Talk: Imperial Army/Legends

Imperial Army Organization

Currently writing the section. Provisionally, I merely quoted the Imperial Sourcebook's summary into the section. I'm in the process of paraphrasing its contents. When that is posted, the quoted summary will be deleted. Kazuaki Shimazaki 16:04, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Finished putting in the future layout. There really isn't much more to say about the higher levels, but there's plenty to be said for the lower levels. Probably sometime tomorrow... Kazuaki Shimazaki 17:45, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Moving on and putting everything up to battalion. As an aside, there is a brief mention in the ISB about how popular an assignment repulsorlift battalions are because of Imperial emphasis on using them for maneuver rather than hard assault. Unfortunately, in the next section (on Regiments), it discusses how line regiments would typically use their repulsorlift battalion along with the assault battalion for hard battles while not commiting their line battalions - which is rather contradictory to the previous section - thus a brief discussion on whether the assignment to repulsorlift units is good (in terms of being lacking hard assaults) was deliberately added. Kazuaki Shimazaki 09:51, 13 Aug 2005 (UTC)

As mentioned, the line between unit and subunit is not perfectly clear in the Imperial Army (and really anyplace). After much deliberation, I decided to lump the Company into the "Units" section. Kazuaki Shimazaki 09:51, 13 Aug 2005 (UTC)

• I will soon get a copy of the Imperial Sourcebook 2nd edition and be able to help this article out! --24.247.124.158 21:16, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I think it needs to break it down in top to bottom hiearchy, Army > Corps > Batallion > and so on, its too confusing as it is. --Stratus 04:43, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Doom

• Why is this article doomed? it looks great to me! (maybe a little incomplete but it's still very long and detailed) --24.247.124.158 20:11, 30 Sep 2005 (UTC)
  • I agree. Removing. MarcK 21:16, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Stormtroopers

• Are they an entire different organization than the army? --24.247.124.158 21:21, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)
• Nevermind, found the answer. --24.247.124.158 22:32, 1 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Overall article structure and AT-ATs

First up, I'm quietly flattered that 24.247.126.44 has taken over stuff from the Systems Army page I wrote, but do we need to do any more than introduce the structure here and shift out the actual discussion of everything from Squads to Sector Armies to other articles (as I've done for everything from Corps upwards, although I could perhaps add a note on HQ strength at the end of every section).

Secondly, VT-16 has moved the AT-AT and Juggernaut to mech. infantry, but under the ISB OB, this would have the odd effect of turning them into nominal "repulsorlift" units! I suspect that AT-ATs at least are "heavy tanks" on the WEG model, butthat may be pure fan inference; should we enter them under both "armor" and "repulsorlift" categories for now? --McEwok 13:48, 14 Nov 2005 (UTC)

No, cause they aren't repulsorlift Head of Confederacy of Independent Systems 00:29, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

Images

• I have uploaded this image from Rules of Engagement: The Rebel SpecForce Handbook. Is it of any use in this article?. -- Volemlock 10:58, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Uniform color edits

Imperial Army personnel wore grey uniforms, to differentiate themselves from their Navy counterparts (who wore black) and Imperial Security Bureau (white).

I believe this text should be removed from the Army,Navy,and ISB because not all Army personnel wore grey and not all Navy personnel wore black. In fact sometimes the opposite is true. Quite simply put you can't tell members from the various branches of the Imperial armed forces apart by uniform color. It is very diverse and not just grey,black,and white. Sulgran 05:12, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

This information is somewhat inaccurate. Stormtrooper Corps officers wore black, while Navy officers wore olive drab. At least, I think. Blackhawk003 05:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Stormtrooper images

Look, if you can't find any actual Imperial Army related images other than the pilots from the films, then don't bother. I know of several guidebooks and will try to find some usable there. In the meantime, I'm removing all the Stormtrooper images. VT-16 17:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Organizational Images

