Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens

[Lord Revan]

And I'm sure there's people who didn't like the EU version of the post-ROTJ events and had thought of a way to "fix" it just as there's 100000 ways people have tried to "fix" the PT.

[Galvatron]

The difference is that the EU never made it to the silver screen. Far more people saw the OT and the PT than read any of the EU. I sincerely doubt there's going to be a significant percentage of the audience who are eagerly anticipating an appearance by "Grand Admiral Who?"

[Elheru Aran]

The difference is that the EU never made it to the silver screen. Far more people saw the OT and the PT than read any of the EU. I sincerely doubt there's going to be a significant percentage of the audience who are eagerly anticipating an appearance by "Grand Admiral Who?"

Conversely:

There was a pretty major interdict on prequel EU before the movies came out, and a fairly tight leash on prequel EU material after that until RotS came out. The rest of the EU is more or less entirely what people thought of as happening after the OT for decades. It was much more of a clean slate than the sequel trilogy will be, canon wipe or no. And let's face it-- until the PT hit the silver screen, it never made it there either!

And while the EU's impact wasn't huge, it was still there. I remember reading the NYT bestseller list back in the early 00's and it had a number of Star Wars books on there. The Thrawn Trilogy made a splash. When the NJO emerged, it made news-- not front page news, but news nonetheless. It was a decent percentage of the overall SF publishing market-- perhaps 15%, perhaps as much as 30% if you count *everything* (merchandising, comics, posters, colouring books...).

While I certainly concede that the majority of viewers aren't going to be interested in old Legends-level canon material and whether or not it appears in the film, you can't just make a blanket statement that people aren't going to have preconceptions about what happened after RotJ. People definitely had preconceptions about what happened in the PT, and people are going to say 'huh, I didn't think that would happen' after seeing how things unfold in the ST. It's not going to be a case of "I have no idea what's going to happen, let's check it out".

[Galvatron]

Okay, so what are you basing all these ST preconceptions on? I based my PT preconceptions on what we were shown and told in the OT, not the EU. What clues did you glean from the OT that gave you an idea of what to expect in the ST?

[Elheru Aran]

What preconceptions exactly?

If you want to go movies only:

--The Empire is obviously going to have issues with its two foremost leaders gone. Massive resources have obviously been consumed in creating two Death Stars that got destroyed, and the Alliance is going to get a massive boost. There are at least two prominent leaders who may well be butting heads-- Leia and Mothma (but that's just a surmise).

--Luke has been confirmed as a Jedi Knight. He knows Leia is his sister, and may well attempt to train her or her children, or other Force sensitives he encounters. The OT never said whether there were other Force users out there, so that's an open question.

--Han and Leia have essentially confirmed that they're in a relationship by the end of RotJ; how long this relationship lasts we can't say, nor what comes of it, but we can assume they keep it up for some time at least.

--Han and Lando are members of the Alliance military and may well be involved in leading military actions against the Empire as the Alliance progresses.

Essentially the big thing is that Palpatine's death is going to stagger the Empire, and as we see from the trailers, it's either fragmented or changed its name, with at least one group being called 'First Order'. They're still fighting the Alliance or New Republic, whatever it is, and Leia at least is still leading part of it if not the whole thing. Who knows what Luke is doing; in another thread I speculated that his efforts to restart the Jedi may have gone bad (leading to the new Dark Side users in TFA) hence he withdraws to navel-gaze. Han may have decided to continue freelancing, but all we get for that is he's flying the Falcon without visible escort over Jakku while being pursued by TIEs. He and Leia are still intimate enough that she appears to go to him for comfort.

[Adam Reynolds]

Okay, so what are you basing all these ST preconceptions on? I based my PT preconceptions on what we were shown and told in the OT, not the EU. What clues did you glean from the OT that gave you an idea of what to expect in the ST?

Other that a handful of lines from Obi-Wan, who was lying at least part of the time, what clues did you have as far as the PT? All we knew was that there were apparently Clone Wars and that Obi-Wan and Anakin had fought in them. Anything beyond that is supposition. Ideas that we shouldn't have had droids in the Clone Wars or that the Empire was around for longer than shown by the PT are mostly just supposition by fans.

