StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Excuse me? The orbital bombardment COULDN'T target the shield generator. The shield generator was what made such bombardment impossible to begin with. If orbital bombardment becomes a possibility the shield generator has to be already gone.

Thanas wrote:

The Romulan Republic wrote:

Thanas wrote: About what? The Mon Cal planetary shield or the Hapans?

The Hapans.

It is in the courtship of Princess Leia.

pg3:

"The accompanying Star Destroyers are theirs, conquered from the Imperials"

pg 10:

"Twelve of the poorer worlds each gave Leia Star Destroyers captured from the empire"

Earlier, it talks about dozens of Star Destroyers.

If I want to get technical, I can argue that their is nothing their about the size of the Imperial occupation force. All this means is that the Hapans captured some dozens of Star Destroyers under unknown circumstances over an unknown period of time. But that's more nitpicky than I generally care to be.

I honestly do not know. I would rationalize this with the Mon Cal being dedicated to only the freedom of their homeworld, not the rebel alliance, which in fact did not spare ships to protect important planets. So why would the MonCal support anyone if they got nothing in return?

And yet the Mon Cals did support the Rebellion to a considerable extent. I can't recall the source, but there's a quote of Mon Mothma saying that the Rebellion would have been impossible without them. Does that sound familiar?

Still, it may be an ok explanation for why they didn't get give more ships to the Rebels. It just doesn't explain how they got that many ships in the first place.

Reactor scaling would indicate more than 120 ISDs, but this is a tangent that has not really much of a bearing on the discussion here.

Nothing more to discuss here really. Though I would say that while the Executor probably should be that powerful, all the evidence indicates that it isn't. Perhaps because its role was more as a carrier/command ship than as a battleship.

As do the numbers of the Imperial Starfleet - at least 25000 ISD-sized ships. Even if we assume only 5% would have been available for offensive operations, that still are 1250 Star Destroyers.

True. As before, its a case of choosing between multiple implausibilities. Though your argument that the Mon Cals might simply have not been supporting the Alliance very much for whatever reason might have some merit, its still a bit of a stretch that they would send such a weak force to such a critical battle as Endor, and I have yet to be convinced that the Mon Calimari could plausibly have fielded such a large force regardless, for reasons I have repeatedly stated already.

However, I would note that ISDs are not really heavy cruisers (destroyers or lighter cruisers at best). So 1250 ISDs is probably equivalent to a few hundred heavy cruisers maximum.

I would therefore argue that the MonCal were running their yards at full capacity to match the empire's fleet. They would not have been able to spare many ships due to them needing them to keep the empire away.

No doubt they would be running their yards at full capacity. The question is weather that would have been enough to allow them to field that many heavy cruisers.

Even by Star Wars standards, thousands of heavy cruisers is a huge fleet. I can't think of a single canon battle involving that many ships, ever.

That is the only explanation there is that works IMO.

That the Mon Cals somehow hid away a huge fleet that could challenge the Empire for years while the Empire occupied their world, and just sat their biding their time instead of using it to support the Alliance, or for that matter do anything? Or that they rapidly rebuilt this massive fleet in a matter of a few years despite seriously limited resources?

Really, their is no particularly plausible way one world or even one sector should be able to challenge a galactic power. The question is which explanation is the least implausible.

Still more likely than the empire being too stupid to send ships after the MonCal shipyards.

Why would they need to? They expected to shortly have another Death Star to go and crush them with.

The MC80 cruiser is typically described as the standard MonCal cruiser. It is a fraction of the size of Home one (about 30-50%, depending on what source you use for Home One).

Now hold on. You specified heavy cruisers. Not light cruisers or cruisers in general.

I could possibly accept the Mon Cals having a few hundred light cruisers, but that's not what we're talking about here.

That was not the only viable approach. Several species/states succesfully resisted Imperial rule, for example the aforementioned Hapans. And if the MonCal used a strategy that would have had them turtle themselves in.....

The problem is you're then fighting a purely defensive war, which will last exactly as long as it takes the Empire to finish the Second Death Star and deploy it against you.

I would also note that the presence of other systems resisting the Empire makes it less likely that they will be able or willing to commit their entire offensive capability against the Mon Calimari.

As questionable as the Imps not sending more than 1-5% off their own fleet against the MonCal?

Considering that the Empire was spreading their fleet around pretty much an entire Galaxy? That the majority of systems might have gone months without seeing a single Imperial capital ship? That the Empire knew the Mon Cals couldn't seriously challenge the Empire in a conventional war, so they could simply wait until they had a Death Star and then obliterate them in a matter of minutes? That, as you noted above, their were other systems resisting to tie down some of whatever offensive forces the Empire had?

Why not? BDZ the planet. It is unshielded. Nothing prevents the Imps from blasting the MonCal whenever they wish.

You acknowledged earlier that the Mon Cals had a planetary shield, as I recall. You have presented no solid evidence to establish that it was out at or around the time of the Battle of Endor. The most you can point to is the fact that it was out at some other times.

If that doesn't convince you, however, then ask yourself:

If the Mon Cals were focusing on a defensive strategy, and were able to build thousands of heavy cruisers, why could they not fix their damn shield generators?

And the other option would violate all common sense and turn the Imps into clueless idiots.

I'm not sure that's the case. I hope I have adequately explained why in the rest of this post.

Proof that the shields on Hoth would have held up against a Torpedo Sphere? Or even a real BDZ operation? Vader wanted Prisoners, that was the main problem with Hoth for the Imps.

