Wikia

Wookieepedia

Talk:Executrix

111,697pages on
this wiki

Back to page

Imperial or Victory?Edit

Okay, which one is it? Admiral J. Nebulax 16:17, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Page 279 says the attack was being carried out by Victory class star destroyers. User:Lowkey

  • And that's your only source? That's not even a source. Admiral J. Nebulax 16:31, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • And what do you have beyond wishful thinking to back it up? --Lowkey
      • From what I've read in "Dark Lord", it seems that Executrix was the sister ship of Exactor. And since Exactor was mentioned as a Imperial-class, it should mean that Executrix is Imperial-class as well. And let's not forget that Luceno's books are prone to typos. The page after it's introduced, he refers to the vessel as Executor, after all.TIEPilot051999 16:39, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
        • He calls it the older sibling. However, the Enterprise is referred to as a sibling to the Nimitz despite being different classes. -- Lowkey
          • I'm changing article back to how it was originally, since there is not much of a source for the Victory claim. Admiral J. Nebulax 16:41, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
            • And I'm changng it back again until you provide evidence that it is an Impstar. The book is a far better source then you just not liking the fact LFL is using latin names. --Lowkey
              • Your "source" is not even a source. So far, you have provided no evidence to support your claim. Admiral J. Nebulax 17:10, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
                • My source is the book itself stating the attack was conducted by Victory classes. How is that not a source? If Dark Lord is not a source, the entire entry needs to be deleted. And what do you have saying it is an Imperator? A vague statement about it being a sibling that I pointed out is fallacious and a statement about being a parralellogram that isn't even accurate (2 Imps, or an Imp and a Vic would be a hexagon)? Justify your revision. --Lowkey
                  • Where does it say specifically that the Executrix was a Victory-class Star Destroyer? So far, you've only said that the attack on Kashyyyk was conducted by Victorys. That does not mean the Executrix was a Victory. Admiral J. Nebulax 17:18, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
                    • So Victory's attacked but apparently that doesn't count the ship leading the atack? Its said in the JAT Tarkin commanded Victorys and we know from HttE Tarking sacked Kashyyk, but apparently he changed ships just for that? And if you want to play that game, where is it specifically said that the Executrix is an Imperator class Star Destroyer? -- Lowkey
                      • Just because Victorys attacked Kahyyyk does not mean that Tarkin commanded it from a Victory. And ask TIEPilot051999, the creator of this article. Admiral J. Nebulax 17:26, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
                        • So you have proof he was able to get a change of command in days despite the fact that such things take considerable time IRL? And again, where is your proof that it is an Imperator? That banning threat swings both ways; I've cited sources that say my reverts are correct. You have not. Citations are important for a wiki article J. Where are yours? --Lowkey
                          • Your source does not support your claim. And, I don't have the book. Ask TIEPilot051999, the creator of this article, why he did it his way. I'm only sticking on his side because you don't have a source. Admiral J. Nebulax 17:36, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)

And ask TIEPilot051999, the creator of this article.

                          • So you admit to having no idea what you are talking about because you don't have the book, but I must be wrong anyways? That's truely laughable. --Lowkey


