The bomb wasn't that difficult to build in terms of work/resoirces, it was difficult to DESIGN (invent).
Oh? So the Manhattan Project, the massive investment in infrastructure and logistics that allowed the experiments that led to the bomb to actually happen, were what? A smokescreen? I'm not saying that the bomb was easy to design and conceptualize, but actually
building, testing and deploying it took a monumental effort that, strangely, did not need to be replicated for subsequent bombs. Even the hydrogen bomb took only a fraction of the resources to develop and build.
You can't honestly compare a 2m long bomb with a FTL capable station the size of a moon...or a planet.
You might as well say that a skateboard is equal to an aircraft carrier.
And again..REMNANTS.
Something for you to consider.
The Manhattan Project alone employed over 130000 people and cost about 2 billion USD (which, adjusted for inflation, comes out to
70 billion in today's money). So yes, compared to the size of the US economy and workforce at the time? I really can compare a 2m bomb with an FTL capable station the size of a moon.
Also, if we set aside stupid little EU arguments like what you're employing here: Thematically, it doesn't matter how the Empire and the First Order got the ability to pull off hyperstructure engineering. What matters is that they have a lot of power and that they are using it to build giant monuments to their own egos and/or penises.
An unstopable tactic that makes giant death stars pointless.
Makes you wonder why the rebellion didn't simply ram small ships into the Star Destroyers at FTL. Very cost-effective tactic in terms of resources.
All the move did was introduce another plot hole.
Who knows? I mean, we do know that ramming a 3 kilometer Mon Cal cruiser into the 60km Supremacy .... didn't actually
destroy the Supremacy. Disabled it, certainly, definitely caused a lot of damage, but last I checked, it was still in good enough shape to actually launch an invasion force.
The plot hole here exists only in your mind, just like similar objections to certain maneuvers in TFA are only plot holes if you cling to the idea of the Star Wars movies being a factually true and complete account of actual events in an actual universe; Star Wars, for me, has always had a mythological air to it (Hell, even their title card, "A long, long time ago in a Galaxy far away...." sets up a tone that belongs more in the realm of myths and legends rather than facts), and treating these films like war documentaries leads to silly arguments like yours.
Miss perfect Sue already knows it all then.
C'mon, you can't deny Rey is one of the worst characters ever put on TV.
I actually can. I refer you to the threads about TFA in which I and others will deny it.
Yoda didn't seem to think that way when he trained Luke.
And then he died. And got to watch what happened. And probably had a good long chat about this whole thing with Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan and Anakin.