Author Topic: Where'd the AT-AT go?  (Read 2416 times)

Offline Jesse James

  • Staff Member
  • Grand Master
  • *
  • Posts: 30916
  • Slippery When Poopy
    • View Profile
    • JediDefender.com
Re: Where'd the AT-AT go?
« Reply #15 on: October 8, 2003, 03:01 PM »
Quote
We must remember, it is called a "transport". It was designed to move a mass amount of troops not a primary assault weapon.

Well, with only room for 40 troops inside though (If we go by "official" sources that claim that #) it moves very few troops really.  

Plus the "Armored" side of things seems to indicate it's meant to trudge into heavy combat situations as well.  The AT-ST is also labeled "Transport" in its title but it only carries 2 crew and a maximum of 2 extra folks crammed into the cockpit.  So it's not really a "transport" either.

At the battle of Hoth we see the weapons of an AT-AT at full potential, and they do a substntial ammount of damage.  

A heavy laser cannon capable of charging up to destroy an armored structure with one shot or fire rapid/less powerful shots on shorter distances.  And then 2 pivoting anti-personnel blasters that can cover most any arc the vehicle needs defended...  That's pretty heavy duty weaponry to still be hauling 40 troops inside its belly too.

I think the main thing to remember here is the seemingly staggered formations the Empire employs for its walkers.  They're not generally meant to be out on their own, but rather they're intended to be in support for each other (If we look at things from an EU Perspective).

The AT-AT is the main "brute" of an Imperial armored column, with AT-ST's in flanking support.  The AT-ST's have anti-personnel walkers as well (AT-PT's) to mop up the little stuff, and infantry in support of those.  And in the rear lines AT-AA's (Again this is if we follow some EU establishment).

While each walker can function on their own they function better together.  AT-ST's appearing to be the most versatile of the group with AT-AT's a close second (AT-AT's performed some nimble tasks that a vehicle that size wouldn't be expected to at Hoth as I recall).

The best, except for certain situations though, would be the AT-AT.  In ESB they're seen pinpoint shooting individual infantry, destroying large structures, shooting down fast/difficult aircraft, and all the while they advanced rather rapidly and with  minimal support (One AT-ST is seen, it can be assumed more were there, but it wasn't a complete structured/full assault since time was of the essence).

The AT-AT dominated the battle so I really think its front line importance is combat more than transport.  Plus again, 40 troops is really not much at all...  A platoon at most.  

I think the Transport title's very misleading, a nd more a generic term used for many of the Imperial land vehicles with some transporting capabilities.
2011 Rebel Fleet Trooper Gets My Seal Of Approval!  But Where's The Friggin' Holster On Him!?
Jedi Defender & FFURG.com Staff/Representative, Twitter @JediDefender & @Jesse_James77

Offline Morgbug

  • Old
  • Jedi Guardian
  • *
  • Posts: 15957
  • mmm. pemmican.
    • View Profile
Re: Where'd the AT-AT go?
« Reply #16 on: October 8, 2003, 11:35 PM »
Wow, an old topic back in action...


It's likely that the backdoor the Teddy Grahams showed to Han and company was a legitimate surprise to the Empire that the Alliance knew of it, and attacked there.



Yep, that's all they're good for.  Snack Food. ;D
Minivans: a sign of the apocalypse.

Offline jkno

  • Jedi Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 247
    • View Profile
Re: Where'd the AT-AT go?
« Reply #17 on: March 22, 2004, 03:35 AM »
I agree with Jesse... The ATAT probably wasn't the fighting vehicle of choice in the forests of Endor, and the one that we do spot was dropping off the prisoner (Luke) captured who knows where. Luke could have been captured far away as to divert Imperial Forces to a farther-off location. So while the ATAT and how many ATST's escorted it out to "mop up" the other rebels near the same spot Luke was "captured", the rebels were attacking the back door - out of range.

but why the Empire didn't find another type of vehicle to be used on Endor? Ok The AT-AT is too big and the AT-ST is pretty easy to destroy (huh ???)

Offline Jesse James

  • Staff Member
  • Grand Master
  • *
  • Posts: 30916
  • Slippery When Poopy
    • View Profile
    • JediDefender.com
Re: Where'd the AT-AT go?
« Reply #18 on: March 25, 2004, 03:03 AM »
Forrest combat's not very conducive to ANY vehicle combat though, which is a real thing to consider with the AT-ST's.  An M1 Abrahams in a forrest is at a distinct disadvantage to both traps and human assault as well as attack from other tanks (who would be at equal disadvantage).

I think what we need to ask about the AT-ST is that, if we don't accept the obvious "Lucas didn't think them out much and just wanted them for eye-candy to to explode", then we have to see if there's some explanation for their seeming ease of destruction...