[Galvatron]

It sounds like you're just talking about ANH. I'm including TESB and ROTJ when I refer to the OT.

I think the entire trilogy as a whole gave us far more information about what came before than what to expect in the future. In fact, the ending of ROTJ:SE made the Empire's defeat at Endor seem like it was intended (by George Lucas) to be THE END. Hell, he even went on to contradict his own earlier statements and say that Star Wars was always meant to be a six-episode saga about the Tragedy of Darth Vader and that it was over and done with because there was no more story to tell.

[Adam Reynolds]

It sounds like you're just talking about ANH. I'm including TESB and ROTJ when I refer to the OT.

I think the entire trilogy as a whole gave us far more information about what came before than what to expect in the future. In fact, the ending of ROTJ:SE made the Empire's defeat at Endor seem like it was intended (by George Lucas) to be THE END. Hell, he even went on to contradict his own earlier statements and say that Star Wars was always meant to be a six-episode saga about the Tragedy of Darth Vader and that it was over and done with because there was no more story to tell.

In terms of the history of the Clone Wars what else was there? That is what I was referring to.

I agree that the end of ROTJ appeared to be the end of the Empire. The First Order from the new trailers isn't really the traditional Empire.

[Boeing 757]

True, but Disney wants to make money, so the series will go on !!

[Galvatron]

In terms of the history of the Clone Wars what else was there? That is what I was referring to.

The PT as a whole is what I've been referring to. The fall of the Anakin Skywalker and the Jedi; the rise of Darth Vader and the Empire. Clues from the entire OT gave us the basic framework of what the PT would cover and it was certainly more than just a single reference to the Clone Wars in ANH. That's what I based my preconceptions on.

I agree that the end of ROTJ appeared to be the end of the Empire. The First Order from the new trailers isn't really the traditional Empire.

And that's why I'm going into the ST without the same preconceptions that I did with the PT. They're not giving us three new anticlimactic episodes about the New Republic mopping up the remnants of the Empire. No, this new trilogy is about something that was never foreshadowed in the OT.

[Adam Reynolds]

True, but Disney wants to make money, so the series will go on !!

The end of the Empire doesn't mean the end of the series. There is no reason that, without a fully fledged Jedi Order to keep them in line, Dark Side practitioners would not be a threat. This doesn't necessarily mean fully fledged Sith.

The second problem is that in the 30 years after ROTJ, if the galaxy is sufficiently chaotic, it could produce a degree of nostalgia for the Empire. Much the same way it is often commented that Iraq was better off under Sadam Hussein.

The PT as a whole. The fall of the Anakin Skwalker and the Jedi; the rise of Darth Vader and the Empire. Clues from the entire OT gave us the basic framework of what the PT would cover and it was certainly more than just a single reference to the Clone Wars in ANH. That's what I based my preconceptions on.

I was specifically thinking about the idea that a lot of people had about the Cloners being the bad guys in the Clone Wars. I'm not really sure where it came from in the films. I'm pretty sure the source is Timothy Zahn.

I hadn't really thought that much more about Vader's fall. Are you referring mostly to Obi-Wan's discussion in ROTJ? If you are thinking about TPM Anakin in that contradiction I agree completely.

[ray245]

True, but Disney wants to make money, so the series will go on !!

The end of the Empire doesn't mean the end of the series. There is no reason that, without a fully fledged Jedi Order to keep them in line, Dark Side practitioners would not be a threat. This doesn't necessarily mean fully fledged Sith.

The second problem is that in the 30 years after ROTJ, if the galaxy is sufficiently chaotic, it could produce a degree of nostalgia for the Empire. Much the same way it is often commented that Iraq was better off under Sadam Hussein.

Except Star Wars was never meant to be a story that reflect real life. It's at its heart a fairly tale for children, about how good would triumph over evil and the heroes could live happily ever after. It's never meant to be a dark tragedy about a world where peace could never be achieved because the studios wanted to make more money.

