Why Did the Galactic Empire Scrap The Venator Class? | Star Wars

[@DionStabber]

I think the image issue goes deeper than the Republic image, it was specifically associated with the Jedi, even being called the "Jedi Cruiser" on occasion. Every time you see those dual bridges is a reminder that there's no Jedi on either.

[@mattheww.6232]

It's a planetary assaults ship in an era where the Empire controls all the planets.

[@simonmagid4205]

@@mattheww.6232 Excellent point!

[@art-games6230]

Personally I really hate the term “Jedi cruiser” because it’s primarily manned by clones, they should deserve the honor, just like padme called the tanks that beat the zillo beast “Jedi stun cannons” while the Jedi have never manned or build a tank in their lifetime

[@art-games6230]

@@mattheww.6232 I thought that that other fatter star destroyer was the planetary assault ship, a venator Is a carrier

[@simonmagid4205]

@@art-games6230 Yeah, the clones got so much crap and they were the ones who did all the hard work, too. :(

[@FC3D]

The example that comes to mind in my country is the F111, we did away with a strike capable bomber and got the f35...

[@mr.boomguy]

This looks like a video that should've been made years ago! So I'm glad you got around to anwser it. And I especialy love the point that ships in wartime just gets put under huge stress, not to mention the ones that got outright destroyed. Excellent video. I hope to see your further discussion video on the matter

[@legothoron1]

i think it was also a matter of resources in order to build a new fleet while also working on a massive battle station would require a vast amount of resources

[@BookmansBlues]

In real world terms, it was just to sell more toys. :P But probably the best in-universe reasons would be that TIEs simply would not fit, and would have to loaded and unloaded in a very different way, and it would really come down to overall doctrine. ISDs were basically mobile FOBs, where the Empire could establish a beachhead in any star system, and put troops on the ground, or sit back and bombard from space, while carrying a large amount of cheap almost disposable fighters to protect it, and have some extra reach out and touch you capability. The heavier fighters of the republic would take too many resources to maintain in the quantity that the Empire needed. Likely the older ships were being scrapped so that their materials could be used in the new Doctrine. It would not be a technology thing, really, a galactic civilization as old as the one in SW, there would not really be much in the way of new technology, as much as how much do you want to spend on building a given thing, how much in the way of resources do you want to spend? How much time to complete it? The ISDs were basically just bigger versions of their predecessors, so that what they carried would cost less, so they could carry more.

[@paxz503]

wasn't the replacement to the Venator the Victory class with tougher shields, heavier firepower and a more compatibility to the Imperial war doctrine

[@mostmrduck8350]

Still one of the coolest ships in star wars

[@trumediamix1]

Jack of all trades, master of none. - some guy who served on a Venator, probably

[@davidvasquez08]

@@trumediamix1 do you have the slightest of how little that narrows it down?

[@Aelxi]

Still looks like Jar Jar

[@ziggythomas1123]

@@trumediamix1 ...but better than a master of one.

[@Orinslayer]

Yeah they are cooler than the og's

[@DragonActual]

The idea of it being used as a training ship is actually a good idea. I never thought of that myself.

[@BoisegangGaming]

I think that's the case in a short story that I can't remember off the top of my head. Vader is brought onto an old one to oversee its training program and the captain is fed up with the Empire and tries to send it into a star.

[@DragonActual]

@@BoisegangGaming I remember that one. I recall it was a ship called the defiance and the captain tried to get one of the new cadets to enter hyperspace coordinates that would send the ship into a sun or somewhere

[@cmedtheuniverseofcmed8775]

In fact, not only a Training ship but as a heavy patrol vessel or barracks ship that navies did with a lot of their aging battleships.

[@Andy_Sidaris]

@@cmedtheuniverseofcmed8775 weren't aging battleships nuked or turned into mothballed museums?

[@cmedtheuniverseofcmed8775]

@@Andy_Sidaris Some were, depending on the nations that did it. Now I can actually picture the early Death Star laser test firing phases using decommissioned Venators as target practice....

[@awesomehpt8938]

Because Tarkin was like “muh Tarkin doctrine an stuff, gotta have big scary starships and deaff stars to scare everyone innit”.

[@svijj_]

After reading this comment now I'm imagining Tarkin with a brummie accent lmao

[@shadowknight7584]

Haha this is hilarious but it completely ruined the image of tarkin in my head

[@josesanchezrodriguez1783]

The only source that actually says that is the Force Unleashed Campaign guide which is Legends and a very low canon value at that. It's also pretty stupid since there's nothing in the Tarkin doctrine text itself that says they shouldn't rely on fighters

[@mcatalano813]

@@josesanchezrodriguez1783 and yet here we are lol

[@josesanchezrodriguez1783]

@@mcatalano813 Even by Legends, saying that the Empire got rid of all Venators is wrong as several of them were used to guard the Sanctuary Pipeline that connected Sullust to Endor during the construction of Death Star 2 and there was a large fleet of mothballed Venators that were kept long after Endor that were used in 13 ABY by Ennix Devian as a part of his Restored Empire

[@admiralmurphy1543]

"And does working in Imperial shipyards make you more loyal to the Empire?" Sir, I think you just triggered several species worth of PTSD patients.

[@MercenaryPen]

may as well ask "does the inability to swim make you more loyal to the empire?"

[@Sephiroth144]

@@MercenaryPen Ouch.

[@simonmagid4205]

@@MercenaryPen Possibly if the Empire starts to add large numbers of swimming pools to your homeworld. Then it might make you more eager to pretend to be loyal. >.>

[@thejoojoo9999]

​@@MercenaryPenI don't get the joke ?

[@MercenaryPen]

@@thejoojoo9999 sorry, its an Andor reference

[@WolfeSaber9933]

EckhartsLadder did show off his idea of the perfect Imperial battle group and he included a Ventor having the rear, proving TIE craft support.

[@_gungrave_6802]

He based his idea off US Navy fleets that have aircraft carriers as flagships. At first his idea is interesting until you realize that the Empire had so many other craft for Tie support that could do the job better.

[@yemmohater2796]

Link?

[@Cpt_Boony_Hat]

Such as? Admittedly I myself tend to be influenced by USN thought. Glares at ISD lacking point defense “ All I’m saying is we reduce its main battery by 1/3 and use the power saved from it for point defense,”

[@midshipman8654]

@@_gungrave_6802 … but the venator is already in production and can send out a lot more ties then most other things. And carriers were useful and central both in all out wars, like wwii AND in global power projection in non total war times like pretty much any time between wwii and today.

[@enigmagrieshaber5555]

@@_gungrave_6802 like the harrower? Well that one is good but I think venator got larger capacity and more space to get out

[@Scottthebassplayer98]

The Templin Institute is about to produce Clone Wars related videos at the same rate that Kamino produces Clone Troopers.

[@megabyte1778]

200,000 videos are ready, with a million more well on the way.

[@abdurrazzaqmumin1574]

Does that mean not at all? Seeing as Kamino got the Mando treatment

[@Sephiroth144]

So, in non-quantifiable amounts?

[@UGNAvalon]

“Your videos are very impressive. You must be very proud of them.” “….tell me, who was the one ordered their production?”

[@Tahkaullus01]

@@abdurrazzaqmumin1574 Well seeing as Mt Tantiss is now confirmed, I suppose it's the Spaarti treatment now. If you don't know what that is, read the Thrawn Trilogy.