For fire from other combat vehicles of equal power, we only have a brief moment of Chewie firing on a single AT-ST.  WE could argue that he has let a couple shots loose before we actually have the camera cut to that moment, as the AT-ST was seemingly stopped for no reason that he was shooting at.  Perhaps it had stopped to turn and see who was shooting it?  It's plausible...  Odd, but it makes an excuse.  With that in mind then, we could assume the AT-ST had taken a few shots to its rear portion already, combined with those which it had already taken and any possible damage inflicted by Ewok weapons (perhaps a boulder smacked it in the rear portion?).

Then, if we go by the idea that the AT-ST is slightly weaker in the rear of the command pod, as most armor vehicles are a tad weaker in the rear (Such as the Tiger I from WW2, which required a pretty point-blank and direct hit on its rear to be destroyed by most allied tanks).  Chewie blasts the AT-ST he clears out by shots to the rear, so we could assume there's a combination of pre-weakened "hits" there by whatever...  A few possible shots Chewie gets in on it from a greater distance that we "miss" or are just off-screen...  And last, the idea that AT-ST's have a combination of possibly their energy cell compartments in the rear with a slightly weaker armor point.  These things could add up to Chewie's AT-ST being destroyed easily enough.

For the walkers destroyed by the Ewok traps, there's a couple...  The hardest to explain is the walker on the wobbly log trap, as that thing seemed to be the Ford Pinto of Star Wars as it just blew to pieces on impact with the ground.  

My explanation of the tripping walker would then be that it sustained damage previously...  Small arms fire, boulders, or even an Ewok mounting it and pulling and ripping at anything he could, possibly even exposing a fuel-port perhaps?  Or maybe even a Rebel collaboration with an Ewok to plant a bomb on it so when it fell it detonated it and caused the most possible damage?  There's some possible excuses...  Far-fetched or ones that maybe don't seem practical for the situation, but sometimes unpractical events occur in combat that make you scratch your head later too, so it's possible.

For the Log Smash, and for the cutscene one of a single chopped tree collapsing on a walker and crushing it, I believe these to be "reasonable" situations without extra explanation personally.  The logs that smashed the command pod of the one AT-ST were roughly the diameter of the pod itself...  I think if two logs forcefully came together on a modern US tank, which is a fair bit wider than an AT-ST command pod, then it is reasonable to think they'd do some serious damage to the tank's armor or even be capable of knocking the turret off?  It's tough to say without really accurately knowing the weight of the logs, the height they were raised, and such...  Technical junk, but just by watching it, it looked reasonable.

I'd say the same for the cutscene of the chopped tree falling straight down on a Walker too, and even moreso because it lit squarely on the top of the AT-ST it destroyed which would put tremendous pressure on the small legs of the Walker and most likely crush the joints of the walker as is what seemed to happen in this Walker's demise scene.  Resulting damage for its power supply (star wars vehicles, at least fighters, seem to run off of a fuel so it's reasonable ot think it's possibly combustable and that similar stuff's used on walkers and such) then means explosions all around...

The AT-ST isn't big either, and as a "Scout" as opposed to being referred to as some form of heavy assault-type walker, so its armor likely matches.

I'd say, short of running AT-PT's (a  pretty common walker-type from EU we mostly all know), the AT-ST is nimble, heavier armored (than an AT-PT anyway), can handle the valleys and hills/inclines of Endor, and is a simple infantry support vehicle.

The LAV is pretty easily slapped around if it gets caught in a heavy combat situation of any kind (even just infantry), so maybe the AT-ST's simialr to it, without the troop capacity since it could carry 4 or 5 guys at most, counting the crew.  

The AT-ST then seems a reasonable choice for Endor.  That and infantry.  The speederbikes were more cnfusing to me, but I can see their reasoning behind their use, and of course AT-PT's WOULD have been cool to see but are just EU stuff so they ain't there.

I'd say any # of walkers were NEAR the main generator though too...  This is a remote area, from what I can gather in the films, but the area surrounding the actual generator itself (where they expected the attack) appears possibly miles (as in hundreds or more even) away from that rear bunker area.  That area may have had a pre-fab garrison, landing platform(s), and of course the heavier walkers like the AT-AT's, or other vehicles even.  Something expecting a bigger force than a shuttle's worth of Commandoes anyway.
2011 Rebel Fleet Trooper Gets My Seal Of Approval!  But Where's The Friggin' Holster On Him!?
Jedi Defender & FFURG.com Staff/Representative, Twitter @JediDefender & @Jesse_James77

Offline Jediknight760071

  • Jedi Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 1430
    • View Profile
Re: Where'd the AT-AT go?
« Reply #19 on: April 4, 2004, 03:58 AM »
Jesse hits the nail on the head once again.

Offline Playgirl

  • Jedi Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 208
  • Slice and DICE
    • View Profile
Re: Where'd the AT-AT go?
« Reply #20 on: April 4, 2004, 06:43 AM »
Maybe the nail hit Jesse first?

