Evolution of the Imperial Star Destroyer

[Simon_Jester]

All I am saying that integrating a line combattant and a troopship into the same hull makes sense pschychologically, by making the line combattant bigger and more menacing hence increasing its deterrence factor.

OK, yes, but I take exception to your choice of words like "wasted space," because it implies a pure line-combatant perspective on the Imperial-class ships' mission. Which is the wrong one to take, because that's not their job. It's sort of like complaining that a US Marine amphibious assault ship doesn't have as much aircraft capability as it should because it "wastes" valuable hangar space on all those Marines.

Anyway, there are too many EU instances of ships of the [Executor] class being destroyed far too cheaply than should have been the case for me to be comfortable with, and while some of them were cheap shots and writing without a sense of proportion and scale to hand, the established pattern is not good.

Yeah. Something along the lines of:
"Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today."
would seem appropriate.

In fact, the analogy may be quite close- the Executor-class may have been designed with some systematic flaw in the shielding that they never did manage to iron out, much like the inadequate deck armor on the British battlecruisers, which was a problem clear up through HMS Hood... by which time they really ought to have noticed the problem.

The Imperail-class Star Destroyers were just that, Destroyers. We can wax on about whether the term "Star Destroyer" actually corresponds to a role or size description commonly refered to as "Destroyer" in our real world sense, but the overall role of an ISD is jack of all trades master of none (thats on the Imperial scale mind you, an ISD would still seem like a master of all trades to most other players in the SW universe).

We need to remember that there were powerful Core dominions that maintained fleets easliy equal to an average Imperal sector fleet, maybe even a few region scale militaries. Dominions like Corellia or Kuat were themselves the source of the Imperial war machine, so there should be no doubt that they could not field large and advanced vessels.

I only mention that to refute the idea that the ISD was supposed to be some undefeatable behemouth. It only appears that way because we are seeing the story from the eyes of backwater Rebels fighting on the outskirts of the galaxy for the most part.

As a fundamental design requirement, the ISD needs to be an undefeatable behemoth in the eyes of 99.9% to 99.99% of star systems in the galaxy. It has to, because the Empire has on the order of ten million star systems and on the order of ten thousand ISDs to control them with.

Anything heavier than an ISD is so much less numerous that it cannot be spared for police work- the small number of genuine battleships must by kept on hand in the Core to garrison the most industrialized planets (the ones that can build ISD-killers). The task of patrolling and occupying the great majority of Imperial space is up to the ISDs and to the smaller Imperial ships, the sub-capital designs.

So for the majority of Imperial planets (the Rim and the less industrial Core worlds), an ISD is the biggest thing they'll ever see. As such, if it isn't big and powerful enough to overwhelm them, they are likely to wind up functionally independent of the Empire because the Empire will be hard pressed to scrape loose enough of the really big ships to control them.

And that is the only idea I'm trying to express here. The ISD is not the be-all and end-all of ship design, nor does it have to be, but it does have to be big enough that there are only a few thousand worlds in the galaxy capable of resisting one... because the Empire doesn't have the resources to control more than a few thousand star systems that can resist more than one star destroyer each. That places the ISD much closer to the top of the curve than to the bottom in terms of firepower.

[starfury]

And that is the only idea I'm trying to express here. The ISD is not the be-all and end-all of ship design, nor does it have to be, but it does have to be big enough that there are only a few thousand worlds in the galaxy capable of resisting one... because the Empire doesn't have the resources to control more than a few thousand star systems that can resist more than one star destroyer each. That places the ISD much closer to the top of the curve than to the bottom in terms of firepower.

I thought that helps to dovetail with how Eleven century remmant tells why classes like the Bellator battlecruiser or other "heavy" Classes were relatively rare, even though dreadnoughts like Executor were fairly common all things considersed being a prestiage class and swarms of common destroyers like the imperator for the mundane duties, but the middle and heavy classes of Cruisers and Battlecruisers seemed sequeezed out between heavier dreadnoughts and cheaper swarm ships. A sharp constrast to the Warhammer 40k Imperium of man fleet where the cruisers make up of the bulk of fleets supported by escorts and led large battleships and Grand cruisers

[Simon_Jester]

I think that's mainly the difference between a military operating in a largely peaceful galaxy and one where "there is only war!" Most worlds in Star Wars have a level of militarization so low it's practically negligible; the average works out to something like a corvette-weight warship per star system. Individual planets are unlikely to be attacked, and even if they are it makes more sense to rush reinforcements to them through hyperspace than it does to leave garrisons in orbit covering everything.

