How realistic are the last 15 minutes of Return of the Jedi

[Hitomi]

I would have to disagree about the Rebel Alliance “formula” to win the battle. I will address each of igorimp’s points in order.

 

1) Superior Imperial Technology

Imperial technology is not superior to that of the Rebel Alliance. Indeed by all accounts the two sides of the Civil War were at a technological stalemate in every arena except Star Fighters. Both Imperial Star Destroyers and Mon Calamari Cruisers have been proven to have Heavy Turbolaser technology, the most powerful conventional weapons in the galaxy.

 

2) No numerical Superiority

Numerical Superiority was not required for the successful conclusion of the battle on the side of the Rebel Alliance. While in certain situations it could be useful, it became detrimental to the Imperial forces when the Rebel fleet closed to point blank rage with the Star Destroyers. No Destroyer captain in his right mind would open fire with a broadside if it was possible his Turbolaser fire would hit a nearby friendly, especially if they were in close proximity to the flagship, the Executor.

 

3) Technological superiority only pertained to Alliance Star Fighters, not the fleet.

The superior strike capabilities of the Rebel Star Fighters make them a threat to the Capital ships of the Imperial fleet, as X-Wings were destroying the Sensor/Shield Domes atop Star Destroyers later on in the battle. The Imperial fighters had no strike capability, as I did not see a single Tie Bomber deployed by the fleet. As for the Rebel Capital ships lacking technological advanced on par with the Imperials that is easy to discount. The Nebulon-B Frigates are Imperial ships, and bring with them 12 Imperial Turbolaser batteries. Mon Calamari Cruisers are armed with comparable Heavy Cannons, which were capable of destroying an apparently shield-less Star Destroyer. Mon Calamari vessels have back-up shield generators, which reinforce the defense of the vessel after its main array has failed. In contrast the Star Destroyers are generally believed to have weaker overall Ray Shielding.

 

4) They were unprepared to face the Imperial Fleet

While the Rebel forces did not expect to find the Executor and over a dozen other Destroyers defending the DS, it is also apparent that the Rebels did not expect to find the Death Star totally undefended. There would be no reason to gather the entire Rebel fleet if Alliance intelligence said the DS was without escort. Rebel star fighters have hyperdrives; it would have been easier to simply have the fighters jump in from another system before beginning the final DS run.

Also the Rebel strike team led by Liea and Solo did not seem worried about the presence of the Executor and its 2-3 accompanying Star Destroyers. With a dozen or so Mon Calamari Cruisers, including the 3.5 kilometer long Home One Flagship, in the Rebel fleet it would stand to reason the Rebel’s were ready to and could destroy or damage enough of the defending forces to force a retreat. We found out that concentrated fire from the entire rebel fleet was enough to bring down the Executor’s shields and knock out its navigation and engine systems. Perhaps they had expected only the Executor and a few other Destroyers to defend the area.

[igorimp]

I would have to disagree about the Rebel Alliance “formula” to win the battle. I will address each of igorimp’s points in order.

 

1) Superior Imperial Technology

Imperial technology is not superior to that of the Rebel Alliance. Indeed by all accounts the two sides of the Civil War were at a technological stalemate in every arena except Star Fighters. Both Imperial Star Destroyers and Mon Calamari Cruisers have been proven to have Heavy Turbolaser technology, the most powerful conventional weapons in the galaxy.

 

Imperial-II Star Destroyer (24) - Mon Calamari Cruisers (about 6)

Length: 1600 m - 1200 m

Turbolasers: 100 - 48

Ion Cannons: 20 - 20

Starfighter squadrons: 6 - 3

Shields: 300 SBD - 240 SBD

Hull: 150 RU - 140 RU

Speed: 10 MGLT - 10 MGLT

 

While some claim that Mon Cals have "superior" shielding then ISDs beacuse of a supposed "weakness" of ISD's shield generators, I have to point out that some official sources agree, while others don't. Firstly, LucasArts X-wing game says "YES", while the game's two sequels (TIE fighter and X-wing vs. TIE) say a big "NO" to "shield generator destroyed equals shields destroyed". This weakness was only in the Imperial-I class version. The new, Imperial-II class version, has "backup shield generators", at least according to some sources. We can babble about this forever, but if Star Destroyers were so weak due to this weakness, how come the Rebels didn't want to engage them on Hoth (despite the fact they had massive fighters on the surfice? In fact, battle against ISD's is only visible at Endor, where they are destroyed by the cheap - hence the unrealistic part of the battle). In addition, upon the destruction of the Executor's shield generator (which is the only confirmed source in the movies the two domes are in fact shield GENERATORS), the controller on the ship states: "We lost are bridge deflector shield." BRIDGE shield, not the entire ships: so either the generators are only for protecting the bridge or there are enough backup generators to protect most of the ship. Take your pick...

 

2) No numerical Superiority

Numerical Superiority was not required for the successful conclusion of the battle on the side of the Rebel Alliance. While in certain situations it could be useful, it became detrimental to the Imperial forces when the Rebel fleet closed to point blank rage with the Star Destroyers. No Destroyer captain in his right mind would open fire with a broadside if it was possible his Turbolaser fire would hit a nearby friendly, especially if they were in close proximity to the flagship, the Executor.

 

A turoblaser fires at an X-wing fighter and hits 10 % of the time. X-wing is 10 meters long and moves at 100 MGLT speed.

 

A turbolaser fires at an Mon Calamari Cruiser that is 1200 meters long and moves at 10 MGLT speed.

 

Basicly, you're saying that they can fire and hit starfighters (as seen in the movie), but are afraid to fire at a target that is 120 times larger and moving 10 times slower.

 

3) Technological superiority only pertained to Alliance Star Fighters, not the fleet.

The superior strike capabilities of the Rebel Star Fighters make them a threat to the Capital ships of the Imperial fleet, as X-Wings were destroying the Sensor/Shield Domes atop Star Destroyers later on in the battle. The Imperial fighters had no strike capability, as I did not see a single Tie Bomber deployed by the fleet. As for the Rebel Capital ships lacking technological advanced on par with the Imperials that is easy to discount. The Nebulon-B Frigates are Imperial ships, and bring with them 12 Imperial Turbolaser batteries. Mon Calamari Cruisers are armed with comparable Heavy Cannons, which were capable of destroying an apparently shield-less Star Destroyer. Mon Calamari vessels have back-up shield generators, which reinforce the defense of the vessel after its main array has failed. In contrast the Star Destroyers are generally believed to have weaker overall Ray Shielding.

