Develop a cruiser that can defeat an Star Dreadnought

[Shroom Man 777]

Hmmm...

It does bring to mind an interesting question, can a destroyer-scale vessel generate enough power to hurt or kill a Dreadnought in short order? Even Ion Cannons need a lot of power (the Hoth gun being powered by essentially the guts of a Battlecruiser).

Just repurpose a cruiser-sized or sub-cruiser-sized near-capital ship into a torpedo then. Have it go near-lightspeed and ram the dreadnought and set its reactors off.

I think even if the kamikazeship is a spanking new ISD (it's more likely to be a cheapo repurposed fossil-ship) that costs a lot, the expenses would be worth it since a dreadnought would be super expensive and that loss would hurt the dreadnought-owner more.

[Knife]

If you could make a small ship that could take on a huge ship and win, then all ships would be smaller ships. It makes no sense.

That said, in ROTJ, there is a little scene in the space battle of Endor where a SD gets hit by a red laser bolt and kersplodes. Probably had it's shields beaten down but no dialogue to say for sure. So something at Endor has enough power to shred a SD with one shot, even if the SD was damaged or weak at the time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPZigWFyK2o

6:23 when Akbar is telling the fleet the fighters need more time and focus on the SSD, in the back ground you can see it. Though might be 2-3 shots that hit the SD. Nah, just watched it a couple times, one bolt hits and the SD explodes.

[Shroom Man 777]

That's like saying if a small toyota truck with a TOW missile - or two dudes hauling said TOW - can ruin a tank then all armored vehicles would be either toyotas or just two dudes and land warfare would be redefined in the next Tom Clancy RAINBOW MOD-TOW CODBLOPS sequel written by insert-ghostwriterrecon-here.

[Knife]

No because in SW it's reactor output for weapon strength. If you could put a huge reactor in a small hull with same results as a big hull, then you'd do it. The reactor both determines shield strength and weapons strength.

Yeah, specific roles would determine a lot, but for large scale combatants, if you can make a smaller ship with same capabilities of a large ship, you make smaller ship. Harder to hit, quicker to make with less materials, less crew, but with same armor and weapons output.

In your analogy, if the TOW launcher could deflect a TOW missile, then yes, you'd just have a bunch of people running around with TOW launchers as a standard TO&E.

[Shroom Man 777]

No because in SW it's reactor output for weapon strength. If you could put a huge reactor in a small hull with same results as a big hull, then you'd do it. The reactor both determines shield strength and weapons strength.

Yeah, specific roles would determine a lot, but for large scale combatants, if you can make a smaller ship with same capabilities of a large ship, you make smaller ship. Harder to hit, quicker to make with less materials, less crew, but with same armor and weapons output.

The capabilities aren't the same though. It doesn't have the same armor. It might not even have the same weapons output. Just because the dreadnought-killer's weapon can defeat a dreadnought or it's shields doesn't mean its reactor is on the same grade as the dreadnought.

The dreadnought will not only be powering its weapons but also its shields, its sub-light engines, etc.

The thing I'm suggesting has like pathetic shielding and maneuverability sub-light and FTL and the "shaping" of its weapons systems means that all the power is directed through one orifice/barrel and that might mean there's lifespan issues. The vessel's reactor might have to be replaced after a single dreadnought-slaying, for example.

The ship's guts might look like something akin to those... broadside cannons in ROTS - the ones with the fuel/coolant canisters.

Didn't people here or in other threads discuss the possibility that there might be some mitigating issues in regards to the whole, over-simplified direct reactor output = shield strength or weapons strength (like that old theory of a Star Destroyer channeling all its power into a focused shot of just one of its turbolasers)?

But sure, it might not work if what Eternal_Freedom says is right: "can a destroyer-scale vessel generate enough power to hurt or kill a Dreadnought in short order?"

[Galvatron]

On a semi-related note, I wonder if the rebel generator on Hoth powered both their impenetrable shield and their ISD-killing ion cannon. If so, that's some amazing power generator. Do we know how big it was supposed to be?

[Eternal_Freedom]

According to old Legends stuff (I can't recall exactly) it was supposedly a reactor pulled from an old Star Battlecruiser, which explains why it can power the Ion Cannon.

