StarDestroyer.Net BBS

The 17.6 km long warship VS the 8km (Most common number I have seen) New Republic Viscount Battleship.

From what I know about the Viscount it was built by the Calamari so it might have the same redundancy system as the MC Star Cruisers.
Then I have heard the SSD hasn't fared well against the MC Star Cruisers. The Mon Remonda managed to hold out against a SSD by rotating and presenting fresh shields when it was fired upon.
A MC90 managed to fight against an SSD to a stand still in another engagement?

To me the SSD doesn't sound that impressive, except for it size, but the Viscount has likely several times the firepower of the MC90, so it might be able to break the shield of the SSD in an open engagement.
Because of lack of information on the Viscount when it comes to its weapons it is hard to know how a battle between these two giants would go so what do you think?

What is the Viscount? Where is it from in the EU?

The Unifying Force implies that the Viscount is also a star dreadnaught.

Given the hazyness of what we know about both ships, I'd say its too hard to tell.

I just read the thing that mentions the Viscount. It doesn't give any info other than it exists. And SSDs are severly underrated in the EU. Every two-bit warlord has them and until the Lusankya's dramatic end, they become a nonfactor.

Trooper TK12746 wrote:I just read the thing that mentions the Viscount. It doesn't give any info other than it exists. And SSDs are severly underrated in the EU. Every two-bit warlord has them and until the Lusankya's dramatic end, they become a nonfactor.

Every two bit Warlord? Outside of DE, 'm only aware of Zijin's Iron Fist, Dalaa's Knighthammer, and the Lusankya (I also seem to recall Pellaeon's remnant owning one.) Considering the sheer number of warlords post-ROTJ, thats not an unrealistic number.

Regardless, the Viscount is said to match up against an SSD. Of course this is the 8 klick SSD....so either we say its not a match for a real Executor or we say that the Viscount DOES match up against the Executor, it just has greater numbers of and more powerful weapons.

Which is quite possible, the Viscount was built about 20 years after the Executors were sent into production. And the NR has made quite a bit of advances in military technology over the Empire.

Pure Sabacc wrote:

Trooper TK12746 wrote:I just read the thing that mentions the Viscount. It doesn't give any info other than it exists. And SSDs are severly underrated in the EU. Every two-bit warlord has them and until the Lusankya's dramatic end, they become a nonfactor.

Every two bit Warlord? Outside of DE, 'm only aware of Zijin's Iron Fist, Dalaa's Knighthammer, and the Lusankya (I also seem to recall Pellaeon's remnant owning one.) Considering the sheer number of warlords post-ROTJ, thats not an unrealistic number.

The Pentastar Alignment, consisting of a large chunk of the Outer Rim, had one, the Reaper, later captured and renamed the Gaurdian by the NR, I think. The Black Fleet that the Yeventha captured supposedly had three(!), although only one was ever talked about. By th NJO, the Remnant had also either found, repaired, or built one of their own.

We really don't no much about the Viscount, and the uneven treatment of the Executor class in the EU really makes it hard to determine what would happen in such an encounter.

I only remember the Mon Remonda taking on an SSD in Darksaber, in which KJA's shitty writing crippled the ship. He had it only starting forest fires from orbital bombardment, and had TIE Bombers exploding in the hangar cripple the ship. Such shitty writing.

That wasn't Mon Remonda, it was called Galatic Voyager and was an inch from being dead, it's shields where battered down in mere monents of GV ebtering the fray, but Callista set off a TIE Bomber Squadrons worth of explosions right next to rear bulkhead causing the engines to be destroyed, and at that moment the NR fleet arrived at Yavin.

Regardless, the Viscount is said to match up against an SSD. Of course this is the 8 klick SSD....so either we say its not a match for a real Executor or we say that the Viscount DOES match up against the Executor, it just has greater numbers of and more powerful weapons.

Where does it say it is a match for an SSD?

