StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Can anyone tell me what the latest consensus is on the Empire deploying its heavy vehicles? Prior to AOTC, the trend is to depict heavy armoured vehicles like the Juggernaut, the AT-AT being landed via transports, then deployed onto the field,roll on roll off so as to speak. Well, save for the AT-AT which had some problems.

Is there any new data on whether the Empire can deploy troops similar to how the AT-TE can be deployed via LAAT? Similarly, is there any new assault gunships?

Why would you need anything new when you have the At-At, and the At-St?

^Well, there are all the larger walkers at SWTC. AT-ATs are obviously not the end-all and be-all of Imperial ground vehicles, but I think he's more referring to rapid combat deployment methods.

To my knowledge, for a rapid combat drop, there is only the single AT-AT scale dropship depicted in force commander and empire at war, and maybe the four-AT-AT-scale Titan dropship from the inside the worlds book. The Titan looks big enough, with sufficient internal re-arrangement, to fit one of the big Juggernaut A6s.

There is also this: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/File:Landing_on_Hoth.jpg

Which almost looks Acclamator-ish, but still has some obvious points of divergence. Probably too small to be an Evakmar corps-level transport though.

There's the Multi Altitude Assault Transport and the LAAT/c is still used to bring in vehicles like the PX-4 mobile command center.

EDIT: That ship is apparantly an Acclamator-class transport drop ship, according to the Complete Encyclopedia. Either heavily modified or based on the original assault ship model.

There is no way the evakmar corps transport could enter the atmosphere. Here is something I made years ago for the RPG.

TROOP TRANSPORT VESSEL
CRAFT: Evakmar-KDY August transport
TYPE: August-class corps transport vessel
SCALE: Capital
LENGTH: 1,075 Meters (3,536.90 ft)
SKILL: Capital Ship Piloting: August-class corps transport
CREW: 7,024, Gunners: 94, Skeleton: 3,050/+10
CREW SKILL: Astrogation 4D+1, Capital Ship Gunnery 4D, Capital Ship Piloting 5D, Capital Ship Sensors 3D+2, Capital Ship Shields 4D
TROOPS: 150 (50 Naval Troopers + 100 Stormtroopers)
PASSENGERS: 80,000 Imperial Army Troopers
CARGO CAPACITY: 170,000 metric tons
CONSUMABLES: 2 years
RESTOCKING COST: 637,056,400 Crs.
COST: 1,443,000,000 Crs. (new)
HYPERDRIVE MULTIPLIER: x2
HYPERDRIVE BACKUP: x12
NAV COMPUTER: Yes
MANEUVERABILITY: 0D
SPACE: 4
HULL: 7D+1
SHIELDS: 4D+1
SENSORS:
Passive: 40/0D
Scan: 80/1D
Search: 160/2D+2
Focus: 4/4D
WEAPONS:
4 Turbolaser Batteries
Fire Arc: 2 front, 1 right, 1 left
Crew: 4
Skill: Capital Ship Gunnery
Fire Control: 1D
Space Range: 3-15/35/75
Atmosphere Range: 6-30/70/150/km
Damage: 7D
10 Turbolaser Cannons
Fire Arc: 5 right, 5 left
Crew: 2
Skill: Capital Ship Gunnery
Fire Control: 2D
Space Range: 3-15/35/75
Atmosphere Range: 6-30/70/150/km
Damage: 5D
20 Quad Laser Cannons
Fire Arc: 5 front, 5 right, 5 left, 5 back
Crew: 2
Scale: starfighter
Skill: Capital Ship Gunnery
Fire Control: 4D
Space Range: 1-3/12/75
Atmosphere Range: 100-300/1.2/2.5 km
Damage: 4D
6 Tractor Beam Projectors
Fire Arc: 3 right, 3 left
Crew: 3
Skill: Capital Ship Gunnery
Fire Control: 2D
Space Range: 1-5/15/30
Atmosphere Range: 1-5/15/30
Damage: 4D
STARFIGHTER COMPLEMENT: 2 squadrons of TIE/In's, 1 squadron of TIE Bombers
SUPPORT CRAFT: 4 Lambda-class shuttles, 2 Katarn-class boarding shuttles, 4 Grek-class troop shuttles, 4 MU-3-class shuttles, 2 Aegis-class combat shuttles, 2 AIC-4-class drop-ships, 12 F-7-class drop-ships, 12 MT-191-class drop-ships, 10 Warlord-class drop-ships
GROUND EQUIPMENT: Has room for 7,000 vehicles of all types (from speeder bikes to AT-AT's)
CAPSULE: The development of the August-class corps transport is one of the few instances of real cooperation between the Imperial Army and the Imperial Navy. The ship was purpose built to transport all of the men and equipment of an entire Imperial Army Corps. The August can land 6,708 fully equipped troopers and 583 combat vehicles at one time using all of it's 52 support craft. In addition, the August has 24 TIE/In's to provide escort to the surface and 12 TIE Bombers to provide direct combat support. The August also has an impressive array of firepower with it's turbolaser emplacements and it's anti-starfighter system.

