4.7 18 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
35 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Josh Peterson
Josh Peterson
4 hours ago

They’ve canonized the existence of the Venator II-class star destroyer, and in my head-canon, I like to think this design is it. It has more point-defense canons in more logical places, shields bulbs on the bridge instead of communications arrays in order to defend an often-exploited weakness, an added miniature hangar door embedded in the massive dorsal hangar doors to avoid constantly opening up the gargantuan doors and creating a weakness, and standardizing the deployment of an SPHA-T in the ventral hangar bay. This ship is a beast.

Lordfra01
17 hours ago

But I admit that this Venator-class Star Destroyer is beautiful, and with the modifications you’ve made this one could be the Imperial version of the Venator.

Lordfra01
17 hours ago

Why don’t you try the Resurgent-Class Star Destroyer?
Or the Mandator IV-class Siege Dreadnought or a Gozanti cruiser or maybe some ship from Leggends?

mileee
mileee
2 days ago

I love the way there are point defence cannons on the underside which was something that many ships were missing in the films

Josh Peterson
Josh Peterson
5 hours ago
Reply to  mileee

I do love the logic behind this design. Between the 3D swivel capabilities on the 2 trench medium turbolaser batteries, the 8 heavy turbolaser batteries all being able to fire forward simultaneously, and point-defense turrets covering the ventral side and engines, this design takes arguably the most well-rounded ship in Stars Wars canon and makes it even smarter. If I could only pick one capital ship for my navy, it’d be the Venator.

Gundamator
Gundamator
2 days ago

This is amazing, just a concept I had but you should make a imperial ship inspired by real modern ship, like the kirov and slava classes.

mileee
mileee
2 days ago

you should do an acclamator

DeltaDart
DeltaDart
2 days ago
Reply to  mileee

I wonder what FS’s stance will be on the ICS’s bridge-terrace quad turbolasers…

Eugene
Eugene
2 days ago
Reply to  DeltaDart

Proclamator retains them, so my bet is – should there be an Acclamator model she too would have them.

Joshua
Joshua
3 days ago

Amazing as always!! Im surprised that the Acclamator hasnt made a depute with you yet Fractal, granted the Proclamator is the Acclamator on steroids.

Imperial Navy Review
Imperial Navy Review
3 days ago

A stunning recreation of the Venator Class Star Destroyer/Attack Cruiser, Victory I Class Star Destroyer, Proclamator class heavy frigate, and ISD I class. Very detailed over all a great piece of work, showing the many details on board the naval ships of Kuat Drive Yards. All of ships seen here would later fall into the Imperial navy, some served long careers with the Empire, others like the Venator class were decommissioned early in the Imperial reign. The size comparison of the ISD and the Venator is something that I have been long waiting for.

Chaser
Chaser
4 days ago

Oh for what might have been: A modernized Venator (a Venator II?) acting as a fleet carrier with a task force of ISDs.

Steven_Universe_fan
Steven_Universe_fan
3 days ago
Reply to  Chaser

it wouldn’t even need the ISDs! A Venator can take them out itself!

Stormsword
Stormsword
3 days ago
Reply to  Chaser

One doesn’t really need to modernise the Venator to act as a carrier within an Imperial fleet. While it’s relatively ill-suited to the sorts of peacetime intervention work that the Imperator proves more capable in, there’s really nothing wrong with the actual frame – it’s a perfectly good carrier without any sort of modernisation, though you may perhaps see the hangar layout get optimised for operations with TIEs. The Venator wasn’t a bad warship for the Empire, just not the one it needed to perform general patrol and garrison duties. Expect quite a lot of the ones in decent shape after the war to be hanging about in strategic reserve fleets and planetary defensive forces. The rest go to the scrapyard because they’re too worn-out for service.

Last edited 3 days ago by Stormsword
CRMcNeill
CRMcNeill
4 days ago

In the side-by-sides with the Victory, the difference in length doesn’t seem like the 237 meters it should be per canon. Is it just an optical illusion, or did you go with non-canon lengths for one or the other?

