StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Despite evidence to the contrary, some minimalists (Thrawn McEwok (Arkady Hodge)) still cling to the unsupported idea that the term "Star Destroyer" is only a scary-sounding brand name, a general term for large dagger-shaped warships with no upper limit. They reject Saxton's two-tiered classification system, and claim that the Executor is a Star Destroyer, NOT a Star Dreadnaught. This is basically outright dismissal of a canon source (ITW) in favor of the numerous EU sources that call the ship a "Super-class Star Destroyer" (quantity over quality).

The Providence and Recusant-classes have already been labeled as "Destroyers" However, while they are clearly within the same size range as established Star Destroyers, the lack of the word "Star" (which I suspect was removed as a "compromise" between Saxton's writing and long-held brain bugs about what Star Destroyers should look like) in their names gave minimalists a loophole which they could use to stick to their dagger-shaped brand name theory.

A minimalist retard at TF.net by the name of EH_Pilot has posted an alternative, but still idiotic argument that ISDs ARE Star Dreadnaughts. That crap is irrelevant here, because what I want to talk about is this interesting little quote:

+http://boards.theforce.net/message.asp? ... t=21864648

EH_Pilot wrote:Move the clock forward a couple thousand years to the Battle of Coruscant in the Clone Wars. With the ROTS DVD release approaching, Lucas recently made comments about the amount of film that was cut, commenting on how there was about an hour's worth of film shot between the begining scroll and "the crash of the Star Destroyer". That's right, Lucas called Greivous' flagship a Star Destroyer... weird, isn't it?

Can anyone verify if Lucas actually said this? Also, are Lucas's comments considered G-canon? If this Lucas quote is canon, the minimalists no longer have that loophole. The existence of Providence-class Star Destroyers would prove that the term isn't just a cool name for ships with a general dagger shape.

Quotes are not canon, I'm afraid. Even though they can be used to back up a viewpoint.

Even so, there's a quote from Empire #29 about how the Empire can sneak "a frigate or a small destroyer" through a debris-field without anyone knowing, so 'destroyer' is also used as a term.

I also believe the 'Star'-prefix on things are there to seperate certain ships from less powerful ones. But that's just me.

In Rogue Planet by Greg Bear it says

"It's a dream, but an achievable dream, given certain advances in hypermeter technology." Page 39.

This referees to some one saying the death star (or a deathstar like weapon) is too big. It is possible that the same advances that made the deathstar possible also made larger “Star" prefix ships possible or economical.

Glimmervoid wrote:In Rogue Planet by Greg Bear it says

"It's a dream, but an achievable dream, given certain advances in hypermeter technology." Page 39.

This referees to some one saying the death star (or a deathstar like weapon) is too big. It is possible that the same advances that made the deathstar possible also made larger “Star" prefix ships possible or economical.

You are reading the same argument, right?

Your point is a leap of logic, unless it's spoken by someone who has intimate knowledge with starship construction. It rates up there with the claim of the Executor bankrupting the GE. The engineering for the Star-class vessel was known, given the usage of vessels within the Clone wars. Unless anyone wants to claim that there was a sudden leap in both structural and power in less then a decade...at most. And given what we have seen in for shows during even points in the OR as far back as the Sith Wars and such...this claim become even more ludicrous....given we saw fleets of vessels with at least comparable firepower. So economics is not the point but the fact there was no military build up, which was unprecedented during the Clone Wars and the New Order.

And the Death Star quote is ignorant in the thought of creating such a device within the confines of a far smaller power was believed eminently possible.

As to Jim, no, Lucas' quotes depend upon whether he is dictating policy or just commenting on an image. For commenting it gives avenues upon insight, not much more.

It was said by Sienar who owns a star ship manufacturing company who was talking to Tarkin. And it was a general comment on the topic rather than a direct response the discussion in general. But I see your point. Forgot to give a time scale also it was between TFM and AOTC.

Its kind of hard to argue definitively for Saxton's classification when no one has obeyed it before or since and the G-canon TESB script, novel, and film definitively establishes HIMS Executor as a "Star Destroyer."

hard to decide. the Black Fleet trilogy refers it to a "Executor-class Star Destroyer"

i'll side with "Executor-class Commandship"

Illuminatus Primus wrote:Its kind of hard to argue definitively for Saxton's classification when no one has obeyed it before or since and the G-canon TESB script, novel, and film definitively establishes HIMS Executor as a "Star Destroyer."

Brand name. The Executor was branded as a Star Destroyer, so as to echo the ISD type of dagger ship, thus hopefully buying support in the Senate and Imperial procurement officers.

I would have called the HIMS Executor "OH KRIFF!"

