It was a shame that the trench war in Solo was so short. It really peaked my interest because it was do gritty and different from what has been an SW movie.
Kyle Cobb For real. It really makes me wonder why History classes when I was in school only mentioned trenches in World War I as if that was the first time they were ever used
@Cribbs Trench warfare fell off in terms of the amount of use because the development of the tank at the end of the war ended the constant stalemate that it caused throughout it.
@@Ghidorah96 Where do we see Stormtroopers in the original trilogy? Capture of the Tantive IV, and subsequent search for survivors: a high priority mission, that will make or break the Death Star project and a good shot at capturing rebel leader Princess Leia. the best troops available must be sent Guarding the interior halls of the Death Star: The Death Star project has been ongoing for decades, with countless people, credits, and resources sunk into its completion. a successful infiltration of the Death Star would result in a devastating loss for the Empire. STRATEGIC VALUE: *ABSOLUTE* The Battle of Hoth: We've has been searching for the rebel home base for 3 years since a complete moral and strategic defeat at Yavin. While the probe droid appears to have been discovered, the data it had collected shows that the rebellion was still settled in. If we can attack before the base is evacuated, they can potentially capture most of the rebel leaders, and learn the details of hundreds of rebel cells across the galaxy. This civil war could be brought to an end years quicker. Ambush in Cloud City: This is an odd mission to say the least. Why Lord Vader is choosing to risk the capture of Princess Leia for some Skywalker kid I'll never know, but rumor has it that kid is the one who blew up the Death Star. Whatever the reason, I shall serve the Empire without question. I would not ask Lord Vader why we are devoting so many resources to this kid, the last person to ask was immediately executed. Battle of Endor: This trap is risky, but if the Emperor's plan succeeds, we might destroy the entire rebel fleet. Our best shot at that is keeping this generator up and running. This blasted rebellion has gone on for too long. It is time to end it
Trench warfare and using trenches are 2 different things. Trench warfare =/= using trenches. Trench warfare is mosty static fighting with minimal changes in territory. Trenches are one of the most protected and effective defensive position to fight from, of course it is still used
@@digitalis2977 not exactly, modern day wars still employ the use of trenches for defensive purposes but modern warfare rarely has a clear “front line”, also trench warfare is more than the use of trenches it is also the tactics employed around them, such as artillery barrages followed by charges, whereas modern day does not see such use of trenches nor charges upon those, should such positions exist, of the enemy. By your logic all warfare is trench warfare because all war for centuries has seen use of trenches, obviously this is not the case, trenches are used today for many reasons; anti vehicle ( making certain ditches that will immobilise vehicles) and cover being the main uses, because ground, the earth, is very good at stopping bullets and shrapnel
@@dantewiggins5119 you realise that both sides used trench warfare in the Iraq war right? That’s like saying guns are shit because the nazis used guns and they lost, its a very stupid point
I like how everyone says that artillery would make any trenches pointless when they don't know the historical examples (so it seems). During WWI, a few days prior to the Battle of the Somme, British Artillery shelled German lines up until the battle started. In that time, 1,700,000 shells were fired into German lines. Once that was over, wave after wave of British infantry stormed German lines. The battle lasted about 5 months and they only pushed the Germans back about a half mile, combined losses on both sides being about 900,000. I should also mention the British deployed 50 tanks. Artillery can help, but by no means is it the only solution to forcing out an entrenched enemy.
You're correct, although at the Somme a large part of the shells were Shrapnel as it was thought they could cut the wire. The bomb-proof bunkers the Germans had constructed far exceeded what the British calculations confirmed: being in them durring bombardment was hellish, but the majority survived, and so did their machine-guns. The use of trenches in Stalingrad is another great example of the resilience of troops against artillery.
@@samrussell4065 Good points overall. However in Stalingrad you must also remember the Russians employed a "hugging" tactic to keep German artillery from shelling their own men. Still, you aren't wrong about the shrapnel shells the British used.
@@angryloyer_2821 That's the thing about trenches: people think they're purely defensive, but they can be offensive as well, protecting your troops at the same time as compromising the enemy. Viet Minh tactics in Vietnam were similar: if the enemy's stength is in artillery and support arms then negate it by getting as close as possible to the enemy lines.
