Minimalism part two

[VT-16]

Yes, I meant the US and/or Soviet or Russian Navy. Those ships look huge, but they're not meant to see heavy combat, so they're markedly different from most "command ships" in fiction.

Edit: Guess I had this in mind when I first thought of it. It might not be as representative as I thought after all.

[Darth Hoth]

He said there were a lot of command ships. I don't recall any statement about there being thousands of them,

"A lot" on a galactic scale means something else than on a Tellurian one. Assuming it is merely thousands is, if anything, very conservative.

and if the Ex-class were intended as mere sector command ships then why exactly was Vader using one as his personal vessel? That would be the equivalent of Jellico commanding the Grand Fleet from a destroyer.

Others have commented on this, so I will just add that Sector Commands are not the measly Coast Guard cutter squadrons you apparently assume them to be. That aside, we do know that Executor-class ships have also been used to command special or "pan-Imperial" commands, and are canonically noted as the largest ship class the Imperials built for general use (as opposed to a few highly specialised monsters, such as the Eclipse- and Eclipse-II classes, as well as other superlaser platforms, torpedo spheres and what have you).

So? It's talking about SSDs in general, not necessarily Star Dreadnoughts. As I commented above, this could just as easily be applied to the Allegiance as the Executor.

There is no evidence that that particular unnamed class* was ever put into regular production. We have seen many more Executor-class ships in the role of SECTGRU command vessels and up (and of course, we have Han's dialogue). Also, the passage I quoted referred directly to Executors:

The 19-kilometer-long Super-class Star Destroyers were the largest class of ships built by the Empire. (Though a few larger mobile space stations, such as the two Death Stars, were also put into service, they were neither common enough to qualify as a class nor, properly speaking, starships.) Each was equipped to shatter the backbone of enemy fleets, smash planetary defenses, and land enough troops to control important population centers. The only possible weakness of the ships is their lack of point-defense weapons, leaving them potentially vulnerable to massed fighter attacks if they lack escorts.
Some confusion exists about the official name of the Super Star Destroyer classes, much of it rooted in the idea that nothing 19 kilometers long qualifies as a mere "destroyer", super or not. This misunderstanding is based in the fact that the term Star Destroyer does not indicate a Destroyer-class vessel that happens to be a starship (unlike the terms star cruiser and star dreadnaught).
A Star Destroyer is named after the idea of a ship that has the power needed to destroy entire star systems, an omnious naming convention that goes back to the days of the Old Republic. Any ship that follows the design basics of those early ships (including a combination of massive firepower and a dagger shape to focus that firepower forward) can be a class of Star Destroyer. For this reason, the term Star Destroyer is always capitalized, unlike star frigate or star cruiser. A typical Star Destroyer qualifies as a star cruiser, and a Super Star Destroyer qualifies as a star dreadnaught.

Not that this matters much; the statement is retarded no matter what spin you put on it. Executors are just one small example of the Empire's industrial capabilities, which anyone with a brain should be aware of.

I believe the most commonly stated rationalisation is that the figure applies strictly to the Imperial Starfleet - i.e. the strategic forces, not the local defences represented by sector fleets.

Then he is still a moron for comparing a small subset of the Imperial forces to the sum total of capital ship his own zombie Empire has by then (200 ISDs).



*The name Allegiance-class has no canonical basis; it is a Saxtonian invention.

[Aaron]

Yes, I meant the US and/or Soviet or Russian Navy. Those ships look huge, but they're not meant to see heavy combat, so they're markedly different from most "command ships" in fiction.

Edit: Guess I had this in mind when I first thought of it. It might not be as representative as I thought after all.

No big deal, live and learn.

[VT-16]

Yeah, I compared profiles and it was a bit ways off. There's just something about that ship that made me think of the Executor, even though I know it wasn't for frontline combat. ;d

[Lord Sander]

For what it's worth, TCSWE says that over 25,000 ISDs were built, with half of them stationed in the Core as reserves. The first SWSB also says about 10% of the entire Imperial Navy was in the Core on reserve, so that means about 90% (about 12,500 ISDs and with plenty of non-ISD ships) are stationed elsewhere.

