An Analysis of Star Wars Battle Tactics & Vehicular Design Flaws: Part I

[PowerBroker]

On Inept Commanders and Tactical Idiocy: An Analysis of Star Wars Battle Tactics & Vehicular Design Flaws; Part I

 

Part I: Episode I

 

The Trade Federation Blockade

 

This is one of the most absurd notions in the Star Wars movies. The Trade Federation seems to think that a thin ring of battle stations around a planet can stop all inbound vessels. First of all, space combat is played in three dimensions, not two. Ships can easily dodge the blockade by merely entering the planet from a different angle. The only way to effectively blockade a planet is full spherical coverage, which the Viceroy didn’t have. Second of all, the idiot Naboo launched their ship straight at the blockade. How dumb can they get? If they moved their AOA up about 90° and then maneuvered around the blockade, they’d be home free. But no, let’s fly straight at a battle station.

 

The Trade Federation Battle Station

 

This is one of the most poorly designed vessels I have ever seen. Exceptional shielding on the outside, the vessel is equipped with turrets that just can’t track. The anti-fighter defenses are a disgrace, and the ship follows a pattern similar to the Death Stars. Obviously, all tactical knowledge has been lost on the antagonists. Furthermore, how can a lone fighter enter an open docking bay, maneuver through several layers of defenses unscathed, and then magically find a reactor core. It’s absolutely absurd. Anti-fighter defenses should have been emplaced in the bay, like the turret we saw in the beginning of the movie. And if you’ll notice, the battle droids didn’t even fire until they had advanced to super-close range. They could have easily destroyed the fighter from where it first landed. Also, why the hell is the reactor core not armored and shielded from all angles?!? Any ship designer worth his marbles knows that the reactor has to be in the most heavily armored part of the ship, and never open to a clear firing lane. I’ll bet that a single cruise missile could have taken down the DCS, because of the poor tactical design of the antagonist’s battle stations.

 

Very Poor Defense of the Palace

 

In the last scene, it is obvious that the Neimodians were total dimwits. They had captured a party of the Naboo’s best soldiers, and knew that another heavily armed party was engaging their forces and moving towards, and all they had to defend themselves were a handful of inept droids? They should have had four droidekas, minimum. They had four anyway, what happened to those destroyers? This goes to show that will smart tactics and proper defense, the Trade Federation would have easily remained in control of the planet.

 

OOM-9 and his utter lack of Strategy

 

While the final battle between the Gungans and the Trade Federation may have appeared to be solid strategically, it was actually an unrealistic and highly flawed battle. While the Gungun’s battle tactics were suicidal and inefficient, they were necessary to create a sufficiently large diversion with the highest likelihood of survival. However, OOM-9 proved himself to be a poor tactical commander. He deployed his troops in a fashion similar to the large battles of the middle ages. Artillery behind, troops in front, all in straight lines begging to be slaughtered. The best way to have deployed his troops would have been in a pincer movement, with most of the battle droids attacking from the front, and the droidekas and some of the officer battle droids attacking from the sides. This would have hit them in both their shielded and unshielded areas. The droidekas could slaughter the exposed troops, while the front lines would knock down the brunt of the assault force. Once the shield generators went down, the enemy would already be virtually surrounded, and would be forced to retreat through a narrow column. This column would have been saturated with tanks and more droids, secretly air transported in while the battle raged. Of course, this would mean mass slaughter of the Gunguns, and thus it would never happen. However, these poor tactics further exemplify the ineptitude of the Trade Federation.

 

I just wrote this in a span of fifteen minutes while late at night, so please forgive me for any errors I made, and for some of my poorer explanations.

 

Comments? Criticism? Discussion?

[JediNyt]

OMF.

 

The blockade had enough ships to shoot anyone who tried to enter Naboo air space. You dont see all the ships you only see a few in a particular view of the planet. When the queens ship escaped it was cause the pilot was extremely good, the ship was small, and the Federation wasnt expecting them.

 

The federation made fine ships. The reactor was deap in the interior. The only way to get to it is to blast the hull open or fly into the ship. You dont know what the whole ship looks like inside. The shields took a pounding, a fighter flew in which is very possible, the droids didnt need to shoot the ship. It was disabled and they apparantly intended to capture not destroy. The powerful torpedos punctured the reactor which is deap in the ship so who would think to hassle with a shield in there? The Empire uses all the knowledge of flaws in past ships and makes better ones.

 

Naboo is a peaceful planet. Who would ever think theyd be attacked? Just like Alderan. They dont like to fight and are not threatened so minimal security is fine for them. Ill bet that the people in the Naboo military are the only people who have guns on the planet. Naboo was invaded cause Palpatine was Senator there. He used the invasion to eventually make himself Chancellor.

 

Battle droids are mass produced and follow only direct orders. Unlike clones who can think creatively as Lama Su so well put it. The Federation guys arent brilliant tacticians. Theyre rich cowardly politicians. Walk, shoot, follow orders. Thats what battle droids do.

 

I dont know what your expecting from all this. You typed so much and its just critizism. For your arguments to work youd have to see into the future. And only Jedi can slightly do that. You need to use more logic. You dont see all the ships around the planet cause you cant ever be in a position to see them all. Btw when they return to Naboo and they only see one ship its cause the rest of the fleet left cause there was no need for them. They were doing fine with minimal ships. No one tried to leave cause they were captured and no one tried to enter cause the blockade was legal and could not legally be interfered with. It all makes sense. You need to pay more attention to whats going on and why. Im not insulting you Im suggesting good advice. No worries.