TheIcthala
TheIcthala
4 days ago
Reply to  CRMcNeill

I think it’s an optical illusion. The high angle shot has the back of the Victory’s bridge obscuring the area of empty space behind it where the Venator has its hyperdrive assembly. None of the other angles are hugely useful for determining relative length.

Valoren
Valoren
3 days ago
Reply to  CRMcNeill

Yeah, most of those 237 meters are in the hyperdrive assembly at the back of the ship which the victory doesn’t have. That’s why the difference doesn’t appear that drastic even though the Ven is technically longer.

Rex
Rex
4 days ago

Are you going to make an Acclamator-class assault ship or AT-TE, AT-ST walkers in the near future?

Brandon F
Brandon F
4 days ago

I love all the angles, especially the top down images for my games. I also love the scale/comparison images and alternate paint schemes. Beautiful work, as always!

Steven_Universe_fan
Steven_Universe_fan
4 days ago

Beautiful ship! It and it’s fighter squadrons would completely wreck that ISD!

Stormsword
Stormsword
3 days ago

I considered explaining that an ISD’s hangar complex is very easily as large as that of a Venator, and that the hull can swallow an entire Venator without it touching the sides, in detail, but it’s probably better to let you marinate in your own ineptitude

DeltaDart
DeltaDart
3 days ago

Fighters aside, ISDs are the capital ship to end other capital ships of their time period. They have more firepower and shielding than a Venator, plus an even bigger and better reactor to power these goodies.

The Venator will still come out on top in engagements with most ships of its size class or smaller, however, thanks to the same philosophy that enables the ISD to beat the Venator.

Stormsword
Stormsword
2 days ago
Reply to  DeltaDart

Half of it is really that an ISD is just a bigger ship, by a sizeable margin – by volume, the important metric when it comes to these things, it’s 4x larger, and that means that it just gets more of everything. A Venator’s a hybrid carrier – for its size, it has fairly impressive carrying capacity and respectable, though honestly not amazing, capabilities in direct combat. The salient point is really just that the Imperator, is, in the end of the day, entirely out of the Venator’s weight class – even though it dedicates much less of its volume to things like carrier operations, proportionately speaking, it still has so much more volume to use that a proportionally smaller hangar on it is still very easily competitive with a Venator.

Venators are, at the end of the day, just one kind of warship out of dozens used by the GAR and Imperial Navy – effective when used right, but as a total product, probably not much better than average.

mileee
mileee
2 days ago
Reply to  Stormsword

when you compare the venator to the victory, which is more of a direct size comparison, the loss of armament is more than made up for by the fighters.

BoltActionTwig
BoltActionTwig
23 hours ago
Reply to  mileee

Eh, 9×70 (VicSD) against 8×70 (VenSD) with the diffecrence mainly coming from fighters/torpedo payload. Overall Victory has more capacity for making spectacular kabooms and Venator’s role makes for different place in line of battle anyway. People tend to dramatically overestimate what fighters (I use word fighters here for all similar scale craft, so Y-Wing, TIE Bombers, etc go here too) are capable of in SW combat. C’mon guys, with direct energy weaponry output is king and there’s simply more of it the bigger you go.

I would go as far as saying that fighters are just giant hole of sunken cost. Theoretically, you want to maximise the damage you inflict on the enemy, which points towards going bigger. Since there are other factors at play and more roles for the fleet than that, you then try to cover different niches for different tasks, but this doensn’t inherently means a need for a fighter. Also, their facilities are additional requirement to the frame, and overall they create a complication in combat, which is undesirable. Systems should be as complex as they absolutely have to.

But then if none of our theoretical fleets have fighters, should one get them, they basically have an uncontested ground for doing stuff with their new strike capability, that really is suboptimal in theory on the relative scale, but since there’s no competition the absolute result should be fine. Now, the other side wants none of it and has to have their own fighters and since we already paid for space to be clear of enemy small craft, lets go for our own strike capability.

