Will probably stream some Sins of the Prophets tonight around 9PM EST. If you like Halo Space Battles, I'll see ya there. www.twitch.tv/eckhartsladder Music: DeLorra - My White Daisy // Fourge - Velvet 2600 // Home - Resonance
EckhartsLadder I would like at least one case were the alliance used venators in canon to act as a mix of the old and new sorta ( not including sequel trilogy)
EckhartsLadder Do u still do the other videos that aren’t selected in your polls later down the line cause there have been suggestions that didn’t get picked that I’d like to see get made and haven't been, even some from polls that were quite a while ago still haven't been made. So do u still keep the suggestions for later down the line? Please reply so you can put this loyal followers heart at ease!
You keep missing the option of having the ship, but not sending it on the fighter missions. The Venator would be a perfect mobile base for refitting and maintaining those X-wings. It can be elsewhere dispatching the fighters. Carriers DO fit the hit and fade mission profile, so long as it's not entering the target system. If it's 20 LY away, the fact it's a bit slow is not an issue.
What amazes me is that the rebels never used the shit tons of separatist ships, droids, and materials left over from the clone wars. There were even whole factories left untouched.
Yeah, I wondered that too, I understand that in the original trilogy that they don't have CIS droids because they weren't thought of until the prequels, but would be if at least some of the rebel cells in "Rebels" had made use of CIS droids in the fight against the Empire. Maybe in some of the newer novels.
@@marsbase3729 in some of the novels the rebels did indeed use prequel tech, and for some reason Disney seems to hate the prequels as well, so I think that's why you don't see anything in the new media. I do realize Star Wars Battlefront II has had almost exclusively prequel content for the last few patches, and I'm loving it. The Death Star's first kill was actually a Lucrehulk used by the rebels.
I bet you for the factories, any that remained functional either had the empires close eye, or was for the most part hidden. The droids seemed to operate on the strategy of mass mobilization (to an extent) which requires money and/ or raw resources (plus not really their military doctrine). There's the political aspect. That leaves the droids manufactured during the clone Wars, which rebels showed as having poor battery life and committed to the cis. Might be able to convince them Empire = Republic, but if the rebels won, rebels become the Republic. They would then have to deal with a droid inssurection on their hands.
Tbf George Lucas knew all along that he was doing prequels. This was planned, just poorly. Honestly Star Wars always was popular more because of the awesome idea and a universe which facilitated so much imagination. George Lucas has never been a genius or revolutionary, I’d say in 100 years star wars will still exist but nobody will remember George Lucas.
"Hey Guys I Found A Whole Factory Full Of Republic Ships And Shut Down Battle Droids! What Should We Do?" "How bout we bring ships that have 4 turbolasers to fight the death star." "Wha..."
@@thejgamer0855 the venator wasnt useless in battle. Maybe mediocre but it was still a force to be reconned with. Yes it is a way better carrier. But don't call it useless. It is probably comparable to a victory star destroyer.
I just looked it up because I was having a bad feeling about this (pun intended). And yes I can confirm that original trilogy was released before the prequels 😑😔😞
There has been plenty of Expanded Universe stuff written since 1999, and as far as I know Eckhart doesn't just focus on Disney's Canon. Use of other ships could have easily been written into the lore at this time.
In Fallen Order, we see Venators and other Clone Wars era ships being broken down in scrapyards so at the very least, that provides some canon explanation as to their absence in OT era battles.
But so were Y-Wings broken down ships captured by the Rebels. Just look at Y-Wings...They're VERY stripped unlike their Clone Wars days. Same thing with the Venator. I'd like to think that the Rebels and New Republic did get some Venators and only used them as specialized Mobile Naval Battlegroups that just werent there in the movies and such mobile assets were not needed for Endor or other battles.
@Whiterun Guard Except now you have a *very large* ship that needs to stop for fuel, maintenance, repairs, etc etc. Tracking down 30 odd x wings can be hard. Tracking down a capital ship, which would have to stay much longer at starbases or shipyards for refuel and repair gives the empire more time to arrive. If anything, owning a carrier means the rebels must have a base with more infrastructure than Hoth.
@@ronhan9 repair shops&etc are questionable. Venators had them(as any carrier does), but in the end they weren't dedicated bases. Their huge volumes and fighter loads speak against it, actually.
@@neniAAinen internal size of the starships in starwars always seems odd why have corridors like 4 m in height (and several decks of these), you could most likley cut like a third of the height of most capital ships. And lets say that the rebels had one venerator with what 3 wings of X-wings and 1 wing awings and 1 wing or 2 wings of Y-wings so basicly 1I5th or so of the carrier capacity and room for a handfull of shuttles and leight freighters. The rest of the area could store basicly all that you need for either building a base on a planet or on a astroid, provisions and plemty of space for training, repair shops medical bays and since the venetor already had plenty of troop space. And that they were not dedicated bases is one thing during the clone wars - the rebels might have better use for them aqs mobile bases than a front line assault cruiser/carrier and i think the venetor could do that job prtetty good for the rebellion. those 50-72 fieghters could do plenty of damage in a sector and move around pretty efficiently. And that Venetor could bite back pretty good on most capital ships they might come across.
That certainly makes sense. Just because fighters have a hyperdrive doesn't mean they also have infinite range. The best way to use a very valuable, hard to obtain ship like the Venator would be to have it act as a ferry or mobile base: Transport fighters *near* their destination, launch, and then wait for them to return at a rendezvous point for recovery. Y'know, how actual aircraft carriers work.
I would've thought that even if the Rebels could find Venators, they could still use them more as mobile base of operations than their original purpose as attack carriers during the Clone Wars.
Yea he really ignores the usefulness of this especially for surprise attacks and staying hidden. Basically he seems to think a carrier's only use is to launch strike craft against a target in visual range rather than being able to extend the range of its strike craft including hyperspace range as the X-wing doesn't have the fuel to just go anywhere on its own.
@@CareerKnight Actually, it's the Imperial Tie Fighters that don't have fuel. X-Wings have built-in hyperdrive engines to operate independently due to the Rebellion's limited resources. However, it doesn't mean they'll never rely on motherships. With a Venator, you can just park at one hyperjump end of a star system and send fighters through the other.
@@KuDastardly I didn't say x-wings have no fuel or no hyperdrive, just that they don't carry enough fuel to go anywhere with zero regard for the distance. They can only jump so far from their base before they need more to keep going. The Venator and other carriers allow this distance to be increased considerably not to mention making it much harder for imperials to trace the attacks back to their source.
After I watched this video, I thought the same thing it would be a perfect base ship for their fighters. It's troop carrying capability modified to carry more fuel and or supplies and modified to have a ram scoop to refuel itself and it's underbelly hangar receiving supply ships. What makes it really useful strategically it's can launch it's fighters on raid from one location jump away and rendezvous at another making difficult for the Empire to find their "base." The fact is not just a carrier but also a battlecruiser means it can pound pirates and Imperial patrol vessels to bits! It is safe to assume that it would be gray and I thought a Venator would be called "The Gray Ghost." I thought of the USS Enterprise after I came up with a name! Would be good for a film meesa thinks.
Honestly, I feel like starwars missed the point of carriers. It's a mobile supply base and repair station. Carriers should be staying far away from the main fights and sending in craft from a long ways away to fight and then return. The venator, properly used by the rebels, would rarely see combat and all the extra space would be used to carry more supplies while acting as a defensible base against pirates in deep space. With the rebels being fighter heavy, heavily armed carriers would be invaluable as mobile bases and ports of call that could rendezvous with a fighter squadron it had left at an earlier point, making not just their point of origin unpredictable, but also their point of retreat. Many venators ended up in planetary defense navies from my understanding, and having PDN ships hiding rebel fighters on sympathetic planets would be a pretty in theme tactic.
I think Lucas was inspired more by WW2 aircraft battles, not so much naval battles. But realistically, you're correct. You're not going to take your carrier and support vessels in that close. You'd launch fighters. And since it's space and these things are huge, you can launch just about anything, they wouldn't be limited to carrier-capable fighters like a modern aircraft carrier. Also, why no long range missiles? Aparantly they can cram a hyperdrive into a fighter, why not have computer or droid guided missiles? That should have been part of Star Wars a long time ago, not the stupid lightspeed kamikaze maneuver from EP8....
@@booqueefious2230 Imagine X-Wings armed with BVR capable missiles like an actual modern fighter (take your pick of ANY IRL examples) zipping in from hyperspace, leashing off a salvo at some target, and then just immediately jumping out of the combat zone.
@@kylebrady969 yeah. That would give the Interdictor class star destroyers a reason to exist. Catch those fighters like a fly trap. Some kind of purpose built, autonomous droid-missile could come in at hyperspeed, drop out and immediately hit the target without having to worry about returning to base, and do it before the gravity wells or tractor beams can stop it.
Supreme Leader Nugget At last.... astronaut trained you well... my boy... I made Astronautguy... I have been every voice you have ever heard inside your head...
I think this would actually be an amazing asset to the Alliance. Its a floating base for your fighter squadrons. You can have multiple wings of x-wings and y-wings and a-wings on the ship. The ship then jumps into an isolated location in space. The hyperspace active fighters then leave and do their hit and run tactics. When the missions are over they then jump back to the venator and it jumps to a new location or simply acts as a refueling and rearmament base for more sorties before they have to bug out. I think it makes perfect sense and you don't even have to fill up all the fighter space this thing has. Even if it only holds half the fighter space you can use the leftover space to then pack in extra shields and power, or resources like fuel and armaments for the fighters. A venator would never be or atleast rarely be a pitched battle carrier like it is in the clone wars. It would simply be the floating bases of the alliance. I also think this helps play into the alliance overall as well. You can have entire cells dedicated to a single venator. They don't have to worry about bases being found and then just dumping them like they did on Hoth or Yavin. Empire finds you then you either jump or have your fighters mess them up. It adds flexibility. If you want you can have them all have a few corvettes or cargo transports for extra supplies and recon. I'd imagine maybe a nebulon b, some corvettes of any variety and then some of those transports we see at hoth and such. That makes the perfect hit and run fleet. Then if you have a last ditch effort like lets say the battle over endor then yeah you have the venators in combat to add some tonnage and firepower to the fleet, while also acting as rearming depots for your fighters. I can just imagine it. You have your rebel cell, they jump into a sector in the outer rim. You then deploy your five to ten squadrons and they go jump to various sorties. Then they fly back to you and you then travel to the new point. The empire then has to find a ship that can literally be anywhere instead of a base that is locked to a planet. It would also probably be cheaper for the mon cala to simply retrofit some better shields to a venator then making a while new ship. So while you have your home ones and heavy hitting capital ships, the venator shines as a hit and run carrier.
That sounds amazing but how would the mon cala be able to afford to retrofit an outdated vessel with modern shield technology when they are already making their own massive and up to date ships. And if they did then I wouldn't see them diverting all manpower into one ship. And besides, if the empire were to even find out the rebellion had a venator they'd immediately send a fleet or two out to hunt it down and destroy it
Pretty sure Lucas as we speak is figuring out how he can release Very Special Editions that show Venators in the background of space battles in the OT.
If i remember correctly the Venator was a massive fuel/personnel/maintenance hog, which the rebels lacked all three of during the eras where surplus venators where available. The Venator would however have been useful as mobile bases, with large hangers that could re-arm/refit fighters. Have 100 X-Wings on board then use the rest to store ordinance/supplies. And if the venator was caught by the empire, it would have a fighting chance against an Imperial-1 and its tie fighters.
Yes even replace some hanger space with extra fuel tanks for the fleet, plus it has a class 1.0 hyper drive so it could also be used as a fast attack ship
I think you are right Demo, I think the cost in crew/fuel/maintenance/upgrades needed to keep it in the fight is the far more likely reason it was not used, for in theory it could amplify hit and run tactics. Launch multiple squads from one hyperspace location, they zip in attack and then leave hitting multiple targets at once, by the time the Empire figures out where the attacks came from the Carrier can have recovered the ships and moved on to another location making them an excellent mobile base. You could use the hyperspace attack method to an even greater extent for in theory, a good Carrier would save fuel for the attack runs. Though if the Venator was such a fuel hog, that it made it ate the savings in fuels plus it makes it a bad carrier for you.
This is one of many reasons why Rebels sucked. They wasted many opportunities. We should have seen an episode where one Rebel Cell uses a customized Venator to fight the Empire. Hopefully something like that gets added into cannon in a graphic novel or future tv show.
I think that the rebels did probably use Venators but they couldn't get enough of them. the reason i say this is that while using planetary bases to launch attacks seems good on paper it doesn't hold in the long run. think back to "the empire strikes back" when Vader loses the millennium falcon he talks about extrapolating a trajectory in an attempt to find out where it went. this represents a problem if one base launches a sortie to an imperial base that is too close to them when the fighters retreat or arrive they might accidentally give away their base. this is where the venators come in since they would be used as a moble base there primary mission would be to obscure the locations of rebel bases by serving as a middle man to launch and receive xwings and to serve as a moble base that is constantly on the run. another use is to use them as a platform of deception. you see since the xwing is an former imperial project the empire knows key data about the fighter how much fuel it has hyperdrive range etc. the rebels know that the empire has this data and with the venators they can use this data to their advantage. they could use the venators to make it look like a pro-imperial system is harboring rebels making the empire waste intelligence resources trying to find a rebel base that isn't there.
Considering that all of the Venators were owned by the Republic, and that kinda turned into the Empire, I think it would be hard for a rebellion to purchase giant military weapons from the government they were rebelling against.
This argument makes no sense. The Venators would have been supremely useful. Not as direct fire battleships carrying fighters but as proper carriers acting as mobile logistics bases for their complement Carrier in system A launches fighters Fighters in A Hyperspace to objective in system B Carrier hyperspaces to system C Fighters in B complete their objective, hypers to C for rendezvous That's much better than operating from a planetary base its really simple common sense, you don't need to be Thrawn to figure it out the excuses them come up with in the 'essential guide to warfare' are not thought out at all
Venator, in the end, isn't a carrier. It's a hybrid warship. All of its facilities are a compromise as a result. Huge manning requirements for much if the stuff you don't even need(or to be fair - better never need against the Empire), and for less than ideal starwing facilities. When you need a carrier - build a carrier. Don't build a Kiev.
@@dsdy1205 Opsec. Maybe an Imperial droid spied the carrier launch. Rebellion has to keep moving ahead of the Imperial juggernaut. Planetary bases get discovered and wiped out, I don't see how that helps logistics.
@@dsdy1205 Because when you have a single system as a base, with enough attacks from that base, the Empire can figure out where you're coming from. Thrawn did it after a single year on the job and with one cell supporting other cells nowhere near their main base
I am more thinking they are worried about hiding such a large ship. The logistic of running a ship that big quietly arent exactly easy to deal with. Look at the Rebels show. constantly had issues with fuel and equipment for smaller ships
@asaeampan True, but this is basically an argument based around at what point could they support the larger ships. Sure post endor they gained traction and got support, but at what point would they have the finances/supplies to make it work.
@EckhartsLadder there's a small error at 25 seconds in - you mistakenly say Lucrehulk instead of Venator. Not sure what options are available without re-uploading - is there a way you can use CZcams's system to put a correction notice on the screen?
EckhartsLadder haha no worries. Fantastic video by the way. I could see the odd use for a Venator but as you correctly point out, there are just better capital ships for what the Rebels needed.
Nothing to be missed? You can still read them and believe those? I'd do that rather than believe this new disney crap, you define canon yourself, not these money hoarder shit corporations.
JustAnd13 thats not true so right now you’re saying that if I write a comic in which mace windu kills sidious and I believe that that’s canon? No canon is the thing that the creators of the series see as the true story
@@simondesmet473 According what you just said, Disney is not the creator of the true Star Wars stories alas can't put them outside canon. Other thing: all of this is just entertainment, money business. If the creators produce shit stories like sequels, audience can believe what they want, for me those are just some Disney fella's dirty dreams, and true story is that there is Ben Skywalker etc.. from the good stories some call "extended universe" I don't care what you say about what is canon and what is not, corporations can't change audiences minds any way they want. You shouldn't believe their bullshit either
One thing you didn’t mention though, is that like the acclamator, the Venator is one if the few larger capital ships that could actually land on planets, so it could also be a mobile base, along with GR-75’s.
I disagree with your comment about the Venator being an anchor to the rebellion. In fact, I think it would actually assist majorly. The Venator is basically a mobile base, something the Rebels would want. Instead of a grounded base fixated upon a planet that can eventually be located and invaded like Hoth, the Venator can always be on the move and make it even more difficult for the Empire to find. But not only would it serve as an excellent base of operations , the Venator would also allow the Rebels to be far more aggressive. As we know, the Venator is a carrier focused capital ship. So there must be multiple repair bays and refueling and rearming stations on the ship. So instead of the fighters having to located the nearest most rebel base to get repairs/refuel/rearm, they can just go to their Venator which would be hiding about nearby or micro jump in nearby, get what they need there, and quickly redeploy to commence another slash and run attack. As previously mentioned, seeing that the Venator is a mobile base, it could allow the Rebels to operate in areas where they don’t have any planetary bases. The Venator would help the rebels spread their influences and cause havoc in a wider perimeter and spread the Imperial forces thin. With a military force which has an emphasis on mobility and snub fighters, it only makes sense that a carrier would go hand and hand with them.
