>>64818488
Guns on the top, guns on the bottom, bridge internalised without being open

>>64818488
Install plot armor.

>>64818488
I think a more interesting question would be how would you change the overall imperial navy to improve it

File: repel-3116752656.jpg (95.3 KB)

95.3 KB JPG

>>64818501
You just described Pellaeon-Class (Best commander) Star Destroyer

>>64818517
Actually use all those other ships they added over the years. Use the ISD as the center of a strike group, so you have a line of pickets, support ships and an Interdictor in addition to the onboard TIEs. Then in fleet-level actions, you form the battle line with the ISDs and squadron up the lighter ships.

>>64818488
Switch half of the heavy turrets to the bottom side, and replace most of the smaller casemate-mounted turbolasers in the trench and superstructure with point defense lasers for anti-fighter protection.

File: 1750081435928.jpg (104.2 KB)

104.2 KB JPG

It's a good vessel. It just needs to be properly supported by Venators.

>>64818540
The ventral heavy guns isn't actually as big of a deal as people make it out. Outside of exceptional close-in fights like Coruscant or Endor, it's a trivial matter to orient the ship with the full main battery able to track onto your target. It would even look very close to the head-on facing that Star Destroyers are usually shown on.

>>64818531
so basically just listen to thrawn?

>>64818613
It's almost like he knew what he was doing...

>>64818547
>*supported by Victory classes and Lancer frigates

>>64818488
Increased laser cannons for more anti-fight ability.

>>64818656
I like the headcanon where thrawn isn't actually a super genius at war, he's just fairly average, but that by comparison to everyone else makes him a genius so all his ideas are basically the same as the Sun Tzu's Art of War where it's not the cheat codes to win war, but how to not be a fucking retard 101

>>64818613
To be fair, there's a little bit of evidence in New Hope that they had some sort of layered system, specifically Han's dismissive mention of "the local bulk cruisers", implying that an ISD was something notable, not that you had ISDs regularly patrolling every backwater. Return of the Jedi gets more questionable, because for all the Imperial ships we see at Endor, they're all Star Destroyers. But that is a dedicated kick-your-shit-in fleet, so it makes sense that the LCS equivalent might get left behind. Then the EU comes along everything turns into a clusterfuck of contradictory claims, but I think it can be best summed up as "there are two kinds of systems/sectors/regions: those with ISDs, and criminally undermanned backwaters".

The thing with the Thrawn approach is that he was using it for active campaigning, while the Empire pre-fall was mostly policing. Probably the best option for that would be a layered response system. You have one DSG assigned to several systems, and it splits its ships up among them. Anything a couple light boats can't deal with on hand gets a call up to HQ and brings the Star Destroyer barreling down on it. If an ISD can't do it, then you have a Major Problem and call up the Moff to bring a Battle Division equivalent.

Ultimately, it's the same problem as Stormtroopers writ large. Across the OT, all the Imperial activity we see is either a Major Response to a Major Problem, or the garrison forces of the Death Stars. We never really get to see the day-to-day of Imperial activity, so we either have to turn to the EU or Disney "canon" to try and get a glimpse of it, and both of those got way too obsessed with the I C O N I C elements to really give life to the mundane part.

>>64818692
In the Truce At Bakura, which was the book canonically set immediately after ROTJ the biggest vessel in the system is a Carrack class which are actually kind of shitty, but still managed to kick the shit out of the small rebel fleet sent.

>>64818488
Better writers.

>>64818705
Fuck, I haven't read Bakura in fifteen years or something. That was where they introduced the Corellian Gunboat, too.

>>64818488
>Put the bridge and shield generators on the inside, replace the existing one with a smaller and less critical viewing deck
>get rid of most of the casemate gun mounts in the side trenches
>replace with a ventral battery equivalent to the one on the top (better firing arcs + more consistent with how ships are depicted performing ground bombardment)
Even more important than the design deficiencies is that the Empire should've changed their fleet composition and tactics, like using Lancers and other picket ships more frequently, or simply just using the main battery as the primary offensive arm instead of wasting TIEs on suicide charges that would otherwise be doing a decent job as defensive interceptors keeping distance against Rebel/NR starfighters.
Despite all the shit the ISD I/II/Tector gets both in lore and in real life, it's consistently depicted as a highly valuable and capable capital ship by all factions in the post-Endor period.
The ISD I is also the best rounded and most cost effective ship in EAW:X Thrawn's Revenge and you can honestly just spam them + corvettes to beat the majority of space battles

>>64818724
I read it in 1997, in a hotel over one night while my flight home from London was delayed. It was actually the book that kickstarted my love of the EU, which is very much like falling in love with a hot BPD girl.

File: SDSD Freudian Nightmare.png (157.2 KB)

157.2 KB PNG

With all the might and resources of the Empire that can be mustered, of course.

>>64818887
I know this thing was made as a joke, but it's considerably smaller in overall volume than even the first Death Stars was, let alone the second.

>>64818488
this shit is the future of /k/
>vidya guns
>movie guns
>ai slop 'what if' guns
>"hahaa what if some le wacky gun!"
this is what /k/ will become if the europussies and their threads arent driven off this board

>>64818488
A bit of a triangle behind to add 6 o'clock defense, hidden bridge as >>64818529 but with prism periscopes for frontal view at least. Guns top and down. But all and all, the triangular shape giving all guns ability to fire frontally is a good design.

>>64818914
Hello war tourist. Kindly get the fuck out.

>>64818488
not call it a "destroyer" (must've been some Jap shipbuilder ancestry in KDY) and add a lot of anti-snubfighter batteries

other than that, it's fine as an amphibious landing ship, which is what it really is

>>64818517
>a more interesting question would be how would you change the overall imperial navy
my vanilla EAW fleet comp is always half Imperial-class or Victory-class SDs, half Tartans
whether the change is to increase SD AA or to carry more dedicated AA cruisers, that would be the main fix
throw in a TIE carrier or once again, increase the onboard space allocated to TIEs, and it's good

playing EAW made me appreciate the need in Star Wars for what IRL is a "frigate-based fleet", i.e. a fleet built on CruRons as the main combat strength rather than CSGs which is what the US Navy currently does

the reasons are that:
at a grand strategic level, the Empire is so vast and the Rebellion so rampant that you need to patrol constantly and be able to respond to local attacks quickly and with overwhelming force. at the same time, you need to simplify production and reduce single points of failure. investing in a large capital ship yard on e.g. Kuat is begging for a Jedi and his plucky commando comrades to slip in, blow everything up and get out.

on a tactical level, it's too easy to pick out the enemy capital ship and focus it down, or disable it with ion cannons or bombers. so no US Navy-style carrier task forces. rather, TIE, amphibious, and ideally AA capability needs to be disaggregated across the squadron, so the enemy cannot bring a "hard counter" and must be forced to whittle down the squadron ship by ship, which favours the Empire's greater resources. Star Wars inherently favours Napoleonic man-o-war combat, so I'd build the SW version of that.

oh and I'd call them Star Cruisers, because that's what they are.