Offline Vote for Chewbacca the Wookiee

  • Youngling
  • *
  • Posts: 63
  • If you haven't seen me before, I'm new to you.
    • View Profile
Re: Where'd the AT-AT go?
« Reply #21 on: April 5, 2004, 01:22 AM »
I believe the original ROTJ sourcebook around '92 or '93 stated that AT-AT was not logical in a battle application on Endor because of the dense forests. I've always bought into that, but it doesn't account for two factors:
1) The area around the shield bunker was relatively cleared, for the obvious need of constructing the base and generator.
2) The AT-AT is what brought in Luke, so clearly it could travel to a certain point.
"The truths we cling to depend greatly on our pwn point of view." - Ben Kenobi
Appearing for the first time anywhere outside of Rebelscum, Chewbacca the...

Offline Angry Ewok

  • Staff Member
  • Jedi Master
  • *
  • Posts: 5481
  • The Ewok Village Idiot
    • View Profile
    • www.TowheeStudio.com
Re: Where'd the AT-AT go?
« Reply #22 on: April 5, 2004, 09:32 AM »
I'm sure main paths had been cleared out from outposts to the bunker, so that AT-AT's and AT-ST's could move about quickly... The AT-AT's probably acted more as anti-air defenses than anti-personnel.
"...been known to make mistakes... from time to time."

Offline genraljake

  • Banned
  • Youngling
  • *
  • Posts: 44
  • im a big star wars collector with no friends
    • View Profile
Re: Where'd the AT-AT go?
« Reply #23 on: April 5, 2004, 11:28 AM »
i no why
because the ewoks could trip  the at-at with wire or  the trees could be in the way and it might get damaged

Offline Playgirl

  • Jedi Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 208
  • Slice and DICE
    • View Profile
Re: Where'd the AT-AT go?
« Reply #24 on: April 6, 2004, 01:19 PM »
i no why
because the ewoks could trip  the at-at with wire or  the trees could be in the way and it might get damaged
I'm sorry thats false.

Offline Angry Ewok

  • Staff Member
  • Jedi Master
  • *
  • Posts: 5481
  • The Ewok Village Idiot
    • View Profile
    • www.TowheeStudio.com
Re: Where'd the AT-AT go?
« Reply #25 on: April 6, 2004, 01:31 PM »
The ewoks were unable to trip an AT-ST, so I doubt they'd do much good against an AT-AT. Remember in ESB when Luke is at the foot of the AT-AT? Keep that scale in mind.

A redwood could be reduced to toothpicks, if necesarry, so I don't consider the trees to be much of a defense against the AT-AT's either... Course, a forrest full of redwoods = alot of clearing to do.  :-\

The AT-ST's are more ideal for the forrest fighting simply because it'd take too long for an AT-AT to systematically destroy every tree in its path. I bet a Star Destroyer battery or TIE Bomber squadron was responsible for clearing out the trees at the bunker's construction, too.
"...been known to make mistakes... from time to time."

Offline Jesse James

  • Staff Member
  • Grand Master
  • *
  • Posts: 30916
  • Slippery When Poopy
    • View Profile
    • JediDefender.com
Re: Where'd the AT-AT go?
« Reply #26 on: April 8, 2004, 12:25 AM »
I believe the original ROTJ sourcebook around '92 or '93 stated that AT-AT was not logical in a battle application on Endor because of the dense forests. I've always bought into that, but it doesn't account for two factors:
1) The area around the shield bunker was relatively cleared, for the obvious need of constructing the base and generator.
2) The AT-AT is what brought in Luke, so clearly it could travel to a certain point.

The AT-AT that brought in Luke was near the generator dish (relatively) and landing platform though, which was a larger more cleared area than the rear-bunker Han and the woks attacked though.  That area was still relatively conceiled by woods.  Was very "rugged" terrain (All Terrain can be a somewhat ambiguous title for many vehicles, real and fictional) also, which could still render an AT-AT somewhat less effective.

In the film, the explosion of the generator, and the explosion at the rear-bunker are VERY different.  The generator, which is a pretty huge item on the forrest floor, blows up and goes for a many-mile radius it seems.  Possibly into the 100's even?

The rear-bunker's explosion is minimal though.  A small blast out the back door (no fart jokes guys!).

This, to me, implies again that there's a large cleared zone at the generator itself.  The actual generator film prop (the dish) had 3 large Death Star-like turrets surrounding it as well.  I think this indicates there was a central base.  A large, maybe fortified area that was patrolled by AT-AT's, had the landing platform(s) we saw, etc...

AT-AT's were then just the rear-entrance's protection, since an attack wasn't expected there.  They perhaps expected a much larger assault on the main portion, rather than a small assault to the rear bunker entrance.
2011 Rebel Fleet Trooper Gets My Seal Of Approval!  But Where's The Friggin' Holster On Him!?
Jedi Defender & FFURG.com Staff/Representative, Twitter @JediDefender & @Jesse_James77