StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Galvatron wrote:

FTeik wrote:Could this be the long-range-fighter?

http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/comics ... etail1.jpg

IIRC in the comic Luke has to face two of those far away from every capital ship. Wouldn't that suggest, that they have to be hyperspace-capable?

Real-life answer: the artist used the Kenner toy as his model.

Doesn't work under SOD.

Galvatron wrote: Movie answer: those things don't exist.

Not in the movie. From the movie we know, that the typical TIE is the Empire's short-range-fighter, what suggests the existance of a long-range-fighter this entire debate is about.

Galvatron wrote: EU answer: Great idea! If we can label every poorly drawn ISD from the comics as a different class of warship, why not do the same with fighters?

I would think, that it is a little more than "poorly drawn". In every case an interesting argument by you, since the WEG-hacks claim the opposite by insisting, that many of the different Imperial warship-classes seen in the comics are nothing but poorly drawn ISDs.


Hmmm, now that i think about it in the comic-version of HttE we see what looks like ordinary TIEs coming out of hyperspace. No outside attachments.

IIRC in the comic Luke has to face two of those far away from every capital ship.

How far away?

Light-years or millions of km?

Galvatron wrote:

IIRC in the comic Luke has to face two of those far away from every capital ship.

How far away?

Light-years or millions of km?

Thats why i said IIRC. I was hoping for somebody to confirm a distance to large to cover in a reasonable amount of time at sublight-speeds.

That looks like a specific TIE model... hmm, what's it called again...

FTeik wrote:I would think, that it is a little more than "poorly drawn". In every case an interesting argument by you, since the WEG-hacks claim the opposite by insisting, that many of the different Imperial warship-classes seen in the comics are nothing but poorly drawn ISDs.

That doesn't really surprise or bother me. I don't march in lockstep with any particular "side." I can sometimes see things from, and occasionally agree with, "their" POV as well.

Movie answer: those things don't exist.

Why does the movie actually exclude ships from canon? We see a truly wild variety of ships on screen, and industrial capacity beyond reckoning.

The "what's poorly drawn and what's a warship" question is a false dichotomy. On the one hand, truly awful art (like one I remember seeing of a Nebulon-B dwarfing a Mon Cal Cruiser and a Star Destroyer) is immediately obvious. On the other hand, consistent and well-drawn variants (like the many on SWTC) are clearly new warships.

For instance, in Dark Empire, an Imperial-class is an Imperial-class is ALWAYS an Imperial-class. But we also see numerous ships of the Allegiance-type, two Eclipse-types in different stages of construction, and thousands of Imperial starships of all shapes and sizes from afar. The WEG fanboys would have us believe that all of these are somehow Imperial, Executor, Eclipse, or Sovereign-class ships, for reasons which even they cannot adequately explain.

What kind of person watches the movies and thinks the Star Destroyers were all the Empire had? Especially since if you WATCH the movies, you can distinguish four distinct types of "Imperial Star Destroyer," without even couning the Executor.

Another point to consider when debating WEG-whores:

In the comic "Darklighter" we're explicitly TOLD, that the artists took creative/artistic liberties in showing the faces of the TIE-pilots. So when people like the Wookiee-fetishist claim, that what we see is just "visually impressionistic" we can argue, that in that case the artists would have pointed it out to us.

EU answer: Great idea! If we can label every poorly drawn ISD from the comics as a different class of warship, why not do the same with fighters?

Only Dr. Saxton really does that, and thanks to that we actually have a filled-out register of ships rather than the retard, "only the ISD and Exec exist with no medium ships" movie doctrine since GL wanted the Imperial equipment to be monolithic and ubiquitious. Somehow its okay for the fighters and ground equipment to be different, but combined arms in space is bad.

Sometimes the movies fall short on the smart diagram.

I'd have been satisfied with even one class of warship between the star destroyer and star dreadnought. A 10km-long heavy star cruiser would suffice.

Galvatron wrote:I'd have been satisfied with even one class of warship between the star destroyer and star dreadnought. A 10km-long heavy star cruiser would suffice.

And that makes sense with the naval needs and diverse deployments of a galaxy-wide navy that can afford the Death Star with no problem?

That's fucking retarded.

I was agreeing with you that it made no sense for there to be no interim warship classes between the ISD and Exec, thus I would have been satisfied with even one such class (which ROTJ failed to show us).

Is that still fucking retarded?

Galvatron wrote:I was agreeing with you that it made no sense for there to be no interim warship classes between the ISD and Exec, thus I would have been satisfied with even one such class (which ROTJ failed to show us).

Is that still fucking retarded?

It sounded more like you were saying only one more class would ameliorate the stupid, whereas I'm thinking a dozen-odd would be nice. The PT of course, repeats the OT mistakes and compounds them a dozen times over. Smaller ships, less variation within classes, even less variety of classes, in insufficient numbers, and using stupid tactics and poorly crewed.

When it comes to criticizing the PT, you're preaching to the archbishop.

