Each time you mention an SSD being used to take out key targets, I think back to when Vader used the Executor to completely vaporize Xizor's skyhook (with him on it). I can only guess what that sort of spectacle that would look like on the big screen..
@@TedTheHobbyist That's what happens when your criticl target is A.) in plain friggin view and B.) has no backup shielding of it's own. Next time, better use Regional shield generators, like the Venator did.
@@luzfire7523 tbf in Return of the Jedi the officer says they've lost their bridge deflector shields so it seems like they did use region based shields.
Star Wars large ship design seems to consist of putting fifty million normal cannons on a lump of metal the size of a city. With a few exceptions, they don't seem designed to direct firepower efficiently in one direction. That in mind, using them as an anchor for a (very) large formation, or as a defensive emplacement makes some sense. You can't really outmanouvre/position it if it doesn't have a weak side.
Star Destroyers, and other wedge shaped ships, were built with this in mind. The wedge shape means you can focus fire along the point of the ship, forwards towards ur opponents.
@@iwanbarnett7683 yeah, and for some of them it works pretty well, sadly the best known of them, the Executor isn't one - if you look in things like EaW or Sins mods (because they're some of the only place that you can pick a viewing angle) SSD's tend to be volleying shots through their own hulls. I assume in universe they primarily broadside for engaging anything even vaguely comparable to themselves. For most fights it isn't an issue since even a tiny fraction of their firepower should be enough for any foes without plot armour.
One note Ecks, we do see the SSDs used offensively in the massive assault out of the Deep Core leading up to Shadow Hand. Zsinj and Drommel both used their SSDs very offensively. Reaper and Scourge Squadron were used throughout the Outer Rim in the same way Executor and Death Squadron were.
@@EckhartsLadder you're definitely right with them being largely deployed as deterrents. They could be quite flexible in utility with the right commander as Wedge and Zsinj demonstrated. I think what largely made them inflexible was the aspects of the Tarkin Doctrine and Imperial focus on symbolism over seeing the SSDs as tools.
isnt it a bit more similar to the ww1 Dreadnoughts? they are offensive juggernauts defeat anything smaller than them but so ridiculous expensive that you rather just flex with them rather than using them. also a bit similar to nuclear warheads that are also really not used offensively since the only good thing with these weapons is flexing and not using them since besides total destruction of areas that you cannot even occupy afterwards because of radiation its not so tactically flexible. SSDs are more flexible than Dreadnoughts and nukes but are really expensive that only the empire can really use them to its fullest extent and imperial warlords rather Retreat than damaging their SSDs
@@urlauburlaub2222 Well there are more than a few errors in your analysis I have to address. The Executor class were largely designed as terror weapons and symbols-though they were capable of great devastation offensively or defensively. Lusankya and Executor were sister ships, they were literally identical in armament until the New Republic captured and rearmed Lusankya with more point defense weapons than she had initially to partly counter starfighters. Construction was sped up, but four were already well into construction by Yavin because the SSD was the compromise with the fleet over more Death Star funding. Executor and Lusankya came out at the same time, Reaper next then Brawl(later Iron Fist) there were many more in operation by 3 ABY with the likes of Terror, Guardian, Whelm, Annihilator, Aggressor, and others active in the Imperial Navy, at least one with a prototype cloak was under construction at Fondor when it was destroyed, others like Intimidator were finished around the battle of Endor and Night Hammer was finished in the Post Endor period.
@@EckhartsLadder First Order Tie Advance V1, Avenger and Tie Aggressor These are my Verizon on what these tie fighters have from their first order upgrade variants starting with the Tie Advance V1 FO tie fighter. Tie Advance V1 FO: This Tie was made in response of the resistance hit and run tactics and when the First Order discover the Tie Advance V1 from the empire they were impressed by it's performance so they made an upgrade one for their needs they put the solar panels on the outside of the S-Foils and improve on the engines and gave it a red marking on the left side and it's weapons are two SJFS L-s9.6 laser cannons and has a class 2 hyperdrive and a built in life support system like it's Predecessor. Tie Avenger SF: This Tie Variant was base off of the prototype that the First Order discover and when they review it's status that it display they were impressed by its performance so they produce an improved version of the tie Avenger and when Kylo Ren flew it he was impressed by it yet had some problems with the view port so taking insperation of the cockpit design of the Eta class interceptor and added much stronger shielding and a backup hyperdrive and made it faster it became the space superiority fighter, now having six SJFS L-s9.6 laser cannons four on the wings (one on each wing tip) and two on the chin and can contain a rallying slasher cooling point variety of missiles and trackers and added a stronger tracker beam making this First Order Tie fighter is the space superiority fighter. First Order Tie Aggressor FO Mk 2: The Tie Aggressor is the Successer from it's Predecessor from the empire they made the successer faster, stronger shields, and a class 2 hyperdrive the Tie Aggressor FO Mk 2 added some extra energy for the laser cannons like the Tie FO and the turret is now the SJFS Lb-14 dual heavy laser turret and contains magpulse war heads and ion missiles giving this tie fighter enough fire power to take on the resistance. That's my take on these Tie fighters if they were used in the first order honestly the First Order would have a better chance against the Resistance if they had these tie fighters so yeah lete know what tie fighter variant would you add in the First Order?
I am sure that the aftermath of the battle of Endor saw a new use of SSDs because the Empire fractured into pieces that were fighting against themselves and the rebels to decide who got the biggest territory. Zsinj is a great example of using SSDs in all aspects, really: he used it to strike basically every target he ever launched in the form of hit-and-run attacks, such as when he attacked Novquizor or when he assaulted Kuat. In CoPL, Han says the hunt was 5 months of chasing an ever-offensive foe who was always on the move, whose only trail was space stations destroyed, shipyards ruined, and entire fleets decimated; in fact, Selaggis is the first battle where Zsinj is realistically on the defensive. Zsinj used his SSD to its best and better than anyone else, in my opinion, even Isard used the Lusankya rather to defend her commerce or her planet
@@kennethferland5579 Yes. His partnerships with the planets he 'controlled' (he never got any official territory, but instead possessed bases and assets but not de jure governments) would be used to feed his war machine and Empire in exchange for protection. Zsinj was so great at logistics that even after Selaggis, which CoPL states to be an extremely compromising defeat allied with the New Republic's thinking that it had destroyed Iron Fist, it is expected that Zsinj alone will take 14 years to ultimately defeat, that's at the point the NR was not only competent, it had comparable assets to the factions it went against; most of it went away in the Thrawn and Shadow Hand Campaigns.
Speaking of cost-effectiveness, I imagine there would be at least one Republic admiral who rolled up in a Mandator surrounded by an unholy amount of Acclamator variants specialized for different fleet roles.
And then there are fans like me: who felt there were too many Super Star Destroyers, Dreadnoughts, and other mega-ships. The only reason they need these ships is because they neutered the Imperial-class Star Destroyer to such an extent, that the appearance of a warship of its displacement doesn’t inspire dread. Leave the ISD as a credible threat, and the SSDs can remain rare nightmares.
@@Ninjamime56 , The series is _Troy Rising_ by John Ringo. The first book is _Live Free or Die._ The second is _Citadel._ The third is _The Hot Gate._ I don't know if he wrote more books on that IP... I haven't seen any in stores if he did. Unfortunately, the author abuses an overdone trope... but, if you don't mind that stereotype about humans, the series is a great read!
I'm in that camp for sure. Bigger does not equal better!! the ISD should always have been the near-impossible to defeat space battleship that it was in ANH. The SSD in Empire Strikes Back should be a one-in-a-million ship that anchors a fleet as a massive carrier/troop transport. For instance, in the sequel trilogy, we really didn't get to see a normal First Order star destroyer in combat aside from shooting at one of its own TIEs. Would have loved to have seen a conventional battle in the opening of The Last Jedi instead of yet another easy-to-kill behemoth
Well, my thoughts then: Drednoughts can be used to minimise loses in medium size engagements. If an ISD has 20 times less shield rating then an SSD, you'll lose 19 ISDs before anyone breaks through an SSD shield. As such, they are great tanks, to be bluntly wdged in the middle of the battle and cover for other ships, or to serve as a pivot of manoeuvre for other wings as they use tactics to their advantage.
The thing is though, with 20 targets you speed enemy fire-power out and you can manoeuvre more. And tyen theres resources, in an ideal world you'd have 25,000 SSD's but realistically if you want a dreadnought, you have to give up 10 or 20 star destroyers to have the resources to build, maintain and run your super star destroyer
Maybe. Star Wars usually has localized shield breaks tho. We see this against the Lusankya actually, where the overwhelm one section. So more shield but more to cover too
@@EckhartsLadder it's still easier to coordinate fire with one ship and Focus one target down then with multiple ships. So you'd start limiting the enemy firepower while the enemy can't until they break the shield.
The idea of a massive ship like this in the Yusong Vong War at the center of a fleet makes a lot of sense. A ship like this in a fleet during the Clone Wars same thing. A ships like these during the rebellion makes no sense to me. For all of it's firepower you can not escape the fact that it can only be in one place at a time. I always felt that the Rebellion would have been better fought with 20% of the ISD's and way more Victories as the main ship. They could be in more places at a time and with coverage from Lancer frigates you would have been a better match for rebels. Sure you could have 1 or 2 SSD's but the resources used and time to build would have been much better been used to build more Victories and lancers to better fight the enemy you had at that time. A ship can be the greatest even but you need to right ship to fight the battle you have. Lets not even start to look at the second death star...
Really doesn't matter what you build if you can't find them. The bigger issue was tactics. If empire had been willing to take a few more decisive hits on some worlds from the rebels to get them committed to a location and then drop in with an overwhelming force from hyperspace, they likely could have won. Have 2/3 of your force out scouring the galaxy - every nook and cranny. Keep the last 1/3 stationed at key worlds where they can jump to defend anything in the system. You will take more initial losses, but you'll also bring about the decisive battle you want. Otherwise it is like an rpg where you can pick and choose lvl 1 boss and avoid a lvl 15 boss to begin with as the rebels due to stationary defenses and tons of hidey holes. When the bosses might be anywhere and their locations are always changing, it is harder to know when it's safe to take one on before others you can't beat arrive.
Not if you use it as a mobile communication coordination and battle hub deploying weapons and assets in a very mobile environment. Makes it harder to hit and track combined with communication and connection to a galaxy sensor net you have a very lethal killer that would be very hard for the rebels to deal with.
@@josephbirrenkott7993 Ok I will make t6his simple. You have a better chance finding the enemy with more ships and you have a better chance beating a now hear this one out, a small fast attack force with mostly fighters with a lancer frigate that specializes in hear this one, counter fighter.... come on people...
@@josephbirrenkott7993 Slavery, as well as the xenophobia the Empire gets depicted with never made any sense. 5 skilled workers from each planet in the Empire builds your Death Star.
@@shanehudson3995 , It makes some sense... As those 5 skilled workers per planet are building the DS... they need workers to care for their needs... and those workers need their needs met... then you have the people delivering the materials... then you have the people making the materials... then you have the people mining the materials the parts are made out of... All of this could easily be hundreds of millions of workers... Logistically, it simplifies things when you determine that X number of systems are the only systems providing for a massive project... it reduces the likelihood of parts going to the wrong location. On top of that the DS isn't the only project the Empire is making and wookiees are several times stronger than the average human.
My thought is that Thrawns Interdictor tactic would have been stupid effective if he could drop a SSD on top of any enemy battle group. I know it works quite well when I do it in Thrawns Revenge.
I was always hoping to Bellator would be cannonized at some point. I dig the design, and the philosophy of it being a fast, offensively oriented SSD. Also would potentially make for quite a good chase sequence if it was hunting some rebels down.
In addition to being a command platform the SSD was a massive hangar array for star fighters equiped without hyperdrives, so that kinda kills the idea of avoiding direct engagement with them
Generally speaking, the Empire misused most of its assets. In particular, they often didn't provide enough of an escort for their SSD's. They're not all-rounders, they're capital ship killers. They need support. Arguably, they wouldn't have lost to the Rebellion if they'd utilized proper fleet doctrine, tactics, and logistics. A fleet of Star Destroyers is cool, for example, but not that practical; while you may end up winning against your foe, chances are you're going to take far more losses than if you'd brought a couple Victory's, some Carracks/Lancers, some TIE-Fighters that aren't garbage (TIE Defender/Interceptor). A proper Super Star Destroyer fleet composition would have the entire fleet built around the SSD, providing support and covering its weaknesses (mainly smaller craft that its guns cannot hit, such as bombers) while also keeping ships from getting too close so that the SSD can take full advantage of its many long-range weapons to utterly decimate the opposing side. A mixture of smaller capital ships (preferrably ISD-II's), carriers/frigates, screening vessels, fighters/bombers, and an Interdictor or two to prevent retreat would be an ideal support structure for an SSD, making that fleet very costly to deal with if one doesn't choose to outright avoid/run away from it. You would be forced to either commit an equal/greater number of resources to the fight, bring your own SSD/similar Super-Capital vessel, or something even stronger like the Death Star or Sun Crusher to deal with it.
If you filled out the full complement of starfighters and bombers it would make them a lot more dangerous also. Especially hyperdrive capable starfighters and bombers, allow them to operate at a longer range from the mother ship and if you used Thrawns short jump strategy it could further that especially against a force like the rebels.
I'd never put hyperdrive capable starfighters on an SSD, if I want reach I would use some Ton-Falk class escort carriers and dispatch them to a spot under a days travel from the target to launch and recover the strike force. I then don't need to move my SSD out of the position I feel is ideal for intercepting enemy capitol ships, let auxilary ships perform auxilarry task by temporarily detatching from the group.
I think it's also partly *because* each dreadnought is such a massive resource expenditure that they're used cautiously. Lose a couple Venators? No big deal, there are a ton where they came from. Lose a Mandator II? That's a lot harder to replace.
I've always used the ISSD in Empire at War to crush enemy positions. But that only works because the ISSD was fully repaired afterwards. In order to implement this strategy, one would have to equip the ship with strong shields and armor, exactly what was done on the Eclipse. Here it was also done what I would do, equipping the ship with super-heavy weapons. The Eclipse can destroy any battleship, station and even titan with the super laser, making it a perfect artillery support for a battleship fleet. You only need anti-starfighter frigates and you are armed against pretty much any opponent. In deep space, ISSDs can also be used as mobile command bases, and depending on the situation, even a factory complex or farms in the ship would make sense.
Video idea:How much of Exegol's area was used to make the Xyston-class Star Destroyers? there were 1,080 Star Destroyers, in addition Exegol has an area similar to Earth only 800 km more.
Well, Xyston class star destoryers are 2,400 metres long. If we use a figure of 2.5km x 1.5km area used by each star destoyer, that would be 3.75 square kms each. If we say that Exegol is the same size of earth (510,000,000 square kilometres of surface) then it would be big enough to fit 136,000,000 Xystons on it's surface. So 1,080 Xyston classes would take up less than 0.025% of the planets surface.
@@calebbarnhouse496 Well, to use Earth as an example again, we've technically got ~230 billion tonnes of pure iron. Most of our planet's core is iron and nickel.
