The Birth of the Super Star Destroyer - The Secret Truth

[@EckhartsLadder]

Watch Corey's video later: kzbin.info/www/bejne/oYSWl4J_oJ6bn5o All sources linked in description, including thumbnail ship by FractalSponge.

[@Cool_dude9011]

@@davidblalock9945 i think they would be a lot more helpful if there enieme was more powerful and had bigger ships but the rebel alliance is a small not very strong group with not that many large ships

[@VengeanceN7]

I think SSDs could better serve as massive mobile bases for the less compliant sectors of space, like how the Supremacy in Canon is supposed to act as.

[@Cool_dude9011]

@@VengeanceN7 thats a good idea

[@Cool_dude9011]

@@VengeanceN7 but in large space battles SSDs are pretty good

[@coreym8580]

I'm actually subscribed to Corey's Datapad and I like his stuff (he's a more down-to-earth, by-the-numbers version of your videos) but 45 mins is just waaay too long for a breakdown. A three-part series with each video being 15 minutes? At least worth checking out the first video. 45 minute total breakdown? Sorry, but I'm just not willing to commit that much time at one go.

[@jamesd5842]

It’s hard to argue that the SSDs compromised the overall fleet strategically due to excessive concentration of resources when the Empire was still able to build two Death Stars alongside them. Clearly if you eliminated the Death Star projects and reallocated just those resources to the support/escort fleet, the Empire could have had its cake and eaten it too

[@Mikalent]

@Lokabrenna 1 Death Star, capable of securing 1 system, versus 100 SSDs capable of securing 100 systems simultaneously. "Well you can't blow up a planet with an SSD" the Tarkin Doctrine enthusiasts say, "but you can Base Delta Zero the planet and ensure nothing will live on it again for the next century" everyone with a working brain states.

[@MonkeyJedi99]

A real-world parallel can be seen in WW2 big weapons like the railway cannons (Not just made by Germany, but also France, The Soviet Union, The US, UK, Japan, and Italy), super-heavy tanks that never really worked, and Germany's never-completed V3 weapon. Some were so crew intensive that they were a massive drain on manpower, as well as being far more expensive on a 'money per target destroyed' than more reasonably sized weapon systems. That is how I see super star destroyers. A big pile of money crewed by way too many people, concentrating power in too slow and big a target.

[@MrOiram46]

In Legends, I think the Death Stars were also meant to be used against the Yuuzhang Vong

[@jamesd5842]

@@MonkeyJedi99 I get what you’re saying here, but in-universe the SSDs actually were terrifyingly effective tools of war when they were actually used correctly. Granted that is likely only possible because it’s a fictional galaxy based upon fictional rules, but they don’t quite rise to the level they don’t work

[@jamesd5842]

@Lokabrenna that applies offensively as well. But the peer point is absolutely correct. The Empire could clearly handle the resource concentration (if you get rid of the Death Stars), and there’s clearly a role for them. But in the absence of peers the need is purely hypothetical

[@appo9357]

I would've built only five, maybe six, SSDs. The rest of the money and resources could then go towards research/construction of other ships to support them. Maybe even an Imperial Mark 3 SD. Definitely the TIE Defender.

[@gray1shark]

Agreed. Having a few SSDs spread across the galaxy to discourage groups from thinking they could take and hold pockets of space makes a certain sense. 40-60 is a massive waste of resources.

[@kimjongun5691]

I was just about to say, they could've mass produced TIE Defenders and cut their SSD numbers to about a quarter or a third of what they had. And with the freed up resources they could've built fleets of TIE defenders and new SDs. The new SDs could've had better hangar bays and launching platforms, similar to the Venator-class's hangars, but still retain the qualities of the new SDs. Just let Thrawn be in charge of revamping the Imperial Navy and R&D, that should just about do it 😂

[@KamenRiderGumo]

@@kimjongun5691 TIE Defenders, TIE Avengers, Missile Boats, and Assault Gunboats in mass-produced numbers alongside the Imperial-IIs, Victorys, and Interdictors would have been far more cost-effective and efficient for controlling a galaxy. But the Empire had that "bigger is better" mentality and sacrificed efficiency for terror.

[@jaymikevillanueva1212]

Honestly, I'd make up to 12 Executor-class SSDs specifically for Fleet Admirals or a Grand Admiral in command around specific fleets, but I'd make more Bellators and smaller Star Dreadnaughts as command ships for smaller fleets while invest on improving Imperial-class SDs and increase use of multipurpose cruisers (Vindicator-class). I'd steadily replace all older TIEs with newer TIE interceptors with shields, produce more TIE Defenders, mass produce shielded TIE bombers, and improved Howlrunners.

[@Mikalent]

@@appo9357 I wouldn't go that far, I would genuinely say 3 MAYBE, and that is a big maybe, 4, each one having a quick response force built around it. If given more control over Imperial doctrine, I would cut the number of Star Destroyers down from about 2500 to 1500. Instead basing local defense forces around a squadron of Arcitan light cruisers, a few Van Tong carriers (or Quasar light carriers) some Tartans or lancers for anti fighter screening. The ISDs would be placed into squadron commands of about 5, with some Victory I Star Destroyers (keep the Concussion missile launchers, but upgrade then engines to keep up with ISDs) and make Quick response forces consisting of 1 ISD, 2 Victories, maybe an interdictor if available, and anti fighter corvettes of the commander's choosing. 1 ISD is more than enough to subjugate an entire planet, and ISD and a pair of Victorys could take on just about any capital ship the rebels could throw at them until the late GCW era, and the Anti fighter corvettes, especially the Lancers, could screen the task force until the ISD and VSDs could launch fighters.

[@johnmcgehee5484]

Fun fact: for every dreadnought built in the Imperial German Navy under the Tirpitz Plan, 33 U-boats could have been built with the amount of steel used. Sometimes naval construction is driven purely by ego, careerism, and unsound doctrine.

[@laisphinto6372]

to be fair the Kriegsmarine never ever had naval supremacy and it was way more comparable to rebel doctrine with the U-Boats as soon as they tried to go convential to Challenge british naval supremacy they got punished severly ,that is also why Operation sea lion was a wet dream and they pokered on the brits giving up because the royal navy would have massacred any naval invasion

[@nichtvorhanden5928]

Fun fact: the dreadnoughts were meant as a deterence against a war with the UK. Thats why it is called the risk fleet strategy. Its quite an irony that neither Tirpitz nor Wihelm II. seemed to realize that the fleet building would antagonize the UK at least if you reach a certain level. And then their are nations like russia and france and their navys had to ne kept in check too so if Tirpitz and Wilhelm only had said no worries our fleet osnt directed agaisnt the british bit against france and russia it may have never fought the Royal Navy.

