Cool design > practicality

> And look where it brought them, they couldn't defeat a numerically inferior and newly established opponent. What is this even arguing? That a versatile fleet is bad, and it should just be 1 ship type because a faction with a versatile fleet lost a war they were meant to lose? > It was, clone armor was superior, but total overkill for most things the empire faced and expensive on top. The Stormtrooper armor did its job too and was much easier and cheaper to produce. My point exactly, they used inferior equipment as they didn't have a proper economy to produce good equipment. > You mean 3 years of war? The empire basically was at constant wars with rebellion, even if they defeated the allaince, peace would never have come. And a force that doesn't bankrupt the entire economy is much better suited for that. The Republic literally lost half of its entire territory, planets and a huge part of its production base and population immediately at the start of a galaxy spanning war and yet it was able to finance it for 3 years. The Empire couldn't beat a rebel alliance that had 40 capital ships to their 25000. They are not the same. > It does, you said the Empire put military over economy, and I disproved that by showing the empire's superior logisticsl capabilities. Buddy, logistics are part of every military. It's literally a branch of the military. What are you even talking about. It's not an economy thing. Do you even know the difference? > The Death star wasn't a mistake. The Empire was basically either fighting or occupying everything which weren't the core worlds and needed something to keep them line. Tarkin wasn't stupid, he was already a highly regarded official during the republic. Tarkin wasn't stupid. He was a moron. Actual tactical strategists and military prodigies such as Thrawn detested the death star and for good reason. It could never have worked. > Originally they were indeed, but they were upgraded and modified so much they were advanced military cruisers at their height, capable of rivaling a star destroyer. So civilian ships refitted for war could rival a purpose build "state of the art" battleship? It just proves my point. > No, militsrised economies isn't war economy, they are two completelly different things and the empire seitched to the later after the battle of Yavin. I'll actually take an L here, English is my second language, and I think I used the wrong word here. My point was that the Empire had a military 1st and economy 2nd. I used the weong word, I meant militsrised not war economy. >And couldn't be mass produced as a tie could. Militaries have to project their power at every area, just look at which Tanks were successful during WW2. It wasn't the tiger, not the IS II, it was the Sherman even tough it couldn't take any heavy tank on. And yet the X wing brought the empire to its knees. > No, ghat doesn't make it bad, the E11 is a more than capable blaster for what it's intended for, if the Stormtroopers needed something else they had different deparments using blasters for this special occasion. It absolutely does, even the rebellion that was strapped for funds and had a better blaster than the Empires "elite" soldiers. Pathetic. The E11 overheated often and was inaccurate. >Ok, a single ISD can take in 9000 Stormtroopers, not accounting for the other enlisted personal, it held enough resources to operate on its own for 2 years, it had 60 heavy turbolaser batteries, 60 Ion Cannons, 2 dual heavy Ion cannons, 2 quad heavy turbolasers, 3 triple medium turbolaser and 2 medium turbolasers. And? What's it gonna do with all that? Make a bigger boom? > A venator holds 8 heavy turbolaser turrets, 2 middle turbolaser cannons, 50-60 light point defense cannon turrets and 4 proton throwers. It only had space for 2000 troops. Oh, and just one more thing.... FOUR HUNDRED AND TWENTY FIGHTERS AND BOMBERS > 5 venators had ten tousands troops, 2 ISD 18.000. What do you expect those troops to do? Come on the outer hull and then fight clone troopers on top of the ISD like that idiotic scene from the Disney trilogy? > I'm not precisly analysing how 5 venators and 2 ISD can compare, but I can say, a venstor is only a carrier and can't compete with equals without the starfighters, so it's safe to say even a single ISD is superior to 5 Venators. Too bad it always has its starfighters, so you have to account for them. I'd love to see how 2 ISD bricks are gonna handle 2100 fighters and bombers from 5 venators with their 150? vastly inferior TIEs. Must make for some nice fireworks. > The Venator was made to compete with the CIS' sheer mass of starfighters. It didn't havy any other strengths, as already said, even smaller ships than a Venator could destroy it. Palpatine knew it, he commisioned those ships, because he orchestrated the war and put them out of line when he didn't need them anymore. Amazing versatility, great point defense, actually amazing speed, lack of exploitable flaws, ease of mass production.... I could go on. > And the Empire didn't? they also also had other ships. They barely used them, mostly they just sent a few ISDs. Republic actually used picket and support ships. The Empire having them is useless if they just relegate them to PDFs (planetary defense forces). Look at most large engagements, and you will see the Empire only using ISDs and maybe a SSD. > speed is both 975 km/h. Thats in atmosfere, im pretty sure sublight a venator is faster. Even if its equal that still means a ISD can never catch a Venator and will just chase it until the starfighter compliment of the Venator vaporizes it.