Lucas could easily chose to film sequels to the OT in the late 90s and early 2000s. Instead he chose to avoid doing that and give us a story set in a time where we do know was rife with war and suffering. Hell, he even went as far as to depict a Galaxy that had been able to achieve peace for a 1000 years!

Having a sequel trilogy that depicts another massive war for our heroes undermined the core message that Star Wars was about, which to me is the idea that long-lasting peace could be achieved. I think trying to make a sequel about ANOTHER intergalactic war undermines Lucas's philosophy about the nature of Star Wars.

True, but Disney wants to make money, so the series will go on !!

Then Disney would simply not have my money. I haven't spend any money on any Star Wars merchandise in ages and I doubt I would spend any additional money on new Star Wars merchandise any time soon. I'll probably rent a Star Wars blu-ray from a friend if I really want to watch the new movies.

[Boeing 757]

Frankly, it seems rather odd if not outright unbelievable that an entire galaxy-spanning empire could totally disintegrate so quickly in thirty years or however many this film takes place, even if one does take into account that the head of state that everything hinged upon was slayed. Let's face it, despite the Empire not being in existence for too long, its infrastructure was already strongly rooted thanks to the Galactic Republic which had preceded it. Every large state in the history of Earth which fell apart on Earth existed in some smaller form of itself after its breakup, aside from cases where an outside aggressor fully eradicated it. It should be more presentable that the First Order is some kind of splinter group of the old Empire...indeed, it would be cool if we got to see not only a New Republic but also other Imperial splinter groups in this new trilogy.

[ray245]

Frankly, it seems rather odd if not outright unbelievable that an entire galaxy-spanning empire could totally disintegrate so quickly in thirty years or however many this film takes place, even if one does take into account that the head of state that everything hinged upon was slayed. Let's face it, despite the Empire not being in existence for too long, its infrastructure was already strongly rooted thanks to the Galactic Republic which had preceded it. Every large state in the history of Earth which fell apart on Earth existed in some smaller form of itself after its breakup, aside from cases where an outside aggressor fully eradicated it. It should be more presentable that the First Order is some kind of splinter group of the old Empire...indeed, it would be cool if we got to see not only a New Republic but also other Imperial splinter groups in this new trilogy.

But thematically that would be weak. I want the heroes to be able to find peace after a hard-fought struggle. If I want to read more stories about a world filled with perpetual war after the fall of a dictator, I only need to turn towards the Middle East.

[Anacronian]

In truth wouldn't the real war only start after Return of the Jedi?*
wasn't the battle of Endor the first time the rebel alliance engaged in full-scale warfare with the Empire before that the rebels seems to have been restricted to hit and fade attacks?

My guess is that after the victory of Endor and the support that came with it was the point where the Rebels showed themselves as a real threat - and also around that time where the rebel alliance changed name to the resistance since the scope and nature of what they were doing had changed.

*I have not read much of the EU so I don't really know if the EU tell of more and bigger battles with the Empire before Endor.

[ray245]

In truth wouldn't the real war only start after Return of the Jedi?*
wasn't the battle of Endor the first time the rebel alliance engaged in full-scale warfare with the Empire before that the rebels seems to have been restricted to hit and fade attacks?

My guess is that after the victory of Endor and the support that came with it was the point where the Rebels showed themselves as a real threat - and also around that time where the rebel alliance changed name to the resistance since the scope and nature of what they were doing had changed.

*I have not read much of the EU so I don't really know if the EU tell of more and bigger battles with the Empire before Endor.

I don't mind the real war starting after the Battle of Endor, as long as it remains a major turning point which allowed the rebellion to win over the Empire. If all you had is a scenario where the Rebels essentially got caught in a stalemate, or lost after Endor, then it feels pointless to cheer for the Rebels in ROTJ.

[The Romulan Republic]

Frankly, it seems rather odd if not outright unbelievable that an entire galaxy-spanning empire could totally disintegrate so quickly in thirty years or however many this film takes place, even if one does take into account that the head of state that everything hinged upon was slayed. Let's face it, despite the Empire not being in existence for too long, its infrastructure was already strongly rooted thanks to the Galactic Republic which had preceded it. Every large state in the history of Earth which fell apart on Earth existed in some smaller form of itself after its breakup, aside from cases where an outside aggressor fully eradicated it. It should be more presentable that the First Order is some kind of splinter group of the old Empire...indeed, it would be cool if we got to see not only a New Republic but also other Imperial splinter groups in this new trilogy.