[@boobah5643]

@@nichtvorhanden5928 Err... the British didn't care what the Germans claimed their navy was for. They cared what the German navy could do. As an ocean-going navy the German fleet was a threat to the British because the only way to get from Germany to the open ocean was through waters the Royal Navy considered (perhaps unjustly) as 'theirs.' The High Seas Fleet certainly wasn't built to fight in the Baltic; even setting aside the name, there wasn't anybody who had a Baltic fleet, albeit there were a couple Baltic squadrons.

[@nichtvorhanden5928]

@@boobah5643 Did you even read my full comment? Because at least for me the first sentence clearly says that the German Fleet was directed at the UK, and if memory serves one of the past 1900 German Navy laws even stated that officially. Hoewer the original plan by Tirpitz was to build a navy that has a strength of 2/3 of the british navy in dreadnoughts (or before pre dreadnoughts) and than if Britain woul attack Germany according to Tirpitz theory there would be other navies that would be a danger to the UK after it fought the German Navy. That would deter the british from going to war with Germany. What neither Tirpitz nor Wilhelm II. realized was that the UK could simply improve their realations and later over the German Invasion of Belgium ally with France and Russia i.e. the powers that would in Tirpitz theory have the navies to threaten the Royal Navy after it won a costly victory against the German Navy never came into their minds. If hoewer Wilhelm II. and Tirpitz had said ok we build a Navy with the primary task to fight the French navy on the oceans and can make the baltic a torpedo infested hell hole for the russian baltic fleet which would require far less pre dreadnoughts and later dreadnoughts and more cruisers/ later battlecruisers and many many torpedoboats and submarines when they become available than the british would have had far less to worry about the German Navy because it doesnt build as fast and maybe not as many dreadnoughts as it did historicly. How France and Russia react to Germany not building a Navy as big as it did historicly is a different thing. Since any German Navy until 1945 will have France one the list of enemies you will need a ocean going navy and at least at the start of the German Navy buildup the British recognized that Germany was building a Fleet but didnt worry to much about it. The real scare about the german Navy came only between 1905 and 1908 when the british due to german building tempo definetly realized that the German Navy was directed at them and not against France or Russia. High Seas or Hochsee in german only is term for every ship that isnt a pure costal vessel so a vessel that only crosses the baltic from Rostock to Helsinki is technicly a high seas vessel.

[@janossos8620]

Another point of view: With the same amount of steel, instead of an Iowa class BB, was possible to built 22 or so Fletcher class destroyer. But... One Iowa class needed cca. 2700 crewmen. 22 Fletcher needed more than 7000. Also, Iowa class BBs costs 100-120 million USD, why a Fletcher around 6-8 million. (Depending on version, radar and weapon set, etc...) So, more than 150 million USD. If the ships are much smaller in displacement, the "hunger for crew" are even bigger: for example, Iowa class vs SC-497 class. One BB vs. 580 subchaser, 2700 vs 16240 crew.

[@Futuretense101]

To be honest, I prefer SSDs above superweapons. They're excellent command ships and weapons of war the rebellion could never hope to outmatch in a straightforward battle. As weapons of terror, the SSDs crushed all competition and could end battles without firing a single shot. My guess is the Imperial brass hated SSDs even more because resources were being funneled into the construction of the Death Star, which was a project that very few imperials thought was a sound idea. SSDs were nails in the coffin of the Empire's finances in the eyes of Imperial command. If the Death Stars were never built, SSDs could have been the perfect representation of the Empire's might.

[@solarissv777]

I'd prefer something in between. I'm a big fan of Sovereign SSD: it had a superlaser, capable of penetrating any shield and destroying any warship, gravity well projectors, good turbolaser complement and ewerithing one need to dominate the space battle. Yes it was weaker than its older sister Eclipse, but the latter is just an ower kill and waste of resources.

[@absalomdraconis]

@@solarissv777 : Honestly, I'd still take an Executor. Superlasers may be impressive and all, but if all else fails you should be able to strip almost all of the other systems off an ISD, make the ship larger to fit a second reactor bulb, and use that as a dedicated superlaser platform that you never detach from your main fleets. The _Executor,_ on the other hand, is a ship that I'm pretty sure can fit an entire ISD in it's big docking bay, thereby making the Executor a viable drydock/wetdock facility for the largest of your primary warships. You wouldn't build many of them, but but those Executors you built would be invaluable strategic assets.

[@solarissv777]

@@absalomdraconis but why do you need your dry/wet dock to be a heavily armed battleship? A purpose build dry dock would most likely be cheaper then a single ISD (no need for such energy output, guns, heavy shields e.t.c ). What you need the SSD's for is to be unstoppable fleet killers.

[@willjoyce5013]

Guys, you can build fleets of both. The Sovereigns take on planets and the largest capital ships while the Executors or another SSD provide docks, fighter support and general firepower against lighter ships. Issue solved lol

[@mightyone3737]

The SSDs were not practical ships I'd argue, they're very big, but they're also fairly unwieldly, and ships can generally run away from them, which is a chore vs an ISD, so why bother building bigger, slower ISDs that are just asking for an accident or disastrous infiltration?

[@spencercarruth9706]

Thrawn was very correct about SSD’s and huge battlestations like the Death Star: they are far too costly in every metric and can be easily subverted by smaller craft. Resources would have been better put to use by building more smaller craft like the Arquitens class in vast numbers, which were more than enough to deal with the vast majority of the Rebel Alliance.

[@billbraske2894]

Increased power generation capability allowing larger weapons? Possibly better for bombarding planet surfaces or destroying large capital ships.

[@hrs29]

@@billbraske2894 Part of this analysis and debate depends on shield and weapon strength. I have seen some past analysis that suggests Star Wars ship battles as presented in the movies is generally reminiscent of early WWII battles with massive battle ships being the main force projector with support from fighter craft. The Legends material would focus on the role of starfighters (because they make a better Hero unit than a massive battleship) and outline situations where fighters could take on heavier vessels. The X-Wing novels outlined that without a weakness like an exhaust port, it took somewhere around 24 proton torpedoes to bring down the shields of a star destroyer and do some damage. And over 100 to do the same to a Super Star Destroyer that was similar to the Executor. Which is supposed to be difficult while surviving against the protective fighter support and anti-starfighter weapons.

[@UGNAvalon]

I’d assume that they’d provide the role of a Forward Operating Base & logistics/command center for far-off fronts away from industrial worlds. The storage & refueling & power generation capabilities would likely be invaluable compared to the smaller Arquitens.