[@questionmark05]

A beautiful ship. I wonder if the empire has museum ships. I know palpatine considered it too much a symbol of the jedi. To the point, it was known as the jedi crusier.

[@dodopod]

I think Mon Mothma's flagship in Legends was a museum ship that the Rebellion stole.

[@hphp31416]

jedi cruiser as vital in defeat of jedi rebelion?

[@animelordiv2736]

The Venator was known across the galaxy as the “Jedi Cruiser” throughout the Clone Wars. And Emperor Palpatine wanted all indications that the Jedi Order never existed so he decommissioned the Venator months after the Clone Wars ended and the Tarkin Doctrine didn’t help the Venator.

[@CushionRide]

ooo thats a good point i missed

[@wolfrainexxx]

The Tarkin Doctrine also relied on the fact that the Venator was replaced by the Secutor, which was its replacement; the ISD replaced the Acclamator.

[@scopilio13]

THE VENATOR ISN'T REAL!!!!!

[@wolfrainexxx]

@@scopilio13 No shit, thanks for trying to suck the fun out our imaginations fun sucker.

[@Biden2024_]

And then got a ship that looked nearly identical? 😂

[@michaelramon2411]

Related to the "war runs them ragged" theory, I think that given the sheer speed at which most of the Venator fleet was assembled, it is entirely possible that a lot of them were relatively shoddily built. Obviously they were durable enough to pull through in the war, but it's easy to imagine that an enormous number of corners were cut in the name of getting the things out the door faster, and this may have made their long-term operation and maintenance very difficult or expensive. The ISDs may have been built with the expectation of decades of service rather than the necessity of nearly-instant deployment.

[@cptnemo20kl]

I like this line of thought. Taking the Templin analogy, it would be interesting if the Venators were a cross between the Essex classes and the Victory transport ships of WW2. Supremely fast to build, but not destined to last long - one way or another.

[@WingcommanderLuna]

Alot of equipment, including ships built during WWII, was with built with haste and not adding mateiral to protect them long-term. For example German fighters did not add rubber between different metals since it was coldy calculated that they would be shot down/damaged enough before it would become a serious problem. In addition rubber was a material hard to get for Germany. The same applies for many ships regarding thickness and rust protection of hull plating. Ships that had taken heavily damaged was in some cases repaired during war-time but would have had long-term maintenace problems and thus prime candidates to be scrapped first. I also like the idea that some starships/equipment was scrapped to get spare parts to keep others running. This would in turn release funds to produce new starships such as ISD instead of funding parts for the Venator.

[@deepdungeon8465]

​@@WingcommanderLuna lol, the CIS is even more of a threat than the Rebels due to its Gigantic Industrial might. But Venators and Acclimators has already proven their success on a large scale galactic war against the CIS. The ISD is made on a peace time whilst Venators are made for a Galactic war that includes large scale Space battles and Planetary invasions. In fact, the ISD's were made to compliment the need of Venators of a Tank Firepower battleships so it could freely launch its numerous fighters and bombers as well as carrying supplies and heavy equipments for the invading Armada.

[@connarcomstock161]

You... I like you. You get it.

[@TheOtherNeutrino]

@@cptnemo20kl Feels like a parallel to the Cone Troopers that served aboard them.

[@Sereze001]

There's little economic or military reasoning to it, but there is a lot of political reasoning. Can't have the famous 'Jedi Cruiser' stick around after the whole Order 66 situation.

[@KatamuroTheFirst]

Have to keep in mind that the Venator and the Imperials were designed for different purposes. While sure Venator could be a multi-purpose ship it's main role was as a fleet carrier/battleship. Acclamator was used to carry and land the troops en-masse. Inperials were designed to have everything they need to carry out all kinds of missions including limited planetary assaults. And sure they could have kept the Venators and added Imperials but Venators were a symbol of the Republic and Jedi in particular. So they had to go.

[@occam7382]

That still doesn't make it smart. The Venator-class was still capable of doing all of those things, on top of having a larger range than the Imperial-class, what with its hundreds of hyperspace-capable starfighters.

[@KatamuroTheFirst]

@@occam7382 I didn't say it was smart just considering that palpatine most likely went mad and continued to slide down into the dark side madness even the one fact that jedi used Venators was enough for him to issue the orders to get rid of them.

[@calebbarnhouse496]

@Joshua Davis those hyperspace equipped starfighters were a massive disadvantage to the empire, it increases the chances of desertion and giving the rebellion more pilots, which is what the rebellion used to great effect

[@occam7382]

@@calebbarnhouse496, even so, I would argue that the benefits of those starfighters far outweighs any of the negatives. I mean, it's not as if Imperial pilots who want to defect are going to let something like the number of hyperdrive-equipped starfighters on hand get in their way. The fact is, one Venator-class Star Destroyer with its fighter complement could easily monitor and control several systems at once, while an Imperial-class could only cover one. And the biggest problem the Empire always faced was controlling its massive amount of territory, so doesn't it make sense to have ships capable of doing that?

[@calebbarnhouse496]

@Joshua Davis except it literally does, if they are stuck on your ship with the only craft able to go into hyperspace being limited amount of shuttles, you can only entrust those shuttles to your most loyal pilots, when defecting is harder it's less common, what the empire should have had was there mini carriers that carry 4 to 6 ties, that is small enough to monitor vast amounts of space, they don't need to be able to take on any threat by themselves as they can merely be used to call in the calvary, but with things like tie bombers and interceptors, or even just widespread deployment of the tie advanced without the hyperdrive in it, would allow the empire to project power while being a stupid mobile and flexible force

[@Evan-qn2cj]

I think another aspect of why they were scrapped is that lots of venators were destroyed in the war, with many people in the confederacy and elsewhere (who might later become prominent rebel leaders) learning how to destroy them. Learning what their weaknesses are and how to exploit them. The star destroyers were brand new and had seen no major combat against any potential enemies, meaning their unknown abilities were themselves advantages the empire could use against its enemies

[@nahuelleandroarroyo]

ISDs have the same (almost no guns on ventral side) and worst (exposed shield projectors) weaknesess of the Venator

[@Etzelsschizo]

@@nahuelleandroarroyo The biggest weakness of the Venator were the large vulnerable hanger bay and the lack of firepower, both of which the ISD's corrected

[@mattstorm360]

I always assumed because of at least two reasons. First, Venator was too closely related to the Jedi. Sometimes called Jedi Cruisers. Second, the Tarkin Doctrine which saw large warships had no place for the Venator. And as you said, the Destroyer made a lot of jobs. The idea of selling the ship was probably never thought of because the idea was the Empire ruled the galaxy. The Empire would provide defense, not provide the means of defense. You don't have a Naboo fighter core, you have the imperial fighter core stationed on Naboo. They wouldn't want to sell a warship, that was basically the symbol of the republic, to anyone. Rather scrap them down into brand new star destroyers. The empire can afford it.

[@TheInsomniaddict]

Good point, if there were conflicts that other nations were concerned about the Empire would offer a "peacekeeping" force instead of materiel.

[@gbadspcps2]

Finally a realistic assesment instead of just comparing ship stats.

