StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Zahn can be forgiven for one simple reason; the support material up to that point he had to work with was also minimumlistic, or if it had large numbers in it, was looked down upon as unrealistic.

^That is a very good point.

In the end, I choose Stackpole, because unlike Anderson, who at least has some battles of several hundreds of starships, Stackpole decided that Coruscant would normally only be defended by a couple of Star Destroyers.

Solauren wrote:Zahn can be forgiven for one simple reason; the support material up to that point he had to work with was also minimumlistic, or if it had large numbers in it, was looked down upon as unrealistic.

That claim is not supported by the facts. Zahn drew upon the West End Games sources which, while minimalist, do not begin to approach his level, at least not as far as the Thrawn trilogy is concerned. Two hundred antiquated Dreadnoughts tipping the galactic power balance, with an Empire still controlling 1/4 of the original Empire's 51+ million worlds and thousands of sectors? A cloning facility churning out 20,000 clones or so a month being a super-important strategic asset and its "children" suddenly becoming ubiquitous in the Imperial war machine? That is too asinine even for the RPG fluff.

Solauren wrote:Zahn can be forgiven for one simple reason; the support material up to that point he had to work with was also minimumlistic, or if it had large numbers in it, was looked down upon as unrealistic.

Bullshit. Zahn's Dreadnaughts were not acknowledged by the RPG to be worth a 3rd or 5th of a Star Destroyer (they're lucky to rate a 10th or 30th). His scary Dark Force is barely equivalent in tonnage to the minimal Star Destroyer complement of a sector at its height. Zahn persisted as well, claiming with Pelleaon as a mouthpiece that the Empire only had 25,000 Star Destroyers at its height. The ISB cites that 24 Star Destroyers are considered minimal for a sector's complement and goes on to state further that the Empire has "thousands of sector groups" (this is further substantiated by the section on regions, stating that regions may range anywhere from "three to thousands of sectors"). Simple math from the ISB dictates that the colonial forces assigned to all the sectors in the Empire cannot contain less than 48,000 Star Destroyer (minimal 24 per sector, with at least two regions each containing at least two thousand sectors). This of course is probably unrealistically low for the sector count and totally discounts other commands - assigned to regions and oversectors, and "all-Empire," strategic, or special commands (like Lord Vader's Death Squadron).

I always took the 25,000 Star Destroyer figure to be the Star Destroyers which weren't attached to the regional commands.

The Dark Force always seemed to be more of a propaganda showcase unit for Thrawn, being attached to his personal command. than anything of actual strategic importance (there's a picture in one of the sourcebooks where Thrawn has at least two dozen star destroyers, with what appear to be a few Star Cruisers in the bargain).

Well, some of the sector groups were greatly understrength, though that could be balanced out by expanded Corewards regional commands. The Elrood Sector fleet had only two Star Destroyers.

Pelranius wrote: Well, some of the sector groups were greatly understrength, though that could be balanced out by expanded Corewards regional commands. The Elrood Sector fleet had only two Star Destroyers.

The outer rim, for example the whole area of Nar Shadaa and Hutt space (Probably more a region or two than a mere sector, the Hutt's had quite a few planets, even if it was minute in the grand scheme of things) had absolutely no Star destroyers, and it wasn't considered that strange for the rim. (Source: Han Solo: The Hutt Gambit)

Thanas wrote:^That is a very good point.

In the end, I choose Stackpole, because unlike Anderson, who at least has some battles of several hundreds of starships, Stackpole decided that Coruscant would normally only be defended by a couple of Star Destroyers.

Actually If I recall correctly, Couscant's defense fleet was supposed to be dramatically weaken by Isard before she left, so as to let them take the planet. For her whole 'Krytos Trap' to work.

Isard's Empire deliberately ceded Coruscant to the Republic per Operation Shadowhand.

Crazedwraith wrote:Actually If I recall correctly, Couscant's defense fleet was supposed to be dramatically weaken by Isard before she left, so as to let them take the planet. For her whole 'Krytos Trap' to work.

While that is true, would it not be reasonable that the Rebels would be suspicious of a capital left with virtually no defences? The novel strongly implies that Coruscant's resources, while weak, were not as outrageous as anyone with a proper sense of scale would consider them; if my memory is to be trusted, Ackbar et al merely thought themselves lucky.

^ Stackpole is still hyper-minimalist, because Isard halved the defenses of Coruscant...from four ISDs to two!

And yet in the previous book she casually dispatched a "Super Star Destroyer" (not Lusankya) to intimidate the commanding general of a medium-sized base. Where the hell was THAT ship for the rest of the X-Wing books?

Anguirus wrote:^ Stackpole is still hyper-minimalist, because Isard halved the defenses of Coruscant...from four ISDs to two!

Ugh, he is even worse than I remembered. I had completely repressed that memory.

Still, Stackpole is not really a bad author; when he writes about characters instead of war or technology, he is actually in the top tier of Star Wars artists.

And yet in the previous book she casually dispatched a "Super Star Destroyer" (not Lusankya) to intimidate the commanding general of a medium-sized base. Where the hell was THAT ship for the rest of the X-Wing books?

Derricote at Blackmoon?

