Star Trek's Star Destroyers
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 июл 2024
- Today we look into the age old Comparison Between Various Star Trek Ships and the Iconic Imperial Star Destroyers From Star Wars. Examining the Merits of such a comparison. First looking at what makes a Star Destroyer and then comparing these qualities to the Romulan D'deridex, the Jem'hadar Battleship, and the Cardassian Hutet class. looking at the similarities and differences between these ships and the fleets that employ them.
Special thanks to Ryselle3D and the 4th Combined fleet for their renders 
Развлечения
Now we need a video about the Arleigh Burke class, the American warbird
I would consider warbirds to be SSBNs so the Los Angeles class is closer.
Iowa class..
Your thinking of the Ohio Class or the upcoming Columbia Class Ballistic Missile Submarines (SSBN), the Los Angeles Class, Seawolf Class, and Virginia Class are the Attack Submarines (SSN).
Have you seen the new flight of Arleigh Burkes? They're more Excelsiors in the fact that we're never going to be rid of them
@@quentinking4351The Arleigh Burke and the BUFF are forever.
Something to remember about the ISD: it's a REPUBLIC design. It was designed during the Clone Wars and intended to work alongside the Tector (same hull, no hangar, far more armor, shielding, and firepower), Venator (battlecarrier), Victor (AKA Victory, planetary assault support ship or heavy cruiser depending on the variant), and Acclamator (pure planetary assault ship, carrier, or lighter heavy cruiser depending on the variant), plus smaller vessels. It entered the war very late (the first prototype was part of the first wave of reinforcements at the Battle of Coruscant)... And it worked well enough that in Palpatine's Imperial Navy it could be justified to replace the Venator and Acclamator for being too much associated to the Republic) and reduce production for the more specialized Victory I (the heavy combat Victory II was out of production entirely) and Tector).
Yeah I'd say that the ISD was built to master the Clone Wars, but like many ships built for the last war, it wasn't as suited to the next war. The introduction of the X-Wing as a revolutionary new multi-role fighter kinda signed the death warrant for the ISD, which otherwise only really needed lasers and disposable tie fighters for countering confederate droid fighters.
The Hutet looks like a hammerhead shark to me. I'm sure oceanic peoples would have more of a fear ingrained due to it's shape, but you can't deny the hammerhead look.
Or, indeed to me it looks like a giant Hammer coming to crush what ever is facing it
You could also say its design could make it look less of a threat and underestimated. Underestimating an enemy could be your downfall especially after it fires its main weapons.
Most Cardassian designs remind me of the horseshoe crab, a completely harmless animal. The Hutet is a little different, but still seems like a strange mutation of all the other horseshoe crab ships.
But hammerheads are tasty! How is tasty food scary?
For me, from front it look like a water spider, but from side, like a mace.
I like your comparison of doctrine and design philosophy much more than “my numbers are bigger” style comparisons.
@@Tyr666Thor yeah it's the only honestly fair way to compare universes. And to its credit star wars does have a fairly substantial naval doctrine In the clone wars
@@venomgeekmedia9886 ISD make sense if we realize that they were an Assault Ships. What were vastly mishandled by Empire as Battleships (which in EU they also did have). In this context closest equivalent would be Klingon design of Assault Ships, what also tend to have a lot of weapons.
Federation at least in Beta has doctrine closer to realistic. ISD absolutely was not a equivalent of actual Destroyer! And for reminder Trek did have Destroyers in Beta. With Saber and NX Refit being examples.
Romulans would have loved Tarkin Doctrine. It fits them well.
The numbers game is silly when you consider that SW ships only have a speed advantage if they have hyperlanes mapped out, and can't fight at superluminal speeds anyway. Whereas Trek ships have insanely accurate targeting capabilities across distance and at insane velocity. Dating back to TOS, Trek ships fought at FTL often and could bull-s eye a target at 100K +. SW relies on gunners and their ships maneuver like trash at sublight. They'd get sniped and/or strafed to death by Trek ships without contest, regardless how strong their shields or plot-driven turbolasers are.
@@The_Lucent_Archangel Yeh, people notoriously ignore that comparable tech exist in both universes. Star Wars Technological level is mostly comparable to pre-NX era tech. Where they still did use a lot of nukes (proton weapon), plasma (blasters) and early shields (and SW barely has shields).
No one asked but, i decided to post anyway. Turbolasers are basically the ships gun batteries, with the heavy ones being equivalent to a pre dreadnought battleships main battery and the medium being equivalent to its secondaries and light ones being tertiary and point defense. Ion Cannons are used primarily to disable enemy ships, since it has an EMP like effect on ships. Lasers are basically point defense at the Star Destroyers scale. Finally tractor beams are the same as the Star Trek version but are considered a weapon system in Star Wars. Edit: Regarding the Hutet, I actually see it as an equivalent to a Super Star Destroyer like the Executor from Empire Strikes Back, a massive Command Ship to serve as the core of a fleet. Edit2: Also the comparison between the Hutet and a super star destroyer is apt since both are overly large and almost too much ship for their intended missions.
The intended mission of a Super Star Destroyer, or rather a Star Dreadnought (Dreadnought for short) is to wipe out an enemy fleet from distance while they make a futile and desperate charge at it and gets annihilated by its salvoes, with the stragglers (assuming there are) being picked apart by the escorts. That's why they're that big, because they have to take on vast fleets. And the lore shows just how devastating they can be in what kind of insanity is needed to defeat them without a few thousand ISD-sized ships or another dreadnought:
1)Executor (Battle of Endor): the Return of the Jedi novelization mentions that the Rebels brought fire ships - that is, ships filled with explosives to throw at the enemy. Ever wondered what the Rebel transports were doing at Endor? They were kamikaze'd in the Executor until the shields were low enough that the fighters could bring down the bridge's deflector.
2)Eclipse (SW Legends): Palpatine's out-of-control Force Storm.
3)Eclipse II (SW Legends): Rammed into a superweapon capable of blowing up planets from the other side of the galaxy. IT SURVIVED, but lost the engines and crashed on the planet they were orbiting, at which point the reactors blew up ship and planet.
4)Ravager (Battle of Jakku): It was casually decimating the New Republic fleet, with the escorts keeping away those pesky fire ships, when a Star Hawk-class battlecruiser got through... And used its immense tractor beam to drag both ships down to the surface. The ship remained mostly intact, but the crew died in the crash. The New Republic later picked it apart and took away anything useful.