I personally would like to see dreadnoughts used defensively in larger offensives, guarding vital systems and logistical hubs as a larger force pushes into enemy territory, or doing the same across multisystem battle lines. It plays to their strengths, but also keeps them nearby for major 'breaking stuff' offensives or when the enemy sends in their own dreadnoughts and you can't spare the dozen-or-more capital ships needed to bog them down.
5:38 The best source material for the Executor being effective as a flagship in Death Squadron are it's appearances in the Darth Vader comics especially it's debut Mahkota Spacedocks and other similar instances where the intimidation and intense fire power couldn't be replaced by "a few star destroyers" . But, like you said it's up for debate.
@@AAhmou Isard is a worse leader on all conceivable levels. To address the main posts point, I have issues with Daala's decision making at times but if you look at her defeats there were factors no rational person could have anticipated for the most part. Many Imperial officers have found themselves felled by original and unorthodox tactics (as well as completely unanticipatable events). Captain Ait Convarion of the VSD-II Corrupter was one such officer. Man knew his ship and how to fight with it. Still got completely blindsided by random circumstance in a situation where every pilot of Rogue Squadron should have been eliminated or captured. Akbar destroyed the ISD-1 Manticore using the husk of an under construction ship to ram the ship after she had lured away the defenses with her other two ISD-1s. This was her second loss. The Sun Crusher showed up later and blew up a nebula to try to kill her. This resulted in the loss of ISD-1 Basilisk with only ISD-1 Gorgon remaining under her command. It was later scrapped due to an Imperial warlord considering it too damaged to be worth repairing. Her assault on the Yavin 4 Jedi Praxeum was similarly ill-fated. A hundred Victory-class Star Destroyers were magicked away because the students pooled their powers into one student who "pushed" the fleet away leaving it slightly damaged without functioning hyperdrives (very convenient narratively). Pellaeon was in command of this fleet and didn't see it coming either (who would).The effort killed the Jedi who did it. Daala then arrives in the newly christened Executor-class Star Dreanought Knight Hammer (formerly named the Night Hammer partially for its black stealth armor and renamed for irony since it was intended to destroy the Jedi). This ship was destroyed because a Jedi Knight in a borrowed body destroyed its engines from within essentially. The closest that can be said of her tactical incompetence is the First Battle of the Maw Installation. She knew what the Sun Crusher was and should never have tried to engage it like she did. The ship is all but invincible. This cost her the ISD-1 Hydra and was her first loss. Pellaeon respected her tactical abilities immensely as did Grand Moff Tarkin. I have to imagine Thrawn would have found value in her as well (let's recall Thrawn lost a ship in similar circumstances to the Manticore. Didnt make him incompetent). Isard, on the other hand, was no tactician. She was a politician and intelligence officer at best and at worst a narcissistic lunatic.
In actual navel warfare there was a tendency to go bigger as time went on and technology improved. Modern US destroyers, for example, are practically the size and displacement of cruisers in WWII. However, navies still build ships of all sizes for specialized roles - it's about teamwork.
Imagine a couple of Viscounts and the Lusankya leading a fleet of Nebulon Star Destroyers against the Vong at the start of the conflict. Trillions saved, Anakin Solo is alive, Jacen doesn't fall, lots of good things happen.
Nebulas are stupidly hard to make, even Kuat and Dac struggled to make them quickly. a better option would be ISDs, as they are more focused on armor than shields, which is a perfect counter to the YV's shield sucking dovin bassals
Or the vong weapons ignore the shields, and unlike the smaller more munverable state of the art 5th fleet, would not have been able to withdraw or dodge. The super capitals ships and their ridiculously inefficient massive crews could have easily been biofuel for the vong to zerg across the galaxy.
@@JJJBunney001 I read the whole vong saga. Their weapons, called dovin basels, sp and thanks to the other guy here who remembered what they were called, absolutely ignored shields. They were gravity projectors which doubled as engines and weapons. The new republic later found work around which made their shields somewhat effective, but that wasn't untill the retaking courscant part of the war if I remember right. Second, yes they were a zerg species who devoured biomass and reproduced by feeding off the planets and victims they conquered. That's why they're in the star wars galaxy because they ate theirs.
Super star destroyers and dreadnoughts were used similar to battleships in WWI. They formed a battle line where the fire could be concentrated in one direction, opening themselves up to the same threat they posed to opposing fleets. Their role was to keep opponents out, while smaller and faster ships, such as the Star Destroyer, MC-80/85, Nebulon B, CR-90, and others would move in closer. The hope was that the enemy lines would remain focused on the heavy armor so they could get their hits in and possibly punch a hole.
i will say in most cases in the empire at war game atleast the combo of an interdictor and an SSD is always an oh fuck moment and even in multiplayer when an enemy deploys on your like oh great now i have that to deal with and have to switch to a full attack on it to protect your rear lines
I think the best way to use a Super Star Destroyer is as the linchpin of a fleet. A large vessel with thick armor, tough shields, and powerful, long-ranged weapons. A ship that you organize to the rest of your fleet around to support, and in turn, be supported by.
So called "Super Star Destroyers" like Executor were dreadnoughts. Also, in OT canon, Imperator Star Destroyers and dreadnaughts couldn't enter atmospheres. That was a creation of the EU (non-canon).
Even in the EU, they did require extensive modifications for them to be able to manoeuver in the atmosphere, at least for the lusankya which had its lower hull filled with repulsorlifts (which were destroyed during its escape from Coruscant).
@@AAhmou In the EU the only Star Destroyers that were purpose built to enter atmospheres were the smaller Victory-class. In the OT movies, Imperator-class could only enter orbit, at which point they'd either launch landing craft or shuttles, or bombard the surface with their heavy turbolasers, very much like battleships used to bombard shorelines and inland targets. That's why Vader was so angry with Ozzel in ESB, when he clumsily notified the Rebels in advance that they were on their way, because the deflector shield protecting the Rebel base prevented the fleet from bombarding the base from orbit, which necessitated a land invasion using Walkers and ground troops.
@@white-dragon4424 It's just fiction. Canon, non-canon, it doens't matter. If you like what Disney or George Lucas did after the clone wars of 2008, that's ok. But please, it's time to end this continued war between canon and not canon. You can say that there are several dimensions that work with their own logic and that's it
I would think SSDs would work better as mobile command and control for fleet operations. So if you send a fleet to an Outer Rim sector the SSD would basically be set up in one system and direct fleet operations of capital ships or smaller classes from there and only join in active operation where needed. Maybe the occasional show the flag operations too.
Here's a great question: could the Hutt's dark saber have been able to be mass produced and do you think they would have prevented the full yuzhong vong invasion? (In other words, how big of a difference would 6 or so Hutt Darksabers have drastically reduced the length and damage of the invasion.)
Potentially not at all. Spacedock keeps missing this, but the Vongs shields do not struggle against more powerful fire or a larger number of highly accurate fire. But with dispersed fire targeting multiple close together areas. This is because the Vongs shields are literally projected miniature black holes, which have little issue absorbing powerful shots. And the Vong can sustain the black holes for (in combat terms) long periods of time. But they do have significant problems projecting numerous black holes in a small area making slightly inaccurate fire more effective. TL/DR: A DS style weapons produce a single, accurate shot, which Vong shields are highly effective against.
Both canons and the fandom have misunderstood the SSD's role for decades now. SSDs are dedicated command centers (it's right there in the movies). Their primary purpose is to function as mobile planetary bases: you put one of them in the middle of a troubled sector, and you can dock as many transports, carriers, long-range fighters, and even capital ships as you want for repairs, transfers, resupply, and whatever else you might want. A single Executor-class dreadnought could launch a hundred TIE Advanced and a hundred Assault Gunboats three times over, sending the hordes to bomb three different systems while slagging a moon as her short-range bombers and fighters scream over to bomb the antiorbital defenses of the main system. In less than twenty-four hours, a single SSD could launch, resupply, and coordinate strikes on a hundred cities across a planet's surface AND eliminate all lunar bases...all from a much safer platform than the fifty carriers it would take to match it. Combine that with the much larger-scale attack craft she could deploy to a planet, the number of troops she could carry, and the sheer intimidation of her presence...SSDs essentially gave the Empire the ability to move a whole planetary command center into the heart of hostile space. It's not about brawling power, it's about stability and order. Also, it's about having a weapons platform with a thousand turbolasers that a Rebel task force of five Star-Destroyer class warships couldn't hope to match.
I really hope you have a full video on the NR 5th Fleet. Seems something you and Corey could rock. I will check if you already do, and encourage others to do so as well. Also, your Tapcaf Transmission episodes on The Black Fleet Crisis were fantastic.
Few things: Seems most of the time space battles played out WWI style - defensive lines and occasional charges by masses of enemies rather than WWII blitzkrieg. Therefore defensive ssd's make sense unless - like you said - they're being used to lead said charge against known mass enemy defenses. Secondly is cost. I gotta believe cost of running ssd across the galaxy vs fuel cost to keep in orbit is very different. Minimize cost. If enemy commits mass force, you can always jump in with ssd as backup. Thirdly is the hyperdrive quality being low. This makes it less likely you'll commit them during clone wars because the time requirement. Fleet of smaller ships with better hyperdrives can make a deep critical strike faster than you can. If you have to bail, you can't outrun them. This makes such a ploy risky at best. Plus... Palpatine playing NOT to win quickly. Finally, as you alluded to, there's the double edge sword of it's intimidation factor. If you lose it... it is a huge blow to your force even if overall the battle goes better for you than say... losing 3 smaller ships of a total equivalent value for a lesser gain. Both your morale and your opponents'.
For me, larger ships should function more as mobile space stations. Such ships shouldn’t be deployed as frontline units, at least in the first wave(s), because there are various natural & artificial hazards, especially various minefields that’re laid out in advance (That is what I get for playing too much of the _Star Wars_ flight sim series called X-Wing). Heck, even the Empire wouldn’t be too stupid to jump into that, which is why they sent out Probe Droids. Thus, if they were to be used more offensively, they should at least be in the second wave, not the first…
Or... be sent in with the fleet to the outskirts of a system giving time for the screen to scout the approaches to the objectives... the objectives being the fortresses the SSD is there to destroy...
Pretty much the same idea & such, @@aralornwolf3140. Even with the Allegiance-Class OR, my personal favorite, the Titan-Class shouldn’t get ahead of itself. Even the Imperial maneuvers in the prologue mission is flawlessly executed; sent smaller ships in first, & then the bigger ships later…
@@nickvinsable3798 , Yeah. In the Star Wars Adventure Journal Volume 1, Book 1... there was a short story written as a lecture on how to invade planets. The lecturer began with the basics... how to approach the planet. If you don't scout the system, you could lose your ships, especially the troop transports, to ambushes. Also, a system is pretty big and could hide enemy forces, which then stay as you invade the planet (siege the planet), picking off supply ships as they arrive, or leave... hindering your ability to actually secure the planet. However, the reason I said what I said, is... the way you worded your post gave me the impression you were talking about two separate groups of ships... in which the second group only arrives after the first... this isn't done, as the scouts, if they encounter enemy forces they can't fight need the option to fall back to the main force to keep themselves from being destroyed.
Agreed, @@aralornwolf3140. I only used the term(s) Loosely; my main focus was that the bigger ships held back & NOT be in the first wave, Especially the flagship(s).
I still love that old Reddit comment on the Imperium Ultra class star destroyer(which was like 40 times the size of the Eclipse SSD and had a fucking Super Star Destroyer HANGAR) where the sheer size of the ship made people form tribes and built tent cities as traversing it and keeping any semblance of order on a 260km long ship with a crew of 6 million was impossible.
I feel like misusing military resources would be on-point for the Empire, oddly enough. Between the sheer size of the empire, the Tarkin doctrine, and the emperor being a wrinkly ol' space wizard, I would suspect a considerable amount of boondoggles and inefficiency post clone wars. Though, Super Star Destroyers being used defensively kinda makes sense to me. Catching the rebels in a pitched battle would require something crazy like letting them think that the Emperor was on an unarmed and inoperable death star orbiting a nature preserve, so being able to bring multiple SSDs against them would be pretty hard. Plus, the idea of them being unassailable nexuses of imperial influence and force projection, able to hold a multi-sector area by organizing and supplying smaller fleets? That feels Tarkin doctrine but reasonable. Fantastic video as always, gave me a lot to chew on! Gonna rewatch it now, thanks for the upload.
I totally agree. In addition to flag ship roles, the absolutely wall of independent firepower, especially with their almost innumerable smaller caliber guns basically makes them almost mobile defensive space stations to hold an entire vector of attack on a planet. But I imagine their cumbersome mobility and cost to put them in an expeditionary footing makes them less viable force projection asset. I do like how in some of the updated fan models of Battlecruisers suggest the tonnage class is far more offensive in nature and has an anti-capital ship role with a high amount of large battery turbolasers relative to it's surface area
I think another reason for why SSDs weren't used extensively in combat was because they surely must've been very expensive to build and losing one must've been devastating. It's just like how in the early 20th century Britain & Germany kept constructing a very expensive class of ship called dreadnoughts. They costed so much to construct that during WW1 both sides were very reluctant to use them out of fear that they could be lost.
Thing is, it makes no sense, looking at history the best way to defend yourself from other navies is to just have a good navy, and if you can't afford a good navy, that's when you go for ships that's purpose is primarily protecting the coastline, and those are much smaller than most warships, but usually heavily armed due to not needing particularly good seakeeping, range or speed. Good examples of this are the various monitors of the late 19th and early 20th century, and later coastal defense ships of WW2. SSD's seem to seriously suffer from what I'd call the Yamato problem, the upkeep costs on these super star destroyers must be absolutely abysmal, they don't seem to be easy to deploy in an expeditionary capacity and you can easily achieve the same amount of firepower with half the vulnerability if you'd just deploy multiple smaller ships, yet at the same time they should be far to expensive to maintain just for planetary defense when there are so many better ways of doing that. In addition the way speed seems to work in Star Wars suggests that these ships could be easily outmaneuvered, which coupled with the really weird short range engagements we see in SW means they can't necessarily always be where the trouble is, and to a ship that's supposed to be defending something like a planet, that's a huge issue. And then we have the ''there wasn't that much war going on'' explanation, which just makes absolutely zero sense to me, in peace time navies scale back, they don't embark on huge vanity projects unless they NEED to project power like the US, and even then they no longer operate BB's and have never gone into actual battlecruisers, hell even the comparatively modern Ticos will be replaced by destroyers in the future. I could see why the Empire went for them, to me it screams vanity project, like the Kirov's, huge, impossibly expensive to run ships that are just too costly to deploy regularly, and they probably end up spending most of their time in dock because of that. My headcanon reason for why they were used mostly in a defensive role is because they are utterly useless in any other role unless you have absolutely ungodly amounts of money to spend, and still the logistics would be strained to their absolute limits. They're all just big space borne Yamatos.
That's cool that you have CGI footage of the Lusankya emerging from under Corusants surface in this video. It's great to visualize one of these fascinating moments read about from legends.
