And they don't have this why?

[Ritterin Sophia]

And the fact that a few hundred examples of an old design exist is not really impressive. There are still dozens of mint condition model Ts out there but they are a drop in the bucket compared the thousands upon thousands of those built. And though they still exist and work, they are hardly up to modern standards.

So you're comparing a warship that served the Republic for three millenia to a car less than a century old?

[TC Pilot]

You also don't usually see Model T's riding alongside an Abrams in battle. Or, to fit the analogy, a Mark I.

[Patroklos]

So you're comparing a warship that served the Republic for three millenia to a car less than a century old?

Scale appropriately. Note, however, that the Katana fleet itself was not millenia old, and barely used as well.

The fact remains that just because a machine survives and is operational does not mean it is anything of note or at all up to competing with modern equivalents.

You also don't usually see Model T's riding alongside an Abrams in battle. Or, to fit the analogy, a Mark I.

Obtimally, no. But then Thrawn was not operating optimally. The USN keeps many WWII era vessels in mothball just in case we end up in a situation as dire as the one Thrawn faced. I have equal doubts about the usefulness of those ships as well.

[TC Pilot]

Obtimally, no. But then Thrawn was not operating optimally. The USN keeps many WWII era vessels in mothball just in case we end up in a situation as dire as the one Thrawn faced. I have equal doubts about the usefulness of those ships as well.

So I guess the Imperial Navy was in constant dire straits because it used dreadnoughts as front line warships for as long as it existed.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Scale appropriately. Note, however, that the Katana fleet itself was not millenia old, and barely used as well.

The fact remains that just because a machine survives and is operational does not mean it is anything of note or at all up to competing with modern equivalents.

Back up, I didn't say anything about Katana Fleet. Two, learn to fucking read; I said they were in service IE in use not museum or collector's pieces.

[fractalsponge1]

Obtimally, no. But then Thrawn was not operating optimally. The USN keeps many WWII era vessels in mothball just in case we end up in a situation as dire as the one Thrawn faced. I have equal doubts about the usefulness of those ships as well.

The analogy is a bit flawed; the basic technology in Dreadnaughts is probably the same as in an ISD. The problem is that they just aren't very large, fast, powerful, or efficient.

[Patroklos]

So I guess the Imperial Navy was in constant dire straits because it used dreadnoughts as front line warships for as long as it existed.

That, or like the USN who used WWII transports/cruisers/battleships/destroyers in active survice right up to the drawdown of the 1990s despite record spending, they found themselves in a situation where their fleet wasn't expanding fast enough to fullfill all requirments optimally.

Neither scenario discounts my observation, that just because soemthing survives a long time that it is particularly useful in the modern age, just better than nothing.

[Patroklos]

Back up, I didn't say anything about Katana Fleet. Two, learn to fucking read; I said they were in service IE in use not museum or collector's pieces.

A good portion of this thread is talking about the Katana Fleet, and is in fact the only reason we are discussing the Dreadnaught in the first place. The Katana fleet specifically has been sitting unused for quite some time.

It’s irrelevant though, as there are plenty of people who use antique cars daily through providing them with constant care. Inefficient, expensive, and time consuming care but care that allows them to work. Despite this, their abilities have not increased in the decades since their construction to make them modern equivalents, and a brand new model will still outclass them utterly. Warships are no different in this regard.

I realize you think there has been some sort of plateau in warship design and capability, but multiple sources make the point that the Dreadnaught is considered obsolete, the fact that it is still in service does not change this.

[Patroklos]

The analogy is a bit flawed; the basic technology in Dreadnaughts is probably the same as in an ISD. The problem is that they just aren't very large, fast, powerful, or efficient.

Maybe, but discovering new ways to utilize the same technology to increase things like efficiency, capability, endurance or any other number of metircs is an advance all itself. Either way, warships designs marched on and the Dreadnaught did not march with them.

[Simon_Jester]

The real question is: how far have designs marched? Is a Dreadnaught 10% behind the modern norm when it comes to combat effectiveness per ton? 20%? 50%?

The fact that they're used at all suggests that they're still expected to at least survive long enough to run away when faced with heavy modern opposition, and that they're not so slow or labor-intensive that they act as a drag on the rest of the fleet, the way that wooden sailing ships would act as a drag on an oil-powered navy from the World Wars.

Also, there's the question of refits. For example, there are jet fighters still in service today that were designed thirty or forty years ago. The airframes aren't all that stellar by modern standards, but when equipped with modern missiles, radar, and communciation gear they perform well enough to compete with all but the latest fighters. A new modern heat-seeking missile or radar set can still fit in the space that was originally meant to house a much weaker, more primitive piece of equipment.

So given even limited time to overhaul an old ship like a Dreadnought, you could probably make up a large fraction of the performance gap between it and a modern ship of equal tonnage just by improving the electronics fit. It's not as if the basic propulsion, shield, or weapon technologies have changed; people used the same kinds of engines and such before the Clone Wars as they did after Endor. Improvements came from using things better, and you can often implement that kind of change without having to take the ship apart and put it back together.

[Patroklos]

There is also the question of the pace of starship development and innovation. When there isn't much of a military threat and thus no motive to innovate, a ship that was state of the art hundreds/thousands of years ago at the conclusion of the last major galatic conflict might remain stat of the art for the hundreds/thousands of years of following peacetime. Once wartime kicks off again civilian technology that had advanced is applied to military applications or dedicated military technology is developed and that ship that was state of the art for ages could be obsolete in the space of a couple years.