Whenever I hear the term "Imperator Class Star Dreadnaught" or the like, I imagine a guy in coke bottle glasses held together with tape, saying it in a really nasally voice...

You mean like me, with worse glasses?

I don't get it. How is it more nerdy than 'Iowa-class fast battleship'?

PainRack wrote:

Illuminatus Primus wrote:Its kind of hard to argue definitively for Saxton's classification when no one has obeyed it before or since and the G-canon TESB script, novel, and film definitively establishes HIMS Executor as a "Star Destroyer."

Brand name. The Executor was branded as a Star Destroyer, so as to echo the ISD type of dagger ship, thus hopefully buying support in the Senate and Imperial procurement officers.

Brand name reflects corporate use. Unless the trademark was successfully transfered in law from Rendili to KDY and then later back to Rendili its hard to argue for that.

Where did this term Star Dreadnought come from? I don't follow the EU and I don't remember it being used in the films - what was wrong with 'Super Star Destroyer'? I'd imagine thats what almost every common fan would know the ship as - to change it now would only lead to confusion.

In the old Marvel SW comics, the term 'battlecruiser' and 'battleship' were used to describe ships like the Executor (i.e ships larger than ISDs).

From what I understand, one of the toy manufacturers wanted to make a toy based on the Ex but didn't like the "aggressive" terms, so they called the toy a "Super Star Destroyer" (No, I'm not joking, that was their reasoning for it. Because we all know 'destroyer' is less harmful than 'battlecruiser' and 'battleship').

Then it got used in ROTJ (by a Rebel admiral, and there's no indication he was not using it as a slang-term), and basically, WEG perpetuated this term.

I believe Saxton used the 'battlecruiser'-term for the Executor until soemthing happened to make him change his mind, and for the ITW:OT, the term Star Dreadnought (or Dreadnaught, being the American spelling) was used to describe the Ex. (Note 'Star Dreadnought' had already been written in the AOTC:ICS book, so it wasn't a completely new term.)
Imperial Battleships and Battlecruisers had also been mentioned in materials preceding the Executor's debut, even predating most Marvel sources.
Sadly, WEG and WEG-derived material has been allowed to sink the 'SSD'-term into people's heads, until it seemed the most natural term for ships bigger than Star Destroyers.

Basically, before the DK books and Saxton's involvement, the old line went:

Corvette, Frigate, Star Destroyer, Super Star Destroyer (the last two covering all kinds of big warships, and the older 'battlecruiser' and 'battleship' mentions being ignored.)

Now, we have explicit mentions of:

Corvette, Star Frigate, Star Destroyer, Star Cruiser, Star Battlecruiser, Battleship, Star Dreadnought (with 'Dreadnought' being a term for 'Battleship with heavy guns')

But of course, they're all Star Destroyers, 'cus WEG said so!!!1111 *fapfapfapfapfap*

Thanks for the write-up - to be honest I was raised watching ROTJ with the name 'Super Star Destroyer' and to me that is what it will always be called. It's such a cool name IMO. I can see where people are coming from with ref. to 'destroyer' and 'dreadnought' but to be honest I think we should stick to the name given to it in the film, not the EU in this case. Why change such a cool sounding name?

^ Only thing I might add is "Escort Frigate" between Corvette and Star Frigate. A Nebulon-B isn't exactly prepared to duke it out with an Acclamator.

And then you have the Marauder Corvette in the grey area as either a heavy corvette or a light Escort Frigate. The various "cruisers" from WEG sources fall in the Frigate range (though in its day the "Dreadnaught" class heavy cruiser was the heaviest warship with a long-range hyperdrive, so it may itself have been considered a Star Cruiser then and a Star Frigate post Clone Wars). 1 km-plus is a Star Destroyer or Star Cruiser, and anything bigger than that is often called a "Super Star Destroyer" despite immense diversity in sizes and roles. Any fool can see it's not a technical term in-universe any more than "super battle droid" or "X-wing class" but aparently if it's in the movies, it must be more technicl than anything in any EU. Especially if it's written by that devil in human flesh, Dr. Saxton.

but to be honest I think we should stick to the name given to it in the film

In that case, SSD should be out since both Vader and Leia called it a 'Star Destroyer' in ESB.

'Super Star Destroyer' sounds just like a really big destroyer, the Executor far exceeds any such range, both in terms of size and firepower. it's like calling a skyscraper a 'super apartment'.

though in its day the "Dreadnaught" class heavy cruiser was the heaviest warship with a long-range hyperdrive, so it may itself have been considered a Star Cruiser then and a Star Frigate post Clone Wars

That would have been a long time before the CW, since Procurator Star Battlecruisers and Mandator Star Dreadnoughts existed prior to the CW. But I see what you mean, when something is supplanted or phased out by a much larger and more powerful ship, yet is still retained, the formal designation would have to change to avoid confusion and mistakes.

