Imperial Star Destroyer or Imperator class Star Destroyer ?

[Publius]

Explain how Imperial can be consistent with

Acclamator
Procurator
Mandator
Executor

The first three names have no relevance to the consistency of Imperial nomenclature (remember that it is the prerogative of the navy, not of the shipbuilder, to name warships). There is no obligation to keep names consistent; the three boats of the United States Navy's SSN 21 class are USS Seawolf, USS Connecticut, and USS Jimmy Carter. Given that there is virtually no consistency to Imperial warship nomenclature, that Imperial and Executor do not fit a pattern is wholly unsurprising.

Note that Imperial Star Destroyers' names run from HIMS Avenger to HIMS Avarice, from HIMS Chimaera to HIMS Badi Dea, from HIMS Inexorable to HIMS Emperor's Revenge. Super Star Destroyers have such wildly varying names as HIMS Executor, HIMS Iron Fist, HIMS Lusankya, HIMS Reaper, and HIMS Whelm. This nomenclatural inconsistency is not proof that the names are unofficial, only that Imperial nomenclature is highly unstructured.

PUBLIUS

[Vympel]

Explain how Imperial can be consistent with

Acclamator
Procurator
Mandator
Executor

The first three names have no relevance to the consistency of Imperial nomenclature (remember that it is the prerogative of the navy, not of the shipbuilder, to name warships). There is no obligation to keep names consistent; the three boats of the United States Navy's SSN 21 class are USS Seawolf, USS Connecticut, and USS Jimmy Carter. Given that there is virtually no consistency to Imperial warship nomenclature, that Imperial and Executor do not fit a pattern is wholly unsurprising.

Note that Imperial Star Destroyers' names run from HIMS Avenger to HIMS Avarice, from HIMS Chimaera to HIMS Badi Dea, from HIMS Inexorable to HIMS Emperor's Revenge. Super Star Destroyers have such wildly varying names as HIMS Executor, HIMS Iron Fist, HIMS Lusankya, HIMS Reaper, and HIMS Whelm. This nomenclatural inconsistency is not proof that the names are unofficial, only that Imperial nomenclature is highly unstructured.

PUBLIUS

The class-names represent a clear consistency, of which Imperial is a glaring exception- I never said that all names must be consistent, just class. Furthermore, Acclamator, Procurator and Mandator do bear relevance to Imperial nomenclature because we know from the Executor class that the Imperials hadn't abandoned it- in addition, there is contrary evidence that indicates the Imperials do not name their own ship classes- Procurator and Mandator are Kuat Drive Yards sectorial fleet ships (note the Republic itself didn't have a military of it's own at this stage)- and Acclamator, which was commissioned for the Republic itself, retained the form and theme.

(note for dumbasses who still don't get it- I *know* Imperial is canon, that is *not* the argument)

[Publius]

The class-names represent a clear consistency, of which Imperial is a glaring exception- I never said that all names must be consistent, just class. Furthermore, Acclamator, Procurator and Mandator do bear relevance to Imperial nomenclature because we know from the Executor class that the Imperials hadn't abandoned it- in addition, there is contrary evidence that indicates the Imperials do not name their own ship classes- Procurator and Mandator are Kuat Drive Yards sectorial fleet ships (note the Republic itself didn't have a military of it's own at this stage)- and Acclamator, which was commissioned for the Republic itself, retained the form and theme.

Imprimis, there is no requirement that class names be consistent, either (except that the United States' battleships must be named for States of the Union). The United States Navy's submarines belong to the Los Angeles-, Seawolf-, Virginia-, Sturgeon-, and Ohio-classes; its supercarriers belong to the Kitty Hawk-, John F. Kennedy-, Enterprise-, and Nimitz-classes. The last generation of Royal Navy battleships belonged to the King George V- and Vanguard-classes.

In the second place, you must keep in mind that if you wish to establish that "Imperial-class" is an inconsistent name, you must do so within a meaningful context, i.e., that of Imperial nomenclature. The Galactic Empire is under no obligation of any kind to follow the examples of the Galactic Republic (Acclamator-class) and the Kuati sectorial fleet (Mandator-class, Procurator-class). Let us consider, then, the officially-used names of the various Imperial Star Destroyers: Imperator-class, Imperial-class, Super-class, Executor-class, Sovereign-class, Eclipse-class. In this context, the only meaningful one, there is quite clearly no pattern of class designations wherewith Imperial-class can be inconsistent. The fact that Executor happens to match three names used by two different polities twenty years before is hardly significant.

