StarDestroyer.Net BBS

What do you all think? Did the EU writers miss the vastness of the galactic empire, even after the fall of palpatine?

Would it be necessary for the New Republic to create clones to counter the vastness of the empire and use them to take and hold systems?

Wouldnt we have a second clone war then?

Just think about it please. How would a small rebellion measure up against a vast empire? The numbers of the empire even without the emperor would overwhelm the Rebels, and the Rebels would not have the man power to take and hold systems.

tell me what your thoughts are on all of this. Thanks..............

After palpatine died many systems declared independence and rebelled against the Empire. And with the Empire in a HUGE power vacuum after the Emperors death they became fracticious, unable to really coordinate a counter attack.

And the Rebls/Republic would have to build all new cloning facilites. And after the clone wars much of the data on cloning was lost.

just a thought if the president died would then all the states leave the union? Let me put it this way, Roman emperors dies and still the empire of Rome continued on. Just because the emperor was lost, the Roman empire still functioned.

After palpatines death, the military would still have its structure and would still be able to fight even without palpatine.

Why would the cloning data be lost? Isnt it possible that the empire still uses clones. Surely you believe that the clone troopers evolve into Stormtroopers, or do you?

AL wrote:just a thought if the president died would then all the states leave the union? Let me put it this way, Roman emperors dies and still the empire of Rome continued on. Just because the emperor was lost, the Roman empire still functioned.

After palpatines death, the military would still have its structure and would still be able to fight even without palpatine.

Why would the cloning data be lost? Isnt it possible that the empire still uses clones. Surely you believe that the clone troopers evolve into Stormtroopers, or do you?

The Imperial government is not at all like that of the United States or Rome. It was built completely around one man, who wielded absolute power, with no clear line of succession. As explained before, after Palpatine's death, all the governors and military leaders turned on each other in a struggle to see who would be the next leader of the Empire. The small but united Rebel Alliance/New Republic just picked up the pieces after the Imperial factions wrecked each other. In fact, Dark Empire even showed the Rebels attacking with captured Star Destroyers to frame Imperial warlords.

I don't know exactly how cloning technology was lost or fell into disuse, but it is very clear in the EU that clones soldiers are not commonplace. In the Thrawn trilogy, a big deal was made about the Empire acquiring a single cloning facility, with fears that it would bring on another round of Clone Wars.

But in Rome there were frequently civil wars resulting from the death of one Emperor. The difference was that in the Empire, instead of having two or three competing bids for power there were hundreds and perhaps thousands. They had all been bound by the Emperor himself, and his death created a power struggle the likes of which the world has never seen.

Incidentally, your definition of a Roman Empire appears to be flawed. You appear to indicate that the Roman Empire did not change governments. In fact it changed governments several times, by shifting power from one family to another (or from an apparently legitimate heir to the throne to a usurper). This represents a change in government. It is also notable that after nearly every civil war the Empire was substantially weakened and forced to make territorial concessions to barbarian tribes along its borders. At times, small territories even seceded from the Empire rather than submit to the new ruler (most notable when Cicily attempted to secede, and was attacked by three Roman Legions, which were only defeated by the claws of Archimedes).

I dont thinl my definition of rome is wrong at all. The only time there was civil war was when the senate still maintained power and tried to recall julious caeser and have him arrested. Sure he became emperor and was later executed by the senate, but the first true emperor of rome, Augustus named his successor and it went on like that until the fall of the empire. Each emperor naming a successor and so and so on.

What I'm trying to get out with this post is that the limited rebellion flet an military would have a hard time taking on the remnants of the empire. It would be rational to say the conflict with the empire would take many many years. What about an imperial counter attack, surely that would have come.

Anyhow, i did like your idea, about the higher leaders fighting for power after the emperors death, that does make a lot of sense and is expressed in the books of the eu, but i feel the eu writers have written off the empire way to early.

