Why Star Destroyer Shields aren't as dumb as you think

[@EckhartsLadder]

The first 1000 people to use this link will get a free trial of Skillshare Premium Membership: skl.sh/eckhartsladder12201 ty skillshare xoxo

[@darthball2723]

#askeck hey Eck in you opinion what's the most powerful and silly weapon in star wars?

[@matthewbeniamin4834]

Can you do a video on what of the thanos snap happened in star wars.

[@darthball2723]

@@matthewbeniamin4834 182.5 trillion people would die in the galaxy alone and countless more would die

[@jedileader0174]

You should compare the Harower, the Imperial 2, and the Venator, to cover all major eras that were cannon before Disney wiped 95% of the slate clean.

[@griz8381]

Why do you hate my boy dalekgod

[@bogustoast22none25]

Eck: *criticizes the ISD* Everyone: yup, agreed Eck: *finds the logical reasoning behind the ISD design* Everyone: Yup, agreed

[@TheRezro]

Not surprise. ISD's were extremely flawed ships, but they were mostly misused. In hands of competent commander like Thrawn, they were quite efficient.

[@bogustoast22none25]

Ohhhhh 117, noice.

[@DeathBYDesign666]

Ironically it's strengths are the same as it's weaknesses, it's all about the bridge design. The weirdest thing is that both make total sense.

[@bogustoast22none25]

Death By Design Graphics to be fair, it’s main weakness is the lack of a supporting fleet, which it should have. Wanna know what sunk the Yamato? US planes. Wanna know what could have prevented that? A fucking support fleet with extra AA cover

[@ImieNazwiskoOK]

Not me

[@Cpt_Boony_Hat]

My inner 1940s US Navy Admiral: I find your lack of anti aircraft Disturbing

[@SlavGod47]

Empire at War perfectly showcases why: Heavy guns for anti ship, and fighters for anti-fighter

[@danielboatright8887]

@@SlavGod47 'eh, depends on the mod really, in Phoenix Rising fpr example the various older cruisers with more laser cannon do decent against fighters. True, you're diverting a capitol asset to deal with a squadron, but if you build a fleet of say Dreadnought cruisers (to use a ship all factions get), you have your heavy turbolasers, then you have you laser batteries... lots of them. A few heavier ships (IE: wont die instantly in a fight) capable of some antifighter can be massively effective in screening a fleet with a fighter screen, or a decent sized raiding party of all one type of cap ship with decent antifighter capacity can shred attacking snubcraft fairly quickly.

[@felniiriisk8863]

If you ever play squadrons, you'll find they actually do have a lot of point defence weapons, just most of them are concealed. If you try to attack one without support (represented by the advance/fall back mechanic in squadrons), you would just get shot down before you can even get in range of the shields

[@jamesricker3997]

The tie fighters were supposed to act as a star destroyer's his point defense system Overly aggressive commanders (most) use them as an offensive tool leaving the vessels vulnerable to Starfighters. We see this at the Battle of Scarif

[@Cpt_Boony_Hat]

@@jamesricker3997 I’ll take your word on that. Even then even within the doctrine they are lackluster as you are fighting enemy craft with your fighters when they are in range of your ship and you are using a fighter that is more often then not outclassed. For a real life parallel it makes me think of the IJNs Zero combat air patrol and how American planes still got through and the Zeros where often shot down by Hellcats. ( I’m not implying the IJN didn’t have close range AA it’s just the 25mm was a AWFUL gun for the job)

[@Parklarblick]

Question: Why the Micky Mouse ears on the Star Destroyers? Answer: Foreshadowing.

[@RenegadePaladin]

Because they're a binocular phased array radar (or equivalent) unit in geodesic domes, and not shield generators.

[@commandercaptain4664]

It's as if a thousand Star Destroyers cried out in warning and were suddenly silenced...

[@ronaldthompson4989]

@@RenegadePaladin the main reactor (which is so massive it sticks out of the hull necessitating the armored dome behind the hangar) provides electricity to the 2 spherical shield generators on the superstructure(replaced in days on ISDs or weeks on MonCal designs), which feed the emitters scattered across the hull(replaced in minutes by a decent DamCon team and so designed to burn out first). The massive antenae laid horozontally between the generators is the primary sensor suite, extermely precises and long ranged to the front, but relatively near sighted to the sides

[@SomethingThatRhymes]

You touch on it in the video, and I actually loved how the reason droidekas had personal shields but clone troopers didn't is because the radiation from the shield generator would kill organic beings

[@shorewall]

Yet another reason why droids make better soldiers than organics. :D

[@CoolMyron]

Some clones did have shielding. I dont think making the shields radoactive is a good idea. Limits what you could do

[@koraegi]

@@papapalps2415 i guess all those people in the old republic ended up getting radiation poisoning lol

[@carteradams43]

@@papapalps2415 I remember that in EA battlefront 1, it said that the infantry shields were upgraded to remove the risk of radiation poisoning. perhaps the droideka shields were simply cheaper.

[@cgi2002]

@@papapalps2415 droids also have built in power supplies, and tend to be physically stronger allowing them to carry more hardware. A clone trooper carrying around a battery pack is going to get tired/annoyed at lugging it around, and become combat ineffective quickly. A droid may use more energy to carry it around, but their combat effectiveness isn't on a scale, it's either 100% or 0% (not counting damage). And to get a droid from 0% to 100% is easier, just add power. Humans need sleep, food, rest and relaxation (ontop of sleep), and even then your only going to get close to 100% and it will rapidly decay downwards. It's a simple case of soldiers spend more time wasting time and doing busy work than actually in combat on the front lines but must be ready for combat at a moments notice, meaning full kit and gear on/nearby. This wears on them and their kit. Droids can be either in combat, or in standby, in standby they aren't draining energy or wearing out their kit, and they aren't become less effective.

[@nickkurzy2246]

Eck: "Why the Mickey Mouse ears on the ISD?" Me: "please never say those words again." As for alternate placement of the shield bulbs I would suggest on the Superstructure tier at the base of the bridge right above the main turbolaser batteries or perhaps on the underside of the bridge wings. this way the angles from which they can be attacked is reduced from nearly 360 degrees to around 180. Also they are much closer to the defensive batteries and the bridge does not obscure firing angles.

[@SephirothRyu]

Ideally, a shield system should consist of two types of parts, honestly. The emitters, which are a series of ant-lion-den looking things that get the energy-matter hybrid out there to begin with and control them enough to spread them towards near the rest of the ship. And the effectors, which manipulate the shields from behind (at least certain types of, which don't interfere) armor, and which CONTROL the shields and truly keep them stable, in-shape, and so forth. That is based on my limited interpretation of sci-fi shield tech in a barely-realistic sense anyway. In this case, it would likely be a shield based on something that can be called a plasma, but that is how I imagine that it would work. For shields that revolve around some form of energetically charged/controlled particle (which itself has at least some mass), anyway. ...Yeah, I've thought about energy shields a lot in various settings. They kind of fascinate me in the "I want them to exist" kind of way, so I try to imagine ways to have them. But well, regardless, before most sorts of energy shields, we would need at least a fusion reactor and at least some form of limited gravitics. Unless we just want a specific defense against a specific thing. Normal plasma can be good for anti-laser (i.e. real lasers) after all.

[@Kolonol1]

Don't put them near weapons emplacements...I can nail 2 targets with 1 shot...

[@galvanizedgnome]

They look like mouse ears

[@SephirothRyu]

@@galvanizedgnome I mean, they are mouselike in being round and placed on the "head" so yeah, you have a point. I guess I just accidentally posted some random thoughts to this now-highly ranked comment though. That said, Mickey's ears definitely are oversized relative to an actual mouse's. So calling them "mouse ears" is more accurate than "Mickey ears." I will definitely let it slide though, as, well, a certain Mickey Mouse is very well known among the now-owning company of Star Wars (which seems to not know how to handle major movies, but still seems to be doing quite well for TV series on the franchise and such at least, overall. Aside from Marvel's lazy comic artists anyway).

[@SephirothRyu]

To follow up my original comment though, if I am to take my original comment and modify it to fit Star Wars lore and design and... etc... Then the big "mouse ears" are still needed. In addition to the "projectors" and the "affectors" I mentioned before, there would POSSIBLY need to be a third system. The "Detectors" which effectively allow the other two to actually work. In another universe, one might imagine that Detector function is built into one or both of the other system parts noted. But what if Star Wars tech requires them placed separately? In that case, rather that just coincidentally ALSO having sensors and radar in them, those "mouse ears" are in fact a combined suite that also contains the sensors necessary for getting the information needed to maintain shield integrity across at least the upper half of the ship. The lower half perhaps having lower profile ones. Even then, there are two of the things, so you can lose one without issue. Remember that this ISD thing was designed for capital ship engagements basically, and to also be a symbol of fear, that would re-assert itself any time someone actually tried to take another capital ship against it. Hence its heavy turbo-laser batteries and such, so that it would destroy the other ship first. I mean, Mega-lasers basically ended up being artillary (in a way I have my own theory of, but which is irrelevant for now), so one can assume turbo-lasers are longer range than normal ones. At least for what Star Wars calls a "laser" anyway. But yeah, against capital ships and perhaps last-gen-fighters, those "shield bulbs" (actually multipurpose sensor suites) might not be such a weakness. The more you "turbo" or "mega" a "laser," the more it seems to be harder to aim in one way or another. In the latter case, you even need to adjust for some strange parabolic curve.

