StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Mon Cal cruisers I believe are inferior to ISDs. Why? When going one on one with ISDs, Ackbat said "they wont last long against those Star Destroyers" This could mean one of a few things, but it does seem the have less power......prolly more durable, but how could a smaller passenger liner converted be superior to a dedicated larger warship? Later dedicated models though are probobly better than ISDs.

wouldnt the remnants of the empire build better models of the isd?

I guess the MonCals aren't very heavily armored, and perhaps also have structurally weak hulls in comparison to an ISD.

They're converted explorers and liners after all.

Just a thought about RSDS, I wonder if they simply look like an ISD but smaller, and with fewer weapons.

example: speculated Tech Data

6 heavy turrets of 8 HTL 3 port, 3 stbd, just like an ISD but fewer numbers.

a number of lt lt 19cm range or so, some missile or projectile weapons on the ventral hull to target ground targets from space, and a medium number of point defense laser cannons in the 40-60mm range.

Just a thought, I dont have any real proof, but then again who knows.

AL wrote:wouldnt the remnants of the empire build better models of the isd?

Sure, at SWTC Mr. Saxton has shown the ISD III has slight improvements. Not too mention the Empire has alot of free time on their hands.

Do we have
ISD I
ISDII
ISDIII
ISDIV?

Or

Imperator class ISD I
Avenger Class ISD II
no name for III and IV

I like thae actual name class. We currently or any nation for that matter does not call is Destroyers for example American or US Destroyer type I tpye II etc.

any thought on this from anyone.

The class name is Imperator.
There are subclasses I II and III
That's all, simple.

Cpt_Frank wrote:The class name is Imperator.
There are subclasses I II and III
That's all, simple.

It is that simple. What the hell wa I think????????????????

Besides the Mandel fan art, what else names the ISD as Imperator Class?
If there's nothing (as I suspect, but am open to any evidence) I will resume calling them Imperial Class.

Is there anywhere in the official literature that says Imperator?
A quick search of Saxton's ISD page didn't list any sources other than the Mandel pics.

AL wrote:wouldnt the remnants of the empire build better models of the isd?

It would depend on which remnant you're talking about.

Some groups would be scrabbling just to get the resources to build a new ISD, and might assume a bunch of Nebs would be more cost-effective for them.

Other groups might decide that, with time being the critical factor, it's better to continue building the old ISD design in order to have more ships available sooner, and not waste time trying to research upgrades until after they have some breathing room.

There's also having the access to the engineering knowledge to figure out where improvements can be made, to find out if they can make improvements without losing other capabilities, or if they even have the resources and hulls to use on prototyping the improvements.

And just because Imperial Remnant Gamma has found a way to improve an ISD's firepower without sacrificing shield power or hanger space, doesn't mean it'll share it with Remant Delta. They have to be on good terms.

AL wrote:wouldnt the remnants of the empire build better models of the isd?

It would appear that the Imperial Remmanent did build a few new variations on the original design. Or at least altered some of the older destroyers in it's possesion.

If I were Palleon I would build some intermediates sized ships. Say up-gunned and over powered Star Frigates to beef up my fleet numbers. Then build some Alligiance class Star Destroyers; because even if I don't have the resources to build an SSD. I should still be able to build a ships that's only 2.2 Km long. So, I'll have vessels better able to stand up to the NR fleet.

Sardaukar wrote:Besides the Mandel fan art, what else names the ISD as Imperator Class?
If there's nothing (as I suspect, but am open to any evidence) I will resume calling them Imperial Class.

Is there anywhere in the official literature that says Imperator?
A quick search of Saxton's ISD page didn't list any sources other than the Mandel pics.

I'm not sure, but Imperator-class sounds better. Or perhaps there first were constructed two ISDs, the Imperator and the Imperial, and they were completed so close that nobody noticed which one was completed first.

Spartan wrote:If I were Palleon I would build some intermediates sized ships. Say up-gunned and over powered Star Frigates to beef up my fleet numbers. Then build some Alligiance class Star Destroyers; because even if I don't have the resources to build an SSD. I should still be able to build a ships that's only 2.2 Km long. So, I'll have vessels better able to stand up to the NR fleet.

Except the IR can build SSDs. And it also buit up it's military enough to impress Han.

Imperial is just silly. Saxton clearly hates it- it's a blatant naval designation error.

Notice in the SW2ICS Saxton made a point of calling the ship Acclamator, mentioning two other ships called Procurator and Mandator.

Also notice the name of the Executor. Do you see the similarity? Imperator fits in beautifully. Imperial just sounds dumb. And who the hell calls a ship the Imperial?

Imperator forever!!!

Not to mention the latin meaning of Imperator. (also fits perfectly)

I don't think that "it sounds better" is valid justification, and I don't like using Saxton as a primary source (other than for SW2ICS stuff). It's just a bit dodgey getting it originally from the mandell art...
I guess if Saxton writes another ICS or something and renames it and everything after that calls it an Imperator then I'll have to accept it. But for now, just because it sounds "cool" is not enough for me when every source calls it an Imperial Class.
So until I get am official response to the matter I'm going to have to agree to disagree with pretty much everyone on this board about the ISDs class.

The justification is that in no instance in history ships were given names like 'imperial'. It's the same like naming a ship 'american' class, or 'republican', or 'russian' class - no one would do that.
Imperator however does not only fit well into SW's nomenclature (Executor, Tyrant, Avenger, Devastator), but also real-life naval nomenclature (Dreadnought, Thunderer, Orion, Conqueror).
And btw Lucas Arts has made an official statement that Imperial Star Destroyer is a colloquial Rebel term, while Imperator is the correct designation.

Star Wars != real life.
It doesn't matter if you think it should be named this or that because you think it sounds better or it makes more sense. You don't write the reference material and until Saxton is able to cover his ass with some official publication, I find no justification for calling it an Imperator.

Please show me the proof that Lucas Arts has shown any kind of authority on the subject. Since when does Lucas Arts count as a primary source for information when it is contradicted by all the subsequent and preceeding reference material?

The term Imperator which first appeared in Mandell's blueprints from 1978 is consistent with what we know about SW naval nomenclature and, moreover, also with real life nomenclature of naval vessels after which many SW ships were quite obviously patterned (one of the many obvious, and intentional, parallels between SW and real life).
However, Imperial class is consistent with neiter. Now how can the existence of the term, and especially the presence in the official literature be rationalized? Easy: it's a colloquial term made up by the rebels to distinguish Imperator class SD, developed and built during the early days pf the empire, from the Victory class SDs of the late days of the old republic.
This explanation is perfectly logical and accepted by most SW fans.

Thanks for providing information that I had previously overlooked, with an abundance of proof that clearly backs you up. Looks like it's obvious that they are called Imperators. Well done.

Wait... they're calling them Imperator Class Stardestroyers now? That doesn't really roll off the tongue, does it?

How about we just call them I-Class, so that it's futuresafe for upgrade to accept new Internet technology?

Everyone calls them Imperator class. Because they are Imperator class.
Accept it, or be destroyed.
And change your avatar.
It sucks.

Sootydog wrote:Wait... they're calling them Imperator Class Stardestroyers now?

Now? A lot of fans have been calling them Imperator-class for nearly ten years.

That doesn't really roll off the tongue, does it?

It might not sound as slick as Imperial-class, but it gives it a more reagal aura. It sounds more dignified.

Besides, name-wise, Imperial-class really doesn't make any sense. If it was Empire-class, then it would work.

Actually mandell's blueprints called them Imperator class for the last 25 years.