This can't be right as there'd be only 1,042 sectors in the whole Empire (24 ISDs per sector, 51,000,000 inhabited planets in the Empire), with a little less than 48,000 inhabited planets in such super-sectors.
Even if we presume only huge Imperial sectors compared to the old Republican '50 inhabited planets per sector', say, 5,000 inhabited planets per sector that gives us 240,000 ISDs. Realistically sectors would vary between 50 - 2,000 inhabited planets.

[Captain Seafort]

This can't be right as there'd be only 1,042 sectors in the whole Empire (24 ISDs per sector, 51,000,000 inhabited planets in the Empire), with a little less than 48,000 inhabited planets in such super-sectors.
Even if we presume only huge Imperial sectors compared to the old Republican '50 inhabited planets per sector', say, 5,000 inhabited planets per sector that gives us 240,000 ISDs. Realistically sectors would vary between 50 - 2,000 inhabited planets.

We also know from RotS that there's a bare minimum of 4000+ sectors (probably a lot more) given that the Petition of 2000 [sectoral senators] was a minority of the senate.

The likely solution is that ISDs were rare, and only assigned to the most important sectors, with the rest making do with VicStars, VenStars, etc.

[Darth Hoth]

Unfortunately, the ISB speaks specifically of ISDs. Not only that, 24 battlesquadrons (1 ISD each, unaugmented) is the minimum number, we have evidence that it was at least in some cases quite a bit greater.

Why do people have this desperate need to validate one scrap of dialogue from Pellaeon, that fits ill at best with canon information before or since? The best solution is to say simply that he was wrong and talking out of his behind. The encyclopedia is an outlier obviously based on his bullshit, and can be treated as an in-universe source that is fallible, as he is.

[VT-16]

I only remember Star Destroyer, no specific classes. As it stands, the ISB is 20 years old, while the CSWE is from late last year. If half of the Imperial-class were in reserve, then that's it. Whatever is elsewhere in the galaxy, is just other classes. Then again, the CSWE also calls the Shockwave an ISD, even though it is structurally larger, so it might encompass different designs like the SSD now.

[Captain Seafort]

"A lot" on a galactic scale means something else than on a Tellurian one. Assuming it is merely thousands is, if anything, very conservative.

In terms of what the galactic economy could put out sure, but in terms of what was actually produced it's another matter. Where exactly have we seen an Ex used as a sector command ship, rather than commanding either a roving fleet (Ex, Iron Fist) or an Oversector (Intimidator). Plus we have to consider the circumstances - Ex was guarding one of the most important (possibly the most important) sites in the Empire, so you expect it to have a decent guard force.

Others have commented on this, so I will just add that Sector Commands are not the measly Coast Guard cutter squadrons you apparently assume them to be.

I never said anything of the sort, and I'll thank you to cut out the strawman - I compared them to a frigate or destroyer chasing pirates in the Caribbean. This is not a three men and a rubber boat operation, but neither is it the massive concentration of force a CVBG represents.

There is no evidence that that particular unnamed class was ever put into regular production.

There's certainly more than one of them - the Eclipse's escorts appeared to be of the same design, and there were at least three of them in the attack on Pinnacle Base.

We have seen many more Executor-class ships in the role of SECTGRU command vessels

Where? The only Ex's I recall were all commanding roving forces or Oversector groups.