[@laisphinto6372]

SSDs have their uses especially in convential warfare as siege Equipment or smashing through tough defense fleet ,just like mostly everything else it doesnt look that well because the rebel alliance fought every different war with a whole different focus that was hit and run attacks also the rebels rarely engaged anything that they didnt have a massive advantage and the rebels were dictating the pace of Engagement

[@nonamegermany4583]

If we would speak from the bellator class, then I would say that there should be build at least one for every big fleet of the empire. Bellators are pretty fast for their size, good shielded and enough armed for every enemy in the galaxy (except the deathstar)

[@hanzzel6086]

*And lerger SSDs

[@sir.charlesmadden842]

A suggestion: You could make a video that tells more about Warlord Zsinj and his exploits, or maybe talk about the Iron Fist. Zsinj is a character with an exciting story. The Hunt for Zsinj became the New Republic's First Proper campaign against a foreign government since they finally got Coruscant, establishing the government's legitimacy. Zsinj did hit-and-run assaults on the New Republic back in his day, going from planet to planet, raiding and jumping into hyperspace away, just as Courtship of Princess Leia describes. Iron Fist was instrumental in the Warlord's plans to steal another Super Star Destroyer, being a base for his projects and experiments. The Battle of Selaggis involves some exciting tactics.

[@spiffygonzales5899]

Zsinj > Thrawn

[@philip8498]

@@spiffygonzales5899 with equal resources? Zsinj is so dead not even rey can revive him. with Zsinj having a lot more things at his disposal? thrawn still wipes the floor with him.

[@MagnusOrkzyd]

I would argue that one thing could have made these ships a lot more effective: Give them Interdictor projectors (I think the Assertor Class had some if I remember correctly). With the sheer size and durrability of an SSD, protecting the gravity well generators should not be a big problem unless the enemy is of large numbers or has plot armor. The enemy cannot flee effectively into hyperspace, and will have to face the brunt of both launched fighters, and the heavy bombardment of the turbolasers.

[@Nukepositive]

they should have also had death star lasers instead of building the DS2. According to Force Unleashed, the DS1 used 64 kyber-powered beams that converged into the total death star beam. Take one of those 64 and put it along the spine of the SSD. Now you have a dozen or more superweapons that are just as dangerous as a full death star.

[@christopherg2347]

I remember a old theory - Palpatine built the Death Star less to keep Systems in line - but more to keep his _Navy_ in line. Death Star 1 had defenses against a large scale fleet attack, not so much against fighters. The SSD could fulfil a similar role at many more places. If he gives them to the most loyal, highest ranking officers, all below them would fall in line. Dissent would feel impossible even to commanders of the mighty ISD.

[@Motleydoll123]

Indeed. A thing that makes a lot of sense if you think about how dangerous rogue admirals in charge of something like a super star destroyer or a fleet of star destroyers. If we go by the tie fighter game, what really screwed the imperial navies ability to coordinate a solid attack on the rebel forces was the actions of the rogue admiral Zarin which greatly decreased the reserves of tie defenders, tangled up the imperial best naval minds for a while, and likely drew skilled individuals away from dealing with the core rebel alliance fleet which likely contributed to the rebels getting into a solid enough position that Palpatine needed to employ a partially complete death star 2 as bait for the trap to annihilate the core rebel fleet.

[@igncom1]

I know there is the idea that the empire was preparing for intergalactic invaders, but honestly I hate how that seems to try and 'justify' the evil actions of the empire in hindsight. Other then the various minor powers in the galaxy that may have required a more robust imperial military to keep in check I don't see there being much of a reason to build SSD's as there was basically no peer to the imperial military. Even their normal star destroyers found few if any equals in a broadside. Real life had a ridiculous ship arms race because there were comparable opponents. In Star Wars it's not like the Mon Cals were an independent and rising threat. Frankly I feel like there is room for the exploration of regional threats to the empire on it's borders that might require the use of large fleets and SSD's, but nothing so major as to constitute a proper declaration of war. There are a few in the lore, but could be more.

[@igncom1]

@Random Guy Yeah I feel like there is fertile ground for a lot of empire vs alien empires from beyond the rim kind of stories. What with the growing rebellion from within the ability for the empire to wage an external war could be very interesting.

[@mondaysinsanity8193]

​@@igncom1 it would make the rebellions success FAR more believable too of the empire was distracted

[@kutkuknight]

What’s wrong with a bit of moral ambiguity?

[@absalomdraconis]

Honestly, I think the Executor (because of that huge docking bay) should be seen as a combination of battleship and _drydock._ I'm pretty sure that an entire ISD could fit in there, which would be highly useful for e.g. an expansionist government that's somewhat concerned about credible attacks on regional support bases, and highly interested in expanding into unknown or hostile areas. If you assume that at least Executors were _fleet support vehicles,_ then they make much more sense.

[@jonkv23]

The problem with SSDs is that they actually weren't 'an entire fleet lumped together' but merely oversized battleships. If they really wanted to make them effective then an obvious modification would be to remove the superfluous guns and replace them with shipyard and resource facilities. This would turn the SSD into a flagship that could sustain multiple fleets in the outer rim away from logistics lines which had proved to be vulnerable to rebel starfighters. Think the motherships from Homeworld.

[@absalomdraconis]

The Executor's big docking bay is so large that it probably _is_ some sort of shipyard, though not necessarily a production facility.

[@sethb3090]

The Supremacy SSD actually was this. It was even supposed to be able to construct star destroyers, given materials. Of course, it was flown like a battleship and died like one.

[@violetlight1548]

I had that idea for my Empire of the Hand fanfic! A new class of SSD, the Renaissance, can actually house up to 5 ISDs on its hull in triangular depressions, with docking bays on the SSD meeting up with the ventral docking bays on Imperial Star Destroyers. It's Thrawn's personal SSD, so of course it would a more intelligently-designed command and fleet support ship.

[@charlietheunicorn5383]

I'm not sure if you have ever covered this topic, but Eck would you do a deep dive into Coruscant? Specifically, how did it grow and expand from a normal world into a technological marvel and political center of the Republic.

[@boobah5643]

Not sure how 'normal' it ever was; I could have sworn it's been called humanity's home world in a couple of places. Mind, that was millennia before the Republic was founded. Beyond that, it's that Coruscant is basically sitting in the middle of the hyper lane network; even a lot of stuff that's not going to Coruscant goes to Coruscant, and that's wealth. It's basically halfway to anywhere in the galaxy.

[@absalomdraconis]

@@boobah5643 : If you're going by KotOR then it's one of humanity's homeworlds rather than _the_ homeworld, but yeah.

[@ComicSams48]

I'm playing through Dawn of Defiance right now, we haven't officially found out what Project Sarlacc is, but I did predict Super Star Destroyers a few sessions ago (right before we made it to Coruscant) so I'm glad I was right

[@Kalebfenoir]

I think its hilarious that Palpatine had both the Death Star project and the Super Star Destroyer projects being built at the same time, from around the same starting point, and the Death Star still managed to be done BEFORE the Executor. You'd think a ship that makes up less than .01% of the mass of the Death Star might have been faster to build, even if 90% of resources were going to the Not-A-Moon.

[@craigunderhill3415]

The Separatists had already done a lot of the footwork required on the first Death Star. The Executor was pretty much designed from the ground up.