In the third place, what evidence can you offer in support of your claim that the Imperial Navy does not name its own warships? The examples of the Mandator- and Procurator-classes are irrelevant except with respect to the nomenclature of Kuat's sectorial fleet, which is neither here nor there. Likewise the Acclamator-class, which is not even a Kuat Drive Yards product, but a product of Rothana Heavy Engineering (RHE's relationship with KDY appears to have been secret; they were assumed to be competitors, according to "Mining Guild to Fine Exarga", HoloNet News Vol. 531, #52).

PUBLIUS

[Ender]

(note for dumbasses who still don't get it- I *know* Imperial is canon, that is *not* the argument)

Then why the fuck has this gone on for 9 pages now? Honestly, at this point all I see is you throwing a fucking fit because you don't like the canon name and talking about how you hope it is changed and what you beleive would justify a change.

[Vympel]

Then why the fuck has this gone on for 9 pages now?

Oh I see, I'm the only participant in this entire thread- I must've forgotten about the KDY subsidiary argument and all the other subthreads.

Honestly, at this point all I see is you throwing a fucking fit because you don't like the canon name and talking about how you hope it is changed and what you beleive would justify a change.

That and an argument about methodology- of course anyone could've known this by reading the actual posts in question. Btw, who *does* like the canon name, anyway? i mean seriously now.

[Vympel]

Imprimis, there is no requirement that class names be consistent, either (except that the United States' battleships must be named for States of the Union). The United States Navy's submarines belong to the Los Angeles-, Seawolf-, Virginia-, Sturgeon-, and Ohio-classes; its supercarriers belong to the Kitty Hawk-, John F. Kennedy-, Enterprise-, and Nimitz-classes. The last generation of Royal Navy battleships belonged to the King George V- and Vanguard-classes.

It doesn't matter that there's no requirement- the similarity is nevertheless there.

In the second place, you must keep in mind that if you wish to establish that "Imperial-class" is an inconsistent name, you must do so within a meaningful context, i.e., that of Imperial nomenclature. The Galactic Empire is under no obligation of any kind to follow the examples of the Galactic Republic (Acclamator-class) and the Kuati sectorial fleet (Mandator-class, Procurator-class).

Obligation or no (highly debatable, considering that the constant theme of the prequels is that the Republic *is* the Empire), the pattern is demonstrable.

Let us consider, then, the officially-used names of the various Imperial Star Destroyers: Imperator-class, Imperial-class, Super-class, Executor-class, Sovereign-class, Eclipse-class. In this context, the only meaningful one, there is quite clearly no pattern of class designations wherewith Imperial-class can be inconsistent. The fact that Executor happens to match three names used by two different polities twenty years before is hardly significant.

The Republic and Empire are hardly different polities- again, the Republic and Empire are the same entity, with mere aesthetic differences. The military structure of the Empire were established late in the Republic, after all. As to the post-Episode VI 'super' vessels, it's possible that their status as super-laser equipped warships, or the mere fact that there aren't that many names left ending with 'or' (Censor, Superior, and Praetor spring to mind- Dictator is a possibility but I remember a ship of that name being a VSD or ISD perhaps) conveying enough of the required menace to be appropriate (Sovereign shares some similarity, Eclipse seems to have gotten it's name from it's black hull and gargantuan bulk/length) precluded the use of such a name.

In the third place, what evidence can you offer in support of your claim that the Imperial Navy does not name its own warships? The examples of the Mandator- and Procurator-classes are irrelevant except with respect to the nomenclature of Kuat's sectorial fleet, which is neither here nor there. Likewise the Acclamator-class, which is not even a Kuat Drive Yards product, but a product of Rothana Heavy Engineering (RHE's relationship with KDY appears to have been secret; they were assumed to be competitors, according to "Mining Guild to Fine Exarga", HoloNet News Vol. 531, #52).

PUBLIUS

Rothana is canonically a subsidiary of KDY (Ep2ICS)- both the Kuat sectorial fleet ships and the Republic-commissioned have class names common in form and theme- either Kuat does the naming for it's subsidiaries or Rothana does them itself. The burden of proof is also not on me to show that the Imperial Navy does *not* do something (shifting the burden of proof). The similarities are sufficient enough as it is, and cut across the boundaries of non-military sectorial fleet, Republican fleet, and Imperial fleet (though in the latter case I don't see there as being a difference- the Republic IS the Empire).