>>64818968
I would kill a man in cold blood for an empire at war sequel, remake or inspired game that delved deeper into the real autistic logistical shit of fleet running. Neb fleet commands conquest mode WAS going to be that until mazer trooned the fuck out and decided to make homeworld without loading screens instead

>>64818968
>oh and I'd call them Star Cruisers, because that's what they are.
No, that's stupid and you should stop trying to force anachronistic wet navy terminology onto the Imperial Fleet. It's not a Torpedo Boat Destroyer, it's a fucking Star Destroyer. Which is admittedly hyperbole, but does a phenomenal job of getting the point across.

File: 00d9ad3226a8eb2ab64e0451298cd593.jpg (122 KB)

122 KB JPG

The Old Republic's Star Destroyer evolution peaked with The Venator.

>>64818501
>bridge internalised without being open
How will you be able to see your slow, visual range enemies then?

File: TIE Fighter catalogue for Sienar Fleet Systems.png (344.4 KB)

344.4 KB PNG

"SCRAMBLE ALL FIGHTERS! REPEAT: SCRAMBLE ALL FIGHTERS!"

Which one you grabbing /k/?

>>64818984
Have you tried any of hte mods? The Empire at War expanded series adds a metric shitton of EU stuff and a lot of new campaigns with bigger maps and better UI

>>64819057
The most terrifying part is that I can't tell where the EU ends and the shitposting begins.

Dibs on the Defender II.

>>64819058
I have, but what I really want is pure logistical autism put into a game like empire at war. I want to have both options of fully automated production, fleet rearm, refit and production, or 100% manual logistical chains down to the single bullet

File: First Order TIE Fighter-Bomber.jpg (120.7 KB)

120.7 KB JPG

>>64819057
>that feel when my waifu isn't on the chart
It's a bummer that the peak TIE design came from a show nobody watched.

File: iy2ifsyb.png (1.5 MB)

1.5 MB PNG

>>64819057
>Specialized variants that got out of hand
>Red so it stands out
>Shares name with ridiculous fighting style
ROYALGUARD because I'm forcing three memes at three times the speed!

>>64819079
was that the ship racing one?

>>64818488
Actually install point defense weapons instead of trying to rely on fighters and raw shield strength. It's literally the vessel's biggest weakness in lore and why X-wings can take them out.

Aside from that line forward facing heavy turrets down the spine on the top and bottom and invest in better fighters for standard roles. TIE Hunters for example would be a VERY good choice to replace both regular TIEs and interceptors for most roles. Then move the "command bridge" deep inside the hull basically combining it with a proper CIC while the former command bridge is repurposed. To what? Idk, but there's really no good reason to have one of the most important rooms on the ship basically unprotected right smack in the middle of the most prominent structure on it.

When it comes to fleet actions KEEP THE FUCKING VENATORS. The Venator was a spectacular battle carrier and the perfect support vessel for a big heavy gun laden vessel that doesn't carry that many fighters. An ISD and a Venator would be a fucking nightmare to deal with even without any other changes to the ISD or the Empire's fighter lineup.

>>64818887
This pic always bothers me. If they can make two Death Stars and operate them fine for the most part (outside of command's incompetence and arrogance) a relatively small vessel like that one would be well within feasibility.

>>64819110
Yeah, "Resistance." Wouldn't recommend the show desu, but it just had a really cool fighter design.

>>64818897
>>64819229
The joke is explained within the image itself.

>>64818488
It was a fine battleship. Just needed proper support craft to create a battlegroup. And droid fighters instead of human beans.

>>64819068
I hear you. That would be rad

>>64818488
Just shoot Tarkin before his dumbass ideas destroy Imperial military doctrine
The dude was the very definition of an industrious idiot

File: 2566ghj.jpg (6.1 KB)

6.1 KB JPG

>>64818488
Put missiles batteries on it.

>>64819344
Droids have the intelligence and reaction speed of a five year old.

>>64819229
>This pic always bothers me. If they can make two Death Stars and operate them fine for the most part (outside of command's incompetence and arrogance) a relatively small vessel like that one would be well within feasibility.
Yes, that's why the Death Star is a retarded plot item. Approaching the scale from the opposite direction reveals how stupid it is.

File: 5star_fortres.jpg (269.2 KB)

269.2 KB JPG

Base it on 5 point star fortress but in 3D. IMHO it's main deficiency is its 2D boat design making it intrinsically weaker against some directions.

>>64819775
So in other words, lose every single engagement against a ship of even 1/2 your tonnage if they approach you nose on?

>>64818488
Add some racing stripes so it can hit hyperspace faster.

File: 1000024620.jpg (171.9 KB)

171.9 KB JPG

>>64819079
The star wars legacy comics had the most neato tie fighters imo

>>64819737
The scale is fine. It's a galaxy spanning empire building a weapon meant to one shot planets and act as an ever looming threat against uprisings. Properly employed while run by people who are not retards it'd be pretty good at the job of subjugation or obliteration. The problem is as usual Imperial overconfidence failing to take the rebels seriously.

File: 95dfe3e844df4e1dac6b54c3c6d6390b.jpg (257.4 KB)

257.4 KB JPG

>>64819249
That can be said for every sequel trilogy craft (except for the Resistance's BTA-NR2 Y-Wing. That one had no thought put into the design at all.)

The sequel movies were dogshit, but the mechanical design was on-point. LOVE the T-70, especially in Poe's custom colors. Always played as Poe in BF2 simply because his black X-Wing is dope as fuck in a way that's *just* short of edgy. Kind of wish squadrons went into the sequel trilogy era for the starfighters alone.

>>64820223
>the scale is fine
The Death Star would need an unimaginable stream of supply ships
The thing would be publicly known the moment staffing began and its position would never be able to remain secret for more than a few days
Its a fucking city, and now requires a city's logistics

File: K-Wing_NEGVV.png (764.2 KB)

764.2 KB PNG

>star wars thread
today i will post it

>>64820278
The Space B17/A10

File: SmartSelect_20260130_085506_Brave.jpg (84.2 KB)

84.2 KB JPG

>>64819057
Out of my way you fucking manlets.

>>64818687
Thrawn isn't an all-around super genius when you take a clsoer look at how he does things anyway. What he absolutely is brilliant at is playing the opponent rather than playing the game.

>>64818692
I mean, RotJ makes sense when they expected an actual fleet action mostly consisting of penning in the rebels for the Death Star. And with ISDs mostly held in the sector-level or above reserves normally, they'd be the first thing you could send without tipping off people.

For the Stormtroopers bit, Andor did a pretty decent job IMO with how it portrayed them as the sledgehammer brought in when the Imperial Army didn't suffice.