If wartime persits for a long period of time, you could go through several generations of ships in the span of just decades.

[fractalsponge1]

In crew cost-effectiveness, at least, the Dreadnaught is a miserable piece of crap. 16000 for a ship dramatically smaller than an ISD that requires 37000, or a Venator that requires 8000 (Venators have clone crews, so probably leaner manned, but you get the picture). As far as energy density goes, I'll have to build a 3d model to check, but I'm betting it isn't great either.

It might have always been a piece of crap, and only built and kept because Rendilli had an influential senator or something, and/or there was a shortage of hulls for escort and backwater patrol duty.

[Connor MacLeod]

There is a massive disconnect between the military and militarized hull and tonnage numbers seen in TPM/ROTS and fleshed out in sources such as Imperial Sourcebook and the ICSes and the kind of numbers that are mentioned in the Zahn novels. The former sources suggest that the dozens of militarized Lucrehulks and thousands of destroyer-sized vessels (all of them more powerful than Dreadnaughts) at Coruscant still constituted a small fraction of total engaged forces ("campaigns detain millions of ships"). Executor alone at the battle of Endor is bigger than the Katana fleet combined, and there are over a dozen of those in various sources, including (depending on how you want to interpret "Super") the three that were basically forgotten about in Black Sword. 25000 destroyers implied by the ISB. These are the typical numbers for contesting large tracts of the galaxy. More recent sources like the Atlas establish the scale of territory taken by Thrawn.

Then by all means: if you want to claim a problem exists then I want to see the proof of it. Simply saying "I say so" isn't enough and as it stands there isn't enough proof to indicate there is a problem. I'd especially love to see you pull out definitive numbers from ROTS. I'm sur you're referring to the Tradefed army in TPM but the obvious numbers there are counterbalanced by the fact they are largely carriers/assault ships (and rather craptastically designed warships at that point). Most separaist vessels are rather craptastic so they pretty much NEED numbers to be a threat to an actual warship.

As for the ISB, I can simply point out that there are hints at bigger sizes, but by itself it doesn't mean a whole lot or isn't neccesarily contradictory, since a.) some of the numbers regarding fleet organization and set up are highly idealized eg: torpedo sphere numbers (there's supposed to be several torpedo spheres per sector IIRC, and yet there are only 6 total post Yavin) b.) some of the references are vague "Thousands" of Sector groups being mentioned but not saying how many thousands, c.) It's pointed out in the self same source that the data may be unreliable - which is actually a boon considering how craptastic the army and storm trooper sizes are implied in the book.

I can further muddy point b.) by adding a number of the supplement books WEG put out depicts Sector groups that are actually alot smaller than the 24 ISD standard, so again its not absolute.

But like I said. you want to prove otherwise, let's see the evidence.

Either it's Thrawn had a huge fleet and army (allies and all) that makes the Katana fleet look irrelevant, or massive Thrawn wanking to make the conquests possible, with tiny forces stringing together an improbably large string of victories on their own.

False dilemma. I like how you completely ignored the fact that Thrawn wasn't an absolute unanimous leader of the Empire (outlined by details in the New Essnetial Chronology, where it's stated without Thrawn's efforts the Empire fell back into Warlordism, and how he had to demonstrate his ability to win victories in order to actually gain his authority.) and novels like the Jedi Acadmeny Trilogy (Carida witnessed the Imperial army falling back into squabbling and warlordism after Thrawn's fall). Hell Palpy wasn't even an absolute leader whose word was law (despite his efforts to the contrary), so why should Thrawn be so? It's likely that Thrawn had to actually wrestle any military support he could get from the rest of the Empire (why should they stick their necks uot for an unknown unless he proves he could give them victory?) and thus had to do with what he had until later on. with the Katana fleet, he's got more force with which to win victories, whereupon he can encourage his "supporters" to lend him more support, prying more ships away from them. This also explains the whole "Empire falling apart again without Thrawn to hold it together" - which is probably why (in the DESB) Palpy made an effort to actually see Thrawn lose (which is another not so minor factor to pay attention to. Thrawn was working against a number of things against him.)

But no, by all means, lets keep hugging this strawman you've constructed just to bash thrawn with, rather than look for actual explanations that work and fit into the continuity. After all, its THRAWN! KILL THRAWN! THRAWN BAD! *I'm a smarmy asshole*?

What's he going to do to take a major world without more? Blockade a planet with a miniscule fraction of the tonnage the Trade Federation brought to Naboo in peacetime? How many psychological tricks does it take to take and hold territory embodying millions of planets? At some point, conventional warmaking is going to be needed.

Oh wait, he's got to start taking major worlds right away??? I'm sorry. I guess the Outer Rim and other locales are completely and utterly barren and devoid of any usable military assets or resources. Nope, he's just gotta plunge STRAIGHT FOR THE CORE! GO FOR THE THROAT! Yet again we see "Yay fallacies" seems to be your approach to the issue.

To look at it another way, there are sources that clearly state much more powerful units than Katana that are present (Kaine and Reaper, for example). Either the New Republic and the forces it could call on forces (allied or not) that can stand against that level of firepower (they did, after all, manage to take down Zsinj), or they didn't, and there's a big question mark over how it managed to survive. The inconsistencies are not all Zahn's fault, but he doesn't help rationalize it, certainly.