 

The 500+ Rebel stafighters can have all the torpeadoes they want. To fire them at Imperial ships, they need to get past some 8000 TIEs present at Endor. Even if taking them out at a rate of 1 every three seconds, the battle would last 6,67 hours before the Rebels could have felt confident enough to take on Imperial starships. Regarding "strike" capability, a few TIE bombers would not make any differance as the Imperials had ISD's 100*24=2400 + Executor's 500 = 2900 Turbolaser batteries. More then enough to blast some 5-6 Calamari cruisers to crap.

 

As for Nebulon B frigates: The Imperial fleet had 24 ISD's; the Rebel fleet's most powerful arsenal were 6 Mon Cals which (see point 1) are inferior to ISD's. Basically, the Rebels had FOUR TIMES as less of the most powerful starship. Even if we calculate that the Rebels had ALL ships as Mon Cal cruisers (which WE KNOW they didn't), the ratio would be 24 superior ISD's vs. 19 inferior Mon Cals. You do the math.

 

4) They were unprepared to face the Imperial Fleet

While the Rebel forces did not expect to find the Executor and over a dozen other Destroyers defending the DS, it is also apparent that the Rebels did not expect to find the Death Star totally undefended. There would be no reason to gather the entire Rebel fleet if Alliance intelligence said the DS was without escort. Rebel star fighters have hyperdrives; it would have been easier to simply have the fighters jump in from another system before beginning the final DS run.

Also the Rebel strike team led by Liea and Solo did not seem worried about the presence of the Executor and its 2-3 accompanying Star Destroyers. With a dozen or so Mon Calamari Cruisers, including the 3.5 kilometer long Home One Flagship, in the Rebel fleet it would stand to reason the Rebel’s were ready to and could destroy or damage enough of the defending forces to force a retreat. We found out that concentrated fire from the entire rebel fleet was enough to bring down the Executor’s shields and knock out its navigation and engine systems. Perhaps they had expected only the Executor and a few other Destroyers to defend the area.

 

Mon Mothma: "With the Imperial fleet scattered... in effort to find us... it is relatively unprotected." (RotJ, the Rebel briefing scene)

 

Upon arriving at Endor, Shuttle Tyderium passes by the Executor and ONE Imperial-class Star Destroyer. In a few scenes back, the Emperor said: "Send the fleet to the far side of Endor. There it will stay, until called for..." (RotJ, throne room scene)

[vakundok]

Dear igorimp,

I wrote 'standing reasons', not which were already explained.

You simply underestimate the importance of a genius tactic against a poorly led force (actually a force without leading).

 

I would like to ask you not to repeat that technological superiority again and again unless you can provide some evidence for it. What I saw in the movies was that that two destroyers nearly collided, whereas the Home One showed far higher maneouverability despite its larger size. What I also saw in the movies that the rebels had access to weapons capable to taking out an ISD with a dual shot.

 

I would also like to ask you not to repeat that superior personnel training again and again unless you can provide evidence for it. What I saw in the movies was Piett gaining the rank of admiral through oppurtunism, the crew of many destroyers barely able to hit a (at least) 30m long freighter, Tie pilots colliding in canyons without being disturbed and such things.

 

Of course, if you want to find it to be unrealistic (to the level that you misidentified a destroyed mon cal cruiser as a transport and provided imperial losses without actual movie evidence on your page) you will find it to be unreailistic.

[vakundok]

My God! Even LFL advises not to use stats from single player (fighter) centered LucasArts games!

EDIT:

BTW, the Tyderium passed two ISDs escorting the Executor.

[igorimp]

Dear igorimp,

I wrote 'standing reasons', not which were already explained.

You simply underestimate the importance of a genius tactic against a poorly led force (actually a force without leading).

 

If you are refering to leadership, let me put this point past you: the Emperor was not in command of the Imperial starfleet, it was Admiral Piett (I assume it was the "force without leading" you were refering to). As for your "genious tactic" on side of Rebels, here's what the Rebels did that was BRILIANT:

 

1) Arriving out of hyperspace, Admiral Ackbar order the fleet to move towards objective 1 (Death Star).

2) Upon learning of the shield generator's status, they suddenly broke into a 180° turn and stopped (mind you) in space to battle enemy starfighters.

3) Upon learning of the Death Star's status when one of their ships was blown up, they dicided to go back the way they came from and engage the enemy fleet from near suicidal range.

4) They then turned around inside the enemy formation and went back towards objective 1 (again).

5) Once the shield was down, they exited that formation and attacked the Death Star.

 

So, to sum up: they went in one direction, turned, stopped, went back the other direction, turned and went back towards their original heading... You call this tactics? I call it "moving your fleet around for begginers tutorial, part I". Apart from entering the enemy formation, Rebels did nothing out of the ordinary.

 

Now, for the Imperial state of action:

 

1) Blocking out both escape directions, they gathered their fleet to wait for the ambush.

2) Once the enemy fleet came in system, they launched all fighters to keep the fleet tied until the Death Star started picking them out one by one.

3) Once the enemy threatened them by entering their formation, they moved the entire formation forward to push the enemy closer towards the Death Star.

 

Now, I grant you, the Imperials did nothing out of the ordinary too. But, somewhere along the line of that kind of basic level manuvering, the Rebel 6 Calamari cruisers devastated the 24 Star Destroyers.

 

So much for your tactics.

 

I would like to ask you not to repeat that technological superiority again and again unless you can provide some evidence for it. What I saw in the movies was that that two destroyers nearly collided, whereas the Home One showed far higher maneouverability despite its larger size. What I also saw in the movies that the rebels had access to weapons capable to taking out an ISD with a dual shot.

 

I will not repeat the technological superiority you so despise, but I will point you to the following:

 

1) My Tactical analysis of the battle providing evidance of the number of ships and fighter: http://www.geocities.com/imperial_military/endor/analysis.htm

2) Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels (Del Ray Books) providing all needed starship information

3) The Ultimate Guide to the Star Wars Galaxy confirming this

4) The Official Star Wars site also confirming most of this http://www.starwars.com

and last, but not the least

5) Absolutely any site on the Internet with starship / starfighter information where you will find the numbers I've given which you have said to be no evidance.

 

As for Home One's manuverability, is it so high that the ship can outmanuver 25 other ships shooting at it at the same time? Perhaps it has some sort of a cloaking device? Or Imperial gunners just plain ain't worth s*** if they can't shoot a ship some 2000 meters long and moving at 10 MGLTs (or 130 km/h) at a distance of some 500 meters, something an avarage hillbilly with a gun is capable of doing.