[@Jedi_Spartan]

I'm just surprised that the Rebel Alliance were never seen using them... if for nothing else than as a mobile outpost for refuel/resupply between missions, using it like that would hypothetically just need a skeleton crew to maintain while also having somewhere to store starfighters long term during periods when the Alliance had no bases.

[@Hyde-dg7ef]

maybe bc of the replacement parts issue?

[@andreykuzmin4355]

Way I understood it, it was, ironically, a bad choice for Rebellion. Too noticeable, too costly, too hard to get and maintain. Once rebel cell would get one, it would place a huge target on it. That if they'll even manage to find people or droids to crew it or starfighters to field it's bay. Dauntless-class or, let's say, an old Munificent-class would provide all rebel cell needs and for fraction of cost and trouble compared to Venator.

[@BoisegangGaming]

It might be because it might be hard to find them in a manner that wouldn't bring suspicion. After all, it doesn't seem like these would be easy to obtain, refit, and maintain without bringing attention. Of course, I'm sure there were a few cells that may have used one or two that were stripped down but something tells me that the venator wasn't designed for guerilla campaigns.

[@jannegrey593]

It might have been that getting a hand on one was too difficult. They had few big ships. And those few they had were arguably dual purpose civilian/military transports. Also they would have to find a way to produce all the spare parts.

[@andreykuzmin4355]

@@jannegrey593 basically, this. Too much trouble to get one, keep one and field one.

[@SgtP4in]

One of my favorite takes I've heard on the Empire Vs. Republic militaries, is that Clone Troopers were soldiers, while Stormtroopers were militarized police officers. One ship was designed for engaging near peer foes in large fleet engagements, while the other is made for long patrols, and occasionally enforcing a blockade while it's onboard garrison stomped out some insurgents and insurrectionists on some random world. The Empire probably also chose to dismantle their Venerators because they didn't want a bunch of top of the line warships running around: they wanted the vast majority of their ships to only be capable when punching down, and then only kept a relatively tiny contingent of top of the line warships around to keep the others in line, who in turn were only crewed by the most loyal of troops to the Emporer. Even within the Imperial military, there were checks put in place to disempower everyone, and make them afraid, and the only way to gain more power, was to further prove one's loyalty to the Emporer.

[@DragonActual]

I wonder what a Venator with more weaponry would look like.

[@jeambeam3173]

The energy takes to run it is already so taxing would be impractical

[@drksideofthewal]

Look up the Venator “Liberation.” It was modified with extra turbolasers.

[@90skidcultist]

That would be a“Secutor”.

[@fadelsukoco3092]

Likely the giant ventral red hangar plates would be removed and a row of centrally-aligned superfiring turrets would be put in their place, with some of the hangar space being replaced with extra generators and ordinance reserves.

[@cmedtheuniverseofcmed8775]

Excellent work on all this. I don't think the Empire would have completely retired their Venator force by the time the Death Star was completed, mostly because we still see the Arquitens class (Refited) and even the ancient Dreadnought Heavy Cruisers (In SW Rebels) still being used then. However, it can be easily assumed that the Empire just stopped making more. With no refit and parts wearing out, many of the surviving Venators that weren't scrapped immediately were obviously thrown to the scrap yards. With ISDs being produced in bulk, it wouldn't have taken much for the Empire to utterly overwhelm whatever they had of the worn-out Venators.

[@michaelramon2411]

I also wonder if maybe the Venators had some shoddy construction or cut corners that increased their speed of production, but made long-term maintenance a real pain. If an ISD takes two or three years to build but is expected to remain in service for decades, that's fine - they are being built in peacetime, so the Empire can wait. But I wouldn't be remotely surprised to learn that a Clone Wars Venator was thrown together in three months by a shipyard that had never before built a warship because that was the only way for the Republic to bulk up fast enough. Different priorities for different situations.

[@calebbarnhouse496]

@Michael Ramon bruh capital ships in starwars can survive for thousands of years easily, the falcon is almost 100 with retro fits, and by the time of sequal trilogy, and the good timeliness new republic it's over 100, and it's not really that special as far as ships go outside of the emotional attachment and the aftermarket upgrades, the venators were scrapped primarily because they were a status symbol of the previous age, Palpatine wanted the empire to last under his rule and his legacy, anything that wasn't following that path was nothing but a liability to him

[@MazzaAzi]

I can't believe you forgot to mention that they kept the Acclamator, a ship that was present at the start of the clone wars, but Scraped the Venator

[@khartog01]

I was thinking this, the Acclamator didn't even last one movie.

[@def3ndr887]

You’re telling me that they favored flying target practice over the carrier/battleship

[@mosesmm5473]

Generation tech has done videos on this and concluded that not only was the Venator an objectively superior warship to the Imperial classes that succeeded it, but it was an objectively poor decision to retire the entire ship class with the man reasons being the Emperor and Tarkin as Palpatine knew that, while objectively good ships, they were heavily associated with the Republic and Jedi-with them even having the nickname 'Jedi Cruiser' so he wanted them gone. Tarkin was big on the 'Rule through fear' ideology and the Venator didn't fit into that as it didn't invoke that fear he wanted like how an Imperial class could, despite the fact one Venator could cover a much larger area of responsibility or patrol thanks to is massive starfigher wing which even a half decent commander could use to destroy 2 or even 3 Imperial classes if they ever had to fight.

[@Illier1]

Tbf by the time of the Empire there wasn't anyone who could challenge the Star Destroyers. If the CIS or some other major faction had declared war then maybe, but for what they were needed for, to cause fear and blow shit up, they did an excellent job. Especially when the only enemies they had were rebels in modified cargo and personal vessels.

[@wolfrainexxx]

You perhaps aren't considering the difference in technologies as well. So let's compare! An USS Franklin (CV-13, Essex-class) had a flight complement of 103 Aircraft. An USS Enterprise (CVN-65, Nimitz-class) had a flight complement of 60 Aircraft. Which is superior?

[@mosesmm5473]

@@wolfrainexxx I find your argument flawed as while the Nimitz-class is no doubt superior to the Essex, they're both carriers and the Nimitz much more advanced aircraft. The Imperial class was a space battleship which carried cheaply made and underequipped starfighters while the Venator was a space aircraft carrier which carried older, but much better starcraft. Even in Star Wars, Starfighters and Carriers proved themselves superior to Star Destroyers but unlike in our world, the Empire doubled down instead of shifting to this new era of warfare.

[@mosesmm5473]

@@Illier1 True, the Empire wasn't expecting to fight any major conflicts but as they could have kept them around regardless, perhaps serving as carriers, training ships for TIE fighters, placed them in sector fleets that patrolled less important and problematic sectors, heck even as museum ships. But as far as we know, every one of them was reduced to scrap.

[@wolfrainexxx]

@@mosesmm5473 In what way is the ISD inferior to the Venator though? There's no galactic threat to justify swarms of fighters, nor is there entrenched enemies to justify hordes of Assault Ships. So I ask again, in what way was the Venator superior to the ISD? If the Empire needed more fighters, they had dedicated Fighter Carriers, and the onboard firepower, shields, and electronics were leagues beyond the Venator. X-Wing was superior to the Arc-170, and inferior to a TIE fighter (Death Star Battle), and even the Empire At War RTS game (cannon) showed that the Empire could field 5 TIEs for the price of a single X-Wing; the hyperdrive was useless, and the X-Wing had no other function that the TIE didn't. The Rebels used the Hyperdrive for guerilla tactics, which doesn't prove the Empire wrong, it just shows it fit the needs of the Rebels better than it did the Empires.