  • Fact: Exactor was mentioned as Imperial-class. Fact: Executrix was mentioned as Exactor's sister ship. Conclusion: Executrix is Imperial-class, as well. End of discussion. Besides, the Victory class was mentioned in previous material as being introduced during the Clone Wars. It hardly makes any sense for a ship that may have been introduced before to be considered "new" here.TIEPilot051999 17:41, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Thank you for that information, TIEPilot. Admiral J. Nebulax 17:44, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • Not a problem. I actually mentioned that above, so I don't have a clue why he ignored it. (I have a couple good ideas, though...). And in any case, Luceno's books are prone to typos like I said. (Eixes Valorum and Stass Alle as Valorum Eixes and Alle Stass in "Labyrinth of Evil", not to mention that Executrix is mentioned as Executor on the next page.)TIEPilot051999 17:51, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
        • Well, apparently Lowkey figured it out now. Admiral J. Nebulax 17:57, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
          • More like I actually go out and do things on a Saturday. --Lowkey
            • Wait wait, did it actually state the Executrix as an Imperator or is that just conjecture? 'Cus if it's described as an "older sibling", that could be like saying a Victory-class destroyer is an older sibling of an Imperator-class destroyer. And if the Victory-attack is being led by Tarkin in an Imperator, why doesn't the book state this outright? And if the book is the only source about the Executrix, then I'd say it's the only one anyone here can use. VT-16 18:03, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
              • Well, Lowkey's source only said that Victory-class Star Destroyers were used during the attack on Kashyyyk. And, as stated by TIEPilot, Luceno's books have many errors in them. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:32, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
                • I responded to this earlier, and you choose to ignore this. The statement that it says sister ship is a lie. It calls it an older sibling. This is an entirley different statement from it being a sistership. The Los Angeles is the older sibling to the Virginia despite them being different classes. And the "oh, well he makes typos argument fails unless you can show that he made an error in this specific case. Further, as I said we know Tarkin commanded a Victory class at this time from the JAT. We know he led the sacking of Kashyyyk from Pelleons memories. So I have statements in the book and circumstantail evidence backing me. You have nothing but a bluff about what the book actually says. --Lowkey
                  • I would like to add that there's precedent in the EU of an "older sibling" being an entirely different class. The CC-7700 frigate from Rebellion was described as an older sibling of the DP20 Corellian gunship. JimRaynor55 22:57, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
                    • Lowkey, you have no source to back up your claim. So give it up. Admiral J. Nebulax 23:14, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
                      • Actually, it's the people claiming the Executrix was an Imperator-class destroyer who have no evidence. The book itself apparently doesn't call it a sister ship, but does speak of an attack by Victory-class ships on Kashyyyk, led by Tarkin. Pelleon remembered Tarkin leading the sacking of Kashyyyk and Tarkin was known to commanded a Victory-class around this time (Heir to the Empire, Jedi Academy Trilogy). VT-16 10:37, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Oh, for ****'s sakes. I already explained this two times. Do I REALLY have to do it again?TIEPilot051999 01:36, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • OK, I don't have the book, but it sounds like Lowkey is making a good case here. I may go get the book. Please give more page numbers of what your quoting (e.g. "sister ship" vs "older sibling"). Thanks. WhiteBoy 01:57, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Yes, Page 279 of what book? -- Riffsyphon1024 05:32, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader VT-16 10:37, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
        • Well, if the ship was a Victory and we have good proof, then fine. The reason why I stuck with TIEPilot is because Lowkey did not present a good enough source. If Lowkey was in fact right, I apologize. Also, if this is resolved, we would need to take down the "Protected" notice so the article could be fixed up. Admiral J. Nebulax 13:21, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
"Imperial war machines closed in from all sides; speeders and swift boats roaring up onto the sandy banks, gunships coiling down from the treetops, Victory-cass Destroyers descending from the stars, their wedge-shaped armored hulls outlined by bright running lights."
―p. 279 of Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader

Just thought I'd give the exact quote they were talking about. And the page is protected so we can fix the problem in here before anyone else messes with the page. Personally I think that Lowkey has been putting his case forward quite well the entire time...anyway, that's the quote. I can't ever remember the ship being referred to as a sister ship. -Jaymach Ral'Tir 15:51, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Yes, while Lowkey put up a good case, he had no source. And, this article needs to be fixed up, so let's get the "Protected" notice off. I think it's been settled. Admiral J. Nebulax 15:58, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • He's been naming his sources throughout the entire debate, primarily this book + HTTE and JAT. VT-16 16:43, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • I meant his original "The attack was carried out by Victory-class Star Destroyers". That's not a source alone. Admiral J. Nebulax 19:30, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
        • Oh, I thought you meant "source" as in "book", not a single sentence. My bad. VT-16 19:39, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)

She's an Imperator - here's why...Edit

Dark Lord, p. 235, says: "The Star Destroyer Exactor and its older sibling, Executrix, drifted side by side, bow-to-stern, forming a parallelogram of armor and armament."