The 19-kilometer-long Super-class Star Destroyers were the largest class of ships built by the Empire. (Though a few larger mobile space stations, such as the two Death Stars, were also put into service, they were neither common enough to qualify as a class nor, properly speaking, starships.) Each was equipped to shatter the backbone of enemy fleets, smash planetary defenses, and land enough troops to control important population centers. The only possible weakness of the ships is their lack of point-defense weapons, leaving them potentially vulnerable to massed fighter attacks if they lack escorts.
Some confusion exists about the official name of the Super Star Destroyer classes, much of it rooted in the idea that nothing 19 kilometers long qualifies as a mere "destroyer", super or not. This misunderstanding is based in the fact that the term Star Destroyer does not indicate a Destroyer-class vessel that happens to be a starship (unlike the terms star cruiser and star dreadnaught).
A Star Destroyer is named after the idea of a ship that has the power needed to destroy entire star systems, an omnious naming convention that goes back to the days of the Old Republic. Any ship that follows the design basics of those early ships (including a combination of massive firepower and a dagger shape to focus that firepower forward) can be a class of Star Destroyer. For this reason, the term Star Destroyer is always capitalized, unlike star frigate or star cruiser. A typical Star Destroyer qualifies as a star cruiser, and a Super Star Destroyer qualifies as a star dreadnaught.

Hmm, point, although the fact remains that "SSD" applies to many more ships than the Ex, and indeed the second paragraph leaves the question open by referring to the plural classes rather strictly restricting itself to the Ex class.

Not that this matters much; the statement is retarded no matter what spin you put on it. Executors are just one small example of the Empire's industrial capabilities, which anyone with a brain should be aware of.

Absolutely, but you'll forgive me of being extremely sceptical of applying the label of "incompetent" to an individual who, while certainly not the best of commanders, certainly has never displayed the gross incompetence you attribute to him. This is, after all, the same bloke who held the rump Empire together, conducted a staged withdrawal from the core to the rim over a number of years, and defeated the best the New Republic could throw at him on a number of occasions.

Indeed, while it's a slight stretch, it's also possible that the statement may have referred to the navy's discretionary budget, which the development costs of the Ex may have overrun, while dismissing the notion that it could have bankrupted the galactic economy. This would certainly make Pellaeon somewhat parochial, but hardly incompetent as is being suggested.

Then he is still a moron for comparing a small subset of the Imperial forces to the sum total of capital ship his own zombie Empire has by then (200 ISDs).

Or he simply didn't consider the sector groups part of the "real" fleet, which again would make him parochial, but not incompetent.

[PainRack]

In terms of what the galactic economy could put out sure, but in terms of what was actually produced it's another matter. Where exactly have we seen an Ex used as a sector command ship, rather than commanding either a roving fleet (Ex, Iron Fist) or an Oversector (Intimidator). Plus we have to consider the circumstances - Ex was guarding one of the most important (possibly the most important) sites in the Empire, so you expect it to have a decent guard force.

While the presence of an Executor in the sector command ship is relatively unseen, the sheer numbers of ships that could be found in oversector, black sword command and azure command and etc, these ships aren't exactly rare either.

I never said anything of the sort, and I'll thank you to cut out the strawman - I compared them to a frigate or destroyer chasing pirates in the Caribbean. This is not a three men and a rubber boat operation, but neither is it the massive concentration of force a CVBG represents.

So？The original argument was that if Executors were sector level command ships, why was Vader assigned one. This is nonsensical. Churchill used destroyers and cruisers for his personal transport during WW2. There isn't any evidence to suggest that the Executor shouldn't have been restricted to sector forces. We already know the presence of Kuati battleships and other Clone War era warships that significantly outguns an ISD. If a sector fleet was to be capable of gunning those ships under, it requires a heavier warship, presumably on the Star battleship order, of which the Executor is one. The "communications" cruiser could had been the command ship for the sector fleet at Endor. However, Endor was not situated in the Core. Fleets covering independent worlds like Correllia and the like would had required larger, more capable warships.

Or he simply didn't consider the sector groups part of the "real" fleet, which again would make him parochial, but not incompetent.

Except it still doesn't make sense, because the best fit for Paelleon is that he was part of the sector fleet, as opposed to Death Squadron at Endor.