Whereas in 40k, the Imperium has to worry about being attacked anywhere and everywhere, and cannot move forces rapidly. So it has to put a lot more tonnage in space per planet, and set up fairly extensive defenses over any planet it wants to keep. Because of that, it has to compromise between having individual units that are tough enough to make a decent showing against anything they might encounter (and they might run into anything) and having units that are numerous enough that it can distribute them all over the place.

[starfury]

I think that's mainly the difference between a military operating in a largely peaceful galaxy and one where "there is only war!" Most worlds in Star Wars have a level of militarization so low it's practically negligible; the average works out to something like a corvette-weight warship per star system. Individual planets are unlikely to be attacked, and even if they are it makes more sense to rush reinforcements to them through hyperspace than it does to leave garrisons in orbit covering everything.

Well it does help explain the Small number of Middle and Heavy weight Capital ships, they were to large for mundane patrols but at the same is not large enough for showing the flag and helping to assuage the egos of Moffs who want's their personal battle yacht.

[NoogDeNoog]

Most worlds in Star Wars have a level of militarization so low it's practically negligible; the average works out to something like a corvette-weight warship per star system.

I'm just curious where the source on this is located. From the movies, Naboo had quite a starfighter force and even cloud city had an aggressive defense force.

From the EU, planets seem to have had quite extensive militaries or at least planetary defense forces. I'm not saying they could defeat the Imperials, but they seem to be much more powerful than one corvette. Didn't the rebels get most of their resources from planetary defense forces defecting to them?

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Most worlds in Star Wars have a level of militarization so low it's practically negligible; the average works out to something like a corvette-weight warship per star system.

I'm just curious where the source on this is located. From the movies, Naboo had quite a starfighter force and even cloud city had an aggressive defense force.

You call 12-24 Starfighters a considerable fighter force? Are you kidding me?

From the EU, planets seem to have had quite extensive militaries or at least planetary defense forces. I'm not saying they could defeat the Imperials, but they seem to be much more powerful than one corvette. Didn't the rebels get most of their resources from planetary defense forces defecting to them?

And where is your source for this? Most planets don't have an extensive military, which is why the Empire doesn't have to go lug around millions of troops just to take on a planet, whereas in Warhammer 40K, they'd have to bring along hundreds of thousands to over a million troops just to take control of some planets.

There are only a few worlds that have extensive enough industry to support even a decent fleet!

[NoogDeNoog]

"This corps included the famed Bravo Squadron and fought in N-1 starfighters."

So you are telling me that these 24 starfighters were referred to as a "corps" and one of them is a famed squadron?

In the Hutt gambit, the hutts had a sizable force that they didn't commit to the battle.

Where did the rebels get their ships from then?

Anyway, I am just asking for the source where that statement comes from.

[Patroklos]

There are lots of examples of dominions with sizable fleet assets. The names and numbers as Publius describes them. Corellia and Kuat obviously, but also entities like the CSA and the Hapians. It is anyone's guess just how many players of that scale there actually are or how many fleet assets they actually have on hand. Similarly, its anyone's guess as to how many names and numbers there are in comparison to less powerful inhabited planets.

It should also be remembered that all of these dominion forces are not automatically rivals to the Imperial fleet. Many of them are going to be coopted and integrated to a great extent into the Imperial force structure. With this in mind many an ISD may find itself the command ship of a largly sepoy force, its role being coordination and as a show of Imperial support more than direct participation in operations.

[Simon_Jester]

Most worlds in Star Wars have a level of militarization so low it's practically negligible; the average works out to something like a corvette-weight warship per star system.

I'm just curious where the source on this is located. From the movies, Naboo had quite a starfighter force and even cloud city had an aggressive defense force.

From the EU, planets seem to have had quite extensive militaries or at least planetary defense forces. I'm not saying they could defeat the Imperials, but they seem to be much more powerful than one corvette. Didn't the rebels get most of their resources from planetary defense forces defecting to them?

Trouble is:
Think about the size of the Imperial starfleet. The most conservative semi-plausible estimates* are around a few thousand star destroyers (or equivalent tonnage of larger and smaller ships). The more liberal plausible estimates are around a few tens of thousands of such. Contrast this And yet, such a fleet is heavy enough to rule the galaxy by force, or at least make a credible bid of doing so.

That tells us a great deal about the average amount of naval tonnage per star system. It doesn't mean there aren't plenty of systems with above-average tonnage, of course. But for every system with above-average local firepower, there must be one below it... "Alderaan is a peaceful planet, we have no weapons!" or something along those lines.

If the Star Wars galaxy had an average level of defensive firepower such that most systems could hope to stand off a star destroyer, the Empire would not be able to control millions of worlds with thousands of star destroyers. The individual ISDs must be overwhelming compared to the local defense force of practically every world they're assigned to patrol.