>>64818517
Don't be a
>Oops! All battlecarriers
navy

>>64820398
Speaking of day-to-day, this has to be one of my favorite little oddities from ANH.
https://youtu.be/qKdS0gz78RM?t=476 (7:56 if timestamp doesn't work)
I get why it was cut, the last time they were in frame they were in a pitched firefight, but I also enjoy why it was written and filmed. It's a giant fucking military post, of course there's going to be people off-duty walking around out of uniform.

File: AT-TE cope cage.jpg (125.5 KB)

125.5 KB JPG

>Day 1000 of the 3-Parsec Special Military Operation to de-Separate the Outer Rim
>Acclamator and Venator classes functionally extinct, Republic Navy is forced to pull increasing numbers of Mandalorian Wars-era Hammerhead and Interdictor-class cruisers from scrapyards on Raxus Prime to make up for losses
>Republic’s flagship, the Centurion-class battlecruiser Ravager, was destroyed after the CIS successfully distracted the crew with a sign reading “Force users here, free food” and launched a proton torpedo into its exposed core
>culture of institutionalized ass rape has permeated every level of the Grand Army of the Republic, buzz droids have been recorded dropping thermal detonators on clone troopers sucking each others’ dicks at least 66 times in the last week
>it’s been a year since General Anakin Skywalker was killed when his shuttle mysteriously exploded shortly after he led the convicted rapists of the 501st Legion in a failed coup against Palpatine, claiming that he was a Sith Lord, getting to the very gates of Coruscant and completely routing Palpatine’s vaunted clone shock troopers before Jabba the Hutt negotiated a truce
>Milblogger, Republican shill, and convicted pedophile Dave Filoni was detained by clone troopers on suspicion of being a Separatist spy and subsequently gang-raped to death
>AT-TEs are regularly destroyed by Hailfire droids despite being equipped with cope force fields
>so many Borg volunteers sent to help retake Naboo oblast have been killed that the Borg Queen has ordered the survivors pulled off the frontlines (having to fight off Wookie blocking detachments who try to rape them) and sent back to the Delta Quadrant
>despite all of this, Chancellor Palpatine is confident that a complete Republic victory is a mere two parsecs away and that everyone should "trust the Grand Plan" due to flow of supplies from the UNSC to the CIS being recently slowed following the election of Lord Hood on an isolationist platform

>>64818774
>Falling in love with a hot BPD girl.
Fuck you. Everything reminds me of her but it usually isn't so on the nose.

File: truly the epitome of shipbuilding.jpg (6.6 KB)

6.6 KB JPG

>>64820617
>We could've had Yamashiro-tier pagodas.
Okay now I'm sad.

>>64818517
1. 90% of Imperial problems are solved with mass production of shielded TIE Interceptors. Since production lines already up and running, easy to add shields (some variants already had them) and mass produce.
2. Support ISD fleets with Ton Falk escort carrier and Lancers to ensure starfighter superiority.
3. Develop next gen starfighter like TIE Defender/Avenger and roll out to fleet as available.
4. Retrofit Star Destroyers with Mon Calamari redundant shield technology.
5. Don't waste money/political capital on Death Stars or wunderwaffen like SSDs.

>>64818517
You can't in-setting since SHEEV is fucking retarded and the Sith are stuck in 12-year-old mentality of "YEAH BUT IF I BUILD IT BIGGER THEN NO ONE CAN BEAT IT EVER" which infected Imperial Naval doctrine

File: 2879995825_70bc2d276d_o.jpg (849.6 KB)

849.6 KB JPG

>>64820763
Cantwell's original model.

File: 517303491_a6a521d8bf_o.jpg (1.9 MB)

1.9 MB JPG

>>64821010

>>64820617
>>64821010
>"So what exactly do we need a tall superstructure for?"
>"Well space is really big so they need to have lookouts really high up to look over the horizon for enemy ships"

>>64820875
I would actually argue that the SSD does have a very valid place in the Imperial Navy, but not in its role as a dedicated combat ship, but more as a 'fleet' carrier/tender. A single star destroyer can force power over a single planet, maybe a few planets, but it can't he everywhere at once. So for that end you need more than one ISF, perhaps dozens depending on the system and threat at hand. To supply those ships easily and readily you would need to set up a robust logistics chain all the way from your planets and depots to keep those ships and men fed, fueled and ready to fight. When you take the inner systems into account that would be easu, but in the outer rim and systems where empire control is lesser than it should be, you have the risk of logistics being attacked, taking too long, needing to divert, etc etc. Thats why the SSD could be set up to instead be a carrier for captial ships, providing basically a mobile and heavily armed depot for easy and safe resupply, refit and repair. It would be insanely useful the further from the industrial heads of the empire you get, and could still serve in combat itself as a pretty imposing dreadnought, just not dedicated to that role. It could also easily serve the role as a mobile command base for campaigns and land invasions.

>>64819057
>TIE Armageddon
At last! Biblically accurate TIE fighters

>>64819049
Venators are carriers that are under the delusion that they are ships of the line.

While being unable to fire all guns forward, and having a giant weak spot in the middle of the ship. In general battlecarriers are stupid because all design is compromises and a battlecarrier is unnecessarily compromising between a lot more factors than necessary.

It would be better to just make an okay carrier and a good line ship or vice versa depending on priorities

>>64821060
>fantasy battlecarriers are stupid because IRL they are stupid
idiot

>>64818488
make it spherical with gun turrets all over
maybe one big fixed gun that can be aimed by rotating the spacecraft

>>64819068
So, you're waiting for Falling Frontier, then?

FTL mass accelerators all across the hull.
>rapid fire a handful of sand in the enemies direction

>Shields? naw
>Armor? naw
>Fighters? naw
>Bighueg ships? naw
there is only annihilation

>>64820238
After construction the Death Star is large enough to house its own food production and manufacturing facilities. The actual staffing of the thing would be fairly low for its size. Given numbers thrown out by the visual guides the DS1 has a diameter of 160km and houses 1.2 million personnel, which means everyone stationed on the DS could fit onto a single floor with a density of 60 people per square kilometer.

File: shuttle.jpg (10.7 KB)

10.7 KB JPG

>>64819057
If you guys need me, I'll be heading the opposite direction in my captainneedamobile, lounging in a leather chair and getting served drinks by a sexdroid.