More special/experimental ships like the Malevolence or that stealth ship the Republic used to break the blockade of Christophsis make for really good stories
It makes sense to use SSDs defensively. Since in Star Wars hyperspace routes are static, you can just put them with interdictors at the key points during the campaings, forcing the enemy to face a brutal amount of firepower, or to fly into a trap/fortified position. Using them in offense is very risky, they can always get outmaneuvered or ambushed, also ship like this needs a massive ammount of cruisers to protect it from bombers. Quickly moving and setting a whole fleet before the enemy will raid capital ship bridge/engines/shield generators cannot be a easy task.
Wouldn’t work, if your talking bout chief vs cooper because cooper only has light only and has no genetic augmentation Most Halo tech is just more advanced than that in Titanfall imo other than the time travel thingy
@@somehalonerd1176 depends on the matchup. The technology is more comparable to each other then say Star Wars. You could do pilots vs odst, Spartans etc, Titanfall grunts vs UNSC marines, spectres and stalkers vs elites and brutes, repears vs hunters, titans vs scorpions, wraiths, mantises and scarabs etc. there’s a lot to compare and contrast if you have extensive knowledge on both series. You could also do imc and militia vs UNSC
Where do the Lucrehulk ships fit in to the mix? They’re probably not as long as an SSD, but their tonnage is probably similar, right? Or were they classed as something different, to get around restrictions on ship classes?
One big thing I think people forget about is logistics. It takes an amount of fuel to move a star fighter in hyperspace, it takes more to move a freighter. An ISD-2 has yet another tier of fuel consumption, let alone a craft over 10 times the size of it. In the “Star Wars Saga Edition” game system it takes about 1kg of fuel per day to fly a colossal size craft, aka a freighter sized craft. As the sizes go up that fuel consumption gets multiplied, up to ludicrous amounts for a SSD. For each size category it gets multiplied by 100, so it goes from 50 credits per day for a freighters fuel up to 15,000 per day for an SSD. Not including jumps to hyperspace which take a days worth of fuel per jump, that’s a minimum per day cost just to move it. So yeah, logistics are hell for huge vessel refueling.
The Imperial SDD existed for one reason - to deter rebellion from the Star Destroyer Captains. Hence why it was given to the most loyal ones. And the Death Star existed more to keep those holders of SSD's in check. I mean who _but_ the holder of a SSD could have the kind of position that "blowing up the planet" would be a useful tool? In a offensive role, those ships will suffer from the Bismark/Tirpitz Issue: 1. The enemy will spend a lot of resources keeping track of it 2. It will be a priority target to avoid or kill in every operation
The defensive use of Super Star Destroyers mirrors WW1 where at least in the atlantic, where large warships were largely kept in major fleet locations to guard key seaways, partly because the major naval powers considered them too valuable to be risked unnecessarily- hence why the only major battleship engagement of WW1 was the battle of Jutland
I always thought if it more like the us battle ships in pearl harbor at wwii. Small fighters are just a superior tactic. They sit around because they are ego pieces and not real war machines, like the battleship Yamamoto, which never managed to get more than like 200 miles from Japan without being damaged, or the German Bismark which got apha strikes by a group of smaller British warships.
@@lukeseguin1875 would say the battle ships at Pearl are a bad example… docked in a harbour isn’t really the same as on station defensively, and doesn’t matter if it’s a battle ship or a fighter making a sucker punch. But yeah, like those of WW1 from first comment and the Yamato, Bismarck, and all US battle ships that survived Pearl, they were never used for their intended purpose cause they were too “valuable”, and the ships that were there to defend them (carriers, destroyers) proved to be more tactically useful cause there were more of them and they were easier to justify using.
@@mikejulien2330 I disagree on the pearl harbor being there for defense thing. The battleships were redeployed from their base in San Diego, the main base for the us pacific fleet, and were transfered to pearl. They along with all of our carriers, which only weren't in harbor because of a training exercise were specifically deployed to defend against the Japanese.
I suspect that SSDs were largely used for defensive purposes at least partly for logistical reasons. It costs a huge amount of fuel to jump a ship that big to hyperspace.
while im not experienced enough in legends lore to say with certaintay something like this would be practical, i feel like massive ships could be well used as more of a roaming defense penetrator. Similarly to how you can use one to hold down a poorly defended systen on its own, you could also use one as a roaming attack force that could go as an advanced force, shattering planetary shields/guns, orbital gun platforms, and/or defense fleets, so that another fsmaller leet could come along after and mop up any vestiges of defiance, as well as establish a more permanent presence. I feel like a few ISDs could keep a system behaving relatively easily enough, once its defenses are gone, it may be difficult for them to capture a system themselves, so this would be a good solution.
Thank so much for Video Eck!👍✌😎 With so many youtubers and in universe-characters compiling about how unpractical Super Star Destroyers are in offensive battle I was wondering if they can be practical in the right situation. I love using Star Destroyers and want use them in smart way in stories and not make same mistakes a the Empire did.
... and then there was the, non-canon, X-Wing vs TIE Fighter expansion "Balance of Power" which also had a SSD. One of the selling points was getting the chance to see one in action, and it was interesting to say the least. It certainly proved they could be effective when deployed aggressively, however they certainly can be taken down by a force costing far less in terms of resources. (The major issue being the disparity between how much resources the Alliance can expend on ships, versus what the Imperial Navy does. Quite frankly, anything the Rebel Alliance has to lose is supposed *major* for them. The Navy can, and does, just decide what's "acceptable losses" and doesn't worry about it.) Details about the particular incident in "Balance of Power" below for the curious. The Vengeance Task Force was sent to begin swatting an attempt of the Rebellion to get a shipyard going somewhere else. (Also they kinda-sorta stole an Interdictor's gravity-well projector and mounted it on a smaller vessel. Which was a big "can't let them have THAT".) It was hilarious, in a sense, when the drive to remove this modified cruiser also mean when the Vengeance arrived to be the primary attack platform... it was stuck there. And the Alliance *wanted* it stuck there, because they had a plan. See, they decided it was much more useful to send drone ships as one would "fireships", loading them with explosives and crashing them into the SSD until it was crippled. Then just pounding on it until it died. As far as gameplay went, this stopped being fun FAST because the damn thing shrugged off even heavy bombs and several of the tricks for taking on ISDs in a starfighter in that engine simply could not work. Since it wasn't coded to close distance to fight, it also was unable to just do an "advancing wall of doom" situation... which would have made the mission nigh impossible to win, because you can't kill it before it can enter range of the ship keeping it locked down and thus be able to escape.
It does seem the Imperial navy used the Dreadnaughts largely in a defensive way. For example the 2nd Death Star being a famous scene. They were also used to effectively blockade planets like Hoth and at Yavin after the 1st Death Star was destroyed.
I think that real history of the dreadnaught class battleships and their equivalent in navies other than the British Royal Navy has some interesting parallels. The dreadnoughts took years to build and cost so much that losing one could literally bankrupt all but the wealthiest empires. During WWI this led to both sides being so conservative that only one major battle, the Battle of Jutland, was fought between the main fleets of Britain and Germany. The damage inflicted on both sides was so costly that both fleets never risked open battle again for the rest of the war. By the next big naval war the battleship was already becoming obsolete to cheaper aircraft carriers whose planes could knock out battleships without ever coming in range of their big guns. I think it's possible that this real history influenced the strategic use of dreadnaughts, as well as their weaknesses in Star Wars cannon.
@EckhartsLadder Stepping outside the in-world lore for a sec: is the reason that the Mandator didn't show up being used in the prequel trilogy movies because they were "invented" after the movies came out? Because if not, it seems like they should have been used in place of the Venators, or at least in support. Most of the time we say that the Venators were the biggest ships the Republic had to operate as battle line capitol ships - or did they show up in the movies and I'm just forgetting? I realize you partly answered this in saying that the Mandators were held for defense of the core - so do they show up in battle for Corusant in the movie, or was my first sentence there correct?
My favorite is Task Force Vengeance, the SSD dispatched to crush the rebel cells in Xwing vs TIE Fighter. Acted as a home base and primary weapon in the conflict of that sector. Best use of an SSD in my opinion
I would think that the primary role of a ship like a Super Star Destroyer would be to use it offensively against heavily defended worlds or powerful fleets of Star Destroyer or Mon Cal Cruiser level ships. The SSD could sustain a much larger amount of damage and just sort of bulldoze its way through enemy defenses. The problem is that the Aliance didn't really have any of these types of targets, in most cases you could easily make due with some ISDs. It's basically a ship without a mission most of the time.
I never imagined ships like the Executor as warships, but weapons of terror. They are great for dealing with enemy forces that cannot run (like a planetary insurrection) or forcing the enemy to flee (such as making rebels flee towards an interdictor ship protected by tie fighters and star destroyers ready to destroy any ship coming out of hyperspace). While having the Lunskya as an escape vessel can be affective (due to how difficult it would be to take one down if the enemy was not planning to face it), I am sure the ship would have been better spent making sure enemy forces never made it to Coruscant to begin with. Depending on the restrictions placed on military ships during the post-Ruusan Reformation era could explain why large dreadnoughts were built (sectors could only have a certain number of warships, but the warships could be of any desired size). And while several small, fast, and nimble ships can be more affective at maintaining control than a Super Star Destroyer, sometimes, you need a big, heave, and slow sledgehammer to get the job done. It is about understanding the equipment you have, the strengths and limitations of the enemy, and how to best deal with the situation. Luckily for the Rebel Alliance, Thrawn was never put in charge of the Imperial Navy.
Actually deploying an SSD in combat is probably a logistical nightmare. Its closest real-world equivalent, Japan's Yamato and Musashi super-battleships in WWII, spent almost the entire war in port because a) the fuel cost of running them was so high and b) the high command was too afraid of losing them to use them. They were certainly durable (Musashi withstood about 20 bombs and torpedoes before it went down), but air power had just rendered their class of ship nearly useless. The Yamato's final mission was actually to try and beach itself on Okinawa to serve as a massive artillery platform, but it was intercepted and dispatched long before it got there. Granted, Star Wars ships have shields, tend to use reactors rather than oil and don't have to worry about "sinking" if a single hole opens up in the wrong place, which reduces the overwhelming superiority of starfighters, but an SSD still probably works best as a mobile fortress, or possibly as a battering ram against static/orbital defenses. But against anything mobile, you get the Supremacy's problem - the enemy is faster than you and can just run away.
If you come across a task that either an SSD or *any other class of ship* could do, the SSD will be the worse choice between them. However, I can see a few reasonable applications for SSDs. Tasks which they can do, but other ships are incapable of due to their size. First, is as the logistical centrepiece of a task force, or an expedition - just like the Executor served in Death Squadron. During the second world war, many US Navy destroyers and smaller ships simply did not possess the fuel reserves necessary to cross the Pacific ocean - but Iowa class battleships had plenty to spare, and were used to re-fuel other ships in the fleet while on the move. Using an SSD as a mobile hub for fuel, ammunition, crew rotations, as well as command and communications makes sense. You will still need logistics ships, of course, but those won't want to hang around with the fleet long-term or follow the fleet into hostile territory. They're too vulnerable for that. The second choice would be planetary invasion. The sheer scale of an SSD affords plenty of firepower for cracking planetary shielding, as well as ample internal space to house marines, walkers, transport shuttles, and everything else needed to invade a world from orbit. If the ship is specialized for this, all the better, which brings me to the third point; Having a big fucking gun. The Eclipse is, in my opinion, the ideal model for an SSD. It makes use of the ships' massive size to do something which smaller vessels are physically incapable of doing. Being able to one-shot other capital ships, or crack a planet's shield and glass the city underneath in one go. Other close mentions go to the Malevolence, as well as the terribly designed Mandator 4 and Xyston class. The Xyston obviously isn't even an SSD, but it did adhere to the concept - however was stupendously overpowered and made no damn sense. The Mandator 4 meanwhile was *almost* a good ship, but it was *so* focused as to be useless at everything else. Seriously, it had what... 16 point defence guns, which were ALL taken out by a single starfighter? So useful. And it's design was anemic-looking, totally flat, and with an exposed bridge that went so far against the aesthetic of the First Order's beautiful Resurgent class it made me want to vomit into my own eyes so I could stop looking at it. Still, the CONCEPT was good, and if the Xyston's main gun had been closer in power to the Mandator 4's, but slower firing, I think it could have filled the role so well that I'd be arguing SSDs aren't worth it at all. But it wasn't. So I'm not.
I think the issue for the Imperial use is partly one of semantics. Saying they are being used “defensively” is not really accurate. Their purpose, like that of modern day aircraft carriers is power projection. When you are a galaxy spanning empire fighting a rebellion that doesn’t outright “own” any systems or territory, no matter where you station an SSD it could technically be described as a defensive position. The real purpose though is the show of force to that sector of space. The ship is a giant billboard saying “don’t even try rebelling cause we have a fleet’s worth of fire power in one ship that can be here where you are in minutes to bombard your family and friends from orbit. Just like how US carriers are usually defensively projecting power around American interests, but when the US went to Afghanistan, the carriers were showing they could bring their weapons back to the home of those that attacked them. Later usage by the NR in the Vong war were defensive because they were in retreat. If your goal is to just get as many people out as possible, you’re not really going to be using ships to posture or press the attack. You can’t project power you don’t have. Once they developed strategies to counter, and the tide started turning, they did start using them offensively. Not saying SW ship strategy is always properly done, but if you drop the word “defensive”, I don’t see how having massive power projection assets stationed near valuable assets or key strategic interests can be characterized as using them incorrectly…
Would also reference WW2 ships like Bismarck, Sharnhorst, Yamato, or all the US/Brit ships, where their very existence causes the enemy to spend their time trying to figure out how to destroy or avoid them. Even though basically none of them were ever used for their intended purpose, the fact they existed made them the focus of the opposing navies’ planning. The entire Pearl Harbour or attack was to wipe the US battle ships out cause they didn’t want to face them when they were crewed and underway. Having an SSD positioned near important sectors isn’t just defence of a position, it’s adding uncertainty to any plans people would make in that region of space, and forcing them to focus their energy on planning around the SSD instead of just their objective. A bunch of smaller ships spread out in the are (though historically prob more dangerous in real life) prob won’t have the same impact on the planning psychologically.
I think the ssd is really powerful but not that practical like you said the melevolonce is a good ship(bit op tho) also I really like the vicount aswell!
Well, in regard of the picture with the two SSDs shooting at each other, one with Rebel insignia painted on. That implies the Rebel one is a captured ship. The empire one shoots green lasers, the Rebel one shoots red lasers. Did the rebels refit the whole ship with new laser batteries? Or do all laser batteries have kind of a rgb-color-dial for the laser colors? And if so, why does nobody shoot purple lasers? ;-)
Maybe they do misuse Star Destroyers. The Empire almost never used tactics of a mixed fleet, without variety, which caused them to lose many times. Only Thrawn had much better tactics than any other Admiral, and used Star Destroyers much better.
The SSD used in an offensively is kids like a USN Carrier Battle Group. It's to get a lot of Firepower forward quickly. But to also "show off" your biggest, baddest, and best". Well that how I think off an SSD battle fleet
I always thought that SSDs were just built to strike fear and intimidation into their enemies, but not entirely practical. We all know what happened at Endor and a handful of precise hits, you can take out a SSD easily... provided that there's a large gravity well for it to fall into and be destroyed, of course. I believe that SSDs and dreadnought ships were more practical as command vessels or as mobile command bases during front line incursions. That's my two cents.
