What are the Armaments of an ISD II

[His Divine Shadow]

Are you on a post count rage???

No, there's just no editing functions, which I am used to.

[His Divine Shadow]

Hey, I have drawn up the known weapons on both ships, actually, it's from the ISD1, I just assumed similar stuff for the ISD2, and changed what I knew was different:

ISD1 Stats

Laser cannons:
24 Laser-cannons Starboard trench
24 Laser-cannons Port trench
4 Bridge Tower

Turbolasers:
1 Lateral Quad-laser battery Starboard Trench
1 Lateral Quad-laser battery Port Trench
3 Axial Defense Turrets, On Dorsal Surface

Heavy turbolasers:
3 Heavy Dual Turbolaser Turrets Port (flanking superstructure)
3 Heavy Dual Turbolaser Turrets Starboard (flanking superstructure)

Ion Cannons:
1 Heavy Ion Cannon Port (flanking superstructure)
1 Heavy Ion Cannon Starboard (flanking superstructure)


ISD2 Stats

Laser cannons:
24 Laser-cannons Starboard trench
24 Laser-cannons Port trench
4 Bridge Tower

Turbolasers:
Unknown

Heavy turbolasers:
4 Heavy Octuple Turbolaser Turrets Port (flanking superstructure)
4 Heavy Octuple Turbolaser Turrets Starboard (flanking superstructure)

Ion Cannons:
Unknown

[His Divine Shadow]

I know I forgot about the hangar guns, but their number is unknown, we can estimate two atleast, since we have seen them fire, but other than it's unknown, and yes this does boost my post count, though I'd rather be able to edit stuff.

[Vympel]

No. The analogy is that while one might think Vader's fleet would have access to the "best of the best", that logic doesnt neccesarily follow. You said it was unlikely that Vader's fleet would be using an older model ship. I pointed out Ozzel as an example (Unless you think that Vader's prestige demanding quality would for some reason NOT extend to officers or crew.)
It is a perfectly valid analogy. We have no reason to believe Vader WOULD get all the best ships (especially since the Executor alone could pound an entire Rebel fleet to scrap on its own) any more than we do he would have the absolute best officers or crew available to him.

Its clearly stated that the ISD-2 was an upgraded model of the ISD-1 - clearly it was meant to be superior. This is further reinforced by the fact that post-Endor Star Destroyer models (including the Republic and Nebula/Defender models) went for far more TLs than they did ion cannons.

You cannot apply a subjective interpretation of the quality of officers and extend that to ships. Was Needa incompetent enough to be killed? Where is the evidence for all to see of Ozzel's incompetence? He made Admiral, didn't he? He commands the flagship, doesn't he?

Just because Vader is a tempermental psychopath doesn't make him a rank incompetent that should never have made it that far up the ranks.

[Connor MacLeod]

You cannot apply a subjective interpretation of the quality of officers and extend that to ships.

You mean like your subjective "temperamental psychopath" statement regarding Vader?

Was Needa incompetent enough to be killed?

Possibly. It could be argued he didn't do as thorough a sweep as he should of to locate the Falcon.

Where is the evidence for all to see of Ozzel's incompetence? He made Admiral, didn't he? He commands the flagship, doesn't he?

Ever heard of "political connections?" "Family connections?"

We have ample canon proof of Ozzel's incompetene, from his lousy performance at Hoth which LEAD to his execution, to not only his "I want proof not leads" bit with the probe droids.

Furthermore, we have ample proof from official sources (Star Wars Encyclpedia, Galaxy Guide 3 -dealing with tESB) that refer to Ozzel being appointed merely as a figurehead, of being appointed because of political connections, of having repeated prior "conflicts" with Vader - of being sloppy because of his 'contempt' for the Rebels, etc.

It actually seems like we HAVE ample proof to consider Ozzel an idiot.

Just because Vader is a tempermental psychopath doesn't make him a rank incompetent that should never have made it that far up the ranks.

