5

In Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope, we learn that the Empire doesn't consider a single man fighter to be any threat, even going so far as to barely send out any fighters to combat 20 or so Rebel fighters.

And then a single man fighter blows up their battlestation and a few million personnel with a lucky shot.

We also see that their Star Destroyers are updated in The Empire Strikes Back, but these still feature basically no anti-starfighter weaponry. After seeing how much damage starfighters alone could cause, it seems foolish to not at least have some.

Why did Imperial-II Star Destroyers not feature any anti-starfighter weaponry?

  • 1
    I don't know of any in-universe explanation (other than references from the EU about Imperial doctrine being to use overwhelming numbers of "disposable" fighters. OOU answers would be along the lines of, "It gave the rag-tag bunch of misfits fighting a vastly superior force a fighting chance, which makes a better story. – GeoffAtkins Jun 26 at 6:18
  • I would understand if they actually had overwhelming numbers in starfighters, but it seems like they never really did. Each SD only held 72 fighters, some of which were bombers, ill-equipped for dealing with fighters. – Gremer Jun 26 at 6:29
  • 5
    They did. They had turbo lasers, tractor weaponry and squadrons of TIEs. It's just that the Rebels would occasionally get lucky – Valorum Jun 26 at 7:29
  • 1
    Take a moment to consider Aircraft versus Ships (Destroyers and Carriers) - while the ships may have Anti-Air capabilities, launching Fighters is generally more effective – Chronocidal Jun 26 at 9:58
  • The only time I remember a statement like that was when they were specifically talking about the Death Star. I don't remember anything similar being said about Star Destroyers. – Demize Glittersword Jun 26 at 14:38
5

The in universe explanation is that the rebels got lucky/were just that good I suppose

Star destroyers are formidable things as per their specifications here

Imperial II-class Star Destroyer

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

LENGTH

  • 1,600 meters

MGLT

  • 60 MGLT

MAXIMUM ATMOSPHERIC SPEED

  • 975 kilometers per hour

ENGINE UNIT(S)

  • KDY Destroyer-I ion engines (3)
  • Cygnus Spaceworks Gemon-4 ion engines (4) (emergency use)

HYPERDRIVE RATING

  • Class 2 (primary)
  • Class 8 (backup)

HYPERDRIVE SYSTEM

  • Equipped

POWER PLANT

  • Solar ionization reactor

SHIELDING

  • Deflector shield generator domes (2)

SENSOR SYSTEMS

  • Long range sensor

ARMAMENT

  • Turbolaser batteries (60)
  • Heavy ion cannon emplacements (60)
  • Tractor beam projectors (10)

COMPLEMENT

  • TIE line starfighters (72), usually:
  • TIE/ln space superiority starfighters (48)
  • TIE/sa bombers (12)
  • TIE/IN interceptors (12)
  • All Terrain Armored Transports (20)
  • All Terrain Scout Transports (30)
  • At least 2 Gozanti-class cruisers
  • Lambda-class T-4a shuttles (8)

DOCKING BAYS

  • At least 2

CREW

  • Officers (9,200)
  • Enlisted crew (27,850)

PASSENGERS

  • Stormtroopers (9,700)

CONSUMABLES

  • 2 years

COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS

  • Communications tower

OTHER SYSTEMS

  • Internal defences

https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Imperial_II-class_Star_Destroyer

The OOU is simply that we were only shown a tiny cross section of battles that likely occured across the empire. You can't build an empire at all without winning fights after all

So I suspect they won a lot more than they lost.

I'll add to my answer part of Chronocidal's comment to your question, Fighters ARE anti fighter weaponry and as you can see the Star Destroyer has a decent complement.

| improve this answer | |
  • 8
    It's as if a thousand readers cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. – Valorum Jun 26 at 8:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.