Thrawn or Palleon?

[Stark]

Really? I've been assuming 2 Home One-types for years. I'm not sure the ROTJ end shot is detailed enough for determination, but now that you mention it I remember someone counting engine banks or something. The engine distribution *is* pretty distinctive among MonCals.

[Shaidar Haran]

Re effciency I was suggesting that whatever availible technology there is to increase fuel mass and reduce waste, improve cooling and maximum firepower, would be in an ISD and not necessarily a backwater converted terrorist barge.

Quite possibly but a lot of that will depend a lot on materials and workships.

But please, lets not pull out the 'lolz centric command' bullshit. None of the rebels expected to survive. Noone planned to destroy the Executor. Aside from praying Han would somehow get the shield down, the rebels intended simply to make good account of themselves, not wipe the floor with the Imps using their super cruisers of doom.

No, the Rebels expected to take heavy casualties even if they succeeded. I'm guessing that had a lot to do with attacking moon-sized space station bound to be riddled with turbolasers, quite apart from the fleet.

But they didn't go in with no plan nor did they flail about aimlessly. They targeted the Imperial command structure and the results speak for themselves. The Imperial chain of command fell apart and routed with significant casualties and ship losses.

And frankly, I simply don't care what games say about MonCals. I'm not sure what the consensus is (since it's been debated before), but if they're converted liners (ha) they will suck pound-for-pound, and if they're dedicated warships they seem poorly designed and lightly armed. Ships of the 1200m Liberty-type would not be equal to an ISD, and they only had a max of two Home Ones. Yeah, great odds, when they couldn't even match numbers. I disregard CRVs and FFs out of hand as largely irrelevant.

You miss two important points:

1) Not all Mon Cal ships were converted non-combatant. The Home One and Liberty types are both dedicated combatants and there is some evidence that others of the type were as well.

1b) Not all the converted ships are converted liners. Some were actually converted colony ships and thus are probably at least capable of self defense.

2) I know they're not as heavily armed. Did you miss when I said that much? What they do have, from countless sources, is a lot more staying power in terms of shielding, sheilding generators, redudancy of systems, and simple internal subdivisions. Those are not up for debate, they're fact; those points have been repeated at length. Those are also, not coincidentally, are useful assests in a prolonged slugging match or for avoiding becoming crippled.

Don't you think it's odd they'll make an EU novel out of anything Han Solo said, but the 'Executor is having problems before the battle even started' thing is left alone? I mean, that's pretty serious scope for some kind of sabotage.

Can you be a bit more coherent? Perhaps identify what you're talking about? I believe you are confusing battle damage recieved early in the battle with the A-wing's suicidal plunge and the resulting loss of control of the Executor.

[Lazarus]

Wasn't it earlier in this very thread that somebody posted a link to a screencap of the Rebel fleet retreating in ROTJ, and there were something like 8 sets of identifiable Mon Cal engine banks?

But they didn't go in with no plan nor did they flail about aimlessly. They targeted the Imperial command structure and the results speak for themselves. The Imperial chain of command fell apart and routed with significant casualties and ship losses.

Yes it makes sense that they would do, yes its logical that they would aim to concentrate on the Imperials weaknesses, but where is your evidence that the Rebel Fleet had a pre determined plan to concentrate attacks on Imperial communications and command? They didn't even know they would be forced to fight a prolonged fleet engagement.

1) Not all Mon Cal ships were converted non-combatant. The Home One and Liberty types are both dedicated combatants and there is some evidence that others of the type were as well.

1b) Not all the converted ships are converted liners. Some were actually converted colony ships and thus are probably at least capable of self defense.

EVIDENCE??? I've never seen anything saying that the Liberty and Home One class were constructed as warships, if they were they are very poorly armed for their size.
Stark was talking about the fact that little snippets of dialogue like '...Battle of Taanab...' are turned into full backstories, but stuff like the mysteriously easy death of the Executor are not.