Now the opposite sides of a parallelogram are the same length. That means that the two ships are the same size.

Follow that link to wiki and look at the diagram. The two Star Destroyers represent the triangles ABC and ADE... as Exactor is a 1600m ship, this means that the Executrix must be too; she cannot be a 900m VicStar or an 1137m VenStar. It's possible that she represents an older class built on the same hull as that later used for the Imperator... but I doubt it!

I know this means that the name ship of the Imperator-class wasn't the Imperator, but rather the Executrix, but there's no problem with that: warship class-names, both in Star Wars and the real world, can describe the type of things ships of the class are named after: thus, Defender-class Star Destroyers are named after people that defend, and the lead ship is the Obi-Wan, and in the real world, the Royal Navy's Duke-class frigates are named after duke(dom)s, And the lead ship is HMS Norfolk.

Similarly, the names Executrix and Exactor both describe imperatores in the broad sense of people with authority - hence, Imperator-class...

As to evidence for the Trix being a VicStar... well, there's none. VicStars dropped into the atmosphere as part of the attack, as VicStars do. She commands the attack, but doesn't drop into the atmosphere....

Hope that clears things up!! --McEwok 22:47, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • Hmm, very interesting. This might just prove it's an Imperial-class Star Destroyer. Therefore, I haven't seen much of a source supporting Lowkey's claim, I think this page should be changed back to the original text. Admiral J. Nebulax 22:56, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • There is no source supporting the idea that she is a VicStar. I suggest something like the following:

Executrix was one of the first Imperial-class Star Destroyers.

In 19 BBY, she was assigned as the command ship of Moff Wilhuff Tarkin, and she was in the forefront of the governor's early campaigns to impose the New Order on his territories, including a major slave-raid assault on Kashyyyk, approximately two months after the conclusion of the Clone Wars.

==Behind the Scenes==

This seems to imply that Executrix was the first Imperial-class Star Destroyer to enter service, but it is not quite impossible that older variant classes existed, built on the same 1600m hull.

How's that? --McEwok 23:32, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • Made a little modification, but otherwise, it's good. Admiral J. Nebulax 23:37, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Frankly? If McEwok is saying it, that's an excellent reason to question whether it's true. Rogue 9 23:41, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • I see you failed geometry *****. Two Impstars end to end would be a very messed uplooking hexagon. Look at them from above - due to the part above the engines it would look something like <___> when the two of them are together. Thus the description is flawed and thus any conclusions you attempt to draw from it are flawed. Particularily in light of explicet statements later in the book. And again, if the book itself saying Victory clas sis not a source, the entire entry needs to be deleted, making this a null issue. --Lowkey
        • I've been looking for Luceano's email to write him, but no luck. Anyone know his website? --Lowkey
  • 1.) Um, who's "*****"? *confused*
  • 2.) Unfortunately for your argument, what Dark Lord describes is two Star Destroyers bow-to-stern, forming a parallelogram. The bow of one is aligned with the stern of the other. The port side of one is parallel to the starboard side of the other - along the line AC in the picture here.
  • 3.) The "explicit statements" later in the book show only that there are VicStars in Tarkin's fleet, not that Exactrix is a VicStar...
  • I think you're wrong on all counts, I'm afraid... --McEwok 01:53, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • 1) *****, pardon my typo. Wiki logs IP addys, tracebacks are not difficult ******. And I see you refuse to actually look at the evidence. 4r15isd.jpg