As no torpedo sphere was used, I'm not sure how I could prove beyond any doubt that the shields would have held. I can only paraphrase the Imperial officer who explicitly tells Vader that the shield can withstand any bombardment (which in context is most reasonably interpreted as "any bombardment by Death Squadron").

Yet none of those are in place either when Daala attacks or when Palpatine attacks during DE. None.

And the stupidity of the Jedi Academy series strikes again.

Personally, I rationalize Mon Calimari's piss-poor planetary defenses during Daala's attacks as being a by-product of the damage they had recently suffered in the Dark Empire story (World Devastator attack). In short, they had just had their assess kicked and were still recovering. That in no way justifies the absence of a large Republic fleet to guard the system (indeed it makes it all the more shocking). But then, the New Republic is hardly known as a paragon of military competence.

The Romulan Republic wrote:If I want to get technical, I can argue that their is nothing their about the size of the Imperial occupation force. All this means is that the Hapans captured some dozens of Star Destroyers under unknown circumstances over an unknown period of time. But that's more nitpicky than I generally care to be.

I think there is a quote in the New essential history that says that the Hapans captured these during the Imperial withdrawal.

And yet the Mon Cals did support the Rebellion to a considerable extent. I can't recall the source, but there's a quote of Mon Mothma saying that the Rebellion would have been impossible without them. Does that sound familiar?

True, because otherwise the Rebels would not have one Starship capable of taking on ISDs.

However, I would note that ISDs are not really heavy cruisers (destroyers or lighter cruisers at best). So 1250 ISDs is probably equivalent to a few hundred heavy cruisers maximum.

ISDs are for all intents and purposes the capital ships of the empire. True, Star Dreadnoughts are battleships, but there is no evidence to suggest they numbered more than the low hundreds. Meanwhile, we have very many frigates/corvettes. So yes, ISDs are heavy cruisers IMO.

Even by Star Wars standards, thousands of heavy cruisers is a huge fleet. I can't think of a single canon battle involving that many ships, ever.

The New essential history mentions several large battles over Zsinji's realm (those seem to have been the heaviest overall). During a single one of these battles (can't remember the name) the Republic lost all Star Destroyers given to them by the Hapans. Far from thousands of heavy cruisers, but the loss of 60 ISDs in a single battle alone speaks volumes to the scale of fighting there.

Still more likely than the empire being too stupid to send ships after the MonCal shipyards.

Why would they need to? They expected to shortly have another Death Star to go and crush them with.

In 1 BBY - maybe. But not for the half decade following the destruction of the Death Star.

The MC80 cruiser is typically described as the standard MonCal cruiser. It is a fraction of the size of Home one (about 30-50%, depending on what source you use for Home One).

Now hold on. You specified heavy cruisers. Not light cruisers or cruisers in general.

I could possibly accept the Mon Cals having a few hundred light cruisers, but that's not what we're talking about here.

Mon Cal cruisers are generally descriped as the capital ships of the Alliance. You may of course try to claim that they do not fulfill the functions of large cruisers, but this flies in the face of every single EU book out there. It furthermore flies directly in the face of ROTS, where ships smaller and less powerful than ISDs take the role of battleships.

So yeah, ISDs and Mon Cal Cruisers are heavy cruisers. At least.

That was not the only viable approach. Several species/states succesfully resisted Imperial rule, for example the aforementioned Hapans. And if the MonCal used a strategy that would have had them turtle themselves in.....

The problem is you're then fighting a purely defensive war, which will last exactly as long as it takes the Empire to finish the Second Death Star and deploy it against you.

I would also note that the presence of other systems resisting the Empire makes it less likely that they will be able or willing to commit their entire offensive capability against the Mon Calimari.

By your reasoning, even 200 ISDs would have suffficed. That is less than 1% of the entire Imperial fleet. Don't tell me that is not possible.

As questionable as the Imps not sending more than 1-5% off their own fleet against the MonCal?

Considering that the Empire was spreading their fleet around pretty much an entire Galaxy? That the majority of systems might have gone months without seeing a single Imperial capital ship? That the Empire knew the Mon Cals couldn't seriously challenge the Empire in a conventional war, so they could simply wait until they had a Death Star and then obliterate them in a matter of minutes? That, as you noted above, their were other systems resisting to tie down some of whatever offensive forces the Empire had?

So...you are saying the empire had less than 1% of their fleet to spare? Really? Any empire like that would collapse immediately.

Why not? BDZ the planet. It is unshielded. Nothing prevents the Imps from blasting the MonCal whenever they wish.

You acknowledged earlier that the Mon Cals had a planetary shield, as I recall. You have presented no solid evidence to establish that it was out at or around the time of the Battle of Endor. The most you can point to is the fact that it was out at some other times.

If that doesn't convince you, however, then ask yourself:

If the Mon Cals were focusing on a defensive strategy, and were able to build thousands of heavy cruisers, why could they not fix their damn shield generators?

Still leaves out the fact that the shipyards are unprotected at all times.

And the other option would violate all common sense and turn the Imps into clueless idiots.

I'm not sure that's the case. I hope I have adequately explained why in the rest of this post.

Not really.

Proof that the shields on Hoth would have held up against a Torpedo Sphere? Or even a real BDZ operation? Vader wanted Prisoners, that was the main problem with Hoth for the Imps.

As no torpedo sphere was used, I'm not sure how I could prove beyond any doubt that the shields would have held. I can only paraphrase the Imperial officer who explicitly tells Vader that the shield can withstand any bombardment (which in context is most reasonably interpreted as "any bombardment by Death Squadron").

