Eclipse vs Executors

[Grand Moff Tim]

How many Executors would it take to beat an Eclipse? Assuming crews of average compentence and the battle taking place in deep space.

[Kuja]

How many Executors would it take to beat an Eclipse? Assuming crews of average compentence and the battle taking place in deep space.

Probably 5 or 6, depending on how the superlaser is used.

[Illuminatus Primus]

They don't seem to have much different surface area for weapon mountings and the extra reactor power from more volume for the Eclipse probably goes into the superlaser and grav wells.

I'd say one could do it, using its bombers w/ highest intensity weapons if it could batter the shields down somewhere and then use its bombed to puncture the hull to give it a slight firepower edge...it could do it. The Executor class needs to stay out of the superlaser's firing arc though.

[His Divine Shadow]

They don't seem to have much different surface area for weapon mountings and the extra reactor power from more volume for the Eclipse probably goes into the superlaser and grav wells.

No... the Eclipse is magnitudes more dangerous than an Executor, to this date no fleet has been able to destroy one, this thing is a fullblown planet killer(IMO) that takes out planets DS style.

[Exonerate]

I'd say 2. The SSDs just have to stay out of the superlaser's way.

[His Divine Shadow]

I'd say 2. The SSDs just have to stay out of the superlaser's way.

Why? The ESSD has more than twice the number of HTL's than an Executor too, and it's shields are way way stronger.

I'd say atleast 5 Executors so that the Eclipse cannot focus enough firepower on any one ship.

[Illuminatus Primus]

They don't seem to have much different surface area for weapon mountings and the extra reactor power from more volume for the Eclipse probably goes into the superlaser and grav wells.

No... the Eclipse is magnitudes more dangerous than an Executor, to this date no fleet has been able to destroy one, this thing is a fullblown planet killer(IMO) that takes out planets DS style.

What do you think that larger reactor feeds? The superlaser and a dozen grav wells.

Remember, the Errant Venture could only mount a micro-superlaser (that could only instantly destroy much smaller, YV ships) when its HTLs and most of its MTLs were ripped out.

The DS I's SL took up so much reactor energy it had miniscule TLs compared to its surface area and minimal shielding.

Even with more reactor output, there isn't much more surface area to even mount guns anyway.

[Illuminatus Primus]

And it can "only" crack the crust of a planet.

Energy many orders of magnitude less than complete dispersion of a planetary mass.

[His Divine Shadow]

========================
Pg. 88: The Death Star's prime weapon was composed of eight individual lasers that could focus together, generating enough power to destroy an entire planet. By comparison, the Eclipse carries only a single laser, but recent focussing and generator advances make this ray much more powerful than the units used on the Death Star. The beam packs enough destructive power to shatter the most planetary shields and sear whole continents in a flash.
========================
-Dark Empire Sourcebook

Note how it's 2/3rds, too explicit to ignore, also note that the operation of searing whole continents is also coupled with piercing a planetary shield, hence they both work.

This is more problematic:
========================
Pg. 46: The Eclipse was also intended to devastate entire worlds. Its main weapon was a superlaser weapon, although its power was only two-thirds that of the main weapon aboard the first Death Star – it was “merely” powerful enough to crack the crust of a planet rather than destroy it outright.
========================
-The Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels

But we can simply say that is simply a paraphrasing of the other quote, so they essentially mean the same kind of target.

An unshielded planet would be obliterated.

[His Divine Shadow]

And it can "only" crack the crust of a planet.

Energy many orders of magnitude less than complete dispersion of a planetary mass.

No, it's two thirds of the power of the DS, it can blow up planets, those references are made in conjunction with a planetary shield, as you see.

At any rate the original 2/3rds quote has precedence over the later one as the original one has no contradictions and is from DE sourcebook.

[His Divine Shadow]

What do you think that larger reactor feeds? The superlaser and a dozen grav wells

The Eclipse SL is also rated at 2/3rds of the original one, thats alot of power, plus there are mentions of technological maturation.
The Eclipse seems to me to be a whole new class of ships with mature large scale SL technology and an incredibly efficient hypermatter reactor.

[kheegster]

I don't think that the superlaser is really a factor, once the Executor(s) manages to close into combat range. The Eclipse isn't going to be able to bring the superlaser to bear on a smaller opponent at close range unless the latter is incompetently led.