Now, the Rebellion will (rightly) concentrate on the exceptions- places like Corellia and Mon Calamari, that produce actual warships and could probably handle a lone star destroyer without breaking too much of a sweat. Those are the worlds where they can reasonably hope to pick up substantial support by convincing a local defense force to defect. Worlds that have no, or effectively no, such defense force and rely on the Imperial sector fleet to protect them will not have anything to offer the Rebels... and are so helpless against Imperial hostility that they make very poor bases for the Rebellion.

So most of the action we see concentrates around the most heavily defended planets, or at least the most heavily defended Rebel-sympathizing planets. But for every planet we see there are hundreds we don't see... many of which are no doubt the equivalent of the historical Asian cities that dismantled their walls after surrendering to Mongol control because the Mongols insisted that their subjects not have defensive measures capable of resisting them.
_________

*From the purest of pure movie-canon I can make a case for a lower bound of around 2000 ISD-weight ships, and that is a minimum, so don't jump all over me for it not being big enough, guys.

=========

There are lots of examples of dominions with sizable fleet assets. The names and numbers as Publius describes them. Corellia and Kuat obviously, but also entities like the CSA and the Hapians. It is anyone's guess just how many players of that scale there actually are or how many fleet assets they actually have on hand. Similarly, its anyone's guess as to how many names and numbers there are in comparison to less powerful inhabited planets.

This is true. However, we can reasonably infer that an empire which openly rules by force probably actually has enough force to do so. To make stuff like the Tarkin Doctrine anything more than a hideous and foolish joke, the Empire needs to be able to control the great majority of its own planets without relying too heavily on co-opting other people's fleets. It might not be able to beat up everyone else in the galaxy at once, but it must at least be within shouting distance of that kind of firepower. Otherwise, everyone would gang up on the Empire and they'd get torn to shreds in short order.

It should also be remembered that all of these dominion forces are not automatically rivals to the Imperial fleet. Many of them are going to be coopted and integrated to a great extent into the Imperial force structure. With this in mind many an ISD may find itself the command ship of a largly sepoy force, its role being coordination and as a show of Imperial support more than direct participation in operations.

That's certainly plausible on the remote Rim, in territory where Imperial control is noncritical. But, once again, the Empire still needs enough force in reserve that no plausible combination of enemies will think "What if we try the whole CIS route again, only this time we do it right?" After all, the problem with sepoys is always what happens if they decide to mutiny, and if you're going to dominate an empire by the naked threat of force, you need enough non-sepoy troops to make it obvious that a mutiny will fail.

Since the movies begin just as the Empire moves from the pretense of ruling through the Senate to the naked threat of force, that's a sign that the Empire is (during the movies) confident that it has a strong fleet, even on a galactic scale. But since 'galactic scale' means 'tens of millions of star systems' and they only have a few tens of thousands of destroyer-weight ships... you do the math on what that implies for the average militarization level of the galaxy.

[Ghost Rider]

For pure movie canon there's billions of ISD if we go by their ability to produce the Death Stars. Something to consider that it is the EU that lowballs it.

[Stark]

I'm not clear on why an ISD needs to be able to overcome the 'average planet'. The Empire doesn't rule through direct application of military invasion; it's a legitimate government. Even the EU has 'bombardment fleets' that are requried to deal with decently defended worlds; the idea that the ISD is some kind of benchmark for overwhelming offensive power seems bizarre. Cop cars can't overcome all the guns in a neighbourhood; they patrol through authority and as representatives of overwhelming force. If a system can destroy an ISD with their local forces, why would the Empire care? They'd be insane to do so.

[Eleventh Century Remnant]

The possibility exists by volume, no plausible way of denying that, and some of the most direct evidence for comparable numbers is actually ICS, referring to the clone wars, complete p86, "While vast campaigns detain millions of separatist warships in the Outer Rim...".

It only confirms that there could be, though, not that there necessarily are. The Galactic Empire may have uncountable amounts of money and ability to issue construction contracts, but the biggest single problem I can see is the personnel. You'd need to find billions, tens of billions of people who can be trusted with the absolute command of planet killing firepower, when to use it and when not to.

There are also two factors from the movie that directly argue against it. One of them being the continued existence of the Rebel Alliance. How long would it take this multi- billion strong fleet- divided proportionately, with some larger and a lot of smaller ships to make up that tonnage- how long would it take them to search every star in the galaxy? A day, two? A fleet that size would reduce the Empire's problems to a triviality.

The other problem is that fifty million inhabited world thing. I'm prepared to concede that "World"="polity", and there may be more, but even if by world you mean populated system, five, six, a dozen actual stellar bodies full of people of any kind, you're still looking at at least one, possibly- depending on just how many planets and how many tens of billions, a three digit number of credibly planet killing warships for each and every inhabited world. At the very least, this would make Tarkin's Doctrine of Fear entirely, entirely pointless.