[ET Warrior]

I agree that the battle droids had poor battle strategy, but that's the reason that clone troopers are more effective than droid troopers. They can think creatively and come up with ideas to counter enemy tactics. Droids cannot. They shoot and try to overwhelm the enemy with firepower.

As for anti-fighter tactics on federation battleships, capital ships are not designed to destroy fighters, they are primarily used to destroy other big ships. The droid fighters job was to take down the naboo fighter pilots. that's why they had so many of them, to protect themselves.

[Kryllith]

I. I agree with JediNyt that there were probably numerous other ships that we did not see given the limited few point. They wouldn't even have to be the large battleships. Squadrons of fighters could have orbited the planet and then come back for refuelling as needed.

 

II. I agree that the anti-fighter defenses aren't that good, but that's not that surprising since they're most likely designed for destroying larger ships. Heck, no capital ships seem to have good anti-fighter weaponry, they rely on fighters to dogfight and basically fire flak in scatter patterns hoping to get a lucky shot. As for the droids/interior turrets, I had the assumption that the TF figured the fighter was out of commission and wanted to capture it. I will agree that the main reactor was a bit unprotected, but are we even sure he hit the main reactor? He could have just as easily hit something that could have set of a chain reaction to the reactor (and just interpret it as him hitting the reactor itself).

 

III. IIRC, after they captured Padme (and had taken their weapons away), her double showed up and the droids were ordered to capture her, which gave Padme enough leeway to capture the Viceroy. The droids most likely are programmed to prevent any harm from coming to the Viceroy, including not attacking if someone's got the Viceroy dead to rights (as Padme and crew did). As for the Droidika, I think they were still out in the hall. After releaving Padme and crew of their weapons, the Viceroy probably felt he didn't need them crammed into his chambers...

 

IV. I'm more curious about the reasons behind deploying the droids in the first place. If the droids could walk through the shield, then why couldn't they just drive the AATs and the Assault Mechs through the shields...?

 

Kryllith

[ET Warrior]

I think the reason tanks cannot penetrate the shield is that they hover. I think that you must be grounded to be able to move through a defense shield of that sort. Which is why lasers and projectiles cannot penetrate, and why the empire landed their walkers way out past the shield generator in ESB, because they had to walk through the shield, and not land through it.

[Jedi_Monk]

IV. I'm more curious about the reasons behind deploying the droids in the first place. If the droids could walk through the shield, then why couldn't they just drive the AATs and the Assault Mechs through the shields...?

Don't know... but that was the way that the Empire got its AT-ATs and AT-STs inside of the Hoth shield in Empire... they just landed outside and walked on through. Maybe it has something to do with droids being a lot cheaper to produce and replace than their battle tanks

 

[Darth_Vader_27]

all of the orginal post is pretty much critisism and needs to be though about in a logical manner like nyt said and ET Warrior i agree with you that the reason for the tanks not able to move through was due to the tanks not being grounded

 

[PowerBroker]

Originally posted by JediNyt

The blockade had enough ships to shoot anyone who tried to enter Naboo air space. You dont see all the ships you only see a few in a particular view of the planet.

 

As the screenshots below clearly illustrate, there were huge gaps in the blockade. There is no reason to suspect that the blockade would be concentrated on one side of the planet, since all sides are equally acceptable for landing. The thin ring of ships was not enough to project sufficient firepower to stop a ship from coming in at an angle not covered. While fighters could have been used to supplement the blockade, the sheer surface area needing coverage would have required thousands of fighters. Besides, fighters aren't very effective against the shields of capital ships. They would be swatted down like flies by a well guarded supply convoy. And the real meat of the blockade, the battle stations, would not be able to offer support.

 

Blockade (with zones inserted in Photoshop)

 

Broad View of the Blockade

 

View of the Lower Planet

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

The reactor was deap in the interior.

 

Yet all that was protecting the reactor (or, as Kryllith pointed out, something connected to the reactor) was a thin blast door. No heavy armor, no shields. With the blast door open, as it was, a single smart cruise missile could have penetrated the hangar, went through the open blast door, and destroyed the reactor. If the blast door was closed, several cruise missiles could have done the job.

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

The only way to get to it is to blast the hull open or fly into the ship.

 

Or fire a cruise missile into the ship, a viable option. Even today's technology could accomplish that. If the Naboo had even something that resembled a capable navy, they could have destroyed the DCS. The point is, leaving a reactor core exposed like that is one of the only individual things that would be capable of having a ship design summarily rejected. It is common knowledge that such a design is fatally flawed.

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

You dont know what the whole ship looks like inside.

 

And that matters how?

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

The shields took a pounding, a fighter flew in which is very possible, the droids didnt need to shoot the ship. It was disabled and they apparantly intended to capture not destroy.

 

The open bay wasn't shielded. It couldn't be, since fighters were constantly shuffling in and out. In fact, nothing got through the ship's shields, as was aptly stated by the deceased commander of the station. The fighter flew into an unshielded fighter bay, which should have led to a dead end. As for the droids not destroying the fighter, sure they wanted to capture it. But when a potentially dangerous fighter is within shooting distance of your reactor core, I don't think it would take much thought to order the ship destroyed immediately.

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

The powerful torpedos punctured the reactor which is deap in the ship so who would think to hassle with a shield in there?

 

The reactor core should always be in the most heavily shielded and armored part of the ship, and never given a direct line of fire into space. The reactor should have been given shields precisely because it had a virtually open line of sight into space. With the exception of the blast doors, it had no protection whatsoever. As for depth, depth is irrelevant. Even with the smart missiles of today, and especially of the technological level these civilizations have achieved, missiles could be guided as deep into the core of the ship as need be.

