Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Do ISDs have any rear firing weapons?

If not the manuverability of Star Fleet ships gives them another edge, above and beyond their obviously superior weaponry.

They don't have on screen maneuvability unless they are fighters, Defiant, Jen hadar or Birds of Prey - the rest pretty much lumber about same as the Imperial ships.

The Imperium can cross the galaxy in months, as opposed to decades. The Imperium can literally afford to just drown the enemy in the blood of their own soldiers.

 Mr Morden wrote:

They don't have on screen maneuvability unless they are fighters, Defiant, Jen hadar or Birds of Prey - the rest pretty much lumber about same as the Imperial ships.

The Sovereign class Enterprise-E flies cover for the Defiant by swooping between it, and a Cube.

 dogma wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

They don't have on screen maneuvability unless they are fighters, Defiant, Jen hadar or Birds of Prey - the rest pretty much lumber about same as the Imperial ships.

The Sovereign class Enterprise-E flies cover for the Defiant by swooping between it, and a Cube.

Isn;t the Defiant damaged (?) and lets face it Cubes hardly move in battles on screen

Problem is we want to see ships shooting at other on screen in both franchises so we get that but it means ships are mainly big and slow or small and fast. On screen most ships (in both universes) have issues shooting to the rear and often have fixed guns (esp Kiingons) or turrets.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Isn;t the Defiant damaged (?) and lets face it Cubes hardly move in battles on screen

Problem is we want to see ships shooting at other on screen in both franchises so we get that but it means ships are mainly big and slow or small and fast.

Ships of multiple classes swoop around the Cube in First Contact.

 Mr Morden wrote:

On screen most ships (in both universes) have issues shooting to the rear and often have fixed guns (esp Kiingons) or turrets.

The Reliant had aft torpedo tubes, Khan ordered them fired.

Like a siad the Cube hardly moves, the smaller ships move quite quickly (bit only reletive to the Cub), the Defiant is wrecked, the large cruisers and the Enterprise gracefully move but slowly in looooong loops.

They are probably a bit quicker than as ISD but not hugely.

Both franchise fleets engage at point blank and with slow moving ships for narrative reasons - its the same in any other space show that I can think of from Battle Beyond the Stars to Babylon 5 and Battlestar

 dogma wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

Would you expect a Missouri class to hit a torpedo boat moving at max speed with it's 16" guns?

I'm sure an Iowa class couldn't hit a torpedo boat with it's 16" guns, but such vessels have other guns; the large battery of 5" DP guns, the AA battery. And really what we're talking about in a Falcon v. ISD fight is anti-aircraft capacity.

I'm pretty sure it could actually. The 16" guns were more accurate due to the fact that a 16" shell is really heavy compared to a 5" shell and thus won't drift as far off course due to wind etc.

 Mr Morden wrote:

They are probably a bit quicker than as ISD but not hugely.

When do ISDs bank at all?

Starfleet ships are not lumbering, they are sleek and nippy, don’t confuse budget constraints with Lore, just look at the warships he feds built, very fast and able to dodge computer assisted targeting, phasers and torpedoes, that’s pretty nimble, the older ships like the galaxy class are less able to dodge around but still better than ISD, you also have targeting software that is able to hit and disable key systems on an enemy ship while it is moving, something like the ISD shield domes would be easy picking.

The only real issue is numbers


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Voyager has numerous instances of “turning on a dime” and jinking around

As does the defiant

Sovereign class also have numerous examples of high agility comparedton ISD

Prometheus class with or without MVAM runs circles around an ISD

Akira class are also as nippy as defiant class but that’s not shown in the series, so can be dismissed if you choose

Steamrunner class is a long range warfare ship and escort

 Formosa wrote:
Starfleet ships are not lumbering, they are sleek and nippy, don’t confuse budget constraints with Lore, just look at the warships he feds built, very fast and able to dodge computer assisted targeting, phasers and torpedoes, that’s pretty nimble, the older ships like the galaxy class are less able to dodge around but still better than ISD, you also have targeting software that is able to hit and disable key systems on an enemy ship while it is moving, something like the ISD shield domes would be easy picking.

The only real issue is numbers

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Voyager has numerous instances of “turning on a dime” and jinking around

As does the defiant

Sovereign class also have numerous examples of high agility comparedton ISD

Prometheus class with or without MVAM runs circles around an ISD

Akira class are also as nippy as defiant class but that’s not shown in the series, so can be dismissed if you choose

Steamrunner class is a long range warfare ship and escort

Just going by whats on screen Probably SW lore is also not the same as on screen - didn;t someone mention all the guns that ae never used by them.

 dogma wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

They are probably a bit quicker than as ISD but not hugely.