BWAHAHAHa. so a single SSD is going to make ALL the difference? We know nothing about its status or condition or even its level of capability. being a "big ship" doesnt mean much, and if we go by available examples SSDs don't neccessarily need HUGE ASS FLEETS to take them down or even threaten them, at least if you approach the problem right. Kaine and the Pentestar Alignment were OPPOSED to Thrawn. They were ENEMIES. This was explicitly stated in that Red Moons story in (IIRC) Tales from the New Republic. Stop pretending SSDs are somehow now a UBER SUPER WEAPON THREAT O DOOM that somehow marks some significant threat unless they devote huge numbers of assets to it. Aren't you getting tired of distorting the issue yet?

Hell, post Endor SSDs were rather a rarity, which is sensible considering the situation and economic factors likely driving it. The NR doens't WANT SSDS because Mon Mothma is a fool, the Warlords don't always have resources to keep and maintain them - its likely Palp doesnt want anyone having large numbers of them outside of his control either... and not everyone can build them (KDY mainly, and I see no reason to assume they start building for Thrawn.)\

Edit: I'm also tired of this "no numbers but the Dreadnaught is probably crap" argument. I want to see some fucking NUMBERS. along with sources. Stop the motherfucking guerilla debating cuz this ain't spacebattles and I have zero tolerance for this kind of bullshit.

[fractalsponge1]

Then by all means: if you want to claim a problem exists then I want to see the proof of it. Simply saying "I say so" isn't enough and as it stands there isn't enough proof to indicate there is a problem. I'd especially love to see you pull out definitive numbers from ROTS. I'm sur you're referring to the Tradefed army in TPM but the obvious numbers there are counterbalanced by the fact they are largely carriers/assault ships (and rather craptastically designed warships at that point). Most separaist vessels are rather craptastic so they pretty much NEED numbers to be a threat to an actual warship.

An upgraded Lucrehulk is not necessarily a pushover. "A flotilla of these...warships can blast through the shields of a Trade Federation battleship with ease" (ROTS ICS). Venator's reactor is worth ~ 3.6e24 W (ROTS ICS). Assume a minimum of 3 ships to the "flotilla," and a "Trade Federation battleship" is a militarized variant. This suggests that it takes no more than ~1.1e25W to breach the shields. The Lucrehulk core ship has a peak shield capacity (dissipation rate) of 6e23W, vice a peak reactor capacity of 3e24W (AOTC ICS). Assuming that this shield to output ratio holds for a complete ship, then the power of a full ship is on the order of 5.5e25W. 5.5xISD generation, and not inconsistent for a ship in the 3km length range with ISD energy density.

Obviously it does not follow that all of the thousands of Lucrehulks at Naboo were all to this standard, but there are "scores" of militarized Lucrehulks on Geonosis in AOTC (ICS). The only Separatist ships bigger than Munificient/Recusant/Providence size seen at Coruscant in ROTS were complete Trade Fed ships (Ring+Core). "While vast campaigns detain millions of Separatist warships in the Outer Rim, a few dozen battleships lead thousands of destroyers and frigates in a bold strike on the galactic capital Coruscant" (ROTS ICS). Let's say 24 Lucrehulks + 1000 Recusant and 1000 Munificent. Firepower on the order of 24*5.5e25W (Lucrehulk) + 1000*7.7e23W (Recusant) + 1000*4.1e23W (Munificient) ~ 3.68e27W. 368 ISD equivalents at Coruscant alone.

Edit: I'm also tired of this "no numbers but the Dreadnaught is probably crap" argument. I want to see some fucking NUMBERS. along with sources.

Here's what I get about the combat power of Dreadnaughts from more recent sources.

There is a difficult reference to interpret in ROTS novelization, where 3 Carracks and a single Dreadnaught engaged Invisible Hand and lost. In the middle of a general fleet action, so hard to say.

In Dreadnaughts of Rendilli, at least 6 Dreadnaughts and two Acclamators engaged and destroyed two Lucrehulk Core ships (no ring). An Acclamator (transport, not warship Acclamator II) is pegged at 2e23W. If it required 2*6e23W (AOTC ICS) to breach the shields of the two core ships, then the 6 Dreadnaughts contributed 8e23W between them, or 1.33e23W each.

A single Acclamator (Sundiver) also engaged the Rendili Dreadnaught flagship, and sustained shield damage "Sundiver engaging Rendili flagship, we're taking heavy fire...Power overload in substation four...All non-essential power diverted to main shields." The Rendili commander, in the next pane, however, orders "All Rendili ships, focus your fire on the Approaching Republic ship! Defensive wedge formation!" Acclamator shields are rated against 7e22W (assuming dissipation). Suggests that a single Dreadnaught has this power at a minimum, but doesn't have the margin of superiority of, say, a Shockwave vs a Victory (single volley kill).

It wouldn't be entirely surprising if a Dreadnaught were in the mid-high 1e23-24W range, since it's pretty much the same size as an Acclamator's central section, minus wings and hyperdrive tail. A Dreadnaught is ~7-8e6 m3 in total volume (towards the low end). The main reactor on an ISD is on the order of 260m in diameter, for a volume of 9.2e6 m3 (sphere). Total hull volume is ~ 9e7 m3, so say 10% for the main reactor. At the same ratio, a Dreadnaught's reactor is ~8e5 m3, coming out to a spherical reactor ~ 58m in radius. Suggests, for a single reactor and equivalent percentage of total volume in secondaries as an ISD, <1e24W. If it were twice as energy dense as an ISD, that still limits it to 2e24. Going by the 16000 crew figure, it is at the very minimum manpower-inefficient for its size and capability; Venators are manned at 8000 crew.