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

The Empire uses all the knowledge of flaws in past ships and makes better ones.

 

So that's why there's a clear line of fire into the reactor cores of both Death Stars. I see, silly me.

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

Naboo is a peaceful planet. Who would ever think theyd be attacked? Just like Alderan. They dont like to fight and are not threatened so minimal security is fine for them. Ill bet that the people in the Naboo military are the only people who have guns on the planet.

 

Maybe someone would connect two and two together when a huge Gungun army advanced towards the Federation, and Queen Amidala goes missing with a complement of soldiers. Besides which, wouldn't you vamp up security when the armor column outside the palace is attacked and destroyed. The Viceroy doesn't even surround himself with droidekas when he's informed that there is an assault on the palace. Only a fool would be so confident in a bunch of inept battle droids.

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

Battle droids are mass produced and follow only direct orders. Unlike clones who can think creatively as Lama Su so well put it. The Federation guys arent brilliant tacticians. Theyre rich cowardly politicians. Walk, shoot, follow orders. Thats what battle droids do.

 

Actually, the battle droids are commanded by OOM-9, who obviously was built to command. If the creators had any sense they should have given him superior tactical skills, so that he could fight creatively.

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

I dont know what your expecting from all this.

 

I wanted to type an expository to discuss the failing of the antagonists military, and to initiate a discussion.

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

For your arguments to work youd have to see into the future.

 

No, you'd have to have common sense. Which most people have, even the antagonists.

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

And only Jedi can slightly do that.

 

Jedi, Sith, and anyone with a sufficient midi-chlorian count.

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

You dont see all the ships around the planet cause you cant ever be in a position to see them all.

 

Your point? As my screenshots clearly indicate, much of the planet was not covered by the blockade. Show me an image to the contrary, and I will concede the point.

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

Btw when they return to Naboo and they only see one ship its cause the rest of the fleet left cause there was no need for them.

 

Yes, and this contradicts what I said because...?

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

No one tried to leave cause they were captured and no one tried to enter cause the blockade was legal and could not legally be interfered with.

 

Where did you find out that Naboo was captured before the Republic Ambassadors arrived? Also, just because a blockade was legal doesn't mean that it is illegal to run it. You'd need evidence to assert that.

 

Originally posted by JediNyt

You need to pay more attention to whats going on and why.

 

It seems that you need to pay more attention, not me.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

As for anti-fighter tactics on federation battleships, capital ships are not designed to destroy fighters, they are primarily used to destroy other big ships. The droid fighters job was to take down the naboo fighter pilots. that's why they had so many of them, to protect themselves.

 

Capital ships are designed to be able to destroy fighters with ease. That is the primary role of the cruiser, and the ancillary role of the other ships in a fleet. Almost all ships are equipped with some anti-fighter weaponry, and many are very effective against fighters. Ships should not have to depend fully on support from specialized vessels. They should have the ability to do what the specialized vessels do, just on a smaller scale. This is a cornerstone doctrine of design. Relying completely on other ships, as these battle stations do, is very stupid. A mixture of tactical fighters and strike fighters is a very strong combination against this type of deficiency, and ignoring this threat is pure idiocy from the ship's designers.

 

Originally posted by Kryllith

I agree with JediNyt that there were probably numerous other ships that we did not see given the limited few point. They wouldn't even have to be the large battleships. Squadrons of fighters could have orbited the planet and then come back for refuelling as needed.

 

Originally posted by PowerBroker

As the screenshots below clearly illustrate, there were huge gaps in the blockade. There is no reason to suspect that the blockade would be concentrated on one side of the planet, since all sides are equally acceptable for landing. The thin ring of ships was not enough to project sufficient firepower to stop a ship from coming in at an angle not covered. While fighters could have been used to supplement the blockade, the sheer surface area needing coverage would have required thousands of fighters. Besides, fighters aren't very effective against the shields of capital ships. They would be swatted down like flies by a well guarded supply convoy. And the real meat of the blockade, the battle stations, would not be able to offer support.

 

Blockade (with zones inserted in Photoshop)

 

Broad View of the Blockade

 

View of the Lower Planet

 

Originally posted by Kryllith

II. I agree that the anti-fighter defenses aren't that good, but that's not that surprising since they're most likely designed for destroying larger ships. Heck, no capital ships seem to have good anti-fighter weaponry, they rely on fighters to dogfight and basically fire flak in scatter patterns hoping to get a lucky shot.

 

The Aegis Cruiser has some of the most advanced and effective anti-fighter weaponry in the world. The Standard missile coupled with the Spy-1 is absolutely devastating against fighters and bombers. Many types of destroyers also share this type of very effective SAM, as do a good portion of other classes of ships. While fighter do carry the heaviest AA burden, modern capital ships can shred fighter too. As for how this impacts the realm of space combat, modern naval strategy is almost a guaranteed carryover to space combat, with ships being designed to fight in 3D rather than 2D.

 

Originally posted by Kryllith

As for the droids/interior turrets, I had the assumption that the TF figured the fighter was out of commission and wanted to capture it.

 

I wouldn't make that assumption because of the very real possibility of a cataclysmic explosion engulfing if the ship were to start up again and fire on the main reactor is whatever that thing was.

 

Originally posted by Kryllith

I will agree that the main reactor was a bit unprotected, but are we even sure he hit the main reactor? He could have just as easily hit something that could have set of a chain reaction to the reactor (and just interpret it as him hitting the reactor itself).

 

Whatever it was, it clearly caused the massive explosion and should under no circumstances have been so exposed. It should have been treated as a main reactor would be treated today.