Already discussed above.

And the stupidity of the Jedi Academy series strikes again.

Personally, I rationalize Mon Calimari's piss-poor planetary defenses during Daala's attacks as being a by-product of the damage they had recently suffered in the Dark Empire story (World Devastator attack). In short, they had just had their assess kicked and were still recovering. That in no way justifies the absence of a large Republic fleet to guard the system (indeed it makes it all the more shocking). But then, the New Republic is hardly known as a paragon of military competence.

Not a convincing explanation.

Okay.

Been reading the Essential Atlas some more and it speaks of Mon Cal declarations of neutrality. Apparently, after kicking of the empire, they went completely neutral (at least officially, unofficially they supported the Rebels with ships.

This not only goes against what Wookiepedia and other material has said on the subject. It also makes the Imps idiots. But it is another explanation.


That, and the explanation that Palpatine spared Dac because he wanted a credible threat in the alliance.

Serafina wrote:This has been pointed out before:

They simply did not have another choice.

So, there are two options:
-Sit there and let the empire wipe out nearly all your troops and most of your leadership.
-Try the snubfighter attack. If it succeeds - win. If not, you have the same as with option 1.

Which option do you take?

Take the option a true guerilla army does. Sacrifice headquarters troops and other units in a delaying attack while withdrawing documents and your main leadership/political apparatus.

Of course, the real issue here is more about Rebel competence. They "expected" an attack with 30=50 odd starfighters to succeed when hundreds had failed.

NecronLord wrote:Playing Jedi Academy has made me think of this list again. He doesn't even mention 'lack of hand rails?' Seriously, look at the Death Star landing bay; could they not splash out on a grate for that cargo elevator, so Stormtroopers wouldn't fall down it? What about those retractable bridges?

At a guess, construction was a rush job, and they were still in the process of installing hand rails at the time when the ship was deemed battle-ready. They needed the Death Star, and I don't doubt that the Emperor was willing to sacrifice OSHA compliance in favor of getting the thing moving a few weeks sooner.

Serafina wrote:You are right - delaying the Death Star IS important for the rebels.

But my point is: Since they can not deal a fatal blow to the project, delaying it is ultimately futile.

Why?
Well, think about it: If the Death Star is so important (which it certainly was), then it is important to the Empire, too.
Now, what happens if the Rebels manage to delay the project several times?
The protection will be increased.

Since the Empire has WAY more resources than the Rebellion (especially at this point, a point will be reached where the Rebellion can no longer deal any damage to the project.

The first few attacks/delays might be succesfull (they were not), but ulitmately, they are futile.

As I mentioned, there are a lot of ways that the Empire's ability to build a Death Star and win the war that way might become irrelevant. If the Emperor dies, the Rebels win- and he is not a young man. If the Rebels luck onto a powerful fleet that can strike at the Death Star construction site before it's so secure as to be invulnerable, the Rebels can neutralize it. If the Empire diverts enough fleet strength to securing the construction site, the Rebels can strike at other targets, maybe win that way. If the construction is delayed, maybe the Rebels can get a copy of the blueprints and find some secret weakness, or some method of blocking the superlaser.

Hell, maybe the galaxy will be invaded by the Slavering Hordes from Beyond the Outer Rim. Who knows? The point being that if the Death Star is completed on schedule the war is almost certainly over and the Rebels lose, whereas if the Death Star construction is delayed there are legions of things that might happen to stop construction or grant the Rebels a win before construction is finished. So even if attacking the construction site is "futile" in the sense of "no way will this be the decisive battle that wins the war by itself if the Empire chooses to push forward with construction," it is not "futile" in the sense of "useless" or "a sacrifice of lives and resources in exchange for no meaningful gain." Delaying construction is a worthwhile strategic objective all by itself, not an exercise in futility, because the Rebels have a realistic chance of winning as long as the Death Star is kept out of the picture- or at least they believe that they do, which explains what they're thinking.

You are certainly correct here.
However, the greatest asset of any guerillia movement is simply not being detected. If the enemy knows where you are, you are screwed.

Now, there will be a "Phase 2" where you need to engage in open operations, but are not yet strong enough to compete if the enemy brings its full strength.

The attack on the Death Star IS such a point.

If we replace the "Attack the Death Star"-szenario with, say, "Kill Palpatine" - then a "victory" can be achieved - if he is dead, he is dead (ok, he had clones, but they did not know about that).
But with the Death Star, this is not possible.
They had no way to destroy the project, and while delaying it might have made sense, it ALSO compromised the "stay hidden" objective.

The existence of the Rebellion was already known before the attack on the Death Star construction site. After all, my understanding is that the Empire kept building the Death Star largely because the Empire needed a weapon powerful enough to threaten rebel-sympathizing planets with swift and total destruction. So the Rebels had already lost the half of the "stay hidden" battle that involves avoiding strategic detection. They were very much on the Empire's strategic radar.

And because the attack involved a ship making a hyperspace jump to the construction site, it had effectively no effect on the other half of the "stay hidden" objective, the tactical side. Tactically, the attack did not compromise the location of any Rebel base, and provided little or no evidence that the Empire could use to locate and crack down on the Rebels' support structure.

Therefore, the attack did not hurt their ability to avoid detection, and at least prolonged their ability to stay in existence. if the Death Star was operational for any length of time, the Rebellion could not survive even with its bases hidden. The Imperials already knew the location of many of its main sources of support, if not the bases themselves.