They already had Destroyers and Cruisers that fulfilled that role. There's no reason for a Venator when they were literally being handed cruisers for free elsewhere. Besides, the Venator was an aneurysm to begin with. Shitty weapon placements, disastrous bridge placement, slow as fuck, etc
It’s also a matter of that the venator was an old star destroyer. Likely, the empire maintained an iron hold on all of them (cos they owned them and were controlled by programmed clone commanders), and it would not make a lot of sense for the rebels to use one as… they really can’t get one at all. They also would be absolutely crushed by the newer star destroyers anyway, because those were newer and had newer weapons, and as said in the above comment, the bridge is placed in a very vulnerable spot. The rebels would be better of with separatist equipment because they had it and could get lots of it.
A _Venator_ is too big for the Rebel Alliance. I'm reminded of that one ISD in _Legends_ that was privately owned and functioned more-or-less as a mobile smuggler's port. They ended up selling off most of the guns, so it only had an armament more-or-less equivalent to a _Venator_ and they still could barely keep it functioning, from both a money and crew perspective (although the first leads into the second.) If you're not taking the ship into combat anyway,, and given the size of rebel operations, all you need is a GR75 (or three) and somewhere relatively nearby to park them. Sure, the GR75s aren't fixing fighters on the run, so to speak, but a _Venator_ has a thousands strong crew while a trio of GR75s needs about twenty. Yeah, the GR75s would need more people to actually service and fit out the fighters, but you're not needing thousands for those penny-ante squadrons the rebels are deploying; one _Venator_ could probably carry every fightercraft we see in the original trilogy. The later stages, once the Rebel Alliance actually has a fleet, they'd have some use. Pilots can only spend so long in the cockpit before they start having fatigue issues, so having an actual carrier that can move with the fleet starts to come in handy. They'll still probably be off-screen, not actually showing up to the battle, because they're old, were under-armed when shiny and new, and they've got those expensive, hyper-capable fighters.
Absolutely agree with Mr. H, most x-wings were being serviced on the ground in planets like hoth, not in capital ships. even the MC series of capital ships never had the capability to service, refuel, or rearm x-wings. which meant that the rebel fleet could only ever hit as often as they could refuel and rearm, the real anchor was the rebel bases, and the venator was without a doubt the solution. eckartsladders excuse is really freaking lame, its like saying that the nimitz class aircraft carriers are the anchor of the US navy, i never heard of such bull×××× in my life. Aircraft carriers are literally the solution to the problem of limited range of aircraft and limited scope of airbases.
@@MrShamus22 you make it sound like Home-One didnt have sh×tty weapons placements and a sh×tty bridge. The Venator fulfilled its role as an aircraft carrier excellently, and the only reason it suffered overall is because the Victory class was supposed to be paired up with the Venator in the clonewars. the Venator would operate as the Supercarrier of the Battlegroup, while the Victory would act as the Battleship soaking up all the damage while dishing out just as much in return.
I honestly find the fact that most people use the X-Wing's hyperdrive as a reason for the Rebellion to not use carriers to be baffling. If anything it's the one piece of equipment that would have enabled /true/ carrier warfare because it would have allowed the carrier ship to have /true/ stand-off ability like WW2/post-WW2 carriers have where you never, ever put the carrier into the line of fire. In Star Wars this would most likely consist of parking the carrier outside of the system and any sensor nets it had active, deploying the strike craft and having them do a short range jump into the system to strike at the target and then jump back out to land, rearm, refuel, and get back into the action or just straight up leave. The Fortressa, therefore, is an object lesson in how NOT to use a carrier.
Yes! Thank you! This is exactly what I was going to say. I've seen this first attack on the Death Star animation before and it always confused me as to why you'd deploy so close to the target. I guess it must be a Star Wars thing as no one ever seems to operate their fighters unless some one says "Launch fighters!"
Depends, to me, on the speed and range of the x-wing hyper drive. In WWII, airplanes couldn't cross the atlantic without refueling, and while impressively fast over a few dozen miles, couldn't get from Germany to England without being detected in time to scramble defenses. So, if x-wings are only moderately fast or have a serious range limitation, then you are 100% correct that carriers sitting somewhere remote to the battle would make SO MUCH sense. However, if the x-wing has a near galactic range, and speed similar to capital ships, then the benefits of ferrying them to a near-ish location are lost, and replaced with the time sink of loading them onto a carrier and then deploying them from said carrier.
@@keiran215 Fuel consumption means that even the X-Wing has the range to cross the galaxy the farther it is from the fight the less time it has available IN that fight before it has to return to base. Further you have travel times which, on a warship, aren't as big a deal because you're not stuck in a cramped, tiny cockpit, usually with nobody else to talk to for hours or even days on end while traveling to the theater of battle. There's a lot of factors in why carrier warfare would have been good for the Rebellion and not all of them boil down to "Can it reach the battlefield."
@@keiran215 You've got to remember that the carrier is a movable base. Not only can it shorten the travel time for your fighters to be where they need to be but it also allows you to attack from a different direction to what the enemy may be expecting.
I think the Venator would still be useful to the Rebel Alliance as a mobile base; not something to be used in direct confrontation with Imperial forces, just a place for the X-Wings to rearm and refuel between missions, and probably extend the Alliance's reach beyond the range of the X-Wing's hyperdrive and their hidden bases, like those on Hoth and Yavin IV.
@@bradmorales4002 The Empire would need to alter it's naval doctrine to focus more on starfighters first. That means replacing the TIE Fighter with something more robust, like the TIE Hunter from Legends, or the TIE Defender.
It could certainly be useful, but they probably had other, more easily acquired options for any role it could fill. The Empire may have retired the Venator, but it's not like they would've just mothballed them in the outer rim or something like that.
Yes, sure, but the problem is that the Venator is not properly designed for such a task; a much better replacement would have been the Lucrehulk. However, that aside, there's still the problem of crewing such large vessels; the Rebellion didn't have the people to spare, as they could better be used in the cockpit of s starfighter or on the ground blowing stuff up covertly.
The alternate reason is because venators became an imperial ship at the end of Revenge of The Sith (Edit: The Empire Used the Venators before Star Destroyers, they used parts from venators to make Star Destroyers)
I feel that the Venator would have been a good fit for the Rebellion, not to be used as a traditional battle carrier but as a mobile sector base which would have been much harder for the Empire to track down than fixed ground bases.
I would feel extremly pissed off that these dirty degenerates are using our republic's most prized capital ship as a landing bay for their garbage fighters. If there was a venator full of arc-170s and V wing interceptors, piloted by a rogue legion of clones, then I would forgive any hatred I had of Disney all up until star wars rebels.
Something to consider would be that even though carriers aren't needed for hit and run tactics, they do provide a mobile base that fighters can return to and restock and resupply. And a Venator can carry hundreds of Rebel fighters if needed be. Also it is to be noted that while Mon Calamari Cruisers are stronger, better ships, they suffer a fatal flaw in that they can only be crewed by the Mon Calamari species while other ships the Rebels procured could be piloted and operated by multiple species.
The big issue with Venators that I can see in this role, that wasn't already stated in the video, is that they're a military class of ship, which means that they could only land for maintenance on Rebel sympathetic worlds with a minimal Imperial presence. They have fairly powerful guns and a very powerful shield, but these aren't exactly things you need for a mobile base that's never going to see direct combat, and they hog a lot of energy and maintenance to keep running.
@@idealnovelist3484 Rather than wasting resources to modified venator, why not take a CIS Providence. Less maintenance, less crew, better overall firepower and armor, good carrier capacity, droids, automation, availability. Still can do the same role. Yes the MC80 is designed for Mon Cal but for storage, parking your X wing, pilot RnR, briefing room should be quite standard. I dont see the MC 80 has too much flaw. But remember the Mon Cal support come later in the rebel alliance, what i think the better ship prior to mon cal support would still be the CIS Providence.
@EckhartsLadder: You seem to miss one key aspect of the Venator. Hyperdrive capable fighters are a beautiful thing, but a Venator allows you to have a mobile carrier that can repair/rearm their fighters without returning to a fixed base.
The rebel alliance was formed in 2 BBY and one of the first mentions of Mon Calamari being affiliated with a group of senators came in 3 bby, forming the rebel alliance, I may be incorrect as when the Mon Calamari cruisers were added, I know at least before the battle of scariff, even if they were added later I don’t believe acquiring Venators was conceivable in the early years of the rebellion
You make sense when it comes to straight up ship to ship warfare that the Venator is just not strong enough. However with that hyperdrive clocking in at a 1.0 and the large cargo hold they could be used for supply line caravans as both the hauler and defensive measures. I love the clone war era ships especially the LAART and I wonder why those were not used by the alliance.
Honestly we see the Venator is more than capable of ship to ship combat. I say this because while the Venator doesn't have as many large turbolasers each were supossed to pack more power than the standard versions we are accustomed to.
My recommendation would be refitting the venators with more shields, reactors, armaments and armour plating, this way they gain a formidable star destroyer
@@Helperbot-2000 That would also work really well, maybe two variation, the mobile FOB and retrofitted star destroyer, because let's face it, you can fit an extra reactor and a lot of shield generators in the hangar bay, and there's a lot of space on the outside for turbolasers and ion cannons
Actually he wrote the prequels before he wrote the originals so he knew what to come off of so he thought of the clone wars tech from the very beginning
@@Dqoral More or less only the idea of the emperor purging the jedi was conceived prior to the first three movies. screenrant.com/star-wars-emperor-prequel-plan-lucas-1977/
Nah. it would be like having a yard full of 1973 Mazdas. Some wrenched and a welder, and you have nine 1973 Mazdas, a couple of rolling uglies, and a pile of parts.
Assuming the Rebels could fully crew and operate it - Venators would be an excellent ship for hit and run tactics. They would simply jump to a nearby system and then the X-Wings would do a short jump into combat. Venators were pretty fast and durable; so they would even be able of jumping in to deploying non-hyperdrive or slower fighters/bombers and then jumping out before the battle, or jumping in at the end to pick up fighters with disabled hyperdrives.
I thought the same. It would also be wonderful as a mobile repair base for long distance operations. Even with hyperdrive, the X-Wings couldn't fly all the way across the galaxy to make a strike in a timely fashion. The Venator would enable them to position the ship near an area of operations, then send the fighters in on a quick, short jump.
This video was very helpful to the fanfic I'm writing. The leader of a rebel cell uses the Venator as a mobile base. I now know more about how he uses it and where he got it.
i would have imagined the republic having held a tight grip on its venators and just have scrapped them all once the empire went from venators to imperial star destroyers.
@@Alucard-gt1zf I didn't know this. i suppose it would be a better way to recup something from them. surely they stripped many of the more powerful weapon systems? otherwise they'd still be battleships, and possible opposition?
I kinda see 2 issues with the theory. The first is actually in Star Wars Rebels when you say about them not needing a carrier - but they literally steal a purpose built carrier, for their fighters, that had no ability to double as more. They could have simply let Hera's dad blow it up at that point if they were that unneeded. The second comes from our own world today. Between refueling abilities and all, a fighter jet can take off from the West Coast of the US and fly East to say Italy, so why do we still have and are making new aircraft carriers? Same reason a Venator would still be useful to the rebels - It can be underway toward a needed area while preparing the strike force, reduces how far they have to go in both directions, especially if during a battle they are damaged, offers additional defence, etc. Lets say it's a 8 hour hyperspace trip to where they need to go - do you want your pilots to be fatigued after an 8 hour flight, or fresh and rested? Because if they are aboard a carrier they can rest on the bulk of the trip, and the carrier hover out of range so that the fighters have to make a far shorter jump to the target. If the imperials destroyed them all so that a group like the rebels couldn't get them, or if perhaps they were too resource intensive would make sense as to why they would go for some other type, but there is no real reason otherwise to say "we don't need carriers" when it's a mobile version of everything you need as opposed to a place like Yavin that once it's found that's it. And doesn't remove the strike fighter mobility tactics if anything it likely improves the ability as used wisely your pilots have less time between target and home base, use less fuel, and can more likely get a damaged ship back home without incident.
A carrier would also not only reduce fatigue, but amount of wasted resources. Fighters today are fuel hungry monsters, while carriers are nuclear and efficient. Storing your plane leaves the fuel for when they really need it
@@cadenorris4009 Good point, though that wouldn't apply to SW fighters. Modern fighters are inefficient because they have to be propelled through Earth's atmosphere. In the low-gravity vacuum of space, it would take way more energy to change the momentum of a carrier, than that of all the planes in it.
Honestly the venators do make sense to be used by the rebel alliance. They can act as mobile command bases which won't ferry X-Wings and other rebel fighters directly into battle but can jump to a nearby system. This will allow for the fighters to save on fuel and be rearm faster; especially in longer battles. Venators also do have a lot of fire power, they aren't just carriers; they are battlecarriers. X wings could drop in and disable a star destroyers shields, then a venator could come in and finish off the now disabled star destroyer and any other smaller ships left over. Venators overall would of allowed the rebellion to have a large fleet at the start of the war; one that is still practical and still allows for their hit and run strategies. Also it would just be a treasure to see them again, especially post empire.
Love it, I think you nailed it with the large crew needed to operate a republic ship. Also, JFO does a good job showing most of the old venators got broken down to build destroyers. You should do a video on the ARC 170 being used by rebel forces, that's another clone war era ship that works PERFECTLY with the needs of a mobile resistance.
Small, fast carriers carrying small air wings would work in the Rebel Navy in areas where rebel bases are disabled/destroyed or non existant or for planetary invasion support, having an airbase right next to the place you're invading has proven very usefull for the U.S, Britain, Japan, France and any country with an aircraft carrier really. Instead of having to warp back to another friendly planet to refuel you can just climb into orbit, repair, refuel and rearm and head right back in without problem
Even hyperspace capable fighters need a place to rearm, refuel, repair, and recuperate. And a mobile platform is far better than a surface one. While a Venator was not well suited to take on healthy Imperial capital ships, it would be a perfect mop up or boarding tool. Send in your fighters and bombers first to engage the enemy fighters and disable key systems and weapons. Then send in your Venator to support boarding or use its heavy guns to quickly make sure there is nothing salvageable, while the fighters take up a perimeter to take out reinforcements. The best reason for the Alliance to shun Venators is the heavy presence of former Confederates who would be less than nostalgic for old Republic imagery. But, on the other hand, there are large swaths of the "civilized" galaxy that would appreciate that imagery. It's simply not a part of the war that we have seen. Yet.
Lol Lets see 3 Imperial 2's try to take on a venator. *Venator Jump in and launches it's compliment of 450 star fighters of interceptors and bombers, and steam rolls the Empire's own compliment of tie fighters with our superior Clone pilots, piloting Republic ships. Then they wipe out the Imperial's pitifull Imperial 2 star destroyers while the venator snipes at them with DBY-827 turbo lasers, and jumps away.*
People who claim that "The Rebels are a small group of insurgents, they don't have the manpower" NO. Shut up. In CANON there are 40 mc80s fighting the Executor over Endor. Each mc80 liberty has 5,402 crew members. A venator has a crew of 7,400. Two mc80s would fit a complete crew on a Venator, and fill its fighter deck. I think that would be worth it. Especially considering that in episode 4 AND 5, a fighter destroys a superweapon, not a capitol ship. Therefore, you would want more fighters right?
Butter OnToast no one says they have no man power. Im saying they are a group of inexperienced farmers who have no clue what their doing . Yeah thry have 40 mc80s though i dont know where u got tht number, the Empire has over 2,000 imperial star destroyers. The only reason, "they won" was because of their plot armour and weapons. Rogue one was bs, storm troopers has really good training compared to the rebel infiltrators. Death troopers should have easily shot down those troopers. Also star wars canon is a bs lore system a real star wars fan, should not believe anything that comes from canon.the rebels should not have won the battle of the death star. The stations has thousands of ties.
@@user-uy7qg3ot4n i believe it was the Art of Warfare book, but I got that number from watching numerous videos about the battle of Endor. The high number comes from the blooper about the A-wing going right through their shields and destroying an entire SSD, because it shouldn't have unless the shields were gone, and the nickname of the Executor is "fleet destroyer". So the only thing that would take down an Executor class SSD would be a massive fleet, and a shit ton of fighters because supposedly the Executor could house several thousand TIEs of various models. What I am saying is that even IF the Rebels are just a bunch of farmers( they appear to have better training than STs), AND it is assumed the Alliance is SMALLER than the Empire, the Alliance STILL should atleast be able to comfortably man several Venators, which given that the Rebels casually modify advanced starfighters ALL THE TIME, There is no reason as to why they would not favour a heavily modifiable capital ship, with atmospheric capabilities, faster hyperdrives, AND large hangar bays.
No they aren't we're just being shown the last shot that killed the fighter for a "better" viewing experience. Because showing the ships get hit multiple times on screen, adds to the movie's total run time. As well as increasing the special effects budget requirements, making it less cost effective to show it. Than again Lucas wanted the death star trench run to be 2 hours long. His wife at the time thought it was boring, and edited it herself to make it look better.
Actually, if you notice some of the x-wing flyby's on the deathstar you can see the 'sparks' that hits are making against the ship's deflector shields. As for the reason Vader was able to destroy them so easily is because after deflecting the shots coming at them while they ran the gauntlet, their shields were nearly depleted, so even stabilizing rear deflectors couldn't withstand more than a few shots at best.
The various aspects of the starfighters don't ever seem to be properly shown to us in the films for whatever reason. According to the specs though, an X-Wing would be WAY better than any TIE Fighter, by a large margin. Twice the mounted lasers, hyperdrive, shields, and torpedo launchers. Not just the X-Wings though; all the Rebellion fighters specs are significantly better than the Empire. The Imperials basically intended to project strength through overwhelming numbers. Their capital ships were impressive, but the fighter craft they deployed were nearly made of cardboard held together by the tears of all those kids Vader murdered.