 

Originally posted by Kryllith

III. IIRC, after they captured Padme (and had taken their weapons away), her double showed up and the droids were ordered to capture her, which gave Padme enough leeway to capture the Viceroy. The droids most likely are programmed to prevent any harm from coming to the Viceroy, including not attacking if someone's got the Viceroy dead to rights (as Padme and crew did). As for the Droidika, I think they were still out in the hall. After releaving Padme and crew of their weapons, the Viceroy probably felt he didn't need them crammed into his chambers...

 

Perhaps you're right, but you have to remember that the Viceroy was monitoring the battle from a command console, and was probably (or at least should have been) aware that there were two groups inside the palace. So in the interest of prudence, keeping a few droidekas inside the chambers would have been smart. That way, the people who had been captured wouldn't have a chance to initiated any security measures they might have had in place during the confusion. I wouldn't put it past even a peaceful planet to have a few hidden guns, turrets, or any number of security features built into innocuous places. And I certainly wouldn't trust group of inept droids to protect my from it.

 

Originally posted by Kryllith

IV. I'm more curious about the reasons behind deploying the droids in the first place. If the droids could walk through the shield, then why couldn't they just drive the AATs and the Assault Mechs through the shields...?

 

Would it really have been smart to expose the AATs and MTTs to direct heavy weapons fire? As is seen, the guns have guns capable of knocking out the ATTs in a single shot, and all they require is that the ATTs be close enough to fire at accurately. To protect the AATs and MTTs, they would have to be used at long distance. And I guess the fact that it hovers is why it can't get through, but I really don't know.

 

Originally posted by Darth_Vader_27

all of the orginal post is pretty much critisism and needs to be though about in a logical manner

 

How didn't I think in a logical manner? I have found mounds of evidence from the movie that supports my view. Much of my opinion is also supported by logic and common sense. And what's wrong with criticism, anyway?

 

Thanks for the response everyone.

[ET Warrior]

Capital ships are designed to be able to destroy fighters with ease. That is the primary role of the cruiser, and the ancillary role of the other ships in a fleet. Almost all ships are equipped with some anti-fighter weaponry, and many are very effective against fighters. Ships should not have to depend fully on support from specialized vessels. They should have the ability to do what the specialized vessels do, just on a smaller scale. This is a cornerstone doctrine of design. Relying completely on other ships, as these battle stations do, is very stupid. A mixture of tactical fighters and strike fighters is a very strong combination against this type of deficiency, and ignoring this threat is pure idiocy from the ship's designers.

 

Show me an example of a starwars capital ship that is effective against fighters. Something in the movies. A SUPER star destroyer was taken down by a combined total of 3 A-wings, fighters destroyed BOTH death stars. And as for Rebel capital ships, they were not very effective at destroying the empires fighters in the battle of endor. That was left to the other fighters. Star wars capital ships are designed to fight other capital ships, and try to get lucky and hit fighters. Shooting down snub fighters in the star wars universe with the big guns of a capital ship is extremely difficult. The snub fighters are extremely fast, agile and they have almost unlimited range of motion. Thusly you need to have something equally as agile and movable to be effective at bringing them down.

 

 

And as for the blockade, i believe patrolling squadrons of Droid fighters would do the trick to cover it. As we saw from the single droid control ship, they probably had around a hundred droid fighters alone, an entire fleet of ships would have much much more. And there wouldn't be any armed convoys coming through, because naboo doesn't have a military. They have their limited naboo fighters and that is IT. any ships trying to pass through would be picked up by their radar and they would pursue. The droid fighters would be faster than any freighters or such and could simply follow them and slowly eat through their shields and hull. Flying right past a capital ship was probably the smartest thing to do since the queens ship was unarmed but maneuverable enough to stand a chance of avoiding the ships heavy fire. They would not have survived against droid fighters.

[PowerBroker]

Originally posted by ET Warrior

Show me an example of a starwars capital ship that is effective against fighters. Something in the movies. A SUPER star destroyer was taken down by a combined total of 3 A-wings, fighters destroyed BOTH death stars. And as for Rebel capital ships, they were not very effective at destroying the empires fighters in the battle of endor. That was left to the other fighters. Star wars capital ships are designed to fight other capital ships, and try to get lucky and hit fighters. Shooting down snub fighters in the star wars universe with the big guns of a capital ship is extremely difficult. The snub fighters are extremely fast, agile and they have almost unlimited range of motion. Thusly you need to have something equally as agile and movable to be effective at bringing them down.

 

I was talking about capital ships in general, not specifically in the Star Wars universe. Just because most Star Wars capital ships are ineffective against fighters doesn't mean that should not be considered a deficiency. It should be considered a design flaw, which I classified it as such. Unless you can show that not being effective against fighters is not a difficiency in these capital ships, my point stands. And if I write any follow-ups, I will certainly include this as a fault, as it well should be.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

And as for the blockade, i believe patrolling squadrons of Droid fighters would do the trick to cover it. As we saw from the single droid control ship, they probably had around a hundred droid fighters alone, an entire fleet of ships would have much much more. And there wouldn't be any armed convoys coming through, because naboo doesn't have a military. They have their limited naboo fighters and that is IT. any ships trying to pass through would be picked up by their radar and they would pursue. The droid fighters would be faster than any freighters or such and could simply follow them and slowly eat through their shields and hull. Flying right past a capital ship was probably the smartest thing to do since the queens ship was unarmed but maneuverable enough to stand a chance of avoiding the ships heavy fire. They would not have survived against droid fighters.