[consequences]

going by the WEG stats, the superlaser can do up to 8D death star scale damage, resulting in an average roll of 28. the Executor has 10D of hull, and 8D of shields per facing, capital scale, which means any die roll higher than one is ignored. this results in a roll of 3 for normal shielding, and 19 for fully concentreated shields. this means that by WEG rules, on average the Executor will be just barely destroyed if shielded normally, and suffer moderate damage and complete shield loss if concentrating its shields. Granted, this only applies to the 8000 meter "SSD" not a true Executor, and only if you are judging the combat by their rules. As another note, it would take a full broadside from an 8000 meter SSD to reduce the shields of the Eclipse by 1 pip, 3 pips per die, and about 33 volleys before the Eclipse loses shielding on one side and starts to accrue hull damage.

[Illuminatus Primus]

What do you think that larger reactor feeds? The superlaser and a dozen grav wells

The Eclipse SL is also rated at 2/3rds of the original one, thats alot of power, plus there are mentions of technological maturation.
The Eclipse seems to me to be a whole new class of ships with mature large scale SL technology and an incredibly efficient hypermatter reactor.

You're not going to get that kind of super-efficiency to microscale it that much while giving it so many other demands, the DS becomes an uber-waste.

Wong will tell you, there's a difference between cracking open a world into fragments and blasting it so it won't reform.

All descriptions of planetary damage are far far less then the DS I. Moreover, the size of the hypermatter reactor combined with the demands placed on it in a technologically static society suggest the 2/3rds is wrong.

2/3rds just doesn't mesh with the size and requirements the DS had. Perhaps they mean 1/3 less than enough energy to disrupt the planet's structure, that is, 1/3 less than enough to "destroy it."

In a technologically static society, you're not going to improve the technology that well in a few years and not incorperate it into the new model. And all references as to its destructive pontential suggest a specific and far lower yield.

Besides, they get their numbers wrong all the time. I'm willing to overlook it there. Especially since they gave birth to the plasma brain bug.

[Illuminatus Primus]

I'm with Mike here.

Eclipse-class and Sovereign-class Star Destroyer (Star Wars: Dark Empire)

Concept

Eclipse and Sovereign-class Star Destroyers mount smaller versions of the Death Star's fearsome superlaser. There are various conflicting reports on its power. Some sources say that it has two thirds the power of the Death Star's superlaser, while other sources say it has one seventh its power. However, both figures appear to be exaggerated; even one tenth the Death Star's power would easily destroy an entire planet, which is beyond the capabilities of an Eclipse of Sovereign-class ship.

Known Effects

According to the official literature, the Eclipse-class Star Destroyer's superlaser is capable of "cracking the crust" of a targeted world and "searing continents" off its surface. It goes without saying that such a large superlaser should be much more powerful than an Acclamator or an ordinary ISD, and the energy requirement for vapourizing an entire continent is well in excess of the threshold for a global extinction event (1E9 megatons). Figures in the range of 1E10-1E11 megatons are probably more realistic. The radiative heating effect and the enormous volume of ballistic ejecta produced by such an event would undoubtedly heat the entire atmosphere up well beyond the point of total sterilization, so it is unlikely that any forms of life would survive.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

What "plasma brain bug" do you mean? That SW blaster bolts/turbolaser bolts are plasma?

[His Divine Shadow]

You're not going to get that kind of super-efficiency to microscale it that much while giving it so many other demands, the DS becomes an uber-waste

The DS was an uber-waste nomatter how you cut it though.
And the scale is pretty much the same when you look at the reactor size, the Eclipse could fit a reactor of similar size in it's hull, or several smaller ones.

Wong will tell you, there's a difference between cracking open a world into fragments and blasting it so it won't reform

I know this already, though I've not looked at it that way.
Though I could agree with it being a planet killer as in shattering it, but not destroying it to the point that it will never reform.

All descriptions of planetary damage are far far less then the DS I. Moreover, the size of the hypermatter reactor combined with the demands placed on it in a technologically static society suggest the 2/3rds is wrong

Yes, look at the size of the thing, the hypermatter chamber in the DS2 was only a few km wide at most.