[Ender]

Honestly, at this point all I see is you throwing a fucking fit because you don't like the canon name and talking about how you hope it is changed and what you beleive would justify a change.

That and an argument about methodology- of course anyone could've known this by reading the actual posts in question. Btw, who *does* like the canon name, anyway? i mean seriously now.

So yeah, it's you having a temper tantrum. OK, I can ignore this thread now and not worry about missing anything.

[Vympel]

So yeah, it's you having a temper tantrum. OK, I can ignore this thread now and not worry about missing anything.

Whatever, clearly your reading skills haven't improved over the past few hours.

[Connor MacLeod]

Now who's arguing that the intent is 'clear'? Are you seriously suggesting that WEG ignored the canonical 'Super Star Destroyer' all together and instead invented a 8km ship for nothing? They made a fucking mistake.

No, but we treat it as such in order to maintain continuity. You *do* know what continuity is, and how important it is, right?

Or they were *wrong*.

Which by no means changes my logic whatsoever, nor does it prove that the source must be "dismissed" as you keep insisting it must, and which you have yet to prove.

Anything's *possible*. However, it is quite clear that WEG made a mistake- they were not making up a new ship class. Lucasfilm has already corrected the size of the Executor once. I see no reason to invent new ship classes to cover up their sheer incompetence when Lucasfilm clearly doesn't feel the need.

Because you clearly do not understand just what is involved in analysis, much less understand what "unification" involves. I suggest you read the "unification" sub-heading of Curtis's "Continuity, Canon, and Apocrypha" page:

http://www.theforce.net/swtc/continuity.html

Unification.
Only reject existing material where absolutely necessary. Story elements must have genuine continuity problems to justify discarding them; material shan't be thrown away simply because many people hold it to be repugnant or embarassing. The STAR WARS Holiday Special is a prime example. If a source is uncomfortable or incongruent at face value, it is often possible to add background circumstances to alter its significance and give a more realistic perspective.
Sources should be treated with a view towards unifying everything to give a coherent and concise internal reality to the STAR WARS universe. Wherever phenomena can be explained in several different ways, the theory to be favoured is that which requires the simplest and fewest postulates, and which entails the least ad hoc changes in time. Wherever possible, real physical principles must be applied for the assessment of theories. Common phenomena in technological and natural features of STAR WARS should have common causes.

Nice try. I don't have to prove anything- you're making the positive claim, you provide the proof. Prove they're different vessels. Your entire "invent new items whenever some schmuck at WEG gets the size wrong" methodology is absurd. 15m AT-ATs? Sure, let em on in! 160km DS2s? Well, you can't prove that they're *not* different vessels- there must've been one!

Yes, you *do* have to prove its unworkable because unity of material comes before dismissal. You haven't even *bothered* to try to make it fit. instead you just *scream* it doesn't work because "its stupid." Yet rationalization of erroneous or even stupid elements, official or canon, is in fact a core element to analysis, even if you are incapable of grasping that basic fact.

Your logic that "we don't have to deal with other people's stupidity" does not fly. By your logic, we should dismiss visuals if they look like "obvious" errors - something that has in fact been advocated before, but would conflict with suspension of disbelief (an example of an "error" that must be reconciled in ROTJ is when we see the visible portion of a laser or turbolaser blast pass harmlessly through an A-wing. By your logic we should ignore it becuase someone is an idiot. Yet my method requires us to explain it in order to maintain consistency. This is in fact true of many observed behaviours of blasters, no matter how odd it is. Saxton gives other examples of canon and official "fuck ups" that required reconciliation, and even some that received 'in-house' fixes.)

[Connor MacLeod]

The Devastator carries dozens of heavy weapons emplacements on the model itself.

Oh really? I can recall maybe a dozen or so at most being identified on the actual model. So where exactly are these "Dozens" on the model, then?

More rhetoric. I'm not going to bother quoting every time you denigrate my position that it's simply 'stupid', it's not worth my time.

Translation: "I don't like it so I'm going to ignore it." You're getting rather good at ignoring things you don't like.

Now that it's canon, it is. I've said this multiple times. Get it through your skull for fuck's sake.

