StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Just watched the ESB on the new DVD set and a question springs to mind. What the hell was Luke thinking?

Correct me if I'm wrong but the film evidence shows the speeders to be very manouverable... hence flying around a AT AT's legs with cable to trip them.

Why was it then that Lukes group kept on attacking from the front and starting their run from a couple of klicks off? Why not hang around the rear of the AT AT's and launch their strikes from that side instead of running into the guns?

That's always bugged me about that battle.

Gothmog

Gothmog wrote:Why was it then that Lukes group kept on attacking from the front and starting their run from a couple of klicks off? Why not hang around the rear of the AT AT's and launch their strikes from that side instead of running into the guns?

I actually thought the same thing when I last saw that battle. Does the OT ICS show the AT-AT with side and rear guns?

Gothmog wrote:Just watched the ESB on the new DVD set and a question springs to mind. What the hell was Luke thinking?

Correct me if I'm wrong but the film evidence shows the speeders to be very manouverable... hence flying around a AT AT's legs with cable to trip them.

Why was it then that Lukes group kept on attacking from the front and starting their run from a couple of klicks off? Why not hang around the rear of the AT AT's and launch their strikes from that side instead of running into the guns?

That's always bugged me about that battle.

Gothmog

I think he just figured out that it would be a good way to attack them, so he ordered that they try it immediately. They were trying to delay/prevent the walkers from reaching the shield generator at all costs, wasting time to line up the perfect approach would defeat the purpose of their mission.

What Tit said. I always thought the pilots knew they were going on a near-suicide mission in a desperate last-ditch attempt to delay the Imperial troops for as long as possible to facilitate evacuation of Echo Base. Besides that, the snowspeeders, being more maneuverable, could more easily draw fire from the AT-ATs to protect the ground troops.

draw fire from the AT-ATs to protect the ground troops.

There we go.

Fuck Luke dude, what about the Rebel troops who get out of thier trench and start running forward when the first walker falls. Are they going to make sure everyone dies in it? Is it like the video games where they let some of the snow troopers loose and thier going to confront them?

If the latter is the case, then Luke could have the speeders wheeling around for additional assault fire on the ground troops.

Cal Wright wrote:Fuck Luke dude, what about the Rebel troops who get out of thier trench and start running forward when the first walker falls. Are they going to make sure everyone dies in it? Is it like the video games where they let some of the snow troopers loose and thier going to confront them?

If the latter is the case, then Luke could have the speeders wheeling around for additional assault fire on the ground troops.

Shield first, ground troops second.

The over all Battle of Hoth was a rear guard action.

That said, it doesn't mean every unit was involved in a straight 'rear guard action' type combat.

The infantry in trench war fare is uniquly postioned in such, but the T47's aren't. They must move about. The logical conclusion is that they'd take presure off of the infantry, which they did.

Really, you introduce Air assets, and they'd attack the target in the most prudent way imeadiately available. They did a head to head and it didn't work well so they tried somehthing different.

Wasnt there suppose to be an added ground SnowTrooper vs Rebel trooper scene, cause i dont see one. And was that scene with Han, Leia and C-3P0 with the yellow wampa sticker on the door always there. I know theres a deleted scene that C-3P0 goes up to it and rips it off, (its in the trailer on the bonus disc. i knew of it before) but im curious if you could always see the sticker on the door in the movie version

Tychu wrote:Wasnt there suppose to be an added ground SnowTrooper vs Rebel trooper scene, cause i dont see one.

Somewhere in another thread, someone described it as looking like "the inside of IGN's ass."

StarshipTitanic wrote:

Cal Wright wrote:Fuck Luke dude, what about the Rebel troops who get out of thier trench and start running forward when the first walker falls. Are they going to make sure everyone dies in it? Is it like the video games where they let some of the snow troopers loose and thier going to confront them?

If the latter is the case, then Luke could have the speeders wheeling around for additional assault fire on the ground troops.

Shield first, ground troops second.

That makes no sense dude. I will reiterate my post for the literally challenged.

The REBEL troops ran out of thier trenches and went foward. The point is, the REBEL troops where in their trenches and defensive positions, and they got out and RAN forward. What reason was that?

Tychu wrote:Wasnt there suppose to be an added ground SnowTrooper vs Rebel trooper scene, cause i dont see one. And was that scene with Han, Leia and C-3P0 with the yellow wampa sticker on the door always there. I know theres a deleted scene that C-3P0 goes up to it and rips it off, (its in the trailer on the bonus disc. i knew of it before) but im curious if you could always see the sticker on the door in the movie version

The sticker was always there. It's only ripped off in the deleted scene and the trailer. The trailer is on the DVD, but the deleted scene isn't.