5)Lusankya (SW Legends): After years of battles and with little spare parts to fix her, she had all her weapons taken away and then was used to ram a Yuuzhan Vong worldship - that is, an equally large if not larger ship.
Don't forget the different weapon power in different universes
@@lordMartiya,
The issue _I_ have with your "mission profile" for SSDs is, the dimensions of SSDs make it very difficult for them to destroy enemy fleets, as enemy fleets can maneuver around them in such a way to limit their exposure to the SSDs' weapons. Swarming SSDs is the best way to lose a battle, I'm sure there is at least one Grand Admiral out there who will shoot any subordinate who does that, assuming said subordinate survived to report the loss of the fleet Grand Admiral Thrawn by such brainless tactic.
You defeat such a ship by leading it into carefully laid traps, or have a portion of the fleet exit hyperspace in its rear, and maneuver in such a way to prevent it from shielding it's engines from attack. Once it can't maneuver, you carefully move around it blasting all of its weapons apart. During the Bacta War campaign, Wedge Antilles attempted to use both of those strategies against the Lusyanka with some success (it did surrender to 2 ISDs, an Obsolescent Alderaan Frigate, and several dozen Armed Merchant "Cruisers").
There are several problems with Star Wars... and one of those is scale. What _threat_ is the ISDs meant to take out? What possible justification can be made to _justify_ using all those materials to build such a ship, the personnel needed to crew it, and the supplies it goes through a month? The Empire could build dozens of ISDs for the cost of a single SSD and, collectively, the ISDs would have similar firepower to the SSD.
From the internet, the Executor class ships had 5000 Turbolaser Batteries, 2000 Heavy Turbolasers, 250 Heavy Ion Cannons, 500 Point Defense Lasers, and 250 Heavy Concussion Missile Batteries.
From the internet, the ISD-I class ships had 60 turbolasers and 60 ion cannons.
From the internet the ISD-II class ships had 50 Heavy turbolaser batteries, 50 Heavy turbolaser cannons, 26 Additional turbolaser batteries, 20 Heavy ion cannons, and 8 Octuple barbette turbolasers.
From the internet, the dimensions of the Executor class is 19,000 meters by 4,750 meters, by 1,270 meters. The dimensions of the ISD class ships are 1,600 meters by 450 meters, by 300 meters (a bit more than that due to the “command tower”).
Assuming both ships are rectangular prisms, the SSD has a volume of 1.14 x10^11 meters cubed and the ISD has a volume of 2.16 x10^8 meters cubed. A ratio of 500 to 1.
Okay, let’s not do 3d, it’s hard to accurately portray the ships. How about a 2d representation? As both ships are wedge shaped at their widest point, we can treat that portion of the ships as triangles. The widest portion of the SSD is about three-quarters down its length, so, the base would be about 14,250 meters with the height being 4750 meters. The widest point of the ISD is almost exactly at the 1,600 meter point, so we’ll just assume the 1,600 meters is the base to simplify the math and its height is still 450 meters.
The area of a triangle is one-half base times height. The SSD’s area is 33,843,750 meters squared. The ISD’s area is 360,000 meters squared. The ratio is now about 94 to 1. Since the depth of the SSD is 3 to 4 times that of the ISD, we can conclude that the materials used to construct the SSD is enough for a minimum of 200 ISDs, irrespective of the portion of the ship not used in the above calculations.
The 200 ISD-Is can be in more places than the SSD and carry 3 times as many weapons (8,000 by the SSD compared to their 24,000). As for 200 ISD-IIs, they carry more than 3 times as many weapons than the SSD (26,800 weapons vs 8,000) including a greater number of heaviest weapons.
The other thing is, building and repairing times? How long does it take to build an SSD? How long does it take to build an ISD? ISDs should only take 3 to 4 years to construct, but the SSD, much longer than that. How long does it take to repair an SSD if it took “50 ISD’s” worth of damage? If the damage the SSD took forces it to be in the repair yard for several years, it’s just as good as being destroyed. Especially if the opposition is able to replace the fleet it lost faster than the SSD can be repaired.
In the context of Star Wars universe, the SSD is too large to be truly an effective combat platform. If someone introduces capital ship size anti-ship torpedoes/missiles then the SSD is really going to have a rough time of it as it will be the primary, nearly immobile, target. The lack of anti-ship missile armed ships is the second issue with Star Wars...
In the context of WWII combat in space, the SSDs are not best used to "destroy enemy fleets" but to destroy the heaviest fortifications built, which would otherwise destroy the normal battleships of their era (ISD-I's/-II's) in large numbers. If it’s possible to build a battleship 1,600 meters long, then there is nothing stopping anyone from making fortifications 3,000 meters long by 3,000 meters wide by 2,000 meters high, with the heaviest anti-ship weapons protected with the thickest armour available all under multiple layers of heavy shields...
That’s exactly what John Ringo did in his trilogy, Live Free or Die (I think, I never read the first novel), Citadel (or was it Troy?), and Hot Gate (this title I am sure of). The Assault Vector’s are smaller sized Eclipse-class SSDs. Their entire purpose is to enter the heaviest defended systems and use their spinal laser to eviscerate the fortifications, so that the _battleships_ could enter the system without being annihilated by the forts.
Under this idea, the SSDs become specialty ships instead of Fleet Flagships, meant to be protected so that they can serve their intended goal.
But, that’s Star Wars for us... we fans, and other writers, need to create post hoc reasons for the design decisions of others. :/
@@aralornwolf3140 In order...
The one time a dreadnought was used by a competent commander without political interference it was as a fleet killer from a safe distance. It wasn't MY mission profile, it was the canon one. Also, the lore says the Republic used dreadnoughts for planetary sieges during the Clone Wars, so I suppose their firepower in the order of a thousand Star Destroyer-sized ships (this from the Revenge of the Sith Incredible Cross Section, a Mandator II-class dreadnought is described as able to take on a thousand Recusants) can help against planetary shields.
The threat an Imperial Star Destroyer is supposed to take on is one of the MANY types of ships of similar size we've SEEN. Such as the Recusant (adapted from a Mon Cala design that PREDATES the Clone Wars), the Munificent, the Providence, the Lucrehulk. And those are just the ones that appear in the films during the Clone Wars. The RotS: ICS states that, in Legends, Palpatine used the perceived threat of exta-galactic barbarians to justify the fleet expansion, and since nobody knew of the Vong that indicates the Tof that, as it happens, DO have ships larger than a Star Destroyer.