The engine housing is not flat, but points together. Thus two Imperators bow to stern would be <__> a hexagon. Thus we know the description is inherently flawed, as will any conclusion drawn from it. And of course you have evidence that contradicts the statement in the book about Victorys attacking and the statemetns in HttE and JAT about Tarkin commanding the sacking of Kashyyyk and about him commanding a Victory, right? You also think reptiles and mammels are the same, so what you think about the evidence is pretty much irrelevent compared to the actual evidence. --Lowkey

Well, I'm still confused. Is that supposed to be some sort of veiled threat, or are you just being bloody rude in addressing me by the real name of someone who you think I am? I've taken the liberty of removing personal details from your posts... but if you can tell me how to trace a BT dynamic-IP back to an individual, please do - it would be useful tracing some of the anonymous posts people make here...

I see now what you mean now about the slight 'vee' in the taffrail, though... although, personally I think you're reaching. Even assuming that that design-feature is present on the Imperator as well as the later Imperial, there are also notches in the 'sharp' sides of the arrowheads, which don't interfere with the 'parallelogram' image...

If you can tell me how it's more plausible that a 900m VicStar and a 1600m ImpStar parked bow-to-stern would form a parallelogram, please do!

And can you supply the exact JA3 quote on Tarkin and the VicStar, perhaps? Thanks!

For the record:

(1.) the reference to VicStars in Dark Lord cannot be used to infer that the Exactrix is one...

(2.) I'm not aware that there was any explicit connection between Tarkin's period in command of a VicStar and the Kashyyyk raid...

(3.) For those confused by the "reptiles and mammals" thing, this stems from my occasional theory that the novels are best read as in-universe fiction. On the back of this, I once made the suggestion that the (allegedly reptilian) "Noghri" species doesn't really exist, but was made up by NRI to hide the fact that the Death Commandos were really Ewoks - in much the same way that the "night-vision" that radar gave allied pilots in WWII was attributed to the vitamin C in carrots. It should, I hope, be obvious that I wasn't being 100% serious at the time. And that radio-waves are not a type of vegetable, either.

  • shakes head* --McEwok 02:56, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • If we follow through with that line of thought, nothing is true and we can make up what ever we like about the SW universe. Nice try, ME. If you haven't read the sources you're disputing, you're just out of luck. VT-16 10:52, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • Um, nothing about Star Wars is true!! :-P The way I look at it is that in terms of "evidence", what we have are a range of possibilities defined by the (made-up) sources, and that where there are multiple valid interpretations, we're best to skirt the issue, and to use a form of words that can indicate either way. In this case, though, there is some evidence that the Trix is an ImpStar, and no evidence that she's a VicStar. As to the sources, I'm waiting to see what Lowkey says. The only reference I know is to Tarkin using a VicStar at Omwat. That doesn't exclude him having an Imperator, any more than Vader's use of an ISD at the start of RotJ excludes the Executor. But there could be other evidence I don't yet know about!! --McEwok 12:07, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)

The Absolute Final Word On This Discussion Edit

Chapter 9 of "Dark Lord" refers to Exactor as the second of the newly minted Imperator-class Star Destroyer. Chapter 37 of "Dark Lord" refers to Executrix as Exactor's "older sibling". While it doesn't come out and actually state it, it's pretty clear that the intended statement is that Executrix is 'Imperator/Imperial, too.

Oh, and BTW, Lowkey, while I do not actually have "Dark Lord", I have at least read it for the purposes of doing stuff like this. I'm not like some other people who just casually post nonsense and fanon like some other people I could mention.

And now that I've proven myself correct for the third time, can this page go back to the way it was?TIEPilot051999 20:06, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • "Older Sibling" doesn't necessarily mean the same class. That's the whole crux of the discussion here. QuentinGeorge 20:07, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • "While it doesn't come out and actually state it"
Exactly. And with every other statement pertaining to Tarkin's ship around this time, in this or other books, everything points to Victory-class. VT-16 20:16, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Didn't read this entire thing yet, but did anyone notice that a misprint about the Star Destroyers names? Tarkin's and Vader's docked side by side for a spell and one (I'm guessing the Executrix) was called the Executor? I finished the book last night. First off, woah, major mistake on page 237.