Oh for God's sake.

The Empire was only around for a couple of decades when the Emperor died. Why the fuck would it take more than 30 years to collapse?

Sure, its big, but hyperdrive means that bad news, and hostile fleets, travel fast.

And their is precedent for a mighty empire collapsing rather quickly. The fall of the Soviet Union comes to mind, even though the details are very different, of course.

You seem to be thinking in terms of something like the fall of the Roman Empire, but that's far from the only plausible model.

[Galvatron]

Frankly, it seems rather odd if not outright unbelievable that an entire galaxy-spanning empire could totally disintegrate so quickly in thirty years or however many this film takes place, even if one does take into account that the head of state that everything hinged upon was slayed. Let's face it, despite the Empire not being in existence for too long, its infrastructure was already strongly rooted thanks to the Galactic Republic which had preceded it. Every large state in the history of Earth which fell apart on Earth existed in some smaller form of itself after its breakup, aside from cases where an outside aggressor fully eradicated it. It should be more presentable that the First Order is some kind of splinter group of the old Empire...indeed, it would be cool if we got to see not only a New Republic but also other Imperial splinter groups in this new trilogy.

IMO, the disintegration started after the Battle of Yavin. As General Tagge implied, the Empire's "strongly rooted infrastructure" was dependent upon the Imperial Senate's bureaucracy. Without it or the Death Star to prop up the regional governors, I have no trouble imagining that the Empire toppled like a house of cards. The destruction of the second Death Star and the death of the Emperor himself was simply the final nail in its coffin.

[Adam Reynolds]

Except Star Wars was never meant to be a story that reflect real life. It's at its heart a fairly tale for children, about how good would triumph over evil and the heroes could live happily ever after. It's never meant to be a dark tragedy about a world where peace could never be achieved because the studios wanted to make more money.

Lucas could easily chose to film sequels to the OT in the late 90s and early 2000s. Instead he chose to avoid doing that and give us a story set in a time where we do know was rife with war and suffering. Hell, he even went as far as to depict a Galaxy that had been able to achieve peace for a 1000 years!

Having a sequel trilogy that depicts another massive war for our heroes undermined the core message that Star Wars was about, which to me is the idea that long-lasting peace could be achieved. I think trying to make a sequel about ANOTHER intergalactic war undermines Lucas's philosophy about the nature of Star Wars.

Who says this is a full intergalactic war on the scale of the Clone Wars? What makes the First Order dangerous is that they are involved with Dark Side Force users and thus are a long term threat. There is also the problem that it appears that there aren't any proper Jedi to stop them.

The fact that there hadn't been an intergalactic war as of AOTC doesn't mean that there weren't smaller ones. Sio Bibble stated that there hadn't been a full scale war since the formation of the Republic. This was after the Naboo crisis. Presumably a conflict on that scale wasn't unprecedented or even surprising.

Frankly you seem to be looking at these movies from the perspective that you don't want them to be good just to be correct.

Frankly, it seems rather odd if not outright unbelievable that an entire galaxy-spanning empire could totally disintegrate so quickly in thirty years or however many this film takes place, even if one does take into account that the head of state that everything hinged upon was slayed. Let's face it, despite the Empire not being in existence for too long, its infrastructure was already strongly rooted thanks to the Galactic Republic which had preceded it. Every large state in the history of Earth which fell apart on Earth existed in some smaller form of itself after its breakup, aside from cases where an outside aggressor fully eradicated it. It should be more presentable that the First Order is some kind of splinter group of the old Empire...indeed, it would be cool if we got to see not only a New Republic but also other Imperial splinter groups in this new trilogy.

Why would there be Imperial holdouts? Are people going to be evil just for the sake of being evil?

As long as the majority of the Imperial military has the philosophy that they are protecting the state, why would they support the Empire after the New Republic was recreated from the Imperial Senate?