NoogDeNoog wrote:There is no way the evakmar corps transport could enter the atmosphere. Here is something I made years ago for the RPG.

Source? I wasn't aware these ships had been described in any detail. Ships the size of Venators routinely enter the atmosphere, and your hypothetical Evakmar is about that size.

Page 60 of the imperial sourcebook first ed., the section talking about the 900 meter victory clas star destroyer. " One of the vessel's most powerful advantages is its ability to enter the upper levels of a planet's atmosphere, something the newer star destroyers CANNOT do."

In the Hutt Gambit, the slaver ship that is corellian corvette, 150 meters long, has to take on slaves at the space station in orbit.

In tales from the mos eisley cantina, page 77, talking about a strike crusier (450 meter), "a ship this size wasn't really designed to come this deep into a gravity well...". The only reason they were able to lift on is because the imperials had completely gutted the ship and added more repulsorlifts.

So no one knows how old the Evakmar is, what its characteristics are, or whether it is considered a Star Destroyer?

Also, all the other examples are directly contradicted by Venators and Acclamators in the prequels. Both of which are much bigger than a corvette or a strike.

And the Executor in an old Marvel comic. And the Cloud City, which is permanently moving in a gravity well.

Considering the capabilities of anything that can be called a warship, even anything built to survive the acceleration of star wars ion drives and hitting micrometeors at the speed it's drives can propel it to, why would the atmosphere be a problem?

The only reason not to land a big ship is not because the ship might take damage, it's because the planet might. If the repulsors are out of order, or unusable because of causing interference with repulsorlift vehicles that would prevent them deploying (for instance), balancing down on ion drive is going to dump enough energy into the ground to create a lava lake.

Yes, I know, atomic rocket, the lava might be a few centimetres deep, but, rough estimate; hundred million ton ship (medium or heavy frigate), one megawatt per newton of thrust, ~E18 W to balance against one gravity, which...crap, that's almost two hundred and forty megatons per second. The ship can take that, the planet as a whole can take that, but I'm not convinced about the landing zone.

West End is simply dead wrong about this. There may be doctrinal, environmental and humanitarian reasons not to set a capital warship down on a planet, but there are no physical ones.

But if you seriously propose to land troops and light walkers, things that can't wade through a half meter of lava, then it's a serious problem. So a troopship large enough to create a lava lake still won't be able to land on the surface and disembark troops using a reaction drive... unless you wait for the lava to freeze over, which gives the enemy considerable time to respond to your deployment.

Also, your ship has to land on its exhaust nozzles, which could prove awkward in the final stage... or come down in a controlled crash, like the Space Shuttle only without the landing gear. Which is similarly awkward in the final stage.