On 236, the Star Destroyer Exactor, the ship that will be featured prominently in the story, is mentioned, along with it's "older sibling," the Executrix. But on 237, 3rd full paragraph, Luceno and/or the editors conflate them into Executor, Vader's starship in TESB. Now taking Archie Goodwin's "Darth Vader Strikes" LA Times Strip as canon, the Executor was definitely not constructed until after ANH. Oops! They screwed the pooch by inventing Star Destroyer names that sound too much like each other. Geekmasterflash 20:21, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • OK. You know what? How about we make a compromise? How about we mention on the page that the ship is a Star Destroyer, then put a "Behind the Scenes" which mentions this entire controversy?

Quite frankly, I'm right about this. I know I am right about this. But to end the nonsense and make the page available for editing again, I'm willing to concede on this issue.TIEPilot051999 21:43, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • It's an Imperial I-class Star Destroyer. It has been sourced. The debate is over. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:49, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Where has it been sourced? We've been asking for direct quotes for days now, and all that's come up is 'sibling'. Which is previously used about different ship classes related to one another. VT-16 11:35, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

This is ridiculous Edit

The page has been protected for three days. Wikipedia doesn't even do this for the George W. Bush article for more than a few hours, and it's vandalized roughly every five minutes. I'm of the opinion that the evidence strongly points to it being a Victory, but that's not the important part here. The important part is that this whole fiasco is defeating the purpose of a wiki. Rogue 9 07:29, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • Wikipedia has far more users and admins, and, as a result, can settle disputes faster. QuentinGeorge 10:44, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Listen, while this dispute has gone for far too long, it is better to have a discussion than just editing things that keep getting reverted. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:47, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

My ProposalEdit

Executrix was Star Destroyer that led the assault on Kashyyyk approximately two months after the conclusion of the Clone wars. It was commanded by Wilhuff Tarkin.

Behind the ScenesEdit

  • The Executrix is described as the "older sibling" of the Imperator-class Exactor, whether this means it too is an Imperator is unknown, particularly in light of the fact that the Kashyyyk assault force is described as being comprised of Victory-class Star Destroyers.

AppearancesEdit


QuentinGeorge 11:39, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Hmm? A few thoughts...

Is there anything in Dark Lord on VicStars except the line describing "Victory-class Destroyers descending from the stars"? This doesn't mean that every Star Destroyer of unspecified or ambiguous class in Tarkin's fleet was a VicStar... does it?

In Jedi Search, p. 293, Qwi Xux remembers "Moff Tarkin's personal Star Destroyer", twice identified as a VicStar, as being parked in orbit alongside the training facility above Omwat, at the time at which the Maw was being constructed. However, a strictly literal reading of the text would imply that the VicStar was parked there permanently throughout the two years of Qwi's training—though obviously, strictly literal readings aren't strictly necessary!!

It's possible that "personal" is a more rhetorical than literal term here, meaning that the ship symbolizes Tarkin's pesonal involvement, rather than that she's his command ship - or that the Omwati kids were told that Tarkin was there permanently, watching them from the guardship, when in fact he wasn't.

I concede that the combination of "sibling" and the parallelogram image of Executrix and Exactor alongside each other doesn't amount to 100% proof that they share a hullform, and I'd say that Luceno could have been deliberately ambiguous in his use of language here; but I think that this amounts to a stronger implication than the evidence from which it might be argued that she could have been a VicStar...

I suggest:


Executrix was a the Star Destroyer commanded by Moff Wilhuff Tarkin in the early days of the New Order. She led an assault on Kashyyyk approximately two months after the conclusion of the Clone wars.


(Flipped the order of the sentences; her role as Tarkin's command ship is a primary part of her "biography", her role at Kashyyyk follows on from that... no?)