Basically if you want all that stuff either go online and look it up (a few sites have it) or go buy the "Star Wars: Behind the Magic" CD-rom (which rocks & was very cheap). Seriously though, they should revamp that product on DVD and release it as a stand alone thing you can buy.

Hey, it worked for the Matrix (Matrix Revisited), and saves having to buy a whole new set just for some more extras in the future if they want to add 'em.

And yes, the battle of Hoth is the same in this version as in the Special Edition as far as I can tell. No new battle scenes.

Cal Wright wrote:That makes no sense dude. I will reiterate my post for the literally challenged.

The REBEL troops ran out of thier trenches and went foward. The point is, the REBEL troops where in their trenches and defensive positions, and they got out and RAN forward. What reason was that?

There was the possibility of survivors.

Even in the original, I remeber a charge of the Imp troops. Just a flash of them, though.

StarshipTitanic wrote:

Cal Wright wrote:That makes no sense dude. I will reiterate my post for the literally challenged.

The REBEL troops ran out of thier trenches and went foward. The point is, the REBEL troops where in their trenches and defensive positions, and they got out and RAN forward. What reason was that?

There was the possibility of survivors.

Well who cares if there were? If there are and they stay there, they don't matter. If there are and they try to get to the base on foot, they come to the Rebels who are in their nice trenches with good cover and loads of guns. Going into the AT-AT after them makes no sense whatsoever.

Rogue 9 wrote:

StarshipTitanic wrote:

Cal Wright wrote:That makes no sense dude. I will reiterate my post for the literally challenged.

The REBEL troops ran out of thier trenches and went foward. The point is, the REBEL troops where in their trenches and defensive positions, and they got out and RAN forward. What reason was that?

There was the possibility of survivors.

Well who cares if there were? If there are and they stay there, they don't matter. If there are and they try to get to the base on foot, they come to the Rebels who are in their nice trenches with good cover and loads of guns. Going into the AT-AT after them makes no sense whatsoever.

Guns that got wasted by the Imperial armored vehicles. The trenches were useless because the Imperials hauled the high ground around with the AT-ATs and AT-PTs. Such an impetuous tactic would split the Imperials' attention and allow the Rebels to actually engage the enemy on their own terms.

Knife wrote:Even in the original, I remeber a charge of the Imp troops. Just a flash of them, though.

Nope. The scene that is often confused as showing Stormtroopers charging the trenches actually shows Rebel troops retreating.

StarshipTitanic wrote:

Rogue 9 wrote:

StarshipTitanic wrote: There was the possibility of survivors.

Well who cares if there were? If there are and they stay there, they don't matter. If there are and they try to get to the base on foot, they come to the Rebels who are in their nice trenches with good cover and loads of guns. Going into the AT-AT after them makes no sense whatsoever.

Their

Guns that got wasted by the Imperial armored vehicles. The trenches were useless because the Imperials hauled the high ground around with the AT-ATs and AT-PTs. Such an impetuous tactic would split the Imperials' attention and allow the Rebels to actually engage the enemy on their own terms.

Their hand weapons and heavy blasters were wasted by the AT-ATs? Erm... No. The turrets were, but that says nothing about the advantages of engaging ground troops running across an open snowfield from cover, rather than charging into their wrecked vehicle after them, where they're no doubt covering the door with their blasters. That's hardly on the Rebels' terms.

What good do you think hand weapons/heavy blasters are going to be to At-AT's if the snowspeeder weapons are useless? They'd just ignore them until the main objective is fufilled.

Rogue 9 wrote:Their hand weapons and heavy blasters were wasted by the AT-ATs? Erm... No. The turrets were, but that says nothing about the advantages of engaging ground troops running across an open snowfield from cover, rather than charging into their wrecked vehicle after them, where they're no doubt covering the door with their blasters. That's hardly on the Rebels' terms.

Precisely, their static defences were rendered useless. What's the purpose of manning them if they'll just die? The Rebels are safer if they're next to an AT-AT than 100 meters away in a trench that in no way covers them. They're even safer if they're somewhere that the walkers won't fire, like right next to a wreak full of wounded snowtroopers. The Imperials won't fire on their own men just to kill some Rebels and they won't abandon the trapped snowtroopers to be killed for no reason. Those men sacraficed themselves to delay a portion of the Imperial armored force.

StarshipTitanic wrote:

Rogue 9 wrote:Their hand weapons and heavy blasters were wasted by the AT-ATs? Erm... No. The turrets were, but that says nothing about the advantages of engaging ground troops running across an open snowfield from cover, rather than charging into their wrecked vehicle after them, where they're no doubt covering the door with their blasters. That's hardly on the Rebels' terms.