Darth Hoth wrote: Still, Stackpole is not really a bad author; when he writes about characters instead of war or technology, he is actually in the top tier of Star Wars artists.

The king of Mary Sue characterization is a good at writing characters? Put down the crack pipe and step away from the computer.

Stackpole. No, a couple dozen ISDs are not enough to defend Coruscant. And no, a Squadron of X-Wings is NOT capable of damaging a Star Destroyer.

Pelranius wrote:I always took the 25,000 Star Destroyer figure to be the Star Destroyers which weren't attached to the regional commands.

The Dark Force always seemed to be more of a propaganda showcase unit for Thrawn, being attached to his personal command. than anything of actual strategic importance (there's a picture in one of the sourcebooks where Thrawn has at least two dozen star destroyers, with what appear to be a few Star Cruisers in the bargain).

Well, some of the sector groups were greatly understrength, though that could be balanced out by expanded Corewards regional commands. The Elrood Sector fleet had only two Star Destroyers.

It had more than that; and that's a single counterexample. I don't know why when WEG obviously deals more with Rimworld sectors (the ISB is really an internal rebel document on Imperial preparedness and structure) that a single example means we should completely throw out the ISB's statements as opposed to regarding Elrood as a rare exception (inevitable in thousands upon thousands of sectors). Why all the desperation to validate Pelleaon, who is legally considered an incompetent failure. Yes I know all the Zahnites and such are about to descend and say unfair! But his record is terrible, and canon actually establishes that "unlike some military organizations, promotion of Imperial officers is mandatory within a certain amount of time, unless adequate proof of incompetence or dishonesty exists" [emphasis mine, thanks to Publius for the reference] (Galaxy Guide 1: A New Hope). Pelleaon was officially considered incompetent and/or dishonest in order to have failed to be advanced for DECADES. So in light of that, why would we cling to the figure which makes least sense rationally, with plenty of documented sources and circumstantial evidence at the highest canon which refutes it?

Imperial Overlord wrote:

Darth Hoth wrote: Still, Stackpole is not really a bad author; when he writes about characters instead of war or technology, he is actually in the top tier of Star Wars artists.

The king of Mary Sue characterization is a good at writing characters? Put down the crack pipe and step away from the computer.

How is Corran Horn a Mary Sue? He is a weak Jedi who is beaten not only by Luke (which is somewhat evident, given the Jedi Master's power) but also by half-trained Jensaarai, and has huge troubles with Yuuzhan Vong. Yes, he is an uber-pilot, but everyone and their grandmother is in the main SW cast, and he is not even among the top five in the New Republic (below Han, Wedge, Soontir Fel, not to mention Jaina, Luke and the really wanked Jedi *Cough Kyp Durron Cough*). So he gets to lecture Luke Skywalker on how he runs the Jedi Academy... Why not? Given how abysmally retarded KJA made him in that series, the Master needed it. And no one can say Corran never screws up; he does it all the bleeding time.

Really, Corran appears wanked only because as a viewpoint character, he gets to show off more. Somewhat akin to what I have heard referred to as the "Revan Syndrome"; just because a Jedi is shown over a long stretch and pulls off a number of powers, it does not mean that he is the Master of the Universe.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:Why all the desperation to validate Pelleaon, who is legally considered an incompetent failure. Yes I know all the Zahnites and such are about to descend and say unfair! But his record is terrible, and canon actually establishes that "unlike some military organizations, promotion of Imperial officers is mandatory within a certain amount of time, unless adequate proof of incompetence or dishonesty exists" [emphasis mine, thanks to Publius for the reference] (Galaxy Guide 1: A New Hope). Pelleaon was officially considered incompetent and/or dishonest in order to have failed to be advanced for DECADES.

I suppose a Pellaeon apologist could make up the explanation that he had superiors with an axe to grind that wrote abysmal efficiency reports on him for most of his career... Nay, even better, they were jealous of his tactical genius and deliberately held him back for fear that he might eclipse them, just as was the case with the nice and brilliant-but-misunderstood Corporal Daala!

Of course, the point is moot, since the later Expanded Universe decided to go by what the early sources implied about officers with such records...

Stackpole always writes Mary Sues. I never read his Star Wars books because he's a shitty writer with no abilities to write anything but characetures and cardboard saints and I got enough of that reading his Battletech novels. The man can't do characterization to save his life. If Corran Horn is less of a Mary Sue than his previous fare, well that's progress at least. I stopped reading most of the EU a long time ago because it's mostly garbage.

By the way, you get negative points for saying his less wanked than a KJA character. That is the epitome of damning with faint praise.

Imperial Overlord wrote:By the way, you get negative points for saying his less wanked than a KJA character. That is the epitome of damning with faint praise.

I deserved that one. Wonder where I left my seppuku sword...

Still, my general point was that by objective standards, with their character shields et cetera most SW main characters are fairly wanked. Corran is not really worse than many others.

The problem with scale in Star Wars basically breaks down when you realize that the movies are roughly equivalent to a disgruntle Boy Scout Troop from Podunk taking on the US military and winning.