>>64821019
>>"So what exactly do we need a tall superstructure for?"
stuntin' on these hoes

>>64818488
>How would /k/ improve Star Destroyer Design?
1: Reduce crew compliment by half, 37,000 is ridiculous by Star Wars standards. How much armor is wasted on the extra living space?
2: Heavily reduce ground troops, assault shuttles, walkers, and all other military ground force equipment. Again, the Star Destroyer is basically a massive armored shell for the shit inside, so there is a high price tag to internal space. Either shrink the ship or affix more weapons, fighters, shields, none of this half and half bullshit. Galactic travel is time is so short, no reason to risk a whole army in the space battle.
3. More point defense, lasers and those missiles(explosive payload) from Episode 3 that could keep up with Jedi starfighters, lots of those missiles. A couple squadrons of shielded and hyperspace capable fighters to round out the TIE compliment. The amount of Star Destroyers they lose to small craft is insane.
4: Lots of torpedoes, especially those Ion ones that disabled that Star Destroyer in Rogue One, hundreds of them. Missiles and torpedoes use no basically power and take up no internal space as launchers can be mounted on the outside of the hull.
5: Command and Control deep inside the ship please. Just get rid of the tower all together, it is a weak point.
6: Possibly a gravity well generator. For how much these ships fly solo and end up hunting small rebels bands, being able to stop them from entering hyperspace more or less eliminates most famous rebel bands.

File: I am not high enough on death sticks for this.png (6.6 KB)

6.6 KB PNG

>>64819057
don't mind me being a literal flying target practice for anyone with a gun

File: tie-interceptorfrontwmissiles.png (254.7 KB)

254.7 KB PNG

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghUh5KgiBuU

>>64818488
this is a question for a faggot board bud, take it off /k/

File: kBK_pKH_JMiXHdDE.webm (3.8 MB)

3.8 MB WEBM

For me its the ARC-170

Literally the F15E of Star Wars

>>64821051
That sounds like the supership Admiral purple-hair rammed in The Last Jedi. It's definitely an interesting concept. Biggest downside is that for a ship that size, whomever commands it is instantly a potential rebellious warlord.

>>64819775
It already functions like one bastion of such a fort, if you combine several of them tehy can cover each other.
The shape allows it to concentrate all firepower in a forward cone.

It obviously has weakneses, like weapon placement, bridge placement, the fact that it carries two divison of landing troops etc.
But the basic shape is pretty good.

>>64819736
ten thousand five year olds are still a threat.

>>64818531
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PN_CP4SuoTU&pp=ygURb3Rha2luZyBzdGFyIHdhcnPYBgo%3D

File: TIE Fighter.jpg (403.1 KB)

403.1 KB JPG

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN_CP4SuoTU

>>64820238
>unimaginable stream of supply ships
What part of "galaxy spanning empire" is so hard to get? That wouldn't be hard and also wouldn't actually be necessary. The station itself is the size of a small moon and the second one is even bigger than the first. The damn thing could EASILY have entire factory levels inside it operated by droids producing the lion's share of it's own supplies. The amount of storage space available in what's effectively a mostly hollow moon would be gargantuan meaning the thing could undoubtedly have the supplies on tap to operate for decades if not longer.
>EVERYONE WOULD KNOW!
Anon... do you know what the purpose of the Death Star is? As far as "staffing", construction was mostly done by slaves and droids, stormtroopers aren't exactly blabbermouths, the Maw is so secure because even if you know about the imperial facilities there it's well defended and a motherfucker to get to without becoming part of a black hole, and once the station is already built the goal is for EVERYONE to know about it. They immediately blew up Alderaan for a reason.

>>64819057
>hop in my TIE Warmachine and inch towards the vacuum of space
>all the other ties are hovering behind me, offering colorful displays of sign language
>flight crew are baffled, 3 of them with glowsticks are giving me 5 different instructions
>comm is lighting up with 7 competing requests for chatter, including the Grand Moff himself now
>stormtroopers are swarming my legs, trying to break my legs to make room
>a TIE Swordfish tries to be cheeky and fly over me, only to clip a crane and come crashing into the shield generators
>the hangar doors slam closed, too late to save half the flight crew and all but one stormtrooper clinging to my legs
>as a squad of engineers arrive to disassemble my ride, I can only ask myself "How the karabast did I park it here in the first place?"

>>64819736
Droid fighters with access to a nearby central brain on the mothership were actually superior the average living pilot. And a Star Destroyer is the perfect mothership. This isn't a converted bulk freighter or a dedicated carrier, without sufficient firepower to keep ships of the line from bearing down on them. This is a fucking mobile space station. The range limitations of droid fighters are irrelevant in this case, the short range TIE fighters on an ISD were already meant to be a mere screening role. The only reasons the Empire stuck with human pilots was to give jobs and patronage, otherwise TIEs are practically meant to be unmanned short range droid fighters.

>>64821835
nah id win

File: d36v7qo-fc94d979-034d-472f-bbdb-82a42689f96a.jpg (496 KB)

496 KB JPG

>>64819057
I'm sad that I keep searching the most offensive ones and get zero results.
On the topic of other TIE (derived) variants, the Predator is cool.

File: 1740755433528693.png (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB PNG

>>64818488
just make the guns better
idk how in all the movies and games you can always fly right up to these things without the guns on them shredding you to pieces

also the name is retarded it doesnt destroy any stars i dont think even the top tier super-duper megaweapon of the starwars universe cant destroy a star. it would be nice if they had some consistency in what the powerlevel of a given spacecraft is and which one can beat which other one

File: Eckhart_type_star_destroyer.jpg (92.4 KB)

92.4 KB JPG

>>64818488

>>64822944
whoever the fuck labelled this is a noshipz

>back flaps
it's called the poop deck
or at the very least, aft sponson
>octuple barbettes
TURRETS
>all eight of them can be used for either a broadside
only seven of them can fire in a broadside
>pursuer
it's called "forward chase armament"
>group your AA turrets in batteries
why? the only reason to IRL warships co-located them was for magazine / feed protection or fire control, neither of which is applicable here

File: Ocean Destroyer.jpg (241.5 KB)

241.5 KB JPG

>>64822940
>also the name is retarded it doesnt destroy any stars
It's a Destroyer... that sails the stars. A Star Destroyer if you will.

>>64823060
'destroyer' ship is just a shortened name for 'torpedo boat destroyer'

i think the name was co-opted later by plane-destroyers since torpedo-boat-destroyers took on that role and equipment so there was some overlap and the name was consistent.

its not an 'ocean destroyer' since it cant destroy or even damage the ocean it can at most pollute a very small part of the ocean for a short period of time.

>>64823073
>the name was co-opted later by plane-destroyers
correct

>>64823060
>It's a Destroyer... that sails the stars. A Star Destroyer
and what was wrong with Star Cruiser? likewise, it cruises the stars, and performs all the roles of a cruiser as well; gunboat diplomacy, trade protection, fleet battle, etc.

>>64820238
>The Death Star would need an unimaginable stream of supply ships
Very imaginable.
It got about 1,2 millions crewmembers.
For a 160km diameter sphere, that's not a lot, mind you : each crewmember got a whole 1,7 cubic kilometer of space. Most of that is mecanical sections but one can assume there's no lack of storage room.
Park it above a populated industrialized planet and you suddenly need a lot less ships to make the supply runs.
Just fill up storage to the brim and you got yourself possibly weeks or even months of independant operations.

