THE IMPERIALS HAVE HOVERTANKS!

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2003-01-25 05:41pm

And it's about time too, I thought the TF were the only guys with them (that we've seen). Well I was checking the GE Data Bank, which for those who are unaquainted is a poop WEG site, but its information is offical nontheless.

Anyways under the Whats New section it says he'd updated with HOVERTANKS! YAY! That actual pics of the machines are ok too, I'm not sure where he got them (some poop WEG sourcebook prolly), but it doesn't matter. ITS OFFICIAL!

An excerpt from the Heavy hover tank passage, for those interested:

"As the Hell's Hammers were engaged in reorganization and retraining, they missed their chance to participate in the Battle of Hoth. If the Hell's Hammers had been at that battle, the faster Imperial-class Repulsortanks would have been largely immune to the Rebels' firepower, unaffected by the tactics used against the AT-ATs, able to destroy the shield generators in roughly one-third the time General Veers took, and most important of all irrevocably shatter the Rebel Alliance. That opinion by High Colonel Zel Johans of the Hell's Hammers is supported by both Imperial and Rebel analysis of the battle."

I assume this is taken from a passage in soem sourcebook, which he didn't make up. If my assumption is correct, than indeed the Imps have something that is seemingly more effective than the AT-AT (by SOME accounts). YAY!!!

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-01-25 06:22pm

NO SHIT, we've know this for a long time. This is in no way new information, hell GEDB's picture of the tank has been posted to this forum, the history of the hells hammers and the specs of several Imperial tanks have been up on Sheppards site for months.

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2003-01-25 06:24pm

Oh well than, I lose again.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-01-25 06:41pm

you have a link to this site?

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-01-25 06:54pm

Hmm, other than the Chariot LAV I have never seen a pic of an Imp armored hovertank. Wonder what it looks like.

BTW, anyone else absolutely HATE the TIE Crawler? Is it just me or is a tank without any way of firing other than just straight forward a bad concept from the start? I mean, infantry could take out that thing, just flank it and stick a grenade to the treads or something.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-01-25 07:36pm

This page had pretty much every known Imperial vehicle.
http://www.galacticempiredatabank.com/E ... icles.html

This also has quite a bit of information
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/rcrierie/ ... ehicle.htm
More information can be found here, though the total strength of sector army's is highly suspect, WEG understates most everything. Nothing wrong with the lowered level organizational stuff though.
http://daltonator.net/mks/ISB/TOC.htm

Publius · Post by **Publius** » 2003-01-25 07:46pm

NF_Utvol wrote:Hmm, other than the Chariot LAV I have never seen a pic of an Imp armored hovertank. Wonder what it looks like.

BTW, anyone else absolutely HATE the TIE Crawler? Is it just me or is a tank without any way of firing other than just straight forward a bad concept from the start? I mean, infantry could take out that thing, just flank it and stick a grenade to the treads or something.

Sienar Army Systems' Century CAV, also known as the "TIE crawler", is most emphatically not a main battle tank. It is a compact assault vehicle, or CAV, and is not intended to serve as an armoured cavalry unit.

Furthermore, the Century CAV is most probably not limited to firing strictly forward. As it uses the basic TIE/LN cockpit assembly, it most probably shares that starfighter's ability to fire off-axis, as seen in the original film.

Publius

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2003-01-25 07:53pm

Publius wrote:
NF_Utvol wrote:Sienar Army Systems' Century CAV, also known as the "TIE crawler", is most emphatically not a main battle tank. It is a compact assault vehicle, or CAV, and is not intended to serve as an armoured cavalry unit.
You're darned right it ain't a main battle tank! It's a cheap piece of junk, probably glued together from crashed TIEs.

Plus the CAV was is its own seperate vehicle, and the TIE crawler is reffered to as a "century tank" rather than a "century CAV."

Furthermore, the Century CAV is most probably not limited to firing strictly forward. As it uses the basic TIE/LN cockpit assembly, it most probably shares that starfighter's ability to fire off-axis, as seen in the original film.

It may or may not share that abiltity, but regardless it has a light turbolaser (you head me rightturbolaser) in a swivel cannon on the bottom. This leaves it only vulnerable to the sides, which is still a relativley large area.

That being said, I thought they sucked too.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-01-25 08:36pm

I wouldn't be suprised if the Empire had fully fledged heavy main-battle tanks of both repulsorlift and treaded variety w/ weapons out-performing the AT-ATs, in anti-vehicle work, anyway.

