blocking enemy fire.

[ I believe he means the entire exhaust setup is not exposed, like it apparently is in the films.

@Miehm: Not really. You could simply say they were countering his moves precisely. Although, yeah, that is a bit of powerplaying. ]

Yep. Ghost Rider gives me better salvo density, meaning more numbers to throw around. Fun stuff. I try to avoid powergaming, it's a risky line simply using Honorverse in the first place.

On ISDs and point defense, of course they have point defense. What the flying fuck do you think they were shooting asteroids with in The Empire Strikes Back for god's sake! It sure as hell wasn't with their HTLs.

Oh and because they're called "Light Turbolasers" rather than "Point Defense Cannons" doesn't change their role. Or is that too hard for you folks to understand?

And I see no one cared that I showed an instance where pirate ships could shoot down concussion missiles, a much much smaller target than Honorverse missiles with similar acceleration, at only a few thousand km range.

****

Star Wars operates in extremely high ECM environments. The jammers on the Death Star were so powerfull they could warp space-time as per the ANH novel.

The EGTV&V states that A-Wings have an ECM jammer. To think that capships don't is the height of arrogant stupidity.

In fact against the Yuuzhan Vong who have no ECM the New Republic Navy was engaging them at light-minute ranges. And since technology has been static in SW for a good 25,000 years that means Imperial ships could do the same. In fact they can as a Venator's HTLs have the ability to accurately target ships at a 10 light-minute range. They'd rarely hit at that range against other SW ships due to evasive maneuvers made with data from FTL sensors and ECM.

****

Micro-hyperjumps are used in frequent EU sources. It's simply a matter of picking a heading and turning the drive on for a microsecond or so. Any SW ship could use this to tactical advantage.

****

Oh, I read it. It's just that it appears Xess didn't, or is choosing to ignore it, so I wanted to make a rebuttal to his (rather inane) argument.

Or maybe, just maybe the fact that ISDs have point-defense is fucking obvious to anyone who saw The Empire Strikes back.

****

if we Compare the ISD with say; the Sharlin Minbari warcruiser; the Sharlin has 18 Gravitic Neutron Cannons (the BIG guns rated at around 2EW-5EW+ acording to Cannon),

I'm going to assume that EW stands for Exa-Watts or 1e18 Watts. Since anyother measuerment is non-real and thus meaningless.

18 Gravitic Fusion Beam Cannons (Rated at a LOW end of 400,000TW+ slightly lighter guns)

0.4x10^18 Watts

24 EM Neutron guns (more big guns rated at up to 2EW),

2x10^18 Watts

42 Electro-Pulse Guns (each pulse about a 25megaton bomb),

10.5x10^16 Joules, ~10.5x10^22 Watts

now in a one of one firefight; between an ISD and a Sharlin; asuming all weapons are targeting the ISD in a single Salvo and we factor our the pulse beam guns and missiles; the Sharlin can bring 196 EW's to bare on the ISD.

1.96x10^20 Watts.

now assuming it can sustain this level of beam for more than a second (and Cannon supports it can) lets say 7.2 seconds; thats 1389.6EW's of power.

Watts are a unit of power not energy, you mean 14.112x10^21 Joules or 3.36 petatons.

now as stated earlier; the shield output of an ISD is 1e23Watt or 500EW's

Uh no, more like 1x10^24 Watts which is 1 million Exa-Watts. 1x10^23 Watts is 100,000 Exa-Watts by the way.

The Sharlin has more than enough firepower to obliterate an ISD in a single Salvo.

Also no. 1.96x10^20 Watts is roughly 1/5000th of an ISDs shield dissipation rate. Which means it would take roughly 5000 Sharlins to take on an ISD.

ISDs are not real. I refuse to accept them, as they are meaningless.

Wait... now I can't roleplay in any form of FT, PMT, or Fantasy, and most of my MT just went down the drain with it. Crap.

And those sums make my poor 12 year old head hurt.

Oh common sense, I mourn your passing!

ISDs are not real. I refuse to accept them, as they are meaningless.

:rolleyes: In objective analysis you need to use real units for it to make any sense. Of course I don't expect an moron like you to understand anything past high school.

Wait... now I can't roleplay in any form of FT, PMT, or Fantasy, and most of my MT just went down the drain with it. Crap.

That's a mighty nice strawman you knocked down there.

Tis actually rather crap. For a vessel its size, its fighter compliment is horridly low, and the amount of weapons (60, IIRC) is rather low, especially considering the small size, and its crew is centered entirely within one rather easy target. Against something properly designed, ISDs drop like flies.
A Sovereign class starship from Star Trek would have a good chance against an ISD. The phaser array would allow them to simultaneously destroy the weakly armored tie fighters. The ship's high speed and maneuverability would allow it to stay alive in a fight. Not to mention the shielding. A few well aimed quantum torpedoes would allow you to take out the shields on the ISD. A single torpeodo hit to the bridge would finish the job as they are more destructive than a crashing A-Wing

A Sovereign class starship from Star Trek would have a good chance against an ISD. The phaser array would allow them to simultaneously destroy the weakly armored tie fighters. The ship's high speed and maneuverability would allow it to stay alive in a fight. Not to mention the shielding. A few well aimed quantum torpedoes would allow you to take out the shields on the ISD. A single torpeodo hit to the bridge would finish the job as they are more destructive than a crashing A-Wing

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! Good one.:D

Oh wait, you're serious.

Silly Trekky when will you learn, Star Wars ships are millions of times more powerfull than your ships. Give it up already.

EDIT: Actually remember when I kicked your ass in the Sovereign vs ISD thread in General way back when?

Here it is (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=434726) in case you forgot.

EDIT 2: Well not your ass per say, but the ass of all Sovereign suporters.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=hNxhrPaaCA4&search=star%20trek%20vs%20star%20wars
This is how it would play out. Star Wars uses lasers. Star Trek has phasers

phasers > lasers

http://youtube.com/watch?v=hNxhrPaaCA4&search=star%20trek%20vs%20star%20wars
This is how it would play out. Star Wars uses lasers. Star Trek has phasers

phasers > lasers

I see you're still an idiot. So I'll make this short and sweet.

1) Turbolasers are not lasers as they do not behave like lasers. The AOTC:ICS says they're massless exotic particle beams.

2) Star Trek shields are not immune to lasers as that is a No Limits Fallacy. A laser of sufficient power would go through the shields just like anything else would. Turbolasers are many orders of magnitudes more powerfull than ST phasers and shields. A single shot would completely vapourize any Federation ship, Klingon ship, Romulan ship or Borg ship.

Star Trek = One universe. Star Wars = Another universe. Nationstates = Third universe where whatever y'all say means somewhere in the range of jack, shit, or whatever's in between.

People have their preferences. Some may like to RP Star Trek, some may like to RP Star Wars, others do custom, when it comes to RPs in NS between such they're bloody balanced relative to RP ability. Each side has its own pros and cons, and direct numerical figures based on sketchy phrases taken from movies that put plot before technical accuracy have only as much weight as the other side is willing to allow, not how much you bitch about how a turbolaser has the effective firepower to level approximately half a planet in one shot despite the fact that were such true something so simple as a turbolaser popping an asteroid would cause a MUCH more massive explosion than just that little poof of vaporized matter.

Yeesh.