Smaller ships

The Trade Federation Battleship has been one of the best arguments against minimalism since 1999. It's a converted freighter that would make an ISD wet itself.

less variation within classes

Well, we have at least one Venator variant (Obi-Wan's). That's as many as there are confirmed ISD variants, though RotJ was at least considerate enough to hint at other Star Destroyer classes and larger Imperial warships.

even less variety of classes

True, though at least the Seperatist fleet is about as motley as the Rebel fleet, with four distinct classes each over a kilometer long.

in insufficient numbers

Are you kidding? Episode I shows more capital ships than the OT put together (blockading ONE planet), Episode II shows troopships in the hundreds and battleships in the dozens, and Episode III shows thousands of capital ships on both sides. This was one of the things they actually got right.

and using stupid tactics and poorly crewed.

What makes you say this? There isn't much in the way of capship tactics in any SW film, but what suggests that the PT warships are poorly crewed?

Anguirus wrote:The Trade Federation Battleship has been one of the best arguments against minimalism since 1999. It's a converted freighter that would make an ISD wet itself.

I would've prefered dedicated battleships, perhaps not on the scale of Executor, but substantial, throughout most of the Clone Wars.

Anguirus wrote:Well, we have at least one Venator variant (Obi-Wan's). That's as many as there are confirmed ISD variants, though RotJ was at least considerate enough to hint at other Star Destroyer classes and larger Imperial warships.

How is Obi-Wan's Venator a variant? The Venator design itself is stupid with its garage-door dorsal face, vulnerable docking rings from the broadside, and the retarded landing gear and compromising its naval tasks to provide a troopship role for the Grand Army when they had the Acclamator (which is also dumb, but I'll get there later).

There are the Mark I ISDs of ANH, there are the Mark II ISDs of TESB, the Mark I/II (?) models in TESB that are modded-ISD I's without the tower array gear from the first movie, there is the Tector, there is the Communications Ship - both the larger dagger in the distant view and the multi-bridged tower, and there is the Executor.

ROTS displays total ubiquity.

Anguirus wrote:True, though at least the Seperatist fleet is about as motley as the Rebel fleet, with four distinct classes each over a kilometer long.

I think ugly ships were a mistake in ROTJ, but at least the Rebellion was pathetic and small enough for it to maybe make sense. A fully-fledged and well-funded, corporate-backed civil war in ROTS shouldn't feature such unoptimal and small designs.

Anguirus wrote:Are you kidding? Episode I shows more capital ships than the OT put together (blockading ONE planet), Episode II shows troopships in the hundreds and battleships in the dozens, and Episode III shows thousands of capital ships on both sides. This was one of the things they actually got right.

Granted it was a lot better than the OT - which is excusable because of the Death Stars' sheer scale and by far better than the EU, which is without excuse, but I wanted to see the true industrial capacity of the whole galaxy unleashed in total war. I wanted to see what the engines of commerce, industry, and arms could produce in conventional arms before they would go on to create the Death Stars. I would like tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of ships in a single engagement, and battleships that showed where Executor came from in swarms. I'd like to see war on a scale that would make up for the absence of the Death Stars. I'm a maximalist.

Anguirus wrote:What makes you say this? There isn't much in the way of capship tactics in any SW film, but what suggests that the PT warships are poorly crewed?

Point-blank range in ROTJ was supposed to be unprecedented, and that was in the dozens of kilometer range in many cases. In ROTS you have ships with the firepower to glass worlds exchanging potshots over the course of hours within a ship's length of each other.

And as for crewing, I mean staffing a warship with ground troops in full body armor and NBC gear within the confines of a warship.

And I'm not looking for EU or post facto, strained justifications. We all know it could've been smarter.

I would've prefered dedicated battleships, perhaps not on the scale of Executor, but substantial, throughout most of the Clone Wars.

There's going to be a lot of "I agree" in the following, because I think that all of your ideas would be great. So yeah, I would have liked dedicated battleships too, but I'm still a big fan of the Lucrehulk. It also established once and for all that large ships are immune to unsupported fighter attack unless one of them's being piloted by Anakin Skywalker.

How is Obi-Wan's Venator a variant?

It has a small dorsal door that his fighter flies through. No other observed Venator has this, and it's very visible on Obi-Wan's whether open or closed.

The Venator design itself is stupid with its garage-door dorsal face, vulnerable docking rings from the broadside, and the retarded landing gear and compromising its naval tasks to provide a troopship role for the Grand Army when they had the Acclamator (which is also dumb, but I'll get there later).

Yeah, but I'm a fan regardless. (shrug) At least that explains why they were retired.

The ISD, of course, also has a great deal of space devoted to troops and war-machines.

ROTS displays total ubiquity.

Yeah, that's a serious pet peeve for me as well. They should have shown us Acclamators as well as larger warships and more variants.

I would like tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of ships in a single engagement, and battleships that showed where Executor came from in swarms. I'd like to see war on a scale that would make up for the absence of the Death Stars. I'm a maximalist.

Stop it, you're making me drool on my keyboard.

Despite the name, though, Star Wars isn't about large-scale space combat. It's all backdrop for the heroes to do their thing. Sigh.