The Imperial artillery is an odd thing. How does one fire "energy" in "parabolic trajectories"?

nightmare · Post by **nightmare** » 2003-01-25 08:37pm

Darth Garden Gnome wrote:And it's about time too, I thought the TF were the only guys with them (that we've seen). Well I was checking the GE Data Bank, which for those who are unaquainted is a poop WEG site, but its information is offical nontheless.

Anyways under the Whats New section it says he'd updated with HOVERTANKS! YAY! That actual pics of the machines are ok too, I'm not sure where he got them (some poop WEG sourcebook prolly), but it doesn't matter. ITS OFFICIAL!

An excerpt from the Heavy hover tank passage, for those interested:

"As the Hell's Hammers were engaged in reorganization and retraining, they missed their chance to participate in the Battle of Hoth. If the Hell's Hammers had been at that battle, the faster Imperial-class Repulsortanks would have been largely immune to the Rebels' firepower, unaffected by the tactics used against the AT-ATs, able to destroy the shield generators in roughly one-third the time General Veers took, and most important of all irrevocably shatter the Rebel Alliance. That opinion by High Colonel Zel Johans of the Hell's Hammers is supported by both Imperial and Rebel analysis of the battle."

I assume this is taken from a passage in soem sourcebook, which he didn't make up. If my assumption is correct, than indeed the Imps have something that is seemingly more effective than the AT-AT (by SOME accounts). YAY!!!

And you know what.. they have Death Stars too.

Sorry, couldn't resist

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-01-25 10:07pm

Publius wrote: Sienar Army Systems' Century CAV, also known as the "TIE crawler", is most emphatically not a main battle tank.

WRONG WRONG

The TIE Crawler and CAV are TWO Different vehicles!!!

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2003-01-25 10:18pm

Darth Garden Gnome wrote:<snip>
An excerpt from the Heavy hover tank passage, for those interested:

"As the Hell's Hammers were engaged in reorganization and retraining, they missed their chance to participate in the Battle of Hoth. If the Hell's Hammers had been at that battle, the faster Imperial-class Repulsortanks would have been largely immune to the Rebels' firepower, unaffected by the tactics used against the AT-ATs, able to destroy the shield generators in roughly one-third the time General Veers took, and most important of all irrevocably shatter the Rebel Alliance. That opinion by High Colonel Zel Johans of the Hell's Hammers is supported by both Imperial and Rebel analysis of the battle."

Not to be bitchy, but no they couldn't. The shield was why AT-ATs were used. Repulsor vehicles couldn't pass through the shield. Otherwise the first thing that would've happened in the attack would have been TIEs coming through and strafing. The analysts and High Colonel Johans apparently have forgotten that little fact.

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2003-01-25 10:30pm

Well obviously this was made in the pre-ICS era. Plus it's not like WEG cares to try to make sense out of stuff anyways. But yeah, I know.

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2003-01-25 10:38pm

Darth Garden Gnome wrote:Well obviously this was made in the pre-ICS era. Plus it's not like WEG cares to try to make sense out of stuff anyways. But yeah, I know.

True, we need some sort of replacement name for WEG. Since they're gone, we can call them anything...what's a good name for WEG? All I can think of is "Wide-Eyed Gamer", and that's just not funny.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2003-01-26 06:20am

Why don't they just land a big truck with a huge flatbed, load up some repulsorcraft, and cross the shield with those powered down? After they're in, the repulsorcraft could take off and start messing up the rebel speeders.

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2003-01-26 06:39am

Uraniun235 wrote:Why don't they just land a big truck with a huge flatbed, load up some repulsorcraft, and cross the shield with those powered down? After they're in, the repulsorcraft could take off and start messing up the rebel speeders.

Possible, but not necessary. The AT-ATs did fine against the speeders. They lost two of five (or was it six?) AT-ATs, and completed all mission objectives.

EDIT: It must be noted that the two losses were to unconventional means.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-01-26 11:23am

Uraniun235 wrote:Why don't they just land a big truck with a huge flatbed, load up some repulsorcraft, and cross the shield with those powered down? After they're in, the repulsorcraft could take off and start messing up the rebel speeders.

You need to adapt the repulsor to the extreme cold like the Rebels did, remember?

nightmare · Post by **nightmare** » 2003-01-26 01:59pm

NF_Utvol wrote:Hmm, other than the Chariot LAV I have never seen a pic of an Imp armored hovertank. Wonder what it looks like.