[@takashiross8553]

An important thing to remember about refitting ships is that changing a flight deck and changing a powerplant are separated by orders of magnitude in complexity. Replacing power plants can result in the deconstruction of large portions of your full and internal bulkheads, force you to run new piping and electrical lines, or perhaps force you to rearrange the entire layout of your crew compartments, hanger, or storage space. Changing a flight deck may force you to limit the ship's speed, shift its ballast, or drop the height of your hanger and build new elevators, but that pales in comparison to working on a ship's drive and power system. Refitting a starship would be much the same and, like the recently damaged USS Bon Homme Richard, bringing back into service at a modern standard could well eclipse the cost of building a new ship as, at the end of the day, your hull's age may also dictate time and mission limitations upon your ship.

[@jackspartangaming]

Clone/Venator stans inbound.

[@rmisionero]

At the end of the Clone Wars, the Republc's fleets were depleted of starships in operation. Tarkin wanted a new fleet of ships capable of striking fear in its enemies. This was also in line of Emperor Palpatine's vision of controling the masses through fear, a Sith concept. It also introduced new technologies that were incompatible or not economical into refitting on the Venator as they were hastily designed for the Clone Wars. Or at least, that was my understanding of it. This was stated by Grand Moff Tarkin, and thus it was known as the Tarkin Doctrine.

[@scandor8599]

As well as the "hard use" angle (and yes, the rule of thumb is one year of war = ten years of peacetime) there's also the fact the Venators were built very quickly. I would speculate that that like how navies would build wooden ships out of unseasoned wood in wartime - accepting short service life for cheaper and quicker construction - there may have been signifant corners cut in its construction that meant staying in service was unviable.

[@acgearsandarms1343]

Any chance when Rampart was shown using them to bombard Kamino, that, in part, was one reason the Venator was given public stigma and helped contribute to its disuse?

[@tomaskops7119]

That can be good point

[@NobleWolf]

There are alot of reasons they scraped the Venator and I also understand why it was never used by the Rebellion either. It was a symbol of a long lost time in the republic that was quickly buried. The ship did inspire that feeling of rising up against oppression for most and this is what the Emperor didnt want in his Empire in its early days

[@trevynlane8094]

I think that using the Venator as a carrier for Imperial battlegroups would have helped the Empire a lot. The biggest weakness of the Imperial class was a lack of starfighter capacity and having a 2:1 mix of Imperial and Venator Star destroyers would have helped a lot.

[@huntermad5668]

Except that is the reason Venator got replaced. The 300-400 starfighters complement was only viable for Venator assigned to core world defense. on campaign, Venator typically carried way less and use the extra space for supplies so they usually carried around a hundred or so starfighters. That defeated the purpose of dedicated carrier. Imperial's starfighter complement was enough. The problem is the outdated TIE-Fighters. The replacement of them to TIE-Interceptors would render most problem moot. It was underway but the collapse happened.

[@TheInsomniaddict]

The Imperial class needed smaller boats that could perform screening actions more than anything. Tie fighters can only do so much and were outperformed by the fighters they ended up facing. En masse fighter wings might have helped, but really they needed something akin to the Imperial class for point defense.

[@trevynlane8094]

@@huntermad5668 100 or so fighters is better then an Imperial star destroyer could bring to the party. An Imp 1 carried 36 fighters, and an Imp 2 carried 72. Two Imp 1s backed by a Venator could operate 180 or so fighters between themselves, and have some specialized scout fighters aboard the Venator to help find Rebel forces.

[@huntermad5668]

@@trevynlane8094 Imperials always have standard complement of 72. TIE-Fighters are only weak against new Rebel fighters. It is around the level of Late clone war V-wing. Except scout fighters only viable against conventional enemy like Seperatists. Not like Imperial Navy have a shortage of hyper capable scout vessel anyway.

[@darklordmalthric3633]

If the empire kept the venator maybe they could have won endor

[@roguevector1268]

A single Venator escorting the Death Star 1 would have vomited out enough TIE fighters to overwhelm the rebel strike package. It still boggles the mind that Scarif had more TIE fighters than the Death Star did. There should have been thousands if not hundreds of thousands of TIEs defending the Death Star.

[@marimcgee8379]

@@roguevector1268 Blame that on Tarkin, he should have been prept before hand.

[@thijsjong]

An imperial stardesteoyer has 32 tie fighters. Some more some less. Thats not much for a ship a mile long. Compare that to a carrier we have today. 25 carriers have the same volume as an Imperial stardestroyer. Many turbo lasers not enough point defence or flak. A death star could house a 100.000 fighters easy lauching from hundreds of launchtubes from across the surface. Silly Tarkin doctrin.

[@cmedtheuniverseofcmed8775]

Maybe. The Templin Institute does make a valid point that the starfighter facilities might not have been fully compatible with TIEs. Even then, the biggest issue with the Venator is that it really does lack a lot of anti-capital ship firepower. During the Clone Wars, CIS tore into the Venators until the Republic just outbuilt what they lost in battle. Rebel Mon Calamari Cruisers would have had the same advantage with their robust shielding in pounding an Imperial Venator to pieces.

[@darklordmalthric3633]

@@cmedtheuniverseofcmed8775 I don’t agree with your opinion but I respect it

[@marimcgee8379]

That is a Damm good question!

[@merafirewing6591]

Been thinking about making a rebel call that fits in the universe of Star Wars, but a group of ex-republic navy veterans, and CIS veterans getting ahold of many old starships including the Venator from scrapyards or from other battlefields and then operate at the very edge and going where the Empire wouldn't dare to go.

[@garrettharriman6333]

I'd argue that the Venator wasn't replaced by the Imperial, but the Victory Class Star Destroyer. I flew many fighter sorties during the Clone Wars, and if memory serves me right, the Venator was being supplemented and supplanted by the Victory toward the end of that conflict during the outer rim sieges. The Imperial class was designed to embody the Tarkin Doctrine. The Victory was designed to win fleet engagements.

[@occam7382]

You did now? Where did you serve?

[@garrettharriman6333]

@@occam7382 I flew during the incursion on Kamino and against the blockade of Ryloth.

[@occam7382]

@@garrettharriman6333, ah. I remember Ryloth. That was a mess. I was a combat engineer on a Venator during Ryloth, and after my first ship bit the dust, I was reassigned to Resolute. I don't think I ever had more work than when I was on that ship. There were starfighters and gunships coming in scrapped pretty much every other day. I'll never forget all the times I nearly got killed while trying to fix the twisted heaps that were General Skywalker and Commander Tano's fighters after nearly every mission they went on. You ever encounter those two? Let me tell you, it was quite the spectacle, seeing them at work.

[@garrettharriman6333]

@@occam7382 I flew a V-Wing at Ryloth. I never got close to the general or his aide(? Never was sure how that worked militarily). I only heard him on comms during the flight briefs.

