StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Our friends at TF/net have a new discussion about canon and the ICS. Not that we have to waste time with that, but it raised my curiosity.

Now my question:

In my version of the ICS of the OT (translated into german) it is NOT said, what the huge spheres (the sensor-domes) atop the bridge of an ISD are.

But recentely i discovered the english page from the ICS and there it is said, that the Executor was eight times the lenght of an ISD (my version claims five times).

So what is said in the original version? About the lenght of the Exe and the domes?

Link, or die.

Thx in advance (or else )

I have the OT ICS as it was distributed in America.

On the ISD page, there is no mention of the function of the domes.

It says that the Executor is "over eight times as large as the Imperial-class ships." Which isn't untrue. It is over eight times as large. It is unfortunate to see the reference to an Imperial-class rather than the correct term, Imperator-class, though.

Let me guess, are the TF.net boneheads considering the statement which gives the ICS's canon status as bollox or bullshit? I wouldnt be supprised knowing their history.

Regarding the actual question. In the Finnish translated version i had some time ago it allso said that the Exe was over eight times as large as an Imperial class.

Interestingly enough, the same artwork that was comissioned for the ICS was used on the "Behind The Magic" CD, and on there, they were labeled shield generators.

Lord Poe wrote:Interestingly enough, the same artwork that was comissioned for the ICS was used on the "Behind The Magic" CD, and on there, they were labeled shield generators.

That's probably where the confusion comes from. Because in the ICS, they're not labeled as anything, obviously.

Lord Poe wrote:Interestingly enough, the same artwork that was comissioned for the ICS was used on the "Behind The Magic" CD, and on there, they were labeled shield generators.

The BTM CD changed the scematics for it's own use. Badly.

Robert Treder wrote:I have the OT ICS as it was distributed in America.

On the ISD page, there is no mention of the function of the domes.

It says that the Executor is "over eight times as large as the Imperial-class ships." Which isn't untrue. It is over eight times as large. It is unfortunate to see the reference to an Imperial-class rather than the correct term, Imperator-class, though.

So wait, what exactly makes Imperator correct? I've heard it used here and I've assumed it was the same as Imperial, but never before visiting this board had I heard it.

JediNeophyte wrote:So wait, what exactly makes Imperator correct? I've heard it used here and I've assumed it was the same as Imperial, but never before visiting this board had I heard it.

This is, in my opinion, one of Saxton's stretches. The Endor Holocaust and Unknown Regions-in-the-galactic-halo theory are far more bound in canon and demanded my realism concerns than this bit is, yet it strangely is far more easily excepted than those two more controversial theories.

Anyway, a guy named Geoffrey Mandel made a set of officially sanctioned blueprints in 1977 depicting an "Imperator-class Star Destroyer." It is much smaller than the true Star Destroyer, though the intentions are obvious.

http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/kdy/blueisd1.gif
http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/kdy/blueisd2.gif
http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/kdy/blueisd3.gif
http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/kdy/blueisd4.gif

Now, WEG's ship-based material is utter crap. Their ISD is "Imperial-class"--obviously bullshit resulting from a rediculously underresearched leap in logic from calling SDs being called "Imperial Star Destroyers" in canon. Same logic used for turning "Super Star Destroyer" into "Super-class Star Destroyer." However, if you throw that and all the other crap having to do with the Executor out, than in my opinion you awknowledge that WEG's entire model for ship-to-ship combat in SW is flawed. Ships are not lined with dozens of weapon emplacements, but rather a cluster of heavy weapons like the Acclamator and Imperator. Due to the departures from canon in the WEG soruces, I don't particularly trust their weapon counts, fighter counts, Nebulon-B w/ a hangar ( ), etc.

There are other problems, namely how all Mon Cals have to be 1.2 km, despite the fact that ILM/LFL concept art and comparison charts placed Mon Cals nearly at the exact length of the Imperator, and the fact that Home One is not a MC-80, and was many times an ISD's length, combined with the fact that later model cruisers, like the MC-80B and MC-90 could stand up to and in cases bunch through the shielding of Executor-class ships, and were the flagships for notable commanders in major campiagns all makes me doubt WEG numbers.

But come to your own conclusion.

Actually, there's an even easier way. The first ISD came out at Gyndine, was named Imperator. So, following normal naming conventions, that will mean that all ISD are Imperator class star destroyers.

Why don't we just attack George Lucas next time we see him and demand he tells us the class name of the ISD. Also the Star Wars Website labels it as Imperial in fact the only source for Imperator is the Mandal Blueprints which are incorrect in a lot of ways too. I personally don't care, I say Imperial but if someone wants to say Imperator whatever.

Well, i sometimes argued at TF.net (for the fun of it), that WEGs "Imperial"-Class can´t be the ships seen in the movies, for they have totally different weapons.

As for the Imperator-naming, i read somewhere, that according to the modelmakers at ILM it is really Imperator and not Imperial.

Can somebody confirm this?

Illuminatus Primus wrote:

JediNeophyte wrote:So wait, what exactly makes Imperator correct? I've heard it used here and I've assumed it was the same as Imperial, but never before visiting this board had I heard it.

Anyway, a guy named Geoffrey Mandel made a set of officially sanctioned blueprints in 1977 depicting an "Imperator-class Star Destroyer." It is much smaller than the true Star Destroyer, though the intentions are obvious.