Realistic Answer: The original trilogy was made before the prequels. I think this would actually be an amazing asset to the Alliance. It's a floating base for your fighter squadrons. You can have multiple wings of x-wings and y-wings and a-wings on the ship. The ship then jumps into an isolated location in space. The hyperspace active fighters then leave and do their hit-and-run tactics. When the missions are over they then jump back to the venator and it jumps to a new location or simply acts as a refueling and rearmament base for more sorties before they have to bug out. I think it makes perfect sense and you don't even have to fill up all the fighter space this thing has. Even if it only holds half the fighter space you can use the leftover space to then pack in extra shields and power, or resources like fuel and armaments for the fighters. A Venator would never be or at least rarely be a pitched battle carrier like it is in the Clone Wars. It would simply be the floating bases of the alliance. I also think this helps play into the alliance overall as well. You can have entire cells dedicated to a single venator. They don't have to worry about bases being found and then just dumping them like they did on Hoth or Yavin. Empire finds you then you either jump or have your fighters mess them up. It adds flexibility. If you want you can have them all have a few corvettes or cargo transports for extra supplies and recon. I'd imagine maybe a Nebulon B, some corvettes of any variety, and then some of those transports we see at Hoth and such. That makes the perfect hit-and-run fleet. Then if you have a last-ditch effort like let's say the battle over Endor then yeah you have the venators in combat to add some tonnage and firepower to the fleet, while also acting as rearming depots for your fighters. I can just imagine it. You have your rebel cell, they jump into a sector in the outer rim. You then deploy your five to ten squadrons and they go jump to various sorties. Then they fly back to you and you then travel to the new point. The empire then has to find a ship that can literally be anywhere instead of a base that is locked to a planet. It would also probably be cheaper for the mon Cala to simply retrofit some better shields to a Venator than making a whole new ship. So while you have your home ones and heavy-hitting capital ships, the venator shines as a hit-and-run carrier. One thing you didn’t mention though, is that like the acclamator, the Venator is one of the few larger capital ships that could actually land on planets, so it could also be a mobile base, along with GR-75s. Pretty sure Lucas as we speak is figuring out how he can release Very Special Editions that show Venators in the background of space battles in the OT. You should also consider the fact that most of the Venators were revamped into the Imperial Star Destroyers or preceded them, like the clones becoming stormtroopers. It makes more sense during the ending of Episode III where we get to see the Venators painted in the Imperial grayish colors. Love it, I think you nailed it with the large crew needed to operate a Republic ship. Also, JFO does a good job showing most of the old venators got broken down to build destroyers. You should do a video on the ARC 170 being used by rebel forces, that's another clone war-era ship that works PERFECTLY with the needs of a mobile resistance. I feel that the Venator would have been a good fit for the Rebellion, not to be used as a traditional battle carrier but as a mobile sector base which would have been much harder for the Empire to track down than fixed ground bases. Another reason is that the venators would be quite old by the time of the alliance era, and would need more manpower to maintain when that manpower could be used elsewhere. Thanks for giving these great videos. I'm a huge Star Wars fan/nerd and what you doing is great👍👍👍The rebels did use the ship but the camera wasn’t pointing in its direction Having Venators might not have been the most practical option for the rebels, but it certainly would make sense as a symbol. "Hey Guys I Found A Whole Factory Full Of Republic Ships And Shut Down Battle Droids! What Should We Do?" "How about we bring ships that have 4 turbo lasers to fight the Death Star." "Wha..." What’s funny is this lore is well baked in, what he describes is exactly how the entirety of X-Wing Alliance’s campaign works it’s all hit-and-run tactics. Additionally, like Eckheart said rebel capital ships in a combat zone (in the X Wing series) are largely more of a liability for the rebels than an asset unless they serve a specific function. You definitely make sense as to why you should just use the fighters and not launch them from the bay of the Venator. I wish I knew more about the layout of the Venator to see if it would be a good idea to use the bay space for shields or weapons. Considering that all of the Venators were owned by the Republic, and that kind turned into the Empire, I think it would be hard for a rebellion to purchase giant military weapons from the government they were rebelling against. This video was very helpful to the fanfic I'm writing. The leader of a rebel cell uses the Venator as a mobile base. I now know more about how he uses it and where he got it. If you ask if the rebels had senators I think it’d bring hope to other cells and those under the oppression of the empire imagine a fleet of visitors coming to your planet to bring aid that’d be badass A Venator could use the hanger space to retrofit it into one hell of a medical cruiser I think at some point they had to have used at least one, after the destruction of the Death Star the rebels seem to progressively grow larger and larger. When both Hoth and Yavin were lost I would think they might start using more of a mobile base strategy that a Venator would be well suited for. I could see a vendor carrier being set up in deep space as a mobile refit, rearm, and repairing area but never use it as a forward ship purely in support capacity Considering how many Venators got boarded by Grievous during the Clone Wars, I can't blame the Rebels for wanting to avoid the same thing with Vader. There could have been a role for rebel senators as mobile resupply and repair bases to extend the range of fighter squadrons even further. They could also be useful for large assaults where local superiority is long enough for the wings of fighters to need rearmament. These are basically the existing functions of carriers today since they are never expected to approach too closely to targets that can fight back. We saw the captured carrier they used in Rebels, and that thing became a massive target. other reasons could be operating costs, smaller ships mean less fuel, manpower, supplies, etc. By the time they were able to act as more of a government instead of as a rebellion (before they were still having to stay on the run from the Imperial fleet) the Battle of Endor had happened, and I'm sure they were able to acquire ISD's before, and they had captured ISD's to use instead of either having Venators that they had well hidden or finding some and bringing them up to speed.
Personally I feel the venator would have been a perfect fit for the rebels as it would provide a mobile staging point for those hit and run assaults while still being able to hold it's own if it gets ambushed. The attack on the malevolence is a good example in my opinion. Plus it could retreat by itself due to having a faster hyperdrive than the ISD. I also think it would be harder to track one venator compared to 2-3 mc80s with the same fighter complament.
To your last point: that's something we like to call "putting all your eggs in one basket". If the singular Venator runs across trouble of the Imperial-I variety, you've just lost about 300 fighters. If three Mon Cal cruisers run across an ISD, they have a very good chance of actually winning the battle.
That is true however I still think that the greater number of fighters for the same size of ship would be worth that cost. Think about it like this. If several mc80s are not enough to defeat the imperial force ( more than one ISD) it would be a greater loss in ship tonnage to loose 2-3 mc80s than one venator + possible escorts (corvettes etc). Plus a system similar to ww2 carrier groups with venators escorted by battleships and smaller craft would be the ideal if stealth isn't a concern/ direct cobat is expected.
@@theoncomingdork I don't understand. Venators are much tougher than MC80 and have multiple points where they can deploy fighters. The Venator could easier outrun ISDs. Venators may not have as many individual cannons, turrets etc but they packed more individual firepower last I checked. We also see with the right stratigies Venators could take on even more dangerous ships like the Lucrehulk.
You should also consider the fact that most of the Venators were revamped into the Imperial Star Destroyers or preceded them, like the clones becoming stormtroopers. It makes more sense during the ending of Episode III where we get to see the Venators painted in the Imperial grayish colors.
The fully complimented Venator Star Destroyer seem to fit a stand off planetary assault/siege and power projection role much like current US carriers. Neutralize anything not under a planetary shield, probe for enemy defense weaknesses, then flood into any weaknesses to establish a beachhead (planethead?). Power projection is obvious. One of these things with 400 X-wings/Gunboats with daily sorties can cover a lot of territory and provide near immediate support for friendly planetary garrisons.
The problem is even if the Rebels managed to salvage every single Venator left after the Clone Wars, the Empire would still have more star destroyers, simply because they had such a ludicrously vast industrial base. Venators are great frontline capital ships meant to duke it out in massive fleet movements, but the rebels wanted to avoid those at all costs because they generally lost those horribly, and even the ones they won they suffered losses which they couldn't replace remotely as easily as the Empire could replace theirs.
I absolutely love how you can use the gigachad template for X-wings. -goes with a whole squadrion (the boys) -drops out of hyperspace -attacks imperial capital ships 1000x larger, without warning -does massive damage before TIE-fighters show up. -leaves -refuses to elaborate
Ultimately, we have to accept the out of universe explanation that Venators didnt actually exist until the early 2000s.But good book and comic writers can fill this gap if they are savvy enough, and fans would appreciate it. I would love a story about a Rebel fleet of Venators carrying out daring raids and missions away from the main characters. It would help show the continuity between the Republic and Rebellion without contradicting the movies.
i agree i would love to hear about the venators being hardend Forward operations platform. it gives a springboard for the strikes to shorten the pilot fatigue and makes the empires lives hell when it comes to tracking down planetary bases. not to mention it also gives the strike pilots a strong place to mount a defence if they are followed faster than expected.
I'd love to hear about groups using heavier ships away from the main front specifically so the main rebel effort had less ships to face (IE only face Death Squad instead of Death Squad plus 100 Star Destroyers including Gladiators)
Venators would be useful to hold ships when not in combat. And would provide a good screen against ties with there large array of point defense guns. They would be a good compliment to the alliance cruiser battle line. And it wouldn't interfere with rebel hit and ran tactics as the rebels rarely brought large ships to those ambushes anyways. The venators would stay with the main fleet and wait for the fighters to return so they could be serviced in the massive hanger space. Plus just bc they have hyper space capabilities does not mean they have infinite range , they would need a dedicated carrier to hold them for much longer distances , especially with the empire chasing the rebels all over the place.
We know that they "stole" capital ships from scrap yards, I would think that they picked up some venitors from them. We just haven't been told about it yet. They would make good home bases though. The space to repair and rearm fighters while providing cargo transport and medical facilities.
@@Modelstl063 i don't hate them ok. Is just that phrase that was turned into an internet joke alon the high ground one and sand. Those are just stupid jokes.
When was that anyways? It would have had to be in Legends, because the new cannon doesn't allow enough time between Rouge 1 and ANH for that to have occurred.
Not using Venators was a supremely stupid tactical mistake on the part of the Rebellion. Granting everything you said in your video Venators would have been an incredible asset to the Rebellion. They were using hyperspace hit and run operations with X-Wings and deploying them from a Venator in the theatre of operations would have been a drawback, but they were also a stateless nation constantly on the run setting up and abandoning new bases of operation across the galaxy. Venators would have been the perfect mobile headquarters for the rebellion having the fighter carrying capacity, repair and refueling facilities, and ability to move without having to shoot your way out of Echo Base through an Imperial Fleet. jump into a nearby system, deploy your X-Wings and have them make the final jump and attack from there. Have a predetermined rally point and jump away as soon as the X-Wings start their attack and then just meet up there when the attack is over to gather up your fighters and high tail it to the next mission. In closing the Venator would have perfectly suited the rebellion if they had the ability to see it for how it could be used rather than how it had traditionally been used. The only real problem i see with using Venators would be is in personnel. If it takes too much manpower to operate the ship vs what the rebellion had available then maybe that could be a solid stop to the idea, but if you have the manpower and resources needed for Echo Base then you have the manpower and technical expertise to both fly and maintain Venators imho.
At the point in time where the Venators weren't very outdated, I'm pretty sute the rebels were doing guerilla, ambush tactics that didn't use many, if many, capital ships in their raids. EDIT: I shot off too quickly, just wanted to get a good discussion going by making a very early comment, so if my comment is rendered moot by the video, that's why.
I wonder how many people you need for working these ships like the venator, I mean, would the Rebel alliance have the capability to use a lot of capital ships with their numbers?
In space you can easily do hit and fade with capital ships! Jump in with guns primed (and fighters deployed if they have hyperdrives), fire at the enemy for say 5 minutes and then jump out (and I bet you do more damage if you have capital ships!) and only bring the fighters back after you've left (if they have their own drives they can jump out when you do!)
@@dreamingflurry2729 well, how sheilding and laser cannons work says otherwise (turbolasers and laser cannons lose effectiveness at range). the effectiveness of fighters comes with the fact that they are small enough to approach closely, get under shields, fire bombs/torps, and then immediatly FTL out of there. that being said, maintaining venetors as mobile BASES that could go toe to toe with an imp star destroyer would have been very good. imagine if they warped in a venetor in as the 501st attacked hoth. that might have been enough for vadar to call off the attack, allowing for a much more organized retreat for the rebels.
Depends on what kind of venator. A republic or rebel one? If it was a Republic Venator, they literally would have wiped Vader's star destroyers easily. 300+ Republic superior interceptor fighters which have shields or track on missles. Also DBY-827 turbo lasers, the big guns you see on the Venator, when firing on max setting, can act as long range turbo lasers, or just straight up pierce shields, according to the wiki.
Makes sense generally, but as we've seen in Rebels pilots need to rest and fighters need to be serviced, and a carrier can function as an excellent mobile base, unbound from any planet, even if it requires refueling (only the extra fuel to move around since a planet bound base needs to be restocked and its power plants refuelled as well). Plus a Venator can still hold its own in battle should things go south, and jump away if necessary, without having to resort to a hastily evacuation that will definetly result in having to abandon fixed or unmovable assets. Lastly i dont think the alliance would have many problems modifying capital ships to operate with a reduced organic crew, they have done it before.
your video is great EckhartsLadder. The one big piece of information that would beef up and give your theory some meat is this: the Empire got rid of the Venator Cruiser due to the design flaw of the hangar bay opening up in the top. As we see in some Clone Wars TV series space battles, time and again the Republic would open the bay doors to launch their fighter wings, only to have the whole ship destroyed by a downed separatist fighter hitting the hangar, or said fighter making an attack run on the exposed hanger. Thus, the Empire considered this design flaw when they built the Imp SD 1. Note that from Imp SD series 1 and forward to later SD generations (including the Executor SSD), the TIE Hanger bay is on the bottom of the ship and thus protected from topside strafing runs and easy destruction. The Rebels would know this too, which is a possible underlying reason they did not go with the Venator and its design flaw. Not mention their advantage of the X-wing series of fighters where they could launch from anywhere in the galaxy for a hit and run on the SDs disabling them which negates the desire of the Carrier Cruiser like the Venator.
The Quaker is the perfect example in Rebels why they needed carriers. They support the fighters and provided a “safe area” for the fighters to repair or crash if they needed to. It also allows them to have firepower on some hit and run mission. Emphasis on the some.
I do think that your reasoning makes sense, that there are better front line capital ships than the venator,. However I would argue that the Alliance could still use Venators as a sort of mobile base for their star fighters. As we see with the battle of Yavin, Hoth, and Chopper Base on Atollion, the Rebels are at their most vulnerable when they are pinned to a static location by the empire, who can use their numerical superiority and big capital ships/armored vehicles to deal heavy losses to the rebels if they can catch them. I think that a Venator would serve the Alliance's hit and run strategy well, as it would allow the Alliance a base where its ships could return for repairs and refuel, without the need to tie their forces to a single static location. One Venator could drop into a unoccupied system and loiter there while its strike craft made small jumps to nearby Imperial worlds to enact their hit and run tactics. This would actually enhance the rebels ability to perform their hit and run tactics because it would mean the rebels could jump back to the ship to refuel and rearm when needed (similar to modern day carriers), then jump back to the battle, or another nearby system, hitting multiple locations in a single strike. And if the empire ever located their base, they could jump out of system, using the Venator's superior class one hyperdrive to escape the slower Imperial Class, and find somewhere else to hide. Because of this, and the fact that it would have been 'easy' for the Alliance to steal an old mothballed ship, these ships would have been extremely useful for the Alliance especially in the early days of the rebellion, when the Mon Calamari would not have been able to donate as many capital ships as the would have during the late rebellion. Yes, the Venator would be a poor ship to have engage an Imperial Class in a straight up capital ship fight, but frankly if the rebels are using a Venator in this way, then they are using it wrong. All that being said I love the video and I cannot wait untill tomorrow's
Sanders: He's an A**hole sir. Helmet: I KNOW THAT! What's his name! Sanders: That is his name sir, A**hole, Major A**hole. Helmet: And his cousin? Sanders: He's an asshole too sir, Gunners mate First class Phillip A**hole. Helmet: How many A**holes do we got on this ship anyhow!? *95% of people in the room stand* Yo! Helmet: I knew it, I'm surrounded by A**holes! *Mask drops* Helmet: Keep firing a**holes! 😂
I could see a vendor carrier being set up in deep space as a mobile refit, rearm and repairing area but never use it as a forward ship purely in support capacity
I think that a group of X-wings would be most efficiently used around carrier designed with mon-cala philosophies. A carrier would allow larger groups of x-wings to travel further. The central ship woulf give x-wing pilots a place to comfortably rest between missions, and large hangars would allow an always-active respomse team, with pilots cycling in and out of the carrier for R&R. This would also allow refusing and mission prep close to objectives, leaving fighter pilots alert and ready with only a short trip to the objective. This property would pair best with large hangars, as well rested pilots could deploy en-masse just before jumping to the objective, and leave a small number of pilots onboard the vessel, to act as an escort for the carrier after the battle is done, and the pilots stressed by battles can take a few hours to recover, before the always-active response teams start crying again, to keep the ship safe from ambushes.