[Captain Seafort]

While the presence of an Executor in the sector command ship is relatively unseen, the sheer numbers of ships that could be found in oversector, black sword command and azure command and etc, these ships aren't exactly rare either.

I'm not suggesting they are, merely that they're rarer than the thousands or tens of thousands required to give one or more to every sector fleet.

So？The original argument was that if Executors were sector level command ships, why was Vader assigned one. This is nonsensical. Churchill used destroyers and cruisers for his personal transport during WW2.

Churchill wasn't a military commander hunting down a well-armed and well-organised insurgency.

There isn't any evidence to suggest that the Executor shouldn't have been restricted to sector forces. We already know the presence of Kuati battleships and other Clone War era warships that significantly outguns an ISD. If a sector fleet was to be capable of gunning those ships under, it requires a heavier warship, presumably on the Star battleship order, of which the Executor is one. The "communications" cruiser could had been the command ship for the sector fleet at Endor.

That's the sort of thing I'm suggesting - cruisers and battlecruisers on the scale of the Allegiance, "Super-class" or Vengeance operating with the sector fleets while leaving the big ship free to strategic forces.

However, Endor was not situated in the Core. Fleets covering independent worlds like Correllia and the like would had required larger, more capable warships.

We've got at least one example of the sort of forces that would be covering core worlds - Imperial Centre Oversector, supported, IIRC, by Azure Hammer Command. Proper fleets, led by battleships.

Except it still doesn't make sense, because the best fit for Paelleon is that he was part of the sector fleet, as opposed to Death Squadron at Endor.

Why?

[Darth Hoth]

In terms of what the galactic economy could put out sure, but in terms of what was actually produced it's another matter.

For something to be "common" among millions of planets, you do not have bare hundreds of them. If they were that rare, Han should have thrown a fit at one being there.

Plus we have to consider the circumstances - Ex was guarding one of the most important (possibly the most important) sites in the Empire, so you expect it to have a decent guard force.

Wrong. The Emperor was there in secret, and the Rebels noted especially that security was weak, which was why they had a shot at him. Deployment of rare superships would upset such a conception, one should think.

I never said anything of the sort, and I'll thank you to cut out the strawman - I compared them to a frigate or destroyer chasing pirates in the Caribbean. This is not a three men and a rubber boat operation, but neither is it the massive concentration of force a CVBG represents.

Size is relative to scale. A single ISD can devastate a world within hours, whereas a Sector usually comprises tens of thousands of inhabited planets and is the basic political subdivision of the Empire. Each Sector has its own forces for military defense, not merely policing; most pirates are not even hunted by the Navy, but by dedicated police agencies (Sector Rangers, Imperial Customs Office).

There's certainly more than one of them - the Eclipse's escorts appeared to be of the same design, and there were at least three of them in the attack on Pinnacle Base.

And they appear only there, whereas Executors are fairly common and ISDs are ubiquitous. The class does not even have a canonical name.

Where? The only Ex's I recall were all commanding roving forces or Oversector groups.

Actually, here I shall concede, as I could not find any mention of a named SSD in such a role; I misremembered a few Oversector-attached ones. My mistake.

Hmm, point, although the fact remains that "SSD" applies to many more ships than the Ex, and indeed the second paragraph leaves the question open by referring to the plural classes rather strictly restricting itself to the Ex class.

It also specifically speaks of ships of sizes on the same order of magnitude or larger (which would include both Eclipse classes, and perhaps Sovereigns and some others). It in any case rules out something comparatively measly such as the unnamed class.

Absolutely, but you'll forgive me of being extremely sceptical of applying the label of "incompetent" to an individual who, while certainly not the best of commanders, certainly has never displayed the gross incompetence you attribute to him.

So how about the tidbit about what his superiors thought of him prior to Thrawn? How about multiple retarded statements and stupid tactical and strategic decisions? And what happened at Bilbringi again; I forget, was he defeated by smugglers after Thrawn's massive fiat plan had caught the Rebel fleet square?