 

a. Mercenaries can be hired to defend shipping convoys. Protection can also be provided by the government shipping goods to Naboo. Just because Naboo's armed forces are weak doesn't mean external forces can't supplement them. The droid fighters are very weak. Their only appearant armaments are several lasers. A few guided missile cruisers could dispatch even hoards of them quite easily.

 

b. Where in the movie does it say that the Naboo navy is only composed of fighters?

[ET Warrior]

Is there any indication in starwars that there are mercenaries with missile cruisers? Is there any indication that there ARE missile cruisers in Star Wars? And why would mercenaries have any reason to try to ship things to naboo?

 

And as for Naboo's naval forces....if they DID have ships bigger than the fighters why wouldn't they try to get THOSE into space to take down the control ship?

 

And not having anti-fighter capabilities on starwars ships isn't a design flaw, it's a near impossibility. Without the maneuvering capabilities of a starfighter keeping those agile-quickly-moving-in-any-direction starfighters targeted is quite difficult. You will however notice that they still succeed often enough to make a direct assault on a capital ship in a fighter not the best idea if your goal is to live a long life. The Rebel alliance lost all but 3 of it's fighters in the first attack on the death star.

[PowerBroker]

Originally posted by ET Warrior

Is there any indication in starwars that there are mercenaries with missile cruisers? Is there any indication that there ARE missile cruisers in Star Wars?

 

While there is no direct indication of missile cruisers existing in the Star Wars universe, it would be very unrealistic if they don't exist. Missile cruisers are extremely effective, and any balanced navy would be able to make excellent use of them.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

And why would mercenaries have any reason to try to ship things to naboo?

 

Hired to protect trade convoys, perhaps?

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

And as for Naboo's naval forces....if they DID have ships bigger than the fighters why wouldn't they try to get THOSE into space to take down the control ship?

 

Maybe because they were under heavy guard or were inaccessable. Maybe they were knocked out by the initial invasion elements.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

And not having anti-fighter capabilities on starwars ships isn't a design flaw, it's a near impossibility. Without the maneuvering capabilities of a starfighter keeping those agile-quickly-moving-in-any-direction starfighters targeted is quite difficult.

 

Light turrets can auto-track without the ship moving. Missiles like the ones on Jango's ship can take out even the most agile fighter. Waves of those missiles would do a much better job of decimating enemy fighters than weak interceptors. Computer guided turrets with smart enough tracking can project a wall of fire than can engulf a small fighter. Depending on external fighter support without having even the capability of successfully engaging a group of strike fighters is most certainly a design flaw; especially if those fighters had anti-fighter support/

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

You will however notice that they still succeed often enough to make a direct assault on a capital ship in a fighter not the best idea if your goal is to live a long life. The Rebel alliance lost all but 3 of it's fighters in the first attack on the death star.

 

I wonder which cost more: a few squadrons of fighters or a battle station the size of a small moon...

[Plo_Koon_27]

you got it ET warrior!

 

[lukeiamyourdad]

1-Star wars Capital ships are made to be bad against fighters

2-there really is a cruising missile. the naboo used Proton torpedoes which are not good against fighters and better against cap ships.

3-As for the mercenaries, I don't see the need for them. those N-1 could protect trade convoys so no need for mercenaries.

 

 

The only thing I don't really understand:

 

when the naboo cruiser got against the blockade, why didn't they simply launch a swarm of droid fighters?

[PowerBroker]

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad

1-Star wars Capital ships are made to be bad against fighters

 

Which was the complaint I made...

 

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad

2-there really is a cruising missile. the naboo used Proton torpedoes which are not good against fighters and better against cap ships.

 

Those aren't cruise missiles, actually. They don't appear to be programmable.

 

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad

3-As for the mercenaries, I don't see the need for them. those N-1 could protect trade convoys so no need for mercenaries.

 

Droid fighters would have devoured a Naboo fighter escort, if that is what you're referring to.

[lukeiamyourdad]

Proton Torpedoes can be programmable(I think). At least in the flight sims they followed their targets.

 

As for Droid Fighters devouriing N-1s. Those same Droid fighters can devour a mercenaries ship.

[ET Warrior]

Originally posted by PowerBroker

 

While there is no direct indication of missile cruisers existing in the Star Wars universe, it would be very unrealistic if they don't exist. Missile cruisers are extremely effective, and any balanced navy would be able to make excellent use of them.

 

But in every single major space battle shown in star wars there has been absolutely no indication of ANY capital ship making use of homing missiles. Therefore i am forced to conclude they do not exist. If they DID, the empire would unquestionably have made use of them in the battle of Endor.

 

Hired to protect trade convoys, perhaps?

 

 

What trade convoys? I dont think any other systems need to trade with Naboo so badly they would be willing to risk their shipments and/or go to the expense of hiring mercenaries.

Maybe because they were under heavy guard or were inaccessable. Maybe they were knocked out by the initial invasion elements.

Naboo is a peaceful planet. They dont have an army, only volunteers, and i dont think they have an interest in developing massive ships of war. I suppose that IS speculation, but one that I believe to be correct.

 

Light turrets can auto-track without the ship moving. Missiles like the ones on Jango's ship can take out even the most agile fighter. Waves of those missiles would do a much better job of decimating enemy fighters than weak interceptors. Computer guided turrets with smart enough tracking can project a wall of fire than can engulf a small fighter. Depending on external fighter support without having even the capability of successfully engaging a group of strike fighters is most certainly a design flaw; especially if those fighters had anti-fighter support/

 

 

I wonder which cost more: a few squadrons of fighters or a battle station the size of a small moon...

 

The fact that no starfighter we've yet seen aside from Jango's and the fact that no capital ship i've seen have used those missiles leads me to believe they are either very rare, or VERY expensive and not cost efficient. Jango is an extremely wealthy bounty hunter who can afford such commodities.