You forgot quite a few batteries from both the ISD-I and the ISD-II.
Once the prototypes were completed, an ISD could be built in six months and an Executor in one year. The limiting factor on the latter is the small number of shipyards capable of building such a massive vessel (counting Legends we have Kuat, Fondor, Byss, Pammant, a certain secret shipyard in the Deep Core that exhausted their resources in the process, Mon Cala, and Corellia, and we don't know when Mon Cala and Corellia built their slipways), plus of course the material.
An Executor also carry LARGER weapons. Or twenty CR-90 would be a match for an ISD, with their much smaller turbolasers.
Sure, you can field much more Star Destroyers for the cost and material of a single Executor... But that Executor can destroy them all in battle. THAT is the use of a dreadnought: a large battle where you need ludicrous firepower. That or a symbol of might, like battleships were before World War II (Japan wouldn't have almost crippled their shipbuilding industry to build the Yamatos otherwise) and carriers are now.
This is Star Wars, not John Ringo. And we've seen that fleet killing IS the main purpose of a dreadnought, with taking on planetary shield a secondary use that is best served by the specialist vessels that were invented.
@@lordMartiya,
I call BS on those numbers. An Executor class ship can be built in a Single Galactic Year?! *Shakes Head* I did mention Star Wars had a scale issue... and that's definitely _one_ of them.
Anyways, it's pointless to argue with others about how messed up Star Wars lore actually is when they refuse to admit that it's borked.
May the Force Be With You.
I think the D’Deridex’s most potent weapon was the sheer sense of menace that it projected.
I was like 40 years old when one day it clicked that Romulans/Vulcans have green blood and all their ship are painted green. Just like Roman Soldiers all wore red uniforms.
Sorry but no star trek and star wars ships looks as menacing as the Shadow ships from Babylon 5.
@@classreductionist ; Coincidently, I also arrived at that realization a few weeks ago.
Tbf, if I were an Imperial captain commanding an Imperial 1 star destroyer (the variant that's ~700 meters long), I'd crap myself if I found myself looking at a group of emerald shaded warships where there was once open space.
I'd consider resigning if they let me live long enough to watch their fleet cloak as they turned away, as cloaking devices are both much more expensive and even greater power draws in SW than in Trek.
But most of all, I'd cry when my sensor officer confirmed the only way to confirm their presence, both pre-decloak and post-cloak, is a gravity anomaly that all sensors confuse for background radiation after just a few seconds.
I’d say it’s cloak, but whatevs hehe
i think the Warbird had fear because of the cloak too.. not only this hulking ship compared to a Galaxy class.. something rare in starfleet.. the romulans have A LOT.. and they could be anywhere.
And with its heavy plasma torpedo armaments, it could pose a serious threat to both star bases and even planetary colonies. And you won't see it coming until it is in firing range.
Anyone who says the star destroyer is over built and infective forget the rebels spent all their time running away from them.
I'm glad I got my Eaglemoss XL D'deridex model before they went out of business
This might be a bit controversial but the borg cube is a bit of the star destroyer too. It projects instant fear. Has a balance of heavy, medium and light weapons. Has lots of tractor beams. Is much larger than any other sips mentioned in terms of volume. The only box left unchecked is the fighter complement. Which is arguably not needed for the Borg for multiple reasons.
The Borg do not have the same goals or doctrine, but they do have similar needs. Speed, size, multi role adaptability and fear projection. They use this to instantly assimilate rather than dominate.
Brilliant take 👍
An interesting crossover video.
Focusing on design language and purposes between the different ship types of the ISD and some Trek equivalents is a neat idea.
I wouldn't agree that ISD isn't psychologically imposing. It was one of, if not the biggest mass produced warship in the entire history of star wars galaxy (with the only contender being lucrehulk which was 50% empty space on the inside). Also while patrol vessel is a closest naval analogue, you could even call it a mobile occupation garrison.
Closest analogue is multi-purpose battleship. Aka Fast Response Battleship designed to invade disobedient systems, drop a small occupation force, while the Imperial Army transports and their Army Units are being mobilized, and support surface operations when required.
George Lucas, and so many other writers for Star Wars, just misuse the ship. :/
I get the feeling the Maquis would see the Galor as like a Star Destroyer since that was the ship the Cardassians ususally sent to hunt down and kill them. I mean the opening of Caretaker was even like the opening of A New Hope.
YESSSSSSSSSSSSS
I'm not the only one drawing a comparison to a pre-dreadnought for an ISD. :D
Heh, big ship go bang bang bang.
Basically a big ship goes bang bang. I think they are compensating for something or lack there of. Don't get me wrong bout the way these ships purpose being built. Clearly they can do this but within there own fleets and doctrine. I will admit when I see these ships. I have the urge to work out more so I'm not that easy a target or nope the hell out of there if I can.
The problem with the ISD is that it was almost all the Empire had as far as serious capital ships were concerned. It's too much ship to be as ubiquitous as the Empire needed them to be - too big, to expensive to build, and too demanding to properly crew. And it's not enough ship to be the backbone of big fleet actions. Yes, the Empire had other ships - mostly smaller ships - that it used, but not in anywhere near the numbers of the ISD. The ISD was reasonably effective at all its roles, but was not ideal for any of them. The Empire was big enough that it could have afforded more specialized designs.
Just because Star Wars has big ships, doesn't mean Star Trek can't have big ships. It's nice to see the age old comparison being brought back up. So the ISD is just an oversized love child between a Pre-dreadnought and a Ship-of-the-line. And also the Cardies do fear the D'Deridex if anything that's how it gained it's reputation during the Dominion War.
Ships are as big as their role. ISD's are important for troops transport, though they are incredibly oversized for the weaponry they carry. It is like arming an Iowa Class with only quad 40mm Bofors.
As always great video and excellent idea to drop it on Americas 4th of July holiday!!!
No Romulan bias in this RUclipsrs opinions 😂😂
"The key traits of a star destroyer is to instill fear and terror and to serve as an effective platform for power projection" spoken like a learned student of the Tarkin doctrine for which the ISD was designed, the ISD as Tarkan saw it was to make the empire appear even in the most distant backwater as a force that just could not be opposed and actually attempting to oppose it would only lead to a swift failure. and in that, I fully agree and feel part of the D'Deridex's design was to make enemies of the Romulans feel as if fighting the Empire was a wasted effort even if subtly and subconsciously in the case of the other major alpha quadrant powers, Tebok himself owing his first showing of D'Deridex going so well in that she intimidated the Enterprise's crew even if not enough for them to break but to give them pause even with irrc Klingon back up
I give the D'Deridex one over the ISD in this department as ISDs are something you can see coming and if you don't see one its not there, whereas the cloaking device means you don't see the D'Deridex until it materializes in front of or above you so you can never be sure it isn't there.