I have no idea about acceleration or electronics of the Dreadnaught, apart from the Essential Guide. There it's stated that refitted Dreadnaughts could barely match a Victory, whose speed is stated as "insufficient for deep-space actions."

[fractalsponge1]

Oh wait, he's got to start taking major worlds right away??? I'm sorry. I guess the Outer Rim and other locales are completely and utterly barren and devoid of any usable military assets or resources. Nope, he's just gotta plunge STRAIGHT FOR THE CORE! GO FOR THE THROAT! Yet again we see "Yay fallacies" seems to be your approach to the issue.

Did I say he was going straight for the Core, RIGHT AWAY!111!1111!!!? Oh wait, no. I concede I should have been clearer when I said major world, as I meant to say 'any world with a shield generator that could stand a siege unlike TPM Naboo.' Are all the major worlds in the Core? You're right, they're not. Did he actually have to TAKE some of them? Yeah. The new Atlas draws his "Conquests and allies" as taking 80% of the Perlemian run (Atlas p198), the longest established major trade route in the galaxy, linking the Core and Tion clusters, and surrounded by territory that matches the population density of the Core itself (p17). In his campaigns, he pushed down the Perlemian, and annexes about a fifth of it. Included in the conquered area is the "megalopolis" Contruum (p181), a "New Republic stronghold" (p200). Certainly sounds like he might have had to fight at least a few major battles.

False dilemma...

Kaine and the Pentestar Alignment were OPPOSED to Thrawn. They were ENEMIES.

Thrawn "...rallied the military in the Alignment to his cause...Kaine and Krennel agreed to give Thrawn command of a temporary military confederation" (Atlas p199). Certainly sounds like he had access to large forces, even if they weren't physically with him when he emerged from the UR. Or we can say Thrawn had the destroyers named and mentioned in the Zahn novels and 200 Dreadnaughts while he went about "conquering a quarter of the Known Galaxy" (p198).

BWAHAHAHa. so a single SSD is going to make ALL the difference? ... Stop pretending SSDs are somehow now a UBER SUPER WEAPON THREAT O DOOM that somehow marks some significant threat unless they devote huge numbers of assets to it.

Right, I totally said that. An SSD is totally irrelevant if used in exactly the way Thrawn used his small ships; raids against strategic worlds. It is totally unbelievable an SSD and escorts a la Death Squadron could do more damage than Thrawn if he didn't have better than a Sector Group and 200 Dreadnaughts. I'm saying the fact that they didn't do that hypothetical damage might have something to do with:
1) actually needing a lot more than a few SSDs to fight a galactic war, and
2) Thrawn actually having a ton more ships than described in the Zahn books.

[Darth Hoth]

Of course this is far from the "RARRRR MINIMALIST" frothing obsessive nerdrage Zahn inspires people like Hoth to rant about at the drop of a hat. For that matter I may have to go back and poke a few holes in his ranting since he's fucked up on a number of details (like the source of the 25,000 ISDs - it didn't originate with Zahn.. but hey when have facts ever gotten in the way of nerdrage?)

Rar, NERD RAGE! The best, most valid counter to any criticism of your franchise - unfalsifiable and, if used against an inexperienced debater, pushing them onto the defensive.

Being upset with Zahn's retarded numbers is so much inferior to - what? The mature, detached "Everything fits if we cram it in" and "Why so serious, it's just fantasy anyway, I think it's fun" Connor MacLeod approach?

And yes, I know that the "more than 25,000" number originally came from the WEG basic rulebook. Which was followed, in the years between that and Specter of the Past, by numerous other sources noting or implying higher numbers (foremost, of course, the Imperial Sourcebook). Yet Zahn went along with it (as a measure of the Empire at its absolute height, no less) in his story, and that decision deserves criticism.

[TC Pilot]

Thrawn "...rallied the military in the Alignment to his cause...Kaine and Krennel agreed to give Thrawn command of a temporary military confederation" (Atlas p199). Certainly sounds like he had access to large forces, even if they weren't physically with him when he emerged from the UR. Or we can say Thrawn had the destroyers named and mentioned in the Zahn novels and 200 Dreadnaughts while he went about "conquering a quarter of the Known Galaxy" (p198).

Really? Interesting. That's a change from previous sources, which, though I can't cite them, say the Alignment stayed out of the way during Thrawn's campaign. I really need to get ahold of the Atlas...

[Thanas]

2) Thrawn actually having a ton more ships than described in the Zahn books.

Actually, the Zahn books are not really that minimalistic. The only fleet that is ever really described in detail is Thrawn's personal armada. In every other major battle, it is stated that this armada is bolstered by many ships, and especially the Bilbringi battle seems to suggest that he has several wings of SDs with him.

The sourcebooks go even further in this saying that Thrawn encouraged the production of strike cruisers or other cruisers to free up ISDs from garrison roles, even going so far to state that he was able to halve ISD contingent of a sector. That alone would mean that he had thousands of ISDs available for operations.