 

No computer can predict what a human pilot will do when flying in all 3 dimensions. They could go up down left right straight, flip quick and go backwards. And a human manning the guns could do no better. Light turrets can move, yes, but a competent pilot will not allow himself to be in the view of any one turret on a capital ship for an extended period of time. Come in at the ship at an oblique angle as fast as you can, jinking the entire way, fire of what you will at it, and fly out again.

 

I'm not saying that capital ships have no anti-fighter abilities. They do. The Naboo fighters would have been decimated against that control ship without anakin. They couldn't penetrate the shields and they were getting picked to pieces by fighters and big turrets alike.

 

And as to anakin destroying the reactor core. Yes, trade federation design flaw. But one that would not be easy to exploit. It would take someone with either immense piloting abilities or the aid of the force (or both) to accomplish it. The same can be said for both deathstars. Nobody but luke would have made that shot on the first one. And the second one was destroyed because Ewok rocks are lethal to stormtroopers.

[Tyrion]

Actually, I agree with PowerBroker. Since the trade federation is MUCH richer than Jango Fett, they could've easily put missle launchers on thier ships. Also, the U.S. can make a mass of smart missles effeciently and cheaply, so I bet a far better technological force could make them both efficient and cheaper.

 

Why couldnt capital ships have anti-fighter guns? Ships have anti air and anti ship weapons, so all they have to do is put anti-fighter turrets on the bottom.

 

For trying to control a planet,the trade federation sure have poor partoling. Two interceptors could destroy Lady Luck,since apparent they didnt add any cannons at all...

 

I think if I heard that there was an invasion,and i was in a palace,and if I knew I was important,I bet my scrawny ass that I'd put a ton of defenses around me.

 

As for the reactor, I think that no matter what, no one would be dumb enough to not put a strong alloy and tons of shields around the reactor.It's like leaving a open spot in a nuclear reactor!And they would definitatly have enough money.

 

Also, I am wondering why infantry are so important here.... I mean, why wouldnt the trade federation just bomb the palace and stuff?

[boinga1]

Originally posted by Tyrion

Also, I am wondering why infantry are so important here.... I mean, why wouldnt the trade federation just bomb the palace and stuff? [/b]

 

If you mean when the Queen attacked...then its cuz the VICEROY WAS INSIDE THE PALACE and he would be very unhappy to learn that his droid armies blew him up.

[ET Warrior]

Actually, I agree with PowerBroker. Since the trade federation is MUCH richer than Jango Fett, they could've easily put missle launchers on thier ships. Also, the U.S. can make a mass of smart missles effeciently and cheaply, so I bet a far better technological force could make them both efficient and cheaper.

They are certainly rich, but they are not warriors, they don't know anything about war. Plus, they might not have the contacts needed to get those kinds of torpedos, AND they might not be made by a company that can mass produce them. Unknown, what IS known is that there are no missile ships.

 

Why couldnt capital ships have anti-fighter guns? Ships have anti air and anti ship weapons, so all they have to do is put anti-fighter turrets on the bottom.

Because in star wars space battles there is no such thing as anti-fighter guns, because they cannot make them as effective as fighter to fighter combat. Snub fighters in space are too fast, maneuverable, and have a great field of motion.

 

I think if I heard that there was an invasion,and i was in a palace,and if I knew I was important,I bet my scrawny ass that I'd put a ton of defenses around me.

 

Perhaps you should watch that scene again. The viceroy had enough defenses still at the palace to protect him. The way up through the hallways had tons of droids, AND when the queen finally made it to the throne room they ended up surrounded by droidekas and battle droids. Only the clever disguise of her handmaided allowed them to remain around the viceroy while he was relatively undefended. But he had no reason to suspect them able to to anything, as they had no guns. Without the queens hidden weapons they still couldn't have done anything.

 

Also, I am wondering why infantry are so important here.... I mean, why wouldnt the trade federation just bomb the palace and stuff?

All armys have infantry. Simply bombing does no good. Look at Vietnam. We bombed the hell out of north vietnam to absolutely no avail. And the Trade federation couldn't just comb in with bombs flying, because they NEEDED the queen to sign their treaty or they were going to be in big trouble when the senate found out.

[PowerBroker]

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad

Proton Torpedoes can be programmable(I think). At least in the flight sims they followed their targets.

 

Active and passively guided munitions are very different things. Only preprogrammed and remotely guided missiles can be considered the cruise missiles I was referring to, since an actively guiding strategic long range cruise missile is a contradiction in terms. From what I can gather (both empirically and through logical reasoning), proton torpedoes are actively guided munitions capable of pursuing a non static target without support or external guidance. This type of munition is not a cruise missile, since it is not incapable of delivering a precision strike against a static target out of sensory range (save if it had an artificial intelligence program on board, which I highly doubt).

 

I am led to classify the proton torpedo as such due to several factors. In Episode One, the viewers see Anakin Skywalker, after recovering from the temporary shutdown of his star fighter, firing at the droids. He starts by firing laser cannons, and then attempting to destroy them with proton torpedoes. However, the torpedoes had not been assigned a target by the main computer, and thus had to actively seek one. They therefore changed their vector, and homed in on the reactor core, or a constituent of the reactor system. If they had not been active missiles, they would have not changed course, and probably would have slammed into the droids the star fighter was pointed at.

