Did the Death Star have a hidden purpose?

[Straha]

Maybe?

So, at the very least, I think this nixes the idea that we should take the General Veers line as indicative of the impervious nature of the Rebel shielding (as has been trotted out here and elsewhere.)

As for the fuller questions of shield capacity and deployment, we know the power of the BDZ at a minimum, we know the power of the Death Star, we know how much damage larger fleets are capable of. While we lack concrete information of shield capacities we can also extrapolate just how much firepower the Imperial fleet can put down and the utility of the fleet compared to the Death Star. This is useful.

If this is just an arms race between more powerful shielding and more powerful orbital guns the question is "What utility does the Death Star have over simply building more ships?" and there is no satisfying military or political answer to this*, especially in a world where the Empire has complete political control over planets and can easily restrict access to shield production/deployment.

Even if we don't think the answer to this is useful, it still means that we treat shield capacity as a logical unknown as opposed to being a defining force in the Star Wars universe.

* I will note here that there is a thematic answer to this in the fiction of Star Wars, which is that Evil misunderstands power for control and can never understand good's capacity to resist even in the face of overwhelming destruction. Which is a resolution that answers all of this but still requires accepting that the Empire doesn't understand the basics of its political role or how to achieve its goals. Ultimately looping back to my original argument that the Death Star makes no sense in universe as a threat even if some elements of the upper echelon of the Empire think it does.

[Galvatron]

If this is just an arms race between more powerful shielding and more powerful orbital guns the question is "What utility does the Death Star have over simply building more ships?" and there is no satisfying military or political answer to this*,

ROTJ may shed more light on this.

The DS2 was encompassed by a planetary shield and it was also considered virtually impenetrable by the Alliance, but that may simply mean it could withstand a sustained bombardment by their fleet long enough for an Imperial counterattack to make mincemeat out of them.

The same may be true of planets that have similar defenses. A strong shield by itself may simply delay the inevitable, while the same shield combined with powerful artillery (e.g. the Hoth ion cannon) could be enough to make the world practically unassailable by conventional means.

Hence the Death Star.

especially in a world where the Empire has complete political control over planets and can easily restrict access to shield production/deployment.

I'd say it's highly debatable just how much control the Empire had over the planets of the galaxy, especially before the mask came completely off and the Senate was disbanded.

[Straha]

Can't edit the post after an inadvertant click to post it. Intended post below:

If this is just an arms race between more powerful shielding and more powerful orbital guns the question is "What utility does the Death Star have over simply building more ships?" and there is no satisfying military or political answer to this*,

ROTJ may shed more light on this.

The DS2 was encompassed by a planetary shield and it was also considered virtually impenetrable by the Alliance, but that may simply mean it could withstand a sustained bombardment by their fleet long enough for an Imperial counterattack to make mincemeat out of them.

They don't say it's impenetrable, and I don't think it's ever positioned as a planetary shield just as something shielding the Death Star and the direct approach to the base on the moon. While it had to be taken down to attack the Death Star the rebellion made the choice to do so via a covert mission instead of an overt attack, but that doesn't say anything re: the ability to bombard it down. That could be because the rebellion is used to covert attacks being a guerilla outfit, but given what we know about the Ewok genocide debates I also think it's likely that taking down the shield generator by bombardment was a non-starter given the effect it would have on the planet.

That said, I do think bombardment was possibly on the table in some form or another. Otherwise, why bring the capital ships? The risk simply outweighs the utility. More on this below.

The same may be true of planets that have similar defenses. A strong shield by itself may simply delay the inevitable, while the same shield combined with powerful artillery (e.g. the Hoth ion cannon) could be enough to make the world practically unassailable by conventional means.

Hence the Death Star.

Again, the assertion that a stronger shield generator makes a world unassailable is one floating without a warrant. Hypothetically true, but given what we've seen elsewhere in the Empire and the power of the Imperial fleet I think that requires more evidence to believe.

I'll restate the earlier discussion of escalation and the general lack of utility of the Death Star here. What we know from TPM and ESB is that blockades in the Star Wars universe are largely ineffective. Quick ships can reasonably expect to outrun a blockade without too much worry, and once in space (as proven by the Millenium Falcon's evasion of the Imperial Fleet) speed and mobility matter far far more than firepower. Evasion is a far more powerful tool. Even in RotJ the Rebel Fleet thinks it's able to retreat well after combat has begun with the Imperial fleet in position to block it. Given that all the rebellion needs for the mission is its fighters the only reasons to bring the capital ships are either to blow shit up on the ground in case Han fails at his mission or if it's a low-risk proposition. That means either shielding of the Empire's most valuable investment is considered targetable or just stresses how important mobility is. Possibly both.