[@occam7382]

@@garrettharriman6333, if I'm not mistaken, she was 2nd-in-Command of the 501st Brigade following the Battle of Christophsis up until the... situation with the Jedi Temple. You know what I mean. We all saw the tribunal. Anyway, I constantly had to fix their trashed ships, and every time I would complain to General Skywalker about how he kept messing up his ships, he just brushed it off. At least Commander Tano was more understanding about it. She was pretty cool.

[@trumediamix1]

"Why scrap the Venator?" Palpatine: "F*ck the Republic. That includes its symbolism. Lmao." I'm not even joking, to be blunt - it was the first thing that came to mind, aside from the obvious lore complications that could've been formed if George Lucas and his cohorts at LucasArts said "these were the same Star Destroyers, we just remodeled them" or such. Immersive worldbuilding requires good attention to detail - both in terms of the powers at play and in terms of recognizing what's important and what isn't, imo. In this case, I think the Venator was scrapped, aside from the "Tarkin's Big Dick Energy Dakka" Doctrine, because he saw it as a strong symbol of the Galactic Republic. As such, that's a big no-no. He wants the Republic gone in favor of his Empire, so it has to go. In fact, I heard you acknowledge this point late into your video, as I was typing this out on my phone, funnily enough!

[@jeffbrewer1580]

The republic was already begging to introduce victory and even imperial star destroyers towards the end of the clone wars. Essentially they were already being phased out, also no one knows just how many venators were produced, i suspect it's not as many as we think

[@Talon1124]

I would have, in Palpatine's position, used the Venator as a support ship for the Imperial. Like another comment said, Eckharts Ladder did a formation where the Venator was used in larger formations as a dedicated carrier. Smaller units could swap the Vemator to the main ship with an Escort Carrier like the Quasar Fire or Ton Falk as support for even more TIE fighter variants in space.

[@inductivegrunt94]

The Venator would have really given the Empire the edge against the Rebels, especially since the Imperial class kept getting destroyed by Rebel starfighters. So Venators, with their massive anti fighter capabilities, would have been a great counter to Rebels and their heavy use of starfighters. The Venator really was the greatest capital ship of the Republic, and the Empire were fools to replace them with the Imperial in mainline service. Imperials would have been better served as a flag ship with a Venator or two to serve as the mainline warship alongside the Victory Class Star Destroyer.

[@jeremy1860]

The Empire just repeated the same mistake as they did with their Clones. They didn't know how good of a thing they had, so they just threw it away for something newer 😠

[@MasterGhostf]

In legends it answers this by that Palpatine was preparing for a war with the Yuuzhan Vong. A large powerful fleet would be needed.

[@tommyfox854]

I usually find it odd that most videos about Star Wars, and more specifically factions that have Palpatine in it somewhere, it usually tried to portray both the faction and the man as misguided but reasonable rather than what they truly are, Sith. The Sith are the polar opposite to The Jedi (ok not completely but they're defiantly open to their shortcomings rather than The Jedi), they value strength and power above all else, even basic connections, and that thirst for power always leads towards massive armies and navies waging war upon The Galaxy and The Republic. But ever sense Palpatine became Supreme Chancellor and later Emperor of The Galaxy, the Sith has won and can now openly make a comeback without resistance poppin up as strongly as it has before. I think the actual reason why The Venator Class was sent to the scrap yard is because Palpatine wanted any trace of The Republic gone so that his brand new oddly Sith style Star Destroyers can enter the show.

[@EvanKorrigan]

I think what happened was that with the Imperials the Empire took the lessons of the Clone Wars to heart. Reducing the fighter complement, because even 400 starfighters can't really compete with the sheer mass of Vultures the CIS could stuff into their hulls. Increasing the firepower to be both able to quickly smash lighter armoured CIS ships like the Munificent or Recusant and go tow to tow with the bigger ships, like Lucrehulks, Bulwarks and the odd dreadnought like the Malevolence. There was just the tiny problem that the next war wasn't fought that way and the Venator would have been the better counter to the guerilla tactics of the rebels.

[@jamesfra1311]

I love this ship so much, the design and looks is just beautiful.

[@rezaganjizadeh4263]

It wasn't the ship that "won the clone wars". Palpatines own insights did. The Venator was underamred and its hull would have been an easy breach for the superheavy turbolsaers on the recusant or munificent not to mention that a luckerhulk carried more than three times as many fighter as the venator while being much better armed and armoured while smaller ships that could alsp carry hundreds of fighters like the captor were avaliable to the CIS

[@nick-314]

Would be cool to see one in use with the Rebellion

[@samstarkweather5172]

The Venator may have also been built like the Liberty ships of WW2. It may have been built for reliable service for only a few short years, after which it would be relegated to low intensity duties before scrapping. Refitting and overhauling the ship may very well have cost nearly as much as building a new one from scratch, and it still wouldn't be as capable as a brand new warship. By the end of the Clone War, Palpatine and Tarkin were probably well aware that the remaining Venators, much like their clone crews, were unsuited for the long game that they were planning, so they immediately began producing new ships that would both out-preform and out-last the Venators by years or even decades.

[@kereymckenna4611]

I think some of Palpatine's fleet in Rise of Skywalker should have been mostly these. Like the secret fleet was made of things that where supposed to be mothballed...but the emperor was actually tucking away for his back up plan.

[@kingvan7872]

To be fair it's a big galaxy and even though we see a lot of Venators being scrapped that could just represent a fraction of the total number out there in all the non-frontline roles or ships sold to other powers like what was mentioned in the video. This line of thought would give writers some leeway if they ever wanted them to appear in future stories.

[@jamesk370]

Just a thought: The mass decommissioning and scrapping of the Venators could have also been used as a cover operation by Palpatain (as part of his contingency program) to relocate quality military hardware into the unknown region, until industrial capacity could have been built out there.

[@alexandercaires5921]

That makes a lot of sense. Later claim they were scrapped to rebuild devastating worlds as a good cover

[@robkemp598]

The perfect KDY fleet would include; Venators, Aquitans light cruisers, Raider corvettes and the Nebula class star defenders. Anything outside those 4 would probably be a waste

[@5678sothourn]

Difference in doctrine

[@mix-up9003]

You've been watching Perun videos lately I see, nice I might not agree with everything he says, but he does a great job in explaining the logistics sides of the military industrial complex.

[@TemplinInstitute]

Can''t say I have. Can you link me?

[@mix-up9003]

@@TemplinInstitute here you go dude enjoy. www.youtube.com/@PerunAU

[@Eons381]

Or if the Empire ever gets wind of your opinions about the Emperor and his fleet logic... ... ... You might be Exicuted for treason against the Empire. O_O oops 😅😅😅 But on another note I think the Venator was the better class of warships that the Galactic Navy could've salvaged and brought up to standard but somehow I feel they set the standards already and the moffs didn't want to be caught admitting it so they quietly burned and brutality buried the best warships in the Galaxy.

[@90skidcultist]

The Senate: Decommission the Venator, all signs of the Jedi and Republic must be removed from my Empire! Also The Senate: But keep the Secutor, Victorys, Gozantis, repurpose the Gladiators, and rename the Imperator into the “Imperal-1”.

[@raideurng2508]

I always assumed it was to address the glaring issues that cost the Republic during the war: Lack of firepower. The CIS consistently outgunned the Republic in fleet engagements and while the fighters were useful, it only had 16 heavy turbolasers compared to over 70 on the ISD. The Empire quickly retired both the Venator AND the Victory due to insufficient firepower. Considering the numbers of CIS capital ships still floating around the galaxy, a handful of Munificent frigates could possibly defeat a Venator, whereas an ISD would crush them easily.