It wasn't so bad in the movies but when you get into galaxy spanning events, the sheer problem of scale rears it's ugly head. Heck, the movies themselves were not immune to this problem. In order for the Rebellion to win in any meaningful time frame post-Endor, you need to either gut the Empire or massively amp up the Rebellion. In neither sense was that really done and so pretty much ever time you touch on numbers, it winds up really dysfunctional.

Of course, ultimately the big problem is that too much of the EU was done with out reference to the kind of historical examples which might have lent it a bit more credibility. No one really gave much consideration to how such a massive, monolithic block as the Galactic Empire could come unglued.

Darth Hoth wrote:Still, my general point was that by objective standards, with their character shields et cetera most SW main characters are fairly wanked. Corran is not really worse than many others.

No he's not and frankly the wangst a lot of writers put Luke, Han and Leia through was at times massively more grating. The problem with Corran is that Michael Stackpole didn't do a good enough job of making that interesting, unlike the movie characters, to avoid the criticism.

Derricote at Blackmoon?

Indeed.

Illuminatus Primus wrote: It had more than that; and that's a single counterexample. I don't know why when WEG obviously deals more with Rimworld sectors (the ISB is really an internal rebel document on Imperial preparedness and structure) that a single example means we should completely throw out the ISB's statements as opposed to regarding Elrood as a rare exception (inevitable in thousands upon thousands of sectors). Why all the desperation to validate Pelleaon, who is legally considered an incompetent failure. Yes I know all the Zahnites and such are about to descend and say unfair! But his record is terrible, and canon actually establishes that "unlike some military organizations, promotion of Imperial officers is mandatory within a certain amount of time, unless adequate proof of incompetence or dishonesty exists" [emphasis mine, thanks to Publius for the reference] (Galaxy Guide 1: A New Hope). Pelleaon was officially considered incompetent and/or dishonest in order to have failed to be advanced for DECADES. So in light of that, why would we cling to the figure which makes least sense rationally, with plenty of documented sources and circumstantial evidence at the highest canon which refutes it?

I wasn't using the Elrood Sector force disposition to suggest it was typical of Imperial territorial deployments. And I have noted that it is most likely that the Core Sector fleets probably were greatly over strengthened compared to the Outer Rim fleets, so its fair to assume that each sector fleet on the galactic level averaged around several dozen star destroyers or so. Then we have to account for the oversector commands, fleets attached to defend various installations, reserves, so the total for the Star Destroyers not under the direct command of High Command would probably total at least in the 75,000 range, most likely more. The 25000 Star Destroyers are most likely those assets directly responsible to High Command instead of answering through the regional chain of commands with the Moffs and all.

I am not validating Pellaeon's military competence or lack off. I am simply just pointing out an in universe explanation for the inconsistency between his comments and the reality of the galaxy. One can't just simply expunge canon without making an effort to try to fit it in.

I am fitting it in; its the word of a senile old loser who was officially and publicly (its not like no one would notice the two-three decade captain) designated as incompetent and a liar. In-universe, that ranks pretty low as far as authoritativeness goes.

Darth Hoth wrote: I deserved that one. Wonder where I left my seppuku sword...

Still, my general point was that by objective standards, with their character shields et cetera most SW main characters are fairly wanked. Corran is not really worse than many others.

I'm sorry, but did you read the same I Jedi that I did? This the same guy who managed to realise that the wanked Kyp durron was going to turn evil and helped to stop the Sith Lord that was going to kill Luke Skywalker with two proton torps..............


How on god earth was that not a Mary Sue? He inserted a character straight into the middle of someone else novel. Its a classic Mary Sue story right there and then.

And let's face it, at least Hanse Davion was LESS Mary Sue with his "I'm a man who shoots pistols with more accuracy than rifles while running, cause I'm a MECHWARRIOR rar!"

Hmmm.... At times, I wonder whether my intense dislike of VIctor Davion is because of Stackpole.

He blew up Kun's temple after he was defeated, Painrack.

PainRack wrote:I'm sorry, but did you read the same I Jedi that I did?

Most likely, as my version was an imported original paperback. Or did you read a translation?

This the same guy who managed to realise that the wanked Kyp durron was going to turn evil

Well, after his rambling that Nomi Sunrider was weak since she did not follow the Dark Side (or whatever), that does not exactly require any superhuman powers of deduction.

and helped to stop the Sith Lord that was going to kill Luke Skywalker with two proton torps..............

Illuminatus addressed this; it was only after the plot was resolved, a kind of petty symbolic revenge against Lord Kun for the beating he took at his hands.

How on god earth was that not a Mary Sue? He inserted a character straight into the middle of someone else novel. Its a classic Mary Sue story right there and then.

Well, he also managed to clean up some of the stupid shit that KJA wrote up in it, so is the insertion really such a bad thing?

And let's face it, at least Hanse Davion was LESS Mary Sue with his "I'm a man who shoots pistols with more accuracy than rifles while running, cause I'm a MECHWARRIOR rar!"

Hmmm.... At times, I wonder whether my intense dislike of VIctor Davion is because of Stackpole.

I am not familiar with BattleTech/MechWarrior, apart from briefly playing one of the computer games a decade or so ago, so I cannot comment on this.