2/3rds just doesn't mesh with the size and requirements the DS had. Perhaps they mean 1/3 less than enough energy to disrupt the planet's structure, that is, 1/3 less than enough to "destroy it

That I could agree with, but thats still enough to shatter the whole planet, not enough that it'll reform.

In a technologically static society, you're not going to improve the technology that well in a few years and not incorperate it into the new model. And all references as to its destructive pontential suggest a specific and far lower yield.

Who says it has to be technologically stagnant?

Besides, they get their numbers wrong all the time. I'm willing to overlook it there. Especially since they gave birth to the plasma brain bug

The brainbug I think is entierly on the crack the planet side.
An ISD could crack the planets crust or waste a continent easily.

[His Divine Shadow]

Ofcourse, I also came to think of the Darksaber, with all the extra shit removed, it was REALLY small in comparison to the DS, and with all the power of the DS

[Sea Skimmer]

The Eclipse is several times more massive then an Executor, and has a weapon which can blow an Executor up with one shot. I'd say at least six Executors are needed.

[Illuminatus Primus]

The brainbug I think is entierly on the crack the planet side.
An ISD could crack the planets crust or waste a continent easily.

So? This thing pops, in pops open the crust and annhiliates a whole continents sized area sending it molten back into the mantle or into space.

Instant BDZ.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Ofcourse, I also came to think of the Darksaber, with all the extra shit removed, it was REALLY small in comparison to the DS, and with all the power of the DS

We know that internal space is devoted mostly to power and engines and SL support. We know it isn't used for troops because even the highest-end counts are too low.

And you and I both have no idea how long the Darksabre was.

It could've been over 100 km long for all we know.

And yes, we know the SW galaxy is technologically stagnant. You're not going to change things around to make an inconsistent (compared w/ other weapons) firepower. Either you take the 2/3rds erronous count and simply dump both other descriptions, along with the circumstancial evidence of DS volume and technological stasis.

The least contradictions come from going w/ descriptions over the 2/3rds firepower calc.

[Illuminatus Primus]

You're not going to get that kind of super-efficiency to microscale it that much while giving it so many other demands, the DS becomes an uber-waste

The DS was an uber-waste nomatter how you cut it though.
And the scale is pretty much the same when you look at the reactor size, the Eclipse could fit a reactor of similar size in it's hull, or several smaller ones.

That reactor was easily like ten kilometers in diameter, IMHO.

We don't know the size of the fuel silos, hyperdrives, sublight units, superlaser mechanism, auxillary reactors, and associated power systems.

[nightmare]

One thing of interest that I have noted is that the Eclipse was said to be twice the size of the Executor (as in twice the lenght).

Naturally, this was based on the faulty 8 km number, which made the Eclipse the correct 16 km (slightly more in case of the Eclipse 1).

And the stats?

Executor 8 km - 250 turbolasers.
Sovereign 15 km - 500 turbolasers.
Eclipse 16 km - 500 turbolasers.


Naturally, what I mean is that the Executor-class should also have 500 TLs.

[His Divine Shadow]

So? This thing pops, in pops open the crust and annhiliates a whole continents sized area sending it molten back into the mantle or into space.

Instant BDZ.

Thats maybe a few dozen TL shots worth, that makes no sense to me, and we also have to factor in that it will still have to break a planetary shield, even the weak local shield of Hoth could stand up to one Executor and five ISD's.

[His Divine Shadow]

And yes, we know the SW galaxy is technologically stagnant. You're not going to change things around to make an inconsistent (compared w/ other weapons) firepower. Either you take the 2/3rds erronous count and simply dump both other descriptions, along with the circumstancial evidence of DS volume and technological stasis.

The least contradictions come from going w/ descriptions over the 2/3rds firepower calc.

How does it make any inconsistencies? With the ICS figures we know that maybe a few dozen TL shots is enough to wipe out an whole continent, yet that firepower times 5 + an SSD's worth of firepower is unable to bring down the Hoth generator, wich was not that hot.
I would think it'd been possible for the assembled ships to fire 50 broadsides each atleast, that would amount to a minimum of 1e25 joules and the ESSD would have to be greater than this even, and still have enough firepower to vaporize a continent.