Behind the Scenes The Executrix may have been the first of the Imperator-class Star Destroyers, the iconic Imperial battleships of the Original Trilogy: she is described as the "older sibling" of the Exactor, the second ship of the class, and the two ships alongside each other bow-to-stern can be described as forming "a parallelogram of armor and armament", suggesting that they share the same basic hullforms. However, this does not quite amount to categorical proof, and some fans would prefer to believe that she is a Victory-class Star Destroyer: the novel Jedi Search refers to Tarkin as having a ship of this class as his "personal Star Destroyer" in the earlier years of the Empire.


McEwok 14:31, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • First of all: "deliberatly ambigious"? What the hell is that supposed to mean? In a fictional universe where ships are named and classified in almost every single story, Luceno decided to let Tarkin's personal ship be an "ambigious" Star Destroyer? Please.
And then there's this:
the iconic Imperial battleships of the Original Trilogy
Ok, now you're you're just fucking with us. If you're not gonna take things seriously, I'm not going to take you seriously, either. Especially that bizarre obsession you have with making a big deal out of every contentious issue. VT-16 15:09, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Luceno could have decided to leave it unclear, which would be entirely withn his rights as a writer—and the simple truth is that the ship's designation is unclear. The sibling-parallelogram image suggests an Imperator but doesn't come out and say it outright: these are not the obvious terms to describe two starkly different classes, though, so I susepct that either he didn't anticipate the reaction from the VicStar people, or he meant to confuse us.
    • But I'm genuinely sorry that you took offense at my use of "battleship"—I just meant "warships", and I suspect the only influence in my choice of words was the assonance of "Imperial battleships". How does "Imperial capital ships" sound instead? :) --McEwok 16:50, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

My ProposalEdit

  • The following is my proposal:

Executrix was a Star Destroyer in the early days of the Galactic Empire. It was commanded by Wilhuff Tarkin after the Clone Wars.

It participated in the attack on Kashyyyk in the Empire's early days.

Behind the ScenesEdit

AppearancesEdit


So? Admiral J. Nebulax 21:54, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Works for me, if everyone else is fine with it. Maybe throw in a {{ship-stub}}? --McEwok 22:23, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Another ProposalEdit

How about a combination of the proposals by Jack Nebulax and QuentinGeorge?


Executrix was a Star Destroyer in the early days of the Galactic Empire. It was commanded by Wilhuff Tarkin.

It led an assault on Kashyyyk approximately two months after the conclusion of the Clone Wars.

Behind the ScenesEdit

There is some dispute to whether this was an Imperator-class or Victory-class Star Destroyer, as the book Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader does not clearly state its class.

The Executrix is described as the "older sibling" of the Imperator-class Exactor, whether this means it too is an Imperator is unknown, particularly in light of the fact that the Kashyyyk assault force is described as being comprised of Victory-class Star Destroyers.

AppearancesEdit


--Vermilion 22:37, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • I still can't see how the line describing "Victory-class Destroyers descending from the stars" means that the entire assault-force was "comprised of Victory-class Star Destroyers", so maybe add a little of my own version to Behind the Scenes:

There is some dispute to whether this was an Imperator-class or Victory-class Star Destroyer, as the book Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader does not clearly state its class.

The novel Jedi Search had previously referred to Tarkin as having a Victory-class ship as his "personal Star Destroyer" in the earlier years of the Empire, and other ships in his fleet at Kashyyyk certanly belonged to this class. But Executrix is identified as an "older sibling" to the Exactor, the second ship of the Imperator-class, and when the two ships rendezvous alongside each other, bow-to-stern in space, Luceno describes them as forming "a parallelogram of armor and armament", a turn of phrase that would better suit two ships sharing the same basic hullforms.