Yes, you'll quietly admit its canon while still continuing to call it a stupid name based on "poorly researched" WEG material.

By repeatedly dismissing them as irrational without bothering to address them save for vague hand waving.

Ah, so by that overly-generalized logic you must think anyone who has pointed out the flaws in your logic is comitting an ad hominem against you.

Uh huh. Clearly, you can't read. I suggest you type in the word concede in relation to this thread using the find function.

So why are you bothering to continue the debate? If you conceded abot "Imperial" than you should have ended this discussion long ago instead of wasting my time.

Or are you still arguing because you want to be allowed to arbitrarily toss out bits of evidence on the grounds you just don't like it, rather than actually going through the efforts of dealing with it and seeing if it can actually be worked on? You seem to have a vast lack of understanding about how analysis of this material is supposed to be handled.

Explain how Imperial can be consistent with

Acclamator
Procurator
Mandator
Executor

Please. Go ahead. Heaven forbid you actually respond to the fucking point rather than just stand on a pedestal and make generalized comments.

Your interpretation of evidence. That's not the same as stated evidence. You yourself admitted that this was not indicated to you directly by Saxton.

I might point out that according to your logic, its not a KDY design unless it follows said naming conventions (So I guess the Eclipse and Sovereign are incorrectly named, as is the Republic class cruiser, and the Nebulon-B frigate as well. )

Of course, Publius handled this far more better than I could. IF he couldn't get you to see reason, then you're being deliberately dense.

"Supposed to be?" It is. This is not disputable. Not that I ever tied WEG to the argument, save as a tangent to which to rail against their stunning ineptitude, which you seem to defend.

Guess what? If you insist that your material is flawed to begin with, you can't use it at all. Flawed material leads to unreliable conclusions. Hence, your constnat bitching about WEG would suggest we throw it out as unreliable, because if it is "poorly researched", the material cannot be trusted at all. Were you at all familiar with analytical methods, you might have realized this.

New Republic bias. Or do 15m AT-ATs exist, for example, because WEG said so and you're *so* reluctant to correct their inept mistakes? Or do E-Webs take a long time to set up, like WEG claimed, even though we saw it being set up in seconds in the actual damn film? Or do you think that official novels are some sort of perfect source rather than the murky window into the universe that Lucasfilm says they are?

I think material is perfectly viable and useful unless it can be DEMONSTRATED to be utterly irreconcilable. Harmonization of sources is preferrable to outright dismissal. Material is valid unless contradicted by a higher source, or violates scientific principles (the latter is important because we are applying suspension of disbelief.) Consistent application of method is also important. All of which (and probably more) is relevant to accurate, consistent analysis of Star Wars (or anything else, for that matter.)

And I am not the only one. AS I pointed out previously, Saxton has also suggested that its quite possible to treat the 5-8 mile "Super" class vessel as a distinct class type that is erroneously mistaken for the Executor-class, and he does not appear to consider it problematic.

[Vympel]

Oh really? I can recall maybe a dozen or so at most being identified on the actual model. So where exactly are these "Dozens" on the model, then?

The eight on either side, combined with the two notch guns, combined with the spine guns can fall under the category of dozens- regardless, you will be hardpressed to find WEG's weapons stats corresponding to the canon ship whatsoever.

Translation: "I don't like it so I'm going to ignore it." You're getting rather good at ignoring things you don't like.

What's to respond to? Your constant belittling?

Yes, you'll quietly admit its canon while still continuing to call it a stupid name based on "poorly researched" WEG material.

And you deny that?

Ah, so by that overly-generalized logic you must think anyone who has pointed out the flaws in your logic is comitting an ad hominem against you.

No, just you.

So why are you bothering to continue the debate? If you conceded abot "Imperial" than you should have ended this discussion long ago instead of wasting my time.

Your lack of reading comprehension isn't my problem- this is about methodology and how things can be changed should someone want to, not the canon status of Imperial, which is indisputable.

Or are you still arguing because you want to be allowed to arbitrarily toss out bits of evidence on the grounds you just don't like it, rather than actually going through the efforts of dealing with it and seeing if it can actually be worked on? You seem to have a vast lack of understanding about how analysis of this material is supposed to be handled.

Your strawmen of my methodology and what my methodology actually is clearly don't coincide.

Your interpretation of evidence. That's not the same as stated evidence. You yourself admitted that this was not indicated to you directly by Saxton.