Daniel Seames they say it would be poinless in Star Wars because back in ww1 shells were rarely accurate and only sometimes got a direct hit but in Star Wars the technology is much better then shoot a explosive in the air and hope it drops on their heads most energy in starwars a direct so if a side new exactly where a trench is they could decimate it
@@Antisocialexe accuracy is still a thing trenches break up line of sight and explosions for example a fox hole will still protect a man better from a near miss than just laying down and if all that foxhole takes is a piece of metal and elbow grease then you'd better believe it will be used.
FYI-By time of US Civil war, smoothbore muskets were replaced by rifled muzzle loaders. No army was using smoothbore anymore, one of the reasons the Civil war had such high casualties-weapons had improved, but Napoleonic tactics were still being used.
@@tothethreshold.9965 The officers seemed foolsih right now because you know what happened. The officers and generals just did what their predecesors taught them.
Nonsense.The UK was one of the first nations offered the maxim gun, we refused it due to the old guard thinking it would serve no purpose and many officers regarding the weapon as an improper form of warfare. by the time of WW1 machine guns had been around for 30 years, these were recently developed weapons but by no means new. Even after it was repeatedly shown to be devastating they continued to use the same tactics for most of that war. It was nothing less than sheer arrogance of the generally upper class officers which cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of infantry including my great uncle..
Actually based on my eight grade history class I was able to, without a source in front of me, correct some of his facts. I assume you just didn't care nor listen to your teacher, as someone mentioned earlier.
Well to be fair to star wars it's not the only sci-fi that still uses Trench Warfare, Warhammer 40k is another one that still uses Trench warfare as well as Starship Troopers. And our own military in the US actually still trains in Trench Warfare as well. Gotta remember just because tactics are ancient doesn't mean they aren't effective when the situation calls for it. Also orbital bombardment was not used agaisnt rebel forces very often because of the presence of theater and planetary shields. The bases on Hoth for instance were protected by an energy shield that was strong enough to withstand bombardment from an Executor-class Star Dreadnought and a flotilla of Imperial-class Star Destroyers.
In other words, trench warfare is used in star wars and modern day military doctrine because it works. Granted, like most strategies, it depends on the situation, but it works
Nobody uses Trench Warfare anymore, this video confuses digging in and entrenchment for the entire way warfare is conducted. War today is all about combined arms and movement.
@@comradecommissar1945 you are only half right. Nobody uses trench warfare offensively anymore. Trenches have always been relevant in defensive roles since they provide cover for your troops.
@Sam Sadowitz That's what I'm saying, they are used defensively but because of armored vehicles your never going to get that static World War 1 kind of deal with elaborate trench works and large infantry charges.
For those thinking that trenches are obsolete, we had trench training when I was in basic training for the US Army. We had the Urban Assault Course (important considering the use of urban warfare in WW2, Vietnam, and Iraq) the same day as the Night Infiltration Course- colloquially called NIC At Night. We didn’t dig that trench, though we eventually did a version of entrenchment at the Culminating Field Exercise, but we did climb out of one and low crawl for 250 feet. As for real cases of entrenchment, the Syrian Civil War, Donetsk War, and invasion of Northern Iraq all used entrenchment just in the last decade.
A reason why a defensive line isn't solely constructed of trenches, they usually have supporting anti tank guns and artilleries and several machine gun emplacements and if you are a fan of multiple layers of defense lines
I love how even though the video explains that trenches are a common fixture of ground combat, and have been for millennia, people are still complaining in the comment about how it makes no sense.
People tend to forget, when in combat any soldiers regardless of protection they are equipped with would prefer at least some form of cover rather than absolutely zero cover
Nice video. At Geonosis, the clones were attacking. They were on the offensive. Trenches are a defensive measure. I mean, how do you take a trench with you, as you press forward? That’s what tanks are for, and they did use those.
