Talk:Allegiance-class battlecruiser/Archive1

VT-16 - you do realise that I suggested the "Gauntlet Star Destroyer" = "Gauntlet-class" possibility, right? :¬p *good-humoured chuckle*

But, just on technicalities: how clear is it that Allegiance is a GSD? And aren't you putting a lot of weight behind the implications of that one line on Star Cruisers in ItW, because you think it supports your opinion... where someone like me would argue that that opinion might be in contravention to all the rest of the canon?

Not asking you to change it, just to consider why you think she should be a SC rather than an SD. Personally, I would argue that what makes a SC a SC could equally be that (going by WEG) they are less oriented to all-out attack for their size, and lack the dagger hull; hence the SC/Ex contrast. --McEwok 14:09, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's where I first saw it, and the irony is not lost on me, I can tell you that. =P
 * I'd say the term for these Imperial ships that are slightly bigger than ISDs yet still in the SSD-range is as conservative as I could get it, given all sources involved. I also mentioned all three official terms relevant and avoided pulling the "SSD as slang only" argument, as I don't really support that notion. From my point of view, the sub-class upon sub-class definitions work quite well, as they never contradict the older WEG-inspired sources, nor do they leave doubt when people talk of SSDs, as there's so many different types floating about. Basically, in this case, Star Destroyer-line ---> Super Star Destroyer-line ---> Imperial Star Cruiser works out well in describing the class, as the ships are not big enough to compete with Imperial battlecruisers and battleships (who's only real difference amongst themselves, is that BCs have less armor and more enginepower than BSs to make them faster), yet they're not small enough to be counted as 'destroyers' in the same way as Imperial-, Venator- and Victory-class ships. VT-16 14:35, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)


 * Heh! *grins and bows* ;)
 * Three points:
 * 1.) I guess I'm just not convinced that "Star Cruiser" is anything to do with size at all. By inference, at least, you could argue that there's no scaling implication in the SC/SD contrast, but that Star Cruiser = attack/defence balance, TLs disposed around the hull, and Star Destroyer = attack-oriented design, dagger hull, no aft battery. With regard to this, I'm trying to find where the oft-cited association of SDs with a forward-blast "alpha strike" comes from.
 * 1b.) I'd argue that potentially, "Super Star Destroyer" can cover a large number of large ships, including Star Cruisers (which aren't really Star Destroyers), large Star Destroyers (the category I'd place the GSDs in), and perhaps some ships that at lesat some people might think of as SDDs, such as the Ex (although I think she's really a large SD by design).
 * 2.) Where's there any evidence for how Star Battlecruisers Star Dreadnoughts differentiate from each other, as opposed to rl "battlecruisers" and "dreadnoughts"?
 * 3.) I think even the Iron Fist is called an "Imperial destroyer" in Courtship of Princess Leia. I'll check!!
 * As ever, no malice meant, just thoughts. *note to self: to get on better with people, don't edit from the hip* :p --McEwok 17:15, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)


 * 1.) In all navies, both RL and in SW there's a measure of scale and power associated with different terms, that's why we have these terms in the first place, so different warships can be seperated from one another. Then there's the issue of the different companies and cultures using different standards (which is something I intend to add to once the ship classification page comes back up) and that's how you get Mon Cal Star Cruisers smaller than Imperial Star Destroyers, and Imperial Star Cruisers even bigger in turn. The only contentious bit is that ISDs can fullfill several roles, including operating independently, which makes them destroyer/cruiser hybrids. This is actually similar to modern-day destroyers, so that's another connection to RL navies. ;)
 * I'd even go so far as to say that while ISDs are destroyers with cruiser (and carrier) characteristics, the Gauntlets are cruisers with destroyer characteristics (being little more than up-scaled ISDs).
 * 2.) Well, the only mention of power is the Mandator II dreadnought compared with Recusant destroyers, 1:1000. And the Praetor battlecruiser reactor being picked out of a derelict hull and used to power Echo Base. The Executor trumphs both of these, and its a dreadnought as well. The only other means we have of knowing are the Latin names and their designations. And if you're not going to use that, then I don't see the point in giving any warships in SW designations, since they'd be meaningless anyway.
 * A 'destroyer' is a fast and maneuverable yet long-endurance warship intended to escort larger vessels in a fleet or battle group and defend them against smaller, short-range attackers (originally torpedo boats, later submarines and aircraft). At the beginning of the 21st century, destroyers are the heaviest surface combatants in general use, with only two nations (the United States and Russia) operating cruisers and none operating battleships or battlecruisers.
 * In military terminology, a cruiser is a large warship capable of engaging multiple targets simultaneously. Historically they were generally considered the smallest ships capable of independent operations — destroyers usually requiring outside support such as tenders — but in modern parlance this difference has disappeared.
 * This is basically the ISDs in a nutshell, note also how the last sentence fits with the ISDs as presented and how one of the few means left to tell destroyers apart from cruisers is their size. Which also fits in with the Imperial/Gauntlet relationship. :)
 * As an aside: In naval warfare, a battleship was the most powerful gun-armed, most heavily armored and most effective type of warship at any particular time. In the CW-era, this would be the Mandator II for the Republic and the Lucrehulk for the Confederacy. In the GCW, we had the Executor for the Empire and the Home One type for the Rebels. VT-16 18:02, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)