[@Kalebfenoir]

@@craigunderhill3415 the separatists had the blueprints. They'd done the basic design but the actual construction was done on the former-Republic-now-Empire side. That's why at the end of Revenge of the Sith it had them overseeing the base construction. The only thing the Separatists had had was the DESIGNS for a super weapon. They needed the help of their 'secret partner' to start building it. The Genosians never knew they handed it to their enemy when they gave the designs over. The irony...

[@winlin1366]

My issue with a lot of these larger weapons in Star Wars is that power does not scale well with size and budget-SSDs (other than eclipse I guess) does not bring extra capabilities or large improvement to some capability that are substantial enough to justify their resource intensiveness. Hell, somehow the rebels, by “concentrating fire” on an SSD could take down one at Endor.

[@solarissv777]

How about Onager sized turrets? By itself Onager SD is highly vulnerable and operates on the edge of its power capacity an is a chore to aim, but if you take only the main guns from it, put them into a rotating turret and power them from SSD's main reactor, everything becomes much more interesting. Add several gravity well projectors and you get a true fleet killer.

[@absalomdraconis]

The Executor brings that huge docking bay, which I strongly suspect can hold an ISD.

[@everythingknife8763]

I don't think the Rebels killed the SSD at Endor. Sidious being dropped down that shaft is probably what did it.

[@HotTakeJake]

I really love Eck. He’s really well spoken, thoughtful and his channel has heart, unlike some others who only do it for money. Keep up the good work.

[@TheEDFLegacy]

I would say there should be as many as one for every major Imperial fleet. Like the Executor, the class made for excellent flagships, being able to not only be nearly invulnerable and immensely powerful, but have the ability to maintain its own fleet. As a mobile shipyard, I would imagine it was quite decent, and _significantly_ cheaper than a Death Star.

[@grandadmiralzaarin4962]

I believe that the SSDs could have been utilized practically in military strategy as was overwhelming demonstrated in both the Pre Shadow Hand and Shadow Hand campaigns along with the Orinda Campaign for the Empire and the uses at Phaeda, Anx Minor, Borleias and Mon Calamari for the New Republic. SSDs could serve as extremely potent offensive fleets in and of themselves as well as unrivaled deterrents, carriers, fleet support and garrisons. The problem lay with the egos and failings of those the vessels were often assigned to, who generally saw them more as symbols than military assets to be utilized.

[@mattwilson8298]

The SSD's are undeniably cool. I mean just from a fanboy perspective having the biggest and baddest ships in the galaxy is more than enough to compensate lol. But strategically, it's a nightmare. We can scarcely conceive of just how rescource intensive these ships really were. And then there's the problem of implementation, by which I mean that 1 ship can only be in one place, no matter how good the hyperdrive. I've always believed the Tarkin Doctrine to be a load of bollocks. If you had a much larger navy- more responsive more flexible navy- it may actually be MORE effective at instilling fear than a single giant ship. I personally wouldn't want to have to fight either, but one target is (arguably) better than hundreds.

[@absalomdraconis]

The docking bay on the Executor class is so large that I think it may double as a mobile fleet base. The others? Yeah, just shove them all into some "Heavy Reaction Fleet" units or something and forget them until you want to blend a planet or something...

[@seancarroll9849]

My opinion: The Tarkin Doctrine was a mistake. Even our boy Thrawn was against it. Too many big ships of the SSD variety is a resource drain too much even if you have the resources that is the Empire. One SSD per main oversector command fleet seems reasonable, but beyond that lays madness. That means one SSD for one Moff, no more. That means 20 SSD. Thrawn wanted to have more adaptable fleets with fighters to outclass the rebel fighters. So more TIE Defenders, no ships bigger than a frigate, and so on. A modern day case on Earth, for example, is the aircraft carrier. It's a big expensive ship designed to be a command nexus in a fleet with unique capabilities of its own. You really want cruisers, destroyers, and submarines in numbers. In a sense, think of space as a really big ocean. More small fries, fewer big boys.

[@lonelystrategos]

Counterpoint: SSD's are really cool and impressive looking. But yes, they make little sense.

[@dragonsword7370]

you could say that trying to build and field the SSD's was a catch-22, or self fulfilling prophecy in failure. I mean that analogy of the snake eating it's own tail? So you supposedly have a need for this HUGE ship, "To hunt, and kill rebels and any other super powers in our galaxy." this also needs several ships to be an escort and chase down enemy ships and a supply chain so vast, convoluted and deep it would suck in fuel, food, personnel and other ships. So then you have all this waste of expenditure but now that you built 1you can barely afford it. It's also this huge force multiplier is going to be needed everywhere at once, so it "Makes sense to build 2 or more", but then you need more resources to be mined and extracted and now your forced to conquer outer rim planets and mid rim systems to just to fuel construction and maintain it's movement Plus all the ship tenders needed to support it out in the vast black. Because of this you have even More systems that need conquering or rebellions quelled because they exist as a drain on supplies and it just. keeps. going. Until the Empire implodes like that fat posh patron in "Monty Python's the Meaning of Life" movie. To also support your US navy fleet power doctrine with deployed carrier groups ISD's are already their equivalent before even bringing in SSD's! Thrawn was right. How many other ships with much better force projection could they have made with all the materials, and credits spent on them? Death Star was the same way. IT can't be everywhere in an instant.

[@ekscalybur]

No. You want carriers. Singular ships that by themselves rank highly in the list of worlds greatest military powers. Fleets without one are called targets.

[@seancarroll9849]

@@ekscalybur War experience shows that a singled out carrier is vulnerable. Also, I never said carriers were a bad thing (Please read...) , just force multipliers you want to protect zealously. The more anti-air and anti-missile and ASW combatants, the better. The carriers are more expensive because of many reasons, too.

[@ekscalybur]

@@seancarroll9849 Carriers are not force multipliers. They ARE the force. Every boat assigned to a carrier fleet is there to augment its abilities or protect it. Nations that don't have carriers do NOT have blue water navies. Also, dafuq does your first sentence even mean?

[@7ElevenTruther]

If the only the empire had listened to thrawn more regarding the wastefulness of dreadnoughts. At the end of the day individual ISDs were already packing more than enough firepower to deal with any combatant the rebellion could field and SSDs we're little more than vanity projects for high ranking imperials and just building a small fleet of smaller ships no larger than ISDs in their place for the same amount of credits that can be in more places at once instead of packing all those resources into a single asset would have done the empire lot of favors. I suppose you can also blame Kuat as they in turn where aggressively lobbying the empire to order progressively bigger and bigger ships from them mostly to flex at rival shipyards.

[@desel8737]

it is a good idea to have a shiptype that can outclass everything the enemy has, but it doesn't have to be THAT big. just put a small super laser or another super weapon on already existing isd's and give them a new paintjob or something. swtor has a nice mission were you get your own cool looking fleetkiller star destroyer

[@absalomdraconis]

The Executor class, because of that docking bay, should probably be considered a mobile fleet base.