Allen (or is it Alan?) mentions in the video "Everything Wrong With the Battle of Geonosis" that the GAR had air superiority at Geonosis. I don't think that it takes a formally educated military genius to realize that with air superiority against a fleeing enemy (the droid ships were trying to leave), the GAR had no rush to achieve victory. I may not be a trained tactician or strategist, but I dare say that if I were in command of an attacking force in a similar situation, I would deploy anti-air units to fire on the leaving ships and artillery to concentrate fire on the enemy's defending ground forces; then, I'd entrench my own infantry around the artillery/AA positions with armored support and wait for the enemy's forces to either deplete or surrender. (Not to mention that aside from this, I would deploy my superior air force to attack fleeing enemy ships as well, and provide air-to-ground support for the infantry wherever needed). If I really needed to advance or make a human wave assault in an open area with no cover, I'd at least use a smoke screen, or use available special forces to make covert maneuvers. The Jedi just brainlessly launched a human wave assault because they're used to melee combat-- up close and personal. In the film, the wave assault isn't portrayed as starting until the Jedi take command-- the clones just take defensive positions at the staging area until they're ordered into the wave assault. There was no need to charge the droids. It's just bad tactics (and I get the feeling that Lucas intended this to be the implication)
Tiago deCastro Yoda was the commander at the first battle of Geonosis and since he really hadn’t seen the clones in action he had them charge so the Jedi can get close. And they did have anti-air. They took down one of those smaller Death Star things. That’s part of the reason Yoda was kept away from large scale battles. He’s not necessarily bad but more aggressive.
12:34 « The only weapon that will always be relevant in an infantry is the shovel » The death corps of Krieg are pleased, your world may be spared whenever we arrive, futur imperial citizen. The Empereur protects !
That scene from tlj.... The insane amount of cringe i feel at seeing those ww2 style bombers.... Just, why? Why would you work something so ineffective into the setting
Yea my first thought was why do you have dumb bombs that seem to work with gravity. But apparently they are magnetic. Still completely unnecessary for them to get that close to launch
@@Andrewza1 Then why bother with a pathetic bomber, have a corvette which can be overall better at doing the same job just outfitted to bomb from orbit, or heck even just use those turbolasers to OB an area, a lot less risky than having to set up for a bombing run.
@@Andrewza1 And yet they had a bunker buster corvette in the fleet that could have easily destroyed the dreadnought and not been threatened by the TIE's but nope, needed to save that so that they could just let it get destroyed later in the film.
Excellent Series of videos! Thank You! As a former US Army SF Officer I appreciate your attention to detail and accurate factual military real world history and assessments. We use "reality" in our own SciFi films. Well Done again! ~ Be Safe out there folks ~ Peace & Health to Us All.
2:32 I live there! There are Earth and forts all over the place here! There's one not too far from my house actually. Pretty much right in my backyard. I feel lucky to have been born in such a historically relevant place
7:18 - black Union soldiers had drilled extensively for the battle of the crater. But at the last minute, the black troops were replaced by white soldiers untrained in the specifics of what to expect. They ran into the crater and we're slaughtered. That's what happened at that battle. General Burnside, who had planned the battle and selected the black troops, was disgraced by the failure and never commanded troops again.
You left out that it was General Meade, not Burnside, that swapped out the troops last minute for political points and deserved the bulk of the blame, and that Congress's war committee agreed following the war. Burnside *was* disgraced, but eventually cleared.
@@chad_bro_chill To be fair, Meade was concerned about the possibility that Ferrero's division of black troops would be slaughtered in the vanguard, thereby giving the impression that they had been used as cannon fodder. Though that argument is largely put paid to by the fact that they were slaughtered when they were committed to support the initial failed assault on the Crater.
Something sci fi should show more of is trenches with overhead cover, and/or camouflage. Overhead cover is particularly needed against both plunging weapons (like artillery) and aircraft (extremely relevant in sci fi) and would help explain why overwhelming air/space superiority is not pressed or does not decide the battle. Iwo Jima is an excellent example of a ground battle where digging in with primitive tools compensated for a tremendous material advantage by the other side. I understand wanting to make things more open for dramatic purposes, but I would suggest one side using such strong-points but sortieing from them to engage in fluid battles which confuse enemy supporting fires. It actually annoys me how little used arty/air support is in these as they can provide plenty of dramatic moments for the heroes. A great example of the different elements coming together is the attack on the howitzer emplacements on D-Day in Band of Brothers as the heroes have an objective which is far more important than just some enemy soldiers, they have to use tactics and supporting weapons (like their own machine-guns) and don't simply have to take and hold as they are part of a vastly larger battle.
The Star Wars universe is obsessed with direct-fire, That's why the Y-Wing was replaced with a tugboat full of bombs, and running in first gear all day. To teach people that once again, it is direct fire, or nothing.
I think you would of made a great history teacher. Luring us in with talk of Wars in the Stars and then teaching us earth history in an entertaining way.