[@deathhog]

Sacred Cow Shipyards did a wonderful breakdown on why the venator was honestly not *that* great of a ship. But to summarize: Huge dorsal hanger. Two broadside hangers. One ventral hanger. That big hanger door is just begging for a torpedo to hit the flight deck and explode inside the ship. Side guns aren't super firing, unless you tilt the entire ship "down". Meanwhile, the ISDs are much more focused on ship to ship firepower, but still carry a sizable tie fleet. The angle of the ship is likewise steeper, allowing more of the guns to be fired at a "level" target. The twin bridge is likewise, pretty silly and offers no real redundancy. (Anything big enough to take out one will likely take the other.) As for refits: Looking to the real world is actually helpful. Because WWI battleships we're modernized instead of replaced. But this is because the nations of the world decided, by treaty (London and Washington Naval treaties) to stop production of new ships. Had the treaties not been made, it's likely those refits would not have occured. British shipyards we're always SCREAMING for more capital ships to build even during peak build rates.

[@MadLFC]

Symbolism. Like the Death Star, Imperial Star Destroyers are an image of terror. Visually imposing and uncompromising in function. Venators were designed for troop and fighter mobilization in multi-function roles. Although warships in function, they still remained less aggressive and imposing than the Imperial ships that followed them. Imperial Destroyers were the polar opposite. They were designed for planetary bombardment and rapid put down of insurrection. When the Empire was defeated, the New Republic never used Imperial Star Destroyers for the same reasons. It was a symbol of another era that didn't service the new one. They went back to smaller more versatile ships akin to the Old Republic era. Less imposing, more passive vessels that better represented the philosophy of a more peaceful time.

[@rmartinson19]

"The Venator-class Star Destroyer is widely considered to be one of the best starship designs ever put into service..." Okay, I'm going to stop you right there. No, the Venator is widely considered to be one of the most POPULAR starship designs in the fandom, NOT one of the best built in-universe. In universe, it is actually fairly limited in several ways, and certainly isn't "perfectly balanced." Setting aside the fact that its officially-stated fighter complement is actually far too large for the amount of free space it actually has inside its hull, the Venator suffers from a few glaring flaws. For one, its armor belt is badly compromised by having big honking sliding doors running along 60% of its length. For two, the hullform is drastically weakened by the lack of bracing in the vessel's centerline, making the ship highly vulnerable to certain damage types (particularly impact or tortion-based damage). In structural terms, the Venator has no spine. Thirdly, it's armament is suboptimal. It has a whole lot of point defense batteries (which is good), four heavy proton torpedo launchers (which is... okay, I guess? If you're going to go with missile armaments, it's generally better to go all-in like the Victory-I does, instead of half-assing it like this), a smattering of "deck guns", which seem to be single-barreled light-to-medium scale turbolasers, a couple of medium turbolasers (which is FAR too few) and 8 heavy turbolasers. Essentially, the only enemy type the Venator is truly optimized for facing down is a fighter-swarm, and it is far too large, resource-intensive and expensive for that to be a cost-effective combat niche. For that role, the Lancer-class frigate is simply better in nearly every way. The Venator also lacks the medium armament to take on light-to-medium capital ships in anything more than a 1-on-1 matchup, and its heavy weapons are too few to match up favorably against a competently designed peer-level warship. KDY basically gutted the whole ship to make room for its fighter complement, and treated its non-fighter-related armament as an afterthought. Except in its role as a fast fleet carrier, the Venator class is inferior in every way to the Imperator/Imperial class line. The ISD carries enough fighters to function as a reasonably effective carrier, enough troops to function as a superior planetary assault ship, and mounts a vastly superior array of conventional weaponry that is far better balanced. One ISD-I has four times the number of turbolasers as the Venator (66 compared to the Venator's 16), most of them heavy turbolasers on fast mounts that allow them to target medium and light warships as well. It also has 62 capital ship grade ion cannons and about 2/3ds as much point defense armament as the Venator. As a warship, it would take something like 6 Venators to match the combat capabilities of a single ISD-I, and that disparity is even greater for the ISD-II. Considering that an ISD only costs three times what a Venator does, it becomes clear that the Venator is hugely deficient - and cost-inefficient - as a line warship. For comparison's sake, let's look at a contemporary of the Venator, the Victory-II class Star Destroyer. With one third of the fighter complement of an ISD-I, a similar fraction of the ground force capability (at least in vehicular terms), roughly one third of the ISD-I's firepower, less than one third of an ISD's mass, and all for exactly one third the cost? The VSD-II is perfectly matched as a supplement - or replacement - for the ISD-I, and thus clearly superior as a warship in comparison to the Venator. With the VSD-II, for the same price as an ISD-I, you can get the same combat capability, with the added benefits of a much smaller overall crew requirement and the added operational flexibility that comes from having three hulls rather than one. The only areas where the Venator truly shines for its size and cost is in its role as a carrier, and in its blisteringly fast drives (both sublight and hyper). Aside form those two things, the Venator is badly underpowered for its size. It's also worth noting that its raw speed would offer surprisingly little advantage most of the time, since it can only really move as fast as the slowest ship in its task force, and basically every other ship it might be asked to fight alongside was much, much slower than it. I suspect that the only reason the Venator was as successful as it was in the line warship role during the Clone Wars was because a thousand years of peace had badly atrophied BOTH sides' understanding of effective warship design. The thing was usually matched up against half-improvised (or fully improvised, in the case of the Lucrehulk) warships built on the cheap for megacorps with zero military tradition and no particular understanding of naval warfare. Once the galaxy had gotten its groove back as far as combat experience is concerned and the CIS was destroyed, it should come as no surprise that the Empire dropped the Venator as fast as possible. They didn't need it anymore. They had newer, vastly more capable warship designs coming into service at breakneck speeds. With the enormous militarization campaign the Empire embarked on from the start, keeping a highly inefficient design like the Venator in their line of battle accomplished nothing but to put a major crimp on their budget that they needed for the production of better ships that were more optimized for the very different threat environment the early Empire faced.

[@badmojo90]

hmm.... tough one; firstly minor correction: the war between the sith empire and old republic occurred roughly 3000 years prior not a millennia. That aside I would say the 'Victory Class' was in fact the replacement for the Venator hold around the same size and speed. The Victory Class held less fighters but it was also much faster and had multi-system scanning making it able to monitor several systems at distance at the same time as well as send long range strike wing such as Imperial Gunboats to deal with minor threats. Was is a mistake? ....hmm....Personally I would say Yes. Far from being the Tactical Genius that some would like to believe Palpatine was an absolute idiot; Thrawn warned him about the Death Star and how making it was pulling far too much man power and resources to maintain the Imperial Fleet...and what did Palpatine do? Build a second one! bigger and with far more resources than the first! Palpatine had an illustrious history of squandering resources and engaging in project of mindless self indulgence. If I had been in his place not only would I have kept and upgraded the Venator class I would have (under the cover of rebuilding bounds with the then defeated CIS) assimilated the most effective elements of the CIS fleet as well, and the Mandalorian Death Guard as a secret police to assist Vader. Imagine Super Battle Droids and Droidekas in lockstep with Elite Stormtroopers lead by a Mandalorian Elite perhaps add in a Basilisk War Droid or two.... Venator Class star destroyers flying escort for an Imperial Class Star Destroyer as flagship with squadrons of not only Tie fighters but Vulture Droids as well? It would be glorious. Palpatine didn't invest well in his Empire and as a result it fell.