[@OverlordZephyros]

I always thought that they prioritize the lives of officers on the bridge over the rest of the ship... cause thats what imperials do lol

[@AJSai3007]

I guess that does play into some form of symbolism.

[@isaacnickel]

Like in WW2 on the American ships are 2 bridges, one is literally a bunker for combat.

[@gregkatragis4037]

@@thelonious2213 could possibly lead to more focused fire on the bridge and then they get killed just from the stress on the generator

[@SerAkel]

The rest of the ship is doomed withput the ability to control it from the bridge. Literally just common sense to make it as protected as possible

[@gregkatragis4037]

@@thelonious2213 backup generators wouldve been pretty smart

[@Sinsystems]

If I were to change where the shield generator is located I'd move them to the "Throat" of the bridge tower, around where it connects to the main body of the Star Destroyer. Then I'd adjust the gun placement a tad, move one grouping to a little above the shield generator on the Bridge tower. Basically I am making it so that to hit the shield generator you basically have to fly directly through the biggest crossfire of all my guns.

[@shorewall]

Yeah, if they have to be outside, they have to be well defended. Putting them in the back doesn't work, because the back is notoriously undefended. :P

[@baguette6209]

Those are very smart ideas of you guys

[@floseatyard8063]

@@shorewall on the broadsides there is turbolasers (below those big blocks near the throat) and those can aim backwards. You'd be killed.

[@prophetisaiah08]

The whole "keep things away from crew because of radiation" thing exists in modern vehicles too, specifically with radar systems. Even the weather radar that's in modern airliners emits enough radiation to cause permanent injury if directly exposed at close range; that's why it's located in the plane's nose cone, pointed away from where the people are in the plane'z cabin. The radars aren't allowed to be used on the ground except in designated testing areas, where a cone over 100 feet out is cleared of all animal life to prevent injury. Being 50 feet in front of a plane when the weather radar is turned on can cause infertility in seconds, and radiation sickness in just a couple minutes. That's also why the radar on ships is located high above the deck. It creates a safe zone under the tower where directed radiation is focused above where any people can be expected to be.

[@admiraltiberius1989]

The various Electronic warfare planes the US Navy uses or has used are not allowed to turn on their powerful equipment until they are clear of the deck. And the AEGIS systems aboard many warships in several countries could blow out the electronics on just about anything if the signal beam was focused on one particular area.

[@My_initials_are_O.G.cuz_I_am]

RADAR *can not* cause ARS (acute radiation syndrome) it emits *NON-ionizing* radiation, that is less dangerous than visible light. The only danger factor with radio waves and microwave is that in VERY high concentrations (i.e. in a microwave oven or, to a lesser extent, just in front of a very powerful radio/microwave emiter) it can heat up water in your body. That's it, no cancer, no radiation sickness, just heat stroke. The only radiation types that are ionizing, are the shorter wavelengths of UV, soft and hard X-rays, and gamma rays.

[@treasurehunter3744]

@@My_initials_are_O.G.cuz_I_am Thank you, was going to reply that.

[@bushidog6915]

You can become infertile for free you say?

[@BallinProductionDogs]

After playing squadrons you realize how hard it can actually be to get anywhere near those shields

[@DIEGhostfish]

And that's with the ability to pass through them as if particle shields aren't a thing!

[@MatCor-ty7zi]

@@DIEGhostfish In the Clone Wars show, there was an arc where Ahsoka, Anakin and some clones were training some rebels in fighting Droidikas and how to get past their shields. They did this by rolling un-armed grenades at some Droidikas that they captured and taught this: roll too fast, the grenade bounces off the shield; roll just right, the grenade goes through. Basically, if the particle shields you mentioned work the same as Droidika shields, then no starfighter is getting through a capital ship's shields at the speeds they're going.

[@heroicaknight4735]

TRUTH!!!

[@DIEGhostfish]

@@MatCor-ty7zi Pretty much. Games always ALWAYS nerf particle shields, or jut remove them entirely like basegame Empire at War.

[@Highly-grounded]

@@DIEGhostfishbut how would the isds tie fighter leave the hangar with particle shields?

[@darthball2723]

The most important thing in star wars on from starfighters to capital ships is the shield in my opinion

[@nicholaspulido2885]

Totally agree. Would be a pretty lame movie if Luke got killed by a tiny space pebble

[@thejail_berd8731]

Really?, I would think the starships them selves are but ok

[@cgi2002]

@@nicholaspulido2885 isn't that the fate of all TiE fighter pilots, in their unsheilded fighters.

[@bluearcher1559]

Sad tie fighter noises*

[@abattledroid7649]

Hyperdrive lol

[@GmodPlusWoW]

*"the shields are stored in the balls"* Good god, that's a meme and a half.

[@greenbean325]

Lol the balls are always the weak point not even God himself could find a work around for that weakness guess where humans weak point is (usually on males)

[@greenbean325]

Oddly I counter that weakness by not giving my ocs and characters that balls weak point aka playing as a female

[@thegreatchimp]

Nothing worse than getting a kick in the shield generators

[@Leitis_Fella]

The next question becomes "How do ship reactors in Star Wars work?" I'm guessing like a pinch reactor from Halo

[@timon6759]

I thought more nuclear kinda only more advanced but it depends

[@potatojuice5124]

For all we know it could just be explained in a book with “oh it’s a nuclear reactor” or something

[@cgi2002]

It's a hyper matter reactor (not sure what that is) but its output is apparently far higher than the output of your average star. Which in turn makes you ask a single question, what uses that kind of power (the weapons are junk weak as you can tell by their impacts on unsheilded objects so it's not them or sheilds considering they block those).

[@Nghilifa]

@@cgi2002 Probably the hyperdrive.

[@cgi2002]

@@Nghilifa possibly, travel at FTL speeds has been theorized to need energy outputs in that region, and it could be a case of more mass means more energy on a potentially exponential curve.

[@ssfbob456]

One of the Halo books discusses how the Covenant ships have their bridge buried in the ship because it's so important, and they even make fun of the UNSC for making the bridge on human ships so easily targeted.

[@ssfbob456]

@@papapalps2415 It wasn't the Covenant as a whole, just one shipmaster/fleetmaster. I'm pretty sure it was the one that led the assault on Onyx.

[@UGNAvalon]

@Papa Palpatine - Bold words for someone within glassing range.

[@UGNAvalon]

@@papapalps2415 Good counter. However, the point of my comment was just to point out that the Covvies likely didn't _need_ sophisticated infantry/ground-warfare tactics since their default tactic of "glass everything from range/orbit" often takes care of most enemies. -I guess it'd be like asking why modern militaries are "incompetent" at sword/spear/arrow fights due to our reliance on guns/tanks/missiles.

[@Izz7879]

I would just make a giant star destroyer planet im like the smartest man alive for thinking about this

[@xpredator8813]

Palpatine be like

[@railroadfan-io7ns]

actually that would be a bad idea if it was destroyed then you would be bankrupt and lost a lot of resources

[@hakurai5757]

Yeah real smart. *Cough cough* shit

[@TheInselaffen]

A Star Destroyer shaped like a planet would be spherical, not very efficient at dissipating heat. How would you deal with this issue?

[@CoolMyron]

@@railroadfan-io7ns if you own a galaxy, then You can make a small planet with ease

[@josephstalin839]

They need to create a updated plan to internally place the projectors inside them ship.

[@maaderllin]

"Maybe it'd be even better to have it behind the neck, sort of at the NAPE" *Mikasa and Levi breathing heavily*

[@UGNAvalon]

Levi: “I’ll try spinning, that’s a good trick!”

[@evanhawver1696]

YES!!! I was going to comment something like this lol!

[@isaackim7675]

Palpatine (Rise of Skywalker), "I will not make the same mistake again." Resistance, "Hold my proton torpedoes."

[@xSuperFryx]

Kinda wish these were sensor globes, it’s definitely designed to look like a sensor globe of some kind. Think it would also be some cool Star Wars radar tech.

[@alexency5685]

They originally were but were treated as shields for early star wars video games.