When do ISDs bank at all?

Usually very very slowly when they are avoiding ramming each other in ESB - that bits quite amusing.

 dogma wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

Blowing up Alderaan was a demonstration of political will. Capturing Rebel ships scurrying away from a Rebel base is about intelligence, in the military sense of the term.

The Empire had no problem destroying transports in the escape from Hoth, over half of them; it wasn't looking for intelligence.

Show me the scene where this happened. I don't remember seeing a single transport even shot at.

 djones520 wrote:

The ISD-2's had no anti-fighter guns. All they had were capital weapons. Tons of Turbolasers Turrets and Ion Cannons, but no laser cannons. That's what the tie fighter complements were for.

But the ISD-2 chasing the Falcon managed to hit it, and the Death Star shot down quite a few fighters with its capital scale guns.

In light of that I've always wondered why everyone claims ISDs had NO antifighter defense. A limited antifighter defense, not hugely effective against shielded targets, sure, but NO defense?

Sounds like non-canon material creeping in.

 Vulcan wrote:

Show me the scene where this happened. I don't remember seeing a single transport even shot at.

A GR-75 get's body checked by a Star Destroyer coming out of hyperspace in ESB, and Leia was quite worried about transports being shot at.

 dogma wrote:

And of course if you have a lot of guns you'll eventually hit something. So its not surprising the Falcon got hit occasionally, though remember they did have explicit orders to capture the Falcon so they were holding back.

If they were holding back, why weren't they using ion cannons? An ISD-2 has 60 of them.

Good question. Apparently the commander of those ISD's went on to work for the New Order.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Do ISDs have any rear firing weapons?

Aside from the eight turrets of the main battery being able to turn to the rear? Good question.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 dogma wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

Show me the scene where this happened. I don't remember seeing a single transport even shot at.

A GR-75 get's body checked by a Star Destroyer coming out of hyperspace in ESB, and Leia was quite worried about transports being shot at.

The GR-75 that got pasted on an ISD happened at Scarif in Rogue One. So yes, an ISD can ram a GR-75 into oblivion. At no time is an ISD shown firing at anything other than the Millennium Falcon in ESB.

And Leia could just have easily been worried about ion cannon fire and ships being captured. It's not like the Rebels were likely to be able to rescue them before they were interrogated and executed.

How about this?

SF ships can go instantly to FTL, moving light minutes away well out of range of anything Imperial ships have. They can then fly back to hit an ISD's belly, or rear or any other vulnerable area and be gone before the ship can turn or manually traverse its weapons.

So forget debates about weapon power (SF hand weapons can disintegrate buildings, yet for some reason people thing their capital ships are less powerful...), for get even debates about Warp Speed strafing runs, SF's speed, maneuverability and FTL (which they can use in combat) can easily win the day even if weapons are roughly comparable (which they ain't).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and moon-sized planet killers?

Star Fleet can turn nebulas into planets and dead planets into living ones, and they do with a device the size of my coffee table.



By TNG era they're reigniting suns.

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Half_a_Life_(episode)
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Second_Sight_(episode)
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Gideon_Seyetik

But yeah, I can see why some people might be impressed with a moon-sized planet blowerupper.

 Vulcan wrote:
Aside from the eight turrets of the main battery being able to turn to the rear? Good question.

If the front 6 turrets tried to fire to the rear they would be hitting empty space, or shooting the ISD itself.

The ISD-2 is pyramidal, designed to shoot what it's pointed at...provided what it's pointed at is also relatively above it.

 dogma wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:
Aside from the eight turrets of the main battery being able to turn to the rear? Good question.

Two of those might be able to to do that, but there is no way all eight could.

Are there any belly guns? Or do they count on fighters to defend their hulls?

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

Are there any belly guns? Or do they count on fighters to defend their hulls?

There are not. They also have a big, juicy reactor sitting just aft of the launch bay.

Well they certainly have blind spots in their firing arcs. Directly behind their massive engines they have no defense. Also the most vulnerable parts of the ship are there too. The engines and shield generators and also the bridge as well.

We have fighters in RotJ that destroy these sheild generators easily - on a SSD during a battle in which the empire outnumbered the rebels 5:1 - so it's only reasonable that SF ships would not struggle to disable/destroy ISD's.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Well they certainly have blind spots in their firing arcs. Directly behind their massive engines they have no defense. Also the most vulnerable parts of the ship are there too. The engines and shield generators and also the bridge as well.