>>64823114
>and what was wrong with Star Cruiser
Nothing, there is after all the Mon Calamari Star Cruiser. Not to mention the Munificent-class Star Frigate and the Executor-class Star Dreadnought.

>>64823178
>each crewmember got a whole 1,7 cubic kilometer of space
>supply runs
unnecessary, that's plenty of space for wholly independent life-support, even if 90% of that is taken up with power, propulsion, and combat systems

>>64821019
Taller radio antenna = longer range

>>64819049
double down on venators and spam droid fighters to augment human piloted fighters like the loyal wingman concept.

>>64823114
>and what was wrong with Star Cruiser?
Palpy didn't have complete control yet and needed to slip a few tings pass the Senate.

>>64824013
>Mountbatten reference
I'll allow it

Oddly enough I think they are too generalized. They do well enough for what they were designed for, but it was too wide a scope. So it’s a front line warship, heavily armed and armored. But it’s also a carrier, which is fine, but it’s also also a transport for ground troops. That’s where you lose the plot. Sure, your average planet in starwars isn’t going to be able to handle a single star destroyer. It’s a mighty force projector, but it doesn’t need to be all of those. I would argue you should completely cut out the ground forces aspect and dump all of that space into increasing its fighter complement. That’s the space for over 9,700 storm troopers, 20 or so AT-ATs, as well as 30 or so AT-STs. Replace all of those ground forces with more star fighters, and maybe keep a small number of marines for boarding other vessels. The empire had dedicated ground force transports. But its mainline battleship could also do it all which is silly.

Now yes a capitol ship that can hold its own in space as well as strike ground targets can be useful, but it’s kind of moot if you’ve already got the space combat locked down and all that is left is the ground aspect. You are keeping a fair tonnage of battleship locked in an orbit and preventing it from doing its intended job of projecting power in space. A space superiority variant would be what I would like. Pure battle carrier, with none of the ground assault aspects. Maybe add in a couple of the heavy ion canons from the Allegiance class on the dorsal and ventral surfaces.

Definitely keep the bridge where it is, but turn it into a crew rec zone. Take the back up battle bridge and turn that into the primary bridge. Leave that space up top though so people that think it’s the obviously best target available are suckered into hitting it first before realizing that it isn’t the target they think it is.

>>64824791
It's a ship for the police actions The Empire expected to fight post-Clone wars. A Star destroyer is an expeditionary force in a can; Enough storm troopers and TIE fighters to retake a planet, and naval gunfire support, as well as blowing apart whatever civilian craft are dumb enough to get in the way of a battleship's guns. The rebels were largely not considered that big of a problem until they blew up the Death Star and I'm fairly certain they didn't even have a fleet until around the time of RotJ. It wasn't expected that anyone would be able to actually go toe-to-toe with one.

>>64825660
That is what it was designed for, yes. However, I argue that is too much to expect out of one vessel. Dividing space and land as two entirely different battle zones is what I was recommending as my ideal star destroyer. Same as our battleships of yore didn’t carry entire armies worth of material, I believe the ideal star destroyer should take that army component and move it to pure space combat. It’s a terror weapon, it can still do that without carrying an army contingent. It’s appearance over a planet indicates what is to follow.

FAMAS
>>64818517
Throw Tarkin in a fucking black hole and then have a mixed space navy focused on carriers for rapid response. Star destroyer has a place, but as a giant target/orbital bombardier to keep carriers safe.
The death star was always a really fucking stupid plan because it can be done much more effectively just a group of star destroyers gassing the planet like they did in Mandelor. In fact that planet provides a giant compotency plot hole in star wars because the empire was able to effectively destroy a planet before the death star, making its creation nothing more than "palpatine evil"

>>64818488
No amount of redesigning would matter. The narrative of the universe, and the authors of the expanded universe, made sure that the Star Destroyer shared the same fate as every other Imperial war machine: It fails spectacularly, even in situations where it should excel. However narrow those situations might be.

Take the TIE fighter, for instance: In every metric that means anything, it should be considered superior to the X-Wing. Shields? First of all, TIE fighters have shields in the films. We see them. Second, it doesn't matter. X-Wings and TIE fighters blast each other to pieces in single bursts of their armaments. The shields make no difference.

>>64821014
>>64821010
That's a big ladder...

File: Throne.png (1 MB)

1 MB PNG

>>64826102
>The death star was always a really fucking stupid plan because it can be done much more effectively just a group of star destroyers gassing the planet like they did in Mandelor.
I don't know much about the Disney stuff but the point of the Death Star was to bypass planetary shields, the one on Hoth was capable of repelling the firepower of Death squadron led by the Executor while the surface Ion Cannon could disable entire Star Destroyers in orbit. The rational behind the Tarkin doctrine was that the Galaxy was too big to police, the Republic after all represented 1.2 million worlds. The Empire could not garrison all those worlds with enough troops to hold the world in the event of an uprising. So they relied on an approach of fear. Widespread rebellion will break the Empire but you really don't want to go first so keep your head down.
Planetary Shields allow worlds to turtle shell and with populations in the millions or billions you need a much bigger army than what hit Hoth to go down there and destroy the shield generators and anti-orbital guns. In the event of a wide spread rebellion, individual planets can hold out behind their shields while the rebellion builds up its space force and offers relief. With the Death Star, shields are meaningless, Alderaan had one. The Death Star more or less ends the threat of entire worlds rebelling... unless it has some sort of critical weakness.
The Death Star especially makes sense from the point of view of Palpatine because the Empire was never about making a great society, it was about control and the Death Star was meant to be his invincible throne, which it would have been without the one flaw. Putting those resources into a bigger and better star fleet just means that if a major rebellion does break out, there is the risk of Moffs and Governors defecting with those forces. The Death Star as a concept is over hated desu.

>>64819057
>tie tallboy
>tie rex
Lmao

>>64821060
>In general battlecarriers are stupid because all design is compromises
With spaceships a space carrier just needs cargo space and a hangar door. Sure it is parasitic mass in a direct fire situation, but it is far more flexible than a terrestirial real world flight deck.

You're also forgetting that these are patrolling and operational cruisers that are doing independent and small fleet operations and they do need a hangar anyways to dock corvettes, shuttles, landing craft and the like. They are multirole.

>>64823073
>torpedo boat destroyer'
Which themselves carried torpedo launchers that could threaten larger ships. Battle of Surigao Strait (25 October 1944) IJN Fusō was torpedoed by USS Melvin (DD-680).