 

The dual shot you're refering to must be the ion cannon on Hoth. That ship wasn't destroyed, mearly it's weapon systems were off-line for a few moments. In addition, it had no shields at the moment it was hit by the blast, making the disabling much more easier...

 

Again, even if they did have some sort of a "superweapon" capable of destroying ISD's with a single shot, would not a Galactic Empire with some 50'000'000 inhabitated star systems be able to do much more?! Isn't that what the superlaser is all about?!

 

I would also like to ask you not to repeat that superior personnel training again and again unless you can provide evidence for it. What I saw in the movies was Piett gaining the rank of admiral through oppurtunism, the crew of many destroyers barely able to hit a (at least) 30m long freighter, Tie pilots colliding in canyons without being disturbed and such things.

 

Ups. Caught me there. Of course, since someone pointed out two pages back that most of the Rebellion are defectors from the Empire, wouldn't the same rules apply to them??

 

The evidance for superior training (unless you regard the previous statement as true) is:

 

The Empire, spanning many millions of systems, has Space and Ground Training Academies throughout the galaxy (as noted by Luke in A New Hope) with the sole purpose of training such men for starship duty. Rebel Alliance on the other hand, relies mainly of volanteers who came to the Rebellion from planets like Tatooine (being a sandy dot in space) and defects from the Empire (trained at the suposebly "incompetent" Academies). If you claim this isn't true, why don't you provide evidance, because I think mine stand to reason. Do yours?

 

Of course, if you want to find it to be unrealistic (to the level that you misidentified a destroyed mon cal cruiser as a transport and provided imperial losses without actual movie evidence on your page) you will find it to be unreailistic.

 

As for the Mon Cal destroyed, you are right. That officially lowers our number for the Rebel fleet during fleet engagement from 6 to 4. Congratulations. You just pointed out that it wasn't 6 Rebel cruisers that devastated Imperial fleet of 24 ISD's. IT WAS 4 OF THEM.

 

As for Imperial fleet losses, they are estimations based on what is seen in the movie. You accuse me of not providing evidance for nothing, yet all YOU do is disagree with my propsitions without providing any your evidance. So, basically, you're mind on the subject is set and you are just stating your point to convince others to it.

 

Unfortunately, Lucas and his crew did not take very much care in creating this battle and we are short of evidance for anything. We can argue about this for ages, but at the bottom line I have no proof the Imperials were treated unfairly any more then you have that the Rebels have won fairly. All we have are tons of numbers from manuals and manuals; and more numbers a person can get by counting the ships seen in the movie itself. If you go by that count, the bottom line is that a fleet of 6 Heavy Cruisers with 13 support ships destroyed a fleet of 1 Super Battleship and 24 Heavy Cruisers, all of them with proportionatly large number of fighters. In that the battle was unrealistic.

 

That's the bottom line. I can't help it if you can't see that.

[Hitomi]

We never saw the Rebel fleet make multiple maneuvers igorimp. The initial turning maneuver to avoid the Death Star shield brought the Rebels on a head to head course with the Imperial fleet. As far as we saw from the movies, the only canon source we can work from at the moment, the Rebels turned towards the Imperial fleet. Slowed down to avoid entering the Destroyer’s weapon range too soon, and quickly fell under attack by Imperial fighters. The fighter squadrons were moved up to defend the fleet from strafing runs made by the tie fighters and interceptors, and to lure the Imperial squadrons into the ranges of the Capital ship’s anti-fighter weaponry. The only other maneuver we saw was Lando’s charge into the main force of the Imperial fleet. There were no multiple turns.

 

We only saw two Star Destroyers actually completely destroyed in the battle. One fell to a dual HTL strike by a Mon Calamari Cruiser (after the ISD missed the Cruiser 3 times with its heavy weapons btw) and the second was the destruction of the Executor. Beyond that we only saw superficial damage done to the rest of the fleet. Your claim that the Imperial fleet was devastated is a complete fallacy based around a conclusion you made without evidence. As we know from the lack of any vessels, or debris for that matter, at the end of the battle there were no Destroyers above Endor after the expanded into a dust cloud. As far as we know when the Executor went down, Pellaeon ordered a full retreat shortly afterwards. If anyone knows the exact quote from the book I would like to know it.

 

More later…..

[vakundok]

Hitomi: He based on his maneuvering theory on that that a winged rebell cruiser was seen behind two destroyers facing toward them (so, facing toward the same direction). Of course he completely neglect later evidence (the destruction of the Executor), when the rebel cruisers faced to the opposit direction as the destroyers, and other evidence when a Nebulon- B was perpendicular relative to the destroyers.

[Hitomi]

40 minute long study halls are useful…

 

A standard Class I Star Destroyer is stated to carry six squadrons of fighters; 4 Fighter, 1 Interceptor, 1 Bomber. Each squadron consists of 12 fighters, a total of 72 fighters for each Destroyer. Class II vessels simply replace one Fighter squadron with one Interceptor squadron.

 

That is a total of 72 assorted fighters between roughly two-dozen Destroyers, that’s 1,728 fighters.

Now we never saw a single Tie Bomber in the battle as far as I know, that takes it down to 60 fighters per Destroyer, for a total of 1,440 fighters.

The Executor is stated to carry 12 squadrons, double that of a standard Destroyer. If we assume the same percentages of fighters as a standard Imperator, we get 6 Fighter, 4 Interceptor, and 2 Bomber squadrons. Once again we see no bombers, so drop the 144 fighters to 120.

 

Thus, with low-end number eliminating the Tie Bombers and discounting the Death Star we get approximately 1,560 Imperial Fighters.

 

Now we have 6 Mon Calamari Cruisers at least. The Home One class is stated to carry 10 squadrons, and the rest are said to carry 3 each. So we have 300 Rebel fighters stationed onboard the Calamari force alone. There was at least two Nebulon-B Frigates, which are said to carry only two squadrons of fighters. So, discounting the compliment of the Y-head corvette and the possibility of fighters not stationed on capital ships flying along we get 348 rebel star fighters. Also add in the Falcon, and we get a rough idea of Rebel fighter craft.

 

Imperial: 1,560

Rebels: 349

 

As for the armament of the Mon Calamari Cruiser check out this site, http://www.theforce.net/swtc/

 

It belongs to Curtis Saxton, pre-ICS.

 

Look at the Mon Calamari Warship section. http://www.theforce.net/swtc/mcc.html#listobservations

 

It shows a lot of good shots from the movie itself, detailing the existence of at least 4 and a conclusion of 6 total Mon Calamari vessels, including the Home One Cruiser.