This is, after all, the same bloke who held the rump Empire together,

Which blithering idiots like KJA villains Harrsk and Teradoc managed before him. The Black Fleet books said it in very simple terms when they brought up the Deep Core warlords: Anyone with Star Destroyers can intimidate local systems into supporting him.

conducted a staged withdrawal from the core to the rim over a number of years,

More like plundering those Core Worlds that Daala had taken by treachery and moving their assets to the Rim. There were non-Pellaeon-aligned Imperial holdouts in the Core as of 23 ABY and even later (see Young Jedi Knights).

and defeated the best the New Republic could throw at him on a number of occasions.

Whom did he defeat, on what occasions? The only victory I can think of off the top of my head was at Orinda, where he captured a single planet and forced a group led by Wedge Antilles (a former fighter pilot without any officer training) to retreat. Not very impressive, especially if one considers his track record of defeats.

Indeed, while it's a slight stretch, it's also possible that the statement may have referred to the navy's discretionary budget, which the development costs of the Ex may have overrun, while dismissing the notion that it could have bankrupted the galactic economy. This would certainly make Pellaeon somewhat parochial, but hardly incompetent as is being suggested.

Even that is unreasonable, given the existance of the Death Star(s) and various other resource-intensive projects. The Imperial Navy developed, what, half a dozen SSD classes or more, few going beyond the prototype stage. Why would one of them be that much more expensive, when we know that large-scale construction was not new to them when work was begun on that one?

Or he simply didn't consider the sector groups part of the "real" fleet, which again would make him parochial, but not incompetent.

Except that if the ISD Navy was that asininely small a part of the total forces, it would be the equivalent of a soldier considering everything but his own company not part of the forces.

I do not have the quote available right now (book being at home, me not so), but he compares those 25,000 destroyers to his present TOTAL forces, the sum total of his mini-Empire's defences. How anyone can say that is reasonable with a straight face eludes me.

[VT-16]

There's certainly more than one of them - the Eclipse's escorts appeared to be of the same design, and there were at least three of them in the attack on Pinnacle Base.

And they appear only there, whereas Executors are fairly common and ISDs are ubiquitous. The class does not even have a canonical name.

Actually, the DE audio drama calls the Eclipse's escorts "Imperial-class destroyers" and "Super Star Destroyers", so, go unimaginative writing?

[Darth Hoth]

Imperial-class specifically, or just "Imperial Star Destroyers"?

If the former: Well, that is weird. What do we call it, then - ISD-III?

[VT-16]

It was called what I wrote above. "Imperial-class destroyer" in one line and "Super Star Destroyer" in another, talking about the same ships. Most unoriginal name ever. Still, it's nice they actually bothered to give some kind of id on those things. They're a lot bigger than the ISDs, though, so, I guess, ISSD?

[PainRack]

I'm not suggesting they are, merely that they're rarer than the thousands or tens of thousands required to give one or more to every sector fleet.

When the Imperial Starfleet has a million capital ships, arguing that there's only a hundred or so Executors is rather unbelievable. Alternately, even if Executors were deploy

Churchill wasn't a military commander hunting down a well-armed and well-organised insurgency.

So? There is still no reason to believe that Darth Vader would had automatically rated the biggest baddest rarest supership just because of his status.

That's the sort of thing I'm suggesting - cruisers and battlecruisers on the scale of the Allegiance, "Super-class" or Vengeance operating with the sector fleets while leaving the big ship free to strategic forces.

Errr.... Except that said sector forces MUST be capable of overruning the independent planetary fleets. While Endor and the Outer Rim may not have contained Star Dreadnoughts as the flagship, the Core Worlds must had contained a battleship just so to counter the stronger planetary fleets Kuat, Correllia or any othe rnumber of big prosperous worlds were capable of bringing up.

Why?