Basically, the Rebels were in "Phase 2" more or less from their beginnings. It's clear that they had support from several moderately important worlds, and the active support of some. They had warships and weapons that forced the Imperials to sit up and take notice. There's little evidence that they were ever at a stage where they felt they were so weak they had to conceal their very presence from the Empire, and the nature of Star Wars hyperdrive means that they could operate freely in most of the galaxy without giving away the location of any key bases.

This is most likely the reason why the Rebels did NOT attemp another attack on the Death Star - such an attack would have done nothing, except exposing them to the Empire, compromising the "stay alive" strategic goal.

It's also possible that no fleet units they had available could realistically take down the Death Star given that it punched out the entire attack force the first time. The Rebels would reasonably conclude that either the DS-I was already armed and shielded to the point where conventional attacks couldn't destroy it (in short, that the project was further along than they thought), or that the escort force was so powerful that their ability to punch through it even with everything they had would be in doubt.

Thanas wrote: True, because otherwise the Rebels would not have one Starship capable of taking on ISDs.

What about humans were the arm of the Rebellion, the Mon Cal the soul in ROTJ novelisation?

ISDs are for all intents and purposes the capital ships of the empire. True, Star Dreadnoughts are battleships, but there is no evidence to suggest they numbered more than the low hundreds. Meanwhile, we have very many frigates/corvettes. So yes, ISDs are heavy cruisers IMO.

Why heavy cruisers? Heavy cruisers are designed to engage heavier capital ships. We don't really see that even in the EU since the only heavy cruiser were the Mon Cals. More dedicated ships such as the Nebula were capable of outfighting a ISD. IMO, given the ISD command capabilities, its more likely to be a light cruiser than a destroyer.

Mon Cal cruisers are generally descriped as the capital ships of the Alliance. You may of course try to claim that they do not fulfill the functions of large cruisers, but this flies in the face of every single EU book out there. It furthermore flies directly in the face of ROTS, where ships smaller and less powerful than ISDs take the role of battleships.

So yeah, ISDs and Mon Cal Cruisers are heavy cruisers. At least.

Lucrehulk ships were described as "battleships". However, apart from the civil action seen in TPM, their actual role during the Clone Wars were more of heavy cruisers or carriers, depending on their configuration. Battleships should had the capability to engage multiple lighter warships and inflict serious damage. Republic Commando shows that two Accalamator, even assuming those ships were upgraded gun ships as opposed to mere transports could drive off a Lucrehulk.

The Romulan Republic wrote: That the Mon Cals somehow hid away a huge fleet that could challenge the Empire for years while the Empire occupied their world, and just sat their biding their time instead of using it to support the Alliance, or for that matter do anything? Or that they rapidly rebuilt this massive fleet in a matter of a few years despite seriously limited resources?

My guess is, from the evidence presented, is that for years the moncals were building "transports and passenger liners" to warship spec, in covert build-up and anticipation of quickly and easily converting them to cruisers when the need arises. This could have easily numbered in the hundreds without the imperials really catching wind of it. This would have been even easier if their shipyards had escaped the takeover of their planet.

NecronLord wrote:Did Vader even care? From the opening crawl particularly, and the film, I got the impression that his only real objective was Skywalker. All the other rebels could run off, die, or whatever, as far as he cared. Only his son mattered to him, regardless of what his officers might be thinking the objective was.

Turning the base into radioactive glowing lava does not fit into that objective.

PainRack wrote:

Thanas wrote: True, because otherwise the Rebels would not have one Starship capable of taking on ISDs.

What about humans were the arm of the Rebellion, the Mon Cal the soul in ROTJ novelisation?

Might be explained that humans crewed the ships? The overwhelmingly majority of all resistance members is human. Heck, their entire starfighter arm and troops seem to be human.

ISDs are for all intents and purposes the capital ships of the empire. True, Star Dreadnoughts are battleships, but there is no evidence to suggest they numbered more than the low hundreds. Meanwhile, we have very many frigates/corvettes. So yes, ISDs are heavy cruisers IMO.

Why heavy cruisers? Heavy cruisers are designed to engage heavier capital ships. We don't really see that even in the EU since the only heavy cruiser were the Mon Cals. More dedicated ships such as the Nebula were capable of outfighting a ISD. IMO, given the ISD command capabilities, its more likely to be a light cruiser than a destroyer.

So how would you classify the Tector then? And the Nebula really is not that much of a surprise given that it is a much younger design that arrived what, 20 years after the original ISD?

Mon Cal cruisers are generally descriped as the capital ships of the Alliance. You may of course try to claim that they do not fulfill the functions of large cruisers, but this flies in the face of every single EU book out there. It furthermore flies directly in the face of ROTS, where ships smaller and less powerful than ISDs take the role of battleships.

So yeah, ISDs and Mon Cal Cruisers are heavy cruisers. At least.

Lucrehulk ships were described as "battleships". However, apart from the civil action seen in TPM, their actual role during the Clone Wars were more of heavy cruisers or carriers, depending on their configuration. Battleships should had the capability to engage multiple lighter warships and inflict serious damage. Republic Commando shows that two Accalamator, even assuming those ships were upgraded gun ships as opposed to mere transports could drive off a Lucrehulk.

This flies in the description of the OR needing several Victories/Venators to destroy a Lucrehulk. However, this does not reply to my main point - whenever we see Venators/ISDs, they fulfill the role of ships of the line - in all of the EU and in all the movies, they are the primary capital ship. And the novelization even calls them heavy cruisers, iirc.