Then explain why my interpretation is flawed.

I might point out that according to your logic, its not a KDY design unless it follows said naming conventions (So I guess the Eclipse and Sovereign are incorrectly named, as is the Republic class cruiser, and the Nebulon-B frigate as well.

And where did I say that something can't be a KDY design?

Guess what? If you insist that your material is flawed to begin with, you can't use it at all. Flawed material leads to unreliable conclusions. Hence, your constnat bitching about WEG would suggest we throw it out as unreliable, because if it is "poorly researched", the material cannot be trusted at all. Were you at all familiar with analytical methods, you might have realized this.

Rubbish. WEG *is* unreliable when it can be demonstrated to be so, one mistake does not destroy the entire source. Where we differ is that you will go to all sorts of lengths to prevent obvious nonsense being corrected by canon (re: 8km Super Star Destroyer)- and you seem to think correcting bullshit= "throwing out". It was never *there* to be thrown out in the first place.

I think material is perfectly viable and useful unless it can be DEMONSTRATED to be utterly irreconcilable. Harmonization of sources is preferrable to outright dismissal. Material is valid unless contradicted by a higher source, or violates scientific principles (the latter is important because we are applying suspension of disbelief.) Consistent application of method is also important. All of which (and probably more) is relevant to accurate, consistent analysis of Star Wars (or anything else, for that matter.)

Harmonization has reasonable limits. It is not reasoanble to create new ship classes everytime there's a scaling error due to lack of research, especially in the case of the 5 mile long fallacy- the entire EU has drawn no such distinctions and clearly treated the ships as one and the same. Misidentification is an absurd explanation- no person who wasn't completely blind could mistake a ship half/twice it's size for another. It is an easily corrected error, nothing more.

And I am not the only one. AS I pointed out previously, Saxton has also suggested that its quite possible to treat the 5-8 mile "Super" class vessel as a distinct class type that is erroneously mistaken for the Executor-class, and he does not appear to consider it problematic.

Whether it's possible and whether it's convincing are two unrelated things.

[Vympel]

No, but we treat it as such in order to maintain continuity. You *do* know what continuity is, and how important it is, right?

How does correcting a scaling error violate continuity in any way?

Which by no means changes my logic whatsoever, nor does it prove that the source must be "dismissed" as you keep insisting it must, and which you have yet to prove.

No, corrected as necessary by canon, not dismissed.

Because you clearly do not understand just what is involved in analysis, much less understand what "unification" involves. I suggest you read the "unification" sub-heading of Curtis's "Continuity, Canon, and Apocrypha" page:

http://www.theforce.net/swtc/continuity.html

I'd say my approach was far closer to that than yours- of course you'll keep telling yourself that I'm 'throwing out' material rather than correcting it as necessary with reference to canon.

Yes, you *do* have to prove its unworkable because unity of material comes before dismissal. You haven't even *bothered* to try to make it fit. instead you just *scream* it doesn't work because "its stupid." Yet rationalization of erroneous or even stupid elements, official or canon, is in fact a core element to analysis, even if you are incapable of grasping that basic fact.

You're big on broad rhetoric about analysis but you won't actually get down to the nitty gritty, because your position can't survive it. Again: no distinction is drawn between the 8km/12.8km and 17.6km ships in official or canon material. It is clear that the entire EU has gotten the size of the Executor wrong. There is no explicit evidence of a 8/12.8km vessel, and repeated evidence of errors regarding the Executor's and its sisters true size. Therefore, references to an 8km/12.8km ship are quite simply incorrect. Your approach requires the automatic insertion of extra terms whenever there's an error of a canon item/vessel whatever- including shorter AT-ATs, smaller Death Star IIs, and SSDs, never mind the complete lack of evidence for their existence, and the shifting of the burden of proof to the other party to somehow prove that they're *not* different. It's totally unconvincing, and contributes *nothing* to continuity. In the case of the smaller SSD, it also flies in the face of the interchangeable manner with which the Executor and it's companions are described as 5 miles long.

Your logic that "we don't have to deal with other people's stupidity" does not fly. By your logic, we should dismiss visuals if they look like "obvious" errors - something that has in fact been advocated before, but would conflict with suspension of disbelief (an example of an "error" that must be reconciled in ROTJ is when we see the visible portion of a laser or turbolaser blast pass harmlessly through an A-wing. By your logic we should ignore it becuase someone is an idiot. Yet my method requires us to explain it in order to maintain consistency. This is in fact true of many observed behaviours of blasters, no matter how odd it is. Saxton gives other examples of canon and official "fuck ups" that required reconciliation, and even some that received 'in-house' fixes.)