[Darth Hoth]

What sourcebooks? The Heir to the Empire Sourcebook, the only one I presently have readily available, is arguably even more minimalistic than the trilogy itself. For example:

No new Star Destroyers have been constructed since the death of the Emperor. Grand Admiral Thrawn uses the ones he has left selectively, and refusing [sic] to risk losing even one to a poorly-planned mission.

[The Romulan Republic]

That's rather odd, considering a minor plot point of The Last Command was an attack on an ISD under construction at Bilbringi. No mention is made of this being the first ISD to be built since Endor.

So yeah, "more minimalist than the trilogy" sounds about right.

[Connor MacLeod]

An upgraded Lucrehulk is not necessarily a pushover. "A flotilla of these...warships can blast through the shields of a Trade Federation battleship with ease" (ROTS ICS). Venator's reactor is worth ~ 3.6e24 W (ROTS ICS). Assume a minimum of 3 ships to the "flotilla," and a "Trade Federation battleship" is a militarized variant. This suggests that it takes no more than ~1.1e25W to breach the shields. The Lucrehulk core ship has a peak shield capacity (dissipation rate) of 6e23W, vice a peak reactor capacity of 3e24W (AOTC ICS). Assuming that this shield to output ratio holds for a complete ship, then the power of a full ship is on the order of 5.5e25W. 5.5xISD generation, and not inconsistent for a ship in the 3km length range with ISD energy density.

1.) why the hell are you going stricly on wattage? Dissipation capacity is the only known trait we have a number for, but there's also at LEAST the heat sink capacity (the amount of energy the shields can hold before being brought down). If "breach" means anything, it more liekly means exceeding the heat sink capacity, not simply overcoming the dissipation rate, so your numbers are at best, speculative.

2.) Its too bad volume wise that a TF battleship is about an OOM larger than a ISD. That's not even factoring in the fact that TF battleships are not "purpose built" warships (IE not true warships) which means that it will, by definition be less effective as a warship.

Obviously it does not follow that all of the thousands of Lucrehulks at Naboo were all to this standard, but there are "scores" of militarized Lucrehulks on Geonosis in AOTC (ICS). The only Separatist ships bigger than Munificient/Recusant/Providence size seen at Coruscant in ROTS were complete Trade Fed ships (Ring+Core). "While vast campaigns detain millions of Separatist warships in the Outer Rim, a few dozen battleships lead thousands of destroyers and frigates in a bold strike on the galactic capital Coruscant" (ROTS ICS). Let's say 24 Lucrehulks + 1000 Recusant and 1000 Munificent. Firepower on the order of 24*5.5e25W (Lucrehulk) + 1000*7.7e23W (Recusant) + 1000*4.1e23W (Munificient) ~ 3.68e27W. 368 ISD equivalents at Coruscant alone.

I like how you assume that all those ships MUST be able to devote 100% of their reactor power to their heavy guns, even though they used single digit TT antiship weapons. The only "heavy gun" that even matches that is the axial mount heavy gun, and that was an incredibly silly weapon on so many levels it wouldn't even begin to prove "true warship" design.

Moreover, I dislike the Naboo example since the Tradefed were fucking morons there. Thousands of battleship/carriers? I dont know if that many were even NECCESSARY for one thing, but they absolutely sucked at blockade duty because they had no small ships to actually pursue and capture escaping ships. They might be intimidating and provide you alot of firepower to bear on the planet, but that's not much point unless you intend to bombard the shit out of stuff or scare an enemy. The attack on Coruscant in that respect would have made more sense (although it was hardly "balanced" either since Separtist ships suck donkey balls.) Hell, how you handle a blockade is not an absolute affair, it can depend on alot of things.

In Dreadnaughts of Rendilli, at least 6 Dreadnaughts and two Acclamators engaged and destroyed two Lucrehulk Core ships (no ring). An Acclamator (transport, not warship Acclamator II) is pegged at 2e23W. If it required 2*6e23W (AOTC ICS) to breach the shields of the two core ships, then the 6 Dreadnaughts contributed 8e23W between them, or 1.33e23W each.

A single Acclamator (Sundiver) also engaged the Rendili Dreadnaught flagship, and sustained shield damage "Sundiver engaging Rendili flagship, we're taking heavy fire...Power overload in substation four...All non-essential power diverted to main shields." The Rendili commander, in the next pane, however, orders "All Rendili ships, focus your fire on the Approaching Republic ship! Defensive wedge formation!" Acclamator shields are rated against 7e22W (assuming dissipation). Suggests that a single Dreadnaught has this power at a minimum, but doesn't have the margin of superiority of, say, a Shockwave vs a Victory (single volley kill).

Again, why are you ignoring heat sink capacity? Simply overwhelming the instantanoues shield rating isn't enough. Besides which, being wattage you don't have to deliver "joules/second" to overwhelm it - fractional second energy deliveries can do that as well. It gets even worse when you consider that there's more to shields than just heat sink capacity too, for crying out loud.

It wouldn't be entirely surprising if a Dreadnaught were in the mid-high 1e23-24W range, since it's pretty much the same size as an Acclamator's central section, minus wings and hyperdrive tail. A Dreadnaught is ~7-8e6 m3 in total volume (towards the low end). The main reactor on an ISD is on the order of 260m in diameter, for a volume of 9.2e6 m3 (sphere). Total hull volume is ~ 9e7 m3, so say 10% for the main reactor. At the same ratio, a Dreadnaught's reactor is ~8e5 m3, coming out to a spherical reactor ~ 58m in radius. Suggests, for a single reactor and equivalent percentage of total volume in secondaries as an ISD, <1e24W. If it were twice as energy dense as an ISD, that still limits it to 2e24. Going by the 16000 crew figure, it is at the very minimum manpower-inefficient for its size and capability; Venators are manned at 8000 crew.

