StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I was quite baffled to see the humble Imperator-class Star Destroyer nominated by many as the best sci-fi cruiser ever, as it actually only is a destroyer, a mere escort vessel!!

The Empire's true cruisers are not the ISDs, but 2-3 times as long and sighted numerous times in Dark Empire.


The only Star Destroyer which qualifies as a cruiser could be the Allegiance-class, which could be roughly analogous to the Dauntless-class Light Cruiser of Battlefleet Gothic - a ship with the armaments of a cruiser but the size and speed of a destroyer.

Thread moved, but I'm leaving a shadow-topic. This is in response to another thread in the Other Sci-Fi forum, but discusses only SW, so I'm moving it to "Pure SW" with a shadow topic where it was originally posted in the "Other Sci-Fi" forum.

Simon H.Johansen wrote:I was quite baffled to see the humble Imperator-class Star Destroyer nominated by many as the best sci-fi cruiser ever, as it actually only is a destroyer, a mere escort vessel!!

The Empire's true cruisers are not the ISDs, but 2-3 times as long and sighted numerous times in Dark Empire.

It has to do with a lot of fans predjudice against the EU and it's authors.

But you're right, they're labeled destroyers and as such are not cruisers. the big boys are much larger than that. Curtis Saxton's site has en excellent page on warships giving them their proper classification.

Simon H.Johansen wrote:I was quite baffled to see the humble Imperator-class Star Destroyer nominated by many as the best sci-fi cruiser ever, as it actually only is a destroyer, a mere escort vessel!!

The Empire's true cruisers are not the ISDs, but 2-3 times as long and sighted numerous times in Dark Empire.


The only Star Destroyer which qualifies as a cruiser could be the Allegiance-class, which could be roughly analogous to the Dauntless-class Light Cruiser of Battlefleet Gothic - a ship with the armaments of a cruiser but the size and speed of a destroyer.

That is incorrect. A Cruiser is something that is meant as both an escort for larger ships or it can operate as its own offensive ship with lesser escorts for it. The Imperial Class most definately fits this bill. It is the quint essential Heavy Cuiser. Its one of the most visible combat ships of the Empire and can defeat almost anything else the enemy throws at it. Sure the Empire has some very nice Pocket Battleships (Alliegance) and some rather nice Battleships (Executor, Sovereign, Eclipse), but the Imperial is one of their most well known ships and is the traditional offensive ship of the Empire. The Victory would be the Light Cruiser used more often then not as combined firepower in a larger fleet, rarely ever the lead of a main offensive battle group. The Carrack and Strike cruisers are the standard Destroyer Escorts.

Stormbringer wrote:

Simon H.Johansen wrote:I was quite baffled to see the humble Imperator-class Star Destroyer nominated by many as the best sci-fi cruiser ever, as it actually only is a destroyer, a mere escort vessel!!

The Empire's true cruisers are not the ISDs, but 2-3 times as long and sighted numerous times in Dark Empire.

It has to do with a lot of fans predjudice against the EU and it's authors.

But you're right, they're labeled destroyers and as such are not cruisers. the big boys are much larger than that. Curtis Saxton's site has en excellent page on warships giving them their proper classification.

Just because they have the label destroyer does not make them so. The Carrack and Strike ships are labeled as cruisers, yet they are less then the Imperial class.

Different scifi use their own terms for ships. While the standard convention is
Corvette
Frigate
Destroyer
Cruiser
Battleship

You will see all sorts of stuff

One I saw was like this.

Cruiser
Corvette
Frigate
Destroyer
Juggernaught

Star Wars uses its own titles, but the proper conversion places the ISD as a Heavy Cruiser.

That's all EU crap made up after the fact. They butchered proper naval terminology and indeed consitancy within the EU itself.

I'll buy your explanation of them being cruisers. They do fill that role although that's become more and more of the role of a destroyer in modern naval warfare. It's become as much an issue of scale as anything.

ISDs being cruisers did not originate in the EU. They were called "Imperial Cruisers" in A New Hope.

Jim Raynor wrote:ISDs being cruisers did not originate in the EU. They were called "Imperial Cruisers" in A New Hope.

Where at exactly? I always saw them referred to as destroyers.

Stormbringer wrote:

Jim Raynor wrote:ISDs being cruisers did not originate in the EU. They were called "Imperial Cruisers" in A New Hope.

Where at exactly? I always saw them referred to as destroyers.