I'd just like to point out that the Emperor hasn't the same motivations as most state leaders. Most totalitarian leaders see power as an end to itself; Palpatine had a nice long term goal (that crazy Force hivemind thing) that he was after. As far as he was concerned, all he needed to do was to stay alive and stay in power and it was only be a series of extremely lucky moves by the Rebels and the untimely betrayal by a loyal henchmen did he fail at this. The Rebels could be running around with a fleet of thousands of cruisers and so long as they lacked the capacity to actually destroy the Imperial infrastructure completely Palpatine could use them as an increasingly powerful bargaining chip to draw people into his longer-term plans. I bet he would have let some Rebels escape from Endor if things had gone as planned, just to keep the threat they represent on the table; after all, he was really after Luke that day.

Thanas wrote:Okay.

Been reading the Essential Atlas some more and it speaks of Mon Cal declarations of neutrality. Apparently, after kicking of the empire, they went completely neutral (at least officially, unofficially they supported the Rebels with ships.

This not only goes against what Wookiepedia and other material has said on the subject. It also makes the Imps idiots. But it is another explanation.


That, and the explanation that Palpatine spared Dac because he wanted a credible threat in the alliance.

Not surprisingly, this idiocy originally comes from a WotC sourcebook (if I recall correctly, Geonosis and the Outer Rim Worlds). The likes of Sarli would have us believe that the same Empire that occupied Ralltiir, a prominent Core World, when the Rebels channeled funds through their banks, apparently could not be bothered to crack down on an Outer Rim uprising that allowed the Rebels a base and a substantial space fleet (and among a species the Imperial propaganda purposely designated as subhuman savages, no less) . . .

^To be fair, the last explanation is not repeated in the atlas.

Dac was slated to be destroyed by the Death Star anyway after Yavin was destroyed. The stupid explanation of course is that Palpatine probably wanted as grandiose a demonstration as possible.

Ralltiir on the other hand, was a Core World, with an advanced economy, and such as it is, that could not be ignored, and pulverizing a core world would be a bad thing for Palpatine especially when it comes to the propaganda war front. Palpatine's main source of support is the Core after all.

Of course, that kind of assumes that one of the largest shipyard worlds in the galaxy is less important than a core world.

I don't think there is a sensible explanation for this mess. Of this I am getting more and more convince.

Thanas wrote:Of course, that kind of assumes that one of the largest shipyard worlds in the galaxy is less important than a core world.

I don't think there is a sensible explanation for this mess. Of this I am getting more and more convince.

Well, the galaxy is a rather large place, and if by anything, KDY and CEC stand to benefit from the loss of a competitor.

Mon Cal may or may not have been a major competitor in the shipyard market. That aspect was never dealt with in a lot of detail.

The existence of the Rebellion was already known before the attack on the Death Star construction site. After all, my understanding is that the Empire kept building the Death Star largely because the Empire needed a weapon powerful enough to threaten rebel-sympathizing planets with swift and total destruction. So the Rebels had already lost the half of the "stay hidden" battle that involves avoiding strategic detection. They were very much on the Empire's strategic radar.

Um - yes, they certainly were.

However, attackin the Death Star would also put them on the "tactical radar" of the Empire.

Let's compare it to making strikes on the capital, instead of remote bases/convoys etc.
If you attack the bases, you can twist the odds in your favor - and your movement will be harder to attack.

But if you attack the capital, your movements will be easier to track, AND there are less ways to twist the odds.

To but it bluntly, attacking the death star repedately is simply beyond the rebels capabilities - they do not have enough resources, and they can not amass enough resources without increasing their chance to be detected.

And because the attack involved a ship making a hyperspace jump to the construction site, it had effectively no effect on the other half of the "stay hidden" objective, the tactical side. Tactically, the attack did not compromise the location of any Rebel base, and provided little or no evidence that the Empire could use to locate and crack down on the Rebels' support structure.

Hyperspace jumps can be tracked, to a certain extent.

Therefore, the attack did not hurt their ability to avoid detection, and at least prolonged their ability to stay in existence.

They are automatically detected when they attack - it's hard to stay hidden when you shoot at things.

The main problem is getting the resources without detection. Buying military material can certainly be tracked, and this will eventually compromise them.

Basically, the Rebels were in "Phase 2" more or less from their beginnings.

Phase One does not necessarily mean that the enemy does not know that there might be a resistance goverment, IIRC.

It's also possible that no fleet units they had available could realistically take down the Death Star given that it punched out the entire attack force the first time.

True that.

Serafina wrote:

The existence of the Rebellion was already known before the attack on the Death Star construction site. After all, my understanding is that the Empire kept building the Death Star largely because the Empire needed a weapon powerful enough to threaten rebel-sympathizing planets with swift and total destruction. So the Rebels had already lost the half of the "stay hidden" battle that involves avoiding strategic detection. They were very much on the Empire's strategic radar.

Um - yes, they certainly were.

However, attackin the Death Star would also put them on the "tactical radar" of the Empire.

Let's compare it to making strikes on the capital, instead of remote bases/convoys etc.
If you attack the bases, you can twist the odds in your favor - and your movement will be harder to attack.

But if you attack the capital, your movements will be easier to track, AND there are less ways to twist the odds.

To but it bluntly, attacking the death star repedately is simply beyond the rebels capabilities - they do not have enough resources, and they can not amass enough resources without increasing their chance to be detected.

However an operational Death Star means that the Empire have the capability to destroy a fully armed fortress world. Later on they demonstrated the willingness to do so, and it was something expected from their track record. Thus the Rebels have no choice, they have to gain time at least. And the more they wait the more complete the Death Star will be, thus the less chance they have to cripple it.