Assuming that such things scale linearly. Which may not be the case (see comparisons between TF battleship and ISD.) The DS certainly doesn't "scale down" quite as accurately, since that yields an output well into the E26 watt range for an ISD too.

The Katana fleet dreadnoughts further complicate issues in that they were NOT normal dreadnoughts. They were utilizing CW era technology, and did not to my knowledge carry fighters the way some DNs carried a squadron. The massively reduced crew capability will mean a huge savings on internal space. It gets even messier when you have to factor in acceleration, the fuel mass the ship carries (and how much, or how many times it exceeds the dry mass of the ship, etc.), presence/absence of physical vs energy weapons, etc.

I have no idea about acceleration or electronics of the Dreadnaught, apart from the Essential Guide. There it's stated that refitted Dreadnaughts could barely match a Victory, whose speed is stated as "insufficient for deep-space actions."

I take it I dont have to point out that velocity and acceleration are not the same thing?

[

Did I say he was going straight for the Core, RIGHT AWAY!111!1111!!!? Oh wait, no. I concede I should have been clearer when I said major world, as I meant to say 'any world with a shield generator that could stand a siege unlike TPM Naboo.' Are all the major worlds in the Core? You're right, they're not. Did he actually have to TAKE some of them? Yeah. The new Atlas draws his "Conquests and allies" as taking 80% of the Perlemian run (Atlas p198), the longest established major trade route in the galaxy, linking the Core and Tion clusters, and surrounded by territory that matches the population density of the Core itself (p17). In his campaigns, he pushed down the Perlemian, and annexes about a fifth of it. Included in the conquered area is the "megalopolis" Contruum (p181), a "New Republic stronghold" (p200). Certainly sounds like he might have had to fight at least a few major battles.

You claimed that he would have to take "millions" of major worlds, did you not? That hardly sounds like "some." now, does it? Nevermind that I doubt they have millions of "major" worlds, and the defenses of a :"minor" world are debatable (and variable). Did Thrawn fight some "major" battles? He probably did have to fight some battles, I won't deny that. And likely he expanded his fleet by persuading and impressing his coalition into lending him more support, which would give him the assets to conduct mor battles in conquests.

However according to the Atlas he apparently DID rely on psychological warfare to a large degree: He struck where "the New Republic was already tenative" (p199), he used the "age old 'stateless' stragetgy'"

No place was safe, and neither Coruscant's empty promises nor the overstretched New Republic fleet could change that. Formerly neutral systems and sectors accepted Imperial rule rule, while New Republic systems and sectors fell to Thrawn or accepted his ruleswiftly doubling his holdings - particularily after Thrawn launched an audacious raid on Coruscant itself, seeding its planetary orbit with cloaked asteroids and paralyzing the capital.

Given the whole "Clone Wars" horror vibe running through most of the latter part of the trilogy, its a safe bet that the whole "Clone army" bit Thrawn had played a bigger role in terrorizing people into submitting than anything else did. Or the fears of "new weapons" like the one he supposedly used against Ukio. Indeed page 199 makes extensive mention of the fact the New Republic's "hold" over territory was alot more tenuous than the scale seemed - they effectively over-reached thsemselves and "made themselves vulnerable" by holding a huge amount of territory. Probably also didn't help they had to "rebuild" their forces post-conquest. Page 201 mentions thrawn exploiting the "fundamental weaknesses" of the New REpublic, and considering how rapidly the NR was demonstrated to fall apart in intervening years (especially how it disintegrates in Dark Empire, which si perhaps far more rapid and absurd than anything in TTT ) this seems a likely answer. The tactic wouldn't have worked against a far more stable or less exhuasted government, but the NR at this point wasn't that. And without thrawn to hold it together, it all fell apart just as the NEC indicates.

Thrawn "...rallied the military in the Alignment to his cause...Kaine and Krennel agreed to give Thrawn command of a temporary military confederation" (Atlas p199). Certainly sounds like he had access to large forces, even if they weren't physically with him when he emerged from the UR. Or we can say Thrawn had the destroyers named and mentioned in the Zahn novels and 200 Dreadnaughts while he went about "conquering a quarter of the Known Galaxy" (p198).

Stop the strawmen already, okay? I like how you snipped out huge portions of my reply just to make it sound like I'm claiming that Thrawn only had a tiny fleet now and he steamrolled a huge chunk of the galaxy with it! Yes, let's ignore all the rest of the stuff I've pointed out up to this point which is highly relevant. Let's ignore that the Atlas basically states flat out what I was speculating on - it does a far better job of proving my point for me anyhow. Just in case you forgot, my point is that you're not fucking thinking on this issue properly. You obsess for some reason on the 200 warship bit to the exclusion of everything else as if that were important. It isn't. Look at what I already said, look at what the evidence says. It all works out. We dont' have to go on this silly "RAR DAMN ZAHN AND HIS MINIMALISM" BS cuz its fucking silly.

