StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Not in terms of raw firepower, but compared to other vessels?

Because in the EU, there is a vast range of seeming power scales, everything from the Spectre of the Past/Vision of the Future having 3 ISD's capable of taking on or at least giving a hell of a fight, to around 60 odd major warships of verious sizes from the Republic factions, all the way down to Darksaber and the Republic Flagship (which is probably comparable to an ISD) being 'taken down' by an Assault Frigate, a Neb-B, and four corvettes, despite gunship support.

In the middle you have the X-Wing series with their ISD's pretty much having to be countered by other ISD's (even a pair of VSD-II's were not an overwhelming threat to an ISD-II had it not already been engaged), although they have their anomlaous weakness to X-Wing torpedoes, and the Thrawn series, where three or more Assault Frigates or Dreadnaughts are needed to tie one down.

So, overall, what is the general consensus on how many and what types of ships are required to take down and ISD?

Bah, a lot of that is Eu minimalism or inflationism. In some parts they paint the ISD as something terribly weak, ((See your 'taken down' by an Assault Frigate, a Neb-B, and four corvettes, as an example))

In other parts, its woefully over inflated, staments of a single ISD being something that could tip the balance of a war.

Certainly, an ISD must be powerful. Other than the rather unique Executor-class commandship and all the Deathstar proyotypes/Eclipses/Sovereigns which never made it past the first week, it is the most powerful ship in the Empire's fleet. According to the ICS, they are equal to entire 'fleets' of smaller veseels. However, as seen in many minimalist EU books, 4-10 ships can count as a fleet.

So is there any consensus? No. But personally I'd go with a higher-range estimate.

an ISD1 is a bit more powerfull then a VnSD which could be taken down (in 1 on 1 situtation) by only warships of the same powerlevel (aka light cruisers and/or heavy destroyers) ISD2 is on the other hand a bit more powerfull then an ISD1.

Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba wrote:Certainly, an ISD must be powerful. Other than the rather unique Executor-class commandship and all the Deathstar proyotypes/Eclipses/Sovereigns which never made it past the first week, it is the most powerful ship in the Empire's fleet. According to the ICS, they are equal to entire 'fleets' of smaller veseels. However, as seen in many minimalist EU books, 4-10 ships can count as a fleet.

So is there any consensus? No. But personally I'd go with a higher-range estimate.

Err there are not the most powerful thing in the fleet. Go read SWTC and you will see loads of ships that are bigger (and presumably better armed) than an ISD.

Saxton has found over 23 classes bigger than an ISD listed with pictures on his website, most fitting in to the star cruiser bracket. There is also a quote from The Complete Locations of Star Wars which proves the existence of bigger ships.

“Eventually designated the Executor-class after the vessel assigned to Vader's personal use and commanded by Admiral Ozzel, it is usually referred to in rebel slang as a "Super Star Destroyer" -- a term that covers many warship classes bigger than a Star Destroyer, from Star Cruisers to ultimate Star Dreadnaughts like Executor. Over one hundred times more massive than a common Star Destroyer and almost 12 times as long, the Executor bristles with more than 5000 turbolasers and ion cannons, and carries wings of star fighters and two pre assembled garrison bases." - p. 47 (ITW:OT) p. 175 (CLOSW)

Glimmervoid wrote:There is also a quote from The Complete Locations of Star Wars which proves the existence of bigger ships.

“Eventually designated the Executor-class after the vessel assigned to Vader's personal use and commanded by Admiral Ozzel, it is usually referred to in rebel slang as a "Super Star Destroyer" -- a term that covers many warship classes bigger than a Star Destroyer, from Star Cruisers to ultimate Star Dreadnaughts like Executor. Over one hundred times more massive than a common Star Destroyer and almost 12 times as long, the Executor bristles with more than 5000 turbolasers and ion cannons, and carries wings of star fighters and two pre assembled garrison bases." - p. 47 (ITW:OT) p. 175 (CLOSW)

Actually, this quote is from Inside the Worlds of the Star Wars Trilogy.

EDIT: Wait, the Complete Locations has all the ITW stuff in it as well, right? You can find the quote in both books then.

The Imperial Star Destroyer for the longest time was the big fish in the pond. During the rebellion the Star Destroyers biggest opponent where converted Cruise Ships. Once the Rebellion gained some ground they began to make ships of their own that where comparable. However even in the modern EU, 30 years after ANH, the Imperial class is still considered one of the more powerful designs.

Ultimately, it depends on the Commander. In The Battle of Endor, the Imperials had dozens of Star Destroyers and the Executor and STILL managed to lose to the rebels wheras Thrawn caused massive devastation without having an Executor-class.

Grand Admiral Mango wrote:Ultimately, it depends on the Commander. In The Battle of Endor, the Imperials had dozens of Star Destroyers and the Executor and STILL managed to lose to the rebels wheras Thrawn caused massive devastation without having an Executor-class.