And because the attack involved a ship making a hyperspace jump to the construction site, it had effectively no effect on the other half of the "stay hidden" objective, the tactical side. Tactically, the attack did not compromise the location of any Rebel base, and provided little or no evidence that the Empire could use to locate and crack down on the Rebels' support structure.

Hyperspace jumps can be tracked, to a certain extent.

The solution is multiple jumps...

Therefore, the attack did not hurt their ability to avoid detection, and at least prolonged their ability to stay in existence.

They are automatically detected when they attack - it's hard to stay hidden when you shoot at things.

The main problem is getting the resources without detection. Buying military material can certainly be tracked, and this will eventually compromise them.

Whatever they do sometimes they have to buy military hardware. The question how much another 500 X-Wings will increase the detection chance. Knowing the fact that this is practically nothing, I do not think it is such a deal.

Basically, the Rebels were in "Phase 2" more or less from their beginnings.

Phase One does not necessarily mean that the enemy does not know that there might be a resistance goverment, IIRC.

It's also possible that no fleet units they had available could realistically take down the Death Star given that it punched out the entire attack force the first time.

True that.

Since the other option was laying down arms ( who will support them agains an Empire armed with Death Star(s)? ) they have to act if they hoped to achieved any meaningful goal other than preserve their lives (as a civilian of course, since as armed Rebels the have zero chance in a overly frightened Galaxy).

Serafina wrote:Let's compare it to making strikes on the capital, instead of remote bases/convoys etc.
If you attack the bases, you can twist the odds in your favor - and your movement will be harder to attack.

If failing to hit the capital causes you to predictably lose the war in a matter of months, you still have to attack the capital anyway.

The first priority in any war is to stay alive. All other objectives are secondary. So if you're confronted with a game-ending threat, you may have to do things that would normally be stupid simply to buy time to meet that threat.

To but it bluntly, attacking the death star repedately is simply beyond the rebels capabilities - they do not have enough resources, and they can not amass enough resources without increasing their chance to be detected.

So they're supposed to do what, lie down and die? If they're going to keep fighting at all, the only thing they can do is throw as many resources as feasible at delaying or destroying the Death Star while praying for a lucky break. Even if they don't have a good chance of killing it, they don't have any chance if they don't.

They are automatically detected when they attack - it's hard to stay hidden when you shoot at things.

I think we're talking about "detection" in different terms. The enemy must realize you're a threat to detect you strategically (Al Qaeda was not detected strategically by the US until some time in the late '90s, and was on the edge of the picture until 9/11). To actually hurt you, they must also detect you tactically- they must know where you are so that they can attack.

The Rebels have great advantages in tactical detection: their military bases are hidden, and their civilian support structure is relatively hard for the Empire to strike at as long as the Death Star does not exist. But there's no point in trying to stay hidden if the Empire can blow up every planet even suspected of associating with them; they're doomed if that happens. They'll either be turned over by planetary governments that don't want to die, or they'll watch every world in the galaxy that they could go to for aid be destroyed.

So it doesn't make sense to refrain from attacking the Death Star to avoid tactical detection, either; that's a long-term fail strategy. Hiding in the underbrush only works as long as the enemy can't burn the underbrush off with you in it, and that's exactly what the Death Star lets the Empire do.

Just a couple of things I'd like to point out.

Batman: I think he meant hitting the shield generator before the shield went up, not after.

On the subject of there not being anything on an unfinished Death Star that the destruction of would cause a signifigant construction delay, I would like to point out that there is a reactor in there somewhere that doesn't seem to respond well to people blowing holes in it with proton torpedoes.

PhilosopherOfSorts wrote:On the subject of there not being anything on an unfinished Death Star that the destruction of would cause a signifigant construction delay, I would like to point out that there is a reactor in there somewhere that doesn't seem to respond well to people blowing holes in it with proton torpedoes.

If the reactor isn't fueled and powered up then hitting it is pointless. All you can do then is cause damage to it that will have to get the thing fixed before they can turn it on.

Isolder74 wrote:

PhilosopherOfSorts wrote:On the subject of there not being anything on an unfinished Death Star that the destruction of would cause a signifigant construction delay, I would like to point out that there is a reactor in there somewhere that doesn't seem to respond well to people blowing holes in it with proton torpedoes.

If the reactor isn't fueled and powered up then hitting it is pointless. All you can do then is cause damage to it that will have to get the thing fixed before they can turn it on.

It is not pointless to force an enemy to stop and fix their equipment before they can use it. Forcing them to fix damage is better than allowing them complete freedom of action, because it gives you time to come up with something else.

Simon_Jester wrote:

Isolder74 wrote:

PhilosopherOfSorts wrote:On the subject of there not being anything on an unfinished Death Star that the destruction of would cause a signifigant construction delay, I would like to point out that there is a reactor in there somewhere that doesn't seem to respond well to people blowing holes in it with proton torpedoes.

If the reactor isn't fueled and powered up then hitting it is pointless. All you can do then is cause damage to it that will have to get the thing fixed before they can turn it on.

It is not pointless to force an enemy to stop and fix their equipment before they can use it. Forcing them to fix damage is better than allowing them complete freedom of action, because it gives you time to come up with something else.

It is pointless in the context of instant kill which the person I was quoting was implying. Didn't I point out that all it can do is make them have to repair it? Now in order to hit the reactor that is in the middle they have to attack the station when it is incomplete enough to fire something into the center. The only viable target at the point of construction of the Death Star when it was attacked was the external hardpoints of the Superlaser.