Historically BBs in the 20th Century were used conservatively -- including as "fleets in being" -- with the exception of some major battles and operations. For example in WW1 the British Grand Fleet and German High Seas Fleet only fought once at Jutland, in WW2 the Japanese saved their BBs including the Yamato till the end of the war when in was to late for them to succeed against the by then massively built up US Navy. Hitler stopped risking his BBs after the lost of the Bismarck. Having more BBs the Allies risked them more often, but even after Pearl Harbor the USN for six months kept the surviving BBs in a reserve fleet on the West Coast, till after Midway.
Well, for once, it may then be a good thing that Disney created a new canon. Don't get me wrong, the stories in Legends are amazing, and I feel like as much of that as possible should be kept around as long as it doesn't break with what is now the new canon. But also with this new canon, is an opportunity to do stuff even better. Say with the executors for instance. If we are lucky, we might get some post battle of Yavin stuff with different Executors who could be potentially used more aggressively than they were in Legends. Giving us almost like a Malevolence type deal once more. ^^
the major issue is the fact that there was never any concept of how battles in SW are supposed to be conducted. We only got aesthetic direction from Lucas. As result, there is no system, no reason to anything that you can see onscreen, comics, books etc. Everything is based on feel and patched with whatever comes to a given creative/author mind that they know from history and general knowledge. Destroyers are unwieldy because thats what those authors remembered from WW2, where airplanes made battleships useless... which is not correct, but that's what they think. From my point of view, I have a fan theory that changes all of that, but then it eliminates most of what SW was doing up till this point. It is simple relation of volume/mass to energy output. A ship that is prepared for everything-hitting small and big targets, versatile-is cruiser. It patrols space and allows you to project force. Remember, space is 3d and the galaxy is huge. However, to have big guns against ships, small guns against smaller targets/rockets and shields, armor, and landing craft, and some starfighters-that takes a lot of volume and mass. On top of that, a well-planned defensive and offensive from all angles mean that in fleet engagements cruisers are not using some if not most of their firepower. In order to compensate for that cruisers need to be big, but this still means they are not economical. Cruiser is not a size category, but a role category. Small cruiser tries to do everything and big one as well. Frigates are the answer to that-they have heavy artillery and some anti-fighter guns. Incapable of policing and controlling space/sectors but they are cost-efficient way of attacking heavier ships from the distance (they have guns comparable/the same as cruisers but much less of them but situated together in offensive formation), and they have a better mass-to-energy ratio so are "faster" (acceleration). Corvettes are the smallest of ships, and their purpose is to be heavy anti-fighter screens. A well-roudned task force woudl have Cruiser at the center, one-three frigates, and couple of corvettes. Cruiser would provide fighters and defense while being a big target with big range of fire, difficult to destroy. Frigates would aid it by turning fire away from cruisers because they are a smaller danger, but have long-range capability. Corvettes would allow maintain space superiority around the fleet so that it can not be easily destroyed form small distance by fighters, but if it comes to it Crusier can defend itself. Attacking force needs therefore to choose what to attack and in what order. But star destroyers are entirely different design philosophy. They put everything in long-distance attack. They have all guns capable of anti-ship long-range assault, all of them have a connection to a singular energy system and are standardized. Depending on circumstances the same gun can scale up or scale down energy output to hit bigger or smaller targets with force deemed necessary. By doing this SD's are saving volume and mass required for a parallel defense/attacking systems and their reactors. SD's advantage is that they can hit smaller and bigger targets on high distances, destroying them with a barrage of fire (shape allows efficient long-range placement of guns). So they have no AA guns or smaller ones, everything is turbo laser only. This comes at a price of having no defense on the back, being dependent on long-range engagements (close range limits the amount of firepower because of shape), and that their AA based on turbo lasers gets worse with closer distance. Hence SD's are relying on long-range bombardment, overpowering of the targets,and fighters are used basically onyl for self-defense, hence they don't need a hyperdrive. SSD's are fleet killers-they have guns big enough and reactors huge enough so that they have an effective range of several times that of the most powerful cruiser out there, and each shot is several times more powerful as well at maximum range. This means they sniper out targets from afar before the engagement even begins. In this head-cannon I imagine destroyers being first of their kind in history ships used by Empire, and Destroyers are named after their capability-they obliterate targets with immense firepower being it small or big target. Coupled with their size and they had nothing to be compared against. Then Empire created SSD's like Executor that were dozens of times more dangerous. If one SD had a range of 1 of a cruiser, but its volley was 3-5 times more pwoerful in comparison to a cruiser of its mass; then SSD would have a range of 20 times of that, and its full volley would be in hundreds of range times more powerful than that of the mentioned cruiser. This means that a single volley from SSD would be able to destroy any cruiser or any SD from a distance with impunity. Originally in Legends SSD had only 250 turbolasers; so I maintained this idea here but increased their size and power multiple times to reflect the above design philosophy. It's 250 guns, but they are in an entirely different league.
In my opinion the next Star Wars videogame must be a game totally based on capital ships, a sort of World of Warships based on Star Wars universe but of course with extra features like an open world, the possibility to perform a Base Delta Zero or also simple orbital bombardaments...
I would use an SSD as a mobile supply, dock, and command ship. It would keep vital supplies (food, weapons, repair) and be used to quickly repair ships in the field. This would allow ships to stay deployed longer and reduce their time in "dry dock." There would need to be a slight redesign but it wouldn't be too much. Like many Impirial ships the SSD is not utilized to it's fullest potential. In addition to this it could be used as a last defense just as eck states.
The amount of matter in an Executor class could make at least dozens, maybe hundreds, of imperial class star destroyers. That just seems like a better use of materiel, even if there are particular materials that are rare or hard to make.
Yeah, you pretty much summed up my thoughts at the end. WHY were they used "defensively" most of the time? Because SPACE is HUGE! Sending such giants chasing all over after mobile forces to engage (like the Rebel Alliance) is a giant waste of manpower & fuel & other resources. "Posting" them over critical locations, shipyards, planets, etc. is MUCH more advantageous. (and forces your enemy to ENGAGE you, instead of constantly "drawing away" your "big gun".) And "secures" a wider region of space more long term. Sure, when you have the opportunity to use them offensively (attack a planet or enemy force that cannot easily disengage?) DO SO!
My favorite use of dreadnoughts is when the massive capital ship dies to one rebel fighter for the one billionth time. It definitely never gets old and definitely doesn’t destroy all of the empire’s credibility
Super Star Destroyers and other Very Large Vessels remind me of the real world Bismarck. It was the largest ship of its kind when it was built and cost so much money that Germany avoided sending it into battle for fear of losing it. And, when they did lose it, it was financially disastrous.
From a Star Wars Empire At War Forces of Corruption standpoint with the use of mods to make the game a lot more interesting... I think I would probably state that Star Dreadnoughts, Battlecruisers, Star Defenders would rather be used for as command ships or simply as an extra level of firepower and extra fighters spawning from these vessels defensively. In every mod that I've played including Thrawn's Revenge mods and not so much Phoenix mod, the AI always send the faction commanders with their main flagships whether it will be a standard Imperial I/II, Victory I/II, or to the largest Star Dreadnoughts/Battlecruisers to destroy a smaller weaker defense fleet. I understand using these commanders' ships make the job easy is pretty wasteful. Like Eck states: these vessels are better off be for defensive purposes and not actual combat unless they are attacking defensively.
Something to consider is politics during a crisis. In every political system the influential members will demand what they they perceive as "best protection". While less influential members will be left to fend for themselves. This applies to all crisis, war, disasters, epidemics, ect.
I view SSD's and dreadnoughts as essentially massive ship shaped mobile space stations not unlike say a massive golan. Designed to be a stalwart fort that could be moved easily but weren't really useful for offensive tactics except sieging.
I think my favorite large ship is the praetor, it’s like an oversized isd I just wish it had more weapons because it is a battlecruiser but only has the loadout of an isd
Its an interesting theorem, but it kinda reminds me of how navies were used (or more appropriately, not used) during the world wars. Whilst all sides has invested heavily into their fleets, all sides seemed almost reluctant to use those fleets aggressively on the oceans, preferring to instead utilise light forces and cruisers, with occasional sorties by battlecruisers. Its almost as if the respective admiralties were loathe to use and possibly lose those ships, since losing them would be a big morale blow, and replacing them would take years and resources they might not have. The only time they could realistically use them was in overwhelming force situations (Pearl Harbour) and if not, you risked losing those ships outright (Bismark). I mean, consider the efforts of the highly aggressive IJN in the pacific, which went big and lost a lot of ships quickly. Compare that to the operations of the German High Seas Fleet in the North Sea, which allowed their main battleline to pretty much remain intact until 1918.
I think offensive use is the most obvious use of them, to attack targets that otherwise are unassailable, with an SSD as your spearhead (with plenty of Lancers to escort, and it's own hordes of fighters swarming around) even the most stalwart fortress is a porcelain fence. On the defense it's also good, but people are expecting it and will bring a solution to defeat it, as we see in various Star Wars novels/movies. Thus, I feel like the SSD is primarily an offensive weapon, best deployed vs strongly defended targets that aren't expecting a giant to assail them, and are only loaded for bear!
SSDs also represent an exceptionally large amount of time and resources to produce. Risking that in a headlong assault isn't particularly wise, unless you've either got a massive strength advantage, or have few other options.
for the resources and man power and such, i think you need to think of a SSD as more like a space-station that happens to be able to move as opposed to a ship of the fleet. in orbit of a planet it can move around the planet easily whilst having access to all the staff, and food etc from the planet and as such work as the first point of contact for customs, import export checks, border patrol. Like a moveable orbital space station. However an SSD has the benefit that once the threat or need has stopped to that planet or indeed moved then the SSD can be relocated to set up a new defensive space-station position at a new world. If you are going to invest in a huge space-station to defend a planet or territory then why not invest a little (comparatively ) more and have the added flexibility of designing it to be able to easily relocated, rather than needing other ships to tow it. I know everyone is used to seeing space-stations like DS9 or Babylon 5 or Roost or 3DC or any list of other stations in any other media, but if you think the Death Star and DSII were both mobile space stations not ships, the SSD is just a more compact version with the same mission profile, though DS's were a lot more aggressive, if you know the wedge template of a star destroyer is part of the intimidation and therefore part of the subjugation of a world and you know that loyalists like and feel secure seeing that shape in the sky and you have the templates for building such shapes surely it would be cheaper to scale up and then adjust designs for a space station rather than build something new that needs help to be taken to its final location, and why limit it with a final location, add the flexibility that it can relocate itself or the flexibility that it could be core of a fleet. It is a mobile harbour, a mobile base, a defensive blockage asset. The SSD just happens to be able to move. As such as part of large fleet against large fleet engagements it makes sense, but once you start getting into hit and run tactics or other rebellion tactics then guarding fixed locations makes more sense and it is cheaper to run less costs, less time searching for recruitment, less cost in medical as you can access the planet's resources same with food, leave and other recreation.
I wrote about massive massive ships like SSDs. “Leviathans are capable of carrying entire Mobilized Army Groups. Plural. Tens of millions of men and women aboard a single ship. The ability to engage entire fleets. But the biggest advantage is not it’s offensive capability, but it’s logistical and command capabilities. Losing one means not only billions of tons of resources and years of work lost, but billions of equipment and personnel. The ability to regroup into one pillar is an effective tool. With four of these ships in each corner of the galaxy, we have a direct chain of command, with which fleets can regroup and center themselves before attacking or defending. Can they kill a fleet? Yeah, sure. So can a standard Assault Fleet. But a battleship can’t rally both branches into a single punch. You can’t put entire MAGs where they can train their Army Groups and organic Corps in virtual battlefields on a carrier. And most importantly, you can’t please a legendary and ancient old High Kommandant overseeing a sector with a simple Paladin.” Ships of that size are frankly too large to be used truely offensively, since they are a massive target, but their uses can be extensive especially if you apply them into non-conventional warship positions. IE command and control centers. That would be a MASSIVE advantage since they can move and defend themselves. Ships of that size, we’re talking several hundred miles or so long, can have entire manufacturing facilities and training facilities. I think Star Wars is using them slightly incorrectly but not quite as bad as I think you’re suggesting. What I gathered and correct me if I’m wrong, but you’re saying they aren’t used offensively enough, which frankly I agree with it’s Star Wars rule of cool takes precedence, but realistically Star Destroyers are too big really to be offensive tools, let alone SSDs.
Each time you mention an SSD being used to take out key targets, I think back to when Vader used the Executor to completely vaporize Xizor's skyhook (with him on it). I can only guess what that sort of spectacle that would look like on the big screen..
Bug on the windshield for the SSD
@@josipbroztito6763 Eh that didn't help them when an A-wing bug flew right into the windscreen
@@TedTheHobbyist That's what happens when your criticl target is A.) in plain friggin view and B.) has no backup shielding of it's own.
Next time, better use Regional shield generators, like the Venator did.
@@luzfire7523 tbf in Return of the Jedi the officer says they've lost their bridge deflector shields so it seems like they did use region based shields.
@@TedTheHobbyistalso if it wasn’t so close to the DS2 it would have survived ships like the executor has a back up bridge within the ship.
“Have you ever heard the lore, of Super Star Destroyers?”
“No.”
“I thought not, it’s not a story Wookiepedia would tell you.”
lol
It’s a EckhartsLadder legend. Super Star Destroyers were massive Imperial warships, so powerful and intimidating.
Wookieepedia*
@@aralornwolf3140 Wooquaypedia
@@Arashmickey Weequaypadmea
Star Wars large ship design seems to consist of putting fifty million normal cannons on a lump of metal the size of a city. With a few exceptions, they don't seem designed to direct firepower efficiently in one direction. That in mind, using them as an anchor for a (very) large formation, or as a defensive emplacement makes some sense. You can't really outmanouvre/position it if it doesn't have a weak side.
Star Destroyers, and other wedge shaped ships, were built with this in mind. The wedge shape means you can focus fire along the point of the ship, forwards towards ur opponents.
Add a (mega) cathedral on top and you basically described the ship of the 40k Imperium of Man.
@@andrewspears8891 most of them are either broadsiders or Nova canon/torpedo based artillery, so are at least somewhat directional
@@iwanbarnett7683 yeah, and for some of them it works pretty well, sadly the best known of them, the Executor isn't one - if you look in things like EaW or Sins mods (because they're some of the only place that you can pick a viewing angle) SSD's tend to be volleying shots through their own hulls. I assume in universe they primarily broadside for engaging anything even vaguely comparable to themselves. For most fights it isn't an issue since even a tiny fraction of their firepower should be enough for any foes without plot armour.
@@LordBenjaminSalt I totally missed the whole directional stuff and just saw "city sized ship with all the artillery one can stick on it"
One note Ecks, we do see the SSDs used offensively in the massive assault out of the Deep Core leading up to Shadow Hand. Zsinj and Drommel both used their SSDs very offensively. Reaper and Scourge Squadron were used throughout the Outer Rim in the same way Executor and Death Squadron were.