[@xSuperFryx]

@@papapalps2415 They are very clearly shield projectors in canon lol. In legends their interpretation has varied. Kinda sucks, wish they stuck with sensor globes.

[@xSuperFryx]

@@papapalps2415 Rogue One visual dictionary. I recall other material saying so but can't remember.

[@alexency5685]

@@xSuperFryx Then that makes it a retcon, A dumb one.

[@UGNAvalon]

Ahem, “bridge deflector shields have been destroyed” ?

[@own4801]

Answer: It works effectively until it fails horrifically on screen.

[@AndrewSmoot]

I don't know if Arvel was suicidal as much as he simply didn't have great control of his A-wing.

[@demi-femme4821]

Lost stars implies that Arvel did do that by accident.

[@SharpEdgeSoda]

Your note on shield lore at 4:15 is interesting, because to that, in this space magic realm, I argue- Say, if suddenly, Star Wars books going forward say shields work more akin to Squadron's, it creates it's own interesting new rules for writers and directors to work with to create cool scenes. The Essential Guides and Cross Sections books were never bibles and should never be. Before someone who plays Squadron's thinks that makes ships too weak, lets say canon is more "Danger Zone Mode" than not. If it's not on hard confirmed on film yet, shields can still work however it wants if it makes for more interesting combat scenes. ...and as a tangent I'll never forgive the jerk who wrote in a book that A-wings can swivel their guns to shoot backwards. That's some GI Joe toy silliness that we have never and hopefully WILL never see confirmed in any other major source.

[@shorewall]

I agree with overwriting the side material in order to make things make more sense. Already, things still don't make sense. I go on Wookiepedia all the time, trying to get ideas for star ship designs, and the info is contradictory or incomplete.

[@bubbasbigblast8563]

Something else worth bringing up is that the Imperials were badly overstretched, not having the logistics to actually maintain all the ships they made. As the Shields are rather critical, making them easy to repair makes sense even if it makes the Shields more vulnerable.

[@TheRezro]

Still rational fleet composition was more important.

[@AlyssMa7rin]

@@TheRezro It was also a challenge, it forces the opponents to engage the ISDs from above, as opposed to attacking them from below.

[@bubbasbigblast8563]

@@papapalps2415 From the Imperial Handbook "(The Imperial Navy) grew too fast, I might add. The Empire is top-heavy with war machines, and can no longer crew or fix them." -Rheekan. One of the RPG books (supplements?) also mentioned Star Destroyers frequently being run only by skeleton crews (5000 people,) but I can't remember exactly which one.

[@maxout214226]

As I've become more of a military buff with age I've grown to hate that those bulbs are shields when they're radar housing IRL... which makes more sense than external shields.

[@DIEGhostfish]

They're both and for the same reason. Radiation.

[@ImieNazwiskoOK]

@DIEGhostfish Wouldn't the radiation and jest interupt with radars?

[@DIEGhostfish]

@@ImieNazwiskoOK Not if they're configured to ignore each other correctly. With the systems so close together they probably have the signals "Ride" the shield to a degree.

[@ImieNazwiskoOK]

@@DIEGhostfish Ok. But it might still damage electronics and make errors (One of reasons why NASA doesn't always use newest technology. And also those systems are exposed to much more radiation than normally in space).

[@pementerprises7706]

Bc they are radars lol. everybody thinks they are shields Bc of a casual fallacy in rotj which is restated on wookiepedia and therefore KZbin channels.

[@chton]

An additional point about their placement on top of the bridge: not only is it a good place to avoid radiation flooding into the rest of the ship, but it's also the only such place where, if they are destroyed, nothing else on the ship will get damaged. If the shield is taken down and the generators destroyed, the rest of the ship is unharmed and can still get out of dodge. Or, bar suicide runs, even still fight at full capacity. Placing them somewhere else, like the throat of the bridge neck, means that throat might get damaged with catastrophic consequences.

[@boreasreal5911]

If you can't fly through shields then how does Anakin fly into the Droid Control ships hangar in ep1? I think EC Henrys take makes more sense

[@aaronstorey9712]

Was the droid control ship shielded in ep 1? I cant remember

[@_tertle3892]

The hanger shields where probably dropped to allow fighters in and out

[@davidhamer7820]

Those are ray Shields. So no problem. Particle shielding is to stop missiles, asteroids, snub fighters etc.

[@highadmiraljt5853]

Those were made to let starships go through (it was a hangar shield, it’s purpose was kinda to protect starfighters from lasers while letting them exit). In the empire strikes back, we see a few star destroyers barely pass through an asteroid field, which should’ve destroyed more than the number of actual isd’s destroyed without shields. And asteroids, like starfighters, are physical

[@ronaldthompson4989]

Hangar bay was open with droid fighters deploying

[@akumaking1]

Hey Eck, can you cover the impact that memes have had on sci-fi franchises? (Halo, Mass Effect, Star Trek, Star Wars, Warhammer 40K, etc)

[@cancelanime1507]

I think Halo, Star Wars and Warhammer 40k easily win in that category lol

[@VelociraptorsOfSkyrim]

I'd like a discussion on how Fanon warps people's thoughts on Sci-Fi settings. You have no idea how often people say a setting like, say Mass Effect, is bad because of some Fanon they heard.

[@romepri15]

Quite a way to enjoy dinner watching star destroyer shields

[@marty2129]

I always thought those two shield generators on ISD are actually the main bridge generators/emitters combined with some radar or other sensor housings... as in, those generators protect the command tower, or more like add to the shielding of the superstructure layering over the hull shielding. But they could also give the ship incredible ability to direct shielding over to the side of the ship that would be the one turned towards an oponent of the same weight class. And now that I think of it, the ability to have two massive shield generators that are able not just project an all-around shielding in a way many small emiters would, but also direct them through the whole upper hemisphere of ISD (as well as most of the rear) might be quite a good thing with the ship's purpose and design, especially when the ship's "broadside" (the part with most overlaping gun arcs, thus the heaviest possible firepower) is actually a directly forward or even slightly upward. In that way, you can switch between heavy frontal shielding for attack and heavy rear shieldding for the few cases you might retreat, and you would need lesser amount of large shield emitters... I bet Lyra Wessex didn't expect this ship to fight against multiple powerful oponents, and I somewhat doubt that late Republic/early Imperial Navy would expect that too with people like Wilhuff Tarkin penning the doctrine.

[@Janttanj]

One main advantage of having them positioned on the outer hull is ease of access for maintenance. Never underestimate how much your techs and engineers will love if you if then can actually get to the stuff they need to repair and maintain. In fact given what we see in the Solo movie, they look to be pretty easy to remove entirely, which makes repairs much easier if you can swap out the entire module. I'd imagine the Mon Calamari cruisers with their more integrated shield generators take a lot more effort

[@MrPatrick2160]

I think a point you might've overlooked is the construction & maintenance aspect of the placement. On the ISD-I/II the primary sensor array is mounted above the bridge with the shield generators on either side, now this is something that often gets overlooked in Star Wars, but ships do get damaged, wear and tear happens, and accidents and component failures due occur. Consider this, if either the shields or primary sensor array suffer a critical failure due to battle damage or a failure of a component or material, How long will it take to repair? With the ISD-I/II if the shield generators or the sensor array is so badly damaged or disabled their placement on the hull and various data and power conduits being centralized and relatively few in number mean a yard can pull off the entire assembly with a minimum of effort and swap in a good generator or array far faster than it would take to repair an embedded one. Also the Empire can construct the Generators off a centralized assembly line and then transport them to the individual "Yard"/"Gantry"/"Construction Area" that is building a ship as needed instead of assembling each unit on the ship piece by piece. In modern terms it's like a jetliner's engines, both Airbus and Boeing use pylon mounted engines, if a engine fails (Think the recent United Airlines Flight 328 incident) then replacing the engine with a good one while tedious is actually far easier compared to say the DC-10's Tail mounted engine. I think the concept applies to the Empire in Star Wars. Also if the placement of these generators outside the hull was such a problem why did the New Republic Starhawk-class Battleship also use the generators mounted in a external fashion? Yes I'm aware of their nature of being constructed from ISD parts, but if the New Republic felt it would be such a massive problem then there must've been an alternative. Considering they didn't move the generators to inside the hull then I think the New Republic felt that the trade-off regarding protection vs construction and maintenance was still worth making.

[@shorewall]

Your example of a jetliner doesn't work. You need to compare the ISD to a battleship, because it is a warship, that is going to get shot at. And specifically, it's the shields, which protect the rest of the ship from getting shot at. So any utility from ease of repair is outweighed by the fact that it WILL get shot at, and if it fails, the whole ship will be vulnerable. For something as vital as the shields of a warship, it would pay to make sure they are as secure as can be, even if it makes it harder to get at. And just because the New Republic kept it doesn't make it right. It could mean that the New Republic is a dumb/lazy as the Empire. And I would bet on that, considering all the failure they propagated.