[Knife]

The capabilities aren't the same though. It doesn't have the same armor. It might not even have the same weapons output. Just because the dreadnought-killer's weapon can defeat a dreadnought or it's shields doesn't mean its reactor is on the same grade as the dreadnought.

Yes yes, you could make a smaller ship with a huge reactor with one ill placed weapon and it would be inferior to large ship with same reactor with multiple gun ports.

My point is, in SW, the reactor output is the determining factor for both defense and offense unless you go out of your way to design something stupid.

The dreadnought will not only be powering its weapons but also its shields, its sub-light engines, etc.

Indeed, so will a smaller ship with the same reactor, the only advantage the smaller ship would have is one of mass.

The thing I'm suggesting has like pathetic shielding and maneuverability sub-light and FTL and the "shaping" of its weapons systems means that all the power is directed through one orifice/barrel and that might mean there's lifespan issues. The vessel's reactor might have to be replaced after a single dreadnought-slaying, for example.

And what I'm saying is if you have a large ship with reactor output of x and a smaller ship with reactor output of x, keeping in mind both were designed for slug em out fights, they both have the same amount of power for both shields and weapons. It's a draw, though you could make an argument about size/mass giving one more agility.

The ship's guts might look like something akin to those... broadside cannons in ROTS - the ones with the fuel/coolant canisters.

Didn't people here or in other threads discuss the possibility that there might be some mitigating issues in regards to the whole, over-simplified direct reactor output = shield strength or weapons strength (like that old theory of a Star Destroyer channeling all its power into a focused shot of just one of its turbolasers)?

But sure, it might not work if what Eternal_Freedom says is right: "can a destroyer-scale vessel generate enough power to hurt or kill a Dreadnought in short order?"

IDK, if you find it, I'll read it. And yes, there are always going to be smaller mitigating affects from various sub systems, roles, design, etc... But a vast proportion of the fight in a SW slug match is power output. If ship A has reactor output of X+10 and ship B has reactor output of X+1, A can afford to put a lot more into shields and weapons (yes yes, if the ship is designed to do so which I would argue is going to be a given in a combat ship v combat ship scenario). If you can make a smaller ship with reactor output of x+10 and have the same capabilities of large ship with the same reactor output, you make the smaller ship unless some other factor dictates otherwise.

[Shroom Man 777]

I get that. But the other capabilities of the proposed anti-dreadnought/dreadnought-killer *are* gimped because what reactor output it has is just dedicated to its weapon. At its most absurd, when attacking it probably has next-to-nothing shields and its sublight engines are dialed down and only making spurts to align its weapon to its target, its probably got tissue paper for physical armor, relying on escort vessels for survival. It's to the degree where it *has* to operate with other more generalist platforms, combined arms and all that, in order to be effective because in its lonesome it's going to be murdered.

[Tribble]

Well we learned a few things in Rouge One:

A group of Y-wings Ion torpedoes were enough to disable a Star Destroyer, for an unknown length of time.

When a Star Destroyer is hit by another Star Destroyer even at relatively slow speeds, bad things happen.

A Star Destroyer coming out of hyperspace (presumably with shields up) can flat out destroy smaller ships via impact without suffering any visible damage.

[Captain Seafort]

Well we learned a few things in Rouge One:

A group of Y-wings Ion torpedoes were enough to disable a Star Destroyer, for an unknown length of time.

Provided that a warship can punch a hole in the shields for them beforehand. This raises the question of why the warship can't just keep shooting through those holes themselves, but I suspect the answer is ECM. The heavy ships can shoot accurately enough from long range to hit enemy heavy ships, and hard enough to cause local burnthrough and failure, but they can't predict where those local failures will occur, and the ECM prevents their sensors pinpointing the vulnerable shots. The fighters are small and manoeuvrable enough to get in close enough to locate and target the holes.

[Tribble]

Well we learned a few things in Rouge One:

A group of Y-wings Ion torpedoes were enough to disable a Star Destroyer, for an unknown length of time.

Provided that a warship can punch a hole in the shields for them beforehand. This raises the question of why the warship can't just keep shooting through those holes themselves, but I suspect the answer is ECM. The heavy ships can shoot accurately enough from long range to hit enemy heavy ships, and hard enough to cause local burnthrough and failure, but they can't predict where those local failures will occur, and the ECM prevents their sensors pinpointing the vulnerable shots. The fighters are small and manoeuvrable enough to get in close enough to locate and target the holes.