But everytime the dynasty shifted, it can be argued that a new government was installed. Not every emperor named a successor who took the throne after him.

Mr. B wrote:After palpatine died many systems declared independence and rebelled against the Empire. And with the Empire in a HUGE power vacuum after the Emperors death they became fracticious, unable to really coordinate a counter attack.

.

the EU writers did a great job of telling the tale of a falling Empire. Since Grand Moffs and Imperial Warlords all declared that they were the new emperor and ruler of the Empire there was civil wars between the Imperial Warlords and not very much communication was going on. Grand Admiral Thrawn was the only one that came close to reuniting the Empire.

AL wrote:I dont thinl my definition of rome is wrong at all. The only time there was civil war was when the senate still maintained power and tried to recall julious caeser and have him arrested. Sure he became emperor and was later executed by the senate, but the first true emperor of rome, Augustus named his successor and it went on like that until the fall of the empire. Each emperor naming a successor and so and so on.

What I'm trying to get out with this post is that the limited rebellion flet an military would have a hard time taking on the remnants of the empire. It would be rational to say the conflict with the empire would take many many years. What about an imperial counter attack, surely that would have come.

Anyhow, i did like your idea, about the higher leaders fighting for power after the emperors death, that does make a lot of sense and is expressed in the books of the eu, but i feel the eu writers have written off the empire way to early.

The war with the Empire did take years. As for Imperial counterattacks, have you ever heard of Thrawn? Or Dark Empire?

The war with the Empire did take years. As for Imperial counterattacks, have you ever heard of Thrawn? Or Dark Empire?

Those didn't seem like real counterattacks though. They only lasted a few months at best. A real counterattack in my eyes would have the Empire quickly regaining a bunch of its lost territory, holding and defending it as well as planning new efficient strikes against NR territory, as well as further developing and bringing in new tech like the TIE Defender and such. This is what the Thrawn period SHOULD have been especially with Thrawn in Command. Instead, he came out of nowhere, gave the New Republic a kick in the nuts, and was then quickly dealt with.

Same goes for the Dark Empire series, it didn't last long enough at all. Although I suppose you could chalk it up to the Emperors blinding arrogance again but still, with weapons like the World Devastators and the fact the Emperor was back to reunite the Empire, his second coming should have lasted a lot longer. Instead we get quick trash thrown out like "Empires End"

The EU is crap. All they did was take some second-rate fighters from the Dragon Ball Z universe and called them Jedi. Then we see them do stuff like Force push a fleet of ISD's out of a solar system or cause a whole planet to go insane using Dark Side power. The EU goes overboard with Jedi power.

The EU, for it's size has done rather well in regards to continuity and such.

I notice alot of people don't like it, but hey, it shows the true powers of the jedi and SW tech, whats for the anti-warsies to like about that?

Icehawk wrote:Those didn't seem like real counterattacks though. They only lasted a few months at best. A real counterattack in my eyes would have the Empire quickly regaining a bunch of its lost territory, holding and defending it as well as planning new efficient strikes against NR territory

Wich is not possible since the Empire is fragmented into a shitload of factions...

For the fall of the Galactic Empire- I think TIE Fighter said it best:

"THE EMPEROR *IS* THE EMPIRE

Those didn't seem like real counterattacks though. They only lasted a few months at best.

You do realise that if Thrawn hadn't been assassinated, he probably would have overthrown the rebellion, don't you?

After Thrawn's death, the empire broke up farther, due to its lack of a rallying point. There were no more grand admirals left after Thrawn, and presumably no more Grand moffs either, so given the large number of people with equal power under the old regime, there was likely to be some fighting over different regions of the empire.

Yes indeed. You've got to remember that the Emperor made the government dependent on him, a dictatorship of sorts. Think about it. Just as the US is toying with the idea of disposing of Saddam Hussein, the Rebels wanted the Emperor. If the US were to get Hussein, his stranglehold on Iraq would end. Although corruption in Iraq and tensions between them would still exist, it would mostly die off because of the immense power Hussein has ingulfed in himself. This is the same story as the Emperor.