 

Besides that empirical evidence, logical reason further solidifies my classification. It is only logical that such a torpedo, obviously intended to have primary targets consisting of space vessels and static targets within sensor range, would be an actively guided missile with self adaptability. Besides making very poor tactical weapons, cruise missiles are by design unfit for combat against agile and dynamic targets. They have no place serving as an AA weapon, except against static targets such as the DCS or a large cruiser. Instead, the most intelligent choice would be an actively guiding, terminally homing missile. These missiles are completely dynamic and adaptable, capable of tracking agile and fast moving targets. They fit the profile of the proton torpedo precisely, and are the natural choice for a missile of its type.

 

That leads me to conclude that proton torpedoes are not cruise missiles.

 

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad

Those same Droid fighters can devour a mercenaries ship.

 

What class of ship are you talking about? A tactical fighter? A gunship? A corvette? A cruiser? Sure, tactical fighters can destroy another tactical fighter or a gunship or even a corvette. But not a cruiser. And any mercenaries hired to protect trade convoys would most certainly be equipped with cruisers. To understand why droid fighters would be wholly ineffective against a properly equipped cruiser or group of cruisers, the following must be established.

 

Droid fighters are not strike fighters, they are tactical fighters. Their designated role is to destroy other fighters. That is why they are equipped with lasers and not bombs, torpedoes, or missiles. The light lasers on tactical fighters like that are not supposed to tear through heavy armor and shielding, that is the job of the battle stations and their heavy turrets. A swarm of them would be effective against any light ship, as a swarm of any fighter would be. But even a swarm of fighters would stand no chance against an anti-fighter cruiser or heavy cruiser. While tactical fighters are designed to destroy only other light ships, anti-fighter cruisers are designed to destroy fighters. Therefore, they would mount a much more effectual assault against the fighters than the fighters could against them, and will ultimately be very successful.

 

Look at it this way. I'm sure that you are familiar with APCs, infantry, and jeeps. This is similar to that. Envision the droid fighters as infantry. They are equipped with assault rifles that can shred enemy infantrymen. Enough of them can project sufficient firepower to destroy a jeep. Think of this as droid fighters overwhelming a mercenary corvette. However, even with their combined firepower, their bullets just aren't strong enough to penetrate the armor of an APC. The APC, however, is equipped with a heavy machine gun, which can devastate the entire group. That way, even though the APC is outnumbered severely, it was built to kill infantry and does so very well. Think of the APC as an anti-fighter cruiser.

 

Defeating even a few cruisers would require destroyer support, which the Federation doesn't have on hand. Hell, we don't even know if they have any ships besides the landers, fighters, and battle stations. Therefore, it is obvious that the Federation blockade is severely flawed, as it penetrable to any convoy with sufficient anti-fighter support (which should, in theory, be very easy to acquire).

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

But in every single major space battle shown in star wars there has been absolutely no indication of ANY capital ship making use of homing missiles. Therefore i am forced to conclude they do not exist. If they DID, the empire would unquestionably have made use of them in the battle of Endor.

 

If they don't, then that is a serious flaw in all the navies in the universe. A very serious flaw that adds to the credibility of my argument that many of the militaries of Star Wars are poorly designed, utilized (tactically), and equipped. But still, just because they aren't shown on film doesn't mean that they don't exist. My point still stands though. We have seen at least one bounty hunter use them, so it is at least feasible that other mercenaries have missile cruisers, but that major government's refuse to adopt the technology.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

What trade convoys? I dont think any other systems need to trade with Naboo so badly they would be willing to risk their shipments and/or go to the expense of hiring mercenaries.

 

Naboo seems to be a fairly productive agrarian society. I would expect that many parties would be willing to continue trading in spite of the blockade. The Naboo could offer to pay for mercenary protection, protection which if it included anti fighter cruisers could easily circumvent the blockade. Besides which, I kind of doubt that the Trade Federation would attack a shipping convoy. That would be politically devastating, and if proof got out they'd be finished.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

Naboo is a peaceful planet. They dont have an army, only volunteers, and i dont think they have an interest in developing massive ships of war. I suppose that IS speculation, but one that I believe to be correct.

 

The point cannot be decided. There is no evidence of such ships, but there is no evidence that such ships do not exist. Therefore, the point is moot.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

The fact that no starfighter we've yet seen aside from Jango's and the fact that no capital ship i've seen have used those missiles leads me to believe they are either very rare, or VERY expensive and not cost efficient. Jango is an extremely wealthy bounty hunter who can afford such commodities.

 

Considering the inexpensive homing missiles available today, and the degree of technological sophistication of these societies, leads me to believe that is merely a serious flaw in the militaries of major governments. We have seen only one bounty hunter's starship in action in the movies, so it is entirely possible that many mercenaries have fighters or cruisers equipped with missiles such as that. Besides, the Trade Federation is a lot wealthier than Jango, and should therefore be able to purchase or manufacture such missiles. The fact that they don't serves only to support my argument, not weaken it.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

No computer can predict what a human pilot will do when flying in all 3 dimensions. They could go up down left right straight, flip quick and go backwards. And a human manning the guns could do no better. Light turrets can move, yes, but a competent pilot will not allow himself to be in the view of any one turret on a capital ship for an extended period of time. Come in at the ship at an oblique angle as fast as you can, jinking the entire way, fire of what you will at it, and fly out again.

 

Considering how accurate and sophisticated systems like the Phalanx are today, I find it extremely likely that point defense turrets should be able to accurately hit a fighter with the technology available to, say, the Trade Federation. All that needs to be done is to have a high velocity, rapid fire quad laser turrets firing a wall of laser bolts directly ahead of the fighter. If the velocity of the projectiles is high enough, the fighter will slam into an unavoidable wall of fire. Another design flaw that turrets don't incorporate this.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

I'm not saying that capital ships have no anti-fighter abilities. They do. The Naboo fighters would have been decimated against that control ship without anakin. They couldn't penetrate the shields and they were getting picked to pieces by fighters and big turrets alike.