Which is quite possible, the Viscount was built about 20 years after the Executors were sent into production. And the NR has made quite a bit of advances in military technology over the Empire.

Like what? The only advances they made were tailored to vong weaknesses and useless against normal tech ships. And the Empire recieved all the NR info on the Vong and their tech advances to combat them. And the Executor class would have been updated with any useful tech advances by Remnant. It would be their flagship after all.[/quote]

Jadeite wrote:I only remember the Mon Remonda taking on an SSD in Darksaber, in which KJA's shitty writing crippled the ship. He had it only starting forest fires from orbital bombardment, and had TIE Bombers exploding in the hangar cripple the ship. Such shitty writing.

Actually, someone, Vympel maybe, determined that starting forest fires visible from orbit would be indicative of gigaton level firepower at least.

Do you mean the Defender class New republic SSD, when you say star dreadnought?

the .303 bookworm wrote:Do you mean the Defender class New republic SSD, when you say star dreadnought?

Star Dreadnought is the proper designation for the Executor-class command ship and other super battleships.

The Original Nex wrote:

the .303 bookworm wrote:Do you mean the Defender class New republic SSD, when you say star dreadnought?

Star Dreadnought is the proper designation for the Executor-class command ship and other super battleships.

Sort of, since its debatable whether it really qualifies as a "Dreadnought" in the naval sense. It may be less a designation/classification and more of a indication of scale and power.

Do you mean it has too little or too much to qualify as a dreadnaught (given what the dreadnaughts of the clone wars were)?

Until you're talking about Star Dreadnoughts of the Mandator-Class, the classical SW-Dreadnought is a picket-cruiser of the Dreadnought-Class, not a Dreadnought in the sense or "super-powerful-warship".

That's what I mean. The picket ships. SW butchered ship classes. Trying to figure out the IMperial classification system is so confusing.

I don't know if this site's stats are accurate, but if they are, then the Viscount would seem to have half the overall weaponry of even the 8-KM SSD. Still, Chris O'Farrell has a point with advances in starship technologies. Look at the Allegiance-class Star Destroyer. It's probably ten times more powerful than an ISD and yet it's hull form isn't disgustingly bigger. And that's just from a bigger reactor. They may also have had advances in hypermatter annihilation rates.

Quadlok wrote:Actually, someone, Vympel maybe, determined that starting forest fires visible from orbit would be indicative of gigaton level firepower at least.

I think that was Howedar.

the .303 bookworm wrote:Do you mean the Defender class New republic SSD, when you say star dreadnought?

The Defender-class is a Star Destroyer, I think.

Trooper TK12746 wrote:That's what I mean. The picket ships. SW butchered ship classes. Trying to figure out the IMperial classification system is so confusing.

Not really. Saxton's "Star" classification is a pretty good place to start. You can just rationalize the ill-fitting classifications as simply being the in-house scaling of lesser manufacturers and not that of the Imperial Starfleet.

Trooper TK12746 wrote:Do you mean it has too little or too much to qualify as a dreadnaught (given what the dreadnaughts of the clone wars were)?

I'm talking the traditional classification applied to Dreadnoughts (chiefly being a battleship with an uniform primary battery. There were other traits but most of these resulted mainly from technological innovations that wouldn't neccsarily exist in the Empire.) as well as the fact that canonically they exhibit roles that are wildly inconsistent with what battleships were known for (such as in ROTJ, ,as well as the carrier capability.)

Depending on who you ask, the Executor has been classified a carrier, battlecruiser, fast battleship, or just simply "command ship."

The term "Star Dreadnought" isn't so much a classification as a description for a vessel of immense size and power (the Executor technically does classify as one of the largest and/or most powerful of its "type". Don't forget that there are larger vessels (including the Executor) that are canonically classified as "Star Destroyers" too.