 

 

EDIT: On a second look through it seems Saxton determined the exsistene of 6 Mon Calamari Crusiersm not counting the Home One Flagship. That would increase the Rebel fighter number by 36 fighters, 3 squadrons.

 

Imperial: 1,560

Rebels: 385

[igorimp]

Regarding the Rebel fleet manuevers, the Mon Cal's position mentioned was not my only evidance. What you failed to mentioned, V. is that in the case you stated (the Mon Cal cruiser going past the Executor), the battle is well nearing it's end. In fact, a few moments later, the Executor is destroyed and plunges into the Death Star which would have been impossible from the distance that was displayed at the begining of battle.

 

In fact, you saw the Rebel fleet come out of hyperspace a long way from the Death Star AND the Imperial fleet. After turning, they went back towards the Imp fleet, engaging them and in doing so left the Death Star very far behind (see it's second shot to confirm this - and this was even before they engaged the fleet). Sometime between that scene and the one you mentioned about Mon Cal cruiser being next to the Executor, both fleets somehow TRANSPORTED themselves back to the Death Star. They were so close, in fact, the Executor's crew had no time to regain control of the ship on the auxilary bridge and the ship was pulled in by the Death Star's gravity well. Had they been enough far away from the DS, the Executor would have been pulled by the much stronger Endor's gravity - but this is pure speculation. What is NOT speculation is the FACT that the Executor lost it's bridge and PLUNGED into the Death Star in a time frame of 3-4 seconds - minimal distance if it was pulled at a speed of 10 MGLTs (130 km/h) is about 150 meters. Feel free to increase that number to anyone you like. The distance will still be laughably small.

 

In concession to your thoughts, perhaps the Rebel fleet didn't turn around. Perhaps they moved BACKWARDS. I won't even get to the part of the movie where Ackbar (just after the Executor was destroyed) and after the DS was attacked ordered: "Move the fleet away from the Death Star."

 

Why? If they were so far away since they didn't turn ever since they departed to avoid Death Star's superlaser?

 

As far as heavy weaponary that destroys an ISD in a single shot, I find it very doubtful considering Imperial Star Destroyer's cannons seemed unable to destroy the Falcon even with a few direct shots in TESB. Even X-wings in A New Hope survived a few Death Star's heavy turbolaser direct shots; Endor also shows a few direct shots from Star Destroyers to Rebel ships, none to the effect you described. What we don't know (since the 2-second shot mentioned shows only the Destroyer exploding on that shot) is what the status of the ship was before. It might have it's shields down, it might have had it's hull crippled, it might have been abandoned, rammed, shot at for 15 minutes, damaged by nearby superlaser explosion, the crew might have been having a cup of tea in the galley... well, you get my point. We have no idea what was the status of that ship upon the moment that shows one blast taking it out. Now, I would be the first one to like such weapons to be in Star Wars (like some ultra-heavy ship blasts), but I have never seen a book, novel or manual mentioning something of the kind. The closest to it (except the superlaser) is the quad-heavy turoblaser battery the kind of which Victory-class Destroyers carry a lot. Does that make them super-battleships?

 

You did not comment anything on any of my other points. Does that mean you've changed your mind?

[vakundok]

Dear igorimp,

I wrote 'standing reasons', not which were already explained.

You simply underestimate the importance of a genius tactic against a poorly led force (actually a force without leading).

 

If you are refering to leadership, let me put this point past you: the Emperor was not in command of the Imperial starfleet, it was Admiral Piett (I assume it was the "force without leading" you were refering to).

He wasn't in command? You know I remember that Piett got his orders directly from the emperor, and these orders made impossible for him to lead the battle as he (Piett) wished.

As for your "genious tactic" on side of Rebels, here's what the Rebels did that was BRILIANT:

 

1) Arriving out of hyperspace, Admiral Ackbar order the fleet to move towards objective 1 (Death Star).

2) Upon learning of the shield generator's status, they suddenly broke into a 180° turn and stopped (mind you) in space to battle enemy starfighters.

3) Upon learning of the Death Star's status when one of their ships was blown up, they dicided to go back the way they came from and engage the enemy fleet from near suicidal range.

4) They then turned around inside the enemy formation and went back towards objective 1 (again).

5) Once the shield was down, they exited that formation and attacked the Death Star.

 

So, to sum up: they went in one direction, turned, stopped, went back the other direction, turned and went back towards their original heading... You call this tactics? I call it "moving your fleet around for begginers tutorial, part I". Apart from entering the enemy formation, Rebels did nothing out of the ordinary.

This last sentence made me laugh. In other words, apart from causing the DS and many destroyers to be unable to fire on them without endangering other destroyers, they did nothing out of ordinary. Yes, it was brilliant.

3) Once the enemy threatened them by entering their formation, they moved the entire formation forward to push the enemy closer towards the Death Star.

Please provide evidence for this. Because moving forward the entire formation would only leave the entire rebel fleet behind, with a clear path (Path? Half of the horizont.) to escape. It would be the stupidest reaction if you had the orders to not allow their escape.

So much for your tactics.

So much? It is not much. Actually it is nothing. Actually you seem to base the movement of the imperial fleet on the theory that the Executor was pulled by the gravity of the DS' date=' so it must be close to it. Have you ever thought about what distances of the final speed of the Executor (~4km/s) can support? Also you seem to base the movement of the rebel fleet (the turning back) on one ship. (Not to mention not the commanding ship.)

I will not repeat the technological superiority you so despise, but I will point you to the following:

 

1) My Tactical analysis of the battle providing evidance of the number of ships and fighter: http://www.geocities.com/imperial_military/endor/analysis.htm

Excuse me, but for example you theoretized some forms to be B-wings, without stating that if they were B- wings, they would be completely sitting in one place without moving. You also missed to notice that identical forms (during the arrive of the fleet) evolved to be Nebulon- B frigates. Sorry, but I think your rebel fleet count is questionable at best.

2) Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels (Del Ray Books) providing all needed starship information

3) The Ultimate Guide to the Star Wars Galaxy confirming this

I do not own those, so if you say those state that the mon cal cruisers have weaker and not redundant shields or that the ISD II also has redundant shielding, I will trust you.

4) The Official Star Wars site also confirming most of this http://www.starwars.com

I tried that but I failed see any suggestion of the destroyers being technologically superior than mon cal cruisers. I only found a suggestion that mon cal ships receive extensive shielding armor and weaponry later than the destroyers wre designed. (So, actually it supports that the mon cals used more modern shielding.)

and last, but not the least

5) Absolutely any site on the Internet with starship / starfighter information where you will find the numbers I've given which you have said to be no evidance.