[@twojacksandanace3847]

Hey Eck you should do an in depth video on the Imperial Civil War, all the big players, major events and developments. Basically a timeline or explation of the whole event and the galaxy at that time. It sounds very interesting to me and hopefully others.

[@Confusingperson]

Dude i always love the videos you made, if i am looking for some lore, i always go to your channel. You made me learn new things on legends and canon and stuff from other titles. You also introduced me to Spacedock and i love his ship breakdown reviews. Your the best Eck, im glad i found your channel years ago.

[@Ylimez501]

I don't really like the ssd's other than the Bellator, i think the executor class wasn't really practical (like most of the ssd's) and the Bellator was a much better ship when it comes to ssd's and i think most commanders/warlords who used them didn't make it worth for the cost , i always much preferred a fleet made up of isd's vsd's and support ships with a focus of anti fighter and fight carrying capacity rather than the use of the super star destroyer in a fleet, Good video ecks :)

[@absalomdraconis]

Wasn't the Bellator one of the gun-dominant designs? I prefer the Executor because that huge docking bay could fit some very large ships in it. It should properly be used as a fleet support ship.

[@tommyfox854]

I personally would have a mindboggling amount of high-quality small ships; like the ones The Old Republic and CIS used at the start of The Clone Wars. Just add in a class 0.5 Hyper Drive, enough armaments to wipe out a whole planet, comfortable living quarters for crew and we got my navy/armada. I know what you all are thinking "That sounds a bit overkill and unrealistic Tommy Fox.", and you're kind of right (even I haven't thought it completely through yet), but I go for quality and quantity whenever I think about building an army in a game or so; quality so that it'll be extremely hard to take down and quantity so that if the enemy does figure out a reliably means of taking down my warriors and ships, swarm tactics and high level of strategy will hopefully pick up the slack.

[@absalomdraconis]

You also want Executors though, because that big docking bay is large enough to be used as a shipyard. Don't treat it as a battleship unless the enemy explicitly seeks it out.

[@tommyfox854]

@@absalomdraconis Good thinking doc, want to join my crew? =)

[@thatzachguy76]

My favorite mission from any rogue squadron every was in Rogue 2 when you attack the SSD that’s being built. Loved that one sooooo much.

[@NBvangaurd]

Really fun and interesting topic for sure. I still hold out hope we’ll see a live action Eclipse blasting or ramming away at smaller ships someday in a Star Wars film or show

[@TheKingofbrooklin]

In Thrawns Revenge SSDs are a gamechanger in battles and conquests. They can tank most hits away from your fleet and can take out a large number of ships before the need of retreating. SSDs defensively very well if you don't want to pump out smaller ships constantly to supply your defending fleets.

[@vitiate5093]

That’s what I do I also have them in my main fleets

[@squishthepotato2300]

Me when eckharts ladder uploads : A surprise to be sure but a welcome one

[@DarkVaati13]

I feel like SSDs have always been a bit unneeded. They're big, strong, and scary yes, but they cost a ton and can only be in one place at a time. I even feel like the ISD bloat was felt too. For one ISD you could get about 10 Strike Cruisers or Carracks. I have always been a smaller ship supporter since several smaller ships always seem to beat one very big ship. Invest in better defense platforms or space stations too.

[@Idkidkidk716]

The Tarkin doctrine contributed to the fall of the empire

[@arishemghoul9571]

How ?

[@heickelrrx]

@@arishemghoul9571 cuz it's less about funtion and more about show off

[@Idkidkidk716]

@@arishemghoul9571 fear and power creates unrest which leads to rebellion to overthrow an oppressive regime take the Star Wars movies for example. I’m surprised you didn’t get the same conclusion after watching any Star Wars film

[@theliato3809]

It was ultimately Palpatines conception of the empire. When he moved from being a republican emperor/imperial chancelor to a Darth Lord of the Sith he forsoke the institutions of power which upheld his empire.

[@arishemghoul9571]

@@Idkidkidk716 iam kinda new to star wars but sometimes fear and power lead to submissive and obedient which i thought was the reason the empire was able to controll alot worlds

[@owenmeiners8208]

I 100% agree that they are incredibly impractical for a large empire. But my god do SSD's look so fucking cool.

[@sergeantassassin3425]

I would argue that, had they been properly incorporated into fleet doctrine and strategy, the SSD lines could have been devastatingly effective. They instead were often left to their own devices, making them easy prey for small ships to harass that could also outmaneuver the larger, hulking beasts. Furthermore, the number could vary, but no more than a single SSD per fleet. SSDs are fleet-breakers, capital ship smashers, meant to take on large portions of an enemy fleet all at once, allowing other vessels to gang up and beat the rest of the enemy into submission while the SSD solos like half the enemy fleet. If properly utilized, a SSD in a competently-built and structured fleet is almost impossible to take down. Furthermore, it requires an overwhelming amount of firepower to cause any significant damage to one, and it took the entire Rebel fleet composition at Endor attacking AT ONCE to even momentarily stagger the Executor. These are "fuck around and find out" ships, no question.

[@ThrawnFett123]

Problem with the tarkin doctrine here is, once the Death Star dies, justify it all you want but ANYTHING can die. It's all a lucky proton torpedo away for awhile. Goes from fear to underdogs

[@BLitzRunner77]

If the Empire had the wherewithal to recognize the benefit of small ships policing the galaxy, they wouldn't have built the death star to begin with. It's a moot point.

[@Cabooseforprez2012]

The Super Star Destroyer was validated by the threat those ships posed to the New Republic years after Endor. Nearly every remnant faction was buoyed by the presence of an SSD they could call on and let small holdouts challenge the might of the majority galactic government. The main issue was that they were handed out as rewards instead of assigned to the navy. The New Republic only wins because of the Imperial Civil War. A unified fleet with SSD's would have been able to hold onto large swathes of territory. The fact that the SSD's were handed out to those most likely to fracture the empire, only made it worse.

[@SJITZ]

YES I will check it out after the video, that sounds like just what I need!

[@asaschuemann9545]

I often lump the SSDs in with ships like the UNSC Infinity and CSO-Class super carrier from Halo, they're big, unwieldy ships that gobble up a shit ton of resources, development time and construction time to make and even more resources to opperate after the fact. Whats more, while these ships can be capable of doing a whole fleet's job for it, when they get crippled or destroyed, something made easy through smaller ships mobbing them or straight up sabotage, an entire fleet's worth of assets is lost with ONE SHIP. There's no feasible way to recover from a blow like that in the heat of battle, especially when this whole situation is highly avoidable. I mean take the Battle of Jakku in the new canon, SSD Ravager was the center of the Empire's fleet and quite potent at blowing up N.R. capital ships, then all it took was one SD's captain in the defensive line panicking to allow a single enemy capital ship in to tractor-beam the SSD Ravager into crashing planet-side. That's one ship downed, along with half the fleet's assets and it was downed as the result of one stupid mistake by one other ship's commander. Alrighty, rant over XD

[@ZontarDow]

Given the Executor class was referred to as a Star Dreadnought in episode 5 I've always been confused why the name "Super Star Destroyer" stuck given "Star Destroyer" just sounded like it was a Destroyer class of naval vessel but in space, like a Star Cruiser or Star Carrier.