@@Hartzilla2007 at which point the only thing anything shy of a major alpha squadron power ship can do is simply surrender or be annihilated. i do agree that the potential presence of a D'Deridex you can't see outdoes the terror aspect of the ISD but of course power projection is partly about being seen. that said 2360s romulan doctrine isn't a perfect match to imperial tarkin dontrine so differences are to be expected
The whole tarkin doctrine Angle IS massively overblown in my opinion because the ISD IS a great weapon in capable Hands Just Seen in heir of the Empire, also the fact at least in the EU the Star Destroyer IS still in use way way far into Future. Also looking at the ISD from an in universe Perspektive that Star Destroyer IS the solution for every single Problem the Republic faced in the Clone wars in space , completely Outclasses every CIS ship
I disagree with you on the design of the star destroyer. I feel it is heavily over gunned for other bigger ships and can use more point defense and maybe missile launchers for tougher fighters but beyond that over all most of its biggest issues was poor commanders, bad tactics, and misunderstanding of the situations that got many star destroyers killed very quickly. I also do wanna point out rebel fighters did beat most Imperial designs and many Imperial pilots joined the rebels bringing invaluable information on how to beat them over which to be fair the Fighter core could of used better fighters than the tie standard which capable is not good in a true fighter environment as proven by the many fighter on fighter engagements. But over all, I agree with your thoughts on how they're used in the story and etc they both hit the box's of power projection, fear, and controlling a area of space by mere presence. The failing of star destroyers in my book was lack of good supporting ships like corvettes and frigates they kind of are usually alone against like over 50 fighters with other small ships which if they kill the fighters of the ISD leaves them quite vulnerable hence why I love Thrawn and how he uses all pieces of his fleet to their best capabilities making him a terrifying opponent to ever encounter. He knew how to use his ships to the best of their abilities and cover their weaknesses, which, if more imperial commanders did as well, probably would have not lost even half as many as they did.
I need a Galaxy Class starship
For reasons
But as for me, Odyssey, Yorktown and Lexington-class Star Dreadnought Cruisers are the best Federation Rival Ships to match the Republic Venator-class Star Destroyers in terms of size, though whether or not the Lexington will Phaser Spinal Lance will be a match against Imperial-class Star Destroyers?
It seems only recently that star destroyers have become the big dumb defeat-able by y-wings and a dream kind of ship (aka rogue one)
Though it wouldn't be able to handle small craft easily they still would be unable to make straight forward attack runs without the guns zeroing their attack path and blowing them outta the sky.
We need more scenes where a-rings swoop in and take out some point defense control nodes, on one side of the ship that allows ion blasts to disable the SD, or like in Clone wars see an entire wing of Y-wings just deliciated (not by a SD though) by flak and fighter support.
I think because they were a limited number where in some cases smaller patrol ships would've worked more cost effective at stopping the rebels.. hit and run mostly style.. we forget how bad it'd be to really encounter one of these even with a squadron of small ships, as you'd still need to take on the tie wings it deploys AS you try to dodge point defense.
IT seems largely to BE dumbed down also by people with surface Level understanding Like calling the ISD really slow , despite one of the reasons ISDs operate often alone IS because they are too fast for Most of their escorts and the literal First Scene WE See a Star Destroyer chasing down a much smaller and one of the fastest ship classes a CR-90 Corvette. IT really only struggled against the Falcon that isnt even smaller,faster and a Main Character ship but they still landed several Hits ON IT and were closing in.
Funnily enough I just commissioned a really cool Terran Empire Battleship, I'm calling her the ISS DREADNOUGHT, because Fear will keep the keep the Klingons and Romulans in line, and "if you desire peace especially with Klingons and Romulans next door, build badass battleships" some Terran Engineer
Great video. Love it when you dip your toe into other IP's.
Would love to see more comparison videos like this.
As always, you're SPOT ON! Thank you so much for your insightful comprehension on the everything!
The D'Deridex has always been one of my favourite starship designs from the TNG era. The eagle motif and the use of negative space play a big part in that for me, I think.
Great video of featuring Star Wars Imperial class Star Destroyer with everything explained about how Imperial class is compared to the big captial ships of Star Trek of the Dominion War.
I do agree with you of this video of not being a 'who will win' but a informative video of how these big ships work and the roles they serve in.
@@LaterMercury823 yeah "what do they do?" And how well are a lot more interesting
Well I used to think the same about a Star Destroyer being a Destroyer category but really when you think of Star Destroyer as its own class like say a Battlestar or Warbird the naming convention makes more sense as it doesn't have to follow the battleship food chain (corvette
When you get right down to it, there's no reason "Destroyer" has to be synonymous with "small ship". The only reason it means that to IRL navies is because of legacy naming conventions, ie, "destroyer" is short for "torpedo boat destroyer", which were small ships designed to hunt down even smaller ships so that they wouldn't threaten bigger, more expensive ships.
In a sci fi setting, all bets are off when it comes to classifications. A "Destroyer" can be a big capital ship if what it's supposed to destroy are other big capital ships. Or just anything it comes across. If you're gonna call a ship a "destroyer", the first question you should ask is, "What is it meant to destroy?" Size, armament, and so on and so forth will be determined by what the answer is.
Although in the case of Star Wars, I very much get the impression that "Star Destroyer" means "any big wedge-shaped warship". You could build a ship with the same size and armaments and even purpose as a Star Destroyer, but if it isn't a wedge shape, it's not a "Star Destroyer".
I see you chose the load out of the "LEGENDS" Star Desteoyers. Very well done.
Because the Dianey era ones actually make the empire comically imbecil.
A gun for every occation -
a lot of ww2 battleships fall into this category too. While the US had Dual Purpose Guns... not every navy did.. this lead to things like the bismark, 8x15", 12x5.9"(anti- destroyer), 16x4.1" (high alt aa), 16x37mm (low alt aa) 12x20mm (aa)
The iowa class just used DP guns so, 9x16", 20x5", 80x40m, and 49x40mm.
having 4-6 different types of guns was pretty common for warships...
u know its a good day when a new venom geek video drops😊
I enjoyed it quite a bit and would like to see more videos in this style.