And yet(as I've explained previously) the artist that did those images insists they were NOT sanctioned

"Imperator-class" is a fan creation.

The official designation is "Imperial-class", as declared by Official Licensees in their authorised literature.

Lord Edam wrote:
And yet(as I've explained previously) the artist that did those images insists they were NOT sanctioned

"Imperator-class" is a fan creation.

The official designation is "Imperial-class", as declared by Official Licensees in their authorised literature.

Dr Saxton insists that the material, when it came to him, was marked as Lucasfilm property.

As much as I dislike "Super Star Destroyer", it's in the script. WEG is not alone to blame..

nightmare wrote:As much as I dislike "Super Star Destroyer", it's in the script. WEG is not alone to blame..

No, Super Star Destroyer is Rebel slang- the script doesn't say Super-*class*. The Emperor refers to the Executor as the Command Ship. Super-class is WEGs moronic invention. Luckily, there is an offical reference to Executor-class, and we know that the Executor was the first of class- enough for us to throw out Super-class like the embarassing excerement of WEG it is.

WEG took Imperial Stardestroyer into Imperial class because they're stupid and didn't realize it was a Imperial owned SD, as opposed to the OR, CSA, even the Rebels had some...

Vympel wrote: Dr Saxton insists that the material, when it came to him, was marked as Lucasfilm property.

I can't find the message Wayne posted from him, but IIRC Dr Saxton said that the blueprints were included along with a lot of other sources in a box acknowledging Lucasfilm copyright.

Then again, Portal also recognises Lucasfilm copyright - but is far from sanctioned. Infact, most fan creations acknowledge the intellectual property of the franchise holders without becoming officially authorised works.

We have a dierct statement from the artist himself that they were not sanctioned - why take second or third hand hearsay over the word of the artist himself?

and back on topic - if we're ignoring WEG's "Imperial Class" and all those that later followed suit, why must it be Imperator? why not "Star Destroyer Class" (since they are regularly referred to as Imperial Star Destroyers and imperial cruisers in the novellisations - cruisers of the Star Destroyer class belonging to the Imperials)

Because we have several kinds of Star Destroyers.

ISD-I and II from the movies.

VSD-I and II from the EU, as well as Super-Class Star Destroyer (not Super-Class Superstardestroyers)

Nobody can confirm the ILM-quote?

Vympel wrote:

nightmare wrote:As much as I dislike "Super Star Destroyer", it's in the script. WEG is not alone to blame..

No, Super Star Destroyer is Rebel slang- the script doesn't say Super-*class*. The Emperor refers to the Executor as the Command Ship. Super-class is WEGs moronic invention. Luckily, there is an offical reference to Executor-class, and we know that the Executor was the first of class- enough for us to throw out Super-class like the embarassing excerement of WEG it is.

I know that, and I didn't say super-class. The script refers to "super star destroyer" ten times. You may notice that the Executor was referred to as "Star Destroyer" in TESB, "command ship" twice in ROTJ, and "super star destroyer" once. During production, and by Kenner it was called "Darth Vader's Star Destroyer" because Kenner thought "Executor" was giving a bad impression for the toy.

Lord Edam wrote:and back on topic - if we're ignoring WEG's "Imperial Class" and all those that later followed suit, why must it be Imperator? why not "Star Destroyer Class" (since they are regularly referred to as Imperial Star Destroyers and imperial cruisers in the novellisations - cruisers of the Star Destroyer class belonging to the Imperials)

A novel idea, and intruiging, but I think we ought to wait until Episode III though.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:This is, in my opinion, one of Saxton's stretches. The Endor Holocaust and Unknown Regions-in-the-galactic-halo theory are far more bound in canon and demanded my realism concerns than this bit is, yet it strangely is far more easily excepted than those two more controversial theories.

That is because "Imperial-class" sounds stupid. Not quite as stupid as "Super-class", which makes me cringe and want to disembowel somebody at WEG, but stupid nonetheless.

The biggest problem with Lucasfilm continuity is that WEG was allowed to define so much of it in the early stages, and they now feel bound by a desire for internal continuity to keep defending those early mistakes, even to the present day (notice how they struck a compromise between the 5-mile Executor and the correct 11-mile Executor by simply averaging to get 8 miles ).

The worst thing is that only diehard fanboys rate the official stuff anywhere near direct inspection of the films anyway, so they are annoying most of their broad fanbase in order to appease the fanboys. My brother is a good example of a typical SW fan; he is not hardcore and when presented with the "5-mile SSD" quotes, he simply snorted and said that any idiot could look at TESB and see that it's wrong. Outside fanboy havens like theforce.net's forums, Lucasfilm's spirited defense of WEG's residual mistakes only causes ordinary fans to look down on the official literature. The hiring of Curtis Saxton for the AOTC ICS was an encouraging step in the right direction, but it remains to be seen whether that will continue.

Darth Wong wrote:The hiring of Curtis Saxton for the AOTC ICS was an encouraging step in the right direction, but it remains to be seen whether that will continue.

IMHO, the fact that Acclamator-class, Mandator-class and Procurator-class is mentioned in the AOTC ICS is a pretty good sign.

hmm 38cm cannons.... good grief thts a big bore