Space Warfare in Star Wars - Info on tactics and strategies

[SpaceMarine93]

I need a breakdown on Space Warfare strategies and tactics in Star Wars. Anyone knows where to look? Plus some examples of famous battles and strategies used in them.

[The Romulan Republic]

Their is quite a bit of analysis of this on the main site attached to these forums, as well as scattered through various forum topics. For some analysis from the main site, follow this link:

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tac ... ctics.html

If you want something more than that, or less geared towards Star Trek vs. Star Wars arguments, I'm not sure.

[spaceviking]

You need? Are you majoring in Galactic studies?

[SpaceMarine93]

You need? Are you majoring in Galactic studies?

Let's just say I planning something very big involving Star Wars

[Simon_Jester]

It might help if you told us what it was, so we could give you advice that was actually relevant to what you were thinking about.

I doubt it's so big that you can't tell us what it is.

[SpaceMarine93]

It might help if you told us what it was, so we could give you advice that was actually relevant to what you were thinking about.

I doubt it's so big that you can't tell us what it is.

Its for a fanfic project of mine that I plan to write as a hobby during my time in university. You guys probably won't like it.

"Clash of Titans"

Star Wars VS WH40K crossover

Imperium of Man VS Galactic Empire (and probably the rest of Star Wars Galaxy, Rebels included). Set just before the Battle of Endor.

The scale would be at the level of Stravo's "Starcrossed", which by the way isn't finished.

I already got the general plotline in my head, and I think I could handle the ground warfare very well, but I believe I need at least a decent understanding of space warfare in Sci Fi, strategies tactics and the like, in order to portray any space battles, interstellar military campaigns and naval confrontations right. It would be embarassing for me and the story if all the battles doesn't make sense, especially since I plan to thrown in Thrawn and Ackbar at some point in the story.

Any premise, regardless of how crap it sounds like, would become awesome if I can just portray everything right, just like how perfectly Stravo did the Star Trek / Star Wars crossover.

Wondering why I had been asking so much about Star Wars stuff recently? Part of the research, which so far turned out fruitless or not detailed enough for my aims. I have been doing this for days.

I need detailed info on how to plan interstellar grand strategies, sci-fi ship to ship combat, starfighter combat tactics, planetary invasion strategies, strengths and weaknesses between the two Imperial fleets, strategems etc.

Might also help if there are detailed info of major military campaigns in Star Wars I can reference.

Need to know where I can find details on the space battle strategems used by the Imperials and Rebels in Star Wars.

I would also like to know Thrawn's and Ackbar's campaigns and style, and preferably other major Star Wars famous military campaigns.

Might help if you guys could also provide info on Imperium of Man's naval capabilities, tactics, strategies, DETAILED info on major military campaigns I can reference, etc.

I know it sounds silly. But trust me, it will be worth it in a few years time if I can get it off the ground.

[SpaceMarine93]

There, I spoiled it. Can anyone help me with this please?

[Purple]

Their is quite a bit of analysis of this on the main site attached to these forums, as well as scattered through various forum topics. For some analysis from the main site, follow this link:

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tac ... ctics.html

If you want something more than that, or less geared towards Star Trek vs. Star Wars arguments, I'm not sure.

Speaking of the main site. Has anyone read the strategy pages there? I assume those are an abandoned project newer to be finished ever?

[Simon_Jester]

My advice is to read the novels yourself. Thrawn's campaigns are well described in Timothy Zahn's Thrawn trilogy, which is well worth your effort to read. The most famous naval battle of Ackbar's career is in Return of the Jedi, which I assume you've already watched.

Doing this background reading will be a lot less work than actually writing this massive crossover, believe me when I say so.

[Connor MacLeod]

It might also be a good idea to specify a point in time, or even specific regions in the galaxy. Even allowing for totally, completely stagnant technology in Star Wars (which I never bought) Tactics and strategies can be widely divergent and highly diverse, simply due to the sheer number of cultures and races in the galaxy. Just because the GE fights one way doesn't mean its the only way fought (or neccesrily even the best way.) Time at the absolute minimum is the big one, since the way fought during the Galactic Civil War is different, for example, than the way things were fought either in the Clone Wars or in the NJO era (especially the latter.) But hell depending on source and reference, even combat within the GCW coudl vary from completely stationary (Battle of Endor) slugging matches to passing/jousting engagements at long ranges and velocities of thousands of km/s (old WEG RPG material.)

The alternate, and simpler solution is just to arbitrarily make the shit up yourself. I doubt anyone is going to get bent out of shape because you don't get 'TAKTIKS AND STRATERGY' 100% consistent iwth Star Wars, mainly because SW isn't going to be consistent iwth itself in this regard. It's a relatively stable galaxy with little in the way of "life or death" conflicts at the really large scale, so they've never had to worry about or be bothered with learning how to fight competently. Indeed, efficient warfare is actually counter-productive, because the efficient would more than likely mean to outright disruption of, if not destruction of, most of the galactic civilization. (which could actually include most SW hips not having the OMFG TERATONS OR GIGATONS firepower, for example.)

