Republic Fleet Approaching... image

Remember that the Republic was focusing more on quality more than quantity, and that they were also spread real thin. The space battles in clone wars 2003 were comedic with thousands of torrents swarming for 3 acclimators. The space battles in The Clone Wars animated series, while being small, properly showed that the battles were quite small in comparison to the entire conflict which spanned most of the known galaxy. Kamino, Scipio, Ringo Vinda, and 2nd Geonosis were major battles in the conflict that the Republic had to pour resources into. It was quality vs quantity.

Lol, I am one of the people who most often quotes the quality vs quantity aspect of the Republic Army and Navy, compared to both the CIS and the later Imperial assets.

That doesn't change the fact though that the SCALE of even the "minor" battles in the newer animated Clone Wars series is off compared to the movies, novels, comics and yes, even the 2003 older Clone Wars series.
In terms of the showcase of the space and land battles the 2003 series was actually better than the newer series as Acclamators can be refitted to carry around 200 fighters each if the ground equipment is removed.
The main problem of the 2003 series is that force powers and some characters *cough* Grievous *cough* are portrayed way too overpowered and over the top like i.e. Mace Windu trashing more than 2000 B2 Super Battle droids with just his hands + a gigantic hovertank on top on Dantooine.

You have a point not enough battles were portrayed with massive fleets over 5 Venator vs 8 Munificent and 1 CIS Carrier. The Clone Wars 2003 went overkill with OP numbers of ships but 2008-2014 tv show lack the scale in space but Battle of Umbara was and is still a highlight PURE CARNAGE

If I had to take I guess I'd say that the animation style in the newer show is more difficult and costs are higher than in the 2D animated show from 2003.

The scale of numbers when it concerns the ships and space battles is actually more on spot and better in the 2003 series. It's the land battles, especially when (famous) Jedi or Grievous are involved in which the 2003 series overdoes it.

Yea, the LAND battles are more on spot in the newer series, no doubt of that.

every one knows that the confederacy outnumbered the republic. in fact its overplayed in every fight we see. The republic still had trillions of citizens, a vasta and quickly awakening military industrial complex, and a few hundred billion clones to serve. The republic wasnt outnumbered in every fight, in fact gun for gun they could very well bring the confederate fleet to its knees. Which they did.
Further Greivous got so nerfed in the Filoni series that he couldnt beat standard knights, acolytes, and padawans. He was wounded during Coruscant, which is why he died. The 2003 series showed the golden age of the republic at war, Fleets incomprehensibly huge, jedi as powerful as super heroes, and monsters that could beat even them. It was a spectacle that to this day ive only seen rivaled by Gundam 1979.

Well also, if you look at the time period between 2003 and 2005 with the release of episode III and the second season of Genndy Tartakovsky's clone wars, you'll realize that Episode II had set the precedent because no other clone wars battles had been seen after or prior. At the time it was thought that the clone wars battles were these humongous epic battles that were similar to Geonosis and were grand scale battles all across the galaxy. It would even make sense at the time that the republic had that kind of military power (aka hundreds of thousands of ships compared to the now conservative down scaled version of things) for the change into the empire. The idea that the clone wars were these massive field battles as well as more tactically ept battles happening in cities, caves, canyons and trenches were a great idea and really puts into perspective the scale of the conflict that tore the galaxy apart just enough for palpatine to become emperor.

Why they didnt put the cannons in the front and the fighter bays in the back is beyond me. Also that bridge

Yeah I kinda agree

Since the Venator has a whole flight deck which can serve to rapidly deploy masses of fighters it being in the front area actually serves a purpose. Starting Interceptors can in this case directly pounce on enemy bombers before they can reach either the main battery or the bridge while fighter-bombers can either decimate enemy interceptors or directly soften up some of the enemy's medium ships so the Venator itself can blast them out of the sky with one or two salvos.

This is also why Venators often operate in packs instead of alone. two or three Venators launch a huge stream of fighters and bombers from their flight decks while the other two or three Venators give energy to their shields and "tank" the enemy fleet for a while.
After the one group of Venators has launched their complement, they switch roles with the "tank" group.
if you have Victory I-class SDs or even ISDs at hand though of course they can do the tanking.

as a class it is a great addition to imperial battlegroups definitely. With how much ive played thrawns revenge dedicated carriers are vital to overcoming late game swarms.

I would be tempted to actually build my own Katana-fleet, but instead of Dreadnaughts it would be comprised of Venators with all their fighter complements intact.

But with no shields the battles would be over too quickly, wouldn't they?