I.e. if say the development of warships led to ships many times longer than Executors and many times more powerful being labled 'battleships', the Exs would have to be 'demoted' to 'battlecruisers' or even 'cruisers' if they intended to keep them. Smaller ships like ISDs would in turn most certainly be demoted to 'frigates', at best.

VT-16 wrote:

but to be honest I think we should stick to the name given to it in the film

In that case, SSD should be out since both Vader and Leia called it a 'Star Destroyer' in ESB.

But in ROTJ - the latest film in the timeline of the franchise - they call it a 'super star destroyer'.

And it's such a cool name! 'Concentrate all fire on that super star destroyer was a cool quote from Akbar and really got the heart pumping in the middle of the battle when watching it those first few times - lets keep it at least partially accurate!

Edit - I didn't realise that people out there didn't think 'Super Star Destroyer' sounded good. Ah well!

Stark wrote:I don't get it. How is it more nerdy than 'Iowa-class fast battleship'?

Because it's high end nitpicking about something that's pure fiction?

And there's nothing inherently wrong with being a nerd, as long as you admit it.

Here I agree with Ali G, before I came to this forum I had never heard of the term "Star Dreadnaught" or thought of this command ship as anything other than a (or the) "Super Star Destroyer." Just going by the movies one has no idea of all these other technical terms, hence the nerdiness level required.

Edit: To help clarify the nerd comment, imagine two fans watching ANH. One of them says, during the scene where the Troopers first storm the Blockade Runner. "Why can't those Stormtroopers hit the main characters with their blasters? Did they forget how to aim after this scene?"
Then the second fan snaps at the first, "Actually it's a BlasTech E-11 Blaster Rifle!"

Hope that helps.

But in ROTJ - the latest film in the timeline of the franchise - they call it a 'super star destroyer'.

Yes, and in the latest DK books detailing the worlds of the films, it's called a 'Star Dreadnought'. That's more recent than ROTJ. ;)

I have no problem with the phrase 'SSD', and it makes sense for IU military personnel giving it nicknames like that when they don't want to spell out "Sir, it's an Executor-class Star Dreadnought, Sir!"

That still doesn't mean it's designated an SSD any more than B-2 battle droids are designated 'Super Battle Droids'. (I'm glad they caught that one early ;)) Not to mention old 'Rolling Slabs' and 'Turbo Tank' (the A5 and A6 Juggernaut HAVw)

Seriously, most of this debacle comes from the sloppyness of early SW continuity and the long drought between trilogies. WEG had its grip on things and most other sources simply copied what they wrote. As long as the fans were buying, they didn't care.

Just going by the movies one has no idea of all these other technical terms, hence the nerdiness level required.

Word. :P

Still, we got 'Star Frigate' as well as 'Light Destroyer' for ROTS, and why stop with terms based on RL after you reach 'destroyer'? If certain detractors can accept 'corvette', 'frigate', 'destroyer' and 'cruiser' in a fictional universe, why can't they accept 'battlecruiser', 'battleship' and 'dreadnought'?

Like walking onto a battlefield and demanding that everyone start calling self-propelled artillery 'slow-ass super tanks'. :P

Well I don't know what DK is, but if its canon [I don't know the different canon levels here though] then I guess that's that.

Either way for me and the non super-hardcore [no pun intended of course ] fans I think that it will always be known as a SSD not because we are trying to contridict Lucas policy but because its what we have been brought up to say from seeing it in ROTJ.

DK is EU since it's not the movies, but it's higher up on the importance-scale, since it's movie-related.
(Everything that's not movies or movie-production related is EU. Gonna be fun to watch people discuss what the tv-shows are, since Lucas is a script-writer for at least one of them and most of the movie crew is working on both. Still, it's TV, it's EU. Thems the rules.)

Either way for me and the non super-hardcore [no pun intended of course ] fans I think that it will always be known as a SSD not because we are trying to contridict Lucas policy but because its what we have been brought up to say from seeing it in ROTJ.

That's cool. Just don't change articles on sites like SW Wiki because you dislike the term and the author who popularized it (like some people...) ;)

That would have been a long time before the CW, since Procurator Star Battlecruisers and Mandator Star Dreadnoughts existed prior to the CW.

The source that introduces these also notes their short-range hyperdrives. They are large warships, and so they are the first examples of the Clone Wars-Galactic Civil War scaled-up name scheme, but they remained system-defense vessels. Which is why Dreadnaughts were the big fish until the Lucrehulks were retrofitted for combat, and why the occurance in AotC is the first Republic cross-system military engagement in a thousand years.

Ah, yes, that's true. Hadn't thought about it that way.