Really enjoyed the vid. Thanks.
i would kinda disagree on a few points, mainly i think you are overemphasizing the D Deridex being vulnerable to fighters while under estimating how bad the ISD and other similar star wars ships are at dealing with fighters.
Now part of this is plot armor, Fighters in star wars are narratively speaking treated as the undisputed gods of war in the setting thus get massive amounts of plot armor, where as star trek treats them like cannon fodder. But in universe ISD's do tend to just get stomped on by fighters pretty frequently, and the reason is because star wars hips inexplicably just have plain bad fire control systems. Most star wars ships still rely on manually aimed guns, and with this extremely primitive form of fire control employed, star wars ships have pretty abysmal aim, leading them to rely more on sheer volume of fire to hit anything, hence the very pre dreadnought like aspect of ISD's relying on lots and lots and lots of smaller guns for sheer volume of fire to wear down shields while using the biggest guns to deliver finishing blows against large armored targets, often at close range. this is a very pre dreadnought style of fighting.
Star trek ships on the other hand tend to rely on very accurate centralized fire control systems, thus leading them to rely on relatively fewer but more powerful weapons, and with starfleet ships in particular we have seen that their main phaser arrays are more than accurate enough to swat down fighters with no effort, so trek ships dont need to rely on anywhere near as many varied sizes of weapon to deal with all threats. Now to be fair starfleet ships doe seem to by a wide margin be the best at killing fighters with everyone else often having weaker fire control systems and lacking array style weapons leading them to be weaker against fighters than starfleet ships, but most of them still have far greater accuracy against fighters than an ISD's does.
Part of this is that many isds literally did not install point defense guns to make room for more turbolasers. They decided to take off the anti-fighter guns for some reason even though rebels couldn't afford large amounts of bigger ships and relied on fighters.
"Mine is bigger than yours!"
- Every Starship Captain (and teenage boy) ever!
V’ger has entered the chat
Star Trek captures an element that I really like in science fiction: starships are such massive things that take such a large economy-of-labor to keep running that Key Crew like Command Staff and Engineering make up only a fraction of the population. The Enterprise is *designed* to jettison _most of the ship_ so that the saucer section can act as a Dedicated Warship during combat (although they almost never do this in the show).
Very interesting. Thanks 👍
Great video, 99.9% on the mark save the last comment on Star Trek ships being "More Advanced" than Star Wars
>slower sublight speeds
>weaker weaponry
>slower ftl capability
>slower and shorter range ftl communications
>weaker power and shield capabilities
But I quite enjoyed the talk on doctrine, if you ever want to dive into the Star Wars side of the Imperial Navy Order of Battle give the Imperial sourcebook a read
I've seen online somewheres that the Hutet is much larger (practically twice the size but various lengths in wikis) and was just wondering what the sources were for this vids number?
Great videos by the way, watched most of them multiple times:)
Very well done! At the end of the day, the Imperial Star Destroyer outguns nearly every single other capital ship it might face in the galaxy. There are virtually no powers that can field heavy cruisers that can match it in the field, and those rare ones that do can often only do so in single digits and can be overwhelmed via firepower. Few things can outrun it, virtually nothing can outgun it. It is a task force unto itself. It doesn't really -need- to have escorts.
The funniest Thing i read was in the imperial handbook a commanders Guide, the ISD is the equilivant of a Squadron but was bureacratily turned into the equilivant of Just a Line to get more ISDs. After all you need way more lines than fleet Squadrons
I mean that is the way military procurement works. And the budgeting process. And yay, someone else that's read the WEG stuff!
imagine popping the tng romulan empire into starwars as the empire formed the cloaking device alone would just be an insane advantage
The Romulans would love that, they’d just have to be careful of overextending themselves too quickly.
The Romulans ability to target specific areas would be huge , decloak, target and disable ... take over
Fun video!
There is one canon federation ship that fits in the star destroyer type class, it's called the Typhon class I believe. I've also seen attempts at an actual Trek style Star destroyer and more than just slapping some warp nacelles on a regular star destroyer, though that would be interesting as well.
Actually the ISD is very much an imposing ship by Star Wars standards. No pre-empire government would've considered a vessel of that size or firepower to be a default ship-of-the-line. It dwarfed the ships of previous Sith empires, and was a full 50% larger than the Republic's Venator class.
Great information
I'd say the borg cube is the equivalent.......Powerful, multipurpose, and the fact the borg usually send one to wipe out a whole system speaks for itself
I should honestly puck up that legendary D'deridex
Reminds me of those days long ago where I played a lot of ST: Bridge Commander. Star Destroyer vs a Federation fleet. I guess its hard to balance a ship from a different franchise right.
in Star Wars games, ISD's are very slow compared to other ships. ISD moves at around 22 MGLT, where a blockade runner moves around 60 MGLT. An Xwing or Tie fighter moves at around 100 MGLT for comparison.
in the rockwell class vid what evolution chart did you use and where can i find it
@@steller630 that's exclusive to members
@@venomgeekmedia9886 oh
My head canon its a star ship destroyer.
And dhe is like a mobile base , infantry transport . She is also primarily designed to prevent army's from deploying off world. Driods or organic. Plus orbital bombardment and aircraft carrier
Getting that from the rogue one novel.
I really like the concept of thius video. I would be interested though to see a follow up to this also taking into account Beta canon ships to see if more factions have a SD-equivalent in the books and games.
The only similarity ive always seen between the D'Deradex and the ISD is they are both weapons of terror and intimadation.
but is that not the most important part of the ISD?
@@venomgeekmedia9886 that what Grand Mof Tarken told me. 😁
@@venomgeekmedia9886 The Tarken Doctrine wants your location.
They are force projection vessels. Built to project the might and authority of their respective empires into the far reaches of the galaxy and bring/keep entire star systems under control by their mere presence.
IT Isnt remember that the Imperator class Star Destroyer was Designed in the Clone wars and effectively counter nearly all CIS Ship Designs fielded by the seperatists
If you don't understand the layout of an imperial Star destroyer you don't know what a lightsaber is either do you?
Star destroyers get a bad rapp from the Fandom, but they do what they were designed for perfectly. Have a gun that works OK for any given situation and group them together enough to have them make up for eachothers lack of numbers of that weapon.
TLJ made all starship design in SW stupid retroactively.