There were two task forces deployed at Endor. The Sector fleet, which formed the pincer wing and the few Star destroyers and Executor from Death Squadron, which formed the visible close perimeter around the Death Star.

The novels and later updated EU placed Paelleon as the Executive officer, who took command of either one of the wing or the remmants of the fleet after his commanding officer was killed and ordered the retreat, this even though several other superior officers such as a Grand Admiral was still fighting on. Given the relative "small" numbers from Death Squadron(5 ISDs), the odds are Paelleon was actually an officer from the sector fleet in the pincer wing. This would also better explain how he was able to order the retreat. The confusion and disruption to Imperial comms described in Truce at Bakura sourcebook would had made receiving orders to continue and fight from the surviving Grand Admiral and other superior officers difficult if Paelleon was situated in the outskirts of the wing, made up of the sector fleet.

[darthscott]

I like to interpret that there being only 25,000+ ISD's meant that’s how many Imperial-Class Star Destroyers were built and put into service. I always hoped that the Imperial-class SD's were used in missions, which require more flexibility such as hunting Rebels all over the Galaxy. Then the real bulk of the Imperial fleet was made up of the ships from the Home fleets and other SD classes like Tector-Class SD's, Star Cruisers, and Star Dreadnought better suited to protecting the Core Worlds and fighting more conventional enemies.

[Lord Sander]

I like to interpret that there being only 25,000+ ISD's meant that’s how many Imperial-Class Star Destroyers were built and put into service. I always hoped that the Imperial-class SD's were used in missions, which require more flexibility such as hunting Rebels all over the Galaxy. Then the real bulk of the Imperial fleet was made up of the ships from the Home fleets and other SD classes like Tector-Class SD's, Star Cruisers, and Star Dreadnought better suited to protecting the Core Worlds and fighting more conventional enemies.

Considering the ISD is supposed to be the most seen and recognized Imperial warship, that's not likely, as the other classes would then be more numerous.
I think I recall Marina once posed a theory that the 25,000 ISDs were just those in the mobile fleet (the Navy, roving commands), and that figure didn't include those ISDs of the garrison fleets (the Starfleets, sector groups).

[VT-16]

Other classes are more numerous. The various frigates and corvettes are naturally more numerous given their smaller size and faster construction rate. The CR90 is decades-old itself by the time the first ISDs start rolling out during the CW, for instance.

[PainRack]

Other classes are more numerous. The various frigates and corvettes are naturally more numerous given their smaller size and faster construction rate. The CR90 is decades-old itself by the time the first ISDs start rolling out during the CW, for instance.

However, none of the other classes are defined as the symbol of the Imperial Navy.

[VT-16]

That's true.

Hmm, given some of the re-interpretations I've seen in several sources (ships bigger and smaller than the ISD being given this moniker through upgrades etc.) is it possible the actual 25,000+ number refers to actual ships of this kind built at KDY's main facilities?

[Eleventh Century Remnant]

You're the Wookiepedian, if you don't know what hope do the rest of us have?

The earliest reference I personally have for that quote is my copy of West End's 'blue book' (SWRPG, 2nd Ed) dated 1992, which states

The Imperial Star Destroyer was among the most fearsome weapons of the Imperial war machine. With over 25,000 of these awesome ships at his disposal, it is no wonder that Emperor Palpatine could instill fear in the hearts of the Galaxy's citizens.

A willing mind could assume that that implies that the twenty- five thousand are in fact the central reserve, Oversector Imperial Centre's striking force, because- as according to Tarkin in ANH- moffs now have direct control over their sectors, would the local fleets be included in that total? Possibly not.

Seems to support the Duchess' theory.

Also, thrashing out an order of battle from the dear, broken- backed old Imperial Sourcebook I get anywhere from eighty to a hundred and sixteen smaller destroyer- class craft (Victories, Venators, etc) as part of a sector group, in addition to the twenty- four Imperial class.