[@MrPatrick2160]

@@shorewall Really? I thought the comparison made sense considering the Empire built over TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND (25,000) of them in just under 24 years. How else do you build that many of those ships without a streamlined construction process and a design optimized for mass production. Also only a dozen or so shipyards from what I recall had the capacity to build these massive beasts. Even if you had a full dozen shipyards constructing the ISD's each shipyard would've had to build 2,083 or 2,084 ISD's within 24 years. Think of the logistical effort and planning needed to build that many 1.6 kilometer battleships in that time frame!! Certain compromises would have to be made! Edit: Not only did they have to build that many ships, they also had to maintain and repair them. The closest Earth analogy I can make to that kind of building effort is the Liberty ships of WW2, and those were made intentionally as cheap as possible since if a ship made even one, ONE voyage successfully it was considered to have been worth it. The Liberty's were disposable transports almost, The ISD's were battleships meant to be the Mainstay of the Imperial Fleet.

[@ColonelFrontline1152]

Ooooohhhhh more *BIG POINTY TRIANGLE* videos.

[@_tertle3892]

I prefer space Dorito

[@_tertle3892]

@AKUJIRULE SPACE DORITO. YOU INFIDEL!

[@paulwasilewski9030]

What is so amazing about star wars is that it's a great analogy to the absolute shift in naval warfare and war in general from WWI to WWII. Star destroyers represent the quickly obsolete tactics of fleet in line engagements. The tactic of multiple ships coordinating maneuvers of desteoyers, cruisers and basically slugging it out by naval cannons was obsolete the moment the first fighter planes without 4 wings was finished. Then, you've introduced fast and maneuverable planes that can carry torpedoes or a small number of bombs. And these multipurpose planes changdd warfare. The battleship Yamamoto, I believe, was sunk because of lack of effective anti fighter weapons. That is suppoosed to sound familiar. Modern warfare tactics in the navy now have air superiority as sacred. Carriers replaced battleships even during the war, it was a US pacific theater primary gial in WWII, air superiority. It's why the X wing was designed in the first place.

[@QuantumNova]

Everytime I see a luxury yacht in real life: "Look at the shield generators at the top." Seems like popular design for yachts.

[@OrDuneStudios]

Radar

[@QuantumNova]

@@OrDuneStudios yes, they're also called 'radomes' on rare occasions. Radar domes reduce interference I believe.

[@ImieNazwiskoOK]

@QuantumNova And also Protect from weather

[@alexanerose4820]

@EckhartsLadder,I disagree with the whole bridge argument. To keep this short and not write paragraphs since I've written ad nauseum about this: -The bridge takes up a very small space of the T-superstructure -It looks big up close but the farther you get the more you realize how tiny it actually is -Tiny targets are hard to hit even if they are dead centre. Ask a dartboard -If you're shooting at the bridge from the front and not the ISD's centre mass you're going to miss a lot -Where will you even shoot the bridge from? The front where all the guns are? The side where you get broadsided? The top where the shield bulbs are a bigger target? The back where the Engines are the bigger target? Where exactly can you exploit it without the ISD going unga bunga on you? -Real-life WW2 ships had bridges that were bombarded from on high all the time and the ships kept ongoing. Ignoring that little inconsistency in Ep VII -The bridge is a good simple countermeasure against ECM warfare and since the glass is as hard as the rest of the hull it's no problem Tl;DR Besides the giant engines of the back that's the flaw of all human ships, no under belly guns, the questionable quality of TIE fighters, and a few lacking point defense systems how exactly is an ISD lacking in logic again? Because the bridge is not one of them

[@maxharrison1077]

I just had a thought about the exposure--attacking vessels would also be exposed and so would projectiles. Given that hidden command bits don't seem to be a thing, this is kind of genius. Given that the ISD is a brute-force tank vessel, it'd be able to tank long enough for fighters to get out. A side note--how big are the hangars on the ISD? Big enough to fit a Lancer?

[@DIEGhostfish]

Lancer is 250 meters long, the hangar was only slightly longer than the aproximately 150 meter Tantive IV. It couldn't fit. They could easily fit smaller stuff, like alternate fittings of Corellian corvette, corellian gunship, IPV, etc.

[@maxharrison1077]

@@DIEGhostfish I didn't think it'd be able to fit, but it's just such a nice idea that happens to fix both things' weaknesses. Wish there was an official diameter thing on it.

[@frasermiller4366]

Good luck with the calrissian cup!

[@z3r0_35]

The real flaw with the Impstars was their insufficient (and in the case of the Impstar II, complete lack of) point-defense weaponry. A couple dozen quad lasers or maybe some dual purpose light turbolasers could've made a world of difference against the Rebels' starfighter-centric doctrine. Granted, an even better option would've been to make a hyperdrive-equipped starfighter the standard fighter for the Imperial Navy so that way Imperial ships wouldn't be vulnerable in the brief moment before they could deploy their fighters (I'm not even necessarily saying they should've had the TIE Defender here, though that would've been great, just sticking a hyperdrive on a TIE Interceptor could've made a huge difference).

[@samyn_legrie]

There actually were shielded and hyperdrive equipped TIE interceptors (and L/N's too, I think) in Legends. However, adding these systems severly decreased the speed and maneuverability of the fighters, which is why they were not very common.

[@z3r0_35]

@@samyn_legrie They still would've outperformed and outmaneuvered pretty much every fighter in the Rebel arsenal except for the A-Wing, and would've matched the X-Wing's firepower. The real reason such fighters wouldn't have become mainstays of the Imperial navy were related to cost and doctrinal conflicts. The Tarkin Doctrine was the lynchpin upon which the entire Imperial military rested...and was also their fatal flaw.

[@matthewgiglia643]

They didn't even need their standard fighter to be hyper-capable; they just needed a robust, long-range, hyper-capable option of some sort. For reconnaissance purposes alone, it would have been invaluable; the Rebellion operated according to a guerrilla tactics, which meant just finding them at all was a problem. The Empire had a dearth of small, long-range patrol ships in general. In Legends they at least developed the Alpha-class Xg-1 Starwing, but in current canon they've got jack shit. The Rebellion could send their robust, long-range ships with excellent sensors to scout entire systems and sectors stealthily from a great distance, picking targets while the Empire was ignorant of them. The Empire couldn't send anything smaller than a corvette or a Gozanti, which were considerably slower and far less stealthy.

[@matthewgiglia643]

@@papapalps2415 Probe droids were great for scouting planets but not so great at patrolling and doing proper in-space recon work; they were also an irritating combination of expensive and disposable. The TIE Scout in Legends is unclear if it existed before the post-Palpatine empire. In both cases, they're far less efficient and effective than simply having a dedicated long-range, robust starfighter model suitable for patrol and recon. You wouldn't replace the standard TIE line; you'd maintain them as a specialist craft. They find the rebels; then the ISDs and the swarms of standard TIEs come in and do what they do. The Assault Gunboat in Legends filled that role admirably, although like all Imperial specialist craft in Legends (the Lancer class comes to mind) was woefully underproduced.

[@matthewgiglia643]