>>64827212
I do agree with the other poster that the venator is a joke. That said, I agree battle carriers in space make sense, but they have to be of a certain size. The square cube law being a thing, the larger the vessel the more internal volume compared to external surface you get. For something as small as a CR-90 you can’t really add hanger space without adding more space to the vessel. It’s just too small considering all of its internals are already needed to do the thing it’s designed to do. Something the size of a star destroyer though, when you look at how much surface space compared to internal volume that number jumps fantastically. There is more room inside even if you want to keep the same ratio of weapons on its surface compared to actual surface area. The Luchrehulk is a great example of a ship with a huge carrying capacity but still capable of being a battleship. The venator on the other hand, it uses faaaaar to much of its internal space to be a carrier. It just didn’t leave enough for weapons for it to be a competent battlecarrier. That said, considering what they were facing with the CIS being able to field vast quantities of droid starfighter it kind of does make sense for the republic to have a large carrier, I just think they should have made it a dedicated carrier and had a separate dedicated front liner like the victory. Something something palpatine from the sidelines with his boney fingers in everyone’s plans. Ships like the Ton Falk are perfect in my opinion. You get a vessel with a large carrier capacity and you deploy it behind the actual battle fleet. Even better if you are using Ties with hyperdrives because you can plop the carrier out at the edge of the system and let the ties jump into the battle, but not from so great a distance that the pilots are fatigued from sitting in a cramped cockpit like the rebels end up time and time again.

>>64826075
Perhaps but it's functionally a mobile forward operating base; even if a single SD isn't up for the job it allows a convenient staging point for additional forces.

>>64826102
Going by EU both old and new, the point of the Death Star is to punch through planetary shielding and Base Delta Zero in optimal conditions took hours and needed an entire fleet to carry out.

File: eHSOBKg.jpg (273.6 KB)

273.6 KB JPG

>>64827289
>The venator on the other hand, it uses faaaaar to much of its internal space to be a carrier. It just didn’t leave enough for weapons for it to be a competent battlecarrier.
I disagree on that. The Venator has a sound strategy. Four massive Heavy Turbolasers for a extremely long range broadside combined with strong shields. A normal carrier sits far back and releases fighters, a Venator does the same thing but then snipes at distance. That is why it only has long guns, to snipe and lasers to swat flies, it is made to kite enemy capital ships while fighters and long distance shooting chews them up.
The lack of a proper warship to go toe to toe is because the people who make Star Wars seem to have a allergic reaction to portraying the Republics Victory class Star Destroyers and Dreadnought class Heavy Cruisers on screen, they were supposed to be the bruisers.

File: Altor-class.jpg (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB JPG

>>64821051
>>64821542
>'fleet' carrier/tender
That was a thing in Legends, the Altor-class

File: MC80 Mon Calamari Cruiser.jpg (500 KB)

500 KB JPG

rebel ships are better and cooler

>>64824791
not sure how well this translates, but in many 4x games I play where you have separate space and ground forces it can be very easy for your combat fleet to outrun your groundforces. You may have taken vast swathes of enemy territory and have token blockade forces over enemy planets, but if you can't actually go down and taken the planet it's possible for the enemy do things you don't want them doing just behind your frontline. It's best, if possible, to have your ground troops (or at least a strong marine presence) either with your space combat arm or right behind them.

>>64827546
>enjoys blotchy "textured for his pleasure" turds over grey Doritos
sissyboy femboy FAG

File: 1390156010100.jpg (194.4 KB)

194.4 KB JPG

>>64827546
Based.

File: assault frigates.jpg (64.6 KB)

64.6 KB JPG

>>64827546

For me, it's the Assault Frigates

I have a constitutional right to own an Assault Frigate

File: Assault Frigate Mark II.png (723.4 KB)

723.4 KB PNG

>>64827597

>>64820617
>>64821010
Reminds me of the Macross' bridge
>Alien spaceship
>But bridge is retrofitted with human sensor tech

>>64818914
>nigger thinks nobody was discussing fictional weaponry before the war
you're trying way too hard to fit in. which is to say, you don't fit in, at all, you don't belong here.

>>64827782
Honestly the slightly off topic threads are the best ones. I remember a whole ass thread bitching about Xwings requiring ladders over the built in ones on a and b wings

File: CINSTARWARSTLJ (3).jpg (168.2 KB)

168.2 KB JPG

>>64827546
And damn, they make fantastic kinetic kill vehicles!

>>64828340
>how do we top the hyperspace ram that killed all power scaling for the SW universe in the 3rd movie
>why don't we put the Death Stars planet killing laser on a bunch of regular sized cruisers.
I hate Disney soooo much.

>>64818692
>both of those got way too obsessed with the I C O N I C elements to really give life to the mundane part.
It's a shame too because if you use the iconic stuff sparingly it feels like way more of a big moment when it does show up.

>>64818488
Ion turrets only. Adversaries have shielded multi-role lightspeed drive craft-- take their shields away faster, especially the Y-Wings doing the same bombing runs on the capital ship's own shields.

Also more light cruiser escorts and light carrier equivalents with interceptors and heavy fighters to interdict Y-Wings and A-Wings, while providing alternative emergency landing/craft swap outs.

>>64821060
My experience in Starsector has led me to the opinion that battlecarriers are stupid if you try to use them as "carrier that can brawl" but quite good if you use them as "ship of the line that brings its own fighter screen" especially if it's a ship that will be operating away from the rest of your fleet e.g. flanking.

>>64828570
It is a total writer's problem to raise the stakes so high. Empire Strikes Back is escaping hoth followed by being trapped on cloud city. The stakes are highest when the fleet escapes hoth and the rest is just the personal safety of the characters. Wrath of Khan has a stolen science experiment that could "nuke" a single planet, in a universe where glassing planets is already feasible, the problem is more tracking down the fugitive Khan and finding the missing Miranda crew and science team. Search for Spock is personal threat. Star trek 1 and 4 are about saving Earth from a doomsday device.

Prequels 1 through 3 are about a small war and larger wars and the political intrigue causing them. They're not about goofy-ass death stars.

>>64822940
there is actually a top tier super-duper megaweapon that specifically kills stars

it is creatively named the sun crusher

>>64828762
>Its a single seat fighter

>>64828744
Video games are kinda fucked the same way real life gets fucked. It is hard to balance fighters with ships. Either you end up with weak fighters that die and are really expensive missiles or they dominate everything like how ships got dominated by aircraft in WW2.

I don't know how they work in starsector. Some games of your fighters get shot down you're fucked and have to buy new ones, some games they regenerate. Usually some kind of flak turrets can just negate enemy fighters so the optimal strategy becomes a bunch of dreadnauts to fight dreadnauts and some flak mixed in to pop fighters and missiles which are the only objects the dreadnaut cannons won't autodelete.

>>64828786
The main issue with carrier-that-brawls in Starsector is that, as one would expect, it's just a worse carrier. If you want to put a lot of fighters you're better off with a pue carrier and you're probably best not trying to outfit that carrier to shoot stuff. Park it in the backline, let it send out fighters.