When the Millenium Falcon's escaping from Tatooine, the ISDs are called cruisers. The term "Star Destroyer" wasn't even used until TESB.

The Queen's yacht in TPM was referred to as a "Naboo cruiser." I personally failr to see why Dr. Saxton clings to one instance of naval terminology, Star Destroyer, while ignoring the various other ship names. The Executor is referred to as a "Star Destroyer" too, yet it is (what?) eleven times the length of the ISD. As much as I admire most of Dr. Saxton's work, I can't say I agree with him in this instance. Trying to apply traditional naval terminology to Star Wars is problematic at best.

I actually see it a different way. 'Star Destroyer' seems to be its own title, regardless of what 'destroyer' means. To use the list Alyeska posted:

Corvette
Frigate
Destroyer
Cruiser
Battleship
STAR DESTROYER

Of course, it might not actually be in that position, but my point is that ISDs might actually be a completely different set of ship type.

Or am I rambling again?

Currald wrote:The Queen's yacht in TPM was referred to as a "Naboo cruiser." I personally failr to see why Dr. Saxton clings to one instance of naval terminology, Star Destroyer, while ignoring the various other ship names. The Executor is referred to as a "Star Destroyer" too, yet it is (what?) eleven times the length of the ISD. As much as I admire most of Dr. Saxton's work, I can't say I agree with him in this instance. Trying to apply traditional naval terminology to Star Wars is problematic at best.

The Executor would be best classed as a Battleship with C&C facilities. It obviously is not anywhere near the power of a Sovereign or Eclipse, but its sheer size and power are still quite impressive. It is comparable to the lesser Battleships of WW2 that still outclassed any cruiser. Just because you built a monster 4 quadroople turret 18" ship doesn't make the 3 tripple 12" ships not battleships. It just means you have a range of battleships and any of them can beat the crap out of anything less then a battleship.

In many past debates it and the alleginance were both lumped togather as light cruisers like the dauntless light cruiser of battlefleet Gothic.

IG-88E wrote:I actually see it a different way. 'Star Destroyer' seems to be its own title, regardless of what 'destroyer' means. To use the list Alyeska posted:

Corvette
Frigate
Destroyer
Cruiser
Battleship
STAR DESTROYER

Of course, it might not actually be in that position, but my point is that ISDs might actually be a completely different set of ship type.

Or am I rambling again?

No, its a perfect example of how people use terms differently. Both the Imperial and Victory get the term Star Destroyer.

Though when applying standard naval conventions you quickly realize the ISD can't be more then a battleship. The ISD obviously is less then a BB, but its also more then just a mere escort like the term Destroyer would indicate. The best place is Cruiser, and given its relative power over other ships, Heavy Cruiser is the most logical position.

Didn't Saxton hypothesize that 'Star' makes the ship greater than its designation would seem- i.e. a Star Destroyer is an order of magnitude greater than a simple Destroyer.

Vympel wrote:Didn't Saxton hypothesize that 'Star' makes the ship greater than its designation would seem- i.e. a Star Destroyer is an order of magnitude greater than a simple Destroyer.

That just doesn't work. The ISD is not a destroyer. It does not escort ships as its primary function. It is typically the force flag of most combat groups and it takes part actively in offensive combat actions more then it does defensive ones.

Well, the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke is called a destroyer and it has land attack cruise missiles as well as its AEGIS system, yes?

The Project 956 Sovremenny-class is a destroyer and it's arsenal is geared towards surface attack (Moskit missiles)

Vympel wrote:Didn't Saxton hypothesize that 'Star' makes the ship greater than its designation would seem- i.e. a Star Destroyer is an order of magnitude greater than a simple Destroyer.

No, that was someone else's idea. Saxton believes that "star" just means its a spacecraft, and that "Star Destroyer" is a destroyer. I don't have the Episode 2 ICS, but I heard he also wrote about "Star Battleships" and "Star Dreadnaughts" in there.

Vympel wrote:Well, the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke is called a destroyer and it has land attack cruise missiles as well as its AEGIS system, yes?

The Project 956 Sovremenny-class is a destroyer and it's arsenal is geared towards surface attack (Moskit missiles)

Assault is a different task from naval combat. It is smart to somewhat spread out your weapons so you don't risk loosing them. Even then the Burke is primarily meant to defend the larger ships. The newest version of the Burke even REMOVED Harpoon missiles to add anti-submarine choppers to the design.

Even then, assault is primarily for the larger ships. Cruisers have the bigger "guns" making assault better, Carriers have the long range strike capability. Then you got the BBs that just clobber the place.