@@papapalps2415 A naked probe droid costs about one-fifth what a TIE does; it's one-use transportation housing (which has to contain a hyperdrive and navicomputer) is something I can't find a cost source on, but can't be dirt cheap... and these were, again, one-use items; probe droids were not meant to be recovered and re-used. It's the expendability that makes them expensive. As for where the rebels are, I believe you're simply flat-out wrong. One of the central tenets of the Rebellion was that the vast bulk of their forces should be constantly mobile, constantly on the move, because locking yourself down to fixed positions meant that the Empire could find you and pound the shit out of you, the Empire always able to bring more firepower to bear. Both the old Essential Guide to Warfare and newer sources, such as the Rebel Files and the ongoing nu-Canon comic series, make this point repeatedly; mobility was life, the power of the Rebellion was in its fleet, not its fixed emplacements. It needed them, of course, but it preferred to minimize them. Indeed, as the war continued, the Rebels got MORE serious about not having fixed bases, and making the ones they did have as disposable as possible; the Rebellion was very upset that it invested so much effort into Echo Base on Hoth as their shiny new command hub, only for it to turn into an expensive target for Death Squadron. I'm not saying the Empire SHOULDN'T have used probe droids. They had the resources to do so. But the probe droids should have been accompanied by dedicated recon squadrons that could do things like hyper into a system, scout the entire thing while remaining somewhat hidden themselves, because they're small starfighters, and then move onto the next. This is how the Republic used the old ARC-170 against the Separatists (the ARC in that name stands for "Aggressive RECONNAISSANCE", and it worked INCREDIBLY well for that; the ARC-170 would find Separatist fleets, bases, outposts, what have you, and then the Venators would come in to do the heavy lifting. Indeed, that's how the Rebellion would scout its own targets; the A-Wings would go out and survey systems and hyperlanes looking for something tasty, and when they found it other units were called in. Not having a dedicated recon craft hurt the Empire badly. At the very least they should have been building or buying more CR90s and Raider-class corvettes, both excellent reconnaissance units in their own right. You're right that they don't make a lot of specialist craft in SW... but the Rebellion invested heavily in them, despite having fewer resources than the Empire did. Indeed, their heavy focus on specialist starfighters is what can be said to have won the war for them. And it wasn't like the Empire didn't build specialist fighters themselves; the TIE l/n IS a specialist craft. It has one purposes and one purpose only; to throw massive amounts of highly maneuverable twin-linked laser cannons at the enemy until the die. Literally everything else was stripped off it to make it more suited for that role. And that's fine! The Empire had nigh-infinite resources, it is PERFECTLY acceptable to make a specialist craft of that sort... but make OTHER specialist craft too, ones that fill other roles. You're the Galactic Empire. Fill your tactical and strategic blind spots. Marshal a fleet to fight the enemy you are actually fighting, rather than the one you WANT to fight. The Empire wanted to fight set-piece battles against an enemy that would obligingly commit to a conventional order of battle, where their ISD's could pound them to pieces with their turbolasers. Once it became apparent that the Rebellion wasn't going to do that, and indeed that the Rebellion would adopt a strategy of being very, very hard to find, there should have been a big investment in recon.

[@dakufaust]

The main thing with design between our, and the Star Wars world, is that the fighting and technology is far different. So from a Star Wars aspect, a heightened command bridge is a good idea. Though technically Venator's were used for mainly fighter based battles so they needed to see everything, AND the ISD was made for for general use not fleet battles specifically.

[@LoRdCaL]

In a lot of schematics for ships from Star Wars, shield projectors are a lot of the times positioned in areas that are away from the body of the ship. Most ships with wings has the shield projectors along the length of the wings, supposedly this allows greater coverage of the ship. It is also mentioned in some sources that the shields could be projected, perhaps them being high would allow larger field of area to project the shields for additional protection on a large ship. On a side note, every bridge seems to be exposed to some extent in Star Wars. Every bridge has a large window to see out from. I think if you know where the bridge is on any ship, from the front, it would be just as easy to take out the bridge of any ship. I would like to think that there is a reason that bridges in Star Wars are all exposed(besides movie space drop reasons). There is a lot of ships with stealth style technology that makes sensors useless and perhaps the exposed bridge is a way to help counter that to allow commanders to use their own eyes to see targets that would be hidden. Slave 1 is a good example of amazing Stealth, look how close it followed the Millennium Falcon without anyone on board knowing that Slave 1 was tracking it from the Star Destroyers trash in Empire Strikes Back. Also the Victory 1 Star Destroyer is possibly the closest thing to a Destroyer in Star Wars with the retarded amount of capital sized concussion missiles, It was made to destroy other capital ships(probably why it wasn't that fast either, didn't really need to be that fast.) These are my thoughts on this stuff lol. Just wanted to share. Can't unsee Micky Mouse ears now.

[@nickh9071]

I'm subscribed to a whole lot of channels but eckhartsladder is one of the 5% who I have notifications turned on for. No regrets

[@Al1701]

The Mon Cals not only use multiple shield generators, but a bit of subterfuge as well. The shield generators are held in the "blisters" covering the hull. However, they're identical to the literally hundreds across the ship holding various systems and their distribution probably varied from ship to ship given how customizable they were. So, the enemy couldn't just hammer at a known location to get at them. Not only were their many redundancies, there were countless decoys. I think the issue was having a single pair of large generators so exposed on an already exposed structure. It might make sense when you just need to stick somewhere they can do their job from as you cover the ship with as many guns possible, but it just shows the weakness in Imperial doctrine was concentrating on capital ships and not fighters. Fighters especially could park themselves in a blind spot of the guns and hammer at the shield immediately around the shields to either take it down or force that area to be reinforced weakening the shields elsewhere for more fighters to strike. There are times I wonder if the Empire and Rebellion think in the opposite roll they play. The Alliance fleet is designed to be versatile and take on a wide range of missions more like the navy of a superpower. Meanwhile, the Imperial Starfleet is designed for little more than terrorism with seemingly little room for flexibility. In X-Wing Alliance, there were two campaigns where the Rebellion was essentially doing law enforcement with the Empire playing the role of criminals in one of them.

[@ronaldthompson4989]

Ease of maintenance has been my firm belief since day 1. The only way the generators would be in danger is if all the the emitters in the area went offline, which given the speed (a couple minutes) at which backup circuits can be brought online is unlikely unless the sheer ammount of fire the ship is taking outstrips the ability of the reactor to keep the generators charged, in which case their loss will probably be the least of your problems. Interior generator fittings are fairly common in early or private designs (the Acclamators having theirs necelled next to their reactor core) but taking days or weeks to deal with when they wear out, while disconnecting and replacing the ones on an ISD can be done in a day or 2. The exposed bridge may not be a weakness but a calculated choice in line with the situation faced by real world designers. Early battleships had extremely heavily armored bridges for fairly obvious reasons. However, much to their annoyance Naval officers would choose to command from the exterior so they could observe the battle more easily. Eventually, designers bent to this trend and started adding second, unarmored bridges near the top of the superstructure with all the communication relays needed coordinate the entire ship and lots of windows to see both the enemy and a large portion of their own ship. So while the ISD's tower does say shoot me here, its is quite possible the added situational awareness was considered worth it by officers. The large rear blind spot in favor of maximizing the firepower that could be brought against a target in the foward arc being another "weakness" that is simple a compromise.

[@one-shotrailgun8713]

MCRN Donnager-class Battleship vs Imperial-class Star Destroyer I want this video NOW! For too long I have wondered how The Expanse vessels would fare against Star Wars vessels.

[@one-shotrailgun8713]

@@michaelandreipalon359 nah I think the Donnager-class will win, the 2 railguns will one shot the ISD provided it hits the right spot. I know the ISD's shields can stop physical objects but it is only rated for use against debris and astroids, the railguns will for sure overwhelm them. The PDC's (and the advanced FCS they are hooked up) to will make short work of any Star Wars fighters that gets in range. The ISD can win but only IF it gets in range with its weapons. Speed: Donnager(?) Armor: Donnager Weaponry: Donnager Firepower: ISD Shields: ISD Carrying Cap: ISD FCS and Sensors: Donnager The Donnager has superior weaponry, sensors/FCS, speed, and armor but lack shields and only carries a few ships. The ISD carries a huge compliement of fighter and shuttle craft, has shields, and better firepower then the Donnager. However, the low range of its weaponry, its armor designed against turbolasers only, short sensor range, and its slow speed utimately what made it lose against the Donnager.

[@one-shotrailgun8713]

@@michaelandreipalon359 yep Edit: I hope Eckharts and many other see this comment.

[@scytheseven9173]

It still doesn't make sense to put shield bulbs all in one place, that makes it easier to disable the shields in a single strike. If I remember correctly, Mon Calamari ships have their generators dispersed around their hulls, and their shields are famously better for it.

[@sglkh3r6f9h]

As a theoretical. it might be cheaper to do so. perhaps cheaper to make only one type of large industrial grade shield generator, then multiple (perhaps even different sized and shaped) smaller generators. and if the shields do put out radiation the mon cala ships would have to have some sort of system in place to more easily get rid of that radiation. the mon cala design could also take longer to build, or require more experienced build crews to get right. perhaps if not cheaper to make it could have been much cheaper to design.

[@g0thicuk]

Playing squadrons they really make sense, if you attack straight on you've got to get past the entire ships arsenal, otherwise you've got to spend time getting round to a different approach, they're also very far away from other targets meaning they're less likely to get clipped as collateral damage. Isds seem a lot harder to take down vs nebulons

[@nickkurzy2246]

5:40 I've seen this scene many times but I only now just realized there is a Gladiator Star Destroyer in it. I think.

[@DIEGhostfish]

Yes there is, two ISDs and a Gladiator. Vs... An assault frigate, an escort frigate (With Tardis tech given the size of the interior) and a bunch of corvettes and freighters. THere's a reason the novel had two or three big MC80s join the fight.

[@darthball2723]

just about to have lunch AND a new eckcharts video perfect

[@Motoskichimo1974]

I like the shields on the sdf 1. Yeah, it started out as a game with track ball controls. But then, it went on to be a super weapon that could vaporize ships at a decent range.