In that context, given that it's one point device and incredibly slow the Death Star fails as a blockader, given that it is one ship it fails as a sector control mechanism because it can only be in one place at one time (as opposed to the multiple Star Destroyers that could built with its resources.) And its only real threat is to blow up planets, which is a self-defeating move considering the Empire wants to control those planets. Multiple fleets built with those resources makes far more sense in-universe unless there's an ulterior motive from the top.

especially in a world where the Empire has complete political control over planets and can easily restrict access to shield production/deployment.

I'd say it's highly debatable just how much control the Empire had over the planets of the galaxy, especially before the mask came completely off and the Senate was disbanded.

The mask slips off super easily prior to the knowledge of the Death Star's construction, and given the military concentration and centralized bureaucracy of the EU I think it's far easier to keep shield technology low (or just have a small military base on planet) than it is to create a moon-sized battle station with a superweapon aboard. Especially if the goal is to keep planets happy with Imperial rule.

[Galvatron]

They don't say it's impenetrable, and I don't think it's ever positioned as a planetary shield just as something shielding the Death Star and the direct approach to the base on the moon.

Did they have to say it?. They certainly treated it as such, especially after the trap was sprung and their cruisers didn't even attempt to batter it down with their biggaton turbolasers. I think it says a lot about the strength of the DS2's shield that the rebel fleet didn't go to plan B with the fate of the galaxy on the line.

While it had to be taken down to attack the Death Star the rebellion made the choice to do so via a covert mission instead of an overt attack, but that doesn't say anything re: the ability to bombard it down. That could be because the rebellion is used to covert attacks being a guerilla outfit, but given what we know about the Ewok genocide debates I also think it's likely that taking down the shield generator by bombardment was a non-starter given the effect it would have on the planet.

I'm not even talking about the generator, though. I'm talking about the actual shield that surrounded the DS2. If it could have been breached by a capital ship bombardment, why didn't the rebels try? For all they knew, Han and his team were dead and the attack was now a suicide mission. Small price to pay for destroying another Death Star and killing the Emperor, no?

That said, I do think bombardment was probably on the table in some form or another. Otherwise, why bring the capital ships? The risk simply outweighs the utility. More on this below.

Agreed. I just don't think it would have mattered.

Again, the assertion that a stronger shield generator makes a world unassailable is one floating without a warrant. Hypothetically true, but given what we've seen elsewhere in the Empire and the power of the Imperial fleet I think that requires more evidence to believe.

You're missing my point. A strong shield only delays the inevitable if an attacker can just park a fleet of warships in orbit and wear it down with their heavy weapons. It's when the planet can shoot back with even heavier weapons that it becomes a much tougher nut to crack.

I'll restate the earlier discussion of escalation and the general lack of utility of the Death Star here.
<snip>

Not sure of the relevance since I don't think anyone ever suggested that the Death Star was meant to be a blockader. It's a very square peg that has a pretty obvious purpose.

The mask slips off super easily prior to the knowledge of the Death Star's construction, and given the military concentration and centralized bureaucracy of the EU I think it's far easier to keep shield technology low (or just have a small military base on planet) than it is to create a moon-sized battle station with a superweapon aboard. Especially if the goal is to keep planets happy with Imperial rule.

Well, you certainly have the right to your opinion. Mine is that that Empire wasn't able to dominate the wealthy and influential systems with a heavy hand until ANH (and even then only briefly). That's what Tarkin meant about the local systems coming under the direct control of the regional governors.

[Galvatron]

That's what Tarkin meant about the local systems coming under the direct control of the regional governors.

Ghetto edit: I mean, that's what Tarkin meant about fear of the Death Star keeping the local systems in line. The other regional governors would presumably be able to control their own territories through more conventional means. And if not, they could always ask Tarkin to swing by.

[Straha]

They don't say it's impenetrable, and I don't think it's ever positioned as a planetary shield just as something shielding the Death Star and the direct approach to the base on the moon.

Did they have to say it?. They certainly treated it as such, especially after the trap was sprung and their cruisers didn't even attempt to batter it down with their biggaton turbolasers. I think it says a lot about the strength of the DS2's shield that the rebel fleet didn't go to plan B with the fate of the galaxy on the line.

While it had to be taken down to attack the Death Star the rebellion made the choice to do so via a covert mission instead of an overt attack, but that doesn't say anything re: the ability to bombard it down. That could be because the rebellion is used to covert attacks being a guerilla outfit, but given what we know about the Ewok genocide debates I also think it's likely that taking down the shield generator by bombardment was a non-starter given the effect it would have on the planet.