[@asteropax6469]

4:19 "But wars have the tendency to advance military sciences in sudden leaps and bounds as state of the art gun, tank, plane, or ship at the start of a conflict can easily be obsolete after just a few years or even months" A perfect real world example would be the Mitsubishi Zero used by the Empire of Japan in World War 2. It outclassed virtually all allied fighters at the start of the war but by its end they were shot down by the dozen. This was due to a combination of all of the following: 1. The inability to keep up with the new classes of planes the Americans came up with (Hellcats and Corsairs). 2. Improvements to the American fleet's anti-aircraft capabilities (more accurate guns on the ships and proximity fuses in the shells). 3. The training of the pilots (Americans had 400 hours average flight training vs Japan's 120 hours average flight training late in the war). 4. The vastly changing tactics used to counter the Zero (American aces were sent home to help with the training of new pilots and they captured an intact Zero in the Aleutian Islands in 1942 to study for weaknesses).

[@lukedogwalker]

Star Wars uses WW2 as its operating model, so scrapping or selling war time (especially war built) vessels matches what actually happened, perfectly. Many ships were wrecked internally, desperately needing huge machinery refits after having been worked mercilessly for years. The newer ones, or thise which had experienced easier wartime service, could be upgraded and kept for 5 to 10 years (but technology moved fast in the 50's, and most becsme obsolete, again) or sold to smaller countries. This theory of Venator disposal works fine in a historical comparison.

[@jakemurray2635]

the same reason the Grand Fleet was largely scrapped after WW1, and the entire Royal Navy battlefleet was destroyed after WW2. Firstly, they were desiged before the war, and so include none of countless inevitable lessons learned during the war about ship design. Secondly, war service is incredibly hard on a warship of any kind, and by the end of the clone wars, most these ships would be worn completely out. On the training point, that only works if the weapons systems and mechanical components are updated to actually reflect the conditions of the modern fleet.

[@thefirstprimariscatosicari6870]

Two reasons: Propaganda, marking a clean break with the Clone Wars and Jedi, pushing for them both as the Republic's greatest mistake. And Fighting the Last War syndrome. The Venators suffered for it too, having been pressed into all kinds of roles they were ill designed for, starting from the very battleline that made them famous. This was quite obviously, because Republic designers hadn't had any experience in a major peer conflict for a thousand years, and may have let themselves be misled by the developments of more compact star fighter hyperdrives, into believing carriers alone could win battles. The realities of peace time patrols, law enforcement but also the breaking of the blockade of Naboo definitely enforced such belief. The former because of the large volumes of space a single ship would be expected to police on its own, as well as the more sparse and very light weight skirmishes common between law enforcement and criminals. The latter, because of the success of an handful of starfighters, in destroying one of the largest spaceship designs in the galaxy. I am certain the Jedi didn't exactly make it public that a 8 years old apprentice candidate was the one to do it. So, the Venator were designed not for a slug with fellow capital ships, but to project power (thanks to a large complement of FTL capable strike crafts) and respond rapidly (helped by the class 1.0 hyperdrive) over the large volume of space they would be assigned to patrol. With direct ship-to-ship armament being downscaled to the bare minimum self defense, punching down on smaller ships and fleeing from anything in its weight class. The Imperial designs, starting with the Victory, were meanwhile designed explicitly for a peer-to-peer conventional conflict, like the Clone Wars. They were heavy hitters, able to outlast and overpower most ships in their weight class, in a one on one duel. Perfect for the battleline. However, unlike the Venator they could only bring to bear their firepower in one place at a time. That being, the systems they physically were in. Especially since, TIE fighters were no longer FTL capable and relegated to a support role and screening of their capital ships more reminiscent of Separatist drones than Republic designs. This meant, that the Imperial designs would have quite obviously thrived in the Clone Wars. But the Clone Wars designs would have fared much better and been much more effective, in fighting the Rebel Alliance, since such anti-insurgency actions were much more reminiscent of late Republic policing and skirmishes.

[@nickvinsable3798]

🤔 . . . While adhering to the Emperor’s orders & such, I’d definitely would go for a Venator redesign. Granted, its not the same Venator, aesthetically; you wouldn’t tell between it & an Imperial class, unless you got close enough without being shot. You’d still have those four hanger based points of entry, thus you’re likely going to scratch your head in regards to how an Imperial class is able to gorge hundreds, if not thousands of smaller crafts from their sides & above. If Victory classes, and maybe Acclimator classes, are also around, you’d have a formidable strike force of, using _World of Warships_ themed reference, Battleships (Imperial Class) & Frigates (Victory Class) to strike seriously hard targets from a distance & tanking damage as well, Carriers (Venator Class) providing heavy amounts of starfighter support (previously mentioned ships would also gorge their fighter compliment), & finally Destroyers (Acclimator Class) getting to a cleared landing zone (partial orbital bombardment) & gorging out its ground forces, along with other landing units from the commanding Battleship (Imperial Class)…

[@dennmael4044]

It's worth noting that in SW Legends Grand Admiral Thrawn employed the Victory class, an interim design between the Venator and Imperial mk1 (if I remember correctly) to great effect in the Imperial Remnant. One possible technical justification for a larger hull design could be that larger engine blocks provide more efficient fuel-thrust ratio making it cheaper to have a smaller number of "do everything" ships like Star Destroyers instead of dedicated Battle Groups like Carrier Groups from Earth Navies.

[@justagecko]

I like the idea the Venator was scrapped for materials to be used on the Death Star. It's a bit more discrete than diverting billions of metal from ISDs and civil construction for a "secret project." Scrappers probably wouldn't care where the junk goes as long as they get paid. They may even want the junk moved so they have room on their planet to live or keep scrapping.

[@hugo6693]

Because Palps said I want all grey triangles... Also you gotta remember without that decision we wouldn't have got a mongol band creating a song called "Sugaan Essena".

[@bogustoast22none25]

The Imperial class was better in every way to the Venator… for the clone wars. It was tankier and dealt a lot more damage, thus was able to destroy lukrehulk battleships more efficiently than a Venator ever could, which would disable droids. When you look at it from that perspective, the Imperial was clearly the better choice. It was how their new foe, the rebellion, chose to fight, that made the Imperial’s design weaknesses come to light.

[@scimitar109]

it just gos to show much more was going on then just the clones, if i remember right, when obi wan kenobi found out about the clones, they were commissioned 10 years earlier, to have an army you had to have a fleet to go with it, you dont build and hope someone comes along and buys it, more was hidden then the clones, if you watch the ending of attack of the clones you see the majority of it, ships, troops, assault vehicles, weapons carried, all of this was planed out 10 years earlier, it a very good question of why was it scrapped and not used as back up or support for the new Imperial fleet.