There's absolutely no doubt that the empire has the industrial might for all of this; what I do worry about, and an area in which I do reckon I'm a minimalist, is personnel.

Not in absolute numbers- there's far more than enough warm meat out there- but in terms of command qualified officers and senior noncommissioned officers, I believe that the pool of skill and judgement cannot avoid being spread dangerously thin.

Start with what was left at the end of the clone wars- take the starting point as that the late Republic/Imperial founding era crews had seen a lot of action, and had worked up to a high state of competence.

How well does the fleet hold on to that, and how well does it pass on the knowledge of it's veterans? There are retirals, old clones aging too fast, political infighting, general peacetime decline- all sorts of reasons for de-skilling.

One of the worst has to be micromanagement. Assume a destroyer on patrol enounters a small rebel asteroid base; action, excitement, really wild things. Within two minutes, how many people does that captain have looking over his shoulder and kibbitzing- and how many of them is he obliged to take orders from?

Canonically, at least four levels of naval command (squadron, force, fleet, sector group) plus how many political, at least one at Moff or sector governor, plus whatever subsector responsibilities exist.

I take this the opposite way from the OP; the communications technology available is too good, enough that micromanagement and political interference must rate highly on the scale of problems the Starfleet faces.

That is a situation that doesn't help officers on the front line at all. It also doesn't help in learning to exercise your own judgemet, if every anti- management handbook I've ever read is to be believed.

[VT-16]

Well, I dunno, LFL and its affiliates just like fucking things up now and again. The old ISB had ISDs in every sector, now half of the ones made are in reserve acc. to TCSWE. I assume the number for sector group-based ships has been changed, so that a lot of different classes serve instead of just the Imperator. There's the Rendili Dreadnaughts and Gladiators in the outlying systems (ISB and TFUCG), the "Super Star Destroyers or torpedo spheres available to the average Moff or Sector Group Commander" (DESB) and the various Executor ships in the larger, strategic forces (CATCW). Guess this makes it easier to understand why the Moffs built their own SSDs after a while, if most of the regularly scheduled material wasn't distributed fast enough or redistributed to the Deep Core and Core fortress worlds for their own protection.

[PainRack]

Not in absolute numbers- there's far more than enough warm meat out there- but in terms of command qualified officers and senior noncommissioned officers, I believe that the pool of skill and judgement cannot avoid being spread dangerously thin.

Start with what was left at the end of the clone wars- take the starting point as that the late Republic/Imperial founding era crews had seen a lot of action, and had worked up to a high state of competence.

How well does the fleet hold on to that, and how well does it pass on the knowledge of it's veterans? There are retirals, old clones aging too fast, political infighting, general peacetime decline- all sorts of reasons for de-skilling.

The USN could rapidly expand from the nucleus of a peacetime navy to over one thousand warships. Furthermore, you're talking about decades where the requisite investment in training could be made in various training academies and the like.

One of the worst has to be micromanagement. Assume a destroyer on patrol enounters a small rebel asteroid base; action, excitement, really wild things. Within two minutes, how many people does that captain have looking over his shoulder and kibbitzing- and how many of them is he obliged to take orders from?

Canonically, at least four levels of naval command (squadron, force, fleet, sector group) plus how many political, at least one at Moff or sector governor, plus whatever subsector responsibilities exist.

I take this the opposite way from the OP; the communications technology available is too good, enough that micromanagement and political interference must rate highly on the scale of problems the Starfleet faces.

Is that seriously a problem? We seen no such indications in the EU, other than the emphasis on central heroes.

[Darth Hoth]

That TCSWE number is not new; it has been around at least since the last edition. While I am not entirely certain of the causality, I strongly suspect that it came out of Pellaeon's soliloquy from Specter of the Past. In any case, I would say that the ISB supercedes that if there is a conflict; in-universe, the Encyclopedia is just another encyclopaedia, while the ISB was an intelligence document. Its authors were thus more likely to be wrong, or confuse the facts.