1. The first film was made in 1977 and they did not have them designed yet 2. Now that Jedi fallen order is released all venators got scraped and turned into imperial star destroyers
I have to respectfully disagree with you @EckhartsLadder, I think the Venator is excluded from the rebel fleet solely because rebel feet cannon was established before the Venator was written as a part of the clone wars and that it otherwise would be a perfect fit for the alliance navy. My first point is that the unlike the CIS, Republic or Empire, alliance star-fighters do not need to be dropped in front of the enemy like you depict in your video, it certainly happened in the attack on the death star but there dosen't seem to be any logical reason to do so when you have hyperdrives. When you have hyperdrive capable fighters at your disposal you can place your fleet light-years away from the imperials, strike them with your fighter wing, and be gone before the empire can respond allowing allied admirals from getting into gunnery battles with the empire whose navy is designed around that doctrine. Secondly, while a hyperdrive allows alliance starfighters to operate from land bases, it is not necessarily more effective to do so considering their fixed locations. The Star Wars X-Wing novel series shows that alliance fighters are limited by their fuel load and the long flight times make mechanical issues more problematic, a Venator can be positioned closer to the target location making fuel and recovery of damaged space craft less of a concern. The X-Wing series also seems to suggest that imperial intelligence is not wholly incompetent narrowing down the location of alliance fighter bases. A Venator allows you to be constantly on the move and (assuming that this is possible in star wars) potentially hide in deep space where it could be nearly impossible to narrow down your location. Lastly I believe that it is easier to fit a Venator into alliance doctrine then it would be to fit a mon cal cruiser or a providence. An old alliance source book (like my dad probably bought it when i was a baby or younger old) stated that Admiral Akbar's primary objective was to preserve the alliance navy. The empire has nearly unlimited resources but if he loses one capital ship its a serious loss and fighting a line battle with the empire seems like a huge risk, even if a mon cal can outfight an ISD the damages it may very well sustain could be incredibly expensive, time consuming, and take a mon cal off the line where it would be sorely needed, making each engagement a huge risk for the fleet. Furthermore a Venator is on average smaller then an MC80 home one configuration, and only slightly longer then the smaller variant of the Providence so I am doubtful that it is more expensive to operate then the other two and even if it is, I believe that you would save money by not having to repair as much battle damage, assuming that you keep it to a carrier role and take advantage of the alliance's hyperdrive equipped star-fighter fleet. In conclusion I believe that the Venator can fit the alliance fleet far better then the other alternatives.
My though as to why CIS ships are "better" is that because they were designed with droid crews in mind many systems are automated, reducing the required crew compliment.
and, in the case of a direct need for confrontation, the Venator's could be used to get the attention of larger capital ships for a follow on fighter squadron to flank and destroy the Star Destroyers. having a versatile carrier ship like the venator (Which, in alliance fashion, would likely be heavily modified for mission needs, possibly surpassing star destroyers if modified right) it has enough firepower and shielding to hold it's own, it can enter atmosphere to help deploy ground forces, it can operate in a carrier and troop ship functionality entirely on it's own, and when properly supported by it's fighter elements, can hold it's own in a direct ship to ship battle.. it would have made an incredible asset for the rebellion, especially during the earlier stages in the fighting, before the mon cal's joined up.
A year late on the add on, but one key thing that was missed was the Empire took quite a bit of time scrapping its older Clone Wars Era equipment and vehicles and replaced it with more modern equipment. Something like the Venator would've already been scrapped or hard to get out of a scrap yard. The Y wing only remained in service with the rebel forces because of a very carefully laid out plan, and even then it almost failed. It would've been next to impossible to get a Venator. Corvettes were easy to obtain because there were Senate members who were sympathetic to the cause and could use their position to simply say the corvettes were stolen when in reality they were practically given to the rebel forces. These corvettes wouldn't have to have parts replaced and were already in good working order. The same wouldn't have been for a Venator. You would be spending more time hunting for parts, which could take years if not months to fix something you would have to hide. That's too much for an obsolete destroyer.
In The game fallen order, many Venators were scraped to built star destroyers.... So I doubt there were any left, the empire wanted to get rid of anything it reminded about the Republic and the clone wars. Forgot to add that most people who worked on building those ships were fired and most killed, so the knowledge and skills to maintain and get spare parts was an issue if not impossible to get things done, the game at the beginning gave pretty much all the lore to it as why we don't see either Cis or Republic ships from the timeline of the clone wars.
I think the Venator fit the rebel’s quite Well. The Venator could serve as the mobile home of the Rebel fighters. The Rebel could strike from unseen places with the Venator. Like from a much closer system. Instead of using ground based stations they could have a mobile carrying platform that the Empire wouldn’t be able to pin down. If per say a Rebel base became compromised without Rebel knowledge they’d be caught groundside. A Venator would simply jump out of system once detecting an Imperial Ship. It could then relay the new coordinates of the ships to active strike missions. And wouldn’t have to worry about leaving fighters in the open. It’s also a fast sort of ship. A match made in heaven for the rebels hit and run. It serves as a mobile base for the fighters it deploys them a few systems out and the X-Wings jump in attack jump out. The Venator would be perfect for this sort of role. A Carrier always on the move never in one spot for too long. It could save the Rebel fighters fuel and keep their very precious fighters safe. If the Venator became caught it could still fight but it’s X-Wings could escape the battle with the Venators rather strong shields and hull strength. Thus sacrificing the ship but saving the much more important fighters. In my opinion. The Venator served the rebels in every capacity. It doesn’t need to ferry the ships into combat. But it can ferry the ships around to strike from deeper locations, strike more important Imperial installations and keep the Empire more off balance. The Venator would have a much longer range then a single X-Wing would allowing the Venator to find a nice cozy place to allow the fighters to jump away for the mission jump back and go home. Or back to safer space. It fits almost perfectly. The Large hanger space could also House more parts to repair the ships and also could as mentioned before as a mobile base. Maybe a few upgrades to long range communications or more tactical holomaps or something to improve the Venators commanding ability. Or as a mobile training grounds with the rather large hanger space.
A carrier would have improved things for them actually. It's a doctrine issue, their use of hyperspace capable fighters removes the carrier from the battlefield. You don't need a Venator, its capabilities are wasted, instead you need a number of cheap bulk freighters just big enough to host an air wing each. The carrier is a mobile base that can hang out in uninhabited star systems and forgotten boltholes and the middle of interstellar space far from attention. While sending out it's air wing to make strikes across the breadth of entire sectors without ever exposing itself to detection or direct action.
I definitely agree with this. Legal civilian freighters also have a lot more options on where they can land for maintenance. Owning a military grade capitol ship as a private citizen, even an old one, is very likely to be illegal under the Empire, and so you'd only be able to refit Venators in places sympathetic to the Rebellion with minimal Imperial presence. On the other hand, you could have a civilian freighter maintained pretty much anywhere seedy enough to be able to bride the local officer to pass your inspection. Hell, if you launched your fighters and hid them somewhere in the system before you landed and were smart about hiding incriminating supplies, you might even be able to legitimately pass the inspection.
The problem is, even of they didn't need carriers to bring their fighters into battle, they still needed a base to operate from and a base that can move under its own power seems to fit that need far better than a planetary base. No need to pack up evacuate, and set up again elsewhere, you just jump the carriers to a new location. ESB's first act would have been a lot less interesting though.
You mention in this video that a carrier would slow them down. In that scenario yes, but it does however offer a moving platform. Park the venator out side the system target by a couple of jumps. Launch your fighters, have them jump across for a hit and run attack. You then get to rearm and refuel on a mobile carrier closer to your fighters, expanding their mission profile greatly. You could also use it as a one two punch. Fighters launch a hit and run wave, the venator jumps in behind the destroyer and launches fighters while bombarding the engines of a destroyer. Depending on the target of the first wave you could legitimately cripple, kill or capture a destroyer with that.
Considering that Rebels were known to use dreadnought class heavy cruisers that required extremely large crews (even if rebuild as a less manpower intensive assault frigates) they would also acquire Venators if given opportunity. After all when used as a mobile base they would not require such huge crews. More likely is that empire simply kept better track of their Venators and made sure that ones removed from service could not be acquired by their enemies. After all most of the capital ships used by rebel alliance were either pre-clone wars designs that could have been once a part of a system defense navy and as a result may not have been integrated in to Republic navy during the clone wars. And that would make it easier for them to be quietly donated to rebels. Or in case of the former confederacy ships their organic crews may have simply refused to stand down after the end of the war and ended up joining the rebels. Additionally venators could jump in along with fighters but stay in the rear of the engagement not taking part in it but being ready to recover any fighter to damaged to jump to hyperspace.
Wait. Dune shields explode in a nuclear detonation if someone uses a lasgun on it. That probably makes it a terrible choice for a personal shield in a setting where everyone has some kind of energy weapon.
Another factor would be that most of the Venators that weren't decommissioned soon after the end of the Clone Wars were repainted to the Imperial grey, which could give off the impression that the Rebel Alliance would just turn into another Empire. Furthermore, those that weren't resprayed were quickly decommissioned, and we can see in the Bad Batch that they were sent to planets like Bracca, where good condition parts were rapidly scrapped and the hulls left to rust. As well as that, planets such as Bracca had heavy Imperial guard forces, likely for the express purpose of preventing rebels from stealing vessels, so if they were going to raid a scrapyard planet, they'd be much better off taking ships that needed less work, like newer Victory or Imperial-I Star Destroyers, starfighters, like ARC-170s, Alpha-3 Nimbus V-Wings, or decomissioned TIEs, or as you mentioned, Lucrehulk battleships and cargo freighters that could be converted into mobile bases.
I like to believe the rebellion did acquire a few venators, but with the empire already having so much tactical data on those ships it was almost a win scenario for the empire.
The one counter I would note to this: Mon Calimari Cruisers. This is more expanded universe/Legends stuff (I played the X-Wing games back in the 90s), but every mission has you launch from the Liberty, not a hidden base here or there. We also note this in most of the series, including in Rebels. Nebulon-Bs are also used. I feel like they would have been itching for ships. It's kind of like how the Rebels made extensive use of Nebulon-Bs, begged, barrowed, or stolen from the Empire (or anyone else they could get them from). Granted, Nebulon-Bs were far lighter ships requiring far fewer crew and fit the hit and run and light nature of the Rebel fleet. So on the one hand, I don't disagree that you make some good points - but to me, that's more why we would assume the Rebels wouldn't have MANY, not ANY, Venators. It still seems that they'd have a few Venators and Acclaimators. . I tend to think of these things in "real world" terms, and so an example in my mind would be "What if California seceded from the US/started a civil war?" There is mothball fleet there in San Fransisco Bay, I believe. It strikes me that they would attempt to liberate/restore at least some of those ships to use as a base of a fleet until they were able to acquire a navy of their own. And this would probably be true whether or not the split was peaceful (even in a peaceful split, it seems they would repurpose the smaller ships for a quickly assembled Coast Guard, and one or two or three larger ships for a base, if dated, fleet.) Combined with tacticals thrown together by putting guns on light ships (like the IRCG's "navy"), several larger ships would still make sense to have in use. The reason for this is psychological. There's a quote from Tarkin about the effectiveness of the ISD being that people are so intimidated, they don't really estimate their chances correctly/approach the situation tactically. The same is true with the US CVNs. There's something to be said for having a few big ships that you can show up places in, even if the ships were completely unarmed (as long as the other side doesn't know that) I feel like these same principles would apply. An empty Venator with only 10% of its weapons working and escorted by only a small flightgroup of X-Wings showing up at a small Imperial convoy would likely drive the convoy to retreat.
Will probably stream some Sins of the Prophets tonight around 9PM EST. If you like Halo Space Battles, I'll see ya there. www.twitch.tv/eckhartsladder
Music: DeLorra - My White Daisy // Fourge - Velvet 2600 // Home - Resonance
XD You made a slight opsie. You said lucrehulk instead of venator just before the intro music
EckhartsLadder I would like at least one case were the alliance used venators in canon to act as a mix of the old and new sorta ( not including sequel trilogy)
Sounds good
EckhartsLadder Do u still do the other videos that aren’t selected in your polls later down the line cause there have been suggestions that didn’t get picked that I’d like to see get made and haven't been, even some from polls that were quite a while ago still haven't been made. So do u still keep the suggestions for later down the line? Please reply so you can put this loyal followers heart at ease!
You keep missing the option of having the ship, but not sending it on the fighter missions. The Venator would be a perfect mobile base for refitting and maintaining those X-wings. It can be elsewhere dispatching the fighters. Carriers DO fit the hit and fade mission profile, so long as it's not entering the target system. If it's 20 LY away, the fact it's a bit slow is not an issue.
What amazes me is that the rebels never used the shit tons of separatist ships, droids, and materials left over from the clone wars. There were even whole factories left untouched.
Yeah, I wondered that too, I understand that in the original trilogy that they don't have CIS droids because they weren't thought of until the prequels, but would be if at least some of the rebel cells in "Rebels" had made use of CIS droids in the fight against the Empire. Maybe in some of the newer novels.
@@marsbase3729 in some of the novels the rebels did indeed use prequel tech, and for some reason Disney seems to hate the prequels as well, so I think that's why you don't see anything in the new media. I do realize Star Wars Battlefront II has had almost exclusively prequel content for the last few patches, and I'm loving it. The Death Star's first kill was actually a Lucrehulk used by the rebels.
@@elijahsellers3727 ok thanks
I bet you for the factories, any that remained functional either had the empires close eye, or was for the most part hidden. The droids seemed to operate on the strategy of mass mobilization (to an extent) which requires money and/ or raw resources (plus not really their military doctrine). There's the political aspect. That leaves the droids manufactured during the clone Wars, which rebels showed as having poor battery life and committed to the cis. Might be able to convince them Empire = Republic, but if the rebels won, rebels become the Republic. They would then have to deal with a droid inssurection on their hands.
IKR salvidge the metal and other resources!
Short answer to most videos like this:
Making a multi-movie series spanning decades of filming, out of order, tends to result in holes in the story.
Oh Yeah Yeah True
Yeah but Star Wars has explanations for these events which makes it interesting to watch
Tbf George Lucas knew all along that he was doing prequels. This was planned, just poorly.
Honestly Star Wars always was popular more because of the awesome idea and a universe which facilitated so much imagination. George Lucas has never been a genius or revolutionary, I’d say in 100 years star wars will still exist but nobody will remember George Lucas.
Your meme is dead
@@jotarokujo3603
This is why I always start my stories halfway through the overarching plots.
"Hey Guys I Found A Whole Factory Full Of Republic Ships And Shut Down Battle Droids! What Should We Do?"
"How bout we bring ships that have 4 turbolasers to fight the death star."
"Wha..."
Yeah correct the venator was useless in battle but good at bringing starfighters in battle
The JGamer08 however get 1 Droid to pilot them to soak up fire or ram other ships when there shields are gone.
@@likeaboss1059 correct yeah
@@thejgamer0855 the venator wasnt useless in battle. Maybe mediocre but it was still a force to be reconned with. Yes it is a way better carrier. But don't call it useless. It is probably comparable to a victory star destroyer.
@@herroberbesserwisser7331 I wouldn't compare it to the Victory, but i admit my mistake of calling it useless
Realistic Answer: The original trilogy was made before the prequels.
Exactly😭😭
Yeah big G wasn't really thinking all that deeply about it..........too much binks going on 😔
Well, if Lucas still had ownership he could have re released the original trilogy and replaced the rebels ships with venators.
Roasted
I just looked it up because I was having a bad feeling about this (pun intended). And yes I can confirm that original trilogy was released before the prequels 😑😔😞
Why? Because the producers of a A New Hope didn't think of it in 1977.
There has been plenty of Expanded Universe stuff written since 1999, and as far as I know Eckhart doesn't just focus on Disney's Canon. Use of other ships could have easily been written into the lore at this time.
Stop bringing reality into starwars it makes me sad :)
Also every new movie trilogy wanted to sell new toys/merchandise from the movies based on the ships lol.
they could still slowly bring them in later films, but instead totally scraped off
Mean the prequels where they had the venators where made after the original 3 movies so they had no idea that there would even be any called a venator
In Fallen Order, we see Venators and other Clone Wars era ships being broken down in scrapyards so at the very least, that provides some canon explanation as to their absence in OT era battles.
Forms the basis of the entire story lol
But so were Y-Wings broken down ships captured by the Rebels.
Just look at Y-Wings...They're VERY stripped unlike their Clone Wars days.
Same thing with the Venator. I'd like to think that the Rebels and New Republic did get some Venators and only used them as specialized Mobile Naval Battlegroups that just werent there in the movies and such mobile assets were not needed for Endor or other battles.
@Blade Vizor i'm not saying it solves anything or that it's good or bad. Just that Fallen Order offers a canon explanation.
Shoddragon your profile picture sums up how I feel about the deconstruction of Venators.
@Whiterun Guard Except now you have a *very large* ship that needs to stop for fuel, maintenance, repairs, etc etc.
Tracking down 30 odd x wings can be hard.
Tracking down a capital ship, which would have to stay much longer at starbases or shipyards for refuel and repair gives the empire more time to arrive. If anything, owning a carrier means the rebels must have a base with more infrastructure than Hoth.
One of the episodes of Star Wars Rebels specifically revolved around the Rebels needing a carrier.
Was more so because they needed a mobile base/repair and refuel point that the empire wasnt able to find so easily
@@litebluwulf and a Venerator would do all that the tie hangar ship twice as well - except it needed a bigger crew
Its called the quesar carrier with ons cannon
@@ronhan9 repair shops&etc are questionable.
Venators had them(as any carrier does), but in the end they weren't dedicated bases.
Their huge volumes and fighter loads speak against it, actually.