That work for anyone? -- McEwok 22:57, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • It's not what I want, but by a far and wide margin, it's 100% better than keeping this pointless argument going.TIEPilot051999 23:40, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Made a little tweak on this proposal. I personally think what is up there now (not including this separate "Behind the scenes") is good. Admiral J. Nebulax 00:15, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)

OK, unlocking the page Edit

Since we seem to have finally agreed to disagree, I'm unlocking the page. Please put clear, concise reasons supporting each POV. Not too much, but enough information to hopefully avoid this problem in the future. WhiteBoy 06:48, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • So, which proposal will becoming the new "look" of the article? Admiral J. Nebulax 12:42, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)

GhormanEdit

According to the Ghorman Massacre article, Tarkin killed the demonstrators on Ghorman using his flagship. Is this that ship that crushed those people? Are we entitled to put the two together? -- Riffsyphon1024 09:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

–…== Here's what i think ==

Ok, i understand that this is a REALLY old discussion, but i missed it. Just my two cents on the subject.

So the debate is wether or not this ship is Imperator or Victory. Lets start from there.

  • When the Exactor and the Executrix meet in space they are said to form a parellellogram.(i know we went over this). They are said to be bow to stern. I just reread this book and it took me quite a while and some drawing to figure out what the author meant, the ships are pointed the opposite direction with the long sides next to each other. Going back to one of the previous arguments, this confirms that the Exactor and Executrix are the same size. As VicStars and ImpStars are very differant sizes, it would make sense for it to be Imperator.
  • During the Kashyyyk fight, Victories are said to be descending towards the tree cities. Firstly, I didn't know Vics were atmospheric. I thought the last star destroyers that were atmospheric were the Venators. I know that ImpStars are NOT atmospheric, however. If Tarkin was commanding from a Vic, he may have headed down to the surface. If Executrix was indeed an ImpStar, it would have remained in orbit and used its guns in the bombardment, and coordinated the forces(where Tarkin would have been acting as commander of the engagement).
  • Now here is speculation on my part. Imperator is the first ship in the Imperator/Imperial line, we all agree on that. The book states that Exactor was the second ship of the class. Executrix is described as being an "older sibling" of the Exactor. Think back(forward actually) to when Palpatine Created Executor and we later find out that he built two under the name executor, but the second was named Lusankya and hidden, thus proving that the empire can make two of something at the same time. Suppose that Exactor and Executrix were in construction at the same time. More than that, say Exactor was under construction first, but due to some weird coincidence type deals which happen, Executrix is constructed and out the door first. Exactor and Executrix would be considered sibling ships, with Executrix older and Exactor the second of the class to be started. The theory may not hold much water, but its better than having a Vic thats as long as an ImpStar ( which is what Executrix would be if it is a Vic)
  • ANother theory that's slightly more plausable is this. Executrix is a renamed Imperator. Tarkin probobly had a Vic once, and liked it. It was probobly named Executrix. Now, the emperor gives Tarkin a brand new ship named Imperator. Tarkin, unimpressed with the name changes the name to Executrix. There, now we have an "older sibling" of the "second" ship that is also an ImpStar.

Again, i know we already went through this, im just presenting a couple theories that could account for this. Don't shoot it up too much. --Eggzavier 02:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

    • Imperial-class Star Destroyers are also atmospheric as of The Force Unleashed. - Brynn Alastayr 00:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
      • Hello! I'm new here, but i have some idea.

I don't think, the paralologram should be geometrical exact. I think the two destroyers were not next to each other, but "under" each other. If one of them was "topdown", the hangar bays were very close to each other. There is no reason to navigate next to each other. And if we look at this two destroyers from tho horizon, we see a paralelogram. And the view is quite the same at every destroyer classes, also if they az not the same type (it's enogh, if the are similar size).

Other: Where do you read, that Tarkin lead the assault? I don't find any evidience for it.

Every ship can fly in atmosphere. But the bigger can't land. They are too heavy, the landig legs should have been too massive. Morrt 11:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki