Okay, we’ve heard the arguments for and against the Executor SSD coming to Armada.

One of the big reasons against is that it would be so overpowering that it would be impossible to represent accurately. I mean, you look at the stats on wookiepedia and the thing had 5000+ turbolaser and ion cannon batteries. Of course that is just what the reference material says. How much utter devastation do we see it lay down in the movies.

Not much actually. I’m not sure we see it destroy anything in the two movies it appears in.

Of course, that doesn’t mean it can’t... just that we have no way of knowing what they can really do.

This isn’t an argument for or against the SSD, but a question; how do we know that the SSD’s are effectual at all in ship to ship combat, and not just another imperial white elephant propped up by fear factor and propaganda that would have been a better use of resources as a dozen ISD Hulls?

Since the overwrite of the EU we don't really have a whole lot of info when it comes to firepower.

But the imperials built them for a reason, so there must have been some redeeming qualities.

I do tend to agree though, a ship that large seems to really only be good at 2 things, psychological warfare, and maybe planetary bombardment.

I see your making a Bismarck esque argument. Yeah it's big and scary and can do some damage, but in terms of warfare it's from a bygone era and it's primary function is to scare it's oppents. Fear in and of itself is a weapon in it own right.

I would agree. Your idea did seem to follow known imperial doctrine of ruling. Scared people are easier to control.

Super Star Destroyers have no exhaust ports, unlike a certain Death Star.

Just now, Marinealver said:

Super Star Destroyers have no exhaust ports, unlike a certain Death Star.

They do however have the bridge on an easy to locate tower, with easy to overload shield generators, and a giant window begging for fighters to fly into. Also a lack of auxiliary bridge that would keep it from flying into the giant moon sized space station parked nearby.

FractalSponge and I had a throw down about this a while ago. TL;DR: the canon is so shaky on engineering specifics that you can make a case any which way you want. We both held that in order for the Executor to be cost effective it had to be at least a decent combatant, though it wasn't necessarily optimized for it. We didn't really dig into scare factor though. Once my laptop quits being a nuisance I'll link it.

2 minutes ago, GiledPallaeon said:

FractalSponge and I had a throw down about this a while ago. TL;DR: the canon is so shaky on engineering specifics that you can make a case any which way you want. We both held that in order for the Executor to be cost effective it had to be at least a decent combatant, though it wasn't necessarily optimized for it. We didn't really dig into scare factor though. Once my laptop quits being a nuisance I'll link it.

I think Darth Sanguis brought up a good possibility. It could be cost effective as an orbital bombardment platform, and command ship.

Those 5000+ weapons could be built to hit ground targets instead of tracking enemy combatants. Would also explain why it always has an escort of ISD’s.

As promised, the thread, in all its glory. Fractal and I basically fight each other to a standstill, since we have fundamentally different sets of headcanon about how Star Wars physics works, and sizeably divergent tactical and operational doctrines.

Just now, GrandAdmiralCrunch said:

I think Darth Sanguis brought up a good possibility. It could be cost effective as an orbital bombardment platform, and command ship.

Those 5000+ weapons could be built to hit ground targets instead of tracking enemy combatants. Would also explain why it always has an escort of ISD’s.

That was most of my logic, that the Executor is a particularly well armed command ship. The appearance in the films is that the bulk of her main battery is along her beam, so an escort is required to prevent something from maneuvering around her to bombard a more vulnerable section. As for why that A-wing managed to take out the entire ship, I can only assume the same Rebel bombardment that managed to disable the bridge shielding also hammered other sections of the ship, disabling her maneuvering capabilities or preventing damage control teams from regaining command from auxiliary stations quickly enough to save the ship. (Also, plot.)

Essentially... it was an expensive, durable, and scary WOMBAT.

Old EU called it out multiple times as an inefficient use of resources compared to dedicating those same resources to ISDs. It was a big, slow target that had to essentially sit still during battles. The two useful features were that it was harder to destroy than an ISD and that it was an effective psychological weapon.

New canon seems to make it better, but probably still less useful than a few more ISDs.

Im talking to 8km version that I was familiar with as a kid. Not the pantscrap stupid 17km+ version that WOTC said it was. I’m unsure what new canon lists it as.

I’ve always imagined the Super as less of a combat ship but more as an invasion ship. Wasn’t Death Squadron specifically tasked with hunting down the Rebellion? If so it makes sense to me to have a massive invasion platform with enough troops and equipment to invade a planet and enough guns to hold the surrounding space.

It depends on how large you want the SSD. I have some numbers that are for a 1:23.75 scale relative to ISD (48inch) and the dice are reasonable.

Front arc: 20 red, 8 blue, 8 black
Side arcs: 11 red, 4 blue, 4 black
Rear arc: 11 red, 4 blue, 4 black

These numbers are based off the amount of turbolasers an ISD has and how they are distrusted in terms of dice. The front arc of an ISD has about 44% of the overall fire power the ship can put out, so the same logic is applied to the SSD.

I have the hull at 72 and lots of shields, somewhere around 80. This is because it takes roughly 13 MC80s to bring the ISD down, which has a combined firepower of 61.75 damage. So 2 full rounds of attacking is about enough to drop it.

I have more data I can share if you're interested.

28 minutes ago, GrandAdmiralCrunch said:

I think Darth Sanguis brought up a good possibility. It could be cost effective as an orbital bombardment platform, and command ship.

Those 5000+ weapons could be built to hit ground targets instead of tracking enemy combatants. Would also explain why it always has an escort of ISD’s.

A little known (and completely made up) fact about the SSD's 5000+ turbolasers is that they were used to put on some of the most amazing laser shows in the Galaxy. Here in the US we celebrate the Fourth of July with massive fireworks extravaganzas. When loyal galactic citizens celebrate Empire day all they have to do is look to the night sky to watch glorious and dazzling displays of luminescent brilliance (even from light years away thanks/no thanks to JJ). It's just one of the many incredible gifts bestowed upon the galaxy by our kind, loving, and benevolent Emperor.

3 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

It depends on how large you want the SSD. I have some numbers that are for a 1:23.75 scale relative to ISD (48inch) and the dice are reasonable.

Front arc: 20 red, 8 blue, 8 black
Side arcs: 11 red, 4 blue, 4 black
Rear arc: 11 red, 4 blue, 4 black

These numbers are based off the amount of turbolasers an ISD has and how they are distrusted in terms of dice. The front arc of an ISD has about 44% of the overall fire power the ship can put out, so the same logic is applied to the SSD.

I have the hull at 72 and lots of shields, somewhere around 80. This is because it takes roughly 13 MC80s to bring the ISD down, which has a combined firepower of 61.75 damage. So 2 full rounds of attacking is about enough to drop it.

I have more data I can share if you're interested.

But what if only a fraction of the ship’s weapons are rated for ship to ship combat? That would greatly reduce the number of dice there, while keeping its survivability the same.

3 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

It depends on how large you want the SSD. I have some numbers that are for a 1:23.75 scale relative to ISD (48inch) and the dice are reasonable.

Front arc: 20 red, 8 blue, 8 black
Side arcs: 11 red, 4 blue, 4 black
Rear arc: 11 red, 4 blue, 4 black

These numbers are based off the amount of turbolasers an ISD has and how they are distrusted in terms of dice. The front arc of an ISD has about 44% of the overall fire power the ship can put out, so the same logic is applied to the SSD.

I have the hull at 72 and lots of shields, somewhere around 80. This is because it takes roughly 13 MC80s to bring the ISD down, which has a combined firepower of 61.75 damage. So 2 full rounds of attacking is about enough to drop it.

I have more data I can share if you're interested.

I can say that those numbers might seem reasonable, but I highly doubt FFG is going to put out a ship with 20 red dice in its front arc.

Heck, change my statement to 20 dice and I still stand by it. I'd predict (since we're down this road again) 200-300 points, maybe 15 dice total. Being able to one shot a large ship at red range with a lucky roll (accuracy for the brace, 12-20 damage) is a negative play experience and does turn Armada into a pay to win game.

3 minutes ago, Megatronrex said:

A little known (and completely made up) fact about the SSD's 5000+ turbolasers is that they were used to put on some of the most amazing laser shows in the Galaxy. Here in the US we celebrate the Fourth of July with massive fireworks extravaganzas. When loyal galactic citizens celebrate Empire day all they have to do is look to the night sky to watch glorious and dazzling displays of luminescent brilliance (even from light years away thanks/no thanks to JJ). It's just one of the many incredible gifts bestowed upon the galaxy by our kind, loving, and benevolent Emperor.

Now I want to see the Star Wars equivalent of laser Floyd.

31 minutes ago, Church14 said:

Im talking to 8km version that I was familiar with as a kid. Not the pantscrap stupid 17km+ version that WOTC said it was. I’m unsure what new canon lists it as.

http://www.starwars.com/databank/executor

19000 meters

Wiki page is interesting, and also lends some credence to the paper tiget theory. It appears the Rebels successfully destroyed most of the Super Star destroyers.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Super_Star_Destroyer/Canon

Most of you guys are Naval experts... I’m more of a tank guy myself. I’d liken the Super star destroyer to some of the massive interwar period tanks that came out, specifically the Russian T-35 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-35

The ‘35 was good at being a “parade tank” it looked good rolling down Red Square and looked scary as **** too. In combat though it was too complicated and cumbersome to operate (I believe it had a 10 man crew!) At the onset of WW2 the Germans proved that speed and numbers were better than the slow multi-turreted “landships” most other nations were producing.(of course by the end of the war German tank theory flipped to massive guns and thick armor)

Not that I’m saying the SSD was horribly ineffective but it’s size did make it vulnerable to the more agile rebel fleet.

1 hour ago, GrandAdmiralCrunch said:

But what if only a fraction of the ship’s weapons are rated for ship to ship combat? That would greatly reduce the number of dice there, while keeping its survivability the same.

1 hour ago, geek19 said:

I can say that those numbers might seem reasonable, but I highly doubt FFG is going to put out a ship with 20 red dice in its front arc.