No warship would be any bigger than it needed to be to have a hyperspace torpedo, it's own hyperdrive and just enough crew to keep those things running (life support optional).
Battles would be rapid pace shoot-n-scoot versions of submarine warfare: the instant you locate an enemy you jump in as close as possible, fire your torpedo and leave.
I know it's a Hero Ship, so no one wants to compare it to a Star Destroyer, but I would think the most obvious Star Trek ship class comparison to a Star Destroyer is a Galaxy Class. It's large, with a highly distributed weapons layout, a jack of all trades that can fulfill just about any role within a fleet or on its own, can fit a small fleet of shuttles (no reason it couldn't be filled with a large contingent of fighters), etc. It's also, whether the Federation would admit it or not, a ship designed to carry the flag and intimidate potential adversaries. Certainly, the Romulans lost their cool over it, revealing the warbird in a way that gave the Federation the closest look with the best (Galaxy Class) sensors it could have hoped for at the time. It's not as big as some of the ships on this list, but still absolutely massive. It seems the most direct comparison imo.
Andrew Probert designed the Warbird with a massive fighterbay that Greg Jein left off
the final model
And curses to that! I finally want a D`Deridex carrier warbird with properly sized hangar bays in STO!
@@davidedens6353 it's still kinda there but yeah it was meant to extend back way further
@@venomgeekmedia9886 it's on my to-do list
Better way to look at it, is that Imperial Star Destroyers are designed to besiege entire planets, parking way up high in geo-synchronous orbit and providing fire support for invasion forces- large amounts of self sufficiency resources and manpower
Question on the D'Deridex (I'd asked before, but didn't see a reply). That big forward gun - the only one we ever see used. Is it just a big Disruptor, akin to the Dorsal/Ventral Phaser Arrays on a Galaxy? Or is it a Heavy Disruptor, akin to a Vor'cha's main gun?. Or the intermediate step up to the Negh'Var or Jem'Haddar Battleship Siege Guns?
I've literally never once heard anyone compare the ISD to a Romulan D'Deridex Warbird. The Star Destroyer is a Capital Ship designed to project power. ISDs carry thousands of troops, an entire wing of fighters and other support craft, and guns capable of taking out fighters or capital ships. The D'Deridex Warbird is an Alpha Strike Stealth Battleship. It's an ambush predator using a cloak.
Let's not forget the level of intimidation that the cloaking device alone adds. The suspense of, if there is one, are there more?
Also where would Negh'Vahr scale in here?
What about the omega class from bb5?
The Dominion Dreadnought would eat the Star Destroyer as a snack.
Nice video once again.👍👍
I definitely agree the SD feels a bit like an old warship. However I'm not sure about the big gun only theory applied to Star Trek. Lemme explain-
Star wars tech is almost steampunkish - the creators have mixed futuristic lasers with 20th century concepts: you got guys aiming laser turrets manually for heavens sake/ you also have turrets of varying size firing lasers bolts of varying size. So you need shed loads of different types of guns in order to provide masses of inaccurate firefor different occasions. Great for screen battles but utterly ridiculous at the same time.
Star trek is far better imagined IMHO. It's not that they don't have smaller weapons - they simply don't need to implement them another way. The variety of gun 'size' is effectively provided for by varying the power of the phaser/disruptor. And there is no need to have tonnes of turrets because it's a case of one shot one kill due to better aiming systems firing beams at the speed of light (basically undodgeable).
The Trek creators are far more realistic IMHO. You can even see this on modern warships where the flexible capability is made through a change in munitions or warhead as opposed to having multitude of delivery devices. As a result you only really need two weapons, a cannon (=energy weapon) and missiles (= torpedoes).
I doubt that Star Trek IS more realistic than Star wars, because Trek Tech IS way more magical than Star wars Tech that IS way more realistic from Tech to Looks ,they contain all the Fantasy stuff in the Force, meanwhile in Trek the Magic IS the tech
@@laisphinto6372 i know what you mean but i dont mean realistic in the sense whether its possible or not; rather, its more about everything being consistent and how in line it is with the technology of the setting.
Also we're not talking about any other aspects of the franchises (the force, the Q) other the subject here - the ship weaponry.
So if you are able to engineer hyperdrives, semi sentient droids, and have super computing power able to navigate the galaxy then you expect a certain way of fighting and how a ship might - realistically for the setting - be setup with weapons. Things like piloted dogfights with ships shooting laser bolts in a straight line (might as well be bullets) are not a serious doctrine even today in the relatively mediocre tech of the 21st century, let alone when you can engineer a space station the size of a small planet.
So its in that regards that I think star trek is more 'realistic' or 'consistent' might be a better word. Both with how the ships are armed as well as things like the lack of fighters.
All of this makes sense if you think about the premise of the franchises. (Star wars is big screen action, about looking great, providing a sense of scale and awe. Star Trek is more about inspiring mystery, discovery and imagination on the small screen. )
If you don't mind me adding another example of unrealistic - again given the context - is melee fighting in future warfare. We have practically phased this out as the primary way of fighting ever since humans invented guns and its not going to make a return. Yet it creates fighting scenes like no other so you have many many action based films, games ( Warhammer 40k probably one of the most obvious) , making it pillar of their franchises. Understandable and great fun if a bit at odds with the technological context offered in those worlds.
The effectiveness of Star Destroyers, as shown in Star Wars can be rather mixed... and I'd argue that they were built to be more like the various Dreadnoughts to Super Dreadnoughts built before WW1 and upgraded before WW2 (among those that stayed in service after WW1).
They have gun batteries of various sizes, but much of that is also add to the image of power and how something that's bristling with guns would be more intimidating. The heavy turbolasers would equal the main batteries while the medium to light turbolasers would equal the secondary batteries. The laser cannons would be their defense against fighters, though Star Wars often has many of these gun batteries also taking on multiple roles... and with varying degrees of success.
And while at Endor, they do seem to do okay in dealing with Rebel fighters, it should be noted that they were also there with the Executor and with a massive number of the regular Star Destroyers, and thus providing a massive fleet's worth of guns. That would give just about any fighter a trouble given the sheer volume of fire provided. But that actually isn't something that's fit into a lot of Imperial doctrine, and this shows up an awful lot in Rebels, Rogue One, and even A New Hope, and the Empire Strikes Back. Which has shown a vulnerability to starfighters...