Thanas wrote:I think there is a quote in the New essential history that says that the Hapans captured these during the Imperial withdrawal.

Ok.

True, because otherwise the Rebels would not have one Starship capable of taking on ISDs.

A slight exaggeration, but for the most part accurate.

ISDs are for all intents and purposes the capital ships of the empire. True, Star Dreadnoughts are battleships, but there is no evidence to suggest they numbered more than the low hundreds. Meanwhile, we have very many frigates/corvettes. So yes, ISDs are heavy cruisers IMO.

This is arguable, to say the least. There are a wide range of ships between a standard Imperator and the Star Dreadnoughts.

Personally, I prefer a Light Cruiser designation for ISDs (though some prefer to classify them as destroyers). It also occurs to me that we have therefor been arguing at least partially about two different things without realizing it. You are arguing that the Mon Cals should have had hundreds or thousands of Star Destroyer-level vessels. I am arguing that they should not have had hundreds or thousands of Home One-level ships. I would hazard a guess that what we actually disagree on is the definition of a Heavy Cruiser in Star Wars, more than on how many actual ships the Mon Cals had.

I feel sure there was a discussion not that long ago about weather ISDs were destroyers or cruisers, but I can't find it.

The New essential history mentions several large battles over Zsinji's realm (those seem to have been the heaviest overall). During a single one of these battles (can't remember the name) the Republic lost all Star Destroyers given to them by the Hapans. Far from thousands of heavy cruisers, but the loss of 60 ISDs in a single battle alone speaks volumes to the scale of fighting there.

Nonetheless, thousands of heavy cruisers is an absolutely massive fleet for one system or even one Sector to deploy. Possible, maybe, but for a world that had only recently thrown off Imperial enslavement? A world you seem to think was not capable of building a planetary shield?

In 1 BBY - maybe. But not for the half decade following the destruction of the Death Star.

Four years actually. Part of which time at least they were working on the Death Star 2, which was supposed to correct the first one's flaws. But I do see your point.

Mon Cal cruisers are generally descriped as the capital ships of the Alliance. You may of course try to claim that they do not fulfill the functions of large cruisers, but this flies in the face of every single EU book out there. It furthermore flies directly in the face of ROTS, where ships smaller and less powerful than ISDs take the role of battleships.

Where were ships weaker than an ISD used as battleships?

It doesn't surprise me much, though. The EU is so very contradictory, and so often minimalist as well.

So yeah, ISDs and Mon Cal Cruisers are heavy cruisers. At least.

No. They are not. If I want to be generous, I might concede that they are heavy cruisers at most.

By your reasoning, even 200 ISDs would have suffficed. That is less than 1% of the entire Imperial fleet. Don't tell me that is not possible.

It is possible. Note that I repeatedly acknowledged that the Empire could launch a conventional assault on the Mon Cals. But its also potentially costly and ill-advised, considering they might have lost a good portion of those 200 ships in one battle, and that the Mon Cals were far from the only rogue system they had to deal with (as you yourself pointed out). Nor would it have been over after one short battle in space if Mon Cal had a planetary shield.

So...you are saying the empire had less than 1% of their fleet to spare? Really? Any empire like that would collapse immediately.

Addressed above. Let's say they had five or ten percent to spare. Well, that's got to be spread between the Unknown regions, hunting Rebels down and attacking their fleets and bases, going after the likes of the Hapans or some of the larger crime lords, and keeping some forces in reserve just in case. They might have been scraping the bottom of the barrel to pull together 200 ISDs, which might or might not have been enough. And some of them at least would have had to be available for quite a while if the Mon Cals had a planetary shield to take out. And even if they'd won, they would have lost a lot of ships in the process.

Still leaves out the fact that the shipyards are unprotected at all times.

Fair enough. I suppose it might be possible to mount shields or guns around the shipyards, but I have zero evidence that such was the case.

Not really.

I simply find it difficult to believe that one system or sector, in those circumstances, could have produced such a massive fleet, or that they could have hid away such a massive fleet, just doing nothing, during the occupation. The whole thing seems implausible. And while it does seem unlikely that the Empire would just leave an openly hostile world alone, their are other possibilities.

1. They were waiting for the Death Star to avoid a costly conventional assault and protracted siege.

2. Palpatine was leaving them alive, assuming they were no real threat and wanting an enemy for political purposes. I believe you raised this possibility a couple points further down.

3. The Mon Cals were officially playing the neutrality card (raised elsewhere in this thread), and the Empire either bought it, or more likely pretended to while employing option 2.

While it is possible the Mon Cals could have built a massive fleet and held off the Empire accordingly, I feel that the above options are at least as plausible. However, I would reiterate that we seem to be debating two different things, to some extent. I find it a lot easier to buy the Mon Cals having a few hundred or even a few thousand Star Destroyer equivalents (even if it isn't really supported by canon) than I do to buy them having a few hundred to a few thousand Home One equivalents.

Already discussed above.

Indeed. However, the dialog in TESB pretty clearly indicated that bombardment was not an option. I'm not sure this can be just hand-waved aside.

Not a convincing explanation.

It is an attempt to rationalize an extremely implausible part of the EU. However, you have no solid evidence that a Mon Cal shield doesn't exist, and you yourself acknowledged that it did at one time. And you are apparently trying to convince me that a power capable of fielding up to thousands of Heavy Cruisers, one of the primary industrial powers in the Galaxy, was incapable of building or repairing a planetary shield. Or else that they were too stupid to build one.