Kind of a one off thing there, but yep
@@EckhartsLadder you're definitely right with them being largely deployed as deterrents. They could be quite flexible in utility with the right commander as Wedge and Zsinj demonstrated. I think what largely made them inflexible was the aspects of the Tarkin Doctrine and Imperial focus on symbolism over seeing the SSDs as tools.
isnt it a bit more similar to the ww1 Dreadnoughts? they are offensive juggernauts defeat anything smaller than them but so ridiculous expensive that you rather just flex with them rather than using them. also a bit similar to nuclear warheads that are also really not used offensively since the only good thing with these weapons is flexing and not using them since besides total destruction of areas that you cannot even occupy afterwards because of radiation its not so tactically flexible. SSDs are more flexible than Dreadnoughts and nukes but are really expensive that only the empire can really use them to its fullest extent and imperial warlords rather Retreat than damaging their SSDs
@@urlauburlaub2222 Well there are more than a few errors in your analysis I have to address. The Executor class were largely designed as terror weapons and symbols-though they were capable of great devastation offensively or defensively. Lusankya and Executor were sister ships, they were literally identical in armament until the New Republic captured and rearmed Lusankya with more point defense weapons than she had initially to partly counter starfighters. Construction was sped up, but four were already well into construction by Yavin because the SSD was the compromise with the fleet over more Death Star funding. Executor and Lusankya came out at the same time, Reaper next then Brawl(later Iron Fist) there were many more in operation by 3 ABY with the likes of Terror, Guardian, Whelm, Annihilator, Aggressor, and others active in the Imperial Navy, at least one with a prototype cloak was under construction at Fondor when it was destroyed, others like Intimidator were finished around the battle of Endor and Night Hammer was finished in the Post Endor period.
@@EckhartsLadder First Order Tie Advance V1, Avenger and Tie Aggressor
These are my Verizon on what these tie fighters have from their first order upgrade variants starting with the Tie Advance V1 FO tie fighter.
Tie Advance V1 FO: This Tie was made in response of the resistance hit and run tactics and when the First Order discover the Tie Advance V1 from the empire they were impressed by it's performance so they made an upgrade one for their needs they put the solar panels on the outside of the S-Foils and improve on the engines and gave it a red marking on the left side and it's weapons are two SJFS L-s9.6 laser cannons and has a class 2 hyperdrive and a built in life support system like it's Predecessor.
Tie Avenger SF: This Tie Variant was base off of the prototype that the First Order discover and when they review it's status that it display they were impressed by its performance so they produce an improved version of the tie Avenger and when Kylo Ren flew it he was impressed by it yet had some problems with the view port so taking insperation of the cockpit design of the Eta class interceptor and added much stronger shielding and a backup hyperdrive and made it faster it became the space superiority fighter, now having six SJFS L-s9.6 laser cannons four on the wings (one on each wing tip) and two on the chin and can contain a rallying slasher cooling point variety of missiles and trackers and added a stronger tracker beam making this First Order Tie fighter is the space superiority fighter.
First Order Tie Aggressor FO Mk 2: The Tie Aggressor is the Successer from it's Predecessor from the empire they made the successer faster, stronger shields, and a class 2 hyperdrive the Tie Aggressor FO Mk 2 added some extra energy for the laser cannons like the Tie FO and the turret is now the SJFS Lb-14 dual heavy laser turret and contains magpulse war heads and ion missiles giving this tie fighter enough fire power to take on the resistance.
That's my take on these Tie fighters if they were used in the first order honestly the First Order would have a better chance against the Resistance if they had these tie fighters so yeah lete know what tie fighter variant would you add in the First Order?
I am sure that the aftermath of the battle of Endor saw a new use of SSDs because the Empire fractured into pieces that were fighting against themselves and the rebels to decide who got the biggest territory. Zsinj is a great example of using SSDs in all aspects, really: he used it to strike basically every target he ever launched in the form of hit-and-run attacks, such as when he attacked Novquizor or when he assaulted Kuat. In CoPL, Han says the hunt was 5 months of chasing an ever-offensive foe who was always on the move, whose only trail was space stations destroyed, shipyards ruined, and entire fleets decimated; in fact, Selaggis is the first battle where Zsinj is realistically on the defensive. Zsinj used his SSD to its best and better than anyone else, in my opinion, even Isard used the Lusankya rather to defend her commerce or her planet
Zsinj must have been a master of logistics to keep an SSD in constant motion and battle for that amount of time.
@@kennethferland5579 Yes. His partnerships with the planets he 'controlled' (he never got any official territory, but instead possessed bases and assets but not de jure governments) would be used to feed his war machine and Empire in exchange for protection. Zsinj was so great at logistics that even after Selaggis, which CoPL states to be an extremely compromising defeat allied with the New Republic's thinking that it had destroyed Iron Fist, it is expected that Zsinj alone will take 14 years to ultimately defeat, that's at the point the NR was not only competent, it had comparable assets to the factions it went against; most of it went away in the Thrawn and Shadow Hand Campaigns.
Speaking of cost-effectiveness, I imagine there would be at least one Republic admiral who rolled up in a Mandator surrounded by an unholy amount of Acclamator variants specialized for different fleet roles.
And then there are fans like me: who felt there were too many Super Star Destroyers, Dreadnoughts, and other mega-ships.
The only reason they need these ships is because they neutered the Imperial-class Star Destroyer to such an extent, that the appearance of a warship of its displacement doesn’t inspire dread. Leave the ISD as a credible threat, and the SSDs can remain rare nightmares.
Then there are fans like us... Yeah. The only reason you need ships which are >5 km long is to take out threats the regular
@@aralornwolf3140 what IP is this it sounds awesome
@@Ninjamime56 ,
The series is _Troy Rising_ by John Ringo.
The first book is _Live Free or Die._ The second is _Citadel._ The third is _The Hot Gate._
I don't know if he wrote more books on that IP... I haven't seen any in stores if he did. Unfortunately, the author abuses an overdone trope... but, if you don't mind that stereotype about humans, the series is a great read!
This is why we needed the likes of the Victory Class to be used more in its place.
I'm in that camp for sure. Bigger does not equal better!! the ISD should always have been the near-impossible to defeat space battleship that it was in ANH. The SSD in Empire Strikes Back should be a one-in-a-million ship that anchors a fleet as a massive carrier/troop transport. For instance, in the sequel trilogy, we really didn't get to see a normal First Order star destroyer in combat aside from shooting at one of its own TIEs. Would have loved to have seen a conventional battle in the opening of The Last Jedi instead of yet another easy-to-kill behemoth
Well, my thoughts then: Drednoughts can be used to minimise loses in medium size engagements. If an ISD has 20 times less shield rating then an SSD, you'll lose 19 ISDs before anyone breaks through an SSD shield. As such, they are great tanks, to be bluntly wdged in the middle of the battle and cover for other ships, or to serve as a pivot of manoeuvre for other wings as they use tactics to their advantage.
The thing is though, with 20 targets you speed enemy fire-power out and you can manoeuvre more. And tyen theres resources, in an ideal world you'd have 25,000 SSD's but realistically if you want a dreadnought, you have to give up 10 or 20 star destroyers to have the resources to build, maintain and run your super star destroyer
Maybe. Star Wars usually has localized shield breaks tho. We see this against the Lusankya actually, where the overwhelm one section. So more shield but more to cover too
@@EckhartsLadder it's still easier to coordinate fire with one ship and Focus one target down then with multiple ships. So you'd start limiting the enemy firepower while the enemy can't until they break the shield.
The idea of a massive ship like this in the Yusong Vong War at the center of a fleet makes a lot of sense. A ship like this in a fleet during the Clone Wars same thing. A ships like these during the rebellion makes no sense to me. For all of it's firepower you can not escape the fact that it can only be in one place at a time. I always felt that the Rebellion would have been better fought with 20% of the ISD's and way more Victories as the main ship. They could be in more places at a time and with coverage from Lancer frigates you would have been a better match for rebels. Sure you could have 1 or 2 SSD's but the resources used and time to build would have been much better been used to build more Victories and lancers to better fight the enemy you had at that time. A ship can be the greatest even but you need to right ship to fight the battle you have. Lets not even start to look at the second death star...
I see Grand Admiral Thrawn has entered the chat.
Really doesn't matter what you build if you can't find them.
The bigger issue was tactics. If empire had been willing to take a few more decisive hits on some worlds from the rebels to get them committed to a location and then drop in with an overwhelming force from hyperspace, they likely could have won. Have 2/3 of your force out scouring the galaxy - every nook and cranny. Keep the last 1/3 stationed at key worlds where they can jump to defend anything in the system. You will take more initial losses, but you'll also bring about the decisive battle you want. Otherwise it is like an rpg where you can pick and choose lvl 1 boss and avoid a lvl 15 boss to begin with as the rebels due to stationary defenses and tons of hidey holes. When the bosses might be anywhere and their locations are always changing, it is harder to know when it's safe to take one on before others you can't beat arrive.
Not if you use it as a mobile communication coordination and battle hub deploying weapons and assets in a very mobile environment. Makes it harder to hit and track combined with communication and connection to a galaxy sensor net you have a very lethal killer that would be very hard for the rebels to deal with.
@@josephbirrenkott7993 Ok I will make t6his simple. You have a better chance finding the enemy with more ships and you have a better chance beating a now hear this one out, a small fast attack force with mostly fighters with a lancer frigate that specializes in hear this one, counter fighter.... come on people...
@@josephbirrenkott7993 The thing is the rebels knew that and they avoided pitched battles where possible
I wonder how much it cost the Galactic Empire to create this many Super Star Destroyers.
Between the Death Stars and SSD's the Empire almost went bankrupt
@@MGone3 Not really. The DS1 was basically a footnote in Corusant's energy budget.
The Empire was millions of worlds, with an enormous tax base.
I mean if you enslave a couple dozen planets worth of aliens and acquire their resources for free... it doesn't look so bad.
@@josephbirrenkott7993 Slavery, as well as the xenophobia the Empire gets depicted with never made any sense.
5 skilled workers from each planet in the Empire builds your Death Star.
@@shanehudson3995 ,
It makes some sense...
As those 5 skilled workers per planet are building the DS... they need workers to care for their needs... and those workers need their needs met... then you have the people delivering the materials... then you have the people making the materials... then you have the people mining the materials the parts are made out of...
All of this could easily be hundreds of millions of workers... Logistically, it simplifies things when you determine that X number of systems are the only systems providing for a massive project... it reduces the likelihood of parts going to the wrong location.
On top of that the DS isn't the only project the Empire is making and wookiees are several times stronger than the average human.
My thought is that Thrawns Interdictor tactic would have been stupid effective if he could drop a SSD on top of any enemy battle group. I know it works quite well when I do it in Thrawns Revenge.
I was always hoping to Bellator would be cannonized at some point. I dig the design, and the philosophy of it being a fast, offensively oriented SSD. Also would potentially make for quite a good chase sequence if it was hunting some rebels down.
In addition to being a command platform the SSD was a massive hangar array for star fighters equiped without hyperdrives, so that kinda kills the idea of avoiding direct engagement with them
Generally speaking, the Empire misused most of its assets. In particular, they often didn't provide enough of an escort for their SSD's. They're not all-rounders, they're capital ship killers. They need support.
Arguably, they wouldn't have lost to the Rebellion if they'd utilized proper fleet doctrine, tactics, and logistics. A fleet of Star Destroyers is cool, for example, but not that practical; while you may end up winning against your foe, chances are you're going to take far more losses than if you'd brought a couple Victory's, some Carracks/Lancers, some TIE-Fighters that aren't garbage (TIE Defender/Interceptor).
A proper Super Star Destroyer fleet composition would have the entire fleet built around the SSD, providing support and covering its weaknesses (mainly smaller craft that its guns cannot hit, such as bombers) while also keeping ships from getting too close so that the SSD can take full advantage of its many long-range weapons to utterly decimate the opposing side. A mixture of smaller capital ships (preferrably ISD-II's), carriers/frigates, screening vessels, fighters/bombers, and an Interdictor or two to prevent retreat would be an ideal support structure for an SSD, making that fleet very costly to deal with if one doesn't choose to outright avoid/run away from it. You would be forced to either commit an equal/greater number of resources to the fight, bring your own SSD/similar Super-Capital vessel, or something even stronger like the Death Star or Sun Crusher to deal with it.
If you filled out the full complement of starfighters and bombers it would make them a lot more dangerous also. Especially hyperdrive capable starfighters and bombers, allow them to operate at a longer range from the mother ship and if you used Thrawns short jump strategy it could further that especially against a force like the rebels.
I'd never put hyperdrive capable starfighters on an SSD, if I want reach I would use some Ton-Falk class escort carriers and dispatch them to a spot under a days travel from the target to launch and recover the strike force. I then don't need to move my SSD out of the position I feel is ideal for intercepting enemy capitol ships, let auxilary ships perform auxilarry task by temporarily detatching from the group.
I think it's also partly *because* each dreadnought is such a massive resource expenditure that they're used cautiously. Lose a couple Venators? No big deal, there are a ton where they came from. Lose a Mandator II? That's a lot harder to replace.
There was also the Annihilator which was Grand General Tagge's Flagship and was captured by pirates after the Battle of Endor.
"Pirate captured super star destroyer" is the dumbest thing to come out of the Aftermath trilogy in my opinion.
@@uncletammy5025 I thought it was good. It just showed how fractured the Empire was after Endor.
@@uncletammy5025 That's not even the first time a group of "pirates" steal a super star destroyer.
@@uncletammy5025 Pirates led by an individual they make a point about being non-binery.
I've always used the ISSD in Empire at War to crush enemy positions. But that only works because the ISSD was fully repaired afterwards.
In order to implement this strategy, one would have to equip the ship with strong shields and armor, exactly what was done on the Eclipse. Here it was also done what I would do, equipping the ship with super-heavy weapons. The Eclipse can destroy any battleship, station and even titan with the super laser, making it a perfect artillery support for a battleship fleet. You only need anti-starfighter frigates and you are armed against pretty much any opponent.
In deep space, ISSDs can also be used as mobile command bases, and depending on the situation, even a factory complex or farms in the ship would make sense.
Video idea:How much of Exegol's area was used to make the Xyston-class Star Destroyers?
there were 1,080 Star Destroyers, in addition Exegol has an area similar to Earth only 800 km more.
Well, Xyston class star destoryers are 2,400 metres long.
If we use a figure of 2.5km x 1.5km area used by each star destoyer, that would be 3.75 square kms each.
If we say that Exegol is the same size of earth (510,000,000 square kilometres of surface) then it would be big enough to fit 136,000,000 Xystons on it's surface.
So 1,080 Xyston classes would take up less than 0.025% of the planets surface.
I might be wrong but I believe there were at least 10,000 Xystons in the novelization.
@@josiahgibson6373 that ignores that they aren't built out of rock, it'd require them to shift through th planet to find the appropriate metals
@@calebbarnhouse496 Well, to use Earth as an example again, we've technically got ~230 billion tonnes of pure iron.
Most of our planet's core is iron and nickel.