[@savirianwinter1656]

Episode 5 of what?

[@autumnalvoid9646]

Hearing the intro, while already having Corey's video in the next tab for afterwards: "That's... Why I'm here..." ;-P

[@joshpeterson2451]

I definitely understand the concept of the SSD. Having a ship that requires a fleet to destroy it is very useful if you prioritize superior training for your officers. If your fleet's flagship is just an ISD, all it takes is a clever plan or concentrated firepower to bring it down, at which point the command structure is broken. If you want to maintain good leadership and a consistent chain of command, then SSDs make sense. However, they must be commanded by the most competent commanders, not the most loyal. I love the way the Old Republic organized their fleets. Only a few Mandators existed, and they were used as trump cards for defending the most important Core Worlds and for stationing the most important and competent commanders naval commanders of the war. Other than those few Mandators, the Republic just spammed Venators and Acclamators, which were cheap and small enough to mass produce at a level for galactic conflict, but competent enough that they could win space and ground battles, respectively.

[@Duchess_Van_Hoof]

Ooh, the Lusankya. Epic scene in an otherwise average book.

[@gustavopaez2444]

Ages ago I used to run a campaign of Star Wars Roleplaying game and I remember I gave the villain in the story a custom made Super Star Destroyer named The Black Sun and its commander was Lord Surrae an impressive Dark Jedi who hunted Jedi for the Emperor. And this was back in 1989

[@uruuphiil8335]

you mention the Tarkin Doctorine, so I am actually surprised more didnt exist.

[@hrs29]

The Empire probably should have stopped at 4 SSDs, using them as strategic aggressive weapons against high value targets where their sheer presence could induce a sense of defeat in the enemy. Then spend the remaining resources in more traditional cruisers, frigates, and improved TIE fighters. In Legends the force projection of a squadron of starfighters that could enter hyberspace, strike a target, and then retreat was one of the weaknesses of the Empire and their heavy investment in large capital ships that couldn't be everywhere was critical to their defeat in the larger war.

[@baron7755]

3:18 mmmmmm that art!!!!

[@Darkmoon67]

I would have few SSD's, maybe 5. (1-2 larger SSD's, most likely the Executor class or vengeance, with 2-3 smaller SSD's such as the bellator class) I would have instead focused on having improving fleet design and doctrine, notably creating an ISD III that has point defense and laser cannons, while also creating a Venator II, with some light improvements to it's ship-to-ship combat and making use of clone wars era ground and naval vessels. (Eg. LAAT and Y-wings.) I would also put emphasis on using the Raider, Lancer, Nebulon B, (upgraded Imperial ver.) TIE Defender, Striker and Advanced to replace the other ISD II's in a fleet. (Most imperial fleets had three or more ISD II's for reference) Overall I would round off my reforms as focused on not the use of heavy battleships everywhere but as the punch of a fleet instead of its main component.

[@absalomdraconis]

Eh, an ISD III would honestly be fine with an ISD II armament that swapped some turbolasers for extra point defense. The better ship is an anti-starfighter ship that can fit inside the ISD docking bay, so that several can be sent with an ISD, and the ISD can be used to repair them if they take enough damage.

[@AccessDenied20078]

Early gang let’s go

[@carldooley9344]

My biggest issue with SSDs is that their weapons can't be brought to bear on the same target at the same time. In universe, the maximum effective range for most weapons is about a kilometer, which makes no sense on a ship 10 km long. In a sense, it would be wonderful in the hands of a broadside commander, meaning that whoever is in command picks a target and makes a flank speed run at broadside range past a single target. The guns at the front target the target until it is out of range, then the next battery, then the next battery, etc etc etc along the length of the ship. The individual batteries and hull areas are only in the maelstrom for a minute, while the target is under continuous bombardment until the SSD moves past. Essentially a single ship Ackbar Slash.

[@alexandermarken7639]

Personal opinion is that the Super Star Destroyer was superbly capable but needed escorting and had such costs and manning requirements that a fleet of smaller vessels would keep a region locked down as opposed to arriving in a system while the other 20 your needing to lockdown can use resources to rebel. A SSD had to be recieving large numbers of stores every day which creates a security nightmare and easy sabotage route. The SSD is essentially a smaller version of the Death Star and unless your fighting the Yuzhong Vong and need that overkill is useless. I remember years ago reading that the Emperor was preparing to fight the Yuzhong Vong and used the dark side to do so instead of the normal.

[@SpaceMonkeyBoi]

Imagine how easy it would have been for the Empire if the adopted the Malevolence, or at least the technology.

[@derrickstorm6976]

It was pretty easy for a band of small ships to take that one out too lol...

[@U_Jelly]

0:43 nostalgia This game is so underrated

[@marco117sw]

If the Empire had forgone the Death Star construction, I would agree with the construction of more Supers and add more variants to the SSD line. Imagine an SSD that could fend for itself against fighters with countless point defense systems. The regular ship to ship variant we saw in RotJ was vulnerable to fighters. Having point defenses and hangars filled with TIE fighter varients would've helped. Which is y a whole new variant specialized in fighter screening would be great. Having 1 or 2 alongside an Executor would help immensely aside from other supporting vessels.

[@blockyuniverseproductions6587]

One thing I do think would be a good use for an SSD-sized vessel is as a mobile shipyard and logistics platform. (I.e. Having the ability to repair ships far from port, and allowing for logistics teams to have a guarded stockpile to resupply a campaign.)

[@BBQBARNES-GAMING]

One issue not having the SSD would bring is that the Mofs would be far more vulnerable on a standard SD which the Rebels could take out pretty affectively .....at least in legends they could

[@caelumvaldovinos5318]

I feel that the SSD style of ship could work as the nexus of an invasion/siege fleet. Planets can't flee and most fleets will stand and fight, meaning you can turn those many big guns and swarms of snubfighters on them and clear a lane for the transports. Plus, all of that firepower could then be used to clear out an LZ with minimal hassle. From there, thanks to the large carrying capacity and comms systems, the SSD would be perfect for coordinating and supporting ground forces while the rest of the fleet mops up the last of the opposition. However, the main drawbacks of an SSD are that due to its large size and slowness, it is very much a niche weapon. It's good for very little other than clearing areas of offenders. And even then, that kind of ship would be overkill unless you're engaging in major fleet actions. And, forgetting about the large amount of resources needed to construct, operate, and fully utilize the vessel, you need to factor in the large support fleet of cruisers, carriers, destroyers, frigates, and corvettes needed to prevent your opponent from sinking your battleship by exploiting its largeness and lack of maneuverability. And let's not get started about the logistics of fueling, arming, and supplying the crews needed for such a large, dedicated task force.