Ah, now who's jumping to conclusions? What proof do we have that Vader's judgement is questionable in regards to Ozzel? Insofar as we've seen, its been Vader's judgement which lead to Hoth, which cleaned up Ozzel's mess - and should we forget Yavin (he was intelligent enough to recognize the potential threats of the fighters, after all.) I see no reason to dismiss Vader's judgement as "temperamental."

In fact, the evidence points to Vader's actions being anything BUT temperamental, but were perfectly justifiable, if not harsh. (Thrawn executed people for incompetence as well, you might remember.)

He never executed Piett, remember, even though he could hardly have been happy with the Rebel's escape at Bepsin.

So, the analogy remains apt. And the entire argument up until this point has had the bulk of proof on my side. Thank you, come again.

[Vympel]

You mean like your subjective "temperamental psychopath" statement regarding Vader?

Exactly.

So, the analogy remains apt. And the entire argument up until this point has had the bulk of proof on my side. Thank you, come again.

How do you measure up the subjective interpretations of an officer to the concrete specifications of a warship?

[Vympel]

To further elaborate, the two aren't comparable. Simply because you have the best ship doesn't mean it automatically has the best officers. Quite the contrary, there have been numerous historical incidences where good equipment has been manned by morons.

To split up the tangenet about Ozzel and Needa to another post:

Ozzel's "failures"

- Came out of hyperspace to close to the system. Vader killed him for it.

This is just a difference of opinion, really. If Ozzel had came out further away, they may have been able to sneak up through all the meteorites (ref: General Reikaan) but then again, they may not. This would've given the Rebels ample time to escape if it went wrong

- 'Proof not leads'

I can't fault him for this. Piett informed him of the best lead they had, and Ozzel wasn't impressed- it could have been smugglers or anything else- I'm not going to fault a military officer for being skeptical of Vader's odd religion. If Vader hadn't been there and proclaimed that it was the system, would anyone fault Ozzel for not charging off to Hoth with Death Squadron?

Neither of these are worthy of death, and are certainly not evidence of rank incompetence.

Needa

- He lost the Falcon. Definitely deserved to die for that one.

[Darth Garden Gnome]

Actually Vympel, EU sources claim that Piett purposely waited until Vader was around to anounce that he'd found a 'lead' because he knew Ozzel would just shrug it off.

Skeptical? Maybe. An Idiot? Possibly. A skeptical idiot? Ohhh, thats bad.

[Vympel]

Actually Vympel, EU sources claim that Piett purposely waited until Vader was around to anounce that he'd found a 'lead' because he knew Ozzel would just shrug it off.

Skeptical? Maybe. An Idiot? Possibly. A skeptical idiot? Ohhh, thats bad.

The question is whether the lead was in fact valid. Take Vader out of the equation for a second. Would you fault Ozzel for not charging off to an iceball in the middle of nowhere because they found some human lifeform readings? Canonically Imperial officers have an exceeding disdain for this force nonsense- hardly helped by the fact that Vader is a brutal homocidal loon- look at what he did to Needa. Needa had no way of knowing that the Falcon was clamped to his hull, and the scopes showed nothing. He took all the responsibility on to himself and acted like a professional. In case anyone hasn't noticed, I am NOT a Vader fan.

Fact of the matter is, he made some decisions Vader didn't like and died for it. This has been expanded into a whole brain bug of Ozzel's incompetence. I just don't see it. In the same way as I don't take ST characters words as law, nor do I take Vader's words that Ozzel was 'clumsy and stupid' either- it's hardly empirical evidence.

[Vympel]

[In case anyone hasn't noticed, I am NOT a Vader fan.

I should add the proviso- as a military leader. As a Sith Lord he r0XX0rz

[Darth Garden Gnome]

I suppose you are correct. In fact, come to think of it, to the officer who informed Vader about Hoth's shields, mereley said he was 'suprised.' Instead of "He was stupid (clumsy, whatever) enough too..." So it seems that Ozzel is held in high-esteem, at least by that paticular man.

Although it begs the question of how many pirates nd smugglers do have shield generators, so as to make Ozzel shrug off the thought of pursuing the one on Hoth.