[@danconti5984]

The problem with the Venator is that it was made ad hoc by a company that had never made a capital ship before and is extremely impractical. The engine design alone costs more fuel than 2 ISD's. The entirety is extremely weak with the hollow hangar hull and makes the entire ship weak to frontal attacks because of it. It also suffers from having two bridges instead of one which makes coordination difficult since both sides need to be in constant communication with each other, and there is no connecting elevator or bridge to the other side. The big guns are pretty weak in reality as well. It was easier to just make a new ship than to completely redesign and re-manufacture the Venator. It is kinda like the M4 Sherman. A design which won the war but had a ton of issues and did not see much continued use in the USA after the war, being scrapped for the Pershing and Patton series instead.

[@jamesh2321]

Good overall analysis, but why omit the Victory class, which is just about as old but still in service? the lineage does not go directly from acclamator to venator to imperator. The victory-1 would be in the penultimate spot in that list...

[@blairfenning7718]

I think the reasons as outlined here are more then enough reason for the Empire to have cast aside the Venator. The scrap itself would have been a boon to those producing the Imperial and Victory classes. The job creation and economic boon would have been seen very favorably. Palpatine was not worried about nostalgic symbols but rather creating the foundation for his empire, regardless of the cost.

[@stars9084]

The biggest reason it was a mistake to scrap the Venator was that the Venator would have been a great combat partner for the Imperial. Her carrying capacity would have mitigated the Imperial’s vulnerability to fighter attack while still being able to keep up with the Imperial

[@tomhanks1769]

I was wondering this too, but after the ships are scrapped the raw materials are used to construct new ships, i can imagine that the level of technology allows almost all of the scrapped raw materials to be reused and recycled resulting in very little loss of materials in the process. Another thing is, that the only real cost here is the energy required to scrap and remake the raw material and the labor costs, both which are probably a drop in a bucket for a massive galactic nation such as the republic or the empire. And let's not forget that most of the "dirty work" is probably done by droids of various size, all of these would also stimulate the economy and increase purchasing power.

[@the36lessons11]

Reasons...and probably raisins as well

[@silverjohn6037]

The Venator may not have even been state of the art at the start of the war. It may have simply been a design that could be quickly produced in war time situations. A lot like WW 2 corvettes and escort carriers.

[@Andy_Sidaris]

Because nothing in star wars makes any sense whatsoever when you apply logic to it. It's turn your brain off and enjoy the original trilogy fun

[@JoeNasr123]

Ummm because George Lucas didn’t invite them until the new trilogy and we had to explain why we didn’t see any in the old movies. 🤣

[@mordredpendragon1235]

Because I guess shitty cruiser that can be taken out just by suicide raming yourself towards the bridge At least this one had 2 bridges so they're not just dead in the water or space technically

[@orchirion]

I would put a giant gun to replace that central hanger to be honest. Be like Halo where their ship's are just a flying gun. 🤣🍺

[@boqndimitrov8693]

naturally, there are many reasons for the retirement of venators, but the main one boils down to this:- why do you have biplanes when you can have spitfires??

[@CT--py4ge]

to be honest I think they just needed a new class of battleship that could be the back bone of the fleet and that was well suited for that role. The Venator was a carrier and as such illsuited for the role it was given

[@sumairshirazi]

it was a big mistake tbh . they could have just made a even better venator ships instead of a isd. venator overall was a better ship.

[@Vortigernrex]

According to the Thrawn series books, the older republic warships were less efficient and more manpower intensive (though there they were called Dreadnought class). It makes sense when you have an unlimited supply of clones to man the navy in wartime. But the new empire turned to drafting troops from occupied worlds, and likely wanted more efficient ships with smaller crews and more automation to help spread the imperial presence wider.

[@HyperEwok1]

let's be real, it was replaced solely because KDY had a cushy government contract

[@andrewdiez8353]

In a way, I would say the Venator's frontline usage demise was sound since the Empire was more focused on quashing small scale rebellion and Seppy holdouts. Analogous to that, I would argue that the Empire would have been quite shrewd to maintain the Venator alongside the Imp Star Deuce as a matter of precedent and forward thinking defensive readiness. In our own world, The Essex class operated alongside the Super Carriers well into the 70s, 30 years after their construction and commissioning. The only real hinderance to these ships was the consideration of operational range and more importantly, heavier laden aircraft that took up more room. The Venator did not either of these concerns to contend with. Quite the opposite considering just how much smaller the TIE was to Republic starfighters. These ships were perfectly suited to act as CAP command vessels to properly contend with Rebel starfighters. 400 TIE's vs a dozen or two X and Y Wings from 1 or 2 Mon Cala warships, even with better craft to work with, make exceptional use of the "Quantity has a Quality all its Own" facet of reality. Even if the Mon Cala warships could destroy the Venator, all those agree little bees would eventually be able to overwhelm them. Beyond the numerical superiority, refitting these ships to carry more fighters or to serve as Auxiallary command cruisers or even as backwater picket ships, the Empire could have stretched out their service lives and still be able to entice Industry/Fabricators/Shipyards to continue their support. This would satisfy military contractors with the guarantee of continued income and the possibility of being subsidized by the Empire to produce parts and new warships simultaneously. And even if this were not the case for all, their would still be the aspect of hiring additional laborers/technicians to operate and maintain these ships for the forseeable future. Loyalty through economic incentive still accomplished. All in all, suplanting the ISD lines with the Venator, even if only until the events of the OT (almost 20 years) would have been a far greater use of materiel and manpower.

[@VelociraptorsOfSkyrim]

I do think that some Venators _were_ refit and made into a variant of Imperial 1s. In one of the most recent episodes of The Bad Batch, it was mentioned that the Imperial Admiral's Venator was undergoing refits. Perhaps this was being done to bring it more inline to the Imperial 1s.

[@boobah5643]

You'd have to rebuild the entire ship to do that. An _Imperial_ is a gunboat with a little hangar strapped to it; the _Venator_ is a carrier with a few guns strapped to it. The interiors of these ships aren't undifferentiated space that you can just convert from one type of thing to another; you have to haul some giant pieces of machinery into place, and I don't just mean bits that you can throw whole-hog into what was once the hangar bay. You're talking power conduits and other infrastructure all throughout the ship. I mean, one _could_ do it, but why? It'd be far faster and cheaper to build something from scratch.

[@Shadx27]

Venators also had a special alloy needed for a certain construction project.

[@th232r6]

The empire wanted to rebrand themselves after the clone wars.

[@marshalllatta2073]

I love these star wars videos

[@niekvanderhorst6065]

Part 3 pls

[@0SASHIM1]

4:00 where can I find the original image of this???

[@Gamer1990100]

It is silly being the ships weren't even a decade old

[@alexandercaires5921]

I'm of two minds about the scrapping of the Venator. On one, the Empire could have scrapped them to rebuild devastating worlds from the Clone Wars (much like the British Roysl Navy post-WW2) or scrapped the Venators and used their parts to build the first Imperial Class Star Destroyers.

[@davetriesthis]

Because they didn't exist in A New Hope or later, and were invented for the prequels. Star Wrs needed a way to get rid of them because they don't exist in the first few decades of Star Wars content.

[@supoagentti9547]

Imperial 1 would have been the perfect ship for the clone wars and Venator for the galactic civil war.

[@trumpstaffel1675]

I think despite being downsized bigly the Venator was never completely decommissioned, with reports of them getting in battles deep into the civil war.