Whatever holdouts existed were presumably defeated by a mix of the expanded Rebel Alliance/New Republic and Imperial defectors. This obviously is what occurred over Jakku.

In truth wouldn't the real war only start after Return of the Jedi?*
wasn't the battle of Endor the first time the rebel alliance engaged in full-scale warfare with the Empire before that the rebels seems to have been restricted to hit and fade attacks?

My guess is that after the victory of Endor and the support that came with it was the point where the Rebels showed themselves as a real threat - and also around that time where the rebel alliance changed name to the resistance since the scope and nature of what they were doing had changed.

*I have not read much of the EU so I don't really know if the EU tell of more and bigger battles with the Empire before Endor.

If you mean Yavin, you are correct. The problem you aren't recognizing is that all insurgencies rest on the support of the people rather than military strength. The Rebel Alliance doesn't have to destroy the entire Imperial military. The simply have to do enough damage to gain significant public support. As the Imperial officer indicated to Darth Vader in ANH, this was happening within the Imperial Senate at the beginning of the OT.

After the disaster for the Empire of losing the Death Star, they were in a position in which they could not hold on to worlds with strong planetary shields all that easily. Combine this with the resentment that would have occurred as a result of the dissolution of the Imperial Senate, and you would have a state in which the Empire's grip was teetering.

There was almost a sense of desperation in TESB with the Empire needing a victory. It is akin to the position that the US was in under Bush in 2002. Going after the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan wasn't enough of an opportunity to show strength in the region. So he targeted Iraq as an "easy" target that no one in the region liked. Similarly the Empire attempted to destroy the Rebel Alliance as an opportunity to show the strength of the Empire. Obviously in both cases it largely failed. In the case of Iraq the US was unprepared for the sectarian violence*. The Rebel Alliance lost fairly heavily at Hoth, but they were still able to get the majority of their key personnel and much of their heavy equipment offworld.

Going to ROTJ, the fact that the Emperor used such a high risk plan against the Rebel Alliance indicates that he couldn't wait for the Death Star to go online before dealing with them. This indicates a great deal of political turmoil within the Empire.
* Even though they shouldn't have been. "It's a quagmire." Spoken by then former-Secretary of Defense Cheney.

Sure, its big, but hyperdrive means that bad news, and hostile fleets, travel fast.

And their is precedent for a mighty empire collapsing rather quickly. The fall of the Soviet Union comes to mind, even though the details are very different, of course.

This actually seems the most likely scenario after the fall of the Empire. Including the part where military officers star selling off their equipment to the highest bidder. It would explain where the First Order gets their resources. At least to start.

The speed of hyperdrive also means that more contemporary Earth examples are probably more accurate. In the case of something like Rome's fall, bad news could only travel as fast as it could be physically carried. In the case of the Empire that means that it could travel across the entire galaxy in days. There is no way that worlds that were already against the Empire on some level would ever support them.

IMO, the disintegration started after the Battle of Yavin. As General Tagge implied, the Empire's "strongly rooted infrastructure" was dependent upon the Imperial Senate's bureaucracy. Without it or the Death Star to prop up the regional governors, I have no trouble imagining that the Empire toppled like a house of cards. The destruction of the second Death Star and the death of the Emperor himself was simply the final nail in its coffin.

I could see certain regional governors holding out in the early days, if they had sufficiently powerful and more importantly loyal fleets and armies*, but the idea that the Empire itself would last more than a year or two beyond ROTJ seems odd. This actually is something the new continuity seems to be following.

* There actually is an interesting thought here. From what we see, despite their appearance, the Imperial military really isn't very competent. Certainly not as skilled as the Rebel Alliance individually. Look at the difference between stormtroopers and Rebel soldiers as shown on Hoth and Endor. Due to the nature of their blasters, stormtroopers almost never aim properly. While they do often show great discipline, they don't show tactical competence. By contrast, Rebel soldiers almost always seem to aim their weapons properly. Despite a massive disadvantage on Hoth they also hold their ground until ordered to evacuate. Contrast this with the squad of stormtroopers Han literally runs into in ANH who immediately panic.