Not my position at all. You have a very nice way of inventing things that aren't there and ignoring the actual points of the argument to score cheap points regarding broad terms which have never been discussed though.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I would like to point out that my proposal for a KDY "universal" designation would easily reconcile every single armament scheme we have seen on an Imperial-type hull, and even the various bridge configurations. Similiar ships (note my reference to the Meko) in the real world often have dozens of different configurations, which are determined by the particular buyer. I do not see why it would be particularly odd for Imperial-type ships produced by KDY, all sharing the same hullform, to have dozens of different armament schemes, shield strengths, and even bridge configurations, based on their intended service requirements within Imperial service or within the service of another purchasing nation.

There's no reason why the ships identified as the so-called Imperator I, II, and III, along with the ships identified as Imperial I and II by WEG; and the possible Imperator IV and possibly V, along with other versions, are all in-fact ISDs, all based on the universal Imperial-type hull manufactured by KDY, and simply differing in hull and bridge configurations. A good example of this is the Dominator-class, an ISD hullform used to house gravwell projectors, yet identified as a specific class instead of another ISD variant (when this might not be the case for, example, a cruiser of the 1950s with a turret removed and replaced for a missile launcher).

Why then must we attempt to find class names for all of these types when it becomes possible, or even likely, that each one has an individual class name in the service of each individual State to which they have been commissioned? Ultimately the Imperial-type designation, as long as it is properly understood to refer to the hullform produced by KDY, is perfectly serviceable, and should be used by us for the same reason it presumably dominates in the Star Wars Galaxy--to avoid an awkward multiplicity of designations.

[Super-Gagme]

Duchess:

Reason I didn't respond moments later? It was 2 fucking AM. Publius, just because I don't respond I am against my argument? Sorry if not everyone is capable of saying up for all hours to continue a pointless debate.

Imperial-class as KDY universal designation? What the fuck? The only place (ONLY PLACE) you see Imperator-class is in Mandel blueprints. Every other time in EU, released material or whatever when an ISD is refered to by class is Imperial this be in the Empire's hands or Rebel hands it makes no difference. If the Empire renamed it then why didn't we see it as Imperator? Because that is NOT the class name. You are making out of the blue guesses. I think Mon Mothma's middle name was Hilga. It isn't written anywhere so it must be true (because I made it up). This is your logic, its pointless. Why must you all refuse to accept the Canon name?

[Chris OFarrell]

The short answer the people here won't accept the clear cut name of the ISD is that they are stubborn fools who appear to think one source of highly dubious standing which has been ignored by the people who own and control Star Wars should overrule every other single source on this issue.

Cause they don't like the name.

And they know that by any standards of evidence they can not prove in the slightest their claims that the name Imperial is a slang name (as no-one has said that it is in any official/canon source) or that it refers to a specific faction controlling that ship (because when its controlled by the other faction the name remains the same).

So we are left with them claiming that Dr Saxton is going to magically wave his wand in Episode III ICS and declare it to go their way (despite the fact that he in fact did the exact opposite in Episode II ICS and thus moved all their arguments to naught AGAIN) and that Imperator is correct 'cause its sounds like the other class names'.

The people who have argued for Imperator as the correct name in this thread are some of the most idiotic people I have seen since I came to this board.


Oh and I don't include Marina in this simply because I can understand that she would rather not have to edit her several gigabytes worth of fanfics a million times to change Imperator to Imperial. And that whole Imperator/Emperor thing with His Majesty ruling over the UFP or whatever... :p

[Kazuaki Shimazaki]

When I see Imperial-class in any number of novels, the first thing I think about is how much of a moron WEG can be. Yes, I appreciate them telling us so much. I hate them also for how much they get wrong.

Yes, I know the ICS is canon. But even if they used "Imperial-class" in EP3 the Episode, It does not mean it wasn't a brain bug or incompetence. It just means we have to choke it down. It is like Star Trek episodes. We may be willing to choke them down, but we still won't stop saying some of them are moronic. I guess the good news that the ICS are canon comes with a few lumps.