Making a comparison to the Battle of Endor is unfair. Even without the Death Star, the rebel fleet could have never faced the number of ISDs there. The combined confusion caused by Palpatine's death, the collapse of that Grand Admiral's Battle Meditation, and the destruction of the Second Death Star saved Ackbar's fleet, even if he did make a good showing, destroying the Executor and all.

Noble Ire wrote:

Grand Admiral Mango wrote:Ultimately, it depends on the Commander. In The Battle of Endor, the Imperials had dozens of Star Destroyers and the Executor and STILL managed to lose to the rebels wheras Thrawn caused massive devastation without having an Executor-class.

Making a comparison to the Battle of Endor is unfair. Even without the Death Star, the rebel fleet could have never faced the number of ISDs there. The combined confusion caused by Palpatine's death, the collapse of that Grand Admiral's Battle Meditation, and the destruction of the Second Death Star saved Ackbar's fleet, even if he did make a good showing, destroying the Executor and all.

Fair point: i neglected to take into account Palpatine's death and all. Still, my point is that had Thrawn been in command, the Rebels would have had their asses whipped (after the destuction of the Death Star and the Executor). As it was, they took advantage of the mass confusion and triumphed, despite their weaker force.

Fair point: i neglected to take into account Palpatine's death and all. Still, my point is that had Thrawn been in command, the Rebels would have had their asses whipped (after the destuction of the Death Star and the Executor). As it was, they took advantage of the mass confusion and triumphed, despite their weaker force.

Indeed, Pellaeon (who took informal command and order te retreat) may be a good man and a decent commander, but he's no Thrawn. Since the Empire still had at least ten ISDs at Endor after the DS exploded, victory would have been easy for someone like Thrawn, even against Ackbar, assuming the fleet was still coordinated enough to fall under a new commander for battle.

Noble Ire wrote:

Fair point: i neglected to take into account Palpatine's death and all. Still, my point is that had Thrawn been in command, the Rebels would have had their asses whipped (after the destuction of the Death Star and the Executor). As it was, they took advantage of the mass confusion and triumphed, despite their weaker force.

Indeed, Pellaeon (who took informal command and order te retreat) may be a good man and a decent commander, but he's no Thrawn. Since the Empire still had at least ten ISDs at Endor after the DS exploded, victory would have been easy for someone like Thrawn, even against Ackbar, assuming the fleet was still coordinated enough to fall under a new commander for battle.

My point exactly. It's not just the size or power of your tool but how you use it.

True but also depends on what state the Imperial fleet after the destruction of DS2 (phychologically) as good as Thrawn is (and he's really good) he couldn't win if Imperial fleet was in a state of chaos.

In the ROTJ novelization (which outranks lower EU sources), Admiral Ackbar refers to the ISDs as "supervessels" and says that there has never been a point-blank engagement of such vessels before. So while there are larger and more powerful vessels out there, ISDs are much more powerful than previous classes of warship and are part of a class which he calls "supervessels".

Based on other EU information, I would presume that by "supervessel", he refers to a ship that can single-handedly take on large numbers of vessels below this class. It isn't necessarily a size-based classification, since it does not appear to include the 2 mile wide Trade Federation battleships used in the Clone Wars. It may be that the ISD2 is just very densely packed with weaponry, whereas previous warships had a relatively large cargo capacity.

Darth Wong wrote:In the ROTJ novelization (which outranks lower EU sources), Admiral Ackbar refers to the ISDs as "supervessels" and says that there has never been a point-blank engagement of such vessels before. So while there are larger and more powerful vessels out there, ISDs are much more powerful than previous classes of warship and are part of a class which he calls "supervessels".

Doesn't the opening of RotS contradict this, and indicate that Ackbar just doesn't know what the hell he's talking about?

consequences wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:In the ROTJ novelization (which outranks lower EU sources), Admiral Ackbar refers to the ISDs as "supervessels" and says that there has never been a point-blank engagement of such vessels before. So while there are larger and more powerful vessels out there, ISDs are much more powerful than previous classes of warship and are part of a class which he calls "supervessels".

Doesn't the opening of RotS contradict this, and indicate that Ackbar just doesn't know what the hell he's talking about?

Possibly, unless Venator-class ships are much weaker than ISD2s, hence the "supervessel" distinction. This was something I initially thought of as a potential contradiction myself, and the "supervessel" thing is one way to reconcile it. It's pretty hard to imagine an admiral not knowing of the climactic last major engagement of the Clone Wars.

There are much larger ships then ISD's that sit between the Imperial and Executor classes.

But frankly they are very small in number and played little part in most of the Galactic Civil war, only really showing up in Dark Empire (and frankly I'm not complelty convinced every ship Dr Saxton claims is a new class IS a new class, though its very clear more then a few of them are).

With that said, the ISD was effectivly the ship of the line for the Galactic civil war for the Empire. It was part Battleship, part assault ship, part carrier, which was screened by many lesser ships which had designations of cruisers, destroyers, frigates and so on as you went down in size. The fact that bigger ships were built does not change these designations, half of which were probably OR designations and didn't take account of new 'superships'.