At 3:30 the song is called Illusion - Coma Svensson. A homie of mine has been trying to find out the song for 3 years. He hit me up and I used my mixer to isolate the music from the loud guy. We started googling lyrics we thought we heard with no success for 6 hours. But then we started excluding popular songs and found the original. Lots of years of work and just a bit of tism and we got it!
Quick Caveat on the US Civil War, most Union forces by the end of 1862-63, had been issued with rifles muskets such as the Springfield 61 of British made Enfield. So rifled muskets fairly early on, for most part out numbered smooth bore percussion cap conversions.
I am amazed by what you and Ben do, even more so by this. You make history fans of Star Wars fans, and Star Wars fans of history fans. Personally, I'm both, and I love drawing parallels. Star Wars is a gateway which you guys kick open for the rest of us. Respect.
Great video, but you got one thing wrong: the American Civil War was mainly fought with muzzle loaded rifles, not muskets. The two most common guns were the Model 1861 Springfield Rifle and the Enfield Rifle.
At 10:04 You should mention that on Hoth the empire had to use a ground assault and not orbital bombardment because of the shield generators. The bombardment would take too long to overpower the shield in their opinion so they made an assault on the generator in order to allow them to use bombardment.
Great exploration of trenches! I’ve served in the Army Infantry for almost a decade and the trench clear is still preached as the pinnacle achievement for a trained infantry unit.
Trenches still play a role mostly suited for defensive operations. Whilst tanks can bypass the trenches but if the infantry fails to catch up to protect the tanks, those tanks are screwed
Trenches are a very good way of fighting with bad soldiers. combined arms were not invented in WW2, they were invented in the 1620s and first used in the 1630s. the problem with combined arms is that you need well trained and motivated soldiers and officers.
Trenches are still used, but not in the same way. They tend to be 2-4 man structures used in defence, and are primarily used for protection from artillery or air strike. Getting below ground is still the most effective protection from explosives and frag unless you have a direct hit. Many of the Cold War strategies were based around lines of positional defence using trenches.
Well, there are moments in Star Wars canon that try to give and excuse as to why orbital bombardment was not used. In Hoth, for example, the rebels had that ion cannon to keep the imperial navy at bay, and provide an excape route for the transports. So, the Stardestroyers never could get in range to bombard the base. In the Clone Wars, the republican ships in the liberation of Ryloth could not land at first due to heavy anti air weaponry. In Rebels, when Thrawn discovers the Phoenix Squadron secret base, his first order is to bombard, but they used shield generators. But why he didn't keep plummeting the shield until it was down, I will never understand.
Since The Empire Strikes Back was actually a good movie.. They explained that orbital bombardment wouldn't work on Hoth because of the rebels using a shield generator.
The armor value of a meter or three of soil is far higher than the armor value of your skull, chest, meaty bits... Couple of points on the tech: Orbital bombardment was NOT overlooked...The rebels and other forces had wide area ray shielding and large anti ship guns. such as the rebels Ion Cannon which took down a destroyer with a single salvo. they could keep a star destroyer out of firing position or useless against shielded targets..an infantry assault would be needed to take down shields and anti-ship batteries before the fleet could move into firing position. The AT-ATs were not that vulnerable... yeah the rebels took them out with tow cables...but evidently they were only able to slow the assault...slightly, very slightly....but the AT-ATs with their superior firepower, armor, and most importantly an elevated firing angle that allowed them to shoot over terrain features and low hills slaughtered the rebel defenders by the bucketload.
and from Vader's reaction it seems the He wanted to jump in very close and hit ground targets with heavy firepower as soon as they could, to avoid giving them time to bring up shields or power up Heavy Ground batteries.
considering how many troopers that idiot of an officer got killed and how many rebels had the chance to escape because of him...yeah I can see why he got force choked.
Actually during the siege of Yorktown, allied troops never assaulted the earthworks around Yorktown itself, but rather the fortified outposts designated Redoubts #9 & #10. These were taken at night time, using unloaded muskets and fixed bayonets. Once the redoubts were captured the allies were able to move their artillery closer and fire point blank(150 yards) into Yorktown from three directions. Cornwallis tried to escape across the York River, and the first wave of boats made it across but were then lost while returning when a bad storm came in, and the British were forced to surrender. I lived ten miles from the battlefield throughout most of my life, and spent every waking moment I could there when I was a kid.