We have fighters in RotJ that destroy these sheild generators easily - on a SSD during a battle in which the empire outnumbered the rebels 5:1 - so it's only reasonable that SF ships would not struggle to disable/destroy ISD's.

With the caveat that those fighters are destroying the shield generators from within the shield perimeter itself...

 Vulcan wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

Blowing up Alderaan was a demonstration of political will. Capturing Rebel ships scurrying away from a Rebel base is about intelligence, in the military sense of the term.

The Empire had no problem destroying transports in the escape from Hoth, over half of them; it wasn't looking for intelligence.

Show me the scene where this happened. I don't remember seeing a single transport even shot at.

 djones520 wrote:

The ISD-2's had no anti-fighter guns. All they had were capital weapons. Tons of Turbolasers Turrets and Ion Cannons, but no laser cannons. That's what the tie fighter complements were for.

But the ISD-2 chasing the Falcon managed to hit it, and the Death Star shot down quite a few fighters with its capital scale guns.

In light of that I've always wondered why everyone claims ISDs had NO antifighter defense. A limited antifighter defense, not hugely effective against shielded targets, sure, but NO defense?

Sounds like non-canon material creeping in.

1. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Wars:_Complete_Locations_(2016) Canon source material, 17 of 30 GR-75 heavy transports destroyed.

2. Canon numbers are 60 turbo-lasers, 60 ion cannons, 10 tractor beams. That's it. They had the ability to carry up to 72 tie fighters though. That was their anti-fighter defence. And as referenced before, a turbo-laser has the ability to hit smaller ships on a rare occasion, which is what we saw on those scenes. 1 or 2 hits, out of a lot.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
The Imperium can cross the galaxy in months, as opposed to decades. The Imperium can literally afford to just drown the enemy in the blood of their own soldiers.

Which, if a 'legion of your best troops' can get defeated by paleolithic teddy bears, is about the only way your armies could actually harm the enemy.
If a legion of stormtroopers loses to a tribe of hunter-gatherers with flint-tipped spears, then I don't want to know what they will do if they face an enemy equipped with such advanced technology as swords or even *shudders* black powder.

The Galactic Empire has an army that can't handle even the slightest resistance and a fleet of capital ships that can be taken out with minimal effort (like a single fighter). They certainly look imposing and they have huge numbers, but before any enemy armed with equal or better technology they would just melt away. Which is why the Federation would indeed stomp the Empire. Such is the sad fate of being a movie villain.

Let's not blame the Empire for George Lucas being a bad writer. Lets just pretend, in good faith, that the stormtroopers know which direction to point their guns and all of that stuff with the ewoks was actually an ambush by blood thirsty bearbarians.

The Ewoks were a parallel for the Vietkong, so I can actually respect that.

It shows that putting a conscript army far from home against highly motivated natives defending their families is seldom a good idea.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Let's not blame the Empire for George Lucas being a bad writer. Lets just pretend, in good faith, that the stormtroopers know which direction to point their guns and all of that stuff with the ewoks was actually an ambush by blood thirsty bearbarians.

They were going to be wookies anyway.

Yeah. IIRC literally the only reason they weren’t was because it was harder to find a bunch of 7’ actors than a bunch of little people.

flashlightfodder wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Let's not blame the Empire for George Lucas being a bad writer. Lets just pretend, in good faith, that the stormtroopers know which direction to point their guns and all of that stuff with the ewoks was actually an ambush by blood thirsty bearbarians.

They were going to be wookies anyway.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:The Ewoks were a parallel for the Vietkong, so I can actually respect that.

It shows that putting a conscript army far from home against highly motivated natives defending their families is seldom a good idea.

The problem is that they were armed with nothing but spears and bows, vs armoured stormtroopers carrying blaster rifles. Even if they had used guerilla tactics (which they did not in the movie), even if they had outnumbered the stormtroopers 1000 to 1, even if they had been wookiees, if the stormtroopers had been anywhere near remotely capable, they would have massacred the ewoks. The colonial conflicts of our own history show us that even very small bands of trained soldiers with guns can annihilate massive armies of people armed with spears and bow and arrow without barely even breaking a sweat. Especially if said guns fire at a relatively rapid pace.
Basically, the only way for it to make sense is if the Ewoks would have had firearms of some kind. It doesn't matter how numerous, clever or strong you are. If all you have is a pointed stick, you will never be able to inflict any meaningful damage on a force armed with guns. The only way the Ewoks in the movie manage to win the battle is because the Stormtroopers are just incredibly stupid and run after the Ewoks without any sort of tactics or strategy or without even bothering to stop and actually shoot the little buggers (seriously, I just re-watched the movie last week. They literally barely even fire a single shot at the Ewoks). And that is why I have little hope for the Galactic Empire in a conflict with basically any force, let alone one that can (out)match them in technology like the Federation.