BTW, anyone else absolutely HATE the TIE Crawler? Is it just me or is a tank without any way of firing other than just straight forward a bad concept from the start? I mean, infantry could take out that thing, just flank it and stick a grenade to the treads or something.

"The weapons are powered by a single power generator mounted in the rear of the command pod, and they include two medium blaster cannons that are forward-firing, while a retractable light turbolaser is mounted in the bottom of the command pod and can fire in any direction."

Publius · Post by **Publius** » 2003-01-26 06:24pm

MKSheppard wrote:
Publius wrote: Sienar Army Systems' Century CAV, also known as the "TIE crawler", is most emphatically not a main battle tank.
WRONG WRONG

The TIE Crawler and CAV are TWO Different vehicles!!!

The "TIE crawler" is indeed a CAV, as described in the Dark Empire Sourcebook, p. 118:

As part of a plan to refinance the company balance, Lady Santhe began an ambitious plan to remake Sienar. No longer would their product be limited to spaceships. Everything from hand blasters to speeders to armor would soon carry the Santhe/Sienar logo (or that of one of its divisions) and buy freedom for her world. The first product of the new Santhe/Sienar is a compact assault vehicle, or mini-tank.

Nicknamed the Century tank, this is the first production model from Sienar Army Systems. Adapted from the cockpit of the TIE fighter (which Sienar makes), this tank allows a single trooper to have the effectiveness of a squad. Even the targeting computer for the medium blasters is similar to the one in TIE fighters. Since it can use many of the same interfaces as the TIE fighter, the TIE style tank is both economical to make and very easy to train troops to use.

The technical description of the vehicle includes the following:

Craft: Santhe/Sienar Technologies Century Tank
Type: Compact assault vehicle

It is clear that the "TIE crawler" is indeed a compact assault vehicle, or a CAV. It is as accurate to describe it as a "Century CAV" as it is to describe it as a "Century tank".

Furthermore, the entry on "Tank Droids" on the same page makes clear that CAV is a general term, and does not refer to a specific model of vehicle:

Compact assault vehicles (CAVs) have long been a tool of the Empire to maintain its control throughout the galaxy. Allowing one trooper to use the firepower of a whole squad, it was crucial to controlling the rioting that broke out across the huge urban metroplexes of the heavily populated Core and Colonies Regions. As useful as CAVs have proved during the long Civil War and Mutiny, in many situations there haven't been enough trained soldiers to make efficient use of them. As a cost cutting measure, it was decided to increase the number of battle robots to fill out the ranks of the Empire's ground vehicles.

Publius

Jim Raynor · Post by **Jim Raynor** » 2003-01-26 08:47pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:I wouldn't be suprised if the Empire had fully fledged heavy main-battle tanks of both repulsorlift and treaded variety w/ weapons out-performing the AT-ATs, in anti-vehicle work, anyway.

The Imperial artillery is an odd thing. How does one fire "energy" in "parabolic trajectories"?

In addition to "energy" artillery like turbolaser cannons, the Empire also has missile and "traditional" artillery, although WEG and the rest of the EU has done a pretty poor job of exploring them. I think the only places where this kind of artillery is mentioned is in that quote in the ISB, a brief mention from Labria that he "shelled" a city in Tales of the Bounty Hunters, and the Force Commander PC game.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-01-26 08:53pm

WEG did a good job of fleshing out missile and energy weapon artillery; the Imperial source book has several examples of each. But projectile artillery is almost non-existent. A single mortar design is in the Essential guided to weapons, and that's about it.

Jim Raynor · Post by **Jim Raynor** » 2003-01-26 09:00pm

Force Commander had two mobile projectile artillery vehicles.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2003-01-26 09:05pm

Still, how does one fire "energy" in parabolic trajectories?

Jim Raynor · Post by **Jim Raynor** » 2003-01-26 09:11pm

I don't think they're referring to energy weapons when they mention "parabolic trajectories."

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2003-01-27 02:50am

The game Galactic Battlegrounds featured self-propelled artillery pieces of several varieties, all of which fired glowing ejecta in parabolic arcs. I assume it is something like the starfighter missiles or the Wookie bowcaster seen in ROJ; physical projectiles "sheathed" in some sort of energetic protective field.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

THE IMPERIALS HAVE HOVERTANKS!

THE IMPERIALS HAVE HOVERTANKS!

Re: THE IMPERIALS HAVE HOVERTANKS!

Re: THE IMPERIALS HAVE HOVERTANKS!