@@neniAAinen internal size of the starships in starwars always seems odd why have corridors like 4 m in height (and several decks of these), you could most likley cut like a third of the height of most capital ships. And lets say that the rebels had one venerator with what 3 wings of X-wings and 1 wing awings and 1 wing or 2 wings of Y-wings so basicly 1I5th or so of the carrier capacity and room for a handfull of shuttles and leight freighters. The rest of the area could store basicly all that you need for either building a base on a planet or on a astroid, provisions and plemty of space for training, repair shops medical bays and since the venetor already had plenty of troop space.
And that they were not dedicated bases is one thing during the clone wars - the rebels might have better use for them aqs mobile bases than a front line assault cruiser/carrier and i think the venetor could do that job prtetty good for the rebellion. those 50-72 fieghters could do plenty of damage in a sector and move around pretty efficiently. And that Venetor could bite back pretty good on most capital ships they might come across.
Eck: calls a venator a lucrehulk
Comment section: bruh
CZcams: psst want to watch an old eck video from ten months ago?
Me and you: ummm sure.
Ž Ž nice profile pic
Ž Ž yes I was confused when he said lucrehulk
Lol
Imagine a modified Venator with calamari shields. That would be cool.
@Elijah Berliner maybe have that big tank in the ventral hangar to shoot lasers lmao
@@sphee4149 put on a SPMAT gun and just blast the star destroyers while the x wings screen
And a death star death ray!
@@sphee4149 filled with Xbox controllers?
Where’s the shield generator on a venator or does it even have one?
The rebels did use the ship but the camera wasn’t pointing it its direction
Super Red hah yes
This! This is true, just because we didn't see it doesn't mean it wasn't there. We just saw what the main characters saw.
I used a Venator as my personal command ship in Empire at War for my Rebel Alliance fleet.
Zeoinx Nice choice
I see a Separatist Era An
That certainly makes sense. Just because fighters have a hyperdrive doesn't mean they also have infinite range. The best way to use a very valuable, hard to obtain ship like the Venator would be to have it act as a ferry or mobile base: Transport fighters *near* their destination, launch, and then wait for them to return at a rendezvous point for recovery. Y'know, how actual aircraft carriers work.
I would've thought that even if the Rebels could find Venators, they could still use them more as mobile base of operations than their original purpose as attack carriers during the Clone Wars.
Yes, especially as a base they would be able to hold more fighters than a Mon Calamari Ship.
Yea he really ignores the usefulness of this especially for surprise attacks and staying hidden. Basically he seems to think a carrier's only use is to launch strike craft against a target in visual range rather than being able to extend the range of its strike craft including hyperspace range as the X-wing doesn't have the fuel to just go anywhere on its own.
@@CareerKnight Actually, it's the Imperial Tie Fighters that don't have fuel. X-Wings have built-in hyperdrive engines to operate independently due to the Rebellion's limited resources. However, it doesn't mean they'll never rely on motherships. With a Venator, you can just park at one hyperjump end of a star system and send fighters through the other.
@@KuDastardly I didn't say x-wings have no fuel or no hyperdrive, just that they don't carry enough fuel to go anywhere with zero regard for the distance. They can only jump so far from their base before they need more to keep going. The Venator and other carriers allow this distance to be increased considerably not to mention making it much harder for imperials to trace the attacks back to their source.
After I watched this video, I thought the same thing it would be a perfect base ship for their fighters. It's troop carrying capability modified to carry more fuel and or supplies and modified to have a ram scoop to refuel itself and it's underbelly hangar receiving supply ships. What makes it really useful strategically it's can launch it's fighters on raid from one location jump away and rendezvous at another making difficult for the Empire to find their "base." The fact is not just a carrier but also a battlecruiser means it can pound pirates and Imperial patrol vessels to bits! It is safe to assume that it would be gray and I thought a Venator would be called "The Gray Ghost." I thought of the USS Enterprise after I came up with a name! Would be good for a film meesa thinks.
Honestly, I feel like starwars missed the point of carriers. It's a mobile supply base and repair station. Carriers should be staying far away from the main fights and sending in craft from a long ways away to fight and then return. The venator, properly used by the rebels, would rarely see combat and all the extra space would be used to carry more supplies while acting as a defensible base against pirates in deep space. With the rebels being fighter heavy, heavily armed carriers would be invaluable as mobile bases and ports of call that could rendezvous with a fighter squadron it had left at an earlier point, making not just their point of origin unpredictable, but also their point of retreat. Many venators ended up in planetary defense navies from my understanding, and having PDN ships hiding rebel fighters on sympathetic planets would be a pretty in theme tactic.
Well no they don’t stay far from the main combat, but they get as close as possible to combat but to not get into the combat itself.
im sure the rebels had a few drifting off in space
I think Lucas was inspired more by WW2 aircraft battles, not so much naval battles. But realistically, you're correct. You're not going to take your carrier and support vessels in that close. You'd launch fighters. And since it's space and these things are huge, you can launch just about anything, they wouldn't be limited to carrier-capable fighters like a modern aircraft carrier.
Also, why no long range missiles? Aparantly they can cram a hyperdrive into a fighter, why not have computer or droid guided missiles? That should have been part of Star Wars a long time ago, not the stupid lightspeed kamikaze maneuver from EP8....
@@booqueefious2230 Imagine X-Wings armed with BVR capable missiles like an actual modern fighter (take your pick of ANY IRL examples) zipping in from hyperspace, leashing off a salvo at some target, and then just immediately jumping out of the combat zone.
@@kylebrady969 yeah. That would give the Interdictor class star destroyers a reason to exist. Catch those fighters like a fly trap.
Some kind of purpose built, autonomous droid-missile could come in at hyperspeed, drop out and immediately hit the target without having to worry about returning to base, and do it before the gravity wells or tractor beams can stop it.
Eck: _Makes a minor error_
Everyone: *YOU'VE YEE'D YOUR LAST HAW.*
TheAstronautGuy Hey! You’re the second clone of me i’ve found on CZcams!
*imposter*
Supreme Leader Nugget clone? You clone him, he has more subs
Supreme Leader Nugget At last.... astronaut trained you well... my boy... I made Astronautguy... I have been every voice you have ever heard inside your head...
Eck: ight Imma head out
@@curatorcogs5438
You:
IT'S TREASON, THEN
The real reason is because George wanted the rebel and empire fleets to have their own distinct look.
Shhh! Don’t reveal the secret!
Gonna have to call the meta cops on this guy
That's true but it's no fun
They could've at least added one or two of those lol
True
I think this would actually be an amazing asset to the Alliance. Its a floating base for your fighter squadrons. You can have multiple wings of x-wings and y-wings and a-wings on the ship. The ship then jumps into an isolated location in space. The hyperspace active fighters then leave and do their hit and run tactics. When the missions are over they then jump back to the venator and it jumps to a new location or simply acts as a refueling and rearmament base for more sorties before they have to bug out.
I think it makes perfect sense and you don't even have to fill up all the fighter space this thing has. Even if it only holds half the fighter space you can use the leftover space to then pack in extra shields and power, or resources like fuel and armaments for the fighters. A venator would never be or atleast rarely be a pitched battle carrier like it is in the clone wars. It would simply be the floating bases of the alliance. I also think this helps play into the alliance overall as well. You can have entire cells dedicated to a single venator. They don't have to worry about bases being found and then just dumping them like they did on Hoth or Yavin. Empire finds you then you either jump or have your fighters mess them up. It adds flexibility. If you want you can have them all have a few corvettes or cargo transports for extra supplies and recon. I'd imagine maybe a nebulon b, some corvettes of any variety and then some of those transports we see at hoth and such. That makes the perfect hit and run fleet. Then if you have a last ditch effort like lets say the battle over endor then yeah you have the venators in combat to add some tonnage and firepower to the fleet, while also acting as rearming depots for your fighters.
I can just imagine it. You have your rebel cell, they jump into a sector in the outer rim. You then deploy your five to ten squadrons and they go jump to various sorties. Then they fly back to you and you then travel to the new point. The empire then has to find a ship that can literally be anywhere instead of a base that is locked to a planet. It would also probably be cheaper for the mon cala to simply retrofit some better shields to a venator then making a while new ship. So while you have your home ones and heavy hitting capital ships, the venator shines as a hit and run carrier.
That sounds amazing but how would the mon cala be able to afford to retrofit an outdated vessel with modern shield technology when they are already making their own massive and up to date ships. And if they did then I wouldn't see them diverting all manpower into one ship. And besides, if the empire were to even find out the rebellion had a venator they'd immediately send a fleet or two out to hunt it down and destroy it
Pretty sure Lucas as we speak is figuring out how he can release Very Special Editions that show Venators in the background of space battles in the OT.
If i remember correctly the Venator was a massive fuel/personnel/maintenance hog, which the rebels lacked all three of during the eras where surplus venators where available. The Venator would however have been useful as mobile bases, with large hangers that could re-arm/refit fighters. Have 100 X-Wings on board then use the rest to store ordinance/supplies. And if the venator was caught by the empire, it would have a fighting chance against an Imperial-1 and its tie fighters.
Yes even replace some hanger space with extra fuel tanks for the fleet, plus it has a class 1.0 hyper drive so it could also be used as a fast attack ship
I think you are right Demo, I think the cost in crew/fuel/maintenance/upgrades needed to keep it in the fight is the far more likely reason it was not used, for in theory it could amplify hit and run tactics. Launch multiple squads from one hyperspace location, they zip in attack and then leave hitting multiple targets at once, by the time the Empire figures out where the attacks came from the Carrier can have recovered the ships and moved on to another location making them an excellent mobile base. You could use the hyperspace attack method to an even greater extent for in theory, a good Carrier would save fuel for the attack runs. Though if the Venator was such a fuel hog, that it made it ate the savings in fuels plus it makes it a bad carrier for you.
The rebels still needed somewhere to launch the starfighters after Yavin and before echo base was established.
This is one of many reasons why Rebels sucked. They wasted many opportunities. We should have seen an episode where one Rebel Cell uses a customized Venator to fight the Empire. Hopefully something like that gets added into cannon in a graphic novel or future tv show.
I think that the rebels did probably use Venators but they couldn't get enough of them. the reason i say this is that while using planetary bases to launch attacks seems good on paper it doesn't hold in the long run. think back to "the empire strikes back" when Vader loses the millennium falcon he talks about extrapolating a trajectory in an attempt to find out where it went.
this represents a problem if one base launches a sortie to an imperial base that is too close to them when the fighters retreat or arrive they might accidentally give away their base.
this is where the venators come in since they would be used as a moble base there primary mission would be to obscure the locations of rebel bases by serving as a middle man to launch and receive xwings and to serve as a moble base that is constantly on the run.
another use is to use them as a platform of deception. you see since the xwing is an former imperial project the empire knows key data about the fighter how much fuel it has hyperdrive range etc. the rebels know that the empire has this data and with the venators they can use this data to their advantage. they could use the venators to make it look like a pro-imperial system is harboring rebels making the empire waste intelligence resources trying to find a rebel base that isn't there.
Considering that all of the Venators were owned by the Republic, and that kinda turned into the Empire, I think it would be hard for a rebellion to purchase giant military weapons from the government they were rebelling against.
Maybe they find a big fleet of venators hidden on a planet. That’s my head cannon for empire at war remake lol
Stormboxer braca but it was already under heavy imperial occupation
Not only that. But the support requirements including shipyard assets would preclude a small rebellion.
Yeah, this whole video is a joke.
@irgendjemand der gerade schlecht gelaunt ist You would be surprised to know how many Venators ended up in the hands of pirates.
“The alliance used the lukerhulk fortresa”
“Also there are no known instances of them using lukerhulks”
Lol
I was gonna point that out haha.
He meant Venators
@@cxfxcdude yeah but it’s still funny
Honestly very surprised he didn't catch that and at last throw a visual note in the video addressing it
I thought "Rebel One" was a modified lucherhulk (sp)
This argument makes no sense. The Venators would have been supremely useful.
Not as direct fire battleships carrying fighters but as proper carriers acting as mobile logistics bases for their complement
Carrier in system A launches fighters
Fighters in A Hyperspace to objective in system B
Carrier hyperspaces to system C
Fighters in B complete their objective, hypers to C for rendezvous
That's much better than operating from a planetary base
its really simple common sense, you don't need to be Thrawn to figure it out
the excuses them come up with in the 'essential guide to warfare' are not thought out at all
Venator, in the end, isn't a carrier. It's a hybrid warship.
All of its facilities are a compromise as a result.
Huge manning requirements for much if the stuff you don't even need(or to be fair - better never need against the Empire), and for less than ideal starwing facilities.
When you need a carrier - build a carrier. Don't build a Kiev.
why don't the fighters just hyper back to system A? Also logistics favour planetary bases, since procuring supplies is probably easier.
@@dsdy1205 Opsec. Maybe an Imperial droid spied the carrier launch. Rebellion has to keep moving ahead of the Imperial juggernaut.
Planetary bases get discovered and wiped out, I don't see how that helps logistics.
@@dsdy1205 Because when you have a single system as a base, with enough attacks from that base, the Empire can figure out where you're coming from. Thrawn did it after a single year on the job and with one cell supporting other cells nowhere near their main base
Considering how many Venators got boarded by Grievous during the Clone Wars, I cant blame the Rebels for wanting to avoid the same thing with Vader.
I am more thinking they are worried about hiding such a large ship. The logistic of running a ship that big quietly arent exactly easy to deal with. Look at the Rebels show. constantly had issues with fuel and equipment for smaller ships
But it's roughly the size of an mc80
@@fakenuke7487 Which was more of a late rebellion ship wasnt it? I thought the odd triangle carrier was the largest in most cases
@@xionlord00 the quasar?
@asaeampan True, but this is basically an argument based around at what point could they support the larger ships. Sure post endor they gained traction and got support, but at what point would they have the finances/supplies to make it work.
Liberation Reporting in... Hangers open. Launch all Fighters.
TheXPGamers Captain Shack is here!
Ayyyy
TheXPGamers shack!
That’s all I thought of when he asked about which venators was used by the rebellion
Hi
the venator class star destroyers are probably one of my favorite long range transport attack ships
To quote Captain Jack Sparrow, "Stop Blowing Holes in my Plot!"
@EckhartsLadder there's a small error at 25 seconds in - you mistakenly say Lucrehulk instead of Venator.
Not sure what options are available without re-uploading - is there a way you can use CZcams's system to put a correction notice on the screen?
I'm just not gonna sweat it
EckhartsLadder haha no worries. Fantastic video by the way.
I could see the odd use for a Venator but as you correctly point out, there are just better capital ships for what the Rebels needed.
"Don't listen to what I say. Listen to what I mean." -Day9 Don't sweat it. We all read the title of the video.
Yeah I think anyone who catches it will know you meant venator
I'm glad I didn't waste a post asking it--you two already started out the answer!
"The Rebel Alliance never owned any Star Destroyers."
How I miss the EU.
It was a bit of a mess but it was still better times
@@Scoffslaphead72 Only after TCW
Nothing to be missed? You can still read them and believe those? I'd do that rather than believe this new disney crap, you define canon yourself, not these money hoarder shit corporations.
JustAnd13 thats not true so right now you’re saying that if I write a comic in which mace windu kills sidious and I believe that that’s canon? No canon is the thing that the creators of the series see as the true story
@@simondesmet473 According what you just said, Disney is not the creator of the true Star Wars stories alas can't put them outside canon.
Other thing: all of this is just entertainment, money business. If the creators produce shit stories like sequels, audience can believe what they want, for me those are just some Disney fella's dirty dreams, and true story is that there is Ben Skywalker etc.. from the good stories some call "extended universe"
I don't care what you say about what is canon and what is not, corporations can't change audiences minds any way they want. You shouldn't believe their bullshit either
One thing you didn’t mention though, is that like the acclamator, the Venator is one if the few larger capital ships that could actually land on planets, so it could also be a mobile base, along with GR-75’s.
I disagree with your comment about the Venator being an anchor to the rebellion. In fact, I think it would actually assist majorly.
The Venator is basically a mobile base, something the Rebels would want. Instead of a grounded base fixated upon a planet that can eventually be located and invaded like Hoth, the Venator can always be on the move and make it even more difficult for the Empire to find.
But not only would it serve as an excellent base of operations , the Venator would also allow the Rebels to be far more aggressive. As we know, the Venator is a carrier focused capital ship. So there must be multiple repair bays and refueling and rearming stations on the ship. So instead of the fighters having to located the nearest most rebel base to get repairs/refuel/rearm, they can just go to their Venator which would be hiding about nearby or micro jump in nearby, get what they need there, and quickly redeploy to commence another slash and run attack.
As previously mentioned, seeing that the Venator is a mobile base, it could allow the Rebels to operate in areas where they don’t have any planetary bases. The Venator would help the rebels spread their influences and cause havoc in a wider perimeter and spread the Imperial forces thin.
With a military force which has an emphasis on mobility and snub fighters, it only makes sense that a carrier would go hand and hand with them.
They already had Destroyers and Cruisers that fulfilled that role. There's no reason for a Venator when they were literally being handed cruisers for free elsewhere.
Besides, the Venator was an aneurysm to begin with. Shitty weapon placements, disastrous bridge placement, slow as fuck, etc
It’s also a matter of that the venator was an old star destroyer. Likely, the empire maintained an iron hold on all of them (cos they owned them and were controlled by programmed clone commanders), and it would not make a lot of sense for the rebels to use one as… they really can’t get one at all. They also would be absolutely crushed by the newer star destroyers anyway, because those were newer and had newer weapons, and as said in the above comment, the bridge is placed in a very vulnerable spot. The rebels would be better of with separatist equipment because they had it and could get lots of it.