So in short, the ISD is the relative ship of the line for the Empire. With some exceptions, it was the core unit of the fleet in all the major battles of the civil war. When fleets of superships came onto the scene, it moved to a destroyer role, screening and supporting these superships.

How does the Venatator-class Star Destroyer's ship-to-ship armament compare to that of an ISD2?

Crossroads Inc. wrote:Bah, a lot of that is Eu minimalism or inflationism. In some parts they paint the ISD as something terribly weak, ((See your 'taken down' by an Assault Frigate, a Neb-B, and four corvettes, as an example))

In other parts, its woefully over inflated, staments of a single ISD being something that could tip the balance of a war.

It's worth pointing out that the latter view of the ISD tipping the scales in a war is simply another example of EU minimalism; in their mindset, the ISD is capable of making that big a difference because "fleets" are tiny.

Venators have 16(?) Ship to ship heavy TL and 2(?) Medium.

ISD-I has 6 VHeavy TL, 2 Heavy Ions and a large number of medium turbolasers (60+)

ISD-II has 64 Fairly Heavy TL and the same number of medium TL.

I don't have the ROTS ICS on me at the mo, feel free to correct me.

But frankly they are very small in number and played little part in most of the Galactic Civil war, only really showing up in Dark Empire

There's plenty of battlecruisers in the Marvel SW stories. Long before all this SSD-crap started coming up. Giel's flagship is also a good contender for battleship-status, and we also have Jerec's Vengeance in Dark Forces II.

Vanas wrote:Venators have 16(?) Ship to ship heavy TL and 2(?) Medium.

ISD-I has 6 VHeavy TL, 2 Heavy Ions and a large number of medium turbolasers (60+)

ISD-II has 64 Fairly Heavy TL and the same number of medium TL.

I don't have the ROTS ICS on me at the mo, feel free to correct me.

A Venator Class SD has: Eight DBY-827 heavy turbolasers turrets. 2 dual medium TL cannons, and 52 PD. It aslo has 4 proton torpedo launchers.

The Imperator MK I has: eight heavies and supposedly along the lines of +60 other guns of various sizes. I've never seen a good break down of it's medium/light break down.

So, for total firepower, each has eight heavy turrets. Now, according to the RotS ICS, the Venator is a true warship, and can dump almost all of it's reactor output into it's guns.

The ISD, as a dedicated warship, should be able to do the same. So the real question isn't how many guns each ship has, especially light and medium guns, rather reactor output.

Well, undoubtly a ISD is a powerful ship.

But since every Star Cruiser in the Imperial Navy would beat a ISD in a one-on-one, they are clearly not the most powerful. Their name actually fits. They are powerful ships, but pale compared to the real powerhouses of the Imperial Navy.
(Just to compare, taking SWTC as reference, a ordinary Star Cruiser is at least four times as big as a ISD. This already tells us the how the food chain is organized.)

It also depends on the situation.

For example, if the captain of a smaller vessel like a 600meter-Dreadnought is able to surprise the ISD after having powered up his cannons for a few minutes or delivers all weapons-power through a single cannon (we know this to be possible thanks to the ROTS:ICS, the DeathStarTechnicalCompanion and Darksaber) the smaller ship might be able to hurt, if not destroy the ISD.

Concerning the role of the ISD+ships seen in DarkEmpire and Marvel i want to remind people, that we see not much of the GalacticCivilWar. We see almost nothing of the Imperial infighting, the Rebels are in the OuterRim almost till the time of the X-Wing-novels and at least after that all the heavy elements of the Imperial Navy are either destroyed or have vanished inside the deep core.

Knife wrote:So the real question isn't how many guns each ship has, especially light and medium guns, rather reactor output.

Presumably, the Venator, which, IIRC, is intended as a carrier, makes design compromises to allow for a huge landing bay; an ISD, on the other hand, is not only larger, but also has a larger percentage of volume to dedicate to power generation because a (relatively) huge landing bay is not an intention of the class.

Vanas wrote:Venators have 16(?) Ship to ship heavy TL and 2(?) Medium.

ISD-I has 6 VHeavy TL, 2 Heavy Ions and a large number of medium turbolasers (60+)

ISD-II has 64 Fairly Heavy TL and the same number of medium TL.

I don't have the ROTS ICS on me at the mo, feel free to correct me.

Bullhocky!!!

Sure, the ISD-II has 64 main guns vs the ISD-I's 12, But I will fight to the death anyone who says those guns are the samer power level as the massive guns of the ISD-I.

You simply do not increase the amount of heavy Class-10 guns by a factor of eight without either making a much MUCH more massive reactor or stripping the rest of the ships of guns.

The ISD-II does have 64 guns, but I maintain they are lower powerd Turbo lasers specialized in taking on many Many smaller ships, while the ISD-I is specficlly designed to take on Capital and equal sized Warships.