[Juubi Karakuchi]

The alternate, and simpler solution is just to arbitrarily make the shit up yourself. I doubt anyone is going to get bent out of shape because you don't get 'TAKTIKS AND STRATERGY' 100% consistent iwth Star Wars, mainly because SW isn't going to be consistent iwth itself in this regard. It's a relatively stable galaxy with little in the way of "life or death" conflicts at the really large scale, so they've never had to worry about or be bothered with learning how to fight competently. Indeed, efficient warfare is actually counter-productive, because the efficient would more than likely mean to outright disruption of, if not destruction of, most of the galactic civilization. (which could actually include most SW hips not having the OMFG TERATONS OR GIGATONS firepower, for example.)

Some things will have to be decided arbitrarily in any case. The two most important decisions are to do with hyperspace, the Warp, and the Force. The first covers the relationship (if any) between the Warp and Hyperspace, the second covers the relationship (if any) between the Warp and the Force.

The first is crucial because of its implications for FTL travel and communications. The Imperium uses the Warp for both, and the Empire uses Hyperspace for both. If the two are separate, then the two sides will be unable to interfere with each-other's FTL travel and communications, as they would be entirely unfamiliar. If you decide that Hyperspace and the Warp are the same, or at least capable of affecting one-another, then such possibilities arise. In that case, the Empire might or might not lose its FTL travel advantage.

The second is important with regards to interactions between Force-users and Psykers. I shall illustrate through the examples of a Jedi and a Primaris Psyker. If the Force and the Warp are completely unrelated and do not interact, then a Jedi would be able to read the Psyker's mind freely, as the Psyker's telepathy would be unable to block it, and vice versa. It is also relevant to whether a Jedi or Sith could sense the presence of Chaos, and what effect it would ahve on them.

As for space warfare, up to a point it comes down to the practicalities, though that in turn depends on which figures you decide to go with. If you go with the 'Rogue Trader' RPG figures, then 40k warships will be accelerating in the single-digit gs and shooting at ranges of anything up to a hundred thousand kilometres, or six-hundred-thousand with torpedoes. If you accept the 'Amazing Cross-sections' books for SW ships, then turbolasers should have ranges of ten light-minutes or higher (based on the Venator). However, even with light-speed sensors turbolasers would be useless at such ranges, for even if the bolts do in fact travel at lightspeed, it would take them ten minutes reach the target point. The longest effective range for light-speed weapons againt a target moving in anything but a predictable pattern would be 300,000 km, or 1 light-second. Yet in canon SW ships seem to fight at much closer ranges, in the hundreds of kilometres if the SD.net analyses are to be believed. The most likely explanations I can come up with are heavy ECM and/or limitations of sensor technology.

[The Romulan Republic]

Their is quite a bit of analysis of this on the main site attached to these forums, as well as scattered through various forum topics. For some analysis from the main site, follow this link:

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tac ... ctics.html

If you want something more than that, or less geared towards Star Trek vs. Star Wars arguments, I'm not sure.

Speaking of the main site. Has anyone read the strategy pages there? I assume those are an abandoned project newer to be finished ever?

Unfinished, alas. I presume the author is too busy to complete them.

[Srelex]

Mike seems to have abandoned the main site in general since several years ago. He does have kids, after all.

[SpaceMarine93]

It might also be a good idea to specify a point in time, or even specific regions in the galaxy. Even allowing for totally, completely stagnant technology in Star Wars (which I never bought) Tactics and strategies can be widely divergent and highly diverse, simply due to the sheer number of cultures and races in the galaxy. Just because the GE fights one way doesn't mean its the only way fought (or neccesrily even the best way.) Time at the absolute minimum is the big one, since the way fought during the Galactic Civil War is different, for example, than the way things were fought either in the Clone Wars or in the NJO era (especially the latter.) But hell depending on source and reference, even combat within the GCW coudl vary from completely stationary (Battle of Endor) slugging matches to passing/jousting engagements at long ranges and velocities of thousands of km/s (old WEG RPG material.)

The alternate, and simpler solution is just to arbitrarily make the shit up yourself. I doubt anyone is going to get bent out of shape because you don't get 'TAKTIKS AND STRATERGY' 100% consistent iwth Star Wars, mainly because SW isn't going to be consistent iwth itself in this regard. It's a relatively stable galaxy with little in the way of "life or death" conflicts at the really large scale, so they've never had to worry about or be bothered with learning how to fight competently. Indeed, efficient warfare is actually counter-productive, because the efficient would more than likely mean to outright disruption of, if not destruction of, most of the galactic civilization. (which could actually include most SW hips not having the OMFG TERATONS OR GIGATONS firepower, for example.)