LFL said it in its canon policy game mechanics (and the ship statistics are part of it) do not count. Of course, what is LFL? Interesting that you did not use the Rebellion as an example where as I know, the mon cal cruiser can stay longer ...

As for Home One's manuverability, is it so high that the ship can outmanuver 25 other ships shooting at it at the same time? Perhaps it has some sort of a cloaking device? Or Imperial gunners just plain ain't worth s*** if they can't shoot a ship some 2000 meters long and moving at 10 MGLTs (or 130 km/h) at a distance of some 500 meters, something an avarage hillbilly with a gun is capable of doing.

No, it is only far higher than the maneouverability shown by the smaller 'and technologically superior' destroyers, making that superiority questionable.

The dual shot you're refering to must be the ion cannon on Hoth. That ship wasn't destroyed, mearly it's weapon systems were off-line for a few moments. In addition, it had no shields at the moment it was hit by the blast, making the disabling much more easier...

It was shielded. If you watch the scene frame by frame, you can see the shield interaction before the blasts took out the ship, which lost control and all lights, and I cannot remember it being online again so, the time required to bring that ship back to online is only an assumption. I only used the ion cannon as an example to show that the rebels had access to weaponry matching the imperial equipment.

Ups. Caught me there. Of course' date=' since someone pointed out two pages back that most of the Rebellion are defectors from the Empire, wouldn't the same rules apply to them??[/quote']I think you mean the imperial fleet and military as Empire.

Many of them came from the academy' date=' so they got the same training that the imperial personel and was led by former imperial officers and tactical geniuses.[/quote']You can sense the difference between 'many of them from the academy' and 'most of them from the Empire', can't you? Biggs for example came from the academy, not from the 'Empire'.

The evidance for superior training (unless you regard the previous statement as true) is:

 

The Empire' date=' spanning many millions of systems, has Space and Ground Training Academies throughout the galaxy (as noted by Luke in A New Hope) with the sole purpose of training such men for starship duty.[/quote']There is no evidence in ANH suggesting more than one academy. And actually it points out that it was not an exclusively military (or fleet) academy.

Rebel Alliance on the other hand, relies mainly of volanteers who came to the Rebellion from planets like Tatooine (being a sandy dot in space) and defects from the Empire (trained at the suposebly "incompetent" Academies). If you claim this isn't true, why don't you provide evidance, because I think mine stand to reason. Do yours?

Like Tatooine from where the only human ever able to win a pod-race came. Did Biggs collided into the canyon wall on its own? No he did not. In the novelisation of ANH Tagge said that the excellent fighters of the rebells are second only to their pilots. He also mentioned that they were even more dangereous because they were somewhat fanatics. The same novelisation describes many from the rebel pilots as veterans of many battles.

As for the Mon Cal destroyed' date=' you are right. That officially lowers our number for the Rebel fleet during fleet engagement from 6 to 4. Congratulations. You just pointed out that it wasn't 6 Rebel cruisers that devastated Imperial fleet of 24 ISD's. IT WAS 4 OF THEM.[/quote']How can the destruction of ONE cruiser lower that number by TWO? (Slight mistake, from 5 to 4.) It is also interesting that while you counted only 22 ISDs you are willing to use higher numbers for the imperial fleet as 'ships unseen on the frame showing the entire fleet' but use the 6 mon cal cruisers as a hard number, despite we have no frames showing the whole rebell fleet ...

As for Imperial fleet losses, they are estimations based on what is seen in the movie. You accuse me of not providing evidance for nothing, yet all YOU do is disagree with my propsitions without providing any your evidance.

See the first reply on page 14. The definitely lost ISD was the one next to the Executor. 1-3 is quite far from 8-16, so, if you saw the destruction of more ships, please provide evidence, because I did not. And it is not impossible, since the DVD shows more ships than my resources.

So' date=' basically, you're mind on the subject is set and you are just stating your point to convince others to it.[/quote']Yes, basically my mind on the subject is set, and it is not open for such thing like 'adding the fighter compliment of the DS again', after I showed that 1700 Ties were not overwhelmengly superior to 500+ rebel fighters based on the fighter loss count of that period ...

Unfortunately' date=' Lucas and his crew did not take very much care in creating this battle and we are short of evidance for anything. We can argue about this for ages, but at the bottom line I have no proof the Imperials were treated unfairly any more then you have that the Rebels have won fairly. All we have are tons of numbers from manuals and manuals; and more numbers a person can get by counting the ships seen in the movie itself. If you go by that count, the bottom line is that a fleet of 6 Heavy Cruisers with 13 support ships destroyed a fleet of 1 Super Battleship and 24 Heavy Cruisers, all of them with proportionatly large number of fighters. In that the battle was [b']unrealistic[/b].

1 Super heavy cruiser, 6 heavy cruisers, 6 Nebulon- Bs, two corvettes, the two unidentified ships, one Y- head corvette, four transports. not to mention again that we never saw the whole or nearly the whole rebel fleet together. And, as I said, you underestimate the importance of tactics. Alexander the Great usually won aginst 1:10 to 1:50 numerical superiority with only very slight technological advance ...

That's the bottom line. I can't help it if you can't see that.

I cannot see that, sorry.

Edited September 26, 2003 by vakundok

[Hitomi]

Igorimp, a few quick points about the ship count on your site.

 

1) The two "possible B-Wing" shapes look more like the front of a Nebulon-B Frigate.

 

2) Speaking of the Frigates, you completely missed one, there is a Frigate heading to the right of the image just below and to the left of Home One. You can clearly see the forward section of the ship. Your red line surrouding Home One almost touches it.

 

3) You failed to mention that, due to its size and proximity to the camera, Home One may very well be blocking the view other capital ships.

 

4) I can see only 2 medium Transports in this picture, was the third one destroyed yet?

 

5) Was the Liberty destroyed before this picture was taken? She was in close proximity to a nebulon-B Frigate, 2 Medium Transports, 1 Corellian Corvette, and two other "blobs" of white which seem to be ships.

( Image: http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/given/rb/mc22.gif )

 

6) Where is the Y-Head Corvette?

 

Here is the picture you used on your web site: But much larger thanks to Curtis Saxton

 

http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/given/battle3.jpg

 

 

 

EDIT: Quick question to everyone. In large picture of the fleet from Saxton's site there appears to be another ship behind Home One, almost blocked by her engines.

Now the shape of it seems to be a slim dagger pointing to the left. Is that a part of Home One??? It looks a lot like the front 1/2 of the other two Calamari Cruisers that are parrel with the Death Star.

 

or I could just be seeing things......

[vakundok]

Igorimp, a few quick points about the ship count on your site.

 

1) The two "possible B-Wing" shapes look more like the front of a Nebulon-B Frigate.

 

2) Speaking of the Frigates, you completely missed one, there is a Frigate heading to the right of the image just below and to the left of Home One. You can clearly see the forward section of the ship. Your red line surrouding Home One almost touches it.

 

3) You failed to mention that, due to its size and proximity to the camera, Home One may very well be blocking the view other capital ships.

 

4) I can see only 2 medium Transports in this picture, was the third one destroyed yet?

 

5) Was the Liberty destroyed before this picture was taken? She was in close proximity to a nebulon-B Frigate, 2 Medium Transports, 1 Corellian Corvette, and two other "blobs" of white which seem to be ships.

( Image: http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/given/rb/mc22.gif )

 

6) Where is the Y-Head Corvette?

 

Here is the picture you used on your web site: But much larger thanks to Curtis Saxton

 

http://www.theforce.net/swtc/Pix/given/battle3.jpg

 

 

 

EDIT: Quick question to everyone. In large picture of the fleet from Saxton's site there appears to be another ship behind Home One, almost blocked by her engines.

Now the shape of it seems to be a slim dagger pointing to the left. Is that a part of Home One??? It looks a lot like the front 1/2 of the other two Calamari Cruisers that are parrel with the Death Star.

 

or I could just be seeing things......

Well, after that image a Nebulon-B (which you found) and a 'horizontal line' like ship (likely those are corvettes) came out from behind the Home One. The Liberty was not destroyed at the time of this shot. The shot does not show many rebel ships. For example while there were at least two winged cruiser it shows none of them. The so called Y-head is only visible for a very short time in the battle, when there is a (close) corellian corvette to the right of the picture and the DS is on the left, it is in front of the DS.

[igorimp]

I will be very brief, as Vakundok's counterarguments fail to touch on point.

 

Firstly, I try to state as much known numbers and details as their are. You, on the other hand, pull out counterclaims without even backing them up. Not to mention you seem to stick to little facts, ignoring the more prominent one. But, fine, let's forget all counts we ever made. Let's say the Rebels had 99 Mon Calamari Cruisers on Endor. That makes them superior. Yuppy. Happy now?

 

Like it matters if they had four or tweleve Nebulon B frigates. Each one is (about) five-six times weaker in firepower and shielding to a Star Destroyer. Even Mon Cals being near, but still short of ISD strength. EVEN IF THEY WERE, the Rebels would have to have 22 of them (since you claim their weren't 24 ISD's and the Executor is unimportant anyway), so let say they had 99 of them. Hurra.

 

Your claim of there existing ONLY one academy in the galaxy made ME laugh. A Star Destroyer has a crew of 37'000; there are some 17'000 of them. That means that single academy had to train 629'000'000 people just to crew the Star Destroyer force, not to mention millions of other ships, bases, ground troops... etc. That would mean the Empire had the capability of training some 100 million people yearly (or 2 million weekly) in ONE Academy where training courses (at least the one Han Solo went on before he left the Navy - again, proving that academies do exist) last a year... Man, the building where they have classes should be HUUGGGEEEEE.

 

How many such Academies do Rebels have with their (official and public) membership of 0 planets, since they are in hiding?

 

"How can the destruction of ONE cruiser lower that number by TWO?"

 

The other I was refering to was the Liberty, which was destroyed by the first shot, followed by the second shot which took out the other "unnamed" cruiser. That is why I've lowered the number by two before the fleets engaged. But, since we deducted they had 99 cruisers, this would mean that there are 97 of them now. Still enough.

 

"Yes, basically my mind on the subject is set, and it is not open for such thing like 'adding the fighter compliment of the DS again', after I showed that 1700 Ties were not overwhelmengly superior to 500+ rebel fighters based on the fighter loss count of that period ..."

 

I am sorry, did not see ANYONE providing evidance Death Star had no fighters. The fighter loss count? The same one in Return of the Jedi that gives us a 1.84:1 loss ratio? Which means the Imperials would be matched evenly with the Rebels with just 920 TIEs. Statisticly, these two forces would wipe each out evenly leaving no one behind. Now try adding some 800 TIEs more (since you claim DS had no fighters AT ALL).

 

"And, as I said, you underestimate the importance of tactics. Alexander the Great usually won aginst 1:10 to 1:50 numerical superiority with only very slight technological advance ..."

 

Unfortunatly, you stumbled onto an Alexander fan and a history buff. Alexander the Great had three most important and major battles:

1) Granicus (where he won over an army roughly equal to his, just with more cavalary in it) - was won by staging a massive cavalary attack on the enemy flank, braking their line with little problem and then encircling them to finish them off.

2) Issus (where he faced an army of at least 250'000 with his 42'000) - was won because he had superior knowledge of tactics and the enemy carelessly attacked him in a canyon where his numerical ability didn't enter play. In addition, a cavalary charge on the center scared the s*** out of the Persian king, Darius, who fled the field. Discouraged by his escape, his army started to reatreat and the battle was won. The majority of the Persian losses took place during the retreat from the battlefield.

3) Gaugamela (simular odds as at Issus) was the closest to Endor as these battles got, since they fought on even ground. After the battle begun, it went more or less the same way as Issus with Darius retreating.

 

Now I'm sure Endor would have ended like Gaugamela had Executor turned it's back and got the hell out of there.

 

Here are also the list of reasons the Macedonian troops were fighting Persian enemies with ease:

1) Macedonian troops were far better trained and equipped then their enemies thanks to the many military reforms done by Alexander's father, Philip.

2) Macedonian phalanx, their main formation, was equipped with the sarissa (long lance) which made them the most dangerous troops on the battlefield until the appearance of the more verstile Roman Legion which had far better mobility.

3) Macedonian shock cavalry, used at the begining of any battle, had been trained for years and had practice fighting natives west.

4) Persian army, although large in numbers, was composed of multinational armies that had poor communications and cooperations.

5) This was intensified by Persian king's ruling, who treated all non-Persians as slaves (in fact, a part of the Persian armies were slaves - fighting because they had to)

There are many other reasons why Alexander won against Persia, there are, however, much fewer reasons, why would Ackbar win against the Empire. With all due respect for the Calamari, he's not Alexander... and neither is Piett a cowerdly King Darius III to run from battlefield every time a battle goes badly for him.