Chris, I doubt that Saxton, if he ever gets the chance, will trample on something he personally has written in his webpage. In fact, he can be more honest in his webpage than the ICS, with its influences from everyone and the rest of continuity. IMHO, if he seals it as Imperial-class in the EP3:ICS, it won't be because he really wants to.

We don't claim. But we hope. It is natural for fans to hope for new parts of a story to go their wanted directions.

I've already heard the ISD Imperator actually showed up, but I never heard of the ISD Imperial showing up, anywhere.

But I can actually chow down Imperial-class easily. Not having Marina's huge libraries of history, I just think of them as County-class, or Crown-Colony Class. There were NO ships named that, but they do represent an existence class. And if everyone decides to say "County" rather than "Kent" (AFAIK, the first ship of that class) I can chow that down.

As for a 5 or 8 mile ship called the Super-class. IMHO they shot any idea of the Super-class into the toilet when they dared link their 5/8 mile designation to the Executor. They then kill any tiny chance of dissociation with the canon Executor by linking their Executor to VADER's Executor. They then shoot themselves again as they change the length (OK, so maybe Iron Fist is a 5-mile Long Super Class, but now it is 8?)

If people want to find support for the idea of a separate Super-class, I don't think Saxton is the best guy to find it from. In his Executor page, he's like "A 5-mile separate class called the Super-class? I suppose it IS possible. It'd make a nice KDY heavy cruiser, I guess. But I definitely haven't seen it yet. The Super-class claims I've heard of so far all look like they were really Executor-class. And if there is a Super-class, why haven't we ever seen the Nameship Super herself? It is possible in THEORY, I guess, but let's face it - it is more probably slang corruption that grew into a brain bug."

Not supportive if you ask me.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki]

There's no reason why the ships identified as the so-called Imperator I, II, and III, along with the ships identified as Imperial I and II by WEG; and the possible Imperator IV and possibly V, along with other versions, are all in-fact ISDs, all based on the universal Imperial-type hull manufactured by KDY, and simply differing in hull and bridge configurations. A good example of this is the Dominator-class, an ISD hullform used to house gravwell projectors, yet identified as a specific class instead of another ISD variant (when this might not be the case for, example, a cruiser of the 1950s with a turret removed and replaced for a missile launcher).

One little nit: How did you know that Interdictor Star Destroyer is the Dominator-class. Saxton calls it the Dominator class provisionally for it is the first one of its class that he sees (and we all borrow that nomenclature for our FanFics,) but I never knew it was the official class desingation anywhere.

[Vympel]

Duchess:

Reason I didn't respond moments later? It was 2 fucking AM. Publius, just because I don't respond I am against my argument? Sorry if not everyone is capable of saying up for all hours to continue a pointless debate.

Imperial-class as KDY universal designation? What the fuck? The only place (ONLY PLACE) you see Imperator-class is in Mandel blueprints. Every other time in EU, released material or whatever when an ISD is refered to by class is Imperial this be in the Empire's hands or Rebel hands it makes no difference. If the Empire renamed it then why didn't we see it as Imperator? Because that is NOT the class name. You are making out of the blue guesses. I think Mon Mothma's middle name was Hilga. It isn't written anywhere so it must be true (because I made it up). This is your logic, its pointless. Why must you all refuse to accept the Canon name?

I suggest you either contribute to the actual discussion taking place on the thread rather than railing on issues that are not under debate.

[Vympel]

So we are left with them claiming that Dr Saxton is going to magically wave his wand in Episode III ICS and declare it to go their way (despite the fact that he in fact did the exact opposite in Episode II ICS and thus moved all their arguments to naught AGAIN) and that Imperator is correct 'cause its sounds like the other class names'.

In case you didn't notice, the canon status of Imperial is not at issue. Regardless, it IS a demonstrably stupid name thought up by stupid people, hence the dissatisfaction with it and the desire to see it, and it's ilk (i.e. Super-class) removed or reduced from importance. Furthermore, explain how totally not touching the issue save to include the names Acclamator, Procurator and Mandator is "the exact opposite".

The people who have argued for Imperator as the correct name in this thread are some of the most idiotic people I have seen since I came to this board.

Whatever. I think Kazuaki summed up the actual position of the anti-Imperials quite well. Unfortunately, most of the other side just doesn't get what the actual discussion is.