The existence of the Death Star does prove that the Empire could build that much tonnage; it also suggests very strongly that they didn't.

I do go for the high end of the low band, personally, about forty thousand line destroyers- Imperators, Tectors, Dominators, the rest of the Imperator variations. That seems to be the best compromise to me, and YMMV, between the empire being broadly able to enforce it's will and yet not being able to consistently and easily track the rebels down- enough and more to fight an open enemy, not always enough to find an elusive one.


Oh, and a rough ballpark estimate on the Venator vs Imperator, multiplying the relative proportions suggests the ~3.6E24 W Venator is roughly thirty-five percent of the volume of the ~1E25 W Imperator. The actual mechanical difference there is vastly smaller than, for one thing, the potential difference between the skill of the crews, and the Imperator lost nothing at all that matters in terms of combat efficiency.

Even if (in the face of minimal evidence) starship combat was largely automated, the crew that kept it's machinery in better order should still have an edge.

As far as I can tell from the various novels and sourcebooks, Corellia is theoretically independent, and there are individual Corellians who contribute greatly to the Alliance, but the planet itself is running in close parallel to the Empire, a de facto protectorate.
The rebel alliance may get a substantial proportion of it's front line fighters, a higher proportion of it's sneakies and a very high proportion of it's heroes from there, but Corellia as a state would not, and did not, cross that line.

The "Names and Numbers", as I understand it, aren't places, they're people- it seems to be Publius' term for the old republican Galactic Aristocracy, many of whom survived into the Empire as a result of being too economically and legally important to do anything about, and may attend the Court of Courts. They may rule, but I think it would greatly insult Sanya Tagge if you compared her to a planet.

[starfury]

The possibility exists by volume, no plausible way of denying that, and some of the most direct evidence for comparable numbers is actually ICS, referring to the clone wars, complete p86, "While vast campaigns detain millions of separatist warships in the Outer Rim...".

It only confirms that there could be, though, not that there necessarily are. The Galactic Empire may have uncountable amounts of money and ability to issue construction contracts, but the biggest single problem I can see is the personnel. You'd need to find billions, tens of billions of people who can be trusted with the absolute command of planet killing firepower, when to use it and when not to.

There are also two factors from the movie that directly argue against it. One of them being the continued existence of the Rebel Alliance. How long would it take this multi- billion strong fleet- divided proportionately, with some larger and a lot of smaller ships to make up that tonnage- how long would it take them to search every star in the galaxy? A day, two? A fleet that size would reduce the Empire's problems to a triviality.

The other problem is that fifty million inhabited world thing. I'm prepared to concede that "World"="polity", and there may be more, but even if by world you mean populated system, five, six, a dozen actual stellar bodies full of people of any kind, you're still looking at at least one, possibly- depending on just how many planets and how many tens of billions, a three digit number of credibly planet killing warships for each and every inhabited world. At the very least, this would make Tarkin's Doctrine of Fear entirely, entirely pointless.

The existence of the Death Star does prove that the Empire could build that much tonnage; it also suggests very strongly that they didn't.

I do go for the high end of the low band, personally, about forty thousand line destroyers- Imperators, Tectors, Dominators, the rest of the Imperator variations. That seems to be the best compromise to me, and YMMV, between the empire being broadly able to enforce it's will and yet not being able to consistently and easily track the rebels down- enough and more to fight an open enemy, not always enough to find an elusive one.

Again that point in your story in comparsion to the Imperium of man, which is of similar or slightly larger then the Galactic Empire but deploys ten times the tonnage for warships that the galactic empire does, with a balance of much greater biased toward cruisers and relatively small numbers of both battleships and escorts, while the GE fleet is based on decent number of superheavy dreadnoughts and hordes of cheap destroyers even accounting for the technological difference, the Middle weights of Battleships/Battlecrusiers/Cruisers and were as you stated Deliberately kept small.

[Andras]

Pulling numbers from WEGs Imperial Sourcebook, you can get something like 10,000 sectors easily, and possibly twice that, which would give the sector forces something more then 240,000 ISDs (16+ million combatants total), not counting OverSector forces and mobile forces such as Bombardment fleets and Assault fleets which are only deployed to sectors as needed.

There's a line I've read somewhere that says the Empire also keeps 10% of it's forces in reserve in the deep core. That would give you a number very close to Zahns 25,000 ISDs. I also place the heavier combatants in these forces and leave them out of the sector level forces.

And you are still only looking at a force level of only 1 ISD/190 worlds, and 1 combatant/3.2 worlds.