I'm not even talking about the generator, though. I'm talking about the actual shield that surrounded the DS2. If it could have been breached by a capital ship bombardment, why didn't the rebels try? For all they knew, Han and his team were dead and the attack was now a suicide mission. Small price to pay for destroying another Death Star and killing the Emperor, no?

The timing of events in the movie makes the option to start targeting the shield seem like a non-starter. They arrive, they don't detect the shield, they realize "IT'S A TRAP!" and are being jammed before taking evasive actions to prepare to respond and immediately come under fighter attack. Fighter attacks in universe are no joke and can't be easily shrugged off. They never had the opportunity to switch to plan B.

Again, the assertion that a stronger shield generator makes a world unassailable is one floating without a warrant. Hypothetically true, but given what we've seen elsewhere in the Empire and the power of the Imperial fleet I think that requires more evidence to believe.

You're missing my point. A strong shield only delays the inevitable if an attacker can just park a fleet of warships in orbit and wear it down with their heavy weapons. It's when the planet can shoot back with even heavier weapons that it becomes a much tougher nut to crack.

Is there any evidence of a planet having the resources to shoot back at length? I admittedly only remember the old EU, but my recollection is that it never treated planetary responses to fleets as being in anyway serious. Also, the spatial advantage of owning the high ground (lulz) and the disadvantage of being terrestrially based makes it seem like a smart fleet should be able to counter-balance strong ground based counter-batteries pretty easily.

I'll restate the earlier discussion of escalation and the general lack of utility of the Death Star here.
<snip>

Not sure of the relevance since I don't think anyone ever suggested that the Death Star was meant to be a blockader. It's a very square peg that has a pretty obvious purpose.

And this goes back to the first post I made in the thread, which is that there is no square hole for the DS to fit into.

The mask slips off super easily prior to the knowledge of the Death Star's construction, and given the military concentration and centralized bureaucracy of the EU I think it's far easier to keep shield technology low (or just have a small military base on planet) than it is to create a moon-sized battle station with a superweapon aboard. Especially if the goal is to keep planets happy with Imperial rule.

Well, you certainly have the right to your opinion. Mine is that that Empire wasn't able to dominate the wealthy and influential systems with a heavy hand until ANH (and even then only briefly). That's what Tarkin meant about the local systems coming under the direct control of the regional governors.

If the Emperor can already smoothly abolish the senate that has to mean most of its functions are being done by other mechanisms. Otherwise, chaos. Now, admittedly, I'm not opposed to a chaotic Empire being run as an internal clusterfuck, but that doesn't glide easily with a massively legitimated state as in the old EU that had a smooth succession from the Old Republic, nor with one that can build 1k+ heavy duty warships a year, as Shep likes to mention.

[Galvatron]

The timing of events in the movie makes the option to start targeting the shield seem like a non-starter. They arrive, they don't detect the shield, they realize "IT'S A TRAP!" and are being jammed before taking evasive actions to prepare to respond and immediately come under fighter attack. Fighter attacks in universe are no joke and can't be easily shrugged off. They never had the opportunity to switch to plan B.

Sure they did. Instead of choosing to engage the Imperial fleet, they could have chosen to rush the DS2 instead. In fact, they could have circled around to the far side where there was no superlaser dish shooting at them.

Moreover, the fact that Ackbar very nearly ordered a full-scale retreat instead of trying anything like that is just further evidence that the shield was basically impenetrable.

Is there any evidence of a planet having the resources to shoot back at length? I admittedly only remember the old EU, but my recollection is that it never treated planetary responses to fleets as being in anyway serious. Also, the spatial advantage of owning the high ground (lulz) and the disadvantage of being terrestrially based makes it seem like a smart fleet should be able to counter-balance strong ground based counter-batteries pretty easily.

Yes, it happens in one of the new Thrawn novels (relevant quotes here). That said, why isn't the Hoth ion cannon enough evidence by itself?

And this goes back to the first post I made in the thread, which is that there is no square hole for the DS to fit into.

The square hole is the obliteration of even the most heavily defended worlds with impunity.

If the Emperor can already smoothly abolish the senate that has to mean most of its functions are being done by other mechanisms. Otherwise, chaos. Now, admittedly, I'm not opposed to a chaotic Empire being run as an internal clusterfuck, but that doesn't glide easily with a massively legitimated state as in the old EU that had a smooth succession from the Old Republic, nor with one that can build 1k+ heavy duty warships a year, as Shep likes to mention.

Tarkin pretty clearly intimated that the regional governors would simply strong-arm their territories into keeping the trains running on time. Besides, the idea that the Empire was left reeling in a state of chaos after the DS1's destruction is something I've imagined as an obvious consequence for many years now.