@@calebbarnhouse496 there's nothing to say resource's weren't shipped there to build them
I personally would like to see dreadnoughts used defensively in larger offensives, guarding vital systems and logistical hubs as a larger force pushes into enemy territory, or doing the same across multisystem battle lines. It plays to their strengths, but also keeps them nearby for major 'breaking stuff' offensives or when the enemy sends in their own dreadnoughts and you can't spare the dozen-or-more capital ships needed to bog them down.
5:38 The best source material for the Executor being effective as a flagship in Death Squadron are it's appearances in the Darth Vader comics especially it's debut Mahkota Spacedocks and other similar instances where the intimidation and intense fire power couldn't be replaced by "a few star destroyers" . But, like you said it's up for debate.
Thanks for pointing out how Daala was a poor tactician. That woman was her own worst enemy.
Who is the worst leader Daala or Isard ?
@@AAhmou Isard is a worse leader on all conceivable levels. To address the main posts point, I have issues with Daala's decision making at times but if you look at her defeats there were factors no rational person could have anticipated for the most part.
Many Imperial officers have found themselves felled by original and unorthodox tactics (as well as completely unanticipatable events). Captain Ait Convarion of the VSD-II Corrupter was one such officer. Man knew his ship and how to fight with it. Still got completely blindsided by random circumstance in a situation where every pilot of Rogue Squadron should have been eliminated or captured.
Akbar destroyed the ISD-1 Manticore using the husk of an under construction ship to ram the ship after she had lured away the defenses with her other two ISD-1s. This was her second loss. The Sun Crusher showed up later and blew up a nebula to try to kill her. This resulted in the loss of ISD-1 Basilisk with only ISD-1 Gorgon remaining under her command. It was later scrapped due to an Imperial warlord considering it too damaged to be worth repairing.
Her assault on the Yavin 4 Jedi Praxeum was similarly ill-fated. A hundred Victory-class Star Destroyers were magicked away because the students pooled their powers into one student who "pushed" the fleet away leaving it slightly damaged without functioning hyperdrives (very convenient narratively). Pellaeon was in command of this fleet and didn't see it coming either (who would).The effort killed the Jedi who did it. Daala then arrives in the newly christened Executor-class Star Dreanought Knight Hammer (formerly named the Night Hammer partially for its black stealth armor and renamed for irony since it was intended to destroy the Jedi). This ship was destroyed because a Jedi Knight in a borrowed body destroyed its engines from within essentially.
The closest that can be said of her tactical incompetence is the First Battle of the Maw Installation. She knew what the Sun Crusher was and should never have tried to engage it like she did. The ship is all but invincible. This cost her the ISD-1 Hydra and was her first loss.
Pellaeon respected her tactical abilities immensely as did Grand Moff Tarkin. I have to imagine Thrawn would have found value in her as well (let's recall Thrawn lost a ship in similar circumstances to the Manticore. Didnt make him incompetent).
Isard, on the other hand, was no tactician. She was a politician and intelligence officer at best and at worst a narcissistic lunatic.
In actual navel warfare there was a tendency to go bigger as time went on and technology improved. Modern US destroyers, for example, are practically the size and displacement of cruisers in WWII. However, navies still build ships of all sizes for specialized roles - it's about teamwork.
Imagine a couple of Viscounts and the Lusankya leading a fleet of Nebulon Star Destroyers against the Vong at the start of the conflict. Trillions saved, Anakin Solo is alive, Jacen doesn't fall, lots of good things happen.
Nebulas are stupidly hard to make, even Kuat and Dac struggled to make them quickly. a better option would be ISDs, as they are more focused on armor than shields, which is a perfect counter to the YV's shield sucking dovin bassals
Or the vong weapons ignore the shields, and unlike the smaller more munverable state of the art 5th fleet, would not have been able to withdraw or dodge. The super capitals ships and their ridiculously inefficient massive crews could have easily been biofuel for the vong to zerg across the galaxy.
@@lukeseguin1875 The vongs weapons didn't just go through shields though and they weren't the flood or the zerg, they were just people
@@JJJBunney001 I read the whole vong saga. Their weapons, called dovin basels, sp and thanks to the other guy here who remembered what they were called, absolutely ignored shields. They were gravity projectors which doubled as engines and weapons. The new republic later found work around which made their shields somewhat effective, but that wasn't untill the retaking courscant part of the war if I remember right.
Second, yes they were a zerg species who devoured biomass and reproduced by feeding off the planets and victims they conquered. That's why they're in the star wars galaxy because they ate theirs.
@@lukeseguin1875 The Vong use Yaret-Kor that spit superheated rocks and are definitely blocked by shields
Ardius Kaine actually used a super star destroyer to establish his remnant by intimidating smaller groups with it.
Great analysis backed up by tons of in universe examples.
Excellent work as always Eck! 👏
Super star destroyers and dreadnoughts were used similar to battleships in WWI. They formed a battle line where the fire could be concentrated in one direction, opening themselves up to the same threat they posed to opposing fleets. Their role was to keep opponents out, while smaller and faster ships, such as the Star Destroyer, MC-80/85, Nebulon B, CR-90, and others would move in closer. The hope was that the enemy lines would remain focused on the heavy armor so they could get their hits in and possibly punch a hole.
I really hope that one day Disney makes a canon version of the essential guide to warfare. That would be coooool
A super star destroyer acting in a planetary defense role fills the same role as the Golan line while being far more flexible in deployment.
i will say in most cases in the empire at war game atleast the combo of an interdictor and an SSD is always an oh fuck moment and even in multiplayer when an enemy deploys on your like oh great now i have that to deal with and have to switch to a full attack on it to protect your rear lines
I think the best way to use a Super Star Destroyer is as the linchpin of a fleet. A large vessel with thick armor, tough shields, and powerful, long-ranged weapons. A ship that you organize to the rest of your fleet around to support, and in turn, be supported by.
So called "Super Star Destroyers" like Executor were dreadnoughts. Also, in OT canon, Imperator Star Destroyers and dreadnaughts couldn't enter atmospheres. That was a creation of the EU (non-canon).
Even in the EU, they did require extensive modifications for them to be able to manoeuver in the atmosphere, at least for the lusankya which had its lower hull filled with repulsorlifts (which were destroyed during its escape from Coruscant).
@@AAhmou In the EU the only Star Destroyers that were purpose built to enter atmospheres were the smaller Victory-class. In the OT movies, Imperator-class could only enter orbit, at which point they'd either launch landing craft or shuttles, or bombard the surface with their heavy turbolasers, very much like battleships used to bombard shorelines and inland targets. That's why Vader was so angry with Ozzel in ESB, when he clumsily notified the Rebels in advance that they were on their way, because the deflector shield protecting the Rebel base prevented the fleet from bombarding the base from orbit, which necessitated a land invasion using Walkers and ground troops.
EU is Canon
@@aarondevaldez9134 Even Lucas has said that the EU isn't canon. Only what he put in the films is canon.
@@white-dragon4424 It's just fiction. Canon, non-canon, it doens't matter. If you like what Disney or George Lucas did after the clone wars of 2008, that's ok. But please, it's time to end this continued war between canon and not canon. You can say that there are several dimensions that work with their own logic and that's it
I would think SSDs would work better as mobile command and control for fleet operations. So if you send a fleet to an Outer Rim sector the SSD would basically be set up in one system and direct fleet operations of capital ships or smaller classes from there and only join in active operation where needed. Maybe the occasional show the flag operations too.
Eck: Recording a normal sponsorship video.
Te background footage: Man drinking an egg.
Super Star Destroyers? We need a Super Venator or a Super Acclamator!
There was a Super Venator - the Maelstrom-class
Here's a great question: could the Hutt's dark saber have been able to be mass produced and do you think they would have prevented the full yuzhong vong invasion? (In other words, how big of a difference would 6 or so Hutt Darksabers have drastically reduced the length and damage of the invasion.)
Potentially not at all. Spacedock keeps missing this, but the Vongs shields do not struggle against more powerful fire or a larger number of highly accurate fire. But with dispersed fire targeting multiple close together areas. This is because the Vongs shields are literally projected miniature black holes, which have little issue absorbing powerful shots. And the Vong can sustain the black holes for (in combat terms) long periods of time. But they do have significant problems projecting numerous black holes in a small area making slightly inaccurate fire more effective.
TL/DR: A DS style weapons produce a single, accurate shot, which Vong shields are highly effective against.
Both canons and the fandom have misunderstood the SSD's role for decades now.
SSDs are dedicated command centers (it's right there in the movies). Their primary purpose is to function as mobile planetary bases: you put one of them in the middle of a troubled sector, and you can dock as many transports, carriers, long-range fighters, and even capital ships as you want for repairs, transfers, resupply, and whatever else you might want. A single Executor-class dreadnought could launch a hundred TIE Advanced and a hundred Assault Gunboats three times over, sending the hordes to bomb three different systems while slagging a moon as her short-range bombers and fighters scream over to bomb the antiorbital defenses of the main system. In less than twenty-four hours, a single SSD could launch, resupply, and coordinate strikes on a hundred cities across a planet's surface AND eliminate all lunar bases...all from a much safer platform than the fifty carriers it would take to match it. Combine that with the much larger-scale attack craft she could deploy to a planet, the number of troops she could carry, and the sheer intimidation of her presence...SSDs essentially gave the Empire the ability to move a whole planetary command center into the heart of hostile space.
It's not about brawling power, it's about stability and order. Also, it's about having a weapons platform with a thousand turbolasers that a Rebel task force of five Star-Destroyer class warships couldn't hope to match.
All you need is an Eclipse Super Star Destroyer with a few escort ships and full of Tie Defenders. Case close
I would personally use super star destroyers as the us navy uses its carriers
I really hope you have a full video on the NR 5th Fleet. Seems something you and Corey could rock. I will check if you already do, and encourage others to do so as well. Also, your Tapcaf Transmission episodes on The Black Fleet Crisis were fantastic.
Few things:
Seems most of the time space battles played out WWI style - defensive lines and occasional charges by masses of enemies rather than WWII blitzkrieg. Therefore defensive ssd's make sense unless - like you said - they're being used to lead said charge against known mass enemy defenses.
Secondly is cost. I gotta believe cost of running ssd across the galaxy vs fuel cost to keep in orbit is very different. Minimize cost. If enemy commits mass force, you can always jump in with ssd as backup.
Thirdly is the hyperdrive quality being low. This makes it less likely you'll commit them during clone wars because the time requirement. Fleet of smaller ships with better hyperdrives can make a deep critical strike faster than you can. If you have to bail, you can't outrun them. This makes such a ploy risky at best. Plus... Palpatine playing NOT to win quickly.
Finally, as you alluded to, there's the double edge sword of it's intimidation factor. If you lose it... it is a huge blow to your force even if overall the battle goes better for you than say... losing 3 smaller ships of a total equivalent value for a lesser gain. Both your morale and your opponents'.
For me, larger ships should function more as mobile space stations. Such ships shouldn’t be deployed as frontline units, at least in the first wave(s), because there are various natural & artificial hazards, especially various minefields that’re laid out in advance (That is what I get for playing too much of the _Star Wars_ flight sim series called X-Wing). Heck, even the Empire wouldn’t be too stupid to jump into that, which is why they sent out Probe Droids. Thus, if they were to be used more offensively, they should at least be in the second wave, not the first…
Or... be sent in with the fleet to the outskirts of a system giving time for the screen to scout the approaches to the objectives... the objectives being the fortresses the SSD is there to destroy...
Pretty much the same idea & such, @@aralornwolf3140. Even with the Allegiance-Class OR, my personal favorite, the Titan-Class shouldn’t get ahead of itself. Even the Imperial maneuvers in the prologue mission is flawlessly executed; sent smaller ships in first, & then the bigger ships later…
@@nickvinsable3798 ,
Yeah. In the Star Wars Adventure Journal Volume 1, Book 1... there was a short story written as a lecture on how to invade planets. The lecturer began with the basics... how to approach the planet. If you don't scout the system, you could lose your ships, especially the troop transports, to ambushes. Also, a system is pretty big and could hide enemy forces, which then stay as you invade the planet (siege the planet), picking off supply ships as they arrive, or leave... hindering your ability to actually secure the planet.
However, the reason I said what I said, is... the way you worded your post gave me the impression you were talking about two separate groups of ships... in which the second group only arrives after the first... this isn't done, as the scouts, if they encounter enemy forces they can't fight need the option to fall back to the main force to keep themselves from being destroyed.
Agreed, @@aralornwolf3140. I only used the term(s) Loosely; my main focus was that the bigger ships held back & NOT be in the first wave, Especially the flagship(s).
@@nickvinsable3798 ,
The term you're looking for is vanguard. The vanguard is ahead of the van which is the main force.
Eck: It would be cooler if SSDs were used more offensively
Empire at war players: got you fam
I still love that old Reddit comment on the Imperium Ultra class star destroyer(which was like 40 times the size of the Eclipse SSD and had a fucking Super Star Destroyer HANGAR) where the sheer size of the ship made people form tribes and built tent cities as traversing it and keeping any semblance of order on a 260km long ship with a crew of 6 million was impossible.
I feel like misusing military resources would be on-point for the Empire, oddly enough. Between the sheer size of the empire, the Tarkin doctrine, and the emperor being a wrinkly ol' space wizard, I would suspect a considerable amount of boondoggles and inefficiency post clone wars.
Though, Super Star Destroyers being used defensively kinda makes sense to me. Catching the rebels in a pitched battle would require something crazy like letting them think that the Emperor was on an unarmed and inoperable death star orbiting a nature preserve, so being able to bring multiple SSDs against them would be pretty hard. Plus, the idea of them being unassailable nexuses of imperial influence and force projection, able to hold a multi-sector area by organizing and supplying smaller fleets? That feels Tarkin doctrine but reasonable.
Fantastic video as always, gave me a lot to chew on! Gonna rewatch it now, thanks for the upload.
I totally agree. In addition to flag ship roles, the absolutely wall of independent firepower, especially with their almost innumerable smaller caliber guns basically makes them almost mobile defensive space stations to hold an entire vector of attack on a planet. But I imagine their cumbersome mobility and cost to put them in an expeditionary footing makes them less viable force projection asset.
I do like how in some of the updated fan models of Battlecruisers suggest the tonnage class is far more offensive in nature and has an anti-capital ship role with a high amount of large battery turbolasers relative to it's surface area
I think another reason for why SSDs weren't used extensively in combat was because they surely must've been very expensive to build and losing one must've been devastating.
It's just like how in the early 20th century Britain & Germany kept constructing a very expensive class of ship called dreadnoughts. They costed so much to construct that during WW1 both sides were very reluctant to use them out of fear that they could be lost.
Thing is, it makes no sense, looking at history the best way to defend yourself from other navies is to just have a good navy, and if you can't afford a good navy, that's when you go for ships that's purpose is primarily protecting the coastline, and those are much smaller than most warships, but usually heavily armed due to not needing particularly good seakeeping, range or speed. Good examples of this are the various monitors of the late 19th and early 20th century, and later coastal defense ships of WW2. SSD's seem to seriously suffer from what I'd call the Yamato problem, the upkeep costs on these super star destroyers must be absolutely abysmal, they don't seem to be easy to deploy in an expeditionary capacity and you can easily achieve the same amount of firepower with half the vulnerability if you'd just deploy multiple smaller ships, yet at the same time they should be far to expensive to maintain just for planetary defense when there are so many better ways of doing that. In addition the way speed seems to work in Star Wars suggests that these ships could be easily outmaneuvered, which coupled with the really weird short range engagements we see in SW means they can't necessarily always be where the trouble is, and to a ship that's supposed to be defending something like a planet, that's a huge issue.
