StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Between Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi, is it known which of the common Star Destroyer variants (known as mkI and mkII) was more prevalent, and to what extent? The movies would seem to indicate that the mkII was more commonly used, as every Destroyer we see clearly at Hoth and Endor, with the exception of the Executor and the communications ship, is of the mkII variety. However, if the mkII is superior, it would make sence that Vader just demanded the best.

Any thoughts?

Feil, gohere.

Everything you need to know. Hope it helps

Aye, I've read it, along with most of the rest of Dr. Saxton's page. Unfortunately, while the total number of Star Destroyers is hypothesized, the distribution between classes is not mentioned.

Feil wrote:Aye, I've read it, along with most of the rest of Dr. Saxton's page. Unfortunately, while the total number of Star Destroyers is hypothesized, the distribution between classes is not mentioned.

I believe it's primarily ISD-I's in ANH, while it's approximately half-and-half or some such in ESB; by ROTJ it's mostly all ISD-II's. At least that's the impression I always got, I can never tell them apart on screen...

As seen in ESB, many ISD-Is were simply upgraded (at least cosmetically) to be more in-line with ISD-IIs. Have no idea of the ratio. Don'y suppose their wiki-articles have anything either... =/

I see the Imperial Star Destroyer as the Empire's equivalent of the Panzer Mk III - ie. a reliable and long running warhorse that is so successful it survives for years or decades being upgraded to keep up with newer weapon systems. I say the original Mk I Star Destroyers were mostly upgraded by the time of The Return of the Jedi.

I don't know if any EU source ever answers the question. However, I seriously doubt ISD-IIs outnumbered the original version (which had been manufactured for over two decades, according to the latest retcons) after just a few short years. The Star Destroyers seen in TESB and ROTJ were ISD-IIs, but like you said that could have just been Vader demanding the best.

Is their any evidence Imperator-IIs are actually better than the original Imperators? I thought the main difference was in armament, that the ISD-Is had more heavy turbolasers, better for attacking heavy craft, whereas the ISD-IIs had their weaponry distributed in a larger number of smaller weapons, which would work better for attacking the small craft of rebels and pirates?

The EU (WEG RPG to be specific) states that the Imperator IIs had heavier armour and shielding, as well as superior arnament.

The problem with the WEG portrayal of the ISD-II is that they pulled numbers out of their asses (like always), giving the ship almost twice as many turbolasers, each more powerful than the guns on the ISD-I.

Jim Raynor wrote:The problem with the WEG portrayal of the ISD-II is that they pulled numbers out of their asses (like always), giving the ship almost twice as many turbolasers, each more powerful than the guns on the ISD-I.

Yeah, thats why I was sure to include the fact that the numbers were WEG (and thus a crappy source). I don't know of any other source on the capabilities of the Imp-II.

I just thought of something perhaps with a greater number of barrels an ISD-II could focus more firepower through a single turret allowing an ISD-II to outgun an ISD-I in the forward arc while having the same firepower in the broadside and dorsal arcs. It seems that the greatest limit to routing power through a turbolaser is keeping it cool, a greater number of barrels could allow a greater rate of fire and being able to focus more power through one turret because you can allow unused barrels to cool and distribute the power among 8 slightly smaller barrels rather than 2.

The WEG numbers are retarded. Their ISD-I is underarmed, and ISD-II is overall better... but still underarmed. I see no reason to pay the stupid '60 TLs 60 ions lol' stats any attention at all. Since their stats for ISD-I don't even include a distinction between the heavy turrets and everything else, it's demonstrably wrong and worthless.