[Doctor Doom]

Quite possibly but a lot of that will depend a lot on materials and workships.

Ah, so you are claiming that the quality of industrial facilities of a single Outer Rim world will exceed those of an Empire with the resources of an entire galaxy at its beck and call? So much better, in fact, that they are able to convert CIVILIAN vessels into SHIPS-OF-THE-LINE?

No, the Rebels expected to take heavy casualties even if they succeeded. I'm guessing that had a lot to do with attacking moon-sized space station bound to be riddled with turbolasers, quite apart from the fleet.

They didn't know the Death Star was operational. They didn't know there was a fleet in waiting for them. Oops, there goes your theory.

But they didn't go in with no plan nor did they flail about aimlessly. They targeted the Imperial command structure and the results speak for themselves. The Imperial chain of command fell apart and routed with significant casualties and ship losses.

The rebel plan became a moot point when the Imperial fleet showed up and the Death Star became operational.

1) Not all Mon Cal ships were converted non-combatant. The Home One and Liberty types are both dedicated combatants and there is some evidence that others of the type were as well.

1b) Not all the converted ships are converted liners. Some were actually converted colony ships and thus are probably at least capable of self defense.

IIRC, the Mon Cals didn't produce dedicated combatants until post-Endor. Before the death of the Emperor, all Mon Cal capital ships were converted civilian vessels. Whether they were cruise liners or colony ships is irrelevant, as they are still CIVILIAN vessels.

2) I know they're not as heavily armed. Did you miss when I said that much? What they do have, from countless sources, is a lot more staying power in terms of shielding, sheilding generators, redudancy of systems, and simple internal subdivisions. Those are not up for debate, they're fact; those points have been repeated at length. Those are also, not coincidentally, are useful assests in a prolonged slugging match or for avoiding becoming crippled.

Can you provide a source that specifically states the Mon Cal ships are better then the Imperial ships in these regards?

I believe you are confusing battle damage recieved early in the battle with the A-wing's suicidal plunge and the resulting loss of control of the Executor.

What are you on about? He said quite clearly in his post that the Executor was having problems before the battle even started.

[NRS Guardian]

IIRC, the Mon Cals didn't produce dedicated combatants until post-Endor. Before the death of the Emperor, all Mon Cal capital ships were converted civilian vessels. Whether they were cruise liners or colony ships is irrelevant, as they are still CIVILIAN vessels.

Can you provide a source that specifically states the Mon Cal ships are better then the Imperial ships in these regards?

According to the Clone Wars comics the Mon Cals did produce dedicated warships prior to Endor. Though they weren't near as large as the Liberty or Home One. Also, the fact that the Recusant was designed by Quarren and that they helped produce them indicates that while the larger vessels were originally civilian ships, the Mon Cal and Quarren did have dedicated warships as early as the Clone War.

The EGtV&V, Rebellion, various novels, and most other EU agree that Mon Calimari ships are more heavily shielded and have more redundant systems than Imperial vessels. This means that they are harder to damage and cripple, but also are harder to maintain and repair if battle damaged.

The Mon Calimari Star Cruisers are the main cruisers in the New Republic's battle fleet. They are durable ships that are as fast and almost as tough as the larger Imperial Star Destroyers.

Mon Cal ships are notoriously difficult to repair, but they are so durable that they are seldom damaged in combat.

Mon Cal ships have unusually powerful shields-extra shield redundancies allow the Mon Cals to quickly replace damaged shield arrays even while in combat, and this made it much more difficult for Imperial guns to wear down a Star Cruiser's defenses.

[Stark]

NRS, how much sense do these claims make? They're likely 'converted' (ie, largely rebuild or covertly built) civilian ships with black market equipment - how could such a vessel have these amazing shield systems? Are they claiming that ISDs can't shuffle shield segments and such? How does carrying spare generators for in-combat replacement result in a net improvement, when you've got to have spaces, crew and wasted volume for the 'replace-y widgets'?