It can also be seen with the discipline shown by the Rebel Alliance at Hoth as opposed to the Empire at Endor. Though it was a trap, the fact that none in the strike team felt the lax security to be odd indicates that a similar level of overconfidence on the part of the Empire is not unusual.

The same can be said for Imperial TIE fighters. Despite a massive numerical advantage in ROTJ, Rebel fighters gain and maintain superiority throughout the battle. When they get in close, Rebel capital ships also are far more effective in their tactics. We also see an Imperial Star Destroyer blunder right into the Rebel ion cannon on Hoth.

[ray245]

Except Star Wars was never meant to be a story that reflect real life. It's at its heart a fairly tale for children, about how good would triumph over evil and the heroes could live happily ever after. It's never meant to be a dark tragedy about a world where peace could never be achieved because the studios wanted to make more money.

Lucas could easily chose to film sequels to the OT in the late 90s and early 2000s. Instead he chose to avoid doing that and give us a story set in a time where we do know was rife with war and suffering. Hell, he even went as far as to depict a Galaxy that had been able to achieve peace for a 1000 years!

Having a sequel trilogy that depicts another massive war for our heroes undermined the core message that Star Wars was about, which to me is the idea that long-lasting peace could be achieved. I think trying to make a sequel about ANOTHER intergalactic war undermines Lucas's philosophy about the nature of Star Wars.

Who says this is a full intergalactic war on the scale of the Clone Wars? What makes the First Order dangerous is that they are involved with Dark Side Force users and thus are a long term threat. There is also the problem that it appears that there aren't any proper Jedi to stop them.

The fact that there hadn't been an intergalactic war as of AOTC doesn't mean that there weren't smaller ones. Sio Bibble stated that there hadn't been a full scale war since the formation of the Republic. This was after the Naboo crisis. Presumably a conflict on that scale wasn't unprecedented or even surprising.

Frankly you seem to be looking at these movies from the perspective that you don't want them to be good just to be correct.

Except we have Star Wars material indicating the exact opposite, telling us that the Rebels never truly won the war as they were immediately hit by idiotic leadership ruining their war effort.

[Galvatron]

From what we see, despite their appearance, the Imperial military really isn't very competent.

I agree with most of your post until I read the above. They were useless against character shields, I'll grant you, but they were deadly against their rebel counterparts at the Battle of Yavin. Also, an argument can be made that they were ordered to allow the Falcon to escape Cloud City so the Executor could recapture them all in space.

Furthemore, the Imperial fleet at the Battle of Endor was ordered by the Emperor to merely prevent the Alliance fleet from escaping. We have no reason to assume that Piett suddenly decided that the tide of the battle was turning and disobeyed the Emperor before his own ship was destroyed. The surviving Imperial fleet at Endor may have actually retreated or surrendered without ever really putting up a decent fight.

[SCRawl]

There was almost a sense of desperation in TESB with the Empire needing a victory. It is akin to the position that the US was in under Bush in 2002. Going after the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan wasn't enough of an opportunity to show strength in the region. So he targeted Iraq as an "easy" target that no one in the region liked. Similarly the Empire attempted to destroy the Rebel Alliance as an opportunity to show the strength of the Empire. Obviously in both cases it largely failed. In the case of Iraq the US was unprepared for the sectarian violence*. The Rebel Alliance lost fairly heavily at Hoth, but they were still able to get the majority of their key personnel and much of their heavy equipment offworld.

Going to ROTJ, the fact that the Emperor used such a high risk plan against the Rebel Alliance indicates that he couldn't wait for the Death Star to go online before dealing with them. This indicates a great deal of political turmoil within the Empire.

These two things don't make much sense to me.

In the first case, TESB was really just about Vader trying to find Luke. Ostensibly he was trying to bring him in to help his boss, but of course Vader had his own ambitions. The rebels were just the eggs in the plot omelette.

As for the Emperor being unable to "wait for the Death Star to go online before dealing with them", well, no, that was the entire point. Had the Death Star been fully operational it would not have been vulnerable to attack, and therefore not a viable lure for the rebels and (more importantly) Luke. The rebels, again, were not particularly significant to Palpatine's long-term planning, though it was convenient to be able to squish them while they were present.