Precisely, their static defences were rendered useless. What's the purpose of manning them if they'll just die? The Rebels are safer if they're next to an AT-AT than 100 meters away in a trench that in no way covers them. They're even safer if they're somewhere that the walkers won't fire, like right next to a wreak full of wounded snowtroopers. The Imperials won't fire on their own men just to kill some Rebels and they won't abandon the trapped snowtroopers to be killed for no reason. Those men sacraficed themselves to delay a portion of the Imperial armored force.

Whaaaaa? Trench offers no cover? While in it they're only covered up to their shoulders. And I reiterate, storming the AT-AT would be suicide. You're entering an enclosed space that has a lot of hostile people with guns, who will no doubt be pointing said guns at the door. You will die if you attempt this. If the stormies stay where they are, they aren't going to be hurting anyone. If they come out and charge the trench, they can be mowed down from the relative safety of said trench while they're silhouetted against the snowfield.

Rogue 9 wrote:Whaaaaa? Trench offers no cover? While in it they're only covered up to their shoulders. And I reiterate, storming the AT-AT would be suicide. You're entering an enclosed space that has a lot of hostile people with guns, who will no doubt be pointing said guns at the door. You will die if you attempt this. If the stormies stay where they are, they aren't going to be hurting anyone. If they come out and charge the trench, they can be mowed down from the relative safety of said trench while they're silhouetted against the snowfield.

No, the Rebel trenches offered little cover from the elevated guns of AT-STs and AT-ATs. There's no point. The Rebel troops don't need to storm the AT-AT hulk, either, they just need to prevent snowtroopers from exiting it. "If the stormies stay where they are, they aren't going to be hurting anyone." You just summed up my argument. By rushing forward in a dispersed group, they lessened the chances of getting shot because the slow AT-ST and AT-AT turrets would have trouble tracking each individual soldier.

The trenches will never be safe; the AT-ATs didn't operate alone and packs of AT-STs roamed about, too. You do know that this is a direct analogue to the introduction of tanks onto the WW1 battlefield, right? Except this time the tanks also give the high ground advantage.

StarshipTitanic wrote:

Rogue 9 wrote:Whaaaaa? Trench offers no cover? While in it they're only covered up to their shoulders. And I reiterate, storming the AT-AT would be suicide. You're entering an enclosed space that has a lot of hostile people with guns, who will no doubt be pointing said guns at the door. You will die if you attempt this. If the stormies stay where they are, they aren't going to be hurting anyone. If they come out and charge the trench, they can be mowed down from the relative safety of said trench while they're silhouetted against the snowfield.

No, the Rebel trenches offered little cover from the elevated guns of AT-STs and AT-ATs. There's no point. The Rebel troops don't need to storm the AT-AT hulk, either, they just need to prevent snowtroopers from exiting it. "If the stormies stay where they are, they aren't going to be hurting anyone." You just summed up my argument. By rushing forward in a dispersed group, they lessened the chances of getting shot because the slow AT-ST and AT-AT turrets would have trouble tracking each individual soldier.

The trenches will never be safe; the AT-ATs didn't operate alone and packs of AT-STs roamed about, too. You do know that this is a direct analogue to the introduction of tanks onto the WW1 battlefield, right? Except this time the tanks also give the high ground advantage.

The trenches are safer than being silhouetted against a snowfield, and if those stormtroopers do come out of the AT-AT, they die to fire from the trench. Because of this, there is no need to go after them whatsoever. As for the trench, I'd rather be in a foxhole than up on a flat, white surface yelling "Here I am! Please shoot me!"

Rogue 9 wrote:The trenches are safer than being silhouetted against a snowfield, and if those stormtroopers do come out of the AT-AT, they die to fire from the trench. Because of this, there is no need to go after them whatsoever. As for the trench, I'd rather be in a foxhole than up on a flat, white surface yelling "Here I am! Please shoot me!"

Packed snow and dirt may stop a bullet, not a blaster bolt from an AT-AT. The whole idea is that the armored vehicles will bypass the trenches, or kill the inhabitants outright. Have you ever studied World War 1?

StarshipTitanic wrote:

Rogue 9 wrote:The trenches are safer than being silhouetted against a snowfield, and if those stormtroopers do come out of the AT-AT, they die to fire from the trench. Because of this, there is no need to go after them whatsoever. As for the trench, I'd rather be in a foxhole than up on a flat, white surface yelling "Here I am! Please shoot me!"

Packed snow and dirt may stop a bullet, not a blaster bolt from an AT-AT. The whole idea is that the armored vehicles will bypass the trenches, or kill the inhabitants outright. Have you ever studied World War 1?

I have. I also know that snow and dirt might not stop an AT-AT's blaster, but neither will thin air, and at least the trench makes them harder to see and target. Let's spell it out for you, in big letters so you might understand this time: BEING OUT IN THE OPEN WHEN YOU'RE BEING SHOT AT SUCKS. Get behind something, anything, and while it may not stop the bullet, at least you're harder to see.