[Simon_Jester]

For pure movie canon there's billions of ISD if we go by their ability to produce the Death Stars. Something to consider that it is the EU that lowballs it.

That's based on the assumption that they actually have a fleet of ships with collective tonnage on the same general order as that of the Death Stars. While that would perhaps not be a surprise in the abstract, it raises two significant problems:

-The Empire does not bother to station multiple star destroyers over every inhabited planet in its territory, which would be an obvious precaution if it had billions of them to play with.

-Han Solo comments that the destruction of Alderaan "is impossible... it would take a thousand ships, with more firepower than I've ever [seen/imagined/something like that]." Han Solo would probably not consider a fleet of a thousand ships bigger than any he's ever seen to be even slightly "impossible" if he already knew damn well that the Empire already had billions (or even millions) of mile-long warships. Since Han is a former Imperial Navy officer from a Core world, and one who has spent all his time since his desertion trying to evade the Imperial fleet, it would seem likely that he has at least a rough order of magnitude sense of the size of the fleet.

Han's reaction at the idea of the destruction of Alderaan implies two things:
1)Han does not believe that any reasonable concentration of Imperial mobile units could destroy a planet- or, at a minimum, that he would have heard about any such concentration and would know if it were being made.
2)From (1), it follows that the Imperial fleet is not large enough to make planet-destroying concentrations casually, even if it is possible. And a million Star Destroyers with power output on the order of 1E24 or 1E25 watts could do that, dropping enough energy in a 1 to 10 minute bombardment to cancel out the ~3E32 joule gravitational binding energy.

An Imperial fleet with enough ships that it can easily spare a million ISDs is therefore not credible.

I'm not clear on why an ISD needs to be able to overcome the 'average planet'. The Empire doesn't rule through direct application of military invasion; it's a legitimate government. Even the EU has 'bombardment fleets' that are requried to deal with decently defended worlds; the idea that the ISD is some kind of benchmark for overwhelming offensive power seems bizarre. Cop cars can't overcome all the guns in a neighbourhood; they patrol through authority and as representatives of overwhelming force. If a system can destroy an ISD with their local forces, why would the Empire care? They'd be insane to do so.

The trouble is that the Empire may not rule purely by force, but someone who advocates doing so doesn't get laughed out of Palpatine's office. Tarkin was taken seriously, even before the Death Star was a proven concept.

Thus, the fleet's aggregate firepower must be overwhelming compared to the aggregate defensive strength of any probable combination of rebels or enemies. And when you compare the number of ISDs to the number of planets, that requires overwhelming local superiority of any one ISD against any one planet.

In most parts of the world, one cop does have more firearms on his person than the average individual citizen, and the ratio of ISDs to planets is comparable to the ratio of police to citizens: thousands to millions. Policing doesn't work well unless the police have superior force compared to the average citizen, either; places where everyone has an assault rifle on their person routinely are difficult to police.

[ChuckRac]

Is it true that 'Super Star Destroyers' are more powerful than 'Imperial Star Destroyers'? I thought Imperial is more powerful than Super? Anyways, I don't see/hear a lot about Super star destroyers, anybody knows why?
Cheers!

[bz249]

For pure movie canon there's billions of ISD if we go by their ability to produce the Death Stars. Something to consider that it is the EU that lowballs it.

The critical difference is that a Death Star is one unit while billions of ISD are billions of independent units. It is entirely possible that the C4I structure of such a force is divergent, thus adding a new ISD to the structure would require infinite number of support personel after a certain point.

Even if it is convergent (thus a new ISD requires a relatively small finite number of non-combat personnel to the C4I structure) one billion of ISDs mean at least 15 admiral levels (with each of them have 6 subordinates... 20 with a more conservative 4 subordinate). Since (most) GFFA humans did not demonstrate superhuman abilities, thus such a structure is most probably unmanagable to them.

[Eleventh Century Remnant]

Cause and effect, Starfury, cause and effect. I write it the way I see it, fan fiction is not evidence, it is or should be based (insofar as it is proper to base it) on conclusions drawn from evidence. Don't put the horse before the cart.

Andras- hm. "Countless regions, each consisting of anywhere from three to thousands of sectors" is there in black and white, but these could be West End sectors of half a dozen to two dozen worlds each, if you remember the sort of thing the RPG used to use as a sector map.

The force density would be too high for the rebels to do anything other than exist the way they usually did in the tabletop game, as hunted spies and terrorists. Although they never put it like that, "heroic fredom fighters agianst impossible odds" was more the tone. I think it is necessary to divorce the West End sector from the West End sector group- and the chapter does suggest that, from cookie- cutter uniformity deep in the Old Republic, they evolved and changed over the years, some to contain thousands of systems, the way we usually imagine it, although most of those would be dependencies.

