Star Wars: The Force Awakens (Pre-release)

[jme3]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

Thanks for the clarification, I didn't realize that what I was referring to as cruisers were actually Star Destroyers.

Not a problem.

Speaking of which, are Star Destroyers a class of ship like destroyers, and , cruisers carriers, etc. or is Star Destroyer the class name like Arleigh Burke class destroyer and Nimitz class carrier?

They're a "type" of ship, I guess you'd say. But, there are different classes. Somewhere after the Republic Star Destroyer came the Victory class SD, and after that the Imperial class SD. We never really saw the Victory class as the Imperial class was first seen in Ep. IV, it being the Devastator.

If it's the class name then what is the class type? Heavy cruiser? Battleship? Not battlecruiser because battlecruisers were nothing more than upgunned cruisers; big guns, thin armor. If Star Destroyer is indeed a class type what's the class name then, Imperial & Super?

They're really referred to as capital ships. The classes ranged from the version in the prequels to, later, the Victory, then Imperial. The Super class was the Executor, although background info has been changed here and there turning what was originally the Super class into the Executor class. But that's erroneous as the Executor was the name given to the SSD as Darth Vader's Super class SD.

......

 

[Lost21stJedi]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

What's the point of Star Destroyers anyways? They are massive sure but at least on 2 occasions were destroyed by single fighters. (A-wing at the Battle of Endor and Jolli used a Y-wing to take out Crimson Jack's ship) :lol

 

[jme3]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

What's the point of Star Destroyers anyways? They are massive sure but at least on 2 occasions were destroyed by single fighters. (A-wing at the Battle of Endor and Jolli used a Y-wing to take out Crimson Jack's ship) :lol

Supposedly, the reason the ROTJ ISD was destroyed was because the Emperor had been killed, and it was his will through the force that held things together. So after he was gone, things went south. The technical
reason is that the deflector shields had been destroyed, thereby making the conning tower defenseless to attack.

I have no idea about that other one. It's EU, I'm guessing?

 

[Jeyl]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

What's the point of Star Destroyers anyways?

They act as carriers for multiple vehicle types and*also serve as orbital bombing ships.

They are massive sure but at least on 2 occasions were destroyed by single fighters. (A-wing at the Battle of Endor and Jolli used a Y-wing to take out Crimson Jack's ship) :lol

There was also.... this incident. @7:00

 

[Riceball]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

Ya, because a large threat is never used as a deterant in Star Wars. :lol

The bombarding power of a Star destroyer alone makes it worth it as the head of any smaller fleet.

The problem is that for a smaller fleet planet/system a Star Destroyer would likely represent the entire sum of their naval budget and would require near or all of their naval personnel to man and maintain it. One massive super ship is no good when it's the only ship you have; what happens when your one and only Star Destroyer (which is the entire sum of your navy) is down for repairs or out on patrol when your enemy comes a knocking? The Empire could afford to have a Death Star because they also had a formidable fleet of ships backing it up so even when the Death Star wasn't around they still had squadrons of Star Destroyers and other ships with which to pummel you into submission.

 

[Michael Bergeron]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

The problem is that for a smaller fleet planet/system a Star Destroyer would likely represent the entire sum of their naval budget and would require near or all of their naval personnel to man and maintain it. One massive super ship is no good when it's the only ship you have; what happens when your one and only Star Destroyer (which is the entire sum of your navy) is down for repairs or out on patrol when your enemy comes a knocking? The Empire could afford to have a Death Star because they also had a formidable fleet of ships backing it up so even when the Death Star wasn't around they still had squadrons of Star Destroyers and other ships with which to pummel you into submission.

I still don't buy that a planet's fleet budget would be entirely taken up in one Star Destroyer. They would still have the rest of their fleet. Would it be a big investment? Sure, but the navy doesn't lose all of their destroyers when they build an aircraft carrier.

To a smaller fleet the SD would be the equivalent of the DS. A large force supported by a smaller one.

Either way, seems we agree to disagree.

 

[Riceball]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

They're really referred to as capital ships. The classes ranged from the version in the prequels to, later, the Victory, then Imperial. The Super class was the Executor, although background info has been changed here and there turning what was originally the Super class into the Executor class. But that's erroneous as the Executor was the name given to the SSD as Darth Vader's Super class SD.

What people were doing was following standard naval tradition in naming a class of ships after the first one made/commissioned. So in this case, assuming that the Executor is the first of its class, it would (in our universe) make it the Executor class Star Destroyer but, obviously, the Imperial Navy doesn't follow the same class naming convention as us.

 

[jme3]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

What people were doing was following standard naval tradition in naming a class of ships after the first one made/commissioned.

My line of thinking has been that it's more EU nonsense that came along and messed up the original story, but I'll buy your reasoning as well. )

 

[Riceball]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

I still don't buy that a planet's fleet budget would be entirely taken up in one Star Destroyer. They would still have the rest of their fleet. Would it be a big investment? Sure, but the navy doesn't lose all of their destroyers when they build an aircraft carrier.

To a smaller fleet the SD would be the equivalent of the DS. A large force supported by a smaller one.

Either way, seems we agree to disagree.

The difference is that we, and other large navies, can afford the mix of large and small ships, we have the manpower and the resources to build, man, and maintain fleets of ships ranging in size from a super carrier to an LCAC. For smaller navies all they can afford to build/buy, man, and maintain are smaller ships and something like a Nimitz class carrier would probably take near their entire navy to fully man and cost them everything they spend on their entire fleet just to maintain it. For example, according to the Wookipedia an Imperial Star Destroyer has a crew compliment of 37,000, not including Stormtroopers, TIE pilots & support personnel, and misc. support craft crew and support personnel. Now what if your entire planet's navy only had a little over 37,000 total personnel? Would you gut your entire navy just to field one Star Destroyer?