[Adam Reynolds]

From what we see, despite their appearance, the Imperial military really isn't very competent.

I agree with most of your post until I read the above. They were useless against character shields, I'll grant you, but they were deadly against their rebel counterparts at the Battle of Yavin. Also, an argument can be made that they were ordered to allow the Falcon to escape Cloud City so the Executor could recapture them all in space.

That was with every possible advantage in their favor. And even then, apart from Darth Vader and his wingmen, all of the TIE fighters over Yavin were swept aside. Like at Endor, Imperial fighters caused casualties but they never stopped the Rebel fighters from achieving their objectives. On the run on the exhaust port itself, all of the Rebel fighters lost were because of Vader.

It is true that in the cases of the Death Star and Cloud City, it is likely that stormtroopers were ordered to let the Rebels escape. But at several points in those sequences, we see stormtroopers pointlessly expose themselves to return fire. Assuming that they were ordered to let the Rebels escape, that is incredibly foolish. As I said, they show discipline rather than skill.

Even the case of stormtrooper competence, the opening to ANH, shows a lack of tactical creativity. A modern SWAT team would never have made an entry in that fashion. They charge blindly through a choke point. They should have thrown in flash bang grenades before entering. While it could be argued that their initial breaching charge served this purpose, Rebel guards seem to have largely recovered by the point that stormtroopers appear.

Furthemore, the Imperial fleet at the Battle of Endor was ordered by the Emperor to merely prevent the Alliance fleet from escaping. We have no reason to assume that Piett suddenly decided that the tide of the battle was turning and disobeyed the Emperor before his own ship was destroyed. The surviving Imperial fleet at Endor may have actually retreated or surrendered without ever really putting up a decent fight.

I was mostly talking about the fighter combat. Throughout the battle Rebel fighters were largely free to do whatever they wanted. While they took causalities even during the run on the Death Star, Imperial fighters could never stop them from attacking whatever target they wanted to.

In the case of capital ship combat, by the end, when Executor was destroyed, the Empire no longer appeared by be holding back, they increasingly appeared to be getting desperate. It didn't help them. By that point the Rebel Alliance had gained and maintained the initiative.

Even the Death Star gunners showed an astonishing lack of priority targeting. They never fired at Home One, even though it was the largest and most powerful of the Mon Cal Cruisers participating in the battle. Even after being given the order to fire at will, they do not target the most logical priority targets

These two things don't make much sense to me.

In the first case, TESB was really just about Vader trying to find Luke. Ostensibly he was trying to bring him in to help his boss, but of course Vader had his own ambitions. The rebels were just the eggs in the plot omelette.

As for the Emperor being unable to "wait for the Death Star to go online before dealing with them", well, no, that was the entire point. Had the Death Star been fully operational it would not have been vulnerable to attack, and therefore not a viable lure for the rebels and (more importantly) Luke. The rebels, again, were not particularly significant to Palpatine's long-term planning, though it was convenient to be able to squish them while they were present.

That indeed was the focus of both Vader and the Emperor. And they were correct in the sense that he was the most direct threat. Only a Jedi would have a chance against them in personal combat. And I would argue that only a Jedi would be capable of catching them off guard due to their foresight abilities. The problem is that both of them ironically made the same mistake as the Jedi at the rise of the Empire. The Jedi failed to truly realize the fact that Palpatine had amassed such political power. Similarly Palpatine failed to recognize both the military prowess of the Rebel Alliance, with an uncanny ability to pull off clever tactical victories, and the fact that there were deeper underlying poltical problems in the galaxy.

As Tagge and Leia both point out in ANH, without the Imperial Senate, the Imperial bureacracy cannot hold onto the galaxy as a whole. Without a Death Star, there is no way that the Empire would have the strength to challenge shielded planets, if enough decide to rebel. The Imperial fleet cannot possibly lay siege to all of them, especially considering that said crews just might be laying siege to their own worlds. The Death Star, with its relatively much smaller crew requirements, would by comparison be somewhat easy to crew with absolute loyalists.