Just before the Battle of Endor. And I want a story that would actually appeal to Star Wars and WH40K fans in general, so making stuff up when you don't know enough Tactics and Strategy is ill advised. For example, how am I going to portray Admiral Ackbar as a competent commander without referencing the Ackbar Slash?

[Darth Tanner]

For example, how am I going to portray Admiral Ackbar as a competent commander without referencing the Ackbar Slash?

Make it up? The Ackbar slash is nothing more than the tactics Nelson used at Trafalgar. Seriously a story shouldn’t be revolving around what strategy space ships are using, it’s about the plot and the characters. Starcrossed was great because it threw lots of our favourite characters together in interesting ways, not because it shows Star Destroyers moving in the Ozzel twist manoeuvre whilst the Defiant does a Sisko bob to evade.

Typical Star Wars fleet strategy appears to be hyperspace in then stand-off and fire at those ships with guns until their dead or flee. 40k Imperium tactics is more about manoeuvring for advantage at ponderously slow speeds before raking them with a broadside or smashing them apart with long range torpedoes. In either universe modern and historic naval strategy appears to rule the day as foolish as that is in a universe with lasers, instant communication and galactic travel.

If you really have a hardon what sort of shoehorn do clone troopers use when invading a swamp planet then there is the Star Wars essential guide to warfare coming out next May, but it’s likely to be filled with things like unknown regions and Jedi bayonet charges into droid squares formations whilst a fat and obviously evil Neimodian general cackles evilly ten meters from the front lines.

For 40k nearly every single book in the entire fiction is full of details about their warfare capabilities, you literally are drowning in content. The fact most of it is contradictory simply makes it easier to pick and choose what you want for your story.

[Knife]

Here is what I've done in the past for battles:

1) pick a real world battle or existing Sci Fi battle to emulate. Say, for an easy example, crossing the T at Jutland. So you write that the good guys 'cross the T' of an enemy column formation and bombard the hell out of them. Or you can easily look up a time line of what happened during that battle and loosely follow it.

2) bust out a piece of paper or something and use X's on O's for ships and as you write, draw it. See what makes sense in a kind of 'chess' type way. This way you keep track of what is going on for consistency.

[Connor MacLeod]

Just before the Battle of Endor.

It's going to matter when in the Imperium's history you put stuff too, particularily since 5th edition and the HH novels have shown that Imperium capabilities tend to wax/wane depending on the timeframe.

And I want a story that would actually appeal to Star Wars and WH40K fans in general, so making stuff up when you don't know enough Tactics and Strategy is ill advised.

Why does this prevent you from "making it up?" Alot of writers in SW and 40K are not what we owuld call "masters of tactics" I suppose and yet they cna write enjoyable stories. You don't need to get CANONICAL PERFECTION for it to be enjoyable if you focus enough on the plot, the character development, etc. - indeed it can be argued that obsessing over the little details can actually detract from the story (CF Honor Harrington series) for at least some people. And to be blunt you're going to have to contrive it to a certain extent regardless - sw vs 40K debates invariably drag down to the variables and assumptions involved, and its too fucking complex to be objective about (short of "SW uses mass production and DS scale resources to drown 40K in robots" or something) If you want it to be enjoyable to SW and 40K fans, then contrive it some way (intelligently, and self-consistently) to be balanced without too much favoritism for either side, and focus more on the writing than the details.

For example, how am I going to portray Admiral Ackbar as a competent commander without referencing the Ackbar Slash?

As others have said - make it up. It's not as if its impossible for a fallible but otherwise intelligent person to make mistakes or stupid decisions for various reasons (politics, for example. How many stupid decisions IRL get made because of politics, or short sightedness, or some sort of irrational emotive response?) Knife had a good idea for doing battles, and it will stand up as well as just about any other sort of writing without getting needlessly bogged down in silly numbers and shit. As long as this is made clear, I doubt it will be a problem.

[SpaceMarine93]

Just before the Battle of Endor.

It's going to matter when in the Imperium's history you put stuff too, particularily since 5th edition and the HH novels have shown that Imperium capabilities tend to wax/wane depending on the timeframe.

And I want a story that would actually appeal to Star Wars and WH40K fans in general, so making stuff up when you don't know enough Tactics and Strategy is ill advised.