[@thunderwalker2000]

I think it is cool that you used footage of SSD Terror from Star Wars: Rebel Assault II. I thought it was a great game with an excellent story.

[@dafatman2269]

I think that the SSD has shown its worth on more than a couple occasions and definitely fills a niche in naval doctrine. With that said, having just a few SSDs, perhaps no more than ten, would be sufficient to completely fill that niche and would free up a lot more resources for building more ships of smaller sizes. The SSDs would prove invaluable in certain circumstances and would be at their most valuable during the Yuuzhan Vong war where they could provide the firepower necessary to take out Vong home ships while the rest of the fleet provides defensive fire.

[@rhpiggy123]

Now witness the firepower of this fully operational budget commission meeting!

[@macwelch8599]

City sized starships should be powerful enough to destroy planets without the Death Star

[@CK-il8wy]

Cool video idea might be like, how starships specifically larger ones move about without hyperspace. Like something that's really gotten me is if and how would ship's go in reverse if they could. A rebel fleet comes out from behind a star destroyer and my belief is it just has to turn hard around to get its target. Anyways just thought it would be something quick and cool to explain in a video.

[@thunderbug8640]

Personally if i was in charge of the Empire, i would never have built either the SSDs or the Death Stars. I would have even questioned the ISD being the mainstay. Given the cost and crew requirement advantages of the Venator over the ISD and the fact it was still more powerful than most ships a rag tag insurgency could muster I would have kept this as the mainstay, with ISD's as more specialised ships to provide heavy oomph to a given fleet where needed. The Empire built a fleet to fight an enemy it never faced a fleet which would have been good in the capital ship heavy confrontations of the clone wars but as the saying goes "armies prepare to fight their last war, rather than their next war".

[@skaboodlydoodle]

The problem is that the empires centralized approach is exactly that the rebels exploited through hit and run guerilla tactics. Space IS vast and you need quantity to police it. Soaking up resources into handfulls of "unstoppable" super weapons which at any point can be sabotaged, hijacked, or outrun was the exact opposite of what they should've done to counter the fast-paced and adaptable threat of the Rebellion. The Empire's greatest weakness was it's vanity. It cared more about symbolic representations of power over practical and adaptable strategies. Hence why the Republic's military, while not as immense and powerful in general, was far more flexible and effective at countering both a large military threat as well as small insurgencies.

[@mattprivate7439]

IMO, SSDs were fine, they could serve as flag ships and anchor to a large fleet. But when you combine the Death Star on top of that it gets ridiculous. I understand they had slave labor and materials. But between the 2 death stars, you could probably get 100 eclipse class SSDs with all those kyber crystals and still plenty more materials for additional Executors and ISDs. The death stars were a waste of resources and caused for more problems than they could ever hope to solve

[@derrickstorm6976]

Disney probably looked at the popularity of Lusankya and thought, "this but more"

[@redeye4516]

You should make a video discussing the SDSD Freudian Nightmare, a fanmade evolution of the Super Star Destroyer (the "Super Duper Star Destroyer") which comes with an attached Imperial missive by the commander of the vessel detailing the issues encountered during their test drive of the vessel around the Coruscant system. I want to hear your thoughts on it, or at least hear your reaction to it.

[@mako8643]

SSDs remind me of the old Yamato class battleships in some ways. Big, impressive, but probably not as useful as a small fleet of smaller ships/carrier aircraft. SSDs are after all just one ship and as such can be out maneuvered or just avoided.

[@aurorajones8481]

OMG a 45 min video on politics? I have my life thank you.

[@pokemon1895]

SSDs do play well with the Tarkin Doctrine, and really inspire fear. They don't play well with Rebel tactics, though. Limiting the number would have been a display, but saved resources for elsewhere. If they wanted to field a lot of SSDs, they probably could have made it work but it would have needed a tactics change.

[@joegroves2517]

Should they have done something else? I mean, do we ever hear of the Emperor running short on credits and resources? But where did you get info on Jerec's SSD? I've always wondered what it was all about....

[@quietlistener7054]

The theory I heard was that the super weapons (Death Star/SSDs/etc) weren't intended for the role they were publicly used for, i.e. galactic policing/enslavement. Instead, they were developed to fight toe to toe with an enemy that the Emperor never lived to see: the Yuzong Vong, aka an existential extra-galactic threat that only the Emperor foresaw with the Dar Side of the Force. This goes hand in hand with why Palpatine would push so hard and lie even to his closest allies, keeping that threat from the public pervue was the largest factor in his percieved 'evil'.

[@roberthill5805]

My major issue with a large number of excessively large ships are that 99% of the time is it would be more effective to make a small fleet, as it would normally have more fire power, better survival, can flank, scan larger spots, and so on. Yeah sure it would take a fleet to destroy a single ssd, but it would take more to take out a fleet with the same financial backing, and would be near impossible to take it out of commission for too long.

[@admiralkaede]

SSDs would be good for defending worlds like coruscant

[@andrewj1754]

I think it really depends on how distributed the ISDs are, in so far as being able to consolidate into a sizeable fleet to meet an appropriate threat, compared to the benefits of force distribution by having more ISDs spread over a larger area of space. SSDs are unbeatable (unless you are an unlucky A-Wing pilot), but having one in the wrong place where you cannot bring its force to use means little. Play an RTS game, and consider what happens when you build an army and have it fully committed to one area of the map, while others go undefended, and how time consuming it is to then move that big military force to where the threat is. Have only ISDs, that can't back each other up, you can be divided and conquered. Have less ISDs, and more SSDs, and you can't bring your overwhelming force to bear. Its a balancing act.

[@townie1927]

It absolutely blows my mind that a bunch of pirates managed to steal one of these

[@user_anthony]

Putting aside personal feelings for the sequel trilogy, if the empire/palps was able to build fleets of xystons secretly there really was no fear of bankrupting the empire. So much money is spent in diverse projects. The death star is cool and all but yeah if the money was only spent for 5 ssd’s and the rest for xystons, that alone would be more than enough to crush any rebellion.

[@absalomdraconis]

Two Xystons per Executor would be a good mix. The Executor provides fleet support, the Xystons snipe enemy capital ships that try to form large fleets or attack the Executor (in addition to destroying appropriate planets), and an assortment of more conventional ships perform all of the more boring work of the fleet.

[@craigunderhill3415]

I'm as impressed by how many Xyston's he builds, as I am with where they get the materials, AND the crew AND training for them. Sure, it's 30 years. But 30 years to build *that* many star destroyers on a single planet?

[@Fenris77]

6:21 That looks like an Eclipse class Stardestroyer. THAT thing was supposed to beat least twice the size of a Super stardestroyer.