In A New Hope as the Rebels review the Death Star Plans, they note that the station has a firepower greater than half the star fleet. In this, the Death Star had more turbolasers than half the ISDs in service at that time. The Rebels also note that those guns are all stationed around the Death Star and in such a way that while any sort of capital ship assault on the Death Star would fail, fighters would get through and do severe damage. It's then noted in the battle that the X and Y-Wings are too small and fast for the turbolasers to hit... or at least reliably, which then draws Vader to lead the pilots out to engage them ship to ship.
Now, while an ISD wasn't the Death Star, we can assume that the turbolaser emplacements were likely similar to those on the Death Star in how they worked and how they could track small and faster craft. This is something that plays out in Rogue One where a squadron of Y-Wings use ion torpedoes, which are the Star Wars' means to try and short circuit electrical systems and then have a light Hammerhead Corvette then push the disabled Star Destroyer into a neighboring ship and destroying both. If the Star Destroyer was good at dealing with these things... this sort of attack shouldn't have worked for the Rebels in the way that it did.
And at the same time... while Star Destroyers have a decent sub light speed, they're not going to outpace ships like the Millenium Falcon. In fact, much of what enables them to keep up with the ship was more that the Falcon's hyperdrive was damaged before they left Hoth.
But the size and intimidation factor was big for the Star Destroyer. In fact, that would be the one thing that has been consistently shown with the ship in Star Wars' lore.
Translation to 40k..... "Dakka dakka dakka, still needs more dakka"
one thing alot of people forget... the Dederedix is green. not a big deal to a human... but to a vulcan or Orion.. its the very color of blood. imagine one painted blood red.
It's pretty interesting with sci-fi fi Starships like the Galaxy Class, Constitution Class, Dedex Class, the Imperial II Class Star Destroyer and probably the most terrified one the Borg Cube but that's just my opinion but I do like their creativity in sci-fi Starships
Leeroy Jenkins 😂
Honestly I would like to see your assessment of the Harrower Class which I think is the biggest example of the technological decay Wars has from the Old Republic to the Imperial Era
I always seen the term of star destroyer in that it was a ship that was designed to defend and destroy a star system...by itself
I know they gave it "windows" so viewers could work out its massive scale, but are those reallllly windows on the Gem Hadar ship? Would the Dominion put windows on ships used by the Gem Hadar? Gazing off into space, isn't really their vibe.
they even do it on the jem'hadar fighter which is really strange. but on the cruiser and battleship you could argue its because the crew isn't just jem'hadar and vorta but other servitor races we don't see
@@venomgeekmedia9886 Ahhh yes that's right. Like the Vorta command-class.
Windows on something like the dominion battleship could be used for visual targeting of enemy ships and stations or navigation in the event those systems go offline or are otherwise unusable.
It's important not to get too fixated on classifications when the contexts are very different. People have a tendency to try to put square pegs into round holes because round holes are the only ones they know of.
Battleships were never multi-mission ships. They were exactly what their name implies: ship designed primarily to fight in a line of battle to defeat the enemy fleet. During the heyday of the battleship, it was cruisers that were the multi-mission ships. Today, it's generally the destroyer that's the multi-mission ship. The D'deridex may be very large but if it is indeed a multi-mission ship that more often than not operates on its own, that just makes it a very large cruiser.
Interestingly enough, it's accurate to call a Star Destroyer a destroyer. It only entered service after the Empire had largely secured control of the galaxy and needed a large number of multirole ships able to perform independently. It's much like a guided missile destroyer today, with weapons for every task and even a light "air" capability. Guided missile destroyers generally have guns to deal with small surface combatants, torpedoes for submarines, a helicopter or two for recon and more anti-submarine work plus utility, and the missiles can be any mix of anti-air, anti-ship, and ground attack that they want.
Sorry if dumb question but any idea why so many windows in gem hadar battleship? I would think that if they don’t want them seeing view screen the same would be true of seeing out windows..
Likely for vorta and founders but seems a lot for just those oeolle.
Sorry if dumb but made me think about how gem hadar don’t sleep if they just walking around seeing out windows kinda defeats logic of no view screen.
Any thoughts?
I get it for Al other battleships discussed but this one realy made me think
I asked a similar question recently somewhere about the bug ship.
Probably the same reason as the Romulan warbird, to show scale. But you're right however, it doesn't make sense in terms of what we saw of the Dominion and the whole viewscreen thing. Also windows are a weakness in terms of armor, you don't see any on the Defiant, for example.
Weyoun couldn't see the mines around the wormhole exploding because of the Vorta's poor eyesight. I doubt they'd enjoy it much.
@@y_knot_tri exactly that’s why when I saw so many windows in the video last night it just made me wonder
@@logicplague that is another question I have …. We know “windows” are transparent aluminum so how does that affect the integrity of the hull in general. I’m sure it can handle spacial stresses but it seems equivolawbt to windows in deep ocean; risky at any thickness.
I get they need them on federation ships and such for mental stability but just seems like founders would never have wanted them because no windows add an additional intimidation factor beyond them not wanting soldiers to see what’s going on outside the ship and we know the founders are all about appearing all powerful.
I’m sure the out of universe reasoning is someone didn’t think it fully through before designing the ship but development is messy and things happen
Cheers
I believe Cardassian ships are meant to evoke Snakes, in particular Cobras, Vipers, and Rattle Snakes.
How do you feel the Galaxy and Vor'cha fit into this comparison?
Do you intend to compare the Galaxy-class to the MC-series Mon Cal Cruisers?
I mean the Galaxy feels like good guys making their own Star Destroyer and not realizing it, especially since it has a considerable amount of guns you can point at planets.
@@Hartzilla2007 But the Galaxy is not meant to instill terror like the others. It has the capability (note the Romulans never wanted to take on a Galaxy one-on-one with the D'deridex despite it being much larger, suggesting the match was even or at least too close for comfort), but not the reputation.
Which is why the MC-Series is probably a better analogue. They are the Alliance counterpart to the Star Destroyer with comparable capabilities and missions profiles. Yet, even if they could rain death and destruction on a helpless planet at a similar scale, the Mon Cals are not known or associated with rampant destruction.
@@Al1701 that’s only because the Federation are good guys, I mean between the Republic and Empire the only change to the Venator was the imperial paint job and it’s pretty much acting like an ISD under the Empire.
I guess the Klingons didn't make
could you please do videos on the different earth ships from stargate
Hutet: FEAR ME!!!