How often do we really see the likes of lesser ships conducting assault operations on a planet? Usually only when that is the ONLY ships available. How often do we see them conducting the offensive operations? Only when thats all that is available. The ISD is the text book Heavy Cruiser. Big enough to threaten just about any ships, but not quite all. Its the sybmol of the nation, it can do just about everything and is quite deadly against even larger ships once in numbers. The Victory is the perfect Light Cruiser. Its meant to conduct offensive operations and act as close fire support for ships like ISDs.

Anything less then a Victory hardly ever is noted for its combat capability. They almost always just escort the larger ships.

Alyeska wrote:
Assault is a different task from naval combat. It is smart to somewhat spread out your weapons so you don't risk loosing them. Even then the Burke is primarily meant to defend the larger ships. The newest version of the Burke even REMOVED Harpoon missiles to add anti-submarine choppers to the design.

Even then, assault is primarily for the larger ships. Cruisers have the bigger "guns" making assault better, Carriers have the long range strike capability. Then you got the BBs that just clobber the place.

How often do we really see the likes of lesser ships conducting assault operations on a planet? Usually only when that is the ONLY ships available. How often do we see them conducting the offensive operations? Only when thats all that is available. The ISD is the text book Heavy Cruiser. Big enough to threaten just about any ships, but not quite all. Its the sybmol of the nation, it can do just about everything and is quite deadly against even larger ships once in numbers. The Victory is the perfect Light Cruiser. Its meant to conduct offensive operations and act as close fire support for ships like ISDs.

Anything less then a Victory hardly ever is noted for its combat capability. They almost always just escort the larger ships.

Ah k fair enuf. What do we call the Allegiance? Battle cruiser maybe? *shrug*

Vympel wrote:

Alyeska wrote:
Assault is a different task from naval combat. It is smart to somewhat spread out your weapons so you don't risk loosing them. Even then the Burke is primarily meant to defend the larger ships. The newest version of the Burke even REMOVED Harpoon missiles to add anti-submarine choppers to the design.

Even then, assault is primarily for the larger ships. Cruisers have the bigger "guns" making assault better, Carriers have the long range strike capability. Then you got the BBs that just clobber the place.

How often do we really see the likes of lesser ships conducting assault operations on a planet? Usually only when that is the ONLY ships available. How often do we see them conducting the offensive operations? Only when thats all that is available. The ISD is the text book Heavy Cruiser. Big enough to threaten just about any ships, but not quite all. Its the sybmol of the nation, it can do just about everything and is quite deadly against even larger ships once in numbers. The Victory is the perfect Light Cruiser. Its meant to conduct offensive operations and act as close fire support for ships like ISDs.

Anything less then a Victory hardly ever is noted for its combat capability. They almost always just escort the larger ships.

Ah k fair enuf. What do we call the Allegiance? Battle cruiser maybe? *shrug*

Battle Cruiser is somewhat of an odd term. Traditionally it has meant a ship with cruiser armor and speed but Battleship level weaponry. However this traditional definition seems to have been morfing over time. The Soviets built ships that were for the most part considered battlecruisers. They are large and powerfu, but not quite battleship level.

So you have two terms really. Battle Cruiser or Pocket Battleship. Both denote a ship of high levels of power beyond that of a Heavy Cruiser, but still not equal to a Battleship. So the Alliegance is would most likely be a Battle Cruiser/Pocket Battelship.

as for battleships, I think the Giel-class will do, this 6 km long vessel seems right for battleships, the Executor/Soverigan/Eclipse all can fit a higher class, Saxton did make them command ship.

starfury wrote:as for battleships, I think the Giel-class will do, this 6 km long vessel seems right for battleships, the Executor/Soverigan/Eclipse all can fit a higher class, Saxton did make them command ship.

Command ships do not equate to Battleships.

The Giel would be a border line ship. It would still be significantly outgunned by the larger Battleships, but it would still outgun lesser ships.

The Alliegance would be a Battle Cruiser while the Giel could be considered a Pocket Battleship.

I'd just stick ISD into a bog-standard Cruiser slot, with the Alliegence a heavy cruiser.

Howedar wrote:I'd just stick ISD into a bog-standard Cruiser slot, with the Alliegence a heavy cruiser.

Doesn't work that well. The Alliegance was not a common enough ship for that role. When you compare it to the larger and smaller ships you see that it is significantly more powerful. Battle Cruiser is the best position for the Alliegance.