Right, I totally said that. An SSD is totally irrelevant if used in exactly the way Thrawn used his small ships; raids against strategic worlds. It is totally unbelievable an SSD and escorts a la Death Squadron could do more damage than Thrawn if he didn't have better than a Sector Group and 200 Dreadnaughts. I'm saying the fact that they didn't do that hypothetical damage might have something to do with:
1) actually needing a lot more than a few SSDs to fight a galactic war, and
2) Thrawn actually having a ton more ships than described in the Zahn books.

You need to think this matter through more clearly. 1.) Zsinj already tried doing what you did with the Iron Fist. The end result was getting a NR task force devoted to him hounding his ass. Didn't actually work out well now did it? 2.) I see no reason to assume that SSDs are even NECCESSARY for a galactic war. Would they help? Yes, since they're big and tough warships with lots of firepower. But they're hardly CRUCIAL, even in the movies. After all, its not as if they're useful in breaching even partial planetary defenses (nevermind full scale shields), and while it represents a huge concentration of firepower, that also means that said firepower cannot be in more than one place at a time. Which is a rather significant drawback. Whereas with hyperdrive, scores or hundreds of smaller ships (Venator or ISDs say) could be scattered over a huge area and then drawn together in relatively short order if needed. 3.) What made you even thinkg Thrawn had access to SSDs or the facilities to make them, per se? The only people we know of who made them or could make them were big yards like KDY or Fondor, and I doubt KDY would be allowed to sell to the Empire. The NR certainly isn't buying. KDY may not even have even shut down teh capability to save costs if noone is going to build them. And anyone who HAD SSDs (like Kaine) clearly did not loan them directly to Thrawn, since the Reaper in fact outlasted Kaine (and may likewise have been hoarding the facilities to build them. He's heading a confederation of former warlords after all.) 4.) Causing damage is useful up to a point, but a badly damaged world is useless to any military venture, which limits the benefits of direct conquest. Considering that a Venator or Victory can easily sterilize a world in a matter of minutes at full power, nevermind an ISD, the "damage causing value" of an Executor isn't going to add much other than psychological intimidation (which can, as I outlined in point 1, also have drawbacks.)

So.. no go, try again.

[Connor MacLeod]

Rar, NERD RAGE! The best, most valid counter to any criticism of your franchise - unfalsifiable and, if used against an inexperienced debater, pushing them onto the defensive.

No, its a commentary on how poorly you demonstrate yourself to be on these forums. Not only are you impossible to debate rationally until you have facts hammered through that thick skull of yours (as I've demonstrated numerous times in the past) you obsess over the most retarded things.

Being upset with Zahn's retarded numbers is so much inferior to - what? The mature, detached "Everything fits if we cram it in" and "Why so serious, it's just fantasy anyway, I think it's fun" Connor MacLeod approach?

Hey look, Hoth can do strawmen! The really pathetic part of this is that you try to portray yourself as the logical rational one rather than me, instead of you being the "frothing at the mouth, minimalist obsessed Empire wanker" that you are.

And yes, I know that the "more than 25,000" number originally came from the WEG basic rulebook. Which was followed, in the years between that and Specter of the Past, by numerous other sources noting or implying higher numbers (foremost, of course, the Imperial Sourcebook). Yet Zahn went along with it (as a measure of the Empire at its absolute height, no less) in his story, and that decision deserves criticism.

Uh, what? The ISB came AFTER the SWE and Spectre of the past?

SEcondly, I love how you latch onto the 25,000 Star Destroyer figure and completely ignore any context whatsoever, while ignoring the fact that context is important to your much beloeved "higher numbers" sources like the ISB. Seriously this is why I have no respect for you, you post this sort of shit without thinking at all. Hell its pretty much SOP for you to run your mouth off without thinking first, again as I've demonstrated in the past.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Actually, it was an opinion by Pellaeon first in HttE when he opinioned that unlike Vader, Thrawn would not callously throw his men away or give in to emotion. Then in TLC we have Thrawn saying that he was not the Lord Vader and would not sacrifice two squads of troopers for the sake of framing somebody.

Neither is Vader-bashing, I think, but actually pretty fair criticism given the command styles of both Pellaeon and Thrawn, who are very hesitant to throw away their man.

Total bullshit, is what it is. Vader only kills high-ranking elite subordinates who fail him. Wasteful, perhaps, but these are powerbrokers and big men. These are people who accepted great responsibility in the cut-throat Imperial management culture in order to achieve power and glory. They also failed him. Thrawn brutally executes an enlisted man for what was admittedly not his genuine fault, and we know from background publications it was also because the enlisted man was a human inferior and not a Chiss. So he's a hypocrite, he's spiteful and vicious, and he's a racist. Vader's a mass murderer too, but he doesn't capriciously kill innocent-mistake grunts.

[fractalsponge1]

I take it I dont have to point out that velocity and acceleration are not the same thing?

Yes, I know, quoting snipping fail on my part: "The Victory's LF9 ion engines cannot produce sufficient speed for deep-space actions" is the actual full quote.

1.) why the hell are you going stricly on wattage? Dissipation capacity is the only known trait we have a number for, but there's also at LEAST the heat sink capacity (the amount of energy the shields can hold before being brought down). If "breach" means anything, it more liekly means exceeding the heat sink capacity, not simply overcoming the dissipation rate, so your numbers are at best, speculative.
...
Again, why are you ignoring heat sink capacity? Simply overwhelming the instantanoues shield rating isn't enough. Besides which, being wattage you don't have to deliver "joules/second" to overwhelm it - fractional second energy deliveries can do that as well. It gets even worse when you consider that there's more to shields than just heat sink capacity too, for crying out loud.