In the end, yes, let's just agree to disagree although I'm really enjoying this debate.

 

[Michael Bergeron]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

The difference is that we, and other large navies, can afford the mix of large and small ships, we have the manpower and the resources to build, man, and maintain fleets of ships ranging in size from a super carrier to an LCAC. For smaller navies all they can afford to build/buy, man, and maintain are smaller ships and something like a Nimitz class carrier would probably take near their entire navy to fully man and cost them everything they spend on their entire fleet just to maintain it. For example, according to the Wookipedia an Imperial Star Destroyer has a crew compliment of 37,000, not including Stormtroopers, TIE pilots & support personnel, and misc. support craft crew and support personnel. Now what if your entire planet's navy only had a little over 37,000 total personnel? Would you gut your entire navy just to field one Star Destroyer?

In the end, yes, let's just agree to disagree although I'm really enjoying this debate.

Lol. Then let's continue!

37, 000 is a pretty small navy for a large country let alone a planet with (let's use Earth as a baseline) 8 billion people. If your entire planet had a navy that small then yes, you wouldn't be in the market for a SD.

My country (Canada) has a military of aprox. 115, 000. The population here is about 34.5 million. One would presume that a planet's military would primarily be in it's navy So say percentage wise it's 50%. That means for a Planet of 8 billion you would have or navy of approx. 13,800,000.

And that is based on a comparatively small military.

 

[jme3]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

Lol. Then let's continue!

37, 000 is a pretty small navy for a large country let alone a planet with (let's use Earth as a baseline) 8 billion people. If your entire planet had a navy that small then yes, you wouldn't be in the market for a SD.

My country (Canada) has a military of aprox. 115, 000. The population here is about 34.5 million. One would presume that a planet's military would primarily be in it's navy So say percentage wise it's 50%. That means for a Planet of 8 billion you would have or navy of approx. 13,800,000.

And that is based on a comparatively small military.

Pardon my popping in, but Coruscant alone, one planet among a million constituent worlds of the Republic/Empire, had a population of one TRILLION beings... The Imperial military establishment had to be a behemoth organization to say the very, very least, and it wasn't nearly as fleshed out in the p/t as reality would have had it to be...

 

[Michael Bergeron]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

Pardon my popping in, but Coruscant alone, one planet among a million constituent worlds of the Republic/Empire, had a population of one TRILLION beings... The Imperial military establishment had to be a behemoth organization to say the very, very least, and it wasn't nearly as fleshed out in the p/t as reality would have had it to be...

True but I'm basing my numbers on a reasonable average. Coruscant being an extreme case.

Whereas planets like Tatooine would likely have lower populations than Earth.

 

[jme3]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

True but I'm basing my numbers on a reasonable average.

And those rocks from Star Wars were/are anything but reasonable...!

 

[seelsa73]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

I would absolutely LOVE to have a used Star Destroyer!

Divide it up into condos and put in a shopping mall!

I believe they had something like that in the EU. It was a privately owned SD turned into a roaming refuge for the less reputable members of galactic society (smugglers, bounty hunters, etc.) I think it had a casino and stuff.

 

[Edwardowan]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

An interesting Fan art poster that actually has some dignity to it.

 

[jme3]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

Nice... That rendering of Carrie is a lot like how I pictured in my mind that she'd probably be made up to look. Maybe I'm being optimistic, but I'm sure she, along with the rest, will have the Hollywood treatment to make them look "appropriate" (whatever that ultimately means) for this flick.

And I'm stoked to see just how developed Coruscant has become by this time period.

An interesting Fan art poster that actually has some dignity to it.

 

[seelsa73]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

An interesting Fan art poster that actually has some dignity to it.

I like it. The kids can be added later since we don't know who or how many there will be.

 

[Yodamann]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

True but I'm basing my numbers on a reasonable average. Coruscant being an extreme case.

Whereas planets like Tatooine would likely have lower populations than Earth.

Your statement seems to suggest that a planet's navy would come from the planet itself... this simply isn't true. On a single Star Destroyer, there would be men from many different worlds. For example, when Han Solo served in the Imperial Navy, he served with other people who didn't come from Corellia. In addition, there wasn't all that much of an Imperial presence on Tatooine IIRC. Just a couple of barracks. That Star Destroyer was there only because it was chasing the Tantive IV. This is consistent with the Rim Worlds largely being left to themselves, a practice consistent with the Republic's policy (consider the slavery and the unwillingness to accept Republic credits).

tl;dr: A planet's navy probably wouldn't come from that planet exclusively.

 

[rodneyfaile]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

An interesting Fan art poster that actually has some dignity to it.

I hope the stars of Episode VII are new characters, and that the old characters are more of the supporting staff.

 

[Michael Bergeron]

Re: Star Wars Episode VII

Your statement seems to suggest that a planet's navy would come from the planet itself... this simply isn't true. On a single Star Destroyer, there would be men from many different worlds. For example, when Han Solo served in the Imperial Navy, he served with other people who didn't come from Corellia. In addition, there wasn't all that much of an Imperial presence on Tatooine IIRC. Just a couple of barracks. That Star Destroyer was there only because it was chasing the Tantive IV. This is consistent with the Rim Worlds largely being left to themselves, a practice consistent with the Republic's policy (consider the slavery and the unwillingness to accept Republic credits).

tl;dr: A planet's navy probably wouldn't come from that planet exclusively.

In the case of planets within the Republic/Empire yes. However the scenario we're debating is a post-Empire planet or system that is not associated with any other large faction purchasing a used SD for their own fleet.

Tatooine IIRC was outside of the Republic in the PT but by the time of SW was run, or at least controlled to some extent, by the Empire.