But Ozzel should died anyways, he looks goofy. Piett looks, and sounds, much more professional. On those grounds alone Vader shoudl have killed him.

[Vympel]

I suppose you are correct. In fact, come to think of it, to the officer who informed Vader about Hoth's shields, mereley said he was 'suprised.' Instead of "He was stupid (clumsy, whatever) enough too..." So it seems that Ozzel is held in high-esteem, at least by that paticular man.

Indeed. Veers was quick to try to defend Ozzel from le maniac.

Although it begs the question of how many pirates nd smugglers do have shield generators, so as to make Ozzel shrug off the thought of pursuing the one on Hoth.

But Ozzel should died anyways, he looks goofy. Piett looks, and sounds, much more professional. On those grounds alone Vader shoudl have killed him.

Oh I agree with that, Piett makes Admiral easily

[His Divine Shadow]

More importantly, does anyone believe me that the ISD1 is designed for taking on smaller ships and such and the ISD2 is designed with brute force broadsides in mind?

[Vympel]

More importantly, does anyone believe me that the ISD1 is designed for taking on smaller ships and such and the ISD2 is designed with brute force broadsides in mind?

I don't know about smaller ships- I think the ISD1 was designed to go toe to toe with enemy ships one on one and overpower them with it's massive guns. The ISD2 philosophy is more, smaller guns- this is true even of the HTLs- in terms of rate of fire, movement they are probably more efficient than the ISD1 guns, but shot for shot the ISD1 guns put on ... a better show?

[IceHawk-151]

The ISD Mark I seems to have a wider range of weapons than the Mark II, and understandably so. In the early days of the Empire the Imperial Starfleet had to deal with various small problems. The rebellion and other opposotion groups never seemed to have any heavy capital ships in service. At the time of ANH it seems that the Rebellion was still relying most on Fighter Squadrons and smullging vessels. The ISD Mark I was suited well for taking down the shields of light vessels and taking them over, as we saw with the Tanitive in ANH. However it also had Heavy Weapons in case they had to deal with possible Capital Ship battles.

ISD Mark II's weren't seen until ESB, and by then the Mon Calamari had joined the Rebellion. That gave the Rebels a force of Mon Calamari Star Cruisers that were almost on par with the original ISD. The Empire required a vessel designed specifically to deal with the heavier capital ships seeing put into service at the time. THe ISD Mark II seems to be the solution to that particular problem.

So, yes HDS. it seems your theory is plausible.

[Vympel]

The ISD Mark I seems to have a wider range of weapons than the Mark II, and understandably so. In the early days of the Empire the Imperial Starfleet had to deal with various small problems. The rebellion and other opposotion groups never seemed to have any heavy capital ships in service. At the time of ANH it seems that the Rebellion was still relying most on Fighter Squadrons and smullging vessels. The ISD Mark I was suited well for taking down the shields of light vessels and taking them over, as we saw with the Tanitive in ANH. However it also had Heavy Weapons in case they had to deal with possible Capital Ship battles.

ISD Mark II's weren't seen until ESB, and by then the Mon Calamari had joined the Rebellion. That gave the Rebels a force of Mon Calamari Star Cruisers that were almost on par with the original ISD. The Empire required a vessel designed specifically to deal with the heavier capital ships seeing put into service at the time. THe ISD Mark II seems to be the solution to that particular problem.

So, yes HDS. it seems your theory is plausible.

Mike Wong's theory is the absolute reverse- the ISD1 weapons are clearly designed for combat with individual large ships. In reference to the Tantive IV, either ISD design would've had no problems with it- in fact only the lightest weapons were used to disable it.

[His Divine Shadow]

I don't know about smaller ships- I think the ISD1 was designed to go toe to toe with enemy ships one on one and overpower them with it's massive guns. The ISD2 philosophy is more, smaller guns- this is true even of the HTLs- in terms of rate of fire, movement they are probably more efficient than the ISD1 guns, but shot for shot the ISD1 guns put on ... a better show?

This does not fit I think, just because the barrels are smaller does not mean much, as we've already been over it's likely that the weapons system are internal instead of being in an external turret.