The Bantam run was really bad towards the end I thought. Everything was the same old thing repackaged, Imperial warlord of the week, Dark Jedi of the week, Solo kid kidnapping attempt of the week etc. For me the jury is still out on the NJO, there are times I cannot stand the damned thing at all and there are times I quite like it.

Crazy_Vasey wrote:The Bantam run was really bad towards the end I thought. Everything was the same old thing repackaged, Imperial warlord of the week, Dark Jedi of the week, Solo kid kidnapping attempt of the week etc. For me the jury is still out on the NJO, there are times I cannot stand the damned thing at all and there are times I quite like it.

I liked SbS a lot, but the rest of them are merely par for the course of SW books at best.

I hated the Han Solo and Lando Calrissian adventures. They seemed too cartoonish and stupid. I also hated the CSA, instead of the Empire.

WARNING!: FANBOY STATEMENT!!!!!


Personally, it went wrong when everyone else, except Zahn, touched the Star Wars universe. His originally triology was the only series that when I read, I could hear the fucking sound track playing in the back of my mind.

They really should have just turned the whold damn thing over to KJA. In fact, he needs to take over production of Episode III immediately.




LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DG_Cal_Wright wrote:They really should have just turned the whold damn thing over to KJA. In fact, he needs to take over production of Episode III immediately.




LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mere do not convey the sheer, base wickedness of your suggestion - prepare to ingest shotgun pellets, traitor! BLAM! PUM-CHACK BLAM! PUM-CHACK BLAM!!!

(I secretly dislike KJA's Star Wars work. Does it show? )

I for one think the EU is for the most part quite good. While I cant stand the Black Fleet Crisis series or the Corellian Trilogy. The others most notable Zahn's are the best. I like the fact that the Thrawn trilogy did a great job bringing about the popularity of Star Wars again, if memory serves they were some of the first books to come out after ROTJ. I also liked how he tried to tie together all the other crap books in his Hand Of Thrawn series.

As for the Empire falling apart, like everyone else said it was the fault of Palpatine who gave himself way way too much power without delegating a clear successor. The actual organization of the Empire in my opinion seemed rather efficient. Palpatine did delegate a lot of power to Grand Moffs and such given the scope of the Empire was just way way too big for him to micromanage. The only real flaw was lack of a clear-cut successor. Reminds me of how the Mongol Empire fractured apart...

RadiO wrote:

DG_Cal_Wright wrote:They really should have just turned the whold damn thing over to KJA. In fact, he needs to take over production of Episode III immediately.




LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mere do not convey the sheer, base wickedness of your suggestion - prepare to ingest shotgun pellets, traitor! BLAM! PUM-CHACK BLAM! PUM-CHACK BLAM!!!

(I secretly dislike KJA's Star Wars work. Does it show? )

You deny the greatness of KJA?!? His awesome might shall smite you now.

DG_Cal_Wright wrote: You deny the greatness of KJA?!? His awesome might shall smite you now.

Pah, I can take it! Going on the evidence before me, KJA's Awesome Might Projection Device would just randomly fall apart and/or achieve very little in spite of 938 pages of painstaking and exciting build-up. It'll be a push-over.
But on the other hand... KJA would consider himself a good guy, and thus confer upon himself the ability to effortlessly and completely win, over and over again, no matter how long the odds or dark the hour. In which case - NOOOOOO!

::Thinks to himself. What have I done. I have served the dark for too long. I know what I must do now.::

Now Poster, you shall die!

::As the cackle grows louder, DG_Cal_Wright turns to the evil Lord of the Expanded Universe. He grabs the lunatic and hoists him into the air. Tendrils of poor plot energy erupts over the two. With one last effort, Wright tosses Emperor KJA into a deep shicsm where the bottom is nothing but Aaron Alston and Timothy Zahn books.::