Zahn's 25,000 was a canon elevation of a chronologically much earlier statement, going as far back as the first edition of the RPG; the fluff text attached to the game statistic notes for the Imperial class, published as early as 1984 and I think actually predating ROtJ, states over 25,000 were built.

He took it from S-canon to C- canon, and I think given the context in which it was said, by one very senior and quite brilliant (even if personally despicable) fleet officer to his flag captain, why would he only be discussing the strategic reserve, rather than the force comitted to the post- Palpatinian civil wars? If anything, the strategic reserve (held back in the Core) would have been omitted from the statement.

A more worrying question, why were the heavies of the strategic reserve not used against some of the alrger dissident states? The Hapes cluster could do with being jumped up and down on- they had at least one large, open clash with Imperial forces, that the Empire lost. Why was there no crushing of dissidence, no answer to that open revolt? I can't answer that off the top of my head, not in detail, "Politics" seems the only thing remotely plausible.

ChuckRac, you can't possibly be serious. This has to be a wah.

bz249, with droid administrative and info management, simple data shuffling might be easier than you think to the point where I think excessive micromanagement is a greater problem for the Imperial Starfleet than the other way around.

It's the mechanics of support, the fleet technical services- hypermatter production above all- that worry me. Actually that could be an indicator. If we knew more about it, how difficult it is to produce, how easily hypermatter facilities can be expanded, what percentage of full capacity they normally work at, we might have a better idea of the long term growth and growth- potential of the fleet.

The Confederacy's hypermatter production facilities almost certainly ended up in the hands of the Empire, meaning their fleet could be the size of the Confederacy's and Republic's combined, although some of that clearly went to the Death Star. Strategic reserves of fuel being tapped?

[bz249]

bz249, with droid administrative and info management, simple data shuffling might be easier than you think to the point where I think excessive micromanagement is a greater problem for the Imperial Starfleet than the other way around.

It's the mechanics of support, the fleet technical services- hypermatter production above all- that worry me. Actually that could be an indicator. If we knew more about it, how difficult it is to produce, how easily hypermatter facilities can be expanded, what percentage of full capacity they normally work at, we might have a better idea of the long term growth and growth- potential of the fleet.

The Confederacy's hypermatter production facilities almost certainly ended up in the hands of the Empire, meaning their fleet could be the size of the Confederacy's and Republic's combined, although some of that clearly went to the Death Star. Strategic reserves of fuel being tapped?

Well if they can fuel the Death Star than fuelling a much lower tonnage in individual ships (like one million ISD) should not be a real issue (although the economics of scale might play some role). Note also the extent of civilian traffic, by causing relatively minor disruption to the civilian system the Empire can tap the required fuel. I see no economic factor which might prevent the inflation of the Imperial Navy.

So I guess we should look the human factor. The possible explanations I can think are overly complex structure and the reluctance to delegate power to lower levels (thus too much micromanegement). Another thing could be the federal nature of the Empire (although much less than in Republic times) where member worlds were still more or less independent (no monopoly of violence for the central government, no harmonized legal system, etc).

[Simon_Jester]

ECR, that's sort of what I'm talking about; it ought to be physically possible for the Empire to have billions of hulls, but there are practical reasons why a fleet so large would be difficult to control and organize. In my opinion, it's at least as telling that no one acts as if the Empire has a billion-ship fleet, not anywhere. In the movies, individual star destroyers are taken rather seriously, rather than just being the local garrison, and it's strongly implied that not every planet is continuously garrisoned by an ISD-weight ship. Even powerful Imperial figures generally have no more than a few dozen star destroyers under their immediate control; would the Emperor use so few ships at Endor if the average world in his empire had scores of the things floating around in orbit?
__________

As for Chuck, someone owes the fellow a straight answer:

Is it true that 'Super Star Destroyers' are more powerful than 'Imperial Star Destroyers'? I thought Imperial is more powerful than Super? Anyways, I don't see/hear a lot about Super star destroyers, anybody knows why?
Cheers!

Compare the sizes: The "Super" we see is roughly ten times longer than the ordinary "Imperial" star destroyers in scenes where both are visible. It is likewise wider and taller. That makes it roughly 1000 times as massive, which means it has MUCH more room for power plants, guns, and such. Therefore, it is almost certainly a more powerful unit.

[NoogDeNoog]

Pulling numbers from WEGs Imperial Sourcebook, you can get something like 10,000 sectors easily, and possibly twice that, which would give the sector forces something more then 240,000 ISDs (16+ million combatants total), not counting OverSector forces and mobile forces such as Bombardment fleets and Assault fleets which are only deployed to sectors as needed.