About orbital bombardment, in the Hoth and Krait examples Echo Base has those details of a massive shield generator necessitating the ground invasion,of the base before orbital bombardment could begin and a massive anti-ship installation that provides covering fire that effectively suppressed multiple star destroyers, and the bunker on Krait was a similar position the Rebellion had originally selected specifically for being hardened against attack from capital ships. Echo base though seems the better example of how star wars ground combat bridges with space combat, since ground based weapons and shields like the rebels' on Hoth and imperial equivalents elsewhere seem to generally be a hard counter to their ship mounted equivalents.
Imperial Tactician: Sir, the enemy has fortified themselves in a series of earthworks. What should we do? Imperial Officer: Hmm...send the troops. *takes massive casualties Imperial Officer: If only we had a weapon to destroy these trenches and ovoid these casualties. Me telling angrily at the screen: JUST BOMB THEM FROM ORBIT YOU IDIOT!
shut up you two, i meant when it was really obvious to use orbital bombardment. I acknowledge you cant use it every time i just get mad when they should use it
Thanks for the information and video evidence I needed to complete my argument that trenches are still used and will be used in the future. I always knew it was a viable defensive tactic.
@Neon Dawn I assume I'm not allowed to have my own opinion on this then, if you liked the film, I have no problems with that, but I didn't, that's just my personal opinion on it.
What is the best counter to trenches? I’ve always thought it was a massive artillery bombardment that completely destroys the frontline trenches. Like the Soviets did vs the Germans
Off topic, but why didn't the First Order issue Phasma style armour as general issue ? It made the wearer far more resistant to blaster fire and the First Order were more into quality over quantity (except when it came to officer training and tactics). It would be scary to face off against forces completely equipped with mirrored armour. First it's blinding to look at and hard to focus on. And surprisingly harder to pick out in a split second than white armour against a coloured background because it reflects the surroundings. And then when you shoot, there's a very good chance that your shot just bounces off. White armour is no longer intimidating to the general populace because it's the uniform of a defeated side that were cannon fodder. "Oh look, is that some sort of Stormtrooper ? I killed over a dozen of those back in the day" [Pegs a few blaster bolts from a pistol, First Order trooper falls down] "Yup, die just as easily". The only possible reason for not equipping all troopers with blaster reflecting armour is if it required say a lot of digital post processing to get the reflections right in propaganda films. And that's just helping the enemy.
@@jasonskeans3327 Cheaper than losing troopers that you raised from childhood (kidnapped) and have spent 10 plus years indoctrinating. Also it greatly increases combat effectiveness and intimidation if the vast majority of shots just bounces off them.
Orbital bombardment and defensive formations were always my favorite maneuver in empire at war. Nothing was better than seeing formations vanish under a bomber formation or capital ships loving caress.
Air and space superiority is almost always a factor in a universe that has starships. If you think about it, Star Wars technology outpaces Star Wars tactics by centuries if not millennia. They can't even use the aesthetics excuse anymore because the Expanse has proven that long range combat/tactics can look cool. You'd think the Rebel Alliance of all factions would have a vested interest in developing long range weapons and tactics.
@@Wasthere73 depends entirely on the objective, if the rebel alliance just wanted to say, cripple the entire empire's military ship production, you wouldn't need boots on the ground for that, a really large artillery cannon could reduce the Kuat yards to dust. The rebel alliance was more or less like a terror organisation, the goal was to make the fight untenable for the empire to pursue, not to "occupy land" The rebel alliance was way too small to really occupy land but they were big enough to have hideouts. However, if the empire found a hideout they would mostly disappear if they had the chance to do so. The only reason they remained fighting was because they didn't have the chance to run away or they had something that they really needed to defend for a while. Still in general they do need boots on the ground, but it wouldn't take a genius to just buy a few weapons and old pieces of armor on the black markets, you wouldn't really need to invest too much for quality gear, remember a massive galactic war had just ended, and if there is one thing there was a lot of it was military surplus, and serious quality gear at that. Both from both sides of the war, but also from the various planetary militias that weren't really directly involved but whom decided to not be entirely defenseless during the war in which they all most likely vastly increased the sizes of their garrisons only to later having to downsize as the stormtroopers took over garrison duties almost everywhere. They could probably outfit their troops pretty well if they didn't get every person a matching armor and weapon, as well as trying to keep a mostly homogeneous fleet. There was a firesale on seperatist ships on the black markets after all, but they needed the brand new mon-calamari cruisers which were better, but they could've probably gotten a two for one deal on providences and donuts (lucrehulks), at least they got some of the filler ships right from the planetary militias downsizing. To be honest, with the way the rebel alliance was spending its income whatever it is and wherever they got it, it is seriously no wonder that they were always loosing everywhere, and those few victories they gained was just a precursor for another setback.