[@DIEGhostfish]

SDF1? Macross?

[@Motoskichimo1974]

@@DIEGhostfish Yes, It's meant to be a joke as he asked the viewers their thoughts on shields. In the Macross anime, the ship gets a strange Shield that is at first can only be controlled through basically track balls. When they finally try to use it to protect the whole ship. It Catastrophically explodes, destroying the zentradi and the city below.

[@DIEGhostfish]

@@Motoskichimo1974 Huh.

[@pementerprises7706]

Richard Edlund Cinematographer for ROTJ stated the domes were large range radar/scanners… This can be seen in by the location Han hides the falcon in ESB purposely in the domes blind spot to avoid detection.

[@thunderboltcougar5626]

The dome consist sensor, radar, and shield generator. The blue print, however, only mention shield generator.

[@pementerprises7706]

@@thunderboltcougar5626 Any guide book or video that claims the domes as bridge deflector shields is incorrect as they all are based on the logical fallacy in return of the Jedi. The novelization makes the scene more clear having Ackbar command the entire rebel fleet to destroy the executors power generators. The domes destruction following simply statement is circumstantial evidence at best as many other events may have caused the shield to fall. Also the original incredible cross sections from the original trilogy shows cut outs of many ships. This includs the ISD and star fights (x-wings, y-wings, etc). It is clearly stated on the star fighters where the defector shield projectors and generator is located. The structure (labeled deflector generator) shown in these star fights happens to match a large structure inside the star destroyer. This large structure clearly has auxiliary systems and is shown placed next to the main reactor...

[@Mr-Tibbster]

That's the conclusion I came to, the generators project the shields, and it's simply a matter of constant bombardment to deplete the shields before blowing the generators so they can't recharge. As for the bridge system, I always figured the logic was that if all the controls to the ship were blasted, it then becomes inoperable and out of control, the systems shut down. When life support is shot out it also causes havoc (oxygen, artificial gravity and such), etc. The old Rogue Squadron games did a good job of this when you see the ships begin to just descend toward the nearest source of gravity and free fall, same as in ROTJ and the Executor.

[@Gryphorim]

Going as far back as the ancient "Rebel Assault" (iirc) game that the TIE Phantom debut in: the ISD had the 2 main shield projector domes, and a series of smaller field shaping projectors in the trench down each side of the hull, protected by some point defence guns, or at least guns desperately used as point defense.

[@TheWingland]

Fleet battle between Grand admiral Thrawn vs. Ender Wiggin Each one has an equal sized fleet with equally capable subordinates, and since Ender is from a different universe each has equal understanding of the technology they’re using. They are in command of Star Wars vessels. Pick a famous fleet of your choosing I’d suggest death squadron.

[@nickkurzy2246]

Now that you mention it I think Ender is one of the few people across SciFi that could have a chance at beating Thrawn. Never thought about that before.

[@TheWingland]

@MX 3 Ender and Thrawn with a single star destroyer would probably conquer the whole empire.

[@kennethkates3140]

Well... I'm a Harrower fan. I think it out classes the design, layout and strategic use over the Imperial class. Also the reason I put the Harrower vs the ISD do often in previous videos, back when you did verses videos, I miss those btw. Can't wait for the comparison.

[@arn_ice]

good point on the placement like for the MC75 vs the turrets on a Star Destroyer. When it's not being too hampered by plot armour and used well (Rogue One imo showed a competent use vs (surprised/lazy/suckerpunched) crew and commanders of those two Destroyers over the shield gate. ONE destroyer was able to take out an entire fleet where two failed at doing so WITH the support of a space station.

[@matthewgiglia643]

It's been a long time, but I seem to recall in Legends, the Empire eventually did retrofit their Star Destroyers to not put all their shield eggs in two baskets. I think that was a plot point in the B-wing expansion to the original X-Wing; they'd gotten sick and tired of the Rebellion adopting a "target shield generators, then blow up the ship" strategy, and worked to make it less possible.

[@yaklin104]

I like that you referred to Trench Run Disease

[@thefrogman1900]

I've never clicked so fast in ages

[@samspeed6271]

An interesting video I think the Empire was more interested in simplicity than redundancy. They genuinely didn't think they would come across a force that would be able to get through the shields in the first place. By having only two emitters, you simplify the power supply systems, the cooling systems and the command systems for the shields. I also have a theory: shields need or work better with line of sight. So, by having the shields on top of the bridge tower, you can get good coverage of the dorsal, flanks and aft. For the bow and ventral, maybe they have reflectors or repeaters that can redirect the shield to cover those areas. Again, by having only 2 shield emitters, you can get away with fewer repeaters.

[@Snuggs86]

Eck: "I was initially going to do a comparison between the Imperial-II Star Destroyer and the Harrower." Me, a SWtOR nerd: *much excitement* Eck: "But today we'll be breaking down the shield generator of an Imperial Star Destroyer." Me: *sad fluffbunny noises*

[@mortyjhones4068]

Acording to the esetale guid for warfair, the shield bulbs ARE in a good place. When you desine a shield the emmitter it ends up mirroring the shape of the maxumum shield its capable of projecting. ALSO in cannon an ISD is capale of moving close to an ally and projecting a shield large enough to cover both ships. to save power the shield is normaly projected in and exstended eclipes leaving of room under the bace of the hull. In an emergancy. the two large bulb projectors would allow the ship to project two huge Spherical Shields around its self. using Masive amounts of power in the process.

[@cpu46]

Yea, having played squadrons, the ISD shields are pretty damn well protected as Eck stated. Not only do you need to fly past a LOT of cannons to get at them, but in order to get the most time on target you can't skim over the ships surface which means that ALL of the top mounted cannons can fire upon you.

[@JDumbbell]

Behind the neck is a cool idea, star destroyers are forward facing arrows, any med/big ship would have to get behind them it possibly moving through the turbo laser arc. Tie the shields into the ships broadside trenches maybe, equal shield generation + plethora of defence turrets

[@lanehollis9302]

I’m really excited to see that comparison video, I love the Harrower so much

[@genericscottishchannel1603]

doing a good job of making me think my pc was going to crash there

[@480JD]

One of the reasons I like BSG designs, the CIC is buried in the ship and the only window was in that front observation lounge.

[@tjnugget4066]

The last time I was this early, the empire ruled the galaxy

[@galadato7425]

Star wars civilian:"which one?"

[@tjnugget4066]

@@galadato7425 “the first GALACTIC EMPIRE!”

[@MonkeyJedi99]

@@galadato7425 The Infinite Rakatan one, of course.

[@Colonel_Overkill]

Honestly a bigger weakness over the current placement is the lack of aft point defense weapons. I have gotten behind the bridge support and been able to blast away at the generators with laser or rocket pods without issues clearing the back of the bridge structure while in the PDW blind spots. Fighters find me a sitting duck if I hang around too long but a quick hit long enough to take a chunk or disable one generator is plausible on the levels I play at least.

[@colinneumeuer5793]

Hey eck I had a thought about ISD'S, overexposed bridges and shields and would like to hear your opinion about that. Did you ever think about that this overexposed bridge and the shields could be some kind of bait? I mean think about: the ISD is probably the most powerfull ship in the galaxy at that time. So if you are a rebel and you have to bring one of those guys down what do you do? You focus on weak points. Like for example... An overexposed bridge? But that is a giant bait because the shields are next to the bridge and small ships need a big amount of time to punch throu. And right under the bridge there are 8 giant turbos who make quick work of small corvettes and frigates. And it makes sense to play it like that. Without that bait rebels would probably try other strats, like attacking from below and more guerrilla tactics with hit and run aspects, wich would draw battles sooo long. With this bait rebels may think they can bring down an ISD but in reality they are moving in position to get blasted to the graveyard

[@darthscott616]

Good video. Yes I think radiation and to maybe free up internal space would make sense. Now if only shielding was a lot more consistent as you say. It never made any sense to me if physical objects could just pass though with ease. Minus plot armor, I would imagine the in-universe shields of an ISD could withstand quite a bit of abuse.

[@shorewall]

Eckhart has talked in the past about ISD's tanking asteroids. The problem is indeed consistency.

[@kajn3206]

the biggest weakness of the ISD is the absence of point defense, in my opinion, it would like to supplement + add a raider-sized vessel, added defense against fighters and, as necessary, reconnaissance

[@DL24StaS]

Probably a CB radio antenna on a car is an apt analogue: for it to function, you have to have it mounted on the roof of the car, not buried somewhere deep inside it; kind of same thing here - for the generator to project the shield around the ship, it has to be somewhere outside. BTW, there is a simple way to rationalize the exposed design of the bridge on the ISD; it would've made sense if the bridge was the only habitable part of the ship, and the rest of it (the "wedge" itself) was completely automated - e.g. because of radiation hazard (would've saved a lot of energy on life support systems, as well). But, it doesn't seem to be possible within the established SW canon.