I doubt Acclamators or Venators are stably supported by their landing gear without repulsor support - interference with repulsorlifts must not be a huge issue, unless that's the reason why the armor is largely walker/orbit-capable gunship?

After reading about the Acclamator, it seems like a glorified drop ship or landing barge.

If these huge ships are meant to land on planets, why are there so many shuttle and dropships on them?

Why do they build these ships in space? Shipyards are is space.

Cloud City was designed to "float" in a gravity well.

Maybe some ships are designed for planetary landing and some aren't. I don't see how you can land something that doesn't have any landing gear (ISD's, VSD's, nebulon b's, corellian corvettes, and probably most of the ships from 4, 5, and 6).

I must say, I have never been a huge fan of episode 1, 2, and 3. I sort of disreguard anything with Jar Jar Binks in it.

The Acclamator is, I personally reckon, a razee, a proper warship cut down or disarmed- in this case, in the design stage- to make room for troops or stores. There were 'destroyer- transports' in the second world war that followed the same principle.

There's the Eclipse class, which Biggs Darklighter served on and actually defected with, there's an illustration in one of the comic books that came out after Episode 1 of a star frigate that follows the same general shape; I think that, for survivability's sake, Rothana based the Acclamator design on that already existing warship.

It's the only convenient way I can think of to explain why a troop carrier is faster than the subsequent generation of fleet destroyers.

Twelve quad turrets, two hundred gigatons each, and given the power rating of the ship I reckon that is per barrel, not per mount, is not exactly a glorified landing barge. They do have some ability to fight their way through defences and cover their landing craft.

And yes, they almost certainly do come down on repulsors for the most part. Only in emergency would it be necessary to decend on ions; it can't possibly be routine, and the terrain of the battle of geonosis was not lava plain, which is a bit of a giveaway. I wanted to point out that in the event that a ship does have to resort to lithobraking, ("slowing down by slamming into the ground"), in this case the ground might actually lose. They certainly have nothing to fear from the atmosphere.

NoogDeNoog wrote:After reading about the Acclamator, it seems like a glorified drop ship or landing barge.

If these huge ships are meant to land on planets, why are there so many shuttle and dropships on them?.

I can answer this one. Because not every planetary landing is unopposed. Because not every planet has a nice area near the target you can set the whole ship down. Because someones you want the transport providing CAP while the shuttles and dropships go down. Because sometimes you have multiple targets on a planet and a "land the ship and drive the space tanks there" will take to much time.

Don't forget those shuttles and drop ships double as limited use fighters(most of them) and help provide local air support. AND act as default escape pods for the large number of infantry on the ship you otherwise have to devote hull space to putting in pod bays for.

As an Imperial Captain (1. I wish. 2. I don't know what to call clone wars captains) there is no way in hell i am going to bring my capital ship anywhere near a landing zone, even if it is moderately secure. All it would take is one shot from an hidden ion cannon such as in ESB and boom, you ship is screwed and everyone is dead.

BTW, I thought drop ships drop (gravity + powered flight) through the atmosphere at incredible speeds as a defensive maneuver. How could such a large ship, such as an Acclamator, do that?

Don't repulsors have some type of flight ceiling?

NoogDeNoog wrote:After reading about the Acclamator, it seems like a glorified drop ship or landing barge.

Or amphibious assault ship, which its type is named after.

NoogDeNoog wrote:If these huge ships are meant to land on planets, why are there so many shuttle and dropships on them?

Because the troops need to come down in smaller targets if the ships are landing near or on a battlefield. Like the helicopters on the rl amphibious version.

NoogDeNoog wrote:Why do they build these ships in space? Shipyards are is space.

Simpler to set something together in space, although in SW not all shipyards are all space-based, refr. Mon Calamari and Bestine.

NoogDeNoog wrote:Cloud City was designed to "float" in a gravity well.

And is a 17km-wide flying saucer, easily comparable with the Executor of the same film. It has to actually have some sort of repulsor-support to even stay afloat, ergo these things exist for ships of this size.