There's a line I've read somewhere that says the Empire also keeps 10% of it's forces in reserve in the deep core. That would give you a number very close to Zahns 25,000 ISDs. I also place the heavier combatants in these forces and leave them out of the sector level forces.

And you are still only looking at a force level of only 1 ISD/190 worlds, and 1 combatant/3.2 worlds.

I see Eleventh Century Remnant already said some of this.

I thought it was 1,000 sectors at 24 ISD per sector for 24,000 ISD. Each sector originally consisted of 50 inhabited worlds. however, with all the expansion, this number varies greatly. Some sectors may have up to 200 or 300 inhabited worlds not to mention all the small settlements that are scattered throughout the sector.

WEG always say there are a 1000 1000 worlds, I take that to mean a million. I find the figure of 51 million to be amazingly huge. I guess if you took every settlement in each star system instead of just counting the system you would get closer. That is still 51,000 settlements/planets per sector.

[fractalsponge1]

The recent Atlas book describes the formation of 1024 "Regional Sectors" during the Ruusan Reformations from the many smaller pre-existing Republic sectors. Those are the geographical units represented in the Senate as seen in TPM, in addition to "functional constituencies" like large corporations (i.e. the Trade Federation). The Sector Group is presumably for that, larger, definition of "sector." Sector sizes are also said to vary wildly. Regions/Oversectors are overlaid on top of that organization.

In the movies, individual star destroyers are taken rather seriously, rather than just being the local garrison, and it's strongly implied that not every planet is continuously garrisoned by an ISD-weight ship.

Yes, they are taken rather seriously in a dump like Tatooine. But that is not conclusive proof that they are particularly rare or exceptionally powerful. There are "lots of command ships," after all.

Even powerful Imperial figures generally have no more than a few dozen star destroyers under
their immediate control

Yet many officers muster flagships that embody hundreds of star destroyers by themselves.

would the Emperor use so few ships at Endor if the average world in his empire had scores of the things floating around in orbit?

Maybe because moving a substantial portion of the central reserve forces, or a huge proportion of local Sector Fleets, would, I don't know, be sort of obvious? Not to mention the presence of Executor and DS2. Again, I'm not arguing that each world had dozens of ISDs, but it's not conclusive that there aren't many, many thousands of destroyer weight ships and better across the galaxy.

[Simon_Jester]

In the movies, individual star destroyers are taken rather seriously, rather than just being the local garrison, and it's strongly implied that not every planet is continuously garrisoned by an ISD-weight ship.

Yes, they are taken rather seriously in a dump like Tatooine. But that is not conclusive proof that they are particularly rare or exceptionally powerful. There are "lots of command ships," after all.

ISDs aren't exceptionally powerful on a galactic scale, but that's because it's a big galaxy. Compared to galactic civilization as a whole, a hundred worlds isn't even a slightly impressive collection of firepower, and being the biggest ship in those hundred worlds isn't very impressive either.

In absolute terms there are lots of ISDs, but in relative terms there are many, many planets per ISD. And since all ships significantly larger than an ISD exist in even lower numbers, the ISD remains the workhorse of the Imperial fleet. Which requires that it be powerful enough to police the vast majority of planets- even the exceptional ones in the 90th percentile or so of defensive firepower. There simply aren't enough of the heavier ships to go around otherwise. Scores of them, even hundreds... but not scores or hundreds of thousands.

Even powerful Imperial figures generally have no more than a few dozen star destroyers under their immediate control

Yet many officers muster flagships that embody hundreds of star destroyers by themselves.

Sponge, for crying out loud, I'm not talking about the total tonnage of the fleet; I'm talking about numbers of hulls. The flagships are massive, but that does NOT mean that the Empire has an equal tonnage invested in its smaller ships. If they did, they wouldn't need the massive flagships in the first place- why bother with a Death Star when a tiny fraction of the Death Star's weight in Star Destroyers is quite capable of destroying a planet?

There has to be a reason. Either building such a huge number of individual hulls is not cost-effective compared to one large station, or the Empire faces human factors that limit the absolute size of the fleet in hulls, not in tons. Or something else I haven't thought of. But the result is clear: the Empire choose to limit the total number of hulls to levels well below their nominal industrial capabilities, and instead invests those capabilities in building a relatively small number of much larger superships, up to and including the Death Stars.

And at the low end, the ISD is one of those superships: it's the "supership" from the point of view of all but, say, one in a hundred planets. Compared to the strongest of ten thousand planets it's not very impressive at all... but those extra-strong planets in the 99.9th percentile aren't being policed by destroyers. They're controlled by the much heavier supercapital ships, such as the Executor. For planets large enough that even an Executor-class isn't a decisive threat, there's the Death Star.
_________

would the Emperor use so few ships at Endor if the average world in his empire had scores of the things floating around in orbit?