As for "Dreadnaught heavy cruisers", they don't really apply to what I was saying either (they're probably more akin to "coast defense battleships" or something, which were generlaly much smaller and lighter than "true" battleships.

applejack wrote: Not really. Saxton's "Star" classification is a pretty good place to start. You can just rationalize the ill-fitting classifications as simply being the in-house scaling of lesser manufacturers and not that of the Imperial Starfleet.

Well sure you can, jkust as long as you realize that its pretty arbitrary at that point. (which is generally true of most of the available classificatiosn really. SW naval terminology tends to be just as confusing, contradictory, and arbitrary as it has proven IRL. )

Okay, laugh if you want, but where does this 'dreadnoughts have uniform battery' thing come from? I thought it was just the name of a innovative class, that changed everyone's idea of battleship design. It didn't have a uniform battery, either, having both 12 and 3 inch guns. A 'dreadnought' is a stupid type-name (since all dreadnoughts are really 'dreadnought-grade battleships' or something) but technically ALL battleships of that period are 'dreadnoughts', right?

The Rendelli built dreadnaught is in the star frigate range, not picket cruiser.

The idea of a Defender class star destroyer is bullshit, WEG and later WOTC fucked up. It was the Nebula class star Destroyer, the Defender class carrier.

For some reason, bythe time of the Galactic Invasion the republic uses the term star defender instead of star dreadnaught. Probably politics at play.

Stark wrote:Okay, laugh if you want, but where does this 'dreadnoughts have uniform battery' thing come from? I thought it was just the name of a innovative class, that changed everyone's idea of battleship design. It didn't have a uniform battery, either, having both 12 and 3 inch guns. A 'dreadnought' is a stupid type-name (since all dreadnoughts are really 'dreadnought-grade battleships' or something) but technically ALL battleships of that period are 'dreadnoughts', right?

IIRC, battleships used to have A LOT more calibers of guns on them apart from the two that you mentioned. The "uniform battery" thing refers to their main anti-ship armaments, namely the 12-inchers. The three-inchers were kept to ward off subs, destroyers, and torpedo boats. HMS Dreadnaught was the first ship to have an all big gun primary armament. So, every battleship that came afterward that implemented the uniform primary guns philosophy were called "Dreadnaughts".

Stark wrote:Okay, laugh if you want, but where does this 'dreadnoughts have uniform battery' thing come from? I thought it was just the name of a innovative class, that changed everyone's idea of battleship design. It didn't have a uniform battery, either, having both 12 and 3 inch guns. A 'dreadnought' is a stupid type-name (since all dreadnoughts are really 'dreadnought-grade battleships' or something) but technically ALL battleships of that period are 'dreadnoughts', right?

Prior to the development of the British HMS "Dreadnought" (whose battery consisted of 10 12" guns - (Whereas "pre-dreadnought" battleships, such as the "Lord Nelson" class, which carried 4 12" guns and 10 9.2" guns) "Pre Dreadnought" vessels carried only a few "big guns" and a larger number of "medium" guns. The Dreadnought dispensed with the "medium" guns to make room for a larger number of heavy guns. The design was so effective that all battleships afterwards are generally known s "dreadnought" battleships (while those before are called "Pre-dreadnought.")

So really, "Dreadnought" and "battleship" are technically the same thing - "Dreadnought" is simply indicative of a particular kind of battleship.

Connor MacLeod wrote:

applejack wrote: Not really. Saxton's "Star" classification is a pretty good place to start. You can just rationalize the ill-fitting classifications as simply being the in-house scaling of lesser manufacturers and not that of the Imperial Starfleet.

Well sure you can, jkust as long as you realize that its pretty arbitrary at that point. (which is generally true of most of the available classificatiosn really. SW naval terminology tends to be just as confusing, contradictory, and arbitrary as it has proven IRL. )

Yeah, IIRC Saxton outright says that the naval scaling conventions are arbitrary at some part of the introduction to his Warships page. I just like the "Star" classification because it grounds how I can classify ships of SW.