 

I know I said I'll be brief, but you touched a few points here you failed to extend. So, let us sum up our latest Endor analysis:

 

- The Rebels had a fleet of 99 Mon Calamari cruisers (2 of which were destroyed) which were all superior to Star Destroyers

- The Imperials had the Executor and three Star Destroyers which were afraid to fire on the enemy (since the Empire is well known to show reluctance to fire when that fire could damage other nearby Imperials), not to mention Star Destroyers are very well known for being unable to destroy any ship in the Rebel arsenal

- Admiral Ackbar is, in fact, Alexander the Great in disguse with a silly hat

- Admiral Piett is, actually, a cowardly Persian king that flees on sight of battle and has dozens of thousands of slaves fighting for him

- Rebel volunteer crews are all experts at their field, while academy trained Imperials are a bunch of blind and incompetent idiots

- The Rebels had a large number of fighters, but the Imperials had elected not to equip the Death Star with fighters, as it would be unfair to the Rebels

 

Did I miss anything?

 

Don't bother responding, I think I've had enough of having my numbers and evidance countered with claims you yourself fail to provide evidance for. I also have better work to do then fight around a few silly and minor details you grab on to to argue. Thank you and goodbye.

[R2-Opus2]

As for the Mon Cal destroyed, you are right. That officially lowers our number for the Rebel fleet during fleet engagement from 6 to 4. Congratulations. You just pointed out that it wasn't 6 Rebel cruisers that devastated Imperial fleet of 24 ISD's. IT WAS 4 OF THEM.

 

Actually, I don't think they could have had less than 5 cruisers at the time of Executor's destruction. A couple pages back we can at least confirm 7 (including Home One) before the superlaser took those two out. Anything either side might have had NOT SEEN aside, we know there are 4 "wingless" cruisers including Home One in that shot of them turning around from the DS shield, plus 2 winged "Liberty-types".

 

All sarcasm from your comment aside, a good chunk of the Imp fleet retreated and we still do not know if ALL ISDs besides those seen shooting got a shot off let alone if the Imps launched ALL fighters (of all the TIEs and Interceptors since we know no bombers were seen).

 

Imperial-II Star Destroyer (24) - Mon Calamari Cruisers (about 6)

Length: 1600 m - 1200 m

Turbolasers: 100 - 48

Ion Cannons: 20 - 20

Starfighter squadrons: 6 - 3

Shields: 300 SBD - 240 SBD

Hull: 150 RU - 140 RU

Speed: 10 MGLT - 10 MGLT

 

Do we know for certain all 24 ISDs were the Imp II version? If they were not that effects the gun numbers too...those that were close enough to fight that is.

 

The new, Imperial-II class version, has "backup shield generators", at least according to some sources. We can babble about this forever, but if Star Destroyers were so weak due to this weakness, how come the Rebels didn't want to engage them on Hoth (despite the fact they had massive fighters on the surfice? In fact, battle against ISD's is only visible at Endor, where they are destroyed by the cheap - hence the unrealistic part of the battle). In addition, upon the destruction of the Executor's shield generator (which is the only confirmed source in the movies the two domes are in fact shield GENERATORS), the controller on the ship states: "We lost are bridge deflector shield." BRIDGE shield, not the entire ships: so either the generators are only for protecting the bridge or there are enough backup generators to protect most of the ship. Take your pick...

 

While I am convinced an ISD I or II's placement of shield generators is a major design flaw (not to mention not having an auxilary control room i.e. see the death of Exectuor), according to the flight sim games, they had one more, that bulbous shape on the underside of the ship near the stern. Again, this assumes that the games have it right. Its not that I think its a backup, mearly that two primarily protect the bridge only and one covers the rest...I don't believe either had "backup shields" in the same sense the Mon Cals did, but I do believe their strength when fully operational is superior.

 

And in that sense if that is indeed their specs, it is not hard to believe Imp stars could be killed "on the cheap" as you put it given the design flaws I sighted, however I'm not convinced every single fighter that wasn't a bomber, or that even every Imp star managed to help (by proximity mainly for some ISDs).

 

What I am convinced about is the overall strength the Imps possessed (minus unknowns like what the uncompleted DS could sport in the way of fighters for example post shield loss, since we know rebel fighters could not breech the shield when it was up). What we know is they lost despite their clear advantage but they didn't make use of certain opportunities. They had overwhelming force and didn't use it to its full effect.

 

What I would want to know though given their supposed strength, putting the Emperor's influence aside, is how many of their ships fell before they decided they didn't have what it took to finish the job?

 

I still think there had to be other factors at work for the Rebels to win besides simply that the Emperor kicked the bucket and the remaining Imps ran.

[vakundok]

Liar.

- I provided both reasons (the first based on the novelisation, remember?) why the fighter compliment of the DS was not used, but I never suggested that the DS had no fighters.

- I also provided the fighter loss count for the whole battle (1.83:1) and for the period prior to the destruction of the DS shield (3.33:1). The former includes the tunnel hunt in which case the rebel fighters had no chance to fire back and the concentrated attack against the Executor, when again they did not have a chance to cause Tie losses since they attacked the Executor. Please, provide evidence for rebell fighters being destroyed in the tunnel (without fighting back), and concentrating on the Executor during the opening stage of the battle, and I will use the lower number. I am quite fed up with your half or misquoting.

- You also 'forgot' to mention such things as war elephants, but at least admitted that superior tactical knowledge can cause a victory against high numerical superiority (even if it was 'only' 1:5, not 1:10 or 1:50 I suggested).

 

Side note:

Not Ackbar was the tactical genius, but Lando (who according to the novelisation destroyed pirates at Tanab with completely new maneuvers and strategy despite any odds far before Endor).

 

As I wrote previously: 'If you want to find it to be unrealistic, you will.'

- I asked you to provide evidence for the (very high) imperial losses you assumed. (Especially since it was far higher than the losses stated in lower level material.) You did not.

Of course, if you use the lowest possible number for the rebel fleet and rebell losses, estimate very high imperial losses, assume that Piett could do as he wished (despite the evidence) and do not count the importance of surprisingly new tactics you will get the result that the battle was unrealistic to the level of impossibility ...

[Hitomi]

Here are the fleet make-ups as far as I can tell from the various pictures and Saxton’s website.

 

Imperial Fleet: Capital Ships

1 Executor-class Super Star Destroyer - - 12 Squadrons

24 Imperial-class Destroyers (I & II) - - 144 Squadrons

 

· The Death Star is assumed to launch no fighters during the battle for a simple reason, Shield Physics. In order to launch any number of Tie Squadrons the Death Star would have to drop its Particle Shielding. That shield system was controlled by the facility on the moon, and stayed up the entire battle while under Imperial control.