[Vympel]

One little nit: How did you know that Interdictor Star Destroyer is the Dominator-class. Saxton calls it the Dominator class provisionally for it is the first one of its class that he sees (and we all borrow that nomenclature for our FanFics,) but I never knew it was the official class desingation anywhere.

I guess it's like the 'Allegiance' class- not really it's name, but as the only (or first) ship we saw with that name, it's just a comfortable way to identify the vessel. If it can be shown that the Dominator is the first vessel, that's a different story, but I don't keep up well with that sort of thing.

[Cal Wright]

A New Hope Novelisation
pg 5 paperback

The source of those multiple energy beams suddenly hove into view-a lumbering Imperial cruiser.


p12

When word came over the communicators that the last pocket of resistance on the rebel ship had been cleaned out, the Captain of the Imperial cruiser relaxed considerably.

The Empire Strikes Back
pg209 paperback

The mammoth Imperial Star Destroyer occupied a position of deadly prominence in the Emperor's fleet. The sleekly elongated ship was larger and even more ominous than the five wedge-shaped IMPERIAL Star Destroyers guarding it.


p212

Inside the largest of the six Imperial Star Destroyers, Darth Vader sat alone in a smal spherical room.

Interesting to find that the Super Star Destroyer is also referred to as an Imperial Star Destroyer. This changes though in Return of the Jedi, obviously, and somewhere in the novelisation too.

p233

All around them, the laser attack had increased violently. The Millenium Falcon could only continue at its maximum sublight velocity as it moved deeper into space, closely followed by a swarm of TIE Fighters and one gigantic Imperial Star Destroyer.

Return of the Jedi
p329 paperback

An Imperial Star Destroyer approached the giant space station at cruising speed.

p371

The Super Star Destroyer rested in space above the half completed Death Star battle station and its green neighbor, Endor.

[phongn]

Duchess:

Reason I didn't respond moments later? It was 2 fucking AM. Publius, just because I don't respond I am against my argument? Sorry if not everyone is capable of saying up for all hours to continue a pointless debate.

At no point did Publius say such a thing. Re-read the part of his post addressed to you.

Imperial-class as KDY universal designation? What the fuck? The only place (ONLY PLACE) you see Imperator-class is in Mandel blueprints.

Did you even read her post? She said "the ships identified as the so-called Imperator I, II, and III," (emphasis mine) She is not neccessarily saying that the general Imperial type in the service of the Imperial Starfleet is class-named Imperator at all.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Duchess:

Reason I didn't respond moments later? It was 2 fucking AM. Publius, just because I don't respond I am against my argument? Sorry if not everyone is capable of saying up for all hours to continue a pointless debate.

If you can't stand the heat, don't walk into the fire.

Imperial-class as KDY universal designation? What the fuck?

I explained it quite clearly. Do you have reading comprehension problems? Maybe you should look into "Hooked on Phonics".

The only place (ONLY PLACE) you see Imperator-class is in Mandel blueprints.

Relevant to my argument how?

Every other time in EU, released material or whatever when an ISD is refered to by class is Imperial this be in the Empire's hands or Rebel hands it makes no difference.

Exactly, thank you for supporting my argument.

If the Empire renamed it then why didn't we see it as Imperator? Because that is NOT the class name.

I never argued that it was.

You are making out of the blue guesses. I think Mon Mothma's middle name was Hilga. It isn't written anywhere so it must be true (because I made it up). This is your logic, its pointless. Why must you all refuse to accept the Canon name?

Irrelevant posturing.

Come up with a real argument or concede, and stop whining about the fact that I post later than you do while you're at it.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Oh and I don't include Marina in this simply because I can understand that she would rather not have to edit her several gigabytes worth of fanfics a million times to change Imperator to Imperial. And that whole Imperator/Emperor thing with His Majesty ruling over the UFP or whatever... :p

Actually I believe that my argument is logically based on inconsistancies in naming procedure--not the style of the name, as-is Vympel's argmument, but on naval traditions and observed discrepencies in how these are followed in the Star Wars universe--which must be reconciled, and can be reconciled far more easily by carefully investigating what a name means than by a rote defence on basis of canon hierarchy. In no way does my proposal in fact violate the canon hierarchy; it simply explains what the naming of the ISD hullform as "Imperial" means.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

< snip >

The quotes are less than irrelevant as the class was never defined there in relation to the word Imperial.