[@cowerdnerddespacito9518]

Those ball things on the ISD just remind me of Doppler radars

[@waynekoller9499]

I have to say that you are definitely by far my favorite person on youtube when it comes to your knowledge of the star wars universe. I was wondering if you could answer a question for me. Where was the Emperor during the battle of Yavin and the destruction of the first death star?

[@EckhartsLadder]

Probably on Coruscant

[@TheWingland]

For overall design I gotta give it to the Harrower. It has a smaller more squat bridge kind of like on the resurgent battle cruisers. Also, the hanger in the front of the ship I think will allow for faster entry and exit to battle for Star fighters. Finally the Harrower has point defense laser cannons so it can more effective engage enemy Star fighters.

[@CloneScavengerVulpin8389]

Admiral piett: "Intensify forward forward firepower."

[@Falchion1984]

#AskEck Way back, in your video about how the Empire lost nearly 25,000 Star Destroyers, you said that the Empire could no longer produce its own TIE Fighters by the Orinda Campaign. That leaves several questions: 1. What caused the Empire to lose its ability to manufacture TIE Fighters, since they surely still had shipyards? 2. Since they must've used fighters, what fighters did they use? 3. Did this new fighters suck more, less, or as much as TIE Fighters? 4. Was the Remnant able to resume TIE production after the signing of the Bastion Accords and/or joining the Vong War on the G.A's side? 5. Is there enough on this subject and it is interesting enough to warrant a dedicated video? ...yeah, I know, brevity is not my strong point. But, please consider it, if it catches your interest.

[@recity79]

“You can’t just fly through and shoot it”. Unless you’re a Death Star at Yavin, where they actually say they are passing through it, or a Mantidor IV vs Poe Dameron in an X-Wing or a single surviving bomber in the same battle...., an asteroid, the Millennium Falcon that actually wants to land on the back of an imperial bridge, etc...

[@jacobparslow8723]

Id love for you to do a video on the Hapan battle saucer or whatever it was called. We really only get a brief overview of them during The Courtship of Princess Leia. But Id love a video going into at least a little of their design. I mean they have rotating tubo lasers to counteract the cooldown time as is said in the book. No other ship in Star Wars has that design and I mean come on... it's an interesting ship design.

[@troyspencer753]

Not sure if you've done this yet, but could you do a video on a Scilon base star vs a Imperial Star Destroyer or a S.S.D. ?

[@tkc1129]

"Only Imperial Star Destroyers are dumb enough to expose their shield 'generators'" = "I don't know where the shield 'generators' are on other ships."

[@hydrogenone6866]

We need more videos like this or faction vs videos.

[@MacOriginalGamer]

Thanks to less-than-stellar editing in the Battle of Endor, a lot of people think those sensor domes are shield generators.

[@danielbeck2739]

I'm going to say it right now, the Harrower. The main reason it be out classed is because of tech level, but for sheer firepower and design it's practical and intelligent when trying to be an actual battleship/carrier hybrid. Has more guns, even comes with decent point defense, and the fighter compacity is up there with the Venator.

[@azuresentry815]

IMO, the Harrower is the better design overall but the ISD would win in a 1v1 given the time gap. The Harrower has a larger fighter complement, a decent anti-fighter defense grid, and is capable of operating without a major fleet around it. That is particularly useful if trying to manage a large area of space and not enough ships to have fleets everywhere. One or two Harrowers bring enough troops and fighters to do that, as would an ISD, but without the same vulnerability to fighter attacks (in an for its era comparison at least, a Harrower would probably still be vulnerable to squadrons of ISD-era Rebel fighters). I also prefer the hangar layout of the Harrower, it seems much more multipurpose. Both ships suffer from the dumb exposed Bridge issue but it is less glaring on the Harrower and I think the sight lines for her turbo lasers aren't as obstructed as on the ISD.

[@grandsome1]

The "shield generators" look like radar towers, so maybe they are the sensors the shield uses to block incoming treats, if you destroy the sensors the shield can't work.

[@onlypeaceindeath]

They where supposed to be sensors by the film creators. Which is why they are placed as far from the hull as possible.

[@silent_abyss2100]

I have to point out that although I really like eck's usual commentary, this is two videos regarding shields he's mentioned that they can stop physical objects. So far in star wars there are three know classes of shielding deflector shields and ray shields which are for thermal/plasma damage and optic/laser damage respectively. Then there is the jack of all trades master of none used multiple times. Droideka, gungan, and planetary shield are this type. Power seems to be the only requirement for this type, though much more than other shields. Also just prior to endor a star destroyer escorting the executor was destroyed and the executor damaged by asteroids. Not possible if shields on warships stop kinetic damage. Another flaw in the possibility of shields on any ship up to episode six ironically is found in the clone wars. Most weapons both Republic and CIS were energy/plasma cocooned kinetic munitions, hence why ships took damage before shields would fall. Btw droideka vs blaster and the droideka vs the N1 laser canon is a difference in calibre. Compare the blaster to a 9mm and the N1's bolt to a 50mm round. That's why the N1 could destroy it while the group couldn't. Not trying to be harsh just wanted to avoid confusion about shields in that sense. Also anyone try to explain just how gungan shield generators manage to work. The reactor gun system causes me more headaches to contemplate, than the incompetence of the CIS commanders that misuse their resources and screw themselves over.

[@onlypeaceindeath]

"Also just prior to endor a star destroyer escorting the executor was destroyed and the executor damaged by asteroids. Not possible if shields on warships stop kinetic damage" They do stop solid objects. Several asteroids where vaporized in TESB when they impacted the shields on the ISDs. You can also see shield interactions when a Y-wing crashes into an ISD in RotJ. There is some inconsistency on how and when starship shields blocks missiles and projectiles, but they are certainly capable of it.

[@silent_abyss2100]

@@onlypeaceindeath And yet before the battle of Hoth, an ISD loses a superstructure to an asteroid, and in universe missiles are considered expensive but extremely deadly. Also we know pretty much exactly how deflector shields and pretty much every shield type in star wars works on a mechanical standpoint, to be fair they only work because of how space in star wars behaves, and they would not work in reality. Deflector shields don't deflect anything, rather they act like air conditioners in that they try to reduce the heat of thermal based ordnance. Omni shields has I refer to the type stop objects via momentum. Thermoshields a one off only on The Invincible work in the opposite manner of deflector shields, they try to superheat and burn through the energy of thermal ordnance. This also makes them able to block kinetic ordnance like the torpedoes in that scene. This explains much of the plot holes of the stealth ship vs The Invincible, not a plot hole but mechanics not being understood. To be fair neither Thermoshields nor Deflector shields would work in space in our universe because it's a vacuum, however space in star wars behaves in a way for this to work. I didn't just make claims about the shields I actually looked through canon material and then used some basic logic to figure out how they work. Before I forget ray shields work on optic/light (laser) weapons via disrupting the light spectrum. I know shields seem to be somewhat haphazard in universe but they've actually all but outright explained, just piece the context we do receive together. We are actually told a lot about shields without an actual direct explanation. Yes it's frustrating a times but hilarious that the entire series has basically hidden the mechanics while showing us how they work. Also Eckhartsladder did a video explaining the crash of Executor that covers the events that damaged it prior to the battle of Endor. It should be a top result if you look for Executor crash explained, though the actual title escapes me. Edit: forgot to mention the a wing crash, it hit armor... and quite frankly from a graphical perspective, it's hard to tell what damage a ship received during the original trilogy most ships just exploded at some point, rather than systematically take damage. Newer films show this better, has much has I hate to give any kind of praise to the newer movies.

[@onlypeaceindeath]

@@silent_abyss2100 "And yet before the battle of Hoth, an ISD loses a superstructure to an asteroid" You can still see the silhouette of the tower in the dust cloud. But even if that was the case, we don't know how fast something has to travel to be stopped. The shields could be designed to stop incredibly fast objects, which would make a slower but larger object more problematic. "and in universe missiles are considered expensive but extremely deadly" Not in the movies. Proton torpedoes barely dented the outer armor on the Death Star, massive explosions are detonating all over the hulls of the capital ships in the battle of Endor with no apparent damage, the shields on the droid control ship blocking everything etc. Hell, it required like 6-12 torpedoes from two A-wings to destroy a sensor dome on the Executor. "Deflector shields don't deflect anything, rather they act like air conditioners in that they try to reduce the heat of thermal based ordnance" They can block, deflect or scatter energy blasts. The Tantive IV's shields tried to scatter a turbolaser blast but it scattered and deflected into the reactor. You can see the beam breaking up if you watch it frame by frame. It seems to have a lot of do with the power of the bolt or beam. If the bolt is weak, it might bounce or getting absorbed by the shield. If it's a very powerful laser bolt, it will slam right through and destroy the object. And sometimes the bolt will erupt into a fireball followed by a blinding light. "I didn't just make claims about the shields I actually looked through canon material and then used some basic logic to figure out how they work" So did I, and so did many others before me. George Lucas' movies gives lots of insight in the workings of a lot of stuff, especially if you look through all of the details, very closely.