The quotes you've provided (out of context, since I don't have EGVV) seem to simply be saying the MonCals are have impressive or surprising shield systems. It says it's 'more difficult' to defeat their shields, but provides no comparison. Is it possible these quotes merely suggest that the MonCal ships have a surprising emphasis on shielding? They appear poorly armed, so perhaps endurance and linear speed (to evade ships and escape) was seen as more important. Certainly, I doubt they were built with killing similar sized ships in mind: I see their role more as commerce raiders or something.

I've read quotes suggesting Executor was having both helm and power system problems before the battle began. James Bondwalker had clearly infiltrated the ship!

However, much of this discussion has moved away from the OP, so maybe we should request a split of the most recent starship-quality comparisons.

[NRS Guardian]

No source says that the vanilla MC cruisers are superior or even a match one-on-one for ISDs, I wasn't claiming that MC80s or Libertys or whatever are superior to ISDs, except in shielding. Doctor Doom asked for proof that Mon Cal ships are better shielded than Imperial ships so I was providing it. I think that Mon Cal cruisers do have a greater emphasis on shielding and speed considering every source both filmic and EU says so, and it makes sense considering their inferior armor and weaponry. The consensus from the EU is that Mon Cal ships have more projectors than ISDs allowing them to keep some in reserve to bring online when some go down allowing more time for damage control parties to repair or replace the projectors that went down. What we know of the armament of a MC cruiser suggests to me that the Mon Cals have guns as powerful as an ISD's HTLs but fewer of them with poorer arcs, they probably also have poorer point defense. Considering MC cruisers greater volume and powrful engines as well as the size of the dorsal structure identified as the main reactor MC cruisers can probably generate almost as much power as an ISD.

[Stark]

That makes sense. I've grown wary after hearing too many people describing MonCals as almost totally superior to ISDs, with their magical shields of uber. The Home One-type is configured for broadside battle, and has her docking openings on the sides. Duh.

So the MonCals are overequiped with shield generators? That's an interesting idea, particularly given the sort of battles the rebels probably envisaged when they were built.

[Doctor Doom]

Ah, thank you, NRC Guardian.

[FTeik]

How much of the "MC-Cruiser are converted cruise-liners" is still valid?

I mean those claims come from the same sources, that claim that the MonCalamari were discovered by the empire (see prequels and clonewars), were peaceful (we have a MonCalamari warrior-caste and and MC-Admiral serving in the RepublicNavy thanks to CestusDeception) and they had to convert their ships (when they have dedicated warships, that don't look so different from the vessels seen in the OT).

[Lazarus]

I'd say the NR continued use of MC cruisers is simply down to the reluctance of writers etc to make any big changes concerning that sort of thing. Look at AT-ST's; a scout vehicle with obvious niche deployability, and yet it seems to have been used by writers as the Empires primary land vehicle!
I really don't think MC cruisers make much sense anyway past ROTJ. Say that a sizeable faction of Mon Cals do join the Rebels, and happen to take with them several large civilian ships. Somehow, they are turned into military ships, but the lack of military grade weapons means they are outfitted instead with the more readily available defensive shield arrays, and lots of them to counter this.
So these cruisers are deployed at Endor. A few get fragged. The biggest one, Home One, survives. So the Rebel fleet now has say about 8 Mon Cal cruisers (ROTJ engine bank count). Suddenly, from this point on, every Rebel or NR cruiser is Mon Cal. Since when did Mon Calamari become on a par with Fondor? If there was a supply of capital ships coming out of Mon Calamari, why didn't the Empire just BDZ it? This isn't really fixed until about NJO, when you see Star Destroyers and Corellian ships becoming prominent.

[Doctor Doom]

If there was a supply of capital ships coming out of Mon Calamari, why didn't the Empire just BDZ it?

This is one particular example of EU minimism that has always bothered me. It is simply said that the Empire didn't want to commit the resources to attack Mon Calamari because it was so well defended.