Also, I would like to dispute George Lucas being a bad writer. Does George Lucas write a lot of bad scenes? Yes, he certainly does. The Battle of Endor, Jar Jar Binks and the 'I don't like sand' scene are proof enough of that. But overall, his movies are great. Who does not like the Star Wars movies? Everyone likes Star Wars. That means that even though Lucas did a lot of things wrong, there is even more that he did right.

But they did use ambush tactics - they had traps set up to destroy the ATST. They jumped out of trees and threw giant rocks. Plus Chewbaca commandeered one of the ATST.

Plus yes - storm troopers ARE stupid lol.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vulcan wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Well they certainly have blind spots in their firing arcs. Directly behind their massive engines they have no defense. Also the most vulnerable parts of the ship are there too. The engines and shield generators and also the bridge as well.

We have fighters in RotJ that destroy these sheild generators easily - on a SSD during a battle in which the empire outnumbered the rebels 5:1 - so it's only reasonable that SF ships would not struggle to disable/destroy ISD's.

With the caveat that those fighters are destroying the shield generators from within the shield perimeter itself...

Seems odd - we see how shield work in RotJ against Mon Cals - Tiefighters shoot them and even crash into them and we see a sheild effect very close to the ship hull. Are sheilds different on imperial ships? Do they make a giant shield bubble that a fighter can fly into?

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Well they certainly have blind spots in their firing arcs. Directly behind their massive engines they have no defense. Also the most vulnerable parts of the ship are there too. The engines and shield generators and also the bridge as well.

We have fighters in RotJ that destroy these sheild generators easily - on a SSD during a battle in which the empire outnumbered the rebels 5:1 - so it's only reasonable that SF ships would not struggle to disable/destroy ISD's.

With the caveat that those fighters are destroying the shield generators from within the shield perimeter itself...

Seems odd - we see how shield work in RotJ against Mon Cals - Tiefighters shoot them and even crash into them and we see a sheild effect very close to the ship hull. Are sheilds different on imperial ships? Do they make a giant shield bubble that a fighter can fly into?

Yes. We see that in RotJ when Ren not just flies his fighter into their shield perimeter, but into their launch bay. We see it in RotS when Anakin and Obi-Wan fly right into General Grevious' ship after disabling the atmosphere screen on their landing bay. We see it again in TPM when little Anni flies his Naboo fighter into the hangar of the Lucrehulk command ship. Rogue One shows Y-Wings fly through an ISD's shield to disable it with ion torpedoes. Later that same ISD is pushed into another ISD with no interaction with it's shields. And finally a GR-75 flies right through an ISD's shields (and goes spat on it's armored hull).

Over and over again, we see ships flying right through shields. I mentioned this earlier, shields in SW are like shield generators in Dune. Slow and steady penetrates the shield. Only big planetary-grade shields like on Scarif and protecting the DSII at Endor can splat a fighter on impact.

That's why they ARMOR ships.

Now. Do we ever see a small ship go splat on a larger ship's shields in Star Trek? Somehow I doubt it, given the Defiant class' usual tactic of flying NOE across a larger ship's hull, and how the common depiction of shields under fire show a large bubble surrounding the generating ship significantly further out...

There's at least one Voyager episode where two shuttlecraft collide and the shields violently repel each other.

Plus, if Star Wars shields don't block fighters, why would they block torpedoes? Star Destroyers would be facing a weapon that completely negates their shields and is at least as powerful as their own turbolasers. If an A-wing ramming into the bridge of an Executor can wreck the entire thing enough that it veers enough off course to ram itself into the Death Star, imagine what a quantum torpedo would do.

I think the battlestar galactica reboot was dismissed too quickly from being a contender. They won because they had god behind them, and god had a plan. I'll put god against star wars and star trek both at the same time. Much plot armour and deus ex machina will be involved, but there you go, it's god. At one point, there may even be a giant glowing hand smushing fleets in one crush.