We went from the romans to the revolutionary war to the civil war to Star Wars then to fallout. I literally feel like you put every interest of mine in one video lol
The comparisons to the American Civil War is spot on. I would like to add something to it. The complex networks of trenches seen during the later half of the civil war as well as weapon advancements such as trap door rifles and Gatling Gun were absolutely a herald of the changing times. All of the horribleness that we would see in the first world war, I believe, was first seen on such a large scale in the American Civil war and contributed greatly to why the US army divisions that went to Europe for WW1 performed so well.
Disney needs to hire “technical advisors” to educate them on modern combined arms tactics. A universe that has faster than light technology, directed energy weapons, and can use the force to bring down ships in orbit, are still using Napoleonic tactics?!? It’s called lazy writing
The least they could do is be a bit creative about it. Dogfights between space fighters are one thing because at least they're cool even if they make no sense logically, but those bombers... just.. why? Such an obvious replica of B-17s except they somehow move even slower and with absolutely no defenses.. if you want to have WW2-esque combat at least try and make an effort..
perhaps the bombers in TLJ were not in fact "bombers". perhaps they were retrofitted from another purpose. maybe they were a delivery vehicle for active volcano suppression.'ala jj's star trek 2', essentially a volcano fire truck to deliver a "freezing device".Remember the Resistance is in the same financial boat as was the Rebellion.
Combining history and Star Wars was pretty badass. I'd be interested in a series where you tie in aspects inspired by history on Earth.. unless you already have???
I'm assuming the Empire isn't on a planet of mud for no reason, there must be some kind of political or economic reason for controlling the planet and not just blasting it into smithereens. Also artillery and armored vehicles were supposed to make trench warfare obsolete but the Eastern Front of WW2 says otherwise.
I would like to make two notes. First: The trench lines are their to protect the empire's mining operations. That is also why the cave people of Mimban is on the surface. The locals wanna stop the empire destroying the planet even further. Second: How on any earth are you gonna hit anyone with naval artillery, if CAN'T see them. The only thing the empire is gonna destroy; is the resources they came for. Three: Have a nice day. Goodbye.
Ehhhh. No. It is trench warfare, but what would bombarding do? Those Confederate soldiers are darting around like the Viet Kong. What would bombarding from a ship do to a forest? Also, bombarding would destroy imperial troops. Even if the bombarding worked, you would need to land troops to secure the planet. That means the Confederates, not fighting in blocks would just kill them. That's what happened on Mimbam.
I think everyone here is missing the mark, 1. Trenches save lives in REAL combat. 2. We don't use space fleets like they have in Star Wars, so you can't really compare real war to a fantasy movie. 3. The makers of Star Wars don't care about canon, Don't care for realism, don't care about logic and don't care what ANY of the fans think. EVERY fan theory is better than what they will put in the movie. From what I saw in Solo, the empire was fighting shadows and shooting at noises, there was no enemy shown on screen. So orbital bombardment would be useless since you can't target imaginary things. (except SouthPark Imagination Land)
IIRC the rebel infantry defending Hoth were actually Finish or Swedish (can't remember which) infantry on loan as extras. The film crews just told them to dig in however they thought would be most effective against a hypothetical assault.
This is a freaking incredible argument. It actually makes a lot of sense given the technology we see in that universe contrary to our own, requiring a bit of a paradigm shift that not many are prepared to make
I'd love to see more live-action content of the Imperial Army. Lets see faces, grittiness, heroism, and defeat. "Never have I felt more vile than standing victorious on a battlefield."
"We're bringing civilization to these people" (explosions in the background) The trench warfare scene was great. It never occurred to me that there were fierce ground battles involving something other than Stormtroopers. I always believed that the Empire was soo powerful that it took what it wanted and anyone that resisted was eliminated with little effort. I wish I could have seen more