The Romulan Republic wrote:

ISDs are for all intents and purposes the capital ships of the empire. True, Star Dreadnoughts are battleships, but there is no evidence to suggest they numbered more than the low hundreds. Meanwhile, we have very many frigates/corvettes. So yes, ISDs are heavy cruisers IMO.

This is arguable, to say the least. There are a wide range of ships between a standard Imperator and the Star Dreadnoughts.

And we almost never see them. Their numbers are very, very small - in the low dozens, if even that. Whereas there are at least 25000 ISDs and probably millions of smaller craft. The ratio of the ISD to the smaller craft is far more like the Battleship to destroyer ratio of early 20th century navies than the ratio of ISD to Dreadnoughts.

Personally, I prefer a Light Cruiser designation for ISDs (though some prefer to classify them as destroyers). It also occurs to me that we have therefor been arguing at least partially about two different things without realizing it. You are arguing that the Mon Cals should have had hundreds or thousands of Star Destroyer-level vessels. I am arguing that they should not have had hundreds or thousands of Home One-level ships. I would hazard a guess that what we actually disagree on is the definition of a Heavy Cruiser in Star Wars, more than on how many actual ships the Mon Cals had.

Yeah, probably. I am arguing Star Destroyer levels, going by the MonCal being described as Cruisers and IMO ISDs are heavy cruisers.

The New essential history mentions several large battles over Zsinji's realm (those seem to have been the heaviest overall). During a single one of these battles (can't remember the name) the Republic lost all Star Destroyers given to them by the Hapans. Far from thousands of heavy cruisers, but the loss of 60 ISDs in a single battle alone speaks volumes to the scale of fighting there.

Nonetheless, thousands of heavy cruisers is an absolutely massive fleet for one system or even one Sector to deploy. Possible, maybe, but for a world that had only recently thrown off Imperial enslavement? A world you seem to think was not capable of building a planetary shield?

*Shrug* Like I said above, none of this makes sense.

Mon Cal cruisers are generally descriped as the capital ships of the Alliance. You may of course try to claim that they do not fulfill the functions of large cruisers, but this flies in the face of every single EU book out there. It furthermore flies directly in the face of ROTS, where ships smaller and less powerful than ISDs take the role of battleships.

Where were ships weaker than an ISD used as battleships?

The Venators. They fulfill all purposes of the ship of the line.

So yeah, ISDs and Mon Cal Cruisers are heavy cruisers. At least.

No. They are not. If I want to be generous, I might concede that they are heavy cruisers at most.[/quote]

Meh. I don't think we are going to agree on this one. At this point we are just shouting at each other.

It is possible. Note that I repeatedly acknowledged that the Empire could launch a conventional assault on the Mon Cals. But its also potentially costly and ill-advised, considering they might have lost a good portion of those 200 ships in one battle, and that the Mon Cals were far from the only rogue system they had to deal with (as you yourself pointed out). Nor would it have been over after one short battle in space if Mon Cal had a planetary shield.

So how costly do you think it would be?

So...you are saying the empire had less than 1% of their fleet to spare? Really? Any empire like that would collapse immediately.

Addressed above. Let's say they had five or ten percent to spare. Well, that's got to be spread between the Unknown regions, hunting Rebels down and attacking their fleets and bases, going after the likes of the Hapans or some of the larger crime lords, and keeping some forces in reserve just in case. They might have been scraping the bottom of the barrel to pull together 200 ISDs, which might or might not have been enough. And some of them at least would have had to be available for quite a while if the Mon Cals had a planetary shield to take out. And even if they'd won, they would have lost a lot of ships in the process.

You accuse the EU of minimalism but do not think the empire at the height of its power had enough forces left to replace 200 ISDs? Really?

I simply find it difficult to believe that one system or sector, in those circumstances, could have produced such a massive fleet, or that they could have hid away such a massive fleet, just doing nothing, during the occupation. The whole thing seems implausible. And while it does seem unlikely that the Empire would just leave an openly hostile world alone, their are other possibilities.

1. They were waiting for the Death Star to avoid a costly conventional assault and protracted siege.

2. Palpatine was leaving them alive, assuming they were no real threat and wanting an enemy for political purposes. I believe you raised this possibility a couple points further down.

3. The Mon Cals were officially playing the neutrality card (raised elsewhere in this thread), and the Empire either bought it, or more likely pretended to while employing option 2.

While it is possible the Mon Cals could have built a massive fleet and held off the Empire accordingly, I feel that the above options are at least as plausible. However, I would reiterate that we seem to be debating two different things, to some extent. I find it a lot easier to buy the Mon Cals having a few hundred or even a few thousand Star Destroyer equivalents (even if it isn't really supported by canon) than I do to buy them having a few hundred to a few thousand Home One equivalents.

Two of the possibilities you raise were posted by me, so I do not get what repeating them is supposed to accomplish. As for the rest of your post, see above.

It is an attempt to rationalize an extremely implausible part of the EU. However, you have no solid evidence that a Mon Cal shield doesn't exist, and you yourself acknowledged that it did at one time. And you are apparently trying to convince me that a power capable of fielding up to thousands of Heavy Cruisers, one of the primary industrial powers in the Galaxy, was incapable of building or repairing a planetary shield. Or else that they were too stupid to build one.

Well yeah. Either the Imps are idiots, the MonCal are idiots or the MonCal had a strong enough fleet to prevent an attack. Take your pick.