Point-blank range in ROTJ was supposed to be unprecedented, and that was in the dozens of kilometer range in many cases. In ROTS you have ships with the firepower to glass worlds exchanging potshots over the course of hours within a ship's length of each other.

Well, the Venators could have backed off and allowed the CIS forces to escape, but that would have been a little too sporting. There were thousands of ships crammed into Coruscant's upper atmosphere, and the Republic ships were making a massive push towards the Invisible Hand. I think I can forgive 'em. (Even as I relish smart portrayals of space combat, I realize that Star Wars is not the place to find them.)

And as for crewing, I mean staffing a warship with ground troops in full body armor and NBC gear within the confines of a warship.

In combat conditions, especially crewing guns that fire out into space, full armor and NBC protection is SMART, not DUMB. You might as well take exception to the Imperial gunners from ANH. We see the command crew of the RotS Star Destroyers and they're already in Imperial uniforms.

Clones fill a variety of specialty positions from their introduction on, but very few hold command rank. That makes sense: specialty training in the creche is easy, getting regulars to take orders from clones "bred to be more docile" is probably harder.

And since there were no doubt quadrillions of clones at the least, it's not a stretch unless one buys into the BS, in which case one is so dumb that this conversation is already way over one's typical level of thought.

I think ugly ships were a mistake in ROTJ, but at least the Rebellion was pathetic and small enough for it to maybe make sense. A fully-fledged and well-funded, corporate-backed civil war in ROTS shouldn't feature such unoptimal and small designs.

Wait, what was wrong with the Separatist fleet (aside from the moronic observation towers on the Providence-class)? They had dreadnaught equivalents, main-line capital ships, and two varieties of large support vessels. Why is it bad that the latter are "small"? Are you saying that fleets would have no place for any vessels smaller than a capital ship?

You think when membership in a commercial organization - GCPL - is worth hundreds of thousands of ISDs, you think they'd field more sizable capital ships than 3.2 km doughnuts, and ones actually designed for combat, instead of those shitty ships. All combat vessels should be broadly speaking, general wedge- or cone-shaped vessels.

Do we need to have bizarre, irrational shapes for enemy warships in terrestrial fiction to differentiate them and to make combat compelling, narratively? No. So the CIS shouldn't have compromised-design warships. The Providence is poorly designed and small. The Lucrehulk's design is a joke, and the Recusant and the Star Frigate are both poorly designed and insignificant in mass/power.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:Do we need to have bizarre, irrational shapes for enemy warships in terrestrial fiction to differentiate them and to make combat compelling, narratively? No. So the CIS shouldn't have compromised-design warships. The Providence is poorly designed and small. The Lucrehulk's design is a joke, and the Recusant and the Star Frigate are both poorly designed and insignificant in mass/power.

Of course, that is a flaw that all factions of the universe, including the Empire even just of the movies share. I'm not saying that makes it right, just that it would be wholly unrealistic to think that the PT would change it.

Noble Ire wrote:

Do we need to have bizarre, irrational shapes for enemy warships in terrestrial fiction to differentiate them and to make combat compelling, narratively? No. So the CIS shouldn't have compromised-design warships. The Providence is poorly designed and small. The Lucrehulk's design is a joke, and the Recusant and the Star Frigate are both poorly designed and insignificant in mass/power.

Of course, that is a flaw that all factions of the universe, including the Empire even just of the movies share. I'm not saying that makes it right, just that it would wholly unrealistic to think that the PT would change it.

I didn't say that. I just noted it, and it irritates me.

Like I said, if it were up to me we'd regularly see fleets of nigh-Eclipse scale vessels in seemingly endless fleets duking it out as background, leaving planetary orbits filled with radioactive wreckage and dozens of planets partially or completely blasted in the exchange. See SW with the gloves off, no qualms about using high-yield weaponry, in atmosphere, etc.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:Like I said, if it were up to me we'd regularly see fleets of nigh-Eclipse scale vessels in seemingly endless fleets duking it out as background, leaving planetary orbits filled with radioactive wreckage and dozens of planets partially or completely blasted in the exchange. See SW with the gloves off, no qualms about using high-yield weaponry, in atmosphere, etc.

Well, I seriously doubt anyone here would dispute that as the ideal; I certainly wouldn't. There is always hope for the upcoming TV series, although I wouldn't hold my breath. Big battles, perhaps, but no real dreadnaughts.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:I didn't say that. I just noted it, and it irritates me.

Like I said, if it were up to me we'd regularly see fleets of nigh-Eclipse scale vessels in seemingly endless fleets duking it out as background, leaving planetary orbits filled with radioactive wreckage and dozens of planets partially or completely blasted in the exchange. See SW with the gloves off, no qualms about using high-yield weaponry, in atmosphere, etc.

Why should it irritate you? Lucas didn't use dozens of different ship types on each side in the OT because it (a) wasn't necessary and (b) was not worth the effort.

The point of the movies is not ship-wanking. It's about moral choices faced by two main characters -with the spaceships, planets, etc providing the backdrop. By your logic Casablanca was "irritating" because it didn't show enough types of Panzers.