Where did the images showing the organization of different units come from? AFAIK the only source that explicitly discusses the organization of the Imperial Army is the WEG Imperial Sourcebook, and those definitely aren't the images used in that source. The differences are that in the images here different unit types have been given different symbols, and there is no indication of which units are present at standard strength, and which are only present at expanded strength. Should the images here be removed as fanon, or are they from a source I'm not aware of? Doluk 16:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

The images came from the first edition of the Imperial Sourcebook which explains why the unit symbols are different. However they also have a number of typos (i.e. the Heavy Weapons Company uses the symbol for line infantry) which were fixed in the second edition. I would scan them and replace these myself but I don't have a scanner. Valkyriez 20:31, January 29, 2012 (UTC)

Planetary Defenses

The list of turrets (planetary defenses) is very short. I *know* there are a lot more types of Imperial turrets than the two listed there. (the five in EAW - Anti-infantry, Anti-vehicle, anti-air, the grenade mortar, and the offensive sensor node, the homing missile launcher and short turbo laser "tower" in Rogue Squadron, plus the dozens upon dozens that I don't know/am forgetting). Also, would the Magnepulse cannon (surface-to-surface ion-blob thing launcher) go under this section? What about hypervelocity and ion cannons (both of which the Empire has employed)?84.84.207.58 13:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

The Planetary Defenses list should include the w-165 (there is already an article in the wiki), "The Essential Guide to Warfare" refers to it as one common planetary defense used by the Empire (I'm not going to edit because I know that some kind person will just click the "undo" button in less than 24h, so I left it to the person maintaining the article) --85.52.88.47 17:53, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Lacking history

This article is lacking history. I think it would need a rather large history. 88.114.145.156 20:05, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Name

User:Mauser argues that the name of the "Imperial Army" is, in fact, "Imperial ground forces" - he reverted my edit to suggest so. He bases this on the Rebellion Era Sourcebook from Wizards of the Coast. However, he provided no page number to fact-check. I did some fact-checking of my own and came to some conclusions:

On page 28 of the Rebellion Era Sourcebook, it is referred to as "the Imperial Army". This is the same book that Mauser argues the term "Imperial ground forces" is correct.

On page 92 of Rules of Engagement - Rebel SpecForce Handbook", by West End Games, it is referred to as the Imperial Army.

The entire Imperial Sourcebook by West End Games, the go-to-source for information on the Empire (in fact, most knowledge about the Empire owes itself to this Sourcebook) refers to it as the Imperial Army.

The Thrawn Trilogy refers to it as the Imperial Army, as does the Thrawn Trilogy Sourcebook by WEG. In fact, virtually every WEG sourcebook calls it the Imperial Army, and so too does WOC, if the Rebellion Era Sourcebook (page 92) is any indiciation. I still haven't found any authoritative claim in any Star Wars text that says Imperial Army is wrong, Imperial ground forces is the correct terminology. Any objections to changing it back to Imperial Army? --Danik Kreldin 21:30, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

• Rebellion Era Campaign Guide, page 120. Mauser^Comlink 21:41, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

• If you read the whole paragraph, it describes the "Imperial ground forces" as being broken up into groups: the Stormtroopers and "regular army troops". So obviously it's referring to the whole of the Imperial Military's "ground forces" - we know that the Imperial Army is its own separate force, as are the Stormtroopers. They do not share the same chain of command, do not share resources nor do they have the same goals. Since the beginning of Star Wars they've always been two separate, distinct branches. They are both part of the "ground forces" of the Imperial Military, but as know from every other source in Star Wars, they are separate. So you still have the unique Imperial Army (the "regular army troopers") and the unique Stormtrooper Corps. And if you read the paragraph before it, it refers to the other branch of the Imperial armed forces as being the "Imperial fleet" - so are we now to assume that the Imperial Navy is also incorrect, as has now been retconned as the Imperial fleet? Every single source besides Rebellion Era Campaign Guide, including other books in WOTC's line, has always used Imperial Army to refer to the regular army troopers, the Imperial Navy to refer to the space forces, and the Stormtrooper Corps to refer to the elite stormtrooper divisons. If we take the Campaign Guide at face value, the Stormtrooper and Imperial Army components make up the "Imperial ground forces," and together with the Navy, make up the Imperial Military or "Imperial armed forces." I just think that the writers of RECG clumped the STs and regular army together the "Imperial ground forces," kinda how one cam clump together US Army soldiers and US Marines as "American ground forces battling insurgents" or something to that affect - they're all ground forces of America, of course, but one belongs to the United States Army and the other to the United States Marine - two very separate, distinct groups. Officially, it's not "US ground forces", but "US Army" and so forth. If anything, create a new article called "Imperial ground forces" and describe it as being the culmination of both the Imperial Army and the Imperial Stormtrooper Corps. --Danik Kreldin 22:32, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