And then we have the ''there wasn't that much war going on'' explanation, which just makes absolutely zero sense to me, in peace time navies scale back, they don't embark on huge vanity projects unless they NEED to project power like the US, and even then they no longer operate BB's and have never gone into actual battlecruisers, hell even the comparatively modern Ticos will be replaced by destroyers in the future. I could see why the Empire went for them, to me it screams vanity project, like the Kirov's, huge, impossibly expensive to run ships that are just too costly to deploy regularly, and they probably end up spending most of their time in dock because of that. My headcanon reason for why they were used mostly in a defensive role is because they are utterly useless in any other role unless you have absolutely ungodly amounts of money to spend, and still the logistics would be strained to their absolute limits. They're all just big space borne Yamatos.
That's cool that you have CGI footage of the Lusankya emerging from under Corusants surface in this video. It's great to visualize one of these fascinating moments read about from legends.
More special/experimental ships like the Malevolence or that stealth ship the Republic used to break the blockade of Christophsis make for really good stories
It makes sense to use SSDs defensively. Since in Star Wars hyperspace routes are static, you can just put them with interdictors at the key points during the campaings, forcing the enemy to face a brutal amount of firepower, or to fly into a trap/fortified position. Using them in offense is very risky, they can always get outmaneuvered or ambushed, also ship like this needs a massive ammount of cruisers to protect it from bombers. Quickly moving and setting a whole fleet before the enemy will raid capital ship bridge/engines/shield generators cannot be a easy task.
Day 27 of asking for Titanfall vs halo versus matchup
Wouldn’t work, if your talking bout chief vs cooper because cooper only has light only and has no genetic augmentation
Most Halo tech is just more advanced than that in Titanfall imo other than the time travel thingy
That would be cool
@@somehalonerd1176 depends on the matchup. The technology is more comparable to each other then say Star Wars. You could do pilots vs odst, Spartans etc, Titanfall grunts vs UNSC marines, spectres and stalkers vs elites and brutes, repears vs hunters, titans vs scorpions, wraiths, mantises and scarabs etc. there’s a lot to compare and contrast if you have extensive knowledge on both series. You could also do imc and militia vs UNSC
Yes, do it Eck!
Based
Where do the Lucrehulk ships fit in to the mix? They’re probably not as long as an SSD, but their tonnage is probably similar, right? Or were they classed as something different, to get around restrictions on ship classes?
One big thing I think people forget about is logistics. It takes an amount of fuel to move a star fighter in hyperspace, it takes more to move a freighter. An ISD-2 has yet another tier of fuel consumption, let alone a craft over 10 times the size of it. In the “Star Wars Saga Edition” game system it takes about 1kg of fuel per day to fly a colossal size craft, aka a freighter sized craft. As the sizes go up that fuel consumption gets multiplied, up to ludicrous amounts for a SSD. For each size category it gets multiplied by 100, so it goes from 50 credits per day for a freighters fuel up to 15,000 per day for an SSD. Not including jumps to hyperspace which take a days worth of fuel per jump, that’s a minimum per day cost just to move it. So yeah, logistics are hell for huge vessel refueling.
The Imperial SDD existed for one reason - to deter rebellion from the Star Destroyer Captains. Hence why it was given to the most loyal ones.
And the Death Star existed more to keep those holders of SSD's in check. I mean who _but_ the holder of a SSD could have the kind of position that "blowing up the planet" would be a useful tool?
In a offensive role, those ships will suffer from the Bismark/Tirpitz Issue:
1. The enemy will spend a lot of resources keeping track of it
2. It will be a priority target to avoid or kill in every operation
The defensive use of Super Star Destroyers mirrors WW1 where at least in the atlantic, where large warships were largely kept in major fleet locations to guard key seaways, partly because the major naval powers considered them too valuable to be risked unnecessarily- hence why the only major battleship engagement of WW1 was the battle of Jutland
I always thought if it more like the us battle ships in pearl harbor at wwii. Small fighters are just a superior tactic. They sit around because they are ego pieces and not real war machines, like the battleship Yamamoto, which never managed to get more than like 200 miles from Japan without being damaged, or the German Bismark which got apha strikes by a group of smaller British warships.
@@lukeseguin1875 would say the battle ships at Pearl are a bad example… docked in a harbour isn’t really the same as on station defensively, and doesn’t matter if it’s a battle ship or a fighter making a sucker punch.
But yeah, like those of WW1 from first comment and the Yamato, Bismarck, and all US battle ships that survived Pearl, they were never used for their intended purpose cause they were too “valuable”, and the ships that were there to defend them (carriers, destroyers) proved to be more tactically useful cause there were more of them and they were easier to justify using.
@@mikejulien2330 I disagree on the pearl harbor being there for defense thing. The battleships were redeployed from their base in San Diego, the main base for the us pacific fleet, and were transfered to pearl. They along with all of our carriers, which only weren't in harbor because of a training exercise were specifically deployed to defend against the Japanese.
Maybe if they had magic spoon on that star destroyer the rebels would have wanted to go work there and wouldn't have run that a wing into it.
I suspect that SSDs were largely used for defensive purposes at least partly for logistical reasons. It costs a huge amount of fuel to jump a ship that big to hyperspace.
while im not experienced enough in legends lore to say with certaintay something like this would be practical, i feel like massive ships could be well used as more of a roaming defense penetrator. Similarly to how you can use one to hold down a poorly defended systen on its own, you could also use one as a roaming attack force that could go as an advanced force, shattering planetary shields/guns, orbital gun platforms, and/or defense fleets, so that another fsmaller leet could come along after and mop up any vestiges of defiance, as well as establish a more permanent presence. I feel like a few ISDs could keep a system behaving relatively easily enough, once its defenses are gone, it may be difficult for them to capture a system themselves, so this would be a good solution.
Thank so much for Video Eck!👍✌😎 With so many youtubers and in universe-characters compiling about how unpractical Super Star Destroyers are in offensive battle I was wondering if they can be practical in the right situation. I love using Star Destroyers and want use them in smart way in stories and not make same mistakes a the Empire did.
... and then there was the, non-canon, X-Wing vs TIE Fighter expansion "Balance of Power" which also had a SSD. One of the selling points was getting the chance to see one in action, and it was interesting to say the least. It certainly proved they could be effective when deployed aggressively, however they certainly can be taken down by a force costing far less in terms of resources. (The major issue being the disparity between how much resources the Alliance can expend on ships, versus what the Imperial Navy does. Quite frankly, anything the Rebel Alliance has to lose is supposed *major* for them. The Navy can, and does, just decide what's "acceptable losses" and doesn't worry about it.)
Details about the particular incident in "Balance of Power" below for the curious.
The Vengeance Task Force was sent to begin swatting an attempt of the Rebellion to get a shipyard going somewhere else. (Also they kinda-sorta stole an Interdictor's gravity-well projector and mounted it on a smaller vessel. Which was a big "can't let them have THAT".) It was hilarious, in a sense, when the drive to remove this modified cruiser also mean when the Vengeance arrived to be the primary attack platform... it was stuck there.
And the Alliance *wanted* it stuck there, because they had a plan. See, they decided it was much more useful to send drone ships as one would "fireships", loading them with explosives and crashing them into the SSD until it was crippled. Then just pounding on it until it died. As far as gameplay went, this stopped being fun FAST because the damn thing shrugged off even heavy bombs and several of the tricks for taking on ISDs in a starfighter in that engine simply could not work.
Since it wasn't coded to close distance to fight, it also was unable to just do an "advancing wall of doom" situation... which would have made the mission nigh impossible to win, because you can't kill it before it can enter range of the ship keeping it locked down and thus be able to escape.
It does seem the Imperial navy used the Dreadnaughts largely in a defensive way. For example the 2nd Death Star being a famous scene. They were also used to effectively blockade planets like Hoth and at Yavin after the 1st Death Star was destroyed.
I think that real history of the dreadnaught class battleships and their equivalent in navies other than the British Royal Navy has some interesting parallels.
The dreadnoughts took years to build and cost so much that losing one could literally bankrupt all but the wealthiest empires. During WWI this led to both sides being so conservative that only one major battle, the Battle of Jutland, was fought between the main fleets of Britain and Germany. The damage inflicted on both sides was so costly that both fleets never risked open battle again for the rest of the war.
By the next big naval war the battleship was already becoming obsolete to cheaper aircraft carriers whose planes could knock out battleships without ever coming in range of their big guns.
I think it's possible that this real history influenced the strategic use of dreadnaughts, as well as their weaknesses in Star Wars cannon.
@EckhartsLadder Stepping outside the in-world lore for a sec: is the reason that the Mandator didn't show up being used in the prequel trilogy movies because they were "invented" after the movies came out? Because if not, it seems like they should have been used in place of the Venators, or at least in support. Most of the time we say that the Venators were the biggest ships the Republic had to operate as battle line capitol ships - or did they show up in the movies and I'm just forgetting? I realize you partly answered this in saying that the Mandators were held for defense of the core - so do they show up in battle for Corusant in the movie, or was my first sentence there correct?
My assumption on SSDs being used on defense is that ever since Star of Coruscant was hunted down and destroyed they stopped using them on offense
Well the malevolence too hunted and destroyed by y wings
Around the 7:50 mark, what is that space battle from?
It's Eck's Fan film.
@@nobleman9393 Thanks, where would I go to find information about it and see more?
@@dreadgod81 The short Film is called Battle of Dreadnoughts and it's on UA-cam
My favorite is Task Force Vengeance, the SSD dispatched to crush the rebel cells in Xwing vs TIE Fighter. Acted as a home base and primary weapon in the conflict of that sector. Best use of an SSD in my opinion
I would think that the primary role of a ship like a Super Star Destroyer would be to use it offensively against heavily defended worlds or powerful fleets of Star Destroyer or Mon Cal Cruiser level ships. The SSD could sustain a much larger amount of damage and just sort of bulldoze its way through enemy defenses. The problem is that the Aliance didn't really have any of these types of targets, in most cases you could easily make due with some ISDs. It's basically a ship without a mission most of the time.
I never imagined ships like the Executor as warships, but weapons of terror. They are great for dealing with enemy forces that cannot run (like a planetary insurrection) or forcing the enemy to flee (such as making rebels flee towards an interdictor ship protected by tie fighters and star destroyers ready to destroy any ship coming out of hyperspace).
While having the Lunskya as an escape vessel can be affective (due to how difficult it would be to take one down if the enemy was not planning to face it), I am sure the ship would have been better spent making sure enemy forces never made it to Coruscant to begin with.
Depending on the restrictions placed on military ships during the post-Ruusan Reformation era could explain why large dreadnoughts were built (sectors could only have a certain number of warships, but the warships could be of any desired size).
And while several small, fast, and nimble ships can be more affective at maintaining control than a Super Star Destroyer, sometimes, you need a big, heave, and slow sledgehammer to get the job done. It is about understanding the equipment you have, the strengths and limitations of the enemy, and how to best deal with the situation. Luckily for the Rebel Alliance, Thrawn was never put in charge of the Imperial Navy.
Actually deploying an SSD in combat is probably a logistical nightmare. Its closest real-world equivalent, Japan's Yamato and Musashi super-battleships in WWII, spent almost the entire war in port because a) the fuel cost of running them was so high and b) the high command was too afraid of losing them to use them. They were certainly durable (Musashi withstood about 20 bombs and torpedoes before it went down), but air power had just rendered their class of ship nearly useless. The Yamato's final mission was actually to try and beach itself on Okinawa to serve as a massive artillery platform, but it was intercepted and dispatched long before it got there.
Granted, Star Wars ships have shields, tend to use reactors rather than oil and don't have to worry about "sinking" if a single hole opens up in the wrong place, which reduces the overwhelming superiority of starfighters, but an SSD still probably works best as a mobile fortress, or possibly as a battering ram against static/orbital defenses. But against anything mobile, you get the Supremacy's problem - the enemy is faster than you and can just run away.
If you come across a task that either an SSD or *any other class of ship* could do, the SSD will be the worse choice between them. However, I can see a few reasonable applications for SSDs. Tasks which they can do, but other ships are incapable of due to their size.
First, is as the logistical centrepiece of a task force, or an expedition - just like the Executor served in Death Squadron. During the second world war, many US Navy destroyers and smaller ships simply did not possess the fuel reserves necessary to cross the Pacific ocean - but Iowa class battleships had plenty to spare, and were used to re-fuel other ships in the fleet while on the move. Using an SSD as a mobile hub for fuel, ammunition, crew rotations, as well as command and communications makes sense.
You will still need logistics ships, of course, but those won't want to hang around with the fleet long-term or follow the fleet into hostile territory. They're too vulnerable for that.
The second choice would be planetary invasion. The sheer scale of an SSD affords plenty of firepower for cracking planetary shielding, as well as ample internal space to house marines, walkers, transport shuttles, and everything else needed to invade a world from orbit. If the ship is specialized for this, all the better, which brings me to the third point;
Having a big fucking gun. The Eclipse is, in my opinion, the ideal model for an SSD. It makes use of the ships' massive size to do something which smaller vessels are physically incapable of doing. Being able to one-shot other capital ships, or crack a planet's shield and glass the city underneath in one go. Other close mentions go to the Malevolence, as well as the terribly designed Mandator 4 and Xyston class. The Xyston obviously isn't even an SSD, but it did adhere to the concept - however was stupendously overpowered and made no damn sense. The Mandator 4 meanwhile was *almost* a good ship, but it was *so* focused as to be useless at everything else. Seriously, it had what... 16 point defence guns, which were ALL taken out by a single starfighter? So useful. And it's design was anemic-looking, totally flat, and with an exposed bridge that went so far against the aesthetic of the First Order's beautiful Resurgent class it made me want to vomit into my own eyes so I could stop looking at it.
Still, the CONCEPT was good, and if the Xyston's main gun had been closer in power to the Mandator 4's, but slower firing, I think it could have filled the role so well that I'd be arguing SSDs aren't worth it at all. But it wasn't. So I'm not.
Wookieepedia seriously needs to update their articles on SSD's!
I think the issue for the Imperial use is partly one of semantics. Saying they are being used “defensively” is not really accurate. Their purpose, like that of modern day aircraft carriers is power projection. When you are a galaxy spanning empire fighting a rebellion that doesn’t outright “own” any systems or territory, no matter where you station an SSD it could technically be described as a defensive position. The real purpose though is the show of force to that sector of space. The ship is a giant billboard saying “don’t even try rebelling cause we have a fleet’s worth of fire power in one ship that can be here where you are in minutes to bombard your family and friends from orbit. Just like how US carriers are usually defensively projecting power around American interests, but when the US went to Afghanistan, the carriers were showing they could bring their weapons back to the home of those that attacked them.