Why does this prevent you from "making it up?" Alot of writers in SW and 40K are not what we owuld call "masters of tactics" I suppose and yet they cna write enjoyable stories. You don't need to get CANONICAL PERFECTION for it to be enjoyable if you focus enough on the plot, the character development, etc. - indeed it can be argued that obsessing over the little details can actually detract from the story (CF Honor Harrington series) for at least some people. And to be blunt you're going to have to contrive it to a certain extent regardless - sw vs 40K debates invariably drag down to the variables and assumptions involved, and its too fucking complex to be objective about (short of "SW uses mass production and DS scale resources to drown 40K in robots" or something) If you want it to be enjoyable to SW and 40K fans, then contrive it some way (intelligently, and self-consistently) to be balanced without too much favoritism for either side, and focus more on the writing than the details.

For example, how am I going to portray Admiral Ackbar as a competent commander without referencing the Ackbar Slash?

As others have said - make it up. It's not as if its impossible for a fallible but otherwise intelligent person to make mistakes or stupid decisions for various reasons (politics, for example. How many stupid decisions IRL get made because of politics, or short sightedness, or some sort of irrational emotive response?) Knife had a good idea for doing battles, and it will stand up as well as just about any other sort of writing without getting needlessly bogged down in silly numbers and shit. As long as this is made clear, I doubt it will be a problem.

The Imperium's military capabilities would be just after the Tyrannic Wars period, just before the Thirteenth Black Crusade.

And as for the make it up strategy, well, would it be silly if I portray one of Thrawn's basic strategy in one battle is to have the fleet charge in screaming and attacking everything in sight like mad?

[The Romulan Republic]

Yes. It would. Thrawn is not a berserker.

Thrawn's strategies tend to have a few things in common:

1. He relies on insight into his enemies' psychology to predict how they will react. So, if he did charge madly in screaming, it might be because he thought that would be something the enemy were psychologically unprepared for.

2. He tends to use technology in unconventional ways. For example, he slipped cloaked ships under a planetary field, then used Battle Meditation to coordinate his forces, allowing him to make it look like he was firing through the shield and causing the defenders to surrender. He also filled the space around Coruscant with cloaked asteroids to force them to keep the shield up.

3. He tends to be calm, smart, and controlled enough to know when he's at a disadvantage and pull out, rather than going out in a blaze of glory.

4. He tends to use misdirection. For example, he has a captured operative falsely claim Mara was working with him to discredit her in case she gave information to the New Republic. His major offensives also tended to involve hitting several targets to draw defending ships away from the primary objective.

[Simon_Jester]

The Imperium's military capabilities would be just after the Tyrannic Wars period, just before the Thirteenth Black Crusade.

And as for the make it up strategy, well, would it be silly if I portray one of Thrawn's basic strategy in one battle is to have the fleet charge in screaming and attacking everything in sight like mad?

IndrickBoreale93?

Just read the damn books. Get back to us when you know vaguely what you're talking about. Then you will be able to ask intelligent questions, instead of dimwitted ones. And will be able to think of useful things from your own knowledge, instead of relying on us to think of them for you.

[Connor MacLeod]

And as for the make it up strategy, well, would it be silly if I portray one of Thrawn's basic strategy in one battle is to have the fleet charge in screaming and attacking everything in sight like mad?

If you know it's silly to portray it that way you're not going to do it. It's not as if Timothy Zahn put any grand researhc into Thrawn's strategy either. . I mean he had him base it on fucking artwork for fucking fuck's sake. How can one do much worse than that? and failing that, read a wiki.

Edit: Also shit be complicated. I mean It's interesting for me to contemplate how "maximum output" on a starship's reactor (and the fact that hyperdrive range has an intimate relationship to fuel supply, meaning you have a fixed distance you can travel in space generally before running out of fuel) might give great hyperdrive speeds, but ther'es lots of potential drawbacks in all that, given that Curtis always rated maximum endurance at peak reactor output as being no more than a few hours for virutally any warship. Which has all sorts of crazy implications (moreso if you factor in other abilities like needing to use FTL sensors/comms to coordinate accurate FTL jumps, or if you have to use deflector shields to reduce collisons/interaction with the interstellar medium and small debris like micrometeorites, etc.)

But look at that huge, clumsy block of text. That's going to pad out your story needlessly, and its going to be fucking DULL for most people. Gigatons, teratons, and "milllions and billions" aren't really going to matter to most people. Story and characters will matter more. Focus on those. "realistic" tactics are secondary.

OR take your audience into account. ARe you writing for this board? Then you can probably do away with the EU, or just be as arbitrary as you want. Alot of people think it's shit anyhow, so violating it is not going to bother them. Others probably wont' have read obscure novels and won't evne realize there's a fuckup. But if they liked Zahn, they might notice that you didn't characterize Thrawn right.

[The Romulan Republic]

Yeah, Zahn is pretty well liked around here, so you'll probably get some criticism if Thrawn is portrayed inaccurately. Most won't care if you disregard certain other EU authors though.

But my advice would be to worry about what you think will make a good story first, and weather others like it second.