Notes and references

This article is somewhat long and well written, but it lacks notes and references. Could someone find the necessary references to this article? --DARTH SIDIOUS 2 ^{(Ota yhteyttä—muokkaukseni)} 09:52, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

Imperial Army vs The Imperial Japanese Army or the werhmacht

It seems to be based on the werhmacht and the Imperial Japanese Army.

Tens of trillions?

The article reports the total number of personnel in a sector army at something slightly over a million, but I can't find a mention where more than a thousand moffs, or sectors is made, which would give (assuming a full army complement, which I know in practice is unlikely) of about a trillion. What is responsible for the quoted "tens of trillions"? ```

I agree, this is entirely wrong. At 1,025 Sectors, each sector army would have to be 9,756,097,560 men to maintain even 10 Trillion (nvm the tens of trillions).... If the chart is there be believed, then there are 8,472,500 Sector Armies... I'm sorry but noone is so idiotic to seperate their army so deeply. Either that isn't really a fully sectored army (meaning there are numerious military organizations above "sector army") or the chart is dead wrong.

New

Image for infobox.Оби Ван Кеноби 09:13, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

As it prominently features a Stormtrooper, I wouldn't use it as a infobox-image. Greetings, IvanSinclair 17:20, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

And the Death Star and the walker?Оби Ван Кеноби 08:57, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

Source??

The Imperial ground forces, sometimes incorrectly refered to as the Imperial Army, was a branch of the Imperial Military that had the primary responsibility of prosecution of ground-side military operations, under the oversight of Army Command... The Imperial Army is the name of the article, and now suddenly that's incorrect???89.126.31.87 20:48, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

• I was thinking that too. If "Imperial Army" is just BS then why is it the article name instead of "Imperial ground forces?" I think I'll change it, if anybody can find a source that says that ground forces is right by all means, change it back. -- Holocron ^(Complain) 11:38, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

Main Image

I think that an article with this importance should have one. There must be dozens of images showing Army troopers, like that one showing a trooper deployment. 74.37.180.6 13:48, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

• I've added an image that I *think* is fairly representative of the Imperial Army... but if it's not, feel free to remove it. StarsiderSWG 00:29, May 28, 2012 (UTC)

Rewriting the Organisation section

I have noticed that the unit types (Line Squad, Heavy Weapons Squad etc), are included in this article despite being copied almost verbatim from the formation (squad, platoon etc) articles. This has resulted in the article being too long. So on Saturday 9th July I am going to remove the unit types from this page and move them to the respective formation pages. As this is a pretty big change I would welcome any discussion. Cheers Peash 07:19, July 4, 2011 (UTC)

501st Legion

According to Imperial Commando, the 501st Legion, and stormtroopers in general, are part of the Imperial Army. Has it ever been confirmed that the seperate Stormtrooper Corps was formed immediately upon the reorganization of the GAR, or could it have split later from the Imperial Army? --Bluerock 19:19, February 16, 2012 (UTC)

Category for Army units.

Shouldn't we create a category for the units directly within the Imperial Army? It would free up the Imperial military units. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 20:03, July 27, 2013 (UTC)