A _Venator_ is too big for the Rebel Alliance. I'm reminded of that one ISD in _Legends_ that was privately owned and functioned more-or-less as a mobile smuggler's port. They ended up selling off most of the guns, so it only had an armament more-or-less equivalent to a _Venator_ and they still could barely keep it functioning, from both a money and crew perspective (although the first leads into the second.)
If you're not taking the ship into combat anyway,, and given the size of rebel operations, all you need is a GR75 (or three) and somewhere relatively nearby to park them. Sure, the GR75s aren't fixing fighters on the run, so to speak, but a _Venator_ has a thousands strong crew while a trio of GR75s needs about twenty. Yeah, the GR75s would need more people to actually service and fit out the fighters, but you're not needing thousands for those penny-ante squadrons the rebels are deploying; one _Venator_ could probably carry every fightercraft we see in the original trilogy.
The later stages, once the Rebel Alliance actually has a fleet, they'd have some use. Pilots can only spend so long in the cockpit before they start having fatigue issues, so having an actual carrier that can move with the fleet starts to come in handy. They'll still probably be off-screen, not actually showing up to the battle, because they're old, were under-armed when shiny and new, and they've got those expensive, hyper-capable fighters.
Absolutely agree with Mr. H, most x-wings were being serviced on the ground in planets like hoth, not in capital ships. even the MC series of capital ships never had the capability to service, refuel, or rearm x-wings. which meant that the rebel fleet could only ever hit as often as they could refuel and rearm, the real anchor was the rebel bases, and the venator was without a doubt the solution.
eckartsladders excuse is really freaking lame, its like saying that the nimitz class aircraft carriers are the anchor of the US navy, i never heard of such bull×××× in my life. Aircraft carriers are literally the solution to the problem of limited range of aircraft and limited scope of airbases.
@@MrShamus22 you make it sound like Home-One didnt have sh×tty weapons placements and a sh×tty bridge. The Venator fulfilled its role as an aircraft carrier excellently, and the only reason it suffered overall is because the Victory class was supposed to be paired up with the Venator in the clonewars. the Venator would operate as the Supercarrier of the Battlegroup, while the Victory would act as the Battleship soaking up all the damage while dishing out just as much in return.
I honestly find the fact that most people use the X-Wing's hyperdrive as a reason for the Rebellion to not use carriers to be baffling. If anything it's the one piece of equipment that would have enabled /true/ carrier warfare because it would have allowed the carrier ship to have /true/ stand-off ability like WW2/post-WW2 carriers have where you never, ever put the carrier into the line of fire.
In Star Wars this would most likely consist of parking the carrier outside of the system and any sensor nets it had active, deploying the strike craft and having them do a short range jump into the system to strike at the target and then jump back out to land, rearm, refuel, and get back into the action or just straight up leave.
The Fortressa, therefore, is an object lesson in how NOT to use a carrier.
Yes! Thank you! This is exactly what I was going to say. I've seen this first attack on the Death Star animation before and it always confused me as to why you'd deploy so close to the target. I guess it must be a Star Wars thing as no one ever seems to operate their fighters unless some one says "Launch fighters!"
Depends, to me, on the speed and range of the x-wing hyper drive. In WWII, airplanes couldn't cross the atlantic without refueling, and while impressively fast over a few dozen miles, couldn't get from Germany to England without being detected in time to scramble defenses. So, if x-wings are only moderately fast or have a serious range limitation, then you are 100% correct that carriers sitting somewhere remote to the battle would make SO MUCH sense. However, if the x-wing has a near galactic range, and speed similar to capital ships, then the benefits of ferrying them to a near-ish location are lost, and replaced with the time sink of loading them onto a carrier and then deploying them from said carrier.
@@keiran215 Fuel consumption means that even the X-Wing has the range to cross the galaxy the farther it is from the fight the less time it has available IN that fight before it has to return to base.
Further you have travel times which, on a warship, aren't as big a deal because you're not stuck in a cramped, tiny cockpit, usually with nobody else to talk to for hours or even days on end while traveling to the theater of battle.
There's a lot of factors in why carrier warfare would have been good for the Rebellion and not all of them boil down to "Can it reach the battlefield."
@@keiran215 You've got to remember that the carrier is a movable base. Not only can it shorten the travel time for your fighters to be where they need to be but it also allows you to attack from a different direction to what the enemy may be expecting.
It can also replace ordinance allowing bombers to deal more damage (this depends on how long the battle is and how far the carrier is).
I think the Venator would still be useful to the Rebel Alliance as a mobile base; not something to be used in direct confrontation with Imperial forces, just a place for the X-Wings to rearm and refuel between missions, and probably extend the Alliance's reach beyond the range of the X-Wing's hyperdrive and their hidden bases, like those on Hoth and Yavin IV.
Not only Rebels but the Empire also.
@@bradmorales4002 The Empire would need to alter it's naval doctrine to focus more on starfighters first. That means replacing the TIE Fighter with something more robust, like the TIE Hunter from Legends, or the TIE Defender.
It could certainly be useful, but they probably had other, more easily acquired options for any role it could fill. The Empire may have retired the Venator, but it's not like they would've just mothballed them in the outer rim or something like that.
Yes, sure, but the problem is that the Venator is not properly designed for such a task; a much better replacement would have been the Lucrehulk. However, that aside, there's still the problem of crewing such large vessels; the Rebellion didn't have the people to spare, as they could better be used in the cockpit of s starfighter or on the ground blowing stuff up covertly.
In Rebels they even use an imperial small carrier for this exact task. A venator would have filled this exact role but better
The alternate reason is because venators became an imperial ship at the end of Revenge of The Sith (Edit: The Empire Used the Venators before Star Destroyers, they used parts from venators to make Star Destroyers)
I feel that the Venator would have been a good fit for the Rebellion, not to be used as a traditional battle carrier but as a mobile sector base which would have been much harder for the Empire to track down than fixed ground bases.
Man imagine a venetor coming out of hyper space in scarif and a fleet of x wings and y wings flying out of it
I would feel extremly pissed off that these dirty degenerates are using our republic's most prized capital ship as a landing bay for their garbage fighters. If there was a venator full of arc-170s and V wing interceptors, piloted by a rogue legion of clones, then I would forgive any hatred I had of Disney all up until star wars rebels.
Legolasisdeath Gaming if any imperial saw that they would be realy afraid
Biggie Jee Death Star ..
Legolasisdeath Gaming Shame the Kaminoans were wiped out or else they could have supplied the Rebel Alliance with Rebel Clone Troopers.
Legolasisdeath Gaming the X-Wings are Far From garbage, they’re even better than the republic’s fighters.
Something to consider would be that even though carriers aren't needed for hit and run tactics, they do provide a mobile base that fighters can return to and restock and resupply. And a Venator can carry hundreds of Rebel fighters if needed be.
Also it is to be noted that while Mon Calamari Cruisers are stronger, better ships, they suffer a fatal flaw in that they can only be crewed by the Mon Calamari species while other ships the Rebels procured could be piloted and operated by multiple species.
The big issue with Venators that I can see in this role, that wasn't already stated in the video, is that they're a military class of ship, which means that they could only land for maintenance on Rebel sympathetic worlds with a minimal Imperial presence. They have fairly powerful guns and a very powerful shield, but these aren't exactly things you need for a mobile base that's never going to see direct combat, and they hog a lot of energy and maintenance to keep running.
Screaming Cactus I wonder if they could have had a modified one with less shields and firepower... that’d be so cool to see!
@@idealnovelist3484 Rather than wasting resources to modified venator, why not take a CIS Providence. Less maintenance, less crew, better overall firepower and armor, good carrier capacity, droids, automation, availability. Still can do the same role. Yes the MC80 is designed for Mon Cal but for storage, parking your X wing, pilot RnR, briefing room should be quite standard. I dont see the MC 80 has too much flaw. But remember the Mon Cal support come later in the rebel alliance, what i think the better ship prior to mon cal support would still be the CIS Providence.
Aloha732 hmmm fine question
Aloha732 so it could of been handy
"There are no known instances of them using the lukrehulk"
You mean the Venator, right? Pretty sure "That's no moon..." blew up a lukerehulk.
I don’t know, maybe because venators weren’t thought of yet in the 80s
@EckhartsLadder:
You seem to miss one key aspect of the Venator. Hyperdrive capable fighters are a beautiful thing, but a Venator allows you to have a mobile carrier that can repair/rearm their fighters without returning to a fixed base.
Marvin Thomas so did the Mon Calamari cruisers
@@ethanhensley9355 good catch; I stand corrected.
The only downside would be less ships but the Mon Calamari cruisers had a little less crew capacity than a Venator
@@ethanhensley9355 I was also under the impression that Calamari Cruisers came later in the rebellion; but I could be mistaken.
The rebel alliance was formed in 2 BBY and one of the first mentions of Mon Calamari being affiliated with a group of senators came in 3 bby, forming the rebel alliance, I may be incorrect as when the Mon Calamari cruisers were added, I know at least before the battle of scariff, even if they were added later I don’t believe acquiring Venators was conceivable in the early years of the rebellion
You make sense when it comes to straight up ship to ship warfare that the Venator is just not strong enough. However with that hyperdrive clocking in at a 1.0 and the large cargo hold they could be used for supply line caravans as both the hauler and defensive measures. I love the clone war era ships especially the LAART and I wonder why those were not used by the alliance.
Honestly we see the Venator is more than capable of ship to ship combat. I say this because while the Venator doesn't have as many large turbolasers each were supossed to pack more power than the standard versions we are accustomed to.
My recommendation would be refitting the venators with more shields, reactors, armaments and armour plating, this way they gain a formidable star destroyer
It would probably be more efficient to use them as mobile resupplying bases and such stationed further away from the battle
@@Helperbot-2000 That would also work really well, maybe two variation, the mobile FOB and retrofitted star destroyer, because let's face it, you can fit an extra reactor and a lot of shield generators in the hangar bay, and there's a lot of space on the outside for turbolasers and ion cannons
@@sw1nkz50 yeah exactly!!
@@Helperbot-2000 Would be like how they made the assault variant of the Acclamator
Answer: George Lucas didn’t think of that in 1977, as it wasn’t really thought of until the next millennium
Kurt! How you doing bro ? Did those headaches of yours get any better ?
@Sonny Villalobos 1999 and below to 1000 were part of millennium 2. 2000s are millennium 3.
Actually he wrote the prequels before he wrote the originals so he knew what to come off of so he thought of the clone wars tech from the very beginning
@Achillean Nestoris took me a second too
@@Dqoral More or less only the idea of the emperor purging the jedi was conceived prior to the first three movies.
screenrant.com/star-wars-emperor-prequel-plan-lucas-1977/
Finding replacement parts to a Venator would have been a logistical nightmare.
Nah. it would be like having a yard full of 1973 Mazdas. Some wrenched and a welder, and you have nine 1973 Mazdas, a couple of rolling uglies, and a pile of parts.
Assuming the Rebels could fully crew and operate it - Venators would be an excellent ship for hit and run tactics.
They would simply jump to a nearby system and then the X-Wings would do a short jump into combat.
Venators were pretty fast and durable; so they would even be able of jumping in to deploying non-hyperdrive or slower fighters/bombers and then jumping out before the battle, or jumping in at the end to pick up fighters with disabled hyperdrives.
I thought the same. It would also be wonderful as a mobile repair base for long distance operations. Even with hyperdrive, the X-Wings couldn't fly all the way across the galaxy to make a strike in a timely fashion. The Venator would enable them to position the ship near an area of operations, then send the fighters in on a quick, short jump.
@@theswordguy5269 I agree its value is more as a mobile base for operations, not for jumping into fights.
This video was very helpful to the fanfic I'm writing. The leader of a rebel cell uses the Venator as a mobile base. I now know more about how he uses it and where he got it.
i would have imagined the republic having held a tight grip on its venators and just have scrapped them all once the empire went from venators to imperial star destroyers.
Most were sold as cargo carriers and long range freighters
@@Alucard-gt1zf I didn't know this. i suppose it would be a better way to recup something from them. surely they stripped many of the more powerful weapon systems? otherwise they'd still be battleships, and possible opposition?
@@ThibautVDP yep, all heavy weapons stripped and hanger decks were severely lowered in number
I love the dog at the end. He is the reason i keep coming back.
That's a good doggo
I'm worried for that doggos safety
I kinda see 2 issues with the theory. The first is actually in Star Wars Rebels when you say about them not needing a carrier - but they literally steal a purpose built carrier, for their fighters, that had no ability to double as more. They could have simply let Hera's dad blow it up at that point if they were that unneeded.
The second comes from our own world today. Between refueling abilities and all, a fighter jet can take off from the West Coast of the US and fly East to say Italy, so why do we still have and are making new aircraft carriers? Same reason a Venator would still be useful to the rebels - It can be underway toward a needed area while preparing the strike force, reduces how far they have to go in both directions, especially if during a battle they are damaged, offers additional defence, etc. Lets say it's a 8 hour hyperspace trip to where they need to go - do you want your pilots to be fatigued after an 8 hour flight, or fresh and rested? Because if they are aboard a carrier they can rest on the bulk of the trip, and the carrier hover out of range so that the fighters have to make a far shorter jump to the target.
If the imperials destroyed them all so that a group like the rebels couldn't get them, or if perhaps they were too resource intensive would make sense as to why they would go for some other type, but there is no real reason otherwise to say "we don't need carriers" when it's a mobile version of everything you need as opposed to a place like Yavin that once it's found that's it. And doesn't remove the strike fighter mobility tactics if anything it likely improves the ability as used wisely your pilots have less time between target and home base, use less fuel, and can more likely get a damaged ship back home without incident.
A carrier would also not only reduce fatigue, but amount of wasted resources. Fighters today are fuel hungry monsters, while carriers are nuclear and efficient. Storing your plane leaves the fuel for when they really need it
@@cadenorris4009 Good point, though that wouldn't apply to SW fighters. Modern fighters are inefficient because they have to be propelled through Earth's atmosphere. In the low-gravity vacuum of space, it would take way more energy to change the momentum of a carrier, than that of all the planes in it.
Honestly the venators do make sense to be used by the rebel alliance. They can act as mobile command bases which won't ferry X-Wings and other rebel fighters directly into battle but can jump to a nearby system. This will allow for the fighters to save on fuel and be rearm faster; especially in longer battles. Venators also do have a lot of fire power, they aren't just carriers; they are battlecarriers. X wings could drop in and disable a star destroyers shields, then a venator could come in and finish off the now disabled star destroyer and any other smaller ships left over.
Venators overall would of allowed the rebellion to have a large fleet at the start of the war; one that is still practical and still allows for their hit and run strategies. Also it would just be a treasure to see them again, especially post empire.
2:06 this is what I love. They fly in attack and ditch. Hit and Run playstyle is awesome
Because most were under imperial control and where being scrapped on Bracca
You play Roblox?
Lucky Send Robux
gImMe RoBuX
The Empire made ships a very impressive rate.
@@HateCZcamsForThis GIB BOBUX
Damn budget cuts
Justin Y. For fucks sake
No no no go away
I have you to see you in a comment section on a 402THUNDER402 video
@Drew Duffey Probably his mission.
Do subscribers like your comments automatically? Or do you have to pay them?
Love it, I think you nailed it with the large crew needed to operate a republic ship. Also, JFO does a good job showing most of the old venators got broken down to build destroyers. You should do a video on the ARC 170 being used by rebel forces, that's another clone war era ship that works PERFECTLY with the needs of a mobile resistance.
Small, fast carriers carrying small air wings would work in the Rebel Navy in areas where rebel bases are disabled/destroyed or non existant or for planetary invasion support, having an airbase right next to the place you're invading has proven very usefull for the U.S, Britain, Japan, France and any country with an aircraft carrier really. Instead of having to warp back to another friendly planet to refuel you can just climb into orbit, repair, refuel and rearm and head right back in without problem
Even hyperspace capable fighters need a place to rearm, refuel, repair, and recuperate. And a mobile platform is far better than a surface one.
While a Venator was not well suited to take on healthy Imperial capital ships, it would be a perfect mop up or boarding tool. Send in your fighters and bombers first to engage the enemy fighters and disable key systems and weapons. Then send in your Venator to support boarding or use its heavy guns to quickly make sure there is nothing salvageable, while the fighters take up a perimeter to take out reinforcements.
The best reason for the Alliance to shun Venators is the heavy presence of former Confederates who would be less than nostalgic for old Republic imagery. But, on the other hand, there are large swaths of the "civilized" galaxy that would appreciate that imagery. It's simply not a part of the war that we have seen. Yet.
Lol Lets see 3 Imperial 2's try to take on a venator.
*Venator Jump in and launches it's compliment of 450 star fighters of interceptors and bombers, and steam rolls the Empire's own compliment of tie fighters with our superior Clone pilots, piloting Republic ships. Then they wipe out the Imperial's pitifull Imperial 2 star destroyers while the venator snipes at them with DBY-827 turbo lasers, and jumps away.*
People who claim that "The Rebels are a small group of insurgents, they don't have the manpower"
NO. Shut up. In CANON there are 40 mc80s fighting the Executor over Endor. Each mc80 liberty has 5,402 crew members. A venator has a crew of 7,400. Two mc80s would fit a complete crew on a Venator, and fill its fighter deck. I think that would be worth it. Especially considering that in episode 4 AND 5, a fighter destroys a superweapon, not a capitol ship. Therefore, you would want more fighters right?