Also the ISD1 has better coverage of medium and heavy weapons and 500% better accuracy than the ISD2, whose weapons are confirmed to be strongers than the ISD1 weapons(Imp sourcebook & EGVV amongst others), the ISD2's heavy weapons also have a limited field of fire, they are clearly optimized for massive broadsides against single targets, the heavy ion cannons are also removed for more broadside firepower.

In return the ISD1 weapons can project more heavy firepower in a much much larger arc and it's weapons are much much more accurate.

I think those are the main points, if the ISD2 was supposed to be better at taking on smaller ships, then the idea that smaller barrels might be the reason is valid, but, why then is it 500% less accurate, and it's weapons field or fire constricted and optimized for massive broadsides against single targets and it's forward medium weapons removed and heavy trench guns removed and heavy ion cannons removed?

Obviously those where sacrified for more firepower in the heavy turrets on top, that the ISD1 turrets are bigger means very little, esp. against the massive evidence that rather strongly indicates what their respective roles are.

[His Divine Shadow]

[Mike Wong's theory is the absolute reverse-

So?
He's not infallible is he?

the ISD1 weapons are clearly designed for combat with individual large ships.

No, rather the opposite, you take this of one single factor alone, that they look big, and the idea that the ISD2 has bigger internal weapons systems is not even considered, thats just one idea, the problems against it are too many to ignore.

-ISD1 accuracy 5 times better
-ISD1 medium/heavy coverage better
-ISD1 has heavy weapons that can fire forward
-ISD1 has heavy weapons in trench

-ISD2 heavy weapons severly constricted(strange if it's supposed to take on smaller ships, why focus firepower on a single location and remove the others?)
-ISD2 weapons coverage sacrificed for heavier broadsides
-ISD2 quotes confirm it's more powerfull

As you can see the overwhelming majority of evidence says it's the opposite of what MW said.

In reference to the Tantive IV, either ISD design would've had no problems with it- in fact only the lightest weapons were used to disable it.

The heavy trench-gun clearly fired a shot at the Tantive-IV in ANH, shortly after the Tantive-IV's shields where broken.
Clearly that weapon was used to bring it's shields down.

[Vympel]

No, rather the opposite, you take this of one single factor alone, that they look big, and the idea that the ISD2 has bigger internal weapons systems is not even considered, thats just one idea, the problems against it are too many to ignore.

It's the barrels, not the turret, that's important. It doesn't matter how big the turret mechanism is itself, what matters is the size of the barrel- i.e. how big a blast comes out. A perfectly reasonable explanation is that the increased size of the ISD1 barrels means you need a big turret ring to take the greater recoil- which we know from Slave Ship to be in the gigaton range.

-ISD1 accuracy 5 times better
-ISD1 medium/heavy coverage better
-ISD1 has heavy weapons that can fire forward
-ISD1 has heavy weapons in trench

-ISD2 heavy weapons severly constricted(strange if it's supposed to take on smaller ships, why focus firepower on a single location and remove the others?)
-ISD2 weapons coverage sacrificed for heavier broadsides
-ISD2 quotes confirm it's more powerfull

As you can see the overwhelming majority of evidence says it's the opposite of what MW said.

Actuall the ISD2 turrets have superior arc of fire than the ISD1 turrets, with the exception of forward fire. The can point straight up no problem, the ISD1's can't, but the first two on either side can fire dead forward.

Again, do look at the Avenger exhibition pics. You'll see.

The heavy trench-gun clearly fired a shot at the Tantive-IV in ANH, shortly after the Tantive-IV's shields where broken.
Clearly that weapon was used to bring it's shields down.

I've never heard that before- do you have a screen cap?

[IceHawk-151]

Mike Wong's theory is the absolute reverse- the ISD1 weapons are clearly designed for combat with individual large ships. In reference to the Tantive IV, either ISD design would've had no problems with it- in fact only the lightest weapons were used to disable it.

Just cause Mike says soemthing, doesn't make it true.