Later usage by the NR in the Vong war were defensive because they were in retreat. If your goal is to just get as many people out as possible, you’re not really going to be using ships to posture or press the attack. You can’t project power you don’t have. Once they developed strategies to counter, and the tide started turning, they did start using them offensively.
Not saying SW ship strategy is always properly done, but if you drop the word “defensive”, I don’t see how having massive power projection assets stationed near valuable assets or key strategic interests can be characterized as using them incorrectly…
Would also reference WW2 ships like Bismarck, Sharnhorst, Yamato, or all the US/Brit ships, where their very existence causes the enemy to spend their time trying to figure out how to destroy or avoid them. Even though basically none of them were ever used for their intended purpose, the fact they existed made them the focus of the opposing navies’ planning. The entire Pearl Harbour or attack was to wipe the US battle ships out cause they didn’t want to face them when they were crewed and underway.
Having an SSD positioned near important sectors isn’t just defence of a position, it’s adding uncertainty to any plans people would make in that region of space, and forcing them to focus their energy on planning around the SSD instead of just their objective. A bunch of smaller ships spread out in the are (though historically prob more dangerous in real life) prob won’t have the same impact on the planning psychologically.
I think the ssd is really powerful but not that practical like you said the melevolonce is a good ship(bit op tho) also I really like the vicount aswell!
Well, in regard of the picture with the two SSDs shooting at each other, one with Rebel insignia painted on. That implies the Rebel one is a captured ship. The empire one shoots green lasers, the Rebel one shoots red lasers. Did the rebels refit the whole ship with new laser batteries? Or do all laser batteries have kind of a rgb-color-dial for the laser colors? And if so, why does nobody shoot purple lasers? ;-)
Maybe they do misuse Star Destroyers. The Empire almost never used tactics of a mixed fleet, without variety, which caused them to lose many times. Only Thrawn had much better tactics than any other Admiral, and used Star Destroyers much better.
but where are the mi SUS ing super star destroyers
5:10 Damn, fuck that postcode
The SSD used in an offensively is kids like a USN Carrier Battle Group. It's to get a lot of Firepower forward quickly. But to also "show off" your biggest, baddest, and best". Well that how I think off an SSD battle fleet
I always thought that SSDs were just built to strike fear and intimidation into their enemies, but not entirely practical. We all know what happened at Endor and a handful of precise hits, you can take out a SSD easily... provided that there's a large gravity well for it to fall into and be destroyed, of course.
I believe that SSDs and dreadnought ships were more practical as command vessels or as mobile command bases during front line incursions. That's my two cents.
Historically BBs in the 20th Century were used conservatively -- including as "fleets in being" -- with the exception of some major battles and operations. For example in WW1 the British Grand Fleet and German High Seas Fleet only fought once at Jutland, in WW2 the Japanese saved their BBs including the Yamato till the end of the war when in was to late for them to succeed against the by then massively built up US Navy. Hitler stopped risking his BBs after the lost of the Bismarck. Having more BBs the Allies risked them more often, but even after Pearl Harbor the USN for six months kept the surviving BBs in a reserve fleet on the West Coast, till after Midway.
Well, for once, it may then be a good thing that Disney created a new canon.
Don't get me wrong, the stories in Legends are amazing, and I feel like as much of that as possible should be kept around as long as it doesn't break with what is now the new canon.
But also with this new canon, is an opportunity to do stuff even better.
Say with the executors for instance. If we are lucky, we might get some post battle of Yavin stuff with different Executors who could be potentially used more aggressively than they were in Legends. Giving us almost like a Malevolence type deal once more. ^^
the major issue is the fact that there was never any concept of how battles in SW are supposed to be conducted. We only got aesthetic direction from Lucas. As result, there is no system, no reason to anything that you can see onscreen, comics, books etc. Everything is based on feel and patched with whatever comes to a given creative/author mind that they know from history and general knowledge. Destroyers are unwieldy because thats what those authors remembered from WW2, where airplanes made battleships useless... which is not correct, but that's what they think. From my point of view, I have a fan theory that changes all of that, but then it eliminates most of what SW was doing up till this point. It is simple relation of volume/mass to energy output. A ship that is prepared for everything-hitting small and big targets, versatile-is cruiser. It patrols space and allows you to project force. Remember, space is 3d and the galaxy is huge. However, to have big guns against ships, small guns against smaller targets/rockets and shields, armor, and landing craft, and some starfighters-that takes a lot of volume and mass. On top of that, a well-planned defensive and offensive from all angles mean that in fleet engagements cruisers are not using some if not most of their firepower. In order to compensate for that cruisers need to be big, but this still means they are not economical. Cruiser is not a size category, but a role category. Small cruiser tries to do everything and big one as well. Frigates are the answer to that-they have heavy artillery and some anti-fighter guns. Incapable of policing and controlling space/sectors but they are cost-efficient way of attacking heavier ships from the distance (they have guns comparable/the same as cruisers but much less of them but situated together in offensive formation), and they have a better mass-to-energy ratio so are "faster" (acceleration). Corvettes are the smallest of ships, and their purpose is to be heavy anti-fighter screens. A well-roudned task force woudl have Cruiser at the center, one-three frigates, and couple of corvettes. Cruiser would provide fighters and defense while being a big target with big range of fire, difficult to destroy. Frigates would aid it by turning fire away from cruisers because they are a smaller danger, but have long-range capability. Corvettes would allow maintain space superiority around the fleet so that it can not be easily destroyed form small distance by fighters, but if it comes to it Crusier can defend itself. Attacking force needs therefore to choose what to attack and in what order. But star destroyers are entirely different design philosophy. They put everything in long-distance attack. They have all guns capable of anti-ship long-range assault, all of them have a connection to a singular energy system and are standardized. Depending on circumstances the same gun can scale up or scale down energy output to hit bigger or smaller targets with force deemed necessary. By doing this SD's are saving volume and mass required for a parallel defense/attacking systems and their reactors. SD's advantage is that they can hit smaller and bigger targets on high distances, destroying them with a barrage of fire (shape allows efficient long-range placement of guns). So they have no AA guns or smaller ones, everything is turbo laser only. This comes at a price of having no defense on the back, being dependent on long-range engagements (close range limits the amount of firepower because of shape), and that their AA based on turbo lasers gets worse with closer distance. Hence SD's are relying on long-range bombardment, overpowering of the targets,and fighters are used basically onyl for self-defense, hence they don't need a hyperdrive. SSD's are fleet killers-they have guns big enough and reactors huge enough so that they have an effective range of several times that of the most powerful cruiser out there, and each shot is several times more powerful as well at maximum range. This means they sniper out targets from afar before the engagement even begins. In this head-cannon I imagine destroyers being first of their kind in history ships used by Empire, and Destroyers are named after their capability-they obliterate targets with immense firepower being it small or big target. Coupled with their size and they had nothing to be compared against. Then Empire created SSD's like Executor that were dozens of times more dangerous. If one SD had a range of 1 of a cruiser, but its volley was 3-5 times more pwoerful in comparison to a cruiser of its mass; then SSD would have a range of 20 times of that, and its full volley would be in hundreds of range times more powerful than that of the mentioned cruiser. This means that a single volley from SSD would be able to destroy any cruiser or any SD from a distance with impunity. Originally in Legends SSD had only 250 turbolasers; so I maintained this idea here but increased their size and power multiple times to reflect the above design philosophy. It's 250 guns, but they are in an entirely different league.
I always question this:
How are Star Destroyers able to survive _bulldozing through a planet to the surface to get into atmosphere_
Big ship expensive. Moving it around expensive, losing it in a very poorly planned offensive even more expensive.
In my opinion the next Star Wars videogame must be a game totally based on capital ships, a sort of World of Warships based on Star Wars universe but of course with extra features like an open world, the possibility to perform a Base Delta Zero or also simple orbital bombardaments...
I would use an SSD as a mobile supply, dock, and command ship. It would keep vital supplies (food, weapons, repair) and be used to quickly repair ships in the field. This would allow ships to stay deployed longer and reduce their time in "dry dock." There would need to be a slight redesign but it wouldn't be too much. Like many Impirial ships the SSD is not utilized to it's fullest potential.
In addition to this it could be used as a last defense just as eck states.
The amount of matter in an Executor class could make at least dozens, maybe hundreds, of imperial class star destroyers. That just seems like a better use of materiel, even if there are particular materials that are rare or hard to make.
Yeah, you pretty much summed up my thoughts at the end.
WHY were they used "defensively" most of the time? Because SPACE is HUGE! Sending such giants chasing all over after mobile forces to engage (like the Rebel Alliance) is a giant waste of manpower & fuel & other resources. "Posting" them over critical locations, shipyards, planets, etc. is MUCH more advantageous. (and forces your enemy to ENGAGE you, instead of constantly "drawing away" your "big gun".) And "secures" a wider region of space more long term.
Sure, when you have the opportunity to use them offensively (attack a planet or enemy force that cannot easily disengage?) DO SO!
My favorite use of dreadnoughts is when the massive capital ship dies to one rebel fighter for the one billionth time. It definitely never gets old and definitely doesn’t destroy all of the empire’s credibility
Super Star Destroyers and other Very Large Vessels remind me of the real world Bismarck. It was the largest ship of its kind when it was built and cost so much money that Germany avoided sending it into battle for fear of losing it. And, when they did lose it, it was financially disastrous.
From a Star Wars Empire At War Forces of Corruption standpoint with the use of mods to make the game a lot more interesting... I think I would probably state that Star Dreadnoughts, Battlecruisers, Star Defenders would rather be used for as command ships or simply as an extra level of firepower and extra fighters spawning from these vessels defensively. In every mod that I've played including Thrawn's Revenge mods and not so much Phoenix mod, the AI always send the faction commanders with their main flagships whether it will be a standard Imperial I/II, Victory I/II, or to the largest Star Dreadnoughts/Battlecruisers to destroy a smaller weaker defense fleet.
I understand using these commanders' ships make the job easy is pretty wasteful. Like Eck states: these vessels are better off be for defensive purposes and not actual combat unless they are attacking defensively.
Something to consider is politics during a crisis. In every political system the influential members will demand what they they perceive as "best protection". While less influential members will be left to fend for themselves. This applies to all crisis, war, disasters, epidemics, ect.
I view SSD's and dreadnoughts as essentially massive ship shaped mobile space stations not unlike say a massive golan. Designed to be a stalwart fort that could be moved easily but weren't really useful for offensive tactics except sieging.
I think my favorite large ship is the praetor, it’s like an oversized isd I just wish it had more weapons because it is a battlecruiser but only has the loadout of an isd
Its an interesting theorem, but it kinda reminds me of how navies were used (or more appropriately, not used) during the world wars. Whilst all sides has invested heavily into their fleets, all sides seemed almost reluctant to use those fleets aggressively on the oceans, preferring to instead utilise light forces and cruisers, with occasional sorties by battlecruisers.
Its almost as if the respective admiralties were loathe to use and possibly lose those ships, since losing them would be a big morale blow, and replacing them would take years and resources they might not have. The only time they could realistically use them was in overwhelming force situations (Pearl Harbour) and if not, you risked losing those ships outright (Bismark). I mean, consider the efforts of the highly aggressive IJN in the pacific, which went big and lost a lot of ships quickly. Compare that to the operations of the German High Seas Fleet in the North Sea, which allowed their main battleline to pretty much remain intact until 1918.
I think offensive use is the most obvious use of them, to attack targets that otherwise are unassailable, with an SSD as your spearhead (with plenty of Lancers to escort, and it's own hordes of fighters swarming around) even the most stalwart fortress is a porcelain fence. On the defense it's also good, but people are expecting it and will bring a solution to defeat it, as we see in various Star Wars novels/movies. Thus, I feel like the SSD is primarily an offensive weapon, best deployed vs strongly defended targets that aren't expecting a giant to assail them, and are only loaded for bear!
SSDs also represent an exceptionally large amount of time and resources to produce. Risking that in a headlong assault isn't particularly wise, unless you've either got a massive strength advantage, or have few other options.
for the resources and man power and such, i think you need to think of a SSD as more like a space-station that happens to be able to move as opposed to a ship of the fleet. in orbit of a planet it can move around the planet easily whilst having access to all the staff, and food etc from the planet and as such work as the first point of contact for customs, import export checks, border patrol. Like a moveable orbital space station. However an SSD has the benefit that once the threat or need has stopped to that planet or indeed moved then the SSD can be relocated to set up a new defensive space-station position at a new world. If you are going to invest in a huge space-station to defend a planet or territory then why not invest a little (comparatively ) more and have the added flexibility of designing it to be able to easily relocated, rather than needing other ships to tow it.
I know everyone is used to seeing space-stations like DS9 or Babylon 5 or Roost or 3DC or any list of other stations in any other media, but if you think the Death Star and DSII were both mobile space stations not ships, the SSD is just a more compact version with the same mission profile, though DS's were a lot more aggressive, if you know the wedge template of a star destroyer is part of the intimidation and therefore part of the subjugation of a world and you know that loyalists like and feel secure seeing that shape in the sky and you have the templates for building such shapes surely it would be cheaper to scale up and then adjust designs for a space station rather than build something new that needs help to be taken to its final location, and why limit it with a final location, add the flexibility that it can relocate itself or the flexibility that it could be core of a fleet.
It is a mobile harbour, a mobile base, a defensive blockage asset. The SSD just happens to be able to move.
As such as part of large fleet against large fleet engagements it makes sense, but once you start getting into hit and run tactics or other rebellion tactics then guarding fixed locations makes more sense and it is cheaper to run less costs, less time searching for recruitment, less cost in medical as you can access the planet's resources same with food, leave and other recreation.
I wrote about massive massive ships like SSDs. “Leviathans are capable of carrying entire Mobilized Army Groups. Plural. Tens of millions of men and women aboard a single ship. The ability to engage entire fleets. But the biggest advantage is not it’s offensive capability, but it’s logistical and command capabilities. Losing one means not only billions of tons of resources and years of work lost, but billions of equipment and personnel. The ability to regroup into one pillar is an effective tool. With four of these ships in each corner of the galaxy, we have a direct chain of command, with which fleets can regroup and center themselves before attacking or defending. Can they kill a fleet? Yeah, sure. So can a standard Assault Fleet. But a battleship can’t rally both branches into a single punch. You can’t put entire MAGs where they can train their Army Groups and organic Corps in virtual battlefields on a carrier. And most importantly, you can’t please a legendary and ancient old High Kommandant overseeing a sector with a simple Paladin.” Ships of that size are frankly too large to be used truely offensively, since they are a massive target, but their uses can be extensive especially if you apply them into non-conventional warship positions. IE command and control centers. That would be a MASSIVE advantage since they can move and defend themselves. Ships of that size, we’re talking several hundred miles or so long, can have entire manufacturing facilities and training facilities. I think Star Wars is using them slightly incorrectly but not quite as bad as I think you’re suggesting. What I gathered and correct me if I’m wrong, but you’re saying they aren’t used offensively enough, which frankly I agree with it’s Star Wars rule of cool takes precedence, but realistically Star Destroyers are too big really to be offensive tools, let alone SSDs.