Butter OnToast no one says they have no man power. Im saying they are a group of inexperienced farmers who have no clue what their doing . Yeah thry have 40 mc80s though i dont know where u got tht number, the Empire has over 2,000 imperial star destroyers. The only reason, "they won" was because of their plot armour and weapons. Rogue one was bs, storm troopers has really good training compared to the rebel infiltrators. Death troopers should have easily shot down those troopers. Also star wars canon is a bs lore system a real star wars fan, should not believe anything that comes from canon.the rebels should not have won the battle of the death star. The stations has thousands of ties.
@@user-uy7qg3ot4n i believe it was the Art of Warfare book, but I got that number from watching numerous videos about the battle of Endor. The high number comes from the blooper about the A-wing going right through their shields and destroying an entire SSD, because it shouldn't have unless the shields were gone, and the nickname of the Executor is "fleet destroyer". So the only thing that would take down an Executor class SSD would be a massive fleet, and a shit ton of fighters because supposedly the Executor could house several thousand TIEs of various models. What I am saying is that even IF the Rebels are just a bunch of farmers( they appear to have better training than STs), AND it is assumed the Alliance is SMALLER than the Empire, the Alliance STILL should atleast be able to comfortably man several Venators, which given that the Rebels casually modify advanced starfighters ALL THE TIME, There is no reason as to why they would not favour a heavily modifiable capital ship, with atmospheric capabilities, faster hyperdrives, AND large hangar bays.
"X-wings are very good at dodging and are heavily shielded."
Wait a minute...
In starwars the X wings were getting shredded in 1 hit.
No they aren't we're just being shown the last shot that killed the fighter for a "better" viewing experience.
Because showing the ships get hit multiple times on screen, adds to the movie's total run time.
As well as increasing the special effects budget requirements, making it less cost effective to show it.
Than again Lucas wanted the death star trench run to be 2 hours long.
His wife at the time thought it was boring, and edited it herself to make it look better.
Actually, if you notice some of the x-wing flyby's on the deathstar you can see the 'sparks' that hits are making against the ship's deflector shields. As for the reason Vader was able to destroy them so easily is because after deflecting the shots coming at them while they ran the gauntlet, their shields were nearly depleted, so even stabilizing rear deflectors couldn't withstand more than a few shots at best.
I think they forgot to turn them on.....
@@Keihryon Vader also happened to be flying a better fighter than the standard TIE model.
The various aspects of the starfighters don't ever seem to be properly shown to us in the films for whatever reason. According to the specs though, an X-Wing would be WAY better than any TIE Fighter, by a large margin. Twice the mounted lasers, hyperdrive, shields, and torpedo launchers. Not just the X-Wings though; all the Rebellion fighters specs are significantly better than the Empire. The Imperials basically intended to project strength through overwhelming numbers. Their capital ships were impressive, but the fighter craft they deployed were nearly made of cardboard held together by the tears of all those kids Vader murdered.
timing the first bop with the punch in apex at the end there was a nice touch
Realistic Answer: The original trilogy was made before the prequels. I think this would actually be an amazing asset to the Alliance. It's a floating base for your fighter squadrons. You can have multiple wings of x-wings and y-wings and a-wings on the ship. The ship then jumps into an isolated location in space. The hyperspace active fighters then leave and do their hit-and-run tactics. When the missions are over they then jump back to the venator and it jumps to a new location or simply acts as a refueling and rearmament base for more sorties before they have to bug out. I think it makes perfect sense and you don't even have to fill up all the fighter space this thing has. Even if it only holds half the fighter space you can use the leftover space to then pack in extra shields and power, or resources like fuel and armaments for the fighters. A Venator would never be or at least rarely be a pitched battle carrier like it is in the Clone Wars. It would simply be the floating bases of the alliance. I also think this helps play into the alliance overall as well. You can have entire cells dedicated to a single venator. They don't have to worry about bases being found and then just dumping them like they did on Hoth or Yavin. Empire finds you then you either jump or have your fighters mess them up. It adds flexibility. If you want you can have them all have a few corvettes or cargo transports for extra supplies and recon. I'd imagine maybe a Nebulon B, some corvettes of any variety, and then some of those transports we see at Hoth and such. That makes the perfect hit-and-run fleet. Then if you have a last-ditch effort like let's say the battle over Endor then yeah you have the venators in combat to add some tonnage and firepower to the fleet, while also acting as rearming depots for your fighters. I can just imagine it. You have your rebel cell, they jump into a sector in the outer rim. You then deploy your five to ten squadrons and they go jump to various sorties. Then they fly back to you and you then travel to the new point. The empire then has to find a ship that can literally be anywhere instead of a base that is locked to a planet. It would also probably be cheaper for the mon Cala to simply retrofit some better shields to a Venator than making a whole new ship. So while you have your home ones and heavy-hitting capital ships, the venator shines as a hit-and-run carrier. One thing you didn’t mention though, is that like the acclamator, the Venator is one of the few larger capital ships that could actually land on planets, so it could also be a mobile base, along with GR-75s. Pretty sure Lucas as we speak is figuring out how he can release Very Special Editions that show Venators in the background of space battles in the OT. You should also consider the fact that most of the Venators were revamped into the Imperial Star Destroyers or preceded them, like the clones becoming stormtroopers. It makes more sense during the ending of Episode III where we get to see the Venators painted in the Imperial grayish colors. Love it, I think you nailed it with the large crew needed to operate a Republic ship. Also, JFO does a good job showing most of the old venators got broken down to build destroyers. You should do a video on the ARC 170 being used by rebel forces, that's another clone war-era ship that works PERFECTLY with the needs of a mobile resistance. I feel that the Venator would have been a good fit for the Rebellion, not to be used as a traditional battle carrier but as a mobile sector base which would have been much harder for the Empire to track down than fixed ground bases.
Another reason is that the venators would be quite old by the time of the alliance era, and would need more manpower to maintain when that manpower could be used elsewhere. Thanks for giving these great videos. I'm a huge Star Wars fan/nerd and what you doing is great👍👍👍The rebels did use the ship but the camera wasn’t pointing in its direction Having Venators might not have been the most practical option for the rebels, but it certainly would make sense as a symbol. "Hey Guys I Found A Whole Factory Full Of Republic Ships And Shut Down Battle Droids! What Should We Do?" "How about we bring ships that have 4 turbo lasers to fight the Death Star." "Wha..." What’s funny is this lore is well baked in, what he describes is exactly how the entirety of X-Wing Alliance’s campaign works it’s all hit-and-run tactics. Additionally, like Eckheart said rebel capital ships in a combat zone (in the X Wing series) are largely more of a liability for the rebels than an asset unless they serve a specific function. You definitely make sense as to why you should just use the fighters and not launch them from the bay of the Venator. I wish I knew more about the layout of the Venator to see if it would be a good idea to use the bay space for shields or weapons. Considering that all of the Venators were owned by the Republic, and that kind turned into the Empire, I think it would be hard for a rebellion to purchase giant military weapons from the government they were rebelling against. This video was very helpful to the fanfic I'm writing. The leader of a rebel cell uses the Venator as a mobile base. I now know more about how he uses it and where he got it. If you ask if the rebels had senators I think it’d bring hope to other cells and those under the oppression of the empire imagine a fleet of visitors coming to your planet to bring aid that’d be badass
A Venator could use the hanger space to retrofit it into one hell of a medical cruiser I think at some point they had to have used at least one, after the destruction of the Death Star the rebels seem to progressively grow larger and larger. When both Hoth and Yavin were lost I would think they might start using more of a mobile base strategy that a Venator would be well suited for. I could see a vendor carrier being set up in deep space as a mobile refit, rearm, and repairing area but never use it as a forward ship purely in support capacity
Considering how many Venators got boarded by Grievous during the Clone Wars, I can't blame the Rebels for wanting to avoid the same thing with Vader. There could have been a role for rebel senators as mobile resupply and repair bases to extend the range of fighter squadrons even further. They could also be useful for large assaults where local superiority is long enough for the wings of fighters to need rearmament. These are basically the existing functions of carriers today since they are never expected to approach too closely to targets that can fight back. We saw the captured carrier they used in Rebels, and that thing became a massive target. other reasons could be operating costs, smaller ships mean less fuel, manpower, supplies, etc. By the time they were able to act as more of a government instead of as a rebellion (before they were still having to stay on the run from the Imperial fleet) the Battle of Endor had happened, and I'm sure they were able to acquire ISD's before, and they had captured ISD's to use instead of either having Venators that they had well hidden or finding some and bringing them up to speed.
Personally I feel the venator would have been a perfect fit for the rebels as it would provide a mobile staging point for those hit and run assaults while still being able to hold it's own if it gets ambushed. The attack on the malevolence is a good example in my opinion.
Plus it could retreat by itself due to having a faster hyperdrive than the ISD.
I also think it would be harder to track one venator compared to 2-3 mc80s with the same fighter complament.
I could easily see Lucrehulks being retrofitted as mobile bases and trading posts by pirates, smugglers, etc.
To your last point: that's something we like to call "putting all your eggs in one basket". If the singular Venator runs across trouble of the Imperial-I variety, you've just lost about 300 fighters. If three Mon Cal cruisers run across an ISD, they have a very good chance of actually winning the battle.
That is true however I still think that the greater number of fighters for the same size of ship would be worth that cost.
Think about it like this. If several mc80s are not enough to defeat the imperial force ( more than one ISD) it would be a greater loss in ship tonnage to loose 2-3 mc80s than one venator + possible escorts (corvettes etc).
Plus a system similar to ww2 carrier groups with venators escorted by battleships and smaller craft would be the ideal if stealth isn't a concern/ direct cobat is expected.
@@theoncomingdork I don't understand. Venators are much tougher than MC80 and have multiple points where they can deploy fighters. The Venator could easier outrun ISDs. Venators may not have as many individual cannons, turrets etc but they packed more individual firepower last I checked. We also see with the right stratigies Venators could take on even more dangerous ships like the Lucrehulk.
0:25 u said lucrehulk instead of venator lol
Hahahahaha I was going to say the same thing
Messed up on his intro :b
Good eye there Quixotic 👍
Caught that as well. We know what you meant Eck!
@@timbartschwolfman
Ear
Hahaha messing with ya :b
whats funnier is that this comment has more replies and likes then ecks pinned comments
You should also consider the fact that most of the Venators were revamped into the Imperial Star Destroyers or preceded them, like the clones becoming stormtroopers. It makes more sense during the ending of Episode III where we get to see the Venators painted in the Imperial grayish colors.
Having Venators might not have been the most practical option for the rebels, but it certainly would make sense as a symbol.
if they used Venators I would think that they would use them as a small space station, for refueling and reloading. Maybe for advance deploment base.
Would have made a better Home One. The space on a venator is crazy. It would have made a great mobile home base.
The fully complimented Venator Star Destroyer seem to fit a stand off planetary assault/siege and power projection role much like current US carriers. Neutralize anything not under a planetary shield, probe for enemy defense weaknesses, then flood into any weaknesses to establish a beachhead (planethead?). Power projection is obvious. One of these things with 400 X-wings/Gunboats with daily sorties can cover a lot of territory and provide near immediate support for friendly planetary garrisons.
The problem is even if the Rebels managed to salvage every single Venator left after the Clone Wars, the Empire would still have more star destroyers, simply because they had such a ludicrously vast industrial base. Venators are great frontline capital ships meant to duke it out in massive fleet movements, but the rebels wanted to avoid those at all costs because they generally lost those horribly, and even the ones they won they suffered losses which they couldn't replace remotely as easily as the Empire could replace theirs.
I absolutely love how you can use the gigachad template for X-wings.
-goes with a whole squadrion (the boys)
-drops out of hyperspace
-attacks imperial capital ships 1000x larger, without warning
-does massive damage before TIE-fighters show up.
-leaves
-refuses to elaborate
Eck: y no rebel venators?
Last Jedi: laughs in background venator
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say it's because the prequels came after the original movies
AngstFisch i don’t believe that and you’re sounding like a casual!
Ultimately, we have to accept the out of universe explanation that Venators didnt actually exist until the early 2000s.But good book and comic writers can fill this gap if they are savvy enough, and fans would appreciate it.
I would love a story about a Rebel fleet of Venators carrying out daring raids and missions away from the main characters. It would help show the continuity between the Republic and Rebellion without contradicting the movies.
Sword of Tauberg yup lol and truuuuu
i agree i would love to hear about the venators being hardend Forward operations platform. it gives a springboard for the strikes to shorten the pilot fatigue and makes the empires lives hell when it comes to tracking down planetary bases. not to mention it also gives the strike pilots a strong place to mount a defence if they are followed faster than expected.
@Brad Mabie That would actually be a good explanation why we dont see them in the movies.
I'd love to hear about groups using heavier ships away from the main front specifically so the main rebel effort had less ships to face (IE only face Death Squad instead of Death Squad plus 100 Star Destroyers including Gladiators)
Venators would be useful to hold ships when not in combat. And would provide a good screen against ties with there large array of point defense guns. They would be a good compliment to the alliance cruiser battle line. And it wouldn't interfere with rebel hit and ran tactics as the rebels rarely brought large ships to those ambushes anyways. The venators would stay with the main fleet and wait for the fighters to return so they could be serviced in the massive hanger space. Plus just bc they have hyper space capabilities does not mean they have infinite range , they would need a dedicated carrier to hold them for much longer distances , especially with the empire chasing the rebels all over the place.
We know that they "stole" capital ships from scrap yards, I would think that they picked up some venitors from them. We just haven't been told about it yet. They would make good home bases though. The space to repair and rearm fighters while providing cargo transport and medical facilities.
They didn't because they forgot about the droid attack on the wookies
Friends with the Wookies, I am.
Maybe they could waltz there and capture the landed Venator during the droid attack on the Wookies.
Who was the dumbass who turned that phrase into a meme or a joke?
Brad Morales seems like you have poor relations with the Wookiees
@@Modelstl063 i don't hate them ok. Is just that phrase that was turned into an internet joke alon the high ground one and sand. Those are just stupid jokes.
I think the rebel attack on the first Death Star with the Fortressa was a completely idiotic move and a waste of ships.
When was that anyways? It would have had to be in Legends, because the new cannon doesn't allow enough time between Rouge 1 and ANH for that to have occurred.
@@BlackEpyon It was legends. I think he made a video on it before.
Nah, it’s canon.
This happened in the Tarkin novel while the DS was still being built.
Athi Bi I think I missed that!
@@BlackEpyon Yes it was int the EU starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Attack_on_the_first_Death_Star
Not using Venators was a supremely stupid tactical mistake on the part of the Rebellion. Granting everything you said in your video Venators would have been an incredible asset to the Rebellion. They were using hyperspace hit and run operations with X-Wings and deploying them from a Venator in the theatre of operations would have been a drawback, but they were also a stateless nation constantly on the run setting up and abandoning new bases of operation across the galaxy. Venators would have been the perfect mobile headquarters for the rebellion having the fighter carrying capacity, repair and refueling facilities, and ability to move without having to shoot your way out of Echo Base through an Imperial Fleet.
jump into a nearby system, deploy your X-Wings and have them make the final jump and attack from there. Have a predetermined rally point and jump away as soon as the X-Wings start their attack and then just meet up there when the attack is over to gather up your fighters and high tail it to the next mission.
In closing the Venator would have perfectly suited the rebellion if they had the ability to see it for how it could be used rather than how it had traditionally been used. The only real problem i see with using Venators would be is in personnel. If it takes too much manpower to operate the ship vs what the rebellion had available then maybe that could be a solid stop to the idea, but if you have the manpower and resources needed for Echo Base then you have the manpower and technical expertise to both fly and maintain Venators imho.
omg i could not stop laughing at the end with the dog, that is funny and adorable!!
At the point in time where the Venators weren't very outdated, I'm pretty sute the rebels were doing guerilla, ambush tactics that didn't use many, if many, capital ships in their raids.
EDIT:
I shot off too quickly, just wanted to get a good discussion going by making a very early comment, so if my comment is rendered moot by the video, that's why.
I wonder how many people you need for working these ships like the venator, I mean, would the Rebel alliance have the capability to use a lot of capital ships with their numbers?
In space you can easily do hit and fade with capital ships! Jump in with guns primed (and fighters deployed if they have hyperdrives), fire at the enemy for say 5 minutes and then jump out (and I bet you do more damage if you have capital ships!) and only bring the fighters back after you've left (if they have their own drives they can jump out when you do!)
@@dreamingflurry2729
well, how sheilding and laser cannons work says otherwise (turbolasers and laser cannons lose effectiveness at range). the effectiveness of fighters comes with the fact that they are small enough to approach closely, get under shields, fire bombs/torps, and then immediatly FTL out of there.
that being said, maintaining venetors as mobile BASES that could go toe to toe with an imp star destroyer would have been very good.
imagine if they warped in a venetor in as the 501st attacked hoth. that might have been enough for vadar to call off the attack, allowing for a much more organized retreat for the rebels.
Chandler Hughes hmmm fine point
Depends on what kind of venator. A republic or rebel one? If it was a Republic Venator, they literally would have wiped Vader's star destroyers easily. 300+ Republic superior interceptor fighters which have shields or track on missles. Also DBY-827 turbo lasers, the big guns you see on the Venator, when firing on max setting, can act as long range turbo lasers, or just straight up pierce shields, according to the wiki.
Makes sense generally, but as we've seen in Rebels pilots need to rest and fighters need to be serviced, and a carrier can function as an excellent mobile base, unbound from any planet, even if it requires refueling (only the extra fuel to move around since a planet bound base needs to be restocked and its power plants refuelled as well).
Plus a Venator can still hold its own in battle should things go south, and jump away if necessary, without having to resort to a hastily evacuation that will definetly result in having to abandon fixed or unmovable assets.