What large vessels does the ISD Mark I have to contend with? They didn't see service until well after the Clone Wars, so there were no major conflicts to be had. ALL of the Capital Shipyards were under Imperial control, and all other commercial shipyards (Save one) didn't have the technology or resources to build a vessel in the same class as a VSD, nonetheless an ISD. The Mon Calamari were totaly under the control of the Empire for the first few years so there was no fear they'd take thier Luxury Liners and convert them into Battleships.

The ISD I has 12 weapons designed to combat heavy starships. After that it has (By some accounts I'd have to say) around 120 Lighter Cannons and an unknown total of medium scale weapons. These medium and light cannons could be used to beat down the shields of a heavy vessel, but seem best scaled for use against smaller vessels with weaker shilds, like the Correllian Corvette. The ISD I also sports around 120 small ion cannons and atleast 2 Heavy Ion Cannon turrets. When it comes to a vessel the size of an ISD it takes pretty heavy Ion fire to disable it. Those lighter weapons seem best suited against Corvette and Frigate class vessels.

The ISD Mark II on the other hand has, as far as we can tell, no Medium Weapons, no Heavy ion Cannons, and many more Heavy Turbolasers. Although the 64 HTL's are smaller than the original models, one could assume theat each Quad turret atlesat retained the firepower of the original cannon. From the EU we also learn that an ISD has atleast 120 Proton Torpedo Tubes arrayed in 8 clusters of 15 tubes each. Torpedoes have been seen used most often in the EU Literature to break through the shields of heavy vessels and smash the hull with as much directed force as possible. ALthough they can be used against light vessels Proton Torpedoes are powerful enough to be a threat to the Shields of ISD's and SSD's, so I'd figure thier use against smaller vessels would be overkill.

[Vympel]

Mike Wong's theory is the absolute reverse- the ISD1 weapons are clearly designed for combat with individual large ships. In reference to the Tantive IV, either ISD design would've had no problems with it- in fact only the lightest weapons were used to disable it.

Just cause Mike says soemthing, doesn't make it true.

Actually, I've been arguing my POV on my own, thanks very much. I was just pointing out how you came to a completely different conclusion based on the same set of facts.

What large vessels does the ISD Mark I have to contend with? They didn't see service until well after the Clone Wars, so there were no major conflicts to be had. ALL of the Capital Shipyards were under Imperial control, and all other commercial shipyards (Save one) didn't have the technology or resources to build a vessel in the same class as a VSD, nonetheless an ISD. The Mon Calamari were totaly under the control of the Empire for the first few years so there was no fear they'd take thier Luxury Liners and convert them into Battleships.

Yesterday's war syndrome. Besides, there's no point in arguing this when the appearance of eachship speaks for itself.

The ISD I has 12 weapons designed to combat heavy starships. After that it has (By some accounts I'd have to say) around 120 Lighter Cannons and an unknown total of medium scale weapons. These medium and light cannons could be used to beat down the shields of a heavy vessel, but seem best scaled for use against smaller vessels with weaker shilds, like the Correllian Corvette. The ISD I also sports around 120 small ion cannons and atleast 2 Heavy Ion Cannon turrets. When it comes to a vessel the size of an ISD it takes pretty heavy Ion fire to disable it. Those lighter weapons seem best suited against Corvette and Frigate class vessels.

The only thing that's relevant to this discussion is the visible heavy weapons and what it means. The ISD2 heavy weapons are smaller and definitely more maneuverable if we judge by size. Hence, they are designed for smaller targets.

The ISD Mark II on the other hand has, as far as we can tell, no Medium Weapons, no Heavy ion Cannons, and many more Heavy Turbolasers. Although the 64 HTL's are smaller than the original models, one could assume theat each Quad turret atlesat retained the firepower of the original cannon. From the EU we also learn that an ISD has atleast 120 Proton Torpedo Tubes arrayed in 8 clusters of 15 tubes each. Torpedoes have been seen used most often in the EU Literature to break through the shields of heavy vessels and smash the hull with as much directed force as possible. ALthough they can be used against light vessels Proton Torpedoes are powerful enough to be a threat to the Shields of ISD's and SSD's, so I'd figure thier use against smaller vessels would be overkill.