However, fighter screens can sometimes be competitive with fixed flak/pd. If you rely on flak/pd mounted on your capital ship, it has a limited angle of coverage, and turning your ship around when a missile circles it isn't great, so you have to have flak/pd on angles. Conversely a couple fighter squadrons can cover you from any angle and you can use less or no flak/pd. Whether this tradeoff is worth it depends on the ship. For something like the Odyssey that aims to keep its distance and flank/harass the enemy fleet with a fixed orientation, its own self-supplied fighter escort is great, and flak/pd on its far side would be wasted most of the time. On the other hand a ship that's going to be in the middle of things and would have targets on all sides all the time (like the Onslaught) would probably not benefit much from fighters even if it had hangars added - its flak/pd would not be sitting idle so putting them on all angles would still be useful.

That said Starsector does not have anti-missile missiles; if it did, they might be a superior choice to fighter screens.

>>64828786
in starsector you have a certain number of fighter wings that regenerate lost members at a declining rate but also carriers ate a large nerf a few patches back because they dominated everything

i miss dumping 32 torpedoes into a target every fifteen seconds or so

>>64827537
I was thinking less of a dedicated replenishment ship and more of a mobile operations base

>>64828570
You're forgetting the best part
>Need to explain how these ships with death star lasers were built
>Make a comic about it
>Turns out that the Fleet was built in secret and was finished before the Return of the Jedi Movie
>Emperor didn't want to use the fleet he wanted to pretend to be dead so he could kill off the Empire that failed to protect him.. for reasons

File: CINFOUNDATION (113).jpg (222.8 KB)

222.8 KB JPG

>>64829227
At least Foundation has tact…but fucked up bad on scale

>>64827559
That sounds like a skill issue if I’m being honest. That’s all part of those games, adequately managing your forces.

>>64827424
The main issue with a Venator is how hyperspace works. We've seen both in the Clone Wars and Rogue One that an enemy fleet can drop out of hyperspace right on top of you. With so much firepower concentrated in the air wing, a Venator is going to have problems when someone jumps on top of them.

This doesn't make a Venator a bad ship by any means. If your goal is planetary invasions to unite the galaxy, then Venators/Acclimators make total sense. But you need to supplement them with brawlers like Venators, Dreadnoughts, and ultimately, ISDs.

>>64829625
*ugh, supplement with Victories, not Venators.

>>64829625
>Disney canon

File: danbo downtrodden.jpg (39.3 KB)

39.3 KB JPG

>>64827121
>The Empire could not garrison all those worlds with enough troops to hold the world in the event of an uprising.
I'd say that you could do it with Droids, but I think the reason the Trade Federation was pushed to use the Droid army was so Palpatine could see if that was thesable, and their failure proved it unsuited to the task.

>>64824791
>they are too generalized

>>64826075
>that is too much to expect out of one vessel
>Same as our battleships of yore didn’t carry entire armies worth of material
you're arguing in a very abstract way that SDs can't do this because IRL BBs can't, without actually specifying and enumerating the factors involved, which is what IRL naval planners do:

>Ship A's armament must be able to penetrate the projected enemy X Navy's Ship B's armour of Y inches at Z range
>Ship A must carry B number of troops for C number of days and deploy them using D number of landing craft within E hours
>the reason why is that B number of troops is necessary for conducting a Z style attack against Y number of enemies armed with X weapons
>E hours is specified because otherwise Nation P will be able to swamp the beach-head with Q numbers of reinforcements
and most importantly
>we need Z numbers of Ship A and we only have Y numbers of galactic dollars to do it, now figure it out, gentlemen

>>64828751
excellent analysis

>>64828786
>It is hard to balance
it wouldn't be if people stopped lazily cribbing WW2 memes and actually developed space navies based on actual in-game limiting factors

>>64826075
Keeping the Venators is the best way to accomplish what you'd be after without needing to make a single change to the actual Imperial I and II class star destroyers. Alongside being a respectable battlecarrier Venators can do something Imperial Is and IIs can't. They can land without specialized facilities and take their entire ground force planetside, no shuttles needed. A Venator's contingent of ground forces can be huge and that force can be deployed all together. Meanwhile the space previously dedicated to ground vehicles and other ground forces materiel in the ISDs can now be filled with more fighters and bombers. The ISD is better off due to a larger fighter screen and invasions are easier too with the ISDs maintaining orbital supremacy and can offer massive support while Venators dominate actual ground invasions or provide even more fighters to the mix while in orbit.

>>64829697
The Clone Wars would've likely changed his mind on this point with the CIS conquering and holding many worlds before the curtain dropped. The big risk now becomes well organized forced and cyber warfare. What happens if an "order" gets put into his own droids? What happens if a manufacturer sneaks in a mass shutdown command just like what had happened to the CIS droid army? What about a "Kill daddy Palpypoo and anyone that gets in the way" command turning the entire force on him? The only way to stop that sort of thing would be things like super tactical droids that can deny such commands, which are a threat on their own just by existing. Palpatine experimented with this stuff too and I'd say THIS is the bigger reason droids are less prominent in the Imperial military.

The ISD is already perfect. Its the ship you need when a peer galactic superpower comes trying to topple your government and you need to claw their eyes out with your bare hands or die trying.

The rebel alliance was unfortunately just not the kind of enemy who had front lines, strong points or critical infrastructure. 10 ISDs would have made the clone wars a stomp on either side.

>>64830317
>The ISD is already perfect
just about, yeah
>>64830317
>10 ISDs would have made the clone wars a stomp on either side.
nigger what? how would 10 ships make a difference in a galaxy of millions of planets?

File: 20260202134734_1.jpg (328.3 KB)

328.3 KB JPG

>>64819057
>TIEs
Get in lads, we're the boarding party!

>>64818488
Remove the auxiliary port and starboard engines. Remove the hangar. Put the turbo lasers on top of the superstructures in a single line so their targeting is much wider and shared. Slim down all the structure you no longer need and produce twice or thrice as many.

>>64818488
Make it smaller and cheaper by removing the troop compliment and reducing hanger size and then putting it in a fleet with Venators for fighter coverage and Arquitens and Gozantis for screening. For planetside ops the empire should have just kept Acclimators. Trying to make a do-everything terror ship was just dumb when you could just use propaganda to gas it up for the public while maintaining an effective fighting force otherwise.

File: Victory-class.png (3.1 MB)

3.1 MB PNG

>>64830749
>Make it smaller and cheaper by removing the troop compliment and reducing hanger size and then putting it in a fleet with Venators for fighter coverage and Arquitens and Gozantis for screening.
Congrats on reinventing the Victory-class I guess.

