Multimedia > The Original Trilogy

Battle of Hoth

(1/2) > >>

jkno:
1. Why didn't the rebels use the X-Wings against the coming AT-ATs. They have torpedoes and are much faster than the snowspeeders.

2. Why didn't the Imperials use some air attacks to soften the rebels on Hoth? Some TIE Fighters or some Bombers?

genraljake:
the at-at was to strong
and they were not exsecpting air attacks at all

Jesse James:
Sorry for the late response here, but I've been busy.

What I'm gonna do is copy/paste my lengthy replies from REbelscum to this very topic there.  I won't include quotes I addressed, but I think you'll get the gist of Q's or points I countered by my replies...

I'll keep these all separate too.  Here we go:


The weather argument doesn't sit particularly well with me... WHile it was disevowed for this argument, it's still a paramount reason to disregard the idea that "the cold" had anything to do with not using X-Wings.

Short and sweet of it is that it's WAY colder in space than on Hoth.

As far as moisture goes... Luke's X-Wing was submerged, but flew perfectly fine after being taken from the swamp on Dagobah. Moisture obviously has no effect on Starships, or at least the X-Wing. With that in mind, climate, temperature, weather and the like seem inappropriate "reasons" all together by film evidence.

Also, we hear that the Speeders need adapted to the cold, but not the snubfighters which we could assume were all FLOWN to Hoth, nor the transports seemed to need adaptation to the inclement weather.

I would say it's all in strategy...

The Battle of Hoth is a route, not really a "battle". It's a mass retreat more than combat. As such, minimal support to hold off the walkers is going to be placed at the trenches. One squad of pilots it would seem flew Snowspeeders (That was a good analogy that they are more suited to ground combat as helicopters are in our own warfare, by the way. Their very physics seen in the film convey this), and it's debateable how many footsoldiers, but it didn't look like a TON there in the trenches either.

Basically, the line to hold off the mechanized armor lines of the Empire were cannon fodder. These guys, from the pilots to the grunts, knew they had to just wreak as much havoc for the oncoming walkers, at whatever the cost.

The Fighters, if you're to follow the Rogue Squadron Video games and how they play out the battle in more detail, have the Snubfighters at a rally point beyond a mountain ridge (assuming the ALliance base runs through this mountain ridge) for protection of all transports as well as protection of evacuating pilots straggling in from the speeder groups.

The Empire then has two objectives that are paramount... 1) blockade ANYTHING you can from leaving the planet, or better yet, shoot it down before it even gets off the ground. This is where the Empire then will divert remaining fighter/bomber units that aren't in orbit with the Destroyers flying escort for them. And 2) is that the Empire wants the ground assault to bring down the shield generators so the attack on the fleeing personnel on the ground can begin, and so that Imperial troop transports can "land" and disable the Ion Cannon wreaking havoc with their picket lines in orbit.

First the Walkers have to do their job "at any cost" one would assume... Even if it means a real out and out slugfest between Imperial and Alliance army units.

Upon that assault's completion, then they can swarm in with TIE's to assault the escaping transports that haven't left or are just taking off, and they can pound any forces still trying to make it to the rally point.

About the Speederbikes... I've always envisioned them as flying ahead of the AT-AT's feet scouting for possible mines that would blow the AT-AT's foot off at the ankle. That would/could be pretty nasty.

Jesse James:
Unless it's not TOO difficult for accurate/limber guns/gunners to shoot the warheads down. The AT-AT seemed capable of picking a human off from a great distance, and almost as an afterthought by a gunner, so a straight flying Torpedoe may only be effective against an AT-AT if fired point blank, or possibly fired without use of the "target lock" if the target lock would alert the AT-AT's crew that they were being targeted in the first place.

I think this seems reasonable somewhat if you go by EU... If you don't believe warheads are easy enough to shoot down though, that's another story then, and it leaves a slight hole there as to why anyone wouldn't attack AT-AT's with warheads.

Jesse James:
Arknew's explanation makes a good bit of sense to me I think, pertaining to the lack of defensive weaponry. I also don't think trenches are necessarily practical against AT-AT's at least. Even AT-ST's seem capable (judging by Endor's terrain) of negotiating some deep valleys and steep hills if they need to and the valley doesn't just all of a sudden appear in front of them (IE: a hidden pit to trip into).  

AT-AT's don't seem TOO unstable in design... If tripped by the cord they do, but walking over terrain, I don't know. It'd seemingly take a pretty big ditch for them to fall into one. Especially if we buy that their knee joints are quite able to bend to 90 degree angles and things... They'd be much more limber than they look anyway.

The lack of weapons placements though could be that either cost, or simply time/adaptation wasn't on the side of the Alliance.

EU claims the guns, given longer periods of time, can do damage to AT-AT's though... Prolonged fire and things can eventually penetrate armor plating of the walkers... It'd be interesting to see what a longer assault would've turned up. If the Alliance had somehow slowed the Walkers with some man-made traps or snares of some sort, like Herbert mentions in a large trench. Maybe then the Alliance guns would've had a more effective timeframe to punch holes in walker armor.

Those AT-AT's really just tromped right through though, and in an extremely "open" field of battle where the AT-AT would have an advantage because of it's simple height. The Rebels really chose a ****ty planet when you think about it. Too bad for them. Yavin IV was ideal with its treetop canopies, towering command buildings, etc... Much more suited to a ground campaign in the Alliance's favor it seems.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page