Not that it matters, but what EU source is that?

[IceHawk-151]

"Actually, I've been arguing my POV on my own, thanks very much. I was just pointing out how you came to a completely different conclusion based on the same set of facts."

Very well, that I can understand. It just so happens that you seem to agree with Mr.Wong in this particular regard.

"Yesterday's war syndrome. Besides, there's no point in arguing this when the appearance of eachship speaks for itself."

Yesterday's War Snydrome? You must be joking. Emperor Palpatine has nothing to fear in the galaxy. He controlled both sides in the Clone Wars and thusly had no true worries. There is no reason for him to build a fleet meant to defend against Heavy Capitalships when his Empire is the only force in the galaxy that has Heavy Vessels.
And the apperance of each individual does not speak for itself. As the famous quote goes, you cannot judge a book by it's cover.

"The only thing that's relevant to this discussion is the visible heavy weapons and what it means. The ISD2 heavy weapons are smaller and definitely more maneuverable if we judge by size. Hence, they are designed for smaller targets. "

Smaller targets would also be more manuverable, and easily capable of flying UNDERNEATH the Star Destroyer in order to stay out of range of the Heavy Weapons. The HTL Batteries are set in such a way that the Destroyer's own orientation decided what can be attacked. In order for the HTL Cannons to be brought to bear the ISD must be atleast as manuverable as it adversarie.
And as far as the size goes one could also stipulate that the smaller barrells each require less power to operate and thusly allow for a higher fire rate, making each Quad Turret capble of putting out a large amount of firepower in a small amount of time.

"Not that it matters, but what EU source is that?"

In the First Book of the Hand of Thrawn Doulogy Admiral Pellaeon is waiting for Garm Bel Iblis to meet him when he is attacked by Pirates. Pellaeon then orders the use of Torpedoes against the enemy cruiser.
The exact quote is..."Stand by Number Eight Proton Torpedo CLuster, All fifteen torpedoes to fire in a three-by-five sequence along vector two-three by seven"

And the reason that I pointed this out is that even in the EU ISD Mark II's, the type of vessel the Chimaera is believed to be, are designed to take on heavy vessels. In this battle sequence the ISD was having trouble harming the smaller vessels in the pirate force because they were to manuverable and moving to fast.

[omegaLancer]

I throught that the reason they were having problem targeting was due to the modification made to the targeting computers in the attempt to be able to hit targets while cloaked?...

Have to break out my copy and check..

[IceHawk-151]

No that was not it.
The Pirate vessels were flying in close proximity which allowed them to overlap thier shields. That overlap effected made it harder for the Turbolasers to punch through and damage the vessels. The only reason that the Predictor was used in the battle was so that Pellaeon could analyze the battle tactics of the enemy force. He wanted to know whether or not Garm Bel Iblis was in command of the attacking force. The use of the Proton Torpedoes was able to take advantage of the Pirate vessels's lack of Particle Shielding and confirm that Garm was not commanding the force.

[Connor MacLeod]

How do you measure up the subjective interpretations of an officer to the concrete specifications of a warship?

Where the hell do you get off calling them subjective, particularily since you're the one lackin in evidence here?

I've already indicated that both the observed details of Ozzel's behaviour (even if we take Vader out of the picture regarding the probe droid, there is the fact he deliberately refused to follow "their best lead", assuming instead that it wasn't relevant. The dumbass didnt even send scout ships! Remember they did that in ANH?)

And even worse there is the fact he dropped out of hyperspace within easy detection range of the Rebels, rather than dropping out farther away and conducting long range bombardments (as Vader wanted, and as was stated in several sources - the novelization for one.)

Even more, there are a number of sources one can cite (the SW.com website, BTM, The Star Wars Encyclopedia, WEG's Galaxy guide 3) for proof of his ineptness.

These are not "subjective interpretations" - these are demonstrable facts.

For that matter, when did we ever have "concrete specifications" on the warships? They're little more than aggregate details pieced from various sources, and in some respects are still subject to contention. They're far less objective than Ozzel's performance!