NoogDeNoog wrote:Maybe some ships are designed for planetary landing and some aren't. I don't see how you can land something that doesn't have any landing gear (ISD's, VSD's, nebulon b's, corellian corvettes, and probably most of the ships from 4, 5, and 6).

Bingo. ISDs, Executors and VSDs can all operate in an atmosphere, but they can't directly land.

NoogDeNoog wrote:As an Imperial Captain (1. I wish. 2. I don't know what to call clone wars captains) there is no way in hell i am going to bring my capital ship anywhere near a landing zone, even if it is moderately secure. All it would take is one shot from an hidden ion cannon such as in ESB and boom, you ship is screwed and everyone is dead.

You could get screwed in far orbit by said surface to space artillery, look at the example of the Tyrant.

Still, the point is that destroyer-sized ships are canonically shown to be able to routinely operate in atmosphere; whether they do or not probably depends more on doctrine and role rather than technical limitations.

fractalsponge1 wrote:So no one knows how old the Evakmar is, what its characteristics are, or whether it is considered a Star Destroyer?

Also, all the other examples are directly contradicted by Venators and Acclamators in the prequels. Both of which are much bigger than a corvette or a strike.

"Shortly after 0 BBY Evakmar-KDY transports were considered to be amongst the newest vessels in the Imperial Navy. At the time, the ships were typically deployed in troop lines consisting of a pair of the transports, and a pair of escort vessels - typically Strike cruisers"

Also, the ship is not called Evakmar, that is a shipbuilder. KDY is also a shipbuilder and a corps transport is what the ship is. I came up with the name August because it reminds me of world war 1 for some reason.

Ah, my mistake on the name.

Still, do the sources you have say anything about it being atmospheric-capable or not?

And still, what is your argument against large ships entering atmosphere? The Venator and Acclamator examples are already given. I can see where it might be tactically stupid or inconvenient to bring something really big into atmosphere, but there doesn't seem to be any valid technical reason against it.

No, my sources say nothing about if it can go into atmosphere or not, honestly, I just assumed that it can't since hardly any other vessels in all the sourcebooks and other resources i have are able to do that.

I guess I really don't have an argument against it, it just goes against everything I have seen and read in the past 30 years. I do remember sitting in the threater thinking to myself, WTF? how is that even possible. I guess it is just another reason why I don't care for the first 3 movies (1,2,3).

Um-none other than WEG themselves had vessels that dwarf a modern day CVN not just ENTER an atmosphere but actually LAND on a planet's surface, ROUTINELY, thanks to the Corporate Sector sourcebook. NOT first line warships, cargo ships. Hauling grain.

fractalsponge1 wrote:

NoogDeNoog wrote:As an Imperial Captain (1. I wish. 2. I don't know what to call clone wars captains) there is no way in hell i am going to bring my capital ship anywhere near a landing zone, even if it is moderately secure. All it would take is one shot from an hidden ion cannon such as in ESB and boom, you ship is screwed and everyone is dead.

You could get screwed in far orbit by said surface to space artillery, look at the example of the Tyrant.

Still, the point is that destroyer-sized ships are canonically shown to be able to routinely operate in atmosphere; whether they do or not probably depends more on doctrine and role rather than technical limitations.

But having some tens of thousand kilometers between me and the surface to space artillery and indeed being on a powered orbit offer better chances for the countermeasures than just sitting like a duck on the ground.

Actually, chances are you'd be a lot safer on the ground-not only does the fact that you got there to begin with indicate that the antiorbit artillery has either been neutralized or never was much of a threat to begin with but it is highly unlikely to be able to engage ground targets even IF it can depress firing angles far enough, on account of the planet getting in the way.

Possibly, but you are also more exposed in orbit, not much to hide behind up there after all. At a lower altitude you can use the terrain as cover, or at least concealment. That big honkin' ion cannon can't do much to you if it can't target you because there's a mountain in the way.