It also helps to explain why the Emperor wasted little time ordering the construction of another one. It wasn't just a big ruse: he still needed one to staunch the bleeding.

[MKSheppard]

Besides, the idea that the Empire was left reeling in a state of chaos after the DS1's destruction is something I've imagined as an obvious consequence for many years now.

It also helps to explain why the Emperor wasted little time ordering the construction of another one. It wasn't just a big ruse: he still needed one to staunch the bleeding.

It all depends on how far down the Rabbit Hole into the Hall of Mirrors you want to go. One can argue that the Death Star's destruction was foreseen by Palpatine; and allowed to happen, because it eliminated:

Grand Moff Tarkin
Admiral Motti (supposedly CNO of Imperial Navy)
Colonel Yularen (high ranking git in ISB)

Current canon has the DS1 Conference room being a meeting of the Imperial Joint Chiefs -- that's a lot of high ranking "older" guys neatly removed from the scene without much of a fuss in the DS1's destruction.

On the other hand -- that's a little bit too "neat" -- surely Palpatine would have foreseen the massive loss of "Face" when the following happens in less than 72 hours:

1.) Alderaan blown up by secret imperial weapon revealed as the DEATH STAR.
2.) Death Star blown up by REBEL ALLIANCE.

[Galvatron]

I prefer to think that Palpatine was both a) overconfident and b) couldn't foresee everything. Especially when it involved Luke.

Current canon also showed us this...

Spoiler

[MKSheppard]

I prefer to think that Palpatine was both a) overconfident and b) couldn't foresee everything. Especially when it involved Luke.

I posited earlier that the reason Palps couldn't forsee the Death Star's destruction was that he was focused on breaking Leia and bringing her over to the Dark side via destroying Alderaan -- he thought that the eddies in the force he was feeling was Leia...when in actuality; it was Luke (as well).

It makes sense that Palpatine would put 1+1=2 involving the Organas and a sudden baby adoption combined with the fact Padme was pregnant when she died.

Yes; in comics Obi Wan and the others covered it by using the Royal Family's doctors to fake that she was still pregnant when she wasn't -- but wouldn't Palpatine have put a good quality sensor scanner at the funeral for insurance?

[Galvatron]

I posited earlier that the reason Palps couldn't forsee the Death Star's destruction was that he was focused on breaking Leia and bringing her over to the Dark side via destroying Alderaan -- he thought that the eddies in the force he was feeling was Leia...when in actuality; it was Luke (as well).

I don't recall any mention of Palpatine having felt disturbances in the Force around that time.

Yes; in comics Obi Wan and the others covered it by using the Royal Family's doctors to fake that she was still pregnant when she wasn't -- but wouldn't Palpatine have put a good quality sensor scanner at the funeral for insurance?

Meh, I guess you could head-canon that. It all depends on how all-knowing you want Palpatine to be. For my part, I think he genuinely believed that Anakin's unborn child died with Padme.

[KraytKing]

This discussion got me thinking about hyperdrives.

Certain things can't be rules of society, they must be rules of physics or they will be broken. If it is a societal rule, enforced by the BoSS, that hyperspace ramming is illegal, then every terrorist in galactic history would have done it. The Emperor destroyed the Jedi, and you're telling me he can't take over the BoSS? No matter how powerful it is, the most powerful evil space wizard ever will find a way to take it over. Plus, it represents a tremendous thematic conflict for the ultimate battle of good and evil to be regulated by neutral bureaucrats.

Here's a thought. Some of the old WEG books I think mentioned a "hyperspace shadow;" what if we took that idea and ran with it? This is pretty out there, fair warning. Lets say all realspace objects cast a shadow in hyperspace. Hyperdrives take an object from realspace with a hyperspace shadow and turn it into a hyperspace shadow without a corresponding realspace object. This allows them to violate causality, or bend space, or whatever paradigm you prefer. But imagine a shadow in real life. When you walk behind a larger object with an overlapping shadow, your shadow ceases to exist. You are unaffected of course, neither is the larger object. When you return to the light, your shadow exists again. What if you were just the shadow? What if, during a hyperspace collision, the realspace object that has been reduced to only a hyperspace shadow is completely annihilated, but the realspace object castingthe shadow is completely unaffected?

It means there is absolutely zero possible incentive for hyperspace ramming. There is no possibility of using it as an act of terror, mass destruction, combat, anything. The only thing it can do is annihilate a ship in hyperspace, which could still be useful I guess to eliminate political prisoners, but far from revolutionary.

[Batman]

This makes zero sense.