>>64818488
more brothels

For me, it's the Acclamator-class transgalactic military assault ship
>Capital ship
>Can still engage other capital ships
>Can bring thousands of troops, their equipment, gunships, assault walkers, command centers, and troop transports to the planet surface
Star Destroyers are retarded

File: Acclamators_damaged_over_Ryloth.png (1.3 MB)

1.3 MB PNG

>>64831392
If 10 Acclamators were to square off against 1 Imperial Star Destroyer, not only would they probably be fucked if they didn't run for it but so would the 16,000 troops on board each one destroyed and all their equipment. This isn't particularly surprising since they are mostly hollow and moderately armed. At best you could use them as makeshift carriers by replacing their gunships with fighters.
Acclamators have their place in the fleet, its an armored box designed to get whole armies on the ground under fire but they are not made with proper space battles in mind, a dangerous combination of too weak for its size and too much valuable cargo inside. There is a reason the Republic rushed out the Venator ASAP and almost never used Acclamators in warship vs warship role.

>>64831476
That's fucking retarded. Lancasters square law means numbers advantages in ranged combat produce exponential returns.

File: file.png (2.3 MB)

2.3 MB PNG

>>64820617
I swear to god the sora prompt was "what if a battleship looked like a star destroyer"...
I hate me for not 100% hating it.

File: Imperator class by Grok.png (577.3 KB)

577.3 KB PNG

>>64831770
Lanchester's square only really works when you're talking similarly armed infantry, usually early 1900s and earlier infantry at that. Not artillery, not machine guns, not tanks, sure as shit not naval vessels with a massive differences in armor and armament. It's hardly a "law" when either side has advantages of any sort. If everyone's got a 5 round bolt action on flat ground it's a good rule. The second one side brings a semi auto it's fucking over.

If you sent hundreds of LSM(R)-501s against one single Iowa the 501s are going to get their shit pushed in even with that heavier than usual 5 incher and all those rockets unless it's a particularly lucky engagement. This is basically the Acclamators vs an ISD. The Acclamators are slightly better off having a few heavy proton torpedo launchers which unlike the 501's rockets would still be potentially effective, but that's their only ace in the hole against a ship that is otherwise better by every measure.

Keeping it to infantry because that's what that "law" actually applies to, 1000 Wermacht troops armed with Kar98Ks are going to get their shit absolutely rocked by a much smaller force of modern muhrines with M-27s.

File: barry front cropped.jpg (659.8 KB)

659.8 KB JPG

>>64823060
That takes me back

File: BPN17.jpg (277.1 KB)

277.1 KB JPG

>>64818488
I'd space out the mains guns a bit more for better firing arcs.

While I'm in a star wars thread. How the fuck did the First Order manage to lose over a million men in a couple of days, while they were holding all the cards.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=6M7df5lWaYM
It must be my bias because that stuck out when I first saw the film. I had completely forgotten about the Death Stars being destroyed. Why are all the Imperials cursed with incompetence?
The death tally here is wack.
https://listofdeaths.fandom.com/wiki/Star_Wars_Live-Action_Film_Series

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN_CP4SuoTU

>>64832274
Lmao, it's like ten cruisers against an Iowa, starting at potato throwing range.

>>64818488
A lot stronger sub-lightspeed thrusters, or much more generous spacing between ships to prevent downed ones from kamikazee'ing the others, like with Vader's.

>>64833202
>It must be my bias because that stuck out when I first saw the film. I had completely forgotten about the Death Stars being destroyed. Why are all the Imperials cursed with incompetence?
First Death Star was taken out by a guy who just joined the rebellion using space magic and the second was supposed to be protected by a shield generator that was destroyed due to the help of a group of furry tree halflings that decided that a protocol droid was a deity.

Last Jedi starts with them losing the first giant star destroyer because they decided to not use any of the missile launchers that show Poe down in the first scene of the previous film.

>>64818488
I'd build a large number of smaller ships. There's nothing mounted on the star destroyer that should need such a massive hull.
In parallel, I'd also try to develop a weapon system that DOES need a massive hull. There's got to be some intermediate stage between the little turret-mounted lasers and the Death Star main gun, that's the right size to build a star destroyer around. Something that can hopefully engage enemy capital ships from well outside their range, while a screen of frigates protects the big guns from enemy fightercraft.

>>64819057
For me it's the M1 Bizarro

>>64820278
God I hate this thing.

>>64820617
Isn't that based on the original model for star destroyers?

>>64833220
The Acclamators are woefully under-gunned and under-protected to be compared to cruisers. They really are just very well armed troop transports when you get down to it. They're even classed as "assault ships" or transports. Even at close range the ISD is just going to hammer the piss out of them with it's vastly superior arsenal and defenses. You're thinking of the Venator or Victory class, 10 of either would win that fight. 10 Munificents would also likely put up a good fight. The Acclamators would be wholly reliant on their proton torpedoes, any fighters onboard, and lucky hits. God help them if the ISD starts farther out. Again, a lucky engagement (potato throwing range) is one of the few ways they win.

The Acclamator is an amazing landing ship capable of putting an entire army in the field rapidly with heavy support on tap. That's it's primary purpose. They lose in slugging matches. The Venator was the response to this realization and can actually brawl. The Victory ditches the transport role outright instead doing nasty things in space. It's extremely disappointing that the Victory class never showed up in any of the Clone Wars series.

>>64833331
Can you read the text in the image?

>>64833596
Clearly not, in my defense I sold my retinas for a pallet of .25 ACP

>>64833646
Worthy trade, a true /k/ommando. Here let me help you out, it says:
>Star Wars Star Destroyer redesign. Based on early Ep. IV prototypes and McQuarrie concepts
It also says, on the bottom:
>technouveau

File: tumblr_on7zrwImjH1smw5dno5_640.gif (2.9 MB)

2.9 MB GIF

>>64835050
What's air defense doing!?

>>64818488
>no promenade
ugh

>>64819057
TIE Rex (lol) for the boarding action

>>64828744
You can't use Starsector as a guide. It's not even an engineering game. For one thing, even with mods, the AI is woefully simplistic. More importantly, you can't design ships yourself, at best only tweaking them, so any cost is arbitrary, and any design insights you might be able to glean is essentially a matter of coincidence. There was once a time when fighters were supreme, to the point that the optimal build for every ship that wasn't a carrier involved adding converted hangars (for those who don't play the game, they're improvised flight decks for non-carrier ships). Your (currently correct) judgement on the sliding scale of combat carriers only exists because fighters are currently, a situational option. So it's no surprise that a ship that prefers fighters to guns is outclassed by a ship that does the opposite.

File: image_f11861cb-4137566974.jpg (92.4 KB)

92.4 KB JPG

Lemme just mind meld with my canonically accurate prototype

>>64818488
Elongate it and give it a bumper sticker that says "WE BRAKE FOR NOBODY"

File: SD bridge.jpg (88.5 KB)

88.5 KB JPG

Being in combat, being shuddered, slipping on the polished floor, and falling into the pit on top of some poor bastard manning their console

>>64835050
would that actually work?