 

Imperial Fleet: Fighter Squadrons

As we saw no Tie Bombers deployed in the battle, we must assume one of two things. First the Tie Bombers were never deployed because the Death Star trumped their strike capability, or second the Tie Bombers were simply not there. Either way, the lack of any Tie Bombers drops the possible number of Imperial Fighters by 26 Squadrons, one on each Destroyer, and two on the Executor.

 

Maximum Deployed: 156 Squadrons - - 1,872 Fighters

No Bombers Deployed: 130 Squadrons - - 1,560 Fighters

 

Rebel Fleet: Capital Ships

1 Home One Cruiser - - 10 Squadrons

6 Mc80 Cruisers - - 18 Squadrons

7 Nebulon-B Frigates - - 14 Squadrons

2-5 Corvettes - - 0 Squadrons

2-5 Medium Transports - - 0 Squadrons

1 Y-Head Corvette - - ??? Squadrons (0)

Rebel Fleet: Fighters

Maximum Deployed: 42 Squadrons - - 504 Fighters

Plus Millennium Falcon: 505 Fighters

 

The Deployed Fighter Ratio, as far as I can tell, is 3.089 to 1.000 as far as I can tell.

 

Also, the vessel behind Home One is to long and to shallow to be a Corvette. Due to its proximity to a Nebulon-B Frigate, and the fact that it is probably turning away from the Death Star, I would think that it is the Liberty. By turning towards Home One that vessel, if it is the Liberty, would come up along side a Frigate. The Liberty death scene shows the vessel near a Frigate and a pair of Transports.

 

My money is on it being the sixth and final Mon Calamari Cruiser.

[Beast]

I agree that its highly doubtfull that even with the Thrawn theorie in place its highly unlikely that the rebel fleet would have been able to defeat the Imp fleet.

[Hitomi]

When we wish to evaluate the nature of the battle we must not simply look at Capital ship numbers. The Alliance’s fleet theory is based around their star fighters, and the strike capability of those fighters would have to play into the battle situation. Assuming the numbers for star fighters are correct as I have them above the majority of the 505 fighters would be X-Wings and Y-wings, with A-Wings and B-Wings being in the minority. An X-wing squadron would have 72 Proton Torpedoes, Y-Wing squadrons would carry 120, A-Wings would have 144 Concussion Missiles, and B-Wing squadrons would carry 144 Proton Torpedoes.

 

In the Rouge Squadron novels, and throughout the EU, torpedo salvos numbering between 24 and 72 individual warheads were capable of brining down the shields of Star Destroyers. If we assumed that it took 72 Proton Torpedoes to drop a Star Destroyer’s shields, the upper limit from the novels, it would only take a single X-Wing squadron per Destroyer to render the vessels defenseless.

 

X-Wings were making strafing runs on Imperial Star Destroyers, apparently getting through the shields on some occasions, as we saw a pair of X-Wings smash a Destroyer’s Sensor/Shield Globe.

On top of that we also could see blue explosions on the Executor’s hull, and effect not made by Turbolaser, Laser, or Ion Cannon fire.

It is possible that the effects were due to torpedo strikes on the shields.

[vakundok]

My money is on it being the sixth and final Mon Calamari Cruiser.

Sadly, it is not that easy. There were at least two winged cruisers.

Besides, the second ship destroyed by the DS had many command pods like Home one, but unlike the wingless cruisers. (For that reason many fans identify it as a second Home One or a scaled down Home One (which is not impossible, since the Home One model was only as large as the wingless (later winged) cruiser).)

I agree that its highly doubtfull that even with the Thrawn theorie in place its highly unlikely that the rebel fleet would have been able to defeat the Imp fleet.

Well, it depends on what you mean as 'defeat'. Igorimp theoretized that the rebel fleet actually decimated the imperial. In my opinion, at the end (at the loss of the Executor) the imperial fleet was still (far) superior in power, but it lost the commanding officers and was in a tactically very poor situation. So, it not really had other chance than retreating.

[Trejiuvanat]

I think a great part of the Imperial fleet survived Endor and regrouped at Annaj and other nearby systems.

Among the survivors were Teradoc and Pellaeon... Teradoc left from there with a considerable fleet of Star Destroyers...

[vakundok]

Yep. We have only lower level information about the imperial losses: The Executor and six other destroyers (Heir to the Empire).

That was why I asked igorimp to provide evidence for his "8-16 destroyed ISDs" estimate.

[ElvisMiggell]

Fascinating stuff guys. Personally i've always been a little dubious of the numbers, but i have a feeling that was more to do with film budget than anything else.

[vakundok]

Well I think it was because Lucas did not realize how large a galaxy was and how large the empire (and previously the Republic) had to be, not because budget problems ...

- the million worlds of the empire,

- Han saying that the entire imperial starfleet cannot destroy a whole planet because it would require a thousand ships,

- the trillions (US, not EU trillions) of citizens of the Republic,

- 200,000 troopers being 'Grand' army ...

(These, of course require special explanations to fit into the somewhat more correct EU.) These are quite consistent with the dozens of capital ships and hundreds of fighters (the origin of the number of carried crafts is uncertain at best) in the (full) rebell fleet and in the imperial trap fleet.

[ElvisMiggell]

Yeah but if you're a megolomaniac dictator, you're gonna start to believe in your own infallibility. So you're gonna think 24 SD's would be enough. And if you think about what 24 ISD's could do to a planet.... not destroy it, but make it uninhabitable. I dunno, i think there are some perspective problems from Lucas, but i think it's not too muc of a problem.

[Stellar_Magic]

One thing few people hear realize is that the entire battle would have been fought within the Gravity well of Both the Death Star and Endor. This would Impair the manueverability fo the capital ships, especially the Imperials. Perhaps they would hvae done better if they'd deployed some of the Victory Class ships.

 

The Mon Calamari Vessels are more manuevarble and have redundent systems that would enable them to withstand the concentrated fire of their opposition for awhile. Still the Mon Calamari loss two cruisers in the battle and Its quite possible they lost more but didn't show them.

 

The Empire made a dramatic mistake with starfighters, if you remember that the kill loss ratio for the rebellion was four Ties to every rebel ship, when their committed to anti starfighter roll.

 

The Mon Calamari Cruiser got among the imperial formation which was nothing more then a venerable wall in space. They'd be able to press their manueverability advantage over the imperials. Still it would have been a very close call for either side to emerge victorious.