[MKSheppard]

So this is a new thought about the Death Star inspired by Twitter:

Apparently Twitter supposedly had 2,000 people in product and marketing.

This made me think.

There are historic examples for "product and marketing" within military organizations, i.e. the War Department's New Developments Division (NDD) in WW2:

In October 1943, acting on the recommendations of Bundy, Bush, and Bowles, Stimson created the New Developments Division as a special staff division to expedite production and procurement of new and improved equipment. Under Maj. Gen. Stephen G. Henry the New Developments Division was primarily a troubleshooting agency with a limited staff of about two dozen civilian and military personnel. They tried to bridge the gap between producer and consumer and to hasten delivery of equipment to the battlefield.

Large amounts of classified documents were distributed during WW2 for Military Staffs (divisional, Army, theater level) which were designed introduce them to new weapons so they would know about them (and order them for combat use) instead of the weapons collecting dust in warehouses in England or Hawaii.

Entirely new weapons platforms need patrons.

So imagine the Marketing Team that Director Krennic had set up in anticipation of marketing the Death Star's military capability to Moffs (and Grand Moffs).

"So you can blow a planet up....I can have it Base Delta Zeroed."

"Sir, the Death Star is actually a precision instrument. We have demonstrated precision firepower through recent demonstrations at Jedha, showing it is feasible to punch through even the thickest planetary shield and destroy targets such as generators, beneath the shields."

"Furthermore, the Death Star is a mobile sector-level siege platform, bringing sector level assets for planetary pacification with itself; preventing the possibility of [$NAME of Clone Wars Planet$] from happening again."

...and then it got blown up 48 hours after being unleashed on the Galaxy.

[MKSheppard]

This makes zero sense.

Actually he makes some sense.

He's positing that everything in SW exists in two universes simultaneously -- our "normal" universe and the hyperspace universe -- and this is mostly noticed the most with planets and other stellar objects as they cast a large hyperspace "shadow".

And thus, Hyperdrives work by "translating" objects in our universe into purely hyperspace objects that can move within the hyperspace universe before reverting to our universe; enabling 1 million times speed of light travel times without violating casuality or some BS.

What if, during a hyperspace collision, the realspace object that has been reduced to only a hyperspace shadow is completely annihilated, but the realspace object casting the shadow is completely unaffected?

It's a bit confusing, but if you reword it to:

"Realspace objects (aka planets and other ships) win out 100% times in collisions with hyperspace objects (objects translated into hyperspace by hyperdrives).

[Batman]

This 'might' work if there's a mass threshold beyond which the realspace object is unaffected, but we see hyperspace ramming works 'in principle' in TLJ.

[Khaat]

Except Interdictors knock ships out of hyperspace by overloading hyperdrives (which would have been embarrassing for the Admiral if Snoke's flagship had gravity well projectors.) If it's "triggering safeties" instead, I think the Rebellion would have been cutting safeties 20 years earlier, if it meant escaping (especially the small untraceable starfighters.)

[Lord Revan]

Except Interdictors knock ships out of hyperspace by overloading hyperdrives (which would have been embarrassing for the Admiral if Snoke's flagship had gravity well projectors.) If it's "triggering safeties" instead, I think the Rebellion would have been cutting safeties 20 years earlier, if it meant escaping (especially the small untraceable starfighters.)

Well it doesn't have mutually exclusive, if we consider interdictor fields like hyperspace version of really thick and sticky mud so the safeties might be something that turn of hyperdrive before engine possibly overloads, if the chance of engine overload is high enough the risk is too great to bypass the safeties if you got for example a 0.01% chance of escaping and a 99.99% chance of ending up with a large paperweight for a hyperdrive then you wouldn't risk bypass because most of the time it wouldn't be worth it.

[Adam Reynolds]

I think the only way that FTL ramming works is that it is accelerating to hyperspace but hasn't fully transitioned, and thus most of the mass is still real in which it can affect the target. With the gravity affects of planets having a negative effect on FTL, ramming a planet doesn't work. This also explains why she got closer at sublight before hitting the switch.

Or we can just say that the sequel trilogy was badly written, which also extends to the idiocy of Starkiller Base having an FTL multi-planetary superlaser and the First Order having the industrial output to take on the New Republic in the first place. Both of those are at least as bad as the hyperspace issue.

I'd also say that the sequel trilogy should have been a deconstruction for why Grey Jedi or Grey Sith don't work in which there is a schism within the New Jedi Order, but that is a different issue. A group like the First Order as a wannabe Empire would have been fine as an early antagonist that serves as a punching bag while they help set up the more interesting divide.The victory over the external threat is both easy and irrelevant.