SD: …who the hell is this?…
👍
Venom Geek Media 98, if you include Star Trek Online that was set in early 25th Century for this Video, any chance that the Federation Odyssey, Yorktown and Lexington-class Star Cruisers will serve as an Federation Equivalent of either Venator-class Star Destroyer or Mon Calamari Star Cruiser in terms of size and firepower?
If you have not already done so, compare the multi-role ability to that of the original series Battlestar.
I would say if a Star Destroyer had to fight the Romulans or the Jem Hadar, it would be an extremely close match. It would basically come down to the Star Destroyer’s fighter complement to win in those fights. Against the Cardassians…the Empire will win in a 1v1. But the real question is: who would win? A Federation Sovereign class cruiser like the Enterprise-E (Worf not commanding) or a Mon Cal MC-80 Reef Home?
To me the D'deridex class Warbird and the Imperial class Star Destroyer are both ships that represent the spectre and reality of total destruction.
Can you also make a video about Warhammer 40k ships, they also have very unusual ships that are reminiscent of cathedrals?
You mean to tell me the space 🧀 isn't terrifying 😂
The closest the federation has come to a Star Destroyer is the Odyssey-class, almost 100 meters smaller than a Venator.
The Angelou-class is 2,106 meters long and is practically an oversize version of the Ithorian Herdship.
true although as this video should make clear star trek ships tend to have greater volume. Star Wars ships are monolithic and so powerplant propulsion and crew all share space compared to star trek designs which disperse them
In terms of size sure, but in purpose an Odyssey seems to have more in common with a star dreadnought.
Next video - Jean Luc Picard vs Emperor of Mankind 40000)))
I would say the star destroyer has a comparison to Japanese or German ww2 battleships in terms off armaments. Both the bismark and yamato had multiple sized secondary armaments like a predreadnought but not due to having a lack of fire control to support an all big gun armament, more so a that they could not field a single all purpose secondary battery. The yamato had 6 inch secondaries for anti ship work and 5 inch secondaries for dual purpose work, and a ton of smaller aa guns, similar to the bismark. These came with inefficiencies compared to other more standardized secondary armaments but this was counteracted by their sheer size. This in my opinion better compares to the star destroyers.
One of the things about the Imperial Star Destroyer that sets it apart from many of the star ships from Star Trek is that the ISD is a one size fits all, attack vessel, aircraft & trooper carrier, and patrol vessel. Where as each fleet in Star Trek has specific ships for almost all the purposes. That being said if any of the ships in Star Trek were to come up against a ISD in a fight the biggest advantage they have are actually there sensors which are far above the ISD. Because ISD are designed if you were to fusion every type of ship a modern navy would have then toss it into space. But the ISD lack effective weapons for every occasion we see this in Empire Stikes Back when the fleet arrives at Hoth the realize the defensive shield is strong enough to repel any orbital bombardment. Vs Trek most ships can not oy carry out that type of attack but do to the power level of their weapons could have taken Hoth easily. The other big issue is how the ISD shields are set up through a fixed point that is unprotected so any vessel wanting to challenge an ISD would scan it see two massive weak points and begin firing there and given the range and level of accuracy of said weapons an ISD wouldn't last long against most vessels not only on this list but even Borg, Federation, Klingon, Ferengi, and a few others. The ISD is not only a jack of all tradrs but proof why being thst isn't a good thing.
Fear will keep the local systems in line.
No mention of the Scimitar? Similar heavy assault role as the Jem'hadar battleship, but carries a ton of small fighters. It took a beating from three other capital ships and still held together while wiping the floor with them all. Plus it had a planet-killing (depopulation bomb) weapon long before it was considered to mount one on a Star Destroyer by the Star Wars writers.
@@BlastHardcheeseable no because scimitar is silly.
No one seems to consider how OP transporters could be, especially combined with a cloaking device. Beam a warhead into the engine room.
The Cardassian Hu'Tet, kind of reminds me of the profile of the Avatar. The giant capital ship of EVE Online. But only slightly.
You know if you give these things similar tech i.e weapons I tend to use the star destroyer or something close to it has a main battleship meant to be the heavy ship. The D'deridex I see has a transport assault ship that works like a long range sub mixed with an amphibious assault ship and or carrier.
Star Destroyers have Armor nonexistent in nearly all Trek and when the consoles dont exploded all the time especially when the shield IS still up
Though I think a star destroyer would be TERRIFIED of a Breen Dreadnaught.
@@Terra-Quattuor if ever there was a glass cannon... he'll not even glass the breen dreadnought is a paper mache cannon
In my opinion, I think it would be a better comparison to compare. The Star Wars imperial star destroyers to a different franchise. I am speaking of Stargate.And the main battleships of the major enemy, which was the Gould giant pyramid shaped craft the best description between the earth forces versus the forces of the system, lords was by colonel Jack O’Neal in the comparison of their weaponry, the main weaponry of the gold foot soldiers is called a staff weapon, which is a weapon of terror. That’s what it was designed for specifically to terrorize and scare people. I believe the gold chips were designed and behind the same idea where as the human ships were designed for actual war, I think what you see if you want to compare it to ships and Star Trek actually designed for as the imperial star destroyers are designed to terrorize you because of the Tarkan doctrine which states that you want to scare the entirety of the galaxy into submission not actually into the ground it’s all based off something happened in grand moff Tarkan past
The Hutet will crush the enemies of Cardassia.
I dunno if the Star Destroyer is canonically well-defended against fighters. ROTJ had them hitting X-wings, but Rogue One had a handful of Y-wings just straight up one-shot a Star Destroyer with ion weapons.
Yeah but that's is a more recent film. If it were really so easy why wouldn't they do it all the time
@@venomgeekmedia9886 By some accounts they did. ROTJ has an A-Wing damaging the sensor/shield dome on the Executor, and the on-screen action shows the Rebels destroyed a lot of Star Destroyers at Endor with normal fleet and fighter action. Game mechanics are canon, but “X-Wing” the game and Star Wars Squadrons have a dozen fighters beating whole Star Destroyers, and the novels by Aaron Aliston suggest that even if thirty fighters can’t just one-shot an ISD, they can combine torpedo barrages to puncture shields and do real damage.
So the reason there’s secondary lore that the Star Destroyer is an awkward mess is that on-screen action from the original three movies does show the Star Destroyer having much more trouble than it should. And also it shows that the Star Destroyer needed escorts, AA-laden Lancer frigates and such, which was never shown in the original trilogy.