[Adam Reynolds]

From what we see, despite their appearance, the Imperial military really isn't very competent.

I agree with most of your post until I read the above. They were useless against character shields, I'll grant you, but they were deadly against their rebel counterparts at the Battle of Yavin. Also, an argument can be made that they were ordered to allow the Falcon to escape Cloud City so the Executor could recapture them all in space.

That was with every possible advantage in their favor. And even then, apart from Darth Vader and his wingmen, all of the TIE fighters over Yavin were swept aside. Like at Endor, Imperial fighters caused casualties but they never stopped the Rebel fighters from achieving their objectives. On the run on the exhaust port itself, all of the Rebel fighters lost were because of Vader.

It is true that in the cases of the Death Star and Cloud City, it is likely that stormtroopers were ordered to let the Rebels escape. But at several points in those sequences, we see stormtroopers pointlessly expose themselves to return fire. Assuming that they were ordered to let the Rebels escape, that is incredibly foolish. As I said, they show discipline rather than skill.

Even the case of stormtrooper competence, the opening to ANH, shows a lack of tactical creativity. A modern SWAT team would never have made an entry in that fashion. They charge blindly through a choke point. They should have thrown in flash bang grenades before entering. While it could be argued that their initial breaching charge served this purpose, Rebel guards seem to have largely recovered by the point that stormtroopers appear.

Furthemore, the Imperial fleet at the Battle of Endor was ordered by the Emperor to merely prevent the Alliance fleet from escaping. We have no reason to assume that Piett suddenly decided that the tide of the battle was turning and disobeyed the Emperor before his own ship was destroyed. The surviving Imperial fleet at Endor may have actually retreated or surrendered without ever really putting up a decent fight.

I was mostly talking about the fighter combat. Throughout the battle Rebel fighters were largely free to do whatever they wanted. While they took causalities even during the run on the Death Star, Imperial fighters could never stop them from attacking whatever target they wanted to.

In the case of capital ship combat, by the end, when Executor was destroyed, the Empire no longer appeared by be holding back, they increasingly appeared to be getting desperate. It didn't help them. By that point the Rebel Alliance had gained and maintained the initiative.

Even the Death Star gunners showed an astonishing lack of priority targeting. They never fired at Home One, even though it was the largest and most powerful of the Mon Cal Cruisers participating in the battle. Even after being given the order to fire at will, they do not target the most logical priority targets

These two things don't make much sense to me.

In the first case, TESB was really just about Vader trying to find Luke. Ostensibly he was trying to bring him in to help his boss, but of course Vader had his own ambitions. The rebels were just the eggs in the plot omelette.

As for the Emperor being unable to "wait for the Death Star to go online before dealing with them", well, no, that was the entire point. Had the Death Star been fully operational it would not have been vulnerable to attack, and therefore not a viable lure for the rebels and (more importantly) Luke. The rebels, again, were not particularly significant to Palpatine's long-term planning, though it was convenient to be able to squish them while they were present.

That indeed was the focus of both Vader and the Emperor. And they were correct in the sense that he was the most direct threat. Only a Jedi would have a chance against them in personal combat. And I would argue that only a Jedi would be capable of catching them off guard due to their foresight abilities. The problem is that both of them ironically made the same mistake as the Jedi at the rise of the Empire. The Jedi failed to truly realize the fact that Palpatine had amassed such political power. Similarly Palpatine failed to recognize both the military prowess of the Rebel Alliance, with an uncanny ability to pull off clever tactical victories, and the fact that there were deeper underlying poltical problems in the galaxy.

As Tagge and Leia both point out in ANH, without the Imperial Senate, the Imperial bureacracy cannot hold onto the galaxy as a whole. Without a Death Star, there is no way that the Empire would have the strength to challenge shielded planets, if enough decide to rebel. The Imperial fleet cannot possibly lay siege to all of them, especially considering that said crews just might be laying siege to their own worlds. The Death Star, with its relatively much smaller crew requirements, would by comparison be somewhat easy to crew with absolute loyalists.

[Vance]

(Message posted wrong thread.)