This instance then starts a competition, designs get refined, capabilties grow, new countermeasures have to be implemented and this goes on and on.

To illustrate this, lets me go over Empire’s/Rebellion’s fighter rosters.
Imperial fighters are basically min-maxed to reflect the above: TIE Fighters despite the name were always interceptors in role – they impede people’s attempts to bomb capital ships, they ditch the loiter time, sensors and hyper-capability for unparalleled flight performance to ensure they will get through the screen and at least disrupt the strike. Interceptor simply makes more of this.
Bombers on the other hand, are built around maximum possible payload sacrificing a lot to do this. In the fleet brawl there will be a lot of small-craft losses no matter what, and the way to minimise them is to finish it faster altogether, making sure each of the bombers that made it brought the maximum amount of havok.
Starwing is an exeption and rather unique in its role as heavy fighter, to which I’m yet to come up with adequate explanation (baseline – extra capability wouldn’t heart but grounding it in the docrine is somewhat more complex)
We then get a few spealised utility things like Scouts but their place is out of combat so I’ll skip.

Now, Rebellion has a very different approach to this, because they dont wage a conventional war, the dont have a navy to speak of when compared to the Empire, so their designs have to have addtional capabilities stemming from lack of base coverage, hit and run style approach with no actual goal of striking a major defeat (incurring losses and reaching what limited objectives each operation has will do), so they can/have to focus on designs that improve one-on-one capabilities, bringing costlier, heavier, proper space superiority fighters like X-wing, fighter-bombers with much more emphasis on flight performance, etc, etc.(and then there’s A-wing which, same to Starwing, I cant make sense of).

To continue with cost thing, Empire reacted to this by producing stuff like Hunter, Avenger, Defender and on the bomber side of things Scimitar, now rethreading the Alliance way to combat this new threat, when peer-adversary gear proved lacking.
New Republic then rethreaded Empire’s thinking during in later post-Endor period, producing more specialised designs centered around better interceptor capability like Defender, and payloadier bombers like K-wing.

This game has been going since there’s been starfighters in any form capable of delivering worthwhile payload, and the point is – they cannot compete directly with cap-ships. And all of this is just because you cant surrender fighter-scale combat entirely for the enemy to exploit.

Last edited 23 hours ago by BoltActionTwig
Josh Peterson
Josh Peterson
5 hours ago
Reply to  DeltaDart

Don’t forget that the Venator costs just over 1/3 as much as an ISD. Even with its extra fighter complement, you could still buy 2 Venators and stock them with hundreds of fighters against 1 ISD with a few dozen fighters. I’ll take 2 loaded Venators over 1 ISD every time.

BoltActionTwig
BoltActionTwig
4 hours ago
Reply to  Josh Peterson

Good luck coping with CIS fleet, using 2 VenSDs for every ISD commisioned.

TawneyMiyamoto
TawneyMiyamoto
4 days ago

you just turned my favorite star destroyer into a work of art and perfection. Absolutely love it.

Josh Peterson
Josh Peterson
4 days ago

Literal perfection. Even its heavy turbolaser batteries can fire simultaneously forward. This is the best ship in the Star Wars universe. The Victor- and Tector-class star destroyers in Republic livery are the perfect cherry on top.

Evan Schultheis
Evan Schultheis
4 days ago

My only real qualm here is the Imperial-style shield bulb on top, which really messes up the bridge profile and aesthetics.

The engines are a bit thick too but I think it’s one of those things that it just depends on the angle of the screenshot.

Regardless, wonderful job as always!

Spaceisfun45
Spaceisfun45
3 days ago

Much prefer bulbs to smokestacks

mileee
mileee
2 days ago

its more realistic than the original design in the films

Zach
Zach
4 days ago

can you release standalone images of the proclamator and victory in the republic livery?

Jaja Inks
Jaja Inks
5 days ago

I expected that. A great new wallpaper.

CRMcNeill
CRMcNeill
5 days ago

<chef’s kiss>

I particularly like the comparison shots showing how it measures up.