 

Those heavy turrets were very ineffective against fighters.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

And as to anakin destroying the reactor core. Yes, trade federation design flaw. But one that would not be easy to exploit. It would take someone with either immense piloting abilities or the aid of the force (or both) to accomplish it. The same can be said for both deathstars. Nobody but luke would have made that shot on the first one.

 

Cruise missiles, man, cruise missiles. And if they don't exist, then there is absolutely no argument: every military in Star Wars is hopelessly flawed. Which is what I was trying to get across in the beginning.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

They are certainly rich, but they are not warriors, they don't know anything about war.

 

I find it highly unlikely that a federation that has participated and emerged victorious from war and has built an extremely sophisticated and advanced ground army knows nothings about war. In fact I posit that they're army and experience show they know a lot about war.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

Plus, they might not have the contacts needed to get those kinds of torpedos

 

Obviously a munition that effective would be easily acquirable. Basic economic theory.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

they might not be made by a company that can mass produce them.

 

The Trade Federation would have them mass produced by another manufacturer, if they wanted them.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

what IS known is that there are no missile ships.

 

Speculation.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

Because in star wars space battles there is no such thing as anti-fighter guns, because they cannot make them as effective as fighter to fighter combat. Snub fighters in space are too fast, maneuverable, and have a great field of motion.

 

A serious design flaw that furthers my argument.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

Perhaps you should watch that scene again. The viceroy had enough defenses still at the palace to protect him. The way up through the hallways had tons of droids, AND when the queen finally made it to the throne room they ended up surrounded by droidekas and battle droids. Only the clever disguise of her handmaided allowed them to remain around the viceroy while he was relatively undefended. But he had no reason to suspect them able to to anything, as they had no guns. Without the queens hidden weapons they still couldn't have done anything.

 

Originally posted by PowerBroker

you have to remember that the Viceroy was monitoring the battle from a command console, and was probably (or at least should have been) aware that there were two groups inside the palace. So in the interest of prudence, keeping a few droidekas inside the chambers would have been smart. That way, the people who had been captured wouldn't have a chance to initiated any security measures they might have had in place during the confusion. I wouldn't put it past even a peaceful planet to have a few hidden guns, turrets, or any number of security features built into innocuous places. And I certainly wouldn't trust group of inept droids to protect my from it.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

Simply bombing does no good.

 

That is not entirely correct. Modern combat theory states that precision aerial combat is extremely effective, and is capable of knocking most all enemy resistance, should that be required. Infantry is becoming less and less important, though it is still needed to reduce civilian casualties in urban combat and in occupying an area. In the future, infantry will become less and less important, as more precise aerial weaponry in invented.

 

Originally posted by ET Warrior

Look at Vietnam. We bombed the hell out of north vietnam to absolutely no avail.

 

Poor analogy. Vietnam was fought with a restraint over what we could do. Poor military tactics, politicians acting as commanders, and outdated equipment led our withdrawal. In fact, Navy bombing was one of more effective measures used against Vietnam. Saying that, comparing the crude precision bombs of Vietnam to the refined PGMs we have today and presumably in the Star Wars universe is like comparing apples and oranges. A bad idea.

[Tyrion]

Originally posted by ET Warrior

Because in star wars space battles there is no such thing as anti-fighter guns, because they cannot make them as effective as fighter to fighter combat. Snub fighters in space are too fast, maneuverable, and have a great field of motion.

 

I dont mean lasers,I mean tracking missles!

[lukeiamyourdad]

I know this is EU but I am gonna say it anyway.

In the older flight sims( Tie Fighter, X-W vs Tie F) Star Destroyers and other cap ships had concussion missiles to destroy enemy fighters. Those concussion missiles were very fast and could home in a designated target.

[JediNyt]

If youll remember that the Naboo fighters took out the shield generator so thats why Ani didnt blow up when he flew through where the shield would be. And having the Force made it possible to fly through all those hangers in a crippled ship. No one else could do that. It was like podracing to him.

 

Now this is podracing! An exited Anakin Skywalker Ep1

[ET Warrior]

Poor analogy. Vietnam was fought with a restraint over what we could do. Poor military tactics, politicians acting as commanders, and outdated equipment led our withdrawal. In fact, Navy bombing was one of more effective measures used against Vietnam. Saying that, comparing the crude precision bombs of Vietnam to the refined PGMs we have today and presumably in the Star Wars universe is like comparing apples and oranges. A bad idea.

 

Not really a bad analogy. We DID bomb vietnam to the ground. We dropped more tonnage of bombs on them then all nations in any other war COMBINED.

 

And you also must remember that star wars takes place a long time ago. Just because WE have developed such military advances by no mean necessitates that THEY have. If you've ever read the Conquerors trilogy (timothy zhan, very good books) there is an alien race with extremely advanced technology and they haven't even basic understanding of exlposives, but they have GREAT knowledge of lasers. Therefore you cannot call lack of homing missiles or sophisticated targeting computer systems a tactical flaw. They may just not have the military knowhow to do it.

 

And any mercenaries hired to protect trade convoys would most certainly be equipped with cruisers.

You cannot state this, there is no reason to expect that mercenaries would have the funds or manpower or contacts to be able to aquire cruiser type ships.

 

 

Note that all my arguments are based 100% on the movies. If i haven't seen or been told about it in the movies, it does not exist to me, because if it was supposed to be a part of star wars it would have been in the movies.