[@silent_abyss2100]

@@onlypeaceindeath It's a known plot point actually regarding slow objects, there is a clone wars episode that covers rolling thermal detonators to bypass the shields of a droideka. Quite frankly the planetary shield bypass is more of a plausible but not done in a source material yet. The same idea has occurred to bypass by moving slow. The shield gate in Rogue Squadron is actually based of this. I was actually referring to concussion missiles, because quite frankly I don't understand why the proton torpedoes do next to nothing in any movie really. Only in the clone wars 2008 series were they useful. You would think that being torpedoes they would pack a bigger punch, but I don't think besides the malevolence arc they were especially useful at least outside of comics or other expanded universe materials. I remember a ISD model having them but being replaced because they wanted to capture rebels not simply kill. You may be thinking ray shields, has I remember something about imperial era ships being more optic/light based or traditional lasers rather than plasma based like clone wars era. Hence the shift in shields priority for the rebels. Mainly using more ray shields to combat imperial turbo lasers. I kind of wish George Lucas would have simply given somekind of explanation rather than leaving the matter blank, at least we would have some kind of true official mechanism rather than behavioral observation and semi canon sources. Then again this would be a George Lucas explanation, *visibly shudders* world building is certainly his strength, characters and mechanisms, ehhh.....

[@onlypeaceindeath]

@@silent_abyss2100 "It's a known plot point actually regarding slow objects, there is a clone wars episode that covers rolling thermal detonators to bypass the shields of a droideka" Which would be a function that's very useful for starships carrying fighters. It would allow the ship to launch and retrieve fighters without dropping shields, which would be useful in combat. "I was actually referring to concussion missiles, because quite frankly I don't understand why the proton torpedoes do next to nothing in any movie really" I doubt concussion missiles are that much more powerful. It's clear that fighters where never intended to be as powerful as some fans believe. They are primarily used for harmassment tactics against capital ships, while turbolasers are the heavy hitters. "You may be thinking ray shields" Ray shields absorbs energy as I recall it, or incinerate physical projectiles in the Clone Wars. But i believe all ships must have some form of protection against solid impactors, considering all the debris that exists outside in space. I kind of wish George Lucas would have simply given somekind of explanation rather than leaving the matter blank" There is enough in the movies to draw a lot of information if you know what to look for, as well as information from the people working with the movies. Like how the first Death Star is roughly 220km in diameter based on the scale used for the model as an example.

[@XLjackbot]

The more I read and hear about ISDs the more it strikes me how much influence the clone wars had on their design. An ISD is perfect for taking on separatist ships which generally trended towards decent mixtures of fighters and broadside capability. In such wars being able to brute force from a distance straight on as well as to the sides grants ISDs not only immense flexibility but also considerable advantages.

[@shorewall]

Whenever we talk about the design of Star Wars ships, I can't ignore the reality that these ships were made to look cool first, and everything else was invented later. And that is as it should be. :D So I don't really care about retroactively finding justifications for odd design choices, because there aren't any. Sure, we could invent a reason, but it would be just that, an invention. I like designing ships in the Star Wars style, using concepts and ideas that I get from Eckhart's videos. At no point is Star Wars going to care about designing sensible ships, even from an in-universe perspective. Which is fine. It gives us more to talk about. But I don't like coming up with in-universe reasons, which is doing their job for them.

[@theangriestangel6665]

Is anyone else wondering if SG1 could have taken out the Death Star’s shield generator on Endor?

[@cgi2002]

I wasn't but now, yes, easily. Actual military weapons are far more effective than SW weapons (accuracy, rof, range) and they understand camouflage, know of stealth (and suppressed weapons), and wouldn't be nearly as subtle when targetting strategic targets with no civilian populace nearby (naqeda enhanced nukes), the Ewoks were not known to be there before landing.

[@hydrogenone6866]

To be honest they would actually have a clear advantage, having access to cloaking technology even in the early seasons.

[@cgi2002]

@@hydrogenone6866 cloaking tech exists in SW to. Main reason its rarely used is its situational and has high energy drain. SG version may be far better tho, it hides thermal and magnetic signatures too, SW apparently doesn't. But we are ignoring 1 major tech, beaming. Sheilds don't block beaming unless specifically designed to do it in SG.

[@DIEGhostfish]

@@cgi2002 Yeah though there's probably a chance beaming would just be shield blocked anyway because plot. And there'd be some excuse for not just bringing down a nuke. Big issue is EU wise Stormtrooper armor is VERY good against slugthrowers.

[@cgi2002]

@@DIEGhostfish EU slug throwers are basically 18th century muskets, they are junk in most cases. Besides you can have really good armour, bullet impacts still impart considerable force, causing trauma and soft tissue damage underneath (kevlar vests stop bullets, those bullets still break ribs). So considering that, imagine the effects of an enemy who can put 10-20 rounds into your face (even if they don't penentrate), I doubt you'll be conscious. There are very few effective SW slug throwers, and those that are basically decimate everything compared to a standard blaster. Also, the moment you say "bullets don't work" Teal'c gets to bring the staff cannon he stole from the death glider (or his M240). I imagine the storm troopers rapidly beg for bullets to start working again, quick bullet related death is nicer than been shot with a gun designed for shooting down space ships.

[@Venator_500]

As for the harrower vs ISD prediction, I think the harrower is a better designed ship mostly because of the amount of firepower it can squeeze on a frame half the size of the ISD. Also the ship has 5 hangars and even though they’re not as big as the ones on the ISD it’s still incredible how the harrower can fit so much crap in a frame of 800 meters. I think the Empire would have been better off just making a modernized harrower, which could fit into the Tarkin doctrine quite nicely considering how scary the harrower looks with all of its massive turbolasers, but I’ll shut up now.

[@TheRezro]

Thy actually did. It was Gladiator-class SD.

[@Venator_500]

@@TheRezro true though it didn’t see as much use at it could’ve

[@TheRezro]

@@Venator_500 Agree.

[@OllamhDrab]

Sharing the skill of 'Always getting the ISD with Y-wings. ' A ) Load advanced missiles. B) Act like you're on an attack run but instead paint as much of their fighter screen and disrupt them with guided missiles. Fire what's on your rails as you go. c) Cut and thrust your way closer while your fighters winnow down the ones that want to chase you. d) Get behind ISD deflector unload ions and stuff, park and destroy till done while they wonder why they have no guns back there. :)

[@pokemon1895]

Thanks, Eck! I've been watching your vids for a long time now. Love the content!

[@heroicaknight4735]

That quip about the ISD shields being hard to destroy in Squadrons: oh BOY do I know about that... It's so annoying because my team will be putting up a decent defense and take out the Raider when all of a sudden "shield generator destroyed" flashes in white. I'll turn around and see some shmuck literally LAYING on top of the ruined projector and think to myself "when...how...what the hell?"

[@lordfrostwind3151]

Actually the placement makes even more sense now that you've mentioned it, because right on the rear of the bridge tower is the engines so they'd probably be getting the better shielding as well.

[@jacobnestle3805]

Your tweet about this was top-tier

[@TheWingland]

Vs matchup Yss-1000 saber( Halo Reach) vs T-65 X-wing(Star Wars). 2 rounds round 1 average pilot in each round 2 noble 6 in the saber vs Wedge Antilles in the X-wing

[@wlpaul4]

I always assumed it was a "It isn't perfect, but it works when we're building and installing 50,000+ of these things." decision. If you're going to build a fleet that large, that quickly, there are going to be decisions and sacrifices made in the name of ease of production.

[@christophersanchez7731]

I always thought ISD’s had their ups and downs Yes they have flaws that make them exposed to Starfighter precision attacks But they have pluses that made them the most feared and iconic capital ships in Star Wars Their firepower is immense, enough for one to decimate a small noncapital ship fleet ok its own, and at least one could decimate a planet surface with orbital bombardment Despite its weaknesses its Hull is durable, able to take much punishment when shields fail In a comic a Star Destroyer that was nearby the First Death Star survived colliding with a piece of giant shrapnel And the fact it’s a multipurpose ship is plus on it’s own It’s a perfect example of the Tarkin Initiative, a weapon of terror that’s build for capital ship combat, as well as a multipurpose Starfighter and base carrier

[@drewbryk]

Maw had a good post arguing the balls are sensors