Heck, change my statement to 20 dice and I still stand by it. I'd predict (since we're down this road again) 200-300 points, maybe 15 dice total. Being able to one shot a large ship at red range with a lucky roll (accuracy for the brace, 12-20 damage) is a negative play experience and does turn Armada into a pay to win game.

I'm only working with what's on wookiepedia. ISD II has 126 turbolasers and 20 ion cannons. Not exact so don't quote me, but good enough to work some numbers. I have SSD with 4000 turbo, 250 ion, and 500 point defense, as well as 250 concussion/torpedo tubes. Not sure where I got these numbers because they aren't on wookiepedia anymore.

I'm not sure how many are rated to attack other ships but I don't really care. I've heard WWII stories of ships using their AA batteries to attack other ships if they get close. I see no reason why a SSD wouldn't unload all of it's smaller guns onto a ship. And we already know ship to ship guns are not good at shooting squads, which is why there is an AA value for each ship.

That said, I also had to scale down the SSD, which I did not say in my previous post. Without it, there are 311 red dice in the front arc alone, which accounts for 1760 turbolasers. 16 black and 16 blue for the 100 ion and ordnance tubes. And that's only 44% of this ships fire power. However, turbolasers are already weaker in FFG "canon".

The ISD II has 4 red and blue dice in the front arc, but the amount of weapon hard points are drastically different.

Red dice (4 front + 2*2 side + 1 rear) = 9
4/9=44% red dice in front arc = 44% turbolaser in front arc = 56 turbolasers

Blue dice (4 front + 2*2 side + 2 rear)=10
4/10=40% blue dice in front arc = 40% ion in front arc = 8 ion cannons

So you can see each weapon is weighted differently. It get's even weirder when you look at other ships. Home One has a scale of 3 turbolaser / red die. ISD I has 9.375, and the Liberty is 5.33. I went with the ISD II because it get's nerfed the hardest.

Without the turbo/die ratio, you get this: (4000*.44)/5.647 = 311 red dice
This is just in the front arc AND scaled down.

So for me to say there is 20 red dice in the front arc alone sounds reasonable. It works well in the game and it holds up to the lore.

In regards to actual game balance, this thing doesn't even come close to 400 points. You can't play it in a standard game. My version is 4 feet long. I deploy and get to kill a ship. And you have to keep that in mind. The sheer scale of this thing is ridiculous.

Ok, big problem with ssd as a planetary bombardment platform. Based on everything I can find, gun emplacements are evenly spread top and bottom. If I am building for orbital support roles, the lower decks are getting a larger collection of weapons than the upper decks. Case in point, Last Jedi giant pizza wedge with big guns on the lower side. This is my token contribution to this discussion

1 hour ago, Noosh said:

but in terms of warfare it's from a bygone era

*looks at all the new stuff the First Order got...*

2 minutes ago, Grand Admiral Buford said:

Ok, big problem with ssd as a planetary bombardment platform. Based on everything I can find, gun emplacements are evenly spread top and bottom. If I am building for orbital support roles, the lower decks are getting a larger collection of weapons than the upper decks. Case in point, Last Jedi giant pizza wedge with big guns on the lower side. This is my token contribution to this discussion

It doesn’t matter if the weapons are top or bottom of the ship. In space you can just flip the ship to point the desired batteries at the target. Rogue One did a great job of demonstratig this with the Death Star over Jedha. I think even distribution of batteries is ideal for a space battleship, unless you have a single specialized cannon like the new First Order ship.

37 minutes ago, jmswood said:

It doesn’t matter if the weapons are top or bottom of the ship. In space you can just flip the ship to point the desired batteries at the target. Rogue One did a great job of demonstratig this with the Death Star over Jedha. I think even distribution of batteries is ideal for a space battleship, unless you have a single specialized cannon like the new First Order ship.

Why would I want to have bombardment weapons spreadout all over instead of being focused on the actual target. Rolling the ship is silly if my goal is to pound people on the ground. I want all of my ground tageting weapons facing the target at all times. Rolling is fine if you are discussing a non-dedicated platform, but my argument is that this is NOT a dedicated platform based on the spread of the weapon systems.

Finally, don't take my comments personally. I dont have time to proofread this since I am sitting in a meeting. Certainly isn't intended to be offensive. ?

5 minutes ago, Grand Admiral Buford said:

Why would I want to have bombardment weapons spreadout all over instead of being focused on the actual target. Rolling the ship is silly if my goal is to pound people on the ground. I want all of my ground tageting weapons facing the target at all times. Rolling is fine if you are discussing a non-dedicated platform, but my argument is that this is NOT a dedicated platform based on the spread of the weapon systems.

Finally, don't take my comments personally. I dont have time to proofread this since I am sitting in a meeting. Certainly isn't intended to be offensive. ?

Weapons overheat, jam, malfunction. Crews need breaks. Bombard with one side, flip and continue the bombardment while the other side gets rest and maintenance. Repeat until surface is sufficiently glassed.

Rolling for the reasons mentioned above is an excellent idea, however, a flying pizza slice is a poor design choice. A cylinder is far better. Constant rate of fire and sheilding with even recovery time. Further, just look at an ac-130. Pour huge volumes of fire from one side only is a nicely focused manner. Designed well for ground attack.