Is it stated in the film that the Star Destroyer was having shield problems? I don't seem to recall that being the case, and it looked to me as though the Y-wings were able to punch through the shields to disable the ship.

Also forgot to mention that they blew off a sensor dome... again.

[Captain Seafort]

Is it stated in the film that the Star Destroyer was having shield problems? I don't seem to recall that being the case, and it looked to me as though the Y-wings were able to punch through the shields to disable the ship.

The lead Y-wing pilot mentioned a gap in the shields as the reason for ordering the torpedo run.

[Tribble]

Is it stated in the film that the Star Destroyer was having shield problems? I don't seem to recall that being the case, and it looked to me as though the Y-wings were able to punch through the shields to disable the ship.

The lead Y-wing pilot mentioned a gap in the shields as the reason for ordering the torpedo run.

Ah ok I missed that.

[Commander Veers]

Idk if it's been posited already - but how about the following:
Destroyer-sized cruiser with the absolute maximum possible energy density. Very few modcons, minimal crew, and the smallest starfighter complement possible (perhaps none - except for logistics craft.) Strap the largest small superlaser you can on there, and that superlaser uses the largest kyber-crystal possible for yield amplification. Additionally, strap some heavy-duty anti-capital missiles on there. Perhaps design the ship so that as soon as the superlaser has fired, as much power as possible is diverted to shields.

The tactics, then, would be to fire off the superlaser which disables the dreadnought's shields. Then divert all remaining power (perhaps store loads of it in power cells/capacitors) to the shields, and launch every available missile. The missiles would hit the dreadnought's hopefully unshielded hull and do the most damage possible. You might want to focus on specific sectors during this process, like the bridge section. So the superlaser disables the bridge shields momentarily, which allows dozens/hundreds of anti-capital missiles to devastate the bridge, command sector, and command crew.

To make the ship all the more effective, you might wish to add a cloaking device. Strongest ECM and engines possible would also be a plus. But perhaps that is asking too much.

[Commander Veers]

Hmmm...

It does bring to mind an interesting question, can a destroyer-scale vessel generate enough power to hurt or kill a Dreadnought in short order? Even Ion Cannons need a lot of power (the Hoth gun being powered by essentially the guts of a Battlecruiser).

Just repurpose a cruiser-sized or sub-cruiser-sized near-capital ship into a torpedo then. Have it go near-lightspeed and ram the dreadnought and set its reactors off.

I think even if the kamikazeship is a spanking new ISD (it's more likely to be a cheapo repurposed fossil-ship) that costs a lot, the expenses would be worth it since a dreadnought would be super expensive and that loss would hurt the dreadnought-owner more.

There was a comic in Legends where 3 ISDs crash into the Executor, while coming out of lightspeed. Bad jump coordinates or something. The thing is, they didn't even penetrate the shields. And it looked as if they must have been going pretty fast. So there's that. Perhaps it's not possible to do with an ISD-sized ship?

[Shroom Man 777]

The damage could be done via explosives rather than kinetics since I'm open to the idea that going to/from hyperspace requires gravitic shenennigans which means that a hypering vessel hitting an object in realspace won't have the same effects as a relativistic mass hitting something... hence the lack of planet-killing hyperspeed-kamikaze-things.

[Galvatron]

Based on what we've seen lately, it appears that Imperial ships are highly vulnerable to the one-two punch of ion blasts followed up by proton bombardments. Dreadnoughts might be more resistant to this tactic than ISDs are though, if only because of their sheer size.

[The Romulan Republic]

That's something I advocated on the previous page, in the event that an ion canon/mini-superlaser mix wasn't practical. It seems likely to be the most effective way to make a small ship punch well above its weight-class.

Edit: As an aside, its also the main armament mix of Rebel Y-wing bomber squadrons in the Empire at War strategy game- ion canon barrage followed by proton torpedoes to first cripple, then obliterate Imperial capital ships.

[Galvatron]

It seems as though Y-wings have gained a lot more importance in the new EU than they had in the old.

[Adam Reynolds]

It seems as though Y-wings have gained a lot more importance in the new EU than they had in the old.

That both is and isn't true. It is not because they are important in the technical sense, it is because more of the new EU takes place pre-Endor when they were more commonly used.