[@ZoeMalDoran]

In my version of the Star Wars galaxy, the Empire makes 1 Executor class each for the Grand Admirals... and an Eclipse for the Empress, but no Death Star

[@ajaxtheunderkin2545]

Big ship go boom

[@jonwoodhouse1444]

I figured that the SSD's, as well as all the Empire's superweapons, were built for either war with the Vong, or for the eventual conquest of other galaxies. The Empire's military overall seems geared for symmetric warfare, and things like SSD's seem like total overkill for facing the rebel alliance or individual worlds. Even if shock and awe is the objective, the Empire could easily just bring 4 or five ISD's to bear, which could crush most of what would be brought against it. Or it could simply bring overwhelming numbers when the situation called for it.

[@snoomtreb]

The SSDs fit better in the going theory that Palpatine knew the yuzang vong were on their way. Not so much for hunting outgunned scattered rebbel forces.

[@elderliddle2733]

I would have put the money into fighter tech. Namely Defenders as the main multi role/ bomber. Hunters as a heavy fighter as they had s-foils, proton torpedos, ion cannons and hyperdrives. Interceptors as the main tie unit. Then the rest would go into ISD production/ research. ISD 3, Crimson VSDs, and Lancer corvette production. I would have 1 SSD per over sector, on call 24/7 to jump in to aid forces and prevent escapes.

[@rhubarbrebottled]

Hi eck, love your content

[@kylemelinkovich8675]

Would have built 10 more SSDs over building the 2nd death Star. Eclipse class is as big as I would go.

[@celebrim1]

Considering that for each SSD you probably could have built 30-80 Imperial SD's depending on the class I think it's obvious that the SSD was purely a vanity project. They lacked any capabilities that a fleet of smaller ships would have possessed, and a fleet of SD's has capabilities that an SSD lacks. If your estimate of 50 SSD is correct, then that's like 3000 Imperial SD's that could have been built. That said, the SSD's weren't nearly the vanity project that was the Emperor's envisioned personal weapon - the Death Star. The Emperor was probably diverting half the budget of the entire Imperial Navy into construction of that one battle station, and having got it destroyed he doubled down and tried to build a bigger one. While there is some justification to be had in that Death Star had the capability to crack any conceivable planetary shield, sufficient firepower to do that could have been built at a much lower cost using one of several available technologies. The Death Star war overkill in a mission to subjugate a planet and Palpetine's obsession with it was just an extension of his extreme sociopathy - sociopathy that would basically cost him his life and his empire.

[@justbecause3187]

They only seem to make sense in relation to the Yuuzhong Vong invasion as this was the only time they would come up against a peer level adversary.

[@CFRF13]

Executor class was well suited as flagships for offensive operations like Death Squadron but IMO the Bellator made a far better Sector Fleet Flagship.

[@Mandozen]

Love Star Wars ships!

[@darthball2723]

The senate: noooo you can't just lie about how much money you're putting towards the military THE senate: hehe money go brr

[@lucidity1]

well SSD's make for good flagships but you don't need many. an ISD or Arquitens is probably better for the policing roles. an SSD is really useful to pull the full might of a fleet around if you go on a major offensive. you'd realistically need maybe one for your supreme commander/enforcer (I assume this is Vader), and then one as a flagship for each sector fleet, which is not all that many. in a way Snoke had a good setup, his SSD looked like it could function as a roaming capital and more importantly a home base and serving spacedock for his fleet.

[@andrehenrique2093]

That is still the theory that big ships like the super star destroyers and the Death Star were built to defend the Empire against the "Far Outsiders".

[@sharlin648]

The Empire's a post scarcity society, the biggest 'resource' is the time it takes to build things. But the Empire would have probably been better served if the SSD's hadn't been dolled out like party favours and instead were limited to a comparatively small handful of ships of the type (Executor class) say a max of 8 - 10. Then the resources on the others could have gone on what the Empire needed. The problem was that doctrinally the Empire was kind of set up to fight the last war, against a tier level opponent who used large fleets of ships. But the Empire also forgot that fighters played a large part in the CIS's fleet doctrine itself. I'd guess that with the advent of the ISD, which was introduced at the very end of the Clone Wars, it would have been seen as a rather rare Battleship, one that would sit in the center of a fleet, surrounded by Victories, Venator's and escorts. But as the Empire came into power it replaced them with ever growing numbers of ISD's, viewing the big gun battleship as the be all and end all. Whilst fighters were relegated to a defensive role, who's role was to defend the ISDs whilst they sauntered into gunnery range and overwhelmed a target with their turbo's. This faith in the ISD as a do everything ship resulted in a top heavy and very inflexible formation. What was needed was a mixed battlegroup, ISD's supported by frigates, a CVE and smaller cruisers like VSD's or a potential replacement for them. Given time you'd see the Allegience and other 'small' Battlecruisers like the Bellator's joining the fleets, escorted by ISD's but they still needed smaller vessels as anti-fighter escorts and the like.

[@euansolaru5247]

I think one SSD per oversector plus independent SSD’s such as those for death squadron would have been the best use of resources as each oversector would then have a standalone flagship

[@darthrizzen9349]

IMHO the Empire’s main problem after ex-CIS holdouts were eradicated was dealing with the Rebels’ guerilla tactics. Their fleet was supremely well suited to defeat capital ships thanks to the already powerful and massive ISD and smaller classes, but the Navy was ill equipped against small, nimble starfighters. All the money sunk into superweapons might have been better spent on Lancer-class frigates and fast tracking the TIE Advanced and Defender projects. Besides, while the SSD might have been iconic and awe-inducing, it also came with a fatal flaw as the Battle of Endor proved. And Princess Leia was right, the Tarkin doctrine backfired by making the Rebellion even more resolute.

[@blue_squadron4271]

Should have made 3-5 keep them together when not in use and 1 or 2 can go off when it is an emergency

[@kungfuwitcher7621]

Mmm, a whole fleet to put a dent in it, but one little A-Wing to kill it lol 😂😂

[@jedewitz]

It's basically the same argument for Titan doctrine in EVE Online. When they first came out, they were expensive. You don't even roll one out until you need the fleet support. Ships this size aren't meant for anything less than capital to capital domination and become extremely vulnerable to smaller ships as they swarm. When EVERYONE has these titanic super star destroyer size capital ships, then it just becomes a race to see who can heat up their superweapons first before time dialation kicks in. In a more real-world sense, a few flagships might make sense attached to Tarkin-style battlegroups, but to roll tens or hundreds of them as a show of power is a waste of resources and a needless concentration of skill and cadre into a single, mostly useless mobile space station.

[@emilsinclair4190]

ssd have the advantage of their shields. Sure you could eliminate an rebel fleet with 5 isd. However you would most likely need to repair the ships afterwards or even replace an isd. an ssd would most likely not even get damaged. they are optimal for hit and run attacks and therefore very nice for attacking the rebels. However they are not nice enough to produce them in extreme numbers. Small ships to support isds and to patrol space and a few ssd that search for rebels seems to be a good combination