Lastly i dont think the alliance would have many problems modifying capital ships to operate with a reduced organic crew, they have done it before.
your video is great EckhartsLadder. The one big piece of information that would beef up and give your theory some meat is this: the Empire got rid of the Venator Cruiser due to the design flaw of the hangar bay opening up in the top. As we see in some Clone Wars TV series space battles, time and again the Republic would open the bay doors to launch their fighter wings, only to have the whole ship destroyed by a downed separatist fighter hitting the hangar, or said fighter making an attack run on the exposed hanger. Thus, the Empire considered this design flaw when they built the Imp SD 1. Note that from Imp SD series 1 and forward to later SD generations (including the Executor SSD), the TIE Hanger bay is on the bottom of the ship and thus protected from topside strafing runs and easy destruction. The Rebels would know this too, which is a possible underlying reason they did not go with the Venator and its design flaw. Not mention their advantage of the X-wing series of fighters where they could launch from anywhere in the galaxy for a hit and run on the SDs disabling them which negates the desire of the Carrier Cruiser like the Venator.
The Quaker is the perfect example in Rebels why they needed carriers. They support the fighters and provided a “safe area” for the fighters to repair or crash if they needed to. It also allows them to have firepower on some hit and run mission. Emphasis on the some.
I mean, the Venator could easily have been used as a traveling fleet carrier, instead of planetary bases that could be more easily tracked.
Yup and once found can disappear again lol(talking about the ship)
I do think that your reasoning makes sense, that there are better front line capital ships than the venator,. However I would argue that the Alliance could still use Venators as a sort of mobile base for their star fighters. As we see with the battle of Yavin, Hoth, and Chopper Base on Atollion, the Rebels are at their most vulnerable when they are pinned to a static location by the empire, who can use their numerical superiority and big capital ships/armored vehicles to deal heavy losses to the rebels if they can catch them. I think that a Venator would serve the Alliance's hit and run strategy well, as it would allow the Alliance a base where its ships could return for repairs and refuel, without the need to tie their forces to a single static location. One Venator could drop into a unoccupied system and loiter there while its strike craft made small jumps to nearby Imperial worlds to enact their hit and run tactics. This would actually enhance the rebels ability to perform their hit and run tactics because it would mean the rebels could jump back to the ship to refuel and rearm when needed (similar to modern day carriers), then jump back to the battle, or another nearby system, hitting multiple locations in a single strike. And if the empire ever located their base, they could jump out of system, using the Venator's superior class one hyperdrive to escape the slower Imperial Class, and find somewhere else to hide. Because of this, and the fact that it would have been 'easy' for the Alliance to steal an old mothballed ship, these ships would have been extremely useful for the Alliance especially in the early days of the rebellion, when the Mon Calamari would not have been able to donate as many capital ships as the would have during the late rebellion. Yes, the Venator would be a poor ship to have engage an Imperial Class in a straight up capital ship fight, but frankly if the rebels are using a Venator in this way, then they are using it wrong.
All that being said I love the video and I cannot wait untill tomorrow's
I am watching this 2 years after it came out and I still remember when it was posted.
Imagine how much whiplash that would be for any imp clones remaining, just seeing an old Venator fighting against their cruiser.
Would you consider making a Spaceballs versus series? Keep it up man! #AskEck
Suck suck suck suck SUCK SUCK!!!!
Indiana Jones honestly we know nothing about space balls, with the exception that it’s really ludicrously quick
May the schwartz be with you!
Merchandising Merchandising where the real money is made!
Sanders: He's an A**hole sir.
Helmet: I KNOW THAT! What's his name!
Sanders: That is his name sir, A**hole, Major A**hole.
Helmet: And his cousin?
Sanders: He's an asshole too sir, Gunners mate First class Phillip A**hole.
Helmet: How many A**holes do we got on this ship anyhow!?
*95% of people in the room stand*
Yo!
Helmet: I knew it, I'm surrounded by A**holes!
*Mask drops*
Helmet: Keep firing a**holes!
😂
I could see a vendor carrier being set up in deep space as a mobile refit, rearm and repairing area but never use it as a forward ship purely in support capacity
Yea it would be best used for that role
I think that a group of X-wings would be most efficiently used around carrier designed with mon-cala philosophies. A carrier would allow larger groups of x-wings to travel further. The central ship woulf give x-wing pilots a place to comfortably rest between missions, and large hangars would allow an always-active respomse team, with pilots cycling in and out of the carrier for R&R. This would also allow refusing and mission prep close to objectives, leaving fighter pilots alert and ready with only a short trip to the objective. This property would pair best with large hangars, as well rested pilots could deploy en-masse just before jumping to the objective, and leave a small number of pilots onboard the vessel, to act as an escort for the carrier after the battle is done, and the pilots stressed by battles can take a few hours to recover, before the always-active response teams start crying again, to keep the ship safe from ambushes.
1. The first film was made in 1977 and they did not have them designed yet
2. Now that Jedi fallen order is released all venators got scraped and turned into imperial star destroyers
I have to respectfully disagree with you @EckhartsLadder, I think the Venator is excluded from the rebel fleet solely because rebel feet cannon was established before the Venator was written as a part of the clone wars and that it otherwise would be a perfect fit for the alliance navy.
My first point is that the unlike the CIS, Republic or Empire, alliance star-fighters do not need to be dropped in front of the enemy like you depict in your video, it certainly happened in the attack on the death star but there dosen't seem to be any logical reason to do so when you have hyperdrives. When you have hyperdrive capable fighters at your disposal you can place your fleet light-years away from the imperials, strike them with your fighter wing, and be gone before the empire can respond allowing allied admirals from getting into gunnery battles with the empire whose navy is designed around that doctrine.
Secondly, while a hyperdrive allows alliance starfighters to operate from land bases, it is not necessarily more effective to do so considering their fixed locations. The Star Wars X-Wing novel series shows that alliance fighters are limited by their fuel load and the long flight times make mechanical issues more problematic, a Venator can be positioned closer to the target location making fuel and recovery of damaged space craft less of a concern. The X-Wing series also seems to suggest that imperial intelligence is not wholly incompetent narrowing down the location of alliance fighter bases. A Venator allows you to be constantly on the move and (assuming that this is possible in star wars) potentially hide in deep space where it could be nearly impossible to narrow down your location.
Lastly I believe that it is easier to fit a Venator into alliance doctrine then it would be to fit a mon cal cruiser or a providence. An old alliance source book (like my dad probably bought it when i was a baby or younger old) stated that Admiral Akbar's primary objective was to preserve the alliance navy. The empire has nearly unlimited resources but if he loses one capital ship its a serious loss and fighting a line battle with the empire seems like a huge risk, even if a mon cal can outfight an ISD the damages it may very well sustain could be incredibly expensive, time consuming, and take a mon cal off the line where it would be sorely needed, making each engagement a huge risk for the fleet. Furthermore a Venator is on average smaller then an MC80 home one configuration, and only slightly longer then the smaller variant of the Providence so I am doubtful that it is more expensive to operate then the other two and even if it is, I believe that you would save money by not having to repair as much battle damage, assuming that you keep it to a carrier role and take advantage of the alliance's hyperdrive equipped star-fighter fleet.
In conclusion I believe that the Venator can fit the alliance fleet far better then the other alternatives.
CIS Republic or CIS Empire???
NPC detectors are off the charts😂
My though as to why CIS ships are "better" is that because they were designed with droid crews in mind many systems are automated, reducing the required crew compliment.
and, in the case of a direct need for confrontation, the Venator's could be used to get the attention of larger capital ships for a follow on fighter squadron to flank and destroy the Star Destroyers. having a versatile carrier ship like the venator (Which, in alliance fashion, would likely be heavily modified for mission needs, possibly surpassing star destroyers if modified right) it has enough firepower and shielding to hold it's own, it can enter atmosphere to help deploy ground forces, it can operate in a carrier and troop ship functionality entirely on it's own, and when properly supported by it's fighter elements, can hold it's own in a direct ship to ship battle.. it would have made an incredible asset for the rebellion, especially during the earlier stages in the fighting, before the mon cal's joined up.
honestly though, i think you don't see the rebels using them because they were not created until after most of the GCW era stuff was written
You include Republic fighters when talking about hyper-drive incapably fighters but many clone fighters like the Y-wing and ARC-170 had hyperdrives.
Thanks, Eck.
A year late on the add on, but one key thing that was missed was the Empire took quite a bit of time scrapping its older Clone Wars Era equipment and vehicles and replaced it with more modern equipment. Something like the Venator would've already been scrapped or hard to get out of a scrap yard. The Y wing only remained in service with the rebel forces because of a very carefully laid out plan, and even then it almost failed. It would've been next to impossible to get a Venator. Corvettes were easy to obtain because there were Senate members who were sympathetic to the cause and could use their position to simply say the corvettes were stolen when in reality they were practically given to the rebel forces. These corvettes wouldn't have to have parts replaced and were already in good working order. The same wouldn't have been for a Venator. You would be spending more time hunting for parts, which could take years if not months to fix something you would have to hide. That's too much for an obsolete destroyer.
In The game fallen order, many Venators were scraped to built star destroyers.... So I doubt there were any left, the empire wanted to get rid of anything it reminded about the Republic and the clone wars. Forgot to add that most people who worked on building those ships were fired and most killed, so the knowledge and skills to maintain and get spare parts was an issue if not impossible to get things done, the game at the beginning gave pretty much all the lore to it as why we don't see either Cis or Republic ships from the timeline of the clone wars.
It's a hindsight given that this video took place a year before the game's release.
I think the Venator fit the rebel’s quite Well. The Venator could serve as the mobile home of the Rebel fighters. The Rebel could strike from unseen places with the Venator. Like from a much closer system. Instead of using ground based stations they could have a mobile carrying platform that the Empire wouldn’t be able to pin down. If per say a Rebel base became compromised without Rebel knowledge they’d be caught groundside. A Venator would simply jump out of system once detecting an Imperial Ship. It could then relay the new coordinates of the ships to active strike missions. And wouldn’t have to worry about leaving fighters in the open. It’s also a fast sort of ship. A match made in heaven for the rebels hit and run. It serves as a mobile base for the fighters it deploys them a few systems out and the X-Wings jump in attack jump out. The Venator would be perfect for this sort of role. A Carrier always on the move never in one spot for too long. It could save the Rebel fighters fuel and keep their very precious fighters safe. If the Venator became caught it could still fight but it’s X-Wings could escape the battle with the Venators rather strong shields and hull strength. Thus sacrificing the ship but saving the much more important fighters. In my opinion. The Venator served the rebels in every capacity. It doesn’t need to ferry the ships into combat. But it can ferry the ships around to strike from deeper locations, strike more important Imperial installations and keep the Empire more off balance. The Venator would have a much longer range then a single X-Wing would allowing the Venator to find a nice cozy place to allow the fighters to jump away for the mission jump back and go home. Or back to safer space. It fits almost perfectly. The Large hanger space could also House more parts to repair the ships and also could as mentioned before as a mobile base. Maybe a few upgrades to long range communications or more tactical holomaps or something to improve the Venators commanding ability. Or as a mobile training grounds with the rather large hanger space.
A carrier would have improved things for them actually. It's a doctrine issue, their use of hyperspace capable fighters removes the carrier from the battlefield. You don't need a Venator, its capabilities are wasted, instead you need a number of cheap bulk freighters just big enough to host an air wing each. The carrier is a mobile base that can hang out in uninhabited star systems and forgotten boltholes and the middle of interstellar space far from attention. While sending out it's air wing to make strikes across the breadth of entire sectors without ever exposing itself to detection or direct action.
I definitely agree with this. Legal civilian freighters also have a lot more options on where they can land for maintenance. Owning a military grade capitol ship as a private citizen, even an old one, is very likely to be illegal under the Empire, and so you'd only be able to refit Venators in places sympathetic to the Rebellion with minimal Imperial presence. On the other hand, you could have a civilian freighter maintained pretty much anywhere seedy enough to be able to bride the local officer to pass your inspection. Hell, if you launched your fighters and hid them somewhere in the system before you landed and were smart about hiding incriminating supplies, you might even be able to legitimately pass the inspection.
I agree. I think more like Midway or Marianas Turkey Shoot than the battle of the Philippines or The Battle of Jutland.
The problem is, even of they didn't need carriers to bring their fighters into battle, they still needed a base to operate from and a base that can move under its own power seems to fit that need far better than a planetary base. No need to pack up evacuate, and set up again elsewhere, you just jump the carriers to a new location. ESB's first act would have been a lot less interesting though.
You mention in this video that a carrier would slow them down. In that scenario yes, but it does however offer a moving platform. Park the venator out side the system target by a couple of jumps. Launch your fighters, have them jump across for a hit and run attack. You then get to rearm and refuel on a mobile carrier closer to your fighters, expanding their mission profile greatly. You could also use it as a one two punch. Fighters launch a hit and run wave, the venator jumps in behind the destroyer and launches fighters while bombarding the engines of a destroyer. Depending on the target of the first wave you could legitimately cripple, kill or capture a destroyer with that.
Considering that Rebels were known to use dreadnought class heavy cruisers that required extremely large crews (even if rebuild as a less manpower intensive assault frigates) they would also acquire Venators if given opportunity.
After all when used as a mobile base they would not require such huge crews.
More likely is that empire simply kept better track of their Venators and made sure that ones removed from service could not be acquired by their enemies.
After all most of the capital ships used by rebel alliance were either pre-clone wars designs that could have been once a part of a system defense navy and as a result may not have been integrated in to Republic navy during the clone wars.
And that would make it easier for them to be quietly donated to rebels.
Or in case of the former confederacy ships their organic crews may have simply refused to stand down after the end of the war and ended up joining the rebels.
Additionally venators could jump in along with fighters but stay in the rear of the engagement not taking part in it but being ready to recover any fighter to damaged to jump to hyperspace.
Best personal shield: Body shield Dune; Energy shield Halo; Kinetic shield Mass Effect; Shield belt Star Wars
25+ Attempts
This is not a shield but kinda,
Plot armor
Don't forget the Ancient personal shield from Stargate Atlantis lmao
Wait. Dune shields explode in a nuclear detonation if someone uses a lasgun on it. That probably makes it a terrible choice for a personal shield in a setting where everyone has some kind of energy weapon.
Another factor would be that most of the Venators that weren't decommissioned soon after the end of the Clone Wars were repainted to the Imperial grey, which could give off the impression that the Rebel Alliance would just turn into another Empire. Furthermore, those that weren't resprayed were quickly decommissioned, and we can see in the Bad Batch that they were sent to planets like Bracca, where good condition parts were rapidly scrapped and the hulls left to rust. As well as that, planets such as Bracca had heavy Imperial guard forces, likely for the express purpose of preventing rebels from stealing vessels, so if they were going to raid a scrapyard planet, they'd be much better off taking ships that needed less work, like newer Victory or Imperial-I Star Destroyers, starfighters, like ARC-170s, Alpha-3 Nimbus V-Wings, or decomissioned TIEs, or as you mentioned, Lucrehulk battleships and cargo freighters that could be converted into mobile bases.
I like to believe the rebellion did acquire a few venators, but with the empire already having so much tactical data on those ships it was almost a win scenario for the empire.
The one counter I would note to this:
Mon Calimari Cruisers.
This is more expanded universe/Legends stuff (I played the X-Wing games back in the 90s), but every mission has you launch from the Liberty, not a hidden base here or there. We also note this in most of the series, including in Rebels. Nebulon-Bs are also used.
I feel like they would have been itching for ships. It's kind of like how the Rebels made extensive use of Nebulon-Bs, begged, barrowed, or stolen from the Empire (or anyone else they could get them from). Granted, Nebulon-Bs were far lighter ships requiring far fewer crew and fit the hit and run and light nature of the Rebel fleet.
So on the one hand, I don't disagree that you make some good points - but to me, that's more why we would assume the Rebels wouldn't have MANY, not ANY, Venators. It still seems that they'd have a few Venators and Acclaimators.
.
I tend to think of these things in "real world" terms, and so an example in my mind would be "What if California seceded from the US/started a civil war?" There is mothball fleet there in San Fransisco Bay, I believe. It strikes me that they would attempt to liberate/restore at least some of those ships to use as a base of a fleet until they were able to acquire a navy of their own. And this would probably be true whether or not the split was peaceful (even in a peaceful split, it seems they would repurpose the smaller ships for a quickly assembled Coast Guard, and one or two or three larger ships for a base, if dated, fleet.)
Combined with tacticals thrown together by putting guns on light ships (like the IRCG's "navy"), several larger ships would still make sense to have in use.
The reason for this is psychological. There's a quote from Tarkin about the effectiveness of the ISD being that people are so intimidated, they don't really estimate their chances correctly/approach the situation tactically. The same is true with the US CVNs. There's something to be said for having a few big ships that you can show up places in, even if the ships were completely unarmed (as long as the other side doesn't know that)
I feel like these same principles would apply. An empty Venator with only 10% of its weapons working and escorted by only a small flightgroup of X-Wings showing up at a small Imperial convoy would likely drive the convoy to retreat.
For some reason, whenever you mention the Battle of Deep Space Besh, part of me always expects you to say "Deep Space Nine"
Deep Space Nine would have kicked the Empire's ass!
@@jasoncaldwell8199 The Rebels would've stomped the Empire as Deep Space Besh if they had Sisko with them.
@@CollinBuckman I think Defiant Class ships would play well in the Star Wars universe.
You're always answering interesting questions that I didn't think to ask. Thanks for the videos.