Maybe because moving a substantial portion of the central reserve forces, or a huge proportion of local Sector Fleets, would, I don't know, be sort of obvious?[/quote]Yes, but if he had a billion-ship fleet (which is what I'm arguing against), a thousand ships wouldn't be "a substantial portion" of anything. There'd be hordes of ships coming and going in various places around the galaxy all the time. Given reasonable construction rates, tens or hundreds of thousands of new ones would be coming out of the shipyards daily. He could assemble a thousand ships at Endor just by being creative with the damn paperwork. If the ship-based units of the Imperial Navy were comparable in total mass to the Death Stars, a thousand ships wouldn't really be a fleet by Imperial standards, it would be a rounding error.

Therefore, the sheer mass of the largest Imperial constructions (the Death Stars) cannot reasonably be used as evidence for the existence of a comparable mass of smaller ships. The existence of so many smaller ships would have very noticeable effects on the overall setting, and those effects simply aren't there.
_________

Not to mention the presence of Executor and DS2. Again, I'm not arguing that each world had dozens of ISDs, but it's not conclusive that there aren't many, many thousands of destroyer weight ships and better across the galaxy.

Look, I already accept an absolute lower bound of 2000 destroyer weight ships. At LEAST. The more credible figures I've seen (the ones I think are true) are an order of magnitude higher than that, or even more. I'm figuring tens of thousands, maybe low hundreds of thousands.

But not millions or tens of millions. And that still leaves us faced with the fact that there are many planets per star destroyer.

[Andras]

Pulling numbers from WEGs Imperial Sourcebook, you can get something like 10,000 sectors easily, and possibly twice that, which would give the sector forces something more then 240,000 ISDs (16+ million combatants total), not counting OverSector forces and mobile forces such as Bombardment fleets and Assault fleets which are only deployed to sectors as needed.

There's a line I've read somewhere that says the Empire also keeps 10% of it's forces in reserve in the deep core. That would give you a number very close to Zahns 25,000 ISDs. I also place the heavier combatants in these forces and leave them out of the sector level forces.

And you are still only looking at a force level of only 1 ISD/190 worlds, and 1 combatant/3.2 worlds.

I see Eleventh Century Remnant already said some of this.

I thought it was 1,000 sectors at 24 ISD per sector for 24,000 ISD. Each sector originally consisted of 50 inhabited worlds. however, with all the expansion, this number varies greatly. Some sectors may have up to 200 or 300 inhabited worlds not to mention all the small settlements that are scattered throughout the sector.

WEG always say there are a 1000 1000 worlds, I take that to mean a million. I find the figure of 51 million to be amazingly huge. I guess if you took every settlement in each star system instead of just counting the system you would get closer. That is still 51,000 settlements/planets per sector.

Actually, what the Imperial Sourcebook says is that the "... the Rebellion nevertheless burns across a thousand-thousand worlds..." Which in no way limits the total number of worlds in the Empire to 1 million, just that the Rebellion is active on a million worlds.

Further on, the ISB says:

A sector...Originally a cluster of star systems with approximately 50 inhabited planets, the definition of a sector became vague and the average sector grew in size during the latter days of the Republic. Now unimaginably large sectors contain vast number of inhabited worlds with no regard to limiting factors.

Sectors are grouped into larger territorial entities called regions. The Empire has countless regions, which can contain from as few as three to upwards of thousands of sectors.

Under the New Order, the Galactic Empire continues to grow and expand and new sectors and regions are being formed all the time.

That also doesn't include Priority Sector forces, which contain at least twice the number of ships as a regular sector while conducting operations on worlds from a dozen sectors. the Death Star itself was considered a Priority Sector that consumed the resources of a score of sector groups. Grand Moffs are in charge of Priority Sectors, and their numbers are increasing rapidly.

Lastly, the last line in the Sector Group Organization chapter states that there are thousands of sector groups at the Emperor's command. So it's more then just 1,000 sectors, a lot more.

[NoogDeNoog]

P.5 The Star Wars Sourcebook.

"In the days of the Old Republic, a thousand-thousand worlds flourished under a common government."

P.5 Imperial Sourcebook (1st edition)

"The Galactic Empire consists of a thousand-thousand worlds caught in the iron grip of tyranny.

The organization is called a sector fleet, that doesn't mean there can't be more than one sector fleet in a sector. Number of sector fleets does not equal number of sectors.

"P. 108 "A sector Group is the sum total of naval strength which the Empire expects to commit to a NORMAL sector."