You've got a better analysis of how it works on average beyond "it's too complicated to know for sure"? To my knowledge, dissipation is the closest thing we have to a quantitative proxy for how offense stacks up against defense for SW ships. Heat sink capacity can vary, but on average you need to at least overwhelm dissipation, setting a basic benchmark for overcoming defenses. Tactics and accuracy matter a lot, but the basic numbers are going to set the initial odds.

I like how you assume that all those ships MUST be able to devote 100% of their reactor power to their heavy guns, even though they used single digit TT antiship weapons. The only "heavy gun" that even matches that is the axial mount heavy gun, and that was an incredibly silly weapon on so many levels it wouldn't even begin to prove "true warship" design.

Where do you get that Munificents, Providence/Recusants are not actually warships? It's not like they are ever stated to be converted merchants like Lucrehulks. They're worse warships than ISDs, yes. Slower, less energy dense, poorer armament, but within the same order of magnitude. Kinda like, I don't know, Dreadnaughts?

Also, are you assuming the fire rate is always the same for all turbolasers, and always rate out at 1 shot/s? The Acclamator's reactor power spread across 48 200 gigaton turbolasers suggests a fire rate of 5 shots/s, not taking into account any kind of capacitor storage to enable an ever higher fire rate. The ICS also does not state that the turreted guns on the Recusant and Munificient are identical to the quads on the Providence. The turrets of those two ships, at least, are much larger.

Re reactors:

Assuming that such things scale linearly. Which may not be the case (see comparisons between TF battleship and ISD.) The DS certainly doesn't "scale down" quite as accurately, since that yields an output well into the E26 watt range for an ISD too.

We are talking about reactor volumes, yes? I'm sure it won't scale exactly linearly, but the range of reactor volumes from corvette to DSII is what, across 12+ orders of magnitude? Within 1-2 orders of magnitude it ought to be comparable. Still, if larger reactors are more efficient, it doesn't help small ships like the Dreadnaught to be more dangerous, does it?

Lucrehulk core ship: reactor volume ~1.5e7 m3 at the low end, 3e24W output, 2e17W/m3
Acclamator: reactor volume 5-6e5 m3, 2e23W output, assume 5e5 m3, 4e17W/m3
Munificient: reactor volume ~ 5e5-1e6 m3 at the low end, 4.1e23W output, so assuming 7.5e5m3, 5.5e17W/m3
Venator: reactor volume ~ 2-3e6 m3, 3.6e24W output, assuming 2.5e6 m3, 1.4e18W/m3
ISD: reactor volume ~ 9.2e6 m3, 1e25W output, 1.1e18W/m3

The only smaller ones I can think of with hard numbers are civilian Naboo ships, and those density numbers are even worse than a Lucrehulk core ship.

The Katana fleet dreadnoughts further complicate issues in that they were NOT normal dreadnoughts. They were utilizing CW era technology, and did not to my knowledge carry fighters the way some DNs carried a squadron. The massively reduced crew capability will mean a huge savings on internal space. It gets even messier when you have to factor in acceleration, the fuel mass the ship carries (and how much, or how many times it exceeds the dry mass of the ship, etc.), presence/absence of physical vs energy weapons, etc.

How about some numbers?

The Empire upgraded the ships to, with Civil War era technology, and they didn't make it exceptionally better; it was "not significantly different from the original ship the Old Republic had used" (Essential Guide p42). Quote for how the Katanas were significantly better warships in any way other than crew requirement? New reactors? Better weapons? Better engines?

It seems like the closest thing to a significant upgrade was the alliance Assault Frigate modification, but that looks like it involved stripping down the hull and radically changed the basic structure (those vertical fins are a substantial proportion of the initial volume, and the engines were also drastically modified). Did the Katanas have that?

[fractalsponge1]

You claimed that he would have to take "millions" of major worlds, did you not? That hardly sounds like "some." now, does it? Nevermind that I doubt they have millions of "major" worlds, and the defenses of a :"minor" world are debatable (and variable). Did Thrawn fight some "major" battles? He probably did have to fight some battles, I won't deny that. And likely he expanded his fleet by persuading and impressing his coalition into lending him more support, which would give him the assets to conduct mor battles in conquests.

No, I said that the territory conquered encompassed millions of worlds. In that, there are likely lots of worlds there that had defenses (i.e. a shield) that makes quick conquest problematic if they wanted to hold out. Even (relatively) tiny Naboo got a planetary shield before the Clone Wars (AOTC ICS). And after the Clone Wars, the number of defended planets probably went up a good deal. Psychological warfare alone cannot possibly be all it takes to cow, conqueror, or hold all of these worlds.

Stripping away the separate technical arguments that apparently got sucked into that and mixed in, it boils down to the following for me: the New Republic survived and expanded, suggesting that it, and the allies/defectors/whatever it had gathered, had enough force to make a fight of it with a decent proportion of the Imperial military, embodying thousands of star destroyer equivalents (SSDs or tons of destroyers, whatever the distribution). The 200 Katana dreadnaughts being a decisive addition is not my main concern. I refer to it as being emblematic of the disconnect between the kind of military force that should have been present in the galaxy and what I think is shown in Zahn's books.