Imperial Walker versus 40K Anti-Armor Weapons

[Simon_Jester]

Sigh.

Excuse me. I do not know or care where that 60 km/hour figure comes from, I really don't. I'm just sick of having the same "LOL AT-ATs" argument over and over.

Forget I said anything about the speed.

[Todeswind]

Flavorwise, I would expect some of the heavier Imperium infantry antitank weapons to at least scratch an AT-AT, and maybe do cumulative damage that was worth something from sufficient concentrated fire; massed lascannon and krak missile fire can do significant damage to Titan-class ground units. But it takes a shitload of that kind of fire. Melta weapons are classically what the Imperium uses for dealing with really big armor, but as noted they have serious range limitations. Very useful against AT-ATs in close terrain, but then would the Empire send AT-ATs into close terrain to begin with?

As to the comment of close terrain meltaguns are usually mounted on something fast enough to get into place and hit something with it. For example in my previous example of Drop Troop IG a flyby dropping on top of, or near to, an ATAT and letting loose with meta guns and/or demolition grenades. Remember that the survival of the squad in question is often negotiable.

Frankly considering how slow the damn things are I think its far more likely they'd just shell the area with earth-shaker cannons at a distance or something like that, maybe do some bombing runs with air support. They're huge, slow moving, and unshielded targets. Their armor is good but not impervious to harm.

[Simon_Jester]

Titan-class targets can take a lot of shelling if you look at the fluff; I remember one case from the latest Imperial Guard codex where it took something like a day-long bombardment to put one down. I wouldn't place too much faith in Basilisk fire, myself; I'm not sure if the Guard really carries proper superheavy antitank rounds for its artillery.

They have direct-fire guns built to the same scale as the Earthshaker which would make fairly credible direct fire AT weapons against something like an AT-AT; the... Medusa, I think, comes to mind.

[Todeswind]

Is the ATAT really is equivalent to a titan in terms of its survivability and armaments? In terms of size I'm completely on board with you that it's the size of a knight titan, however I'm skeptical that it's as well armored as a even a Knight Titan. If nothing else it lacks the shields that the Titans use to protect themselves from harm. In terms of giving it a quantitative value I could easily see the ATAT as being as armored (or better) than a bane-blade but I think it would be easier to kill than a Titan.

Even if it were, there are plenty of titan killers in 40k. The Valdor and shadowsword come to mind as well as the Leman russ annihilator and Vanquisher.

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-4 ... UNTER.html

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-4 ... TTERN.html

And that is just for the Imperials.

EDIT: Spelling

[Black Admiral]

It depends on the size of the Titan; Warhounds have been brought down by lone Tau Skyray gunships (granted that's a ridiculous low-end I don't like using (not least because the Skyray hadn't been developed when that supposedly happened), but it did occur) or concentrated fire from a single battery (6-8 guns) of Basilisk SPGs (from the IA Vraks material, so of dubious reliability) before.

[Todeswind]

The problem with 40k is that the power of the titan in question is dependent on the plot. In the Eisenhorn trilogy a deamonhost crushes a Titan in a couple seconds with minimal effort, in the Titanicus Novels Titans are nigh indestructible.

[Norade]

There is some evidence to suggest that an AT-AT does have shields, though they may be extremely close to the hull.

[Imperial Overlord]

The problem with 40k is that the power of the titan in question is dependent on the plot. In the Eisenhorn trilogy a deamonhost crushes a Titan in a couple seconds with minimal effort, in the Titanicus Novels Titans are nigh indestructible.

The situations aren't contradictory. The daemonhost in in Eisenhorn is an unbound daemon prince and thus enormously fucking powerful. The Titan in question is only partially functional, completely lacking void shields.

[Norade]

The problem with 40k is that the power of the titan in question is dependent on the plot. In the Eisenhorn trilogy a deamonhost crushes a Titan in a couple seconds with minimal effort, in the Titanicus Novels Titans are nigh indestructible.

The situations aren't contradictory. The daemonhost in in Eisenhorn is an unbound daemon prince and thus enormously fucking powerful. The Titan in question is only partially functional, completely lacking void shields.

That's a point against 40k, half the things you see in the field won't be fully functional or be working at anything near full efficiency.

[Imperial Overlord]

That's a point against 40k, half the things you see in the field won't be fully functional or be working at anything near full efficiency.

No, it isn't. It was a Titan that had been dormant for ages and then quickly reactivated by a bunch of heretics who weren't Titan specialists. 40K stuff tends to be very durable and last forever.

[Simon_Jester]

Is the ATAT really is equivalent to a titan in terms of its survivability and armaments? In terms of size I'm completely on board with you that it's the size of a knight titan, however I'm skeptical that it's as well armored as a even a Knight Titan. If nothing else it lacks the shields that the Titans use to protect themselves from harm. In terms of giving it a quantitative value I could easily see the ATAT as being as armored (or better) than a bane-blade but I think it would be easier to kill than a Titan.

Easier to kill, yes, but built and armored to the same scale- more than capable of shrugging off all but the heaviest Imperium man-portable antitank weapons, if it can handle snowspeeder blaster cannon. I really think that in 40k it would be a superheavy with structure points, just not with shielding. It might not be a really powerful superheavy, but it'd be up in that range.

And yes, the Imperium certainly has weapons to take care of such problems. It's just outside the province of the 40k equivalent of infantry with bazookas.

[Norade]

That's a point against 40k, half the things you see in the field won't be fully functional or be working at anything near full efficiency.

No, it isn't. It was a Titan that had been dormant for ages and then quickly reactivated by a bunch of heretics who weren't Titan specialists. 40K stuff tends to be very durable and last forever.

So explain the fact that it isn't an uncommon sight to see Leman Russes running on things other than the fuel they were designed for, with some companies lacking things like powered turret traverse or gun stabilizers? Or the guard having such differing levels of tech that what would be something one unit would consider junk would be a godsend to many guard legions? They have durable tech, but it is very uneven and often not working at full steam due to age, repair, or simply a lack of the needed technology in the first place.

Where as every GE force will be mechanized if the mission demands it, the IoM might not be able to field a mechanized legion if they had to. While one unit of guard might have tanks centuries old the GE will have equipment younger than they are. This is a huge factor and it wouldn't be unexpected if things as ancient as Titans had their own ticks and quirks and that even with care not all of them should be expected to be at full strength.

[Imperial Overlord]

[
So explain the fact that it isn't an uncommon sight to see Leman Russes running on things other than the fuel they were designed for, with some companies lacking things like powered turret traverse or gun stabilizers? Or the guard having such differing levels of tech that what would be something one unit would consider junk would be a godsend to many guard legions? They have durable tech, but it is very uneven and often not working at full steam due to age, repair, or simply a lack of the needed technology in the first place.

This is totally different issue. Those stem from the IG placing a high emphasis on logistic issues (understandable if you think for a moment about a galaxy wide military force that has unreliable FTL coms and transportation). Production is also an issue with worlds ranging from Stone Age to hypertech. The IG is tithed and supplied by member worlds. So yes, the quality of tech varies a lot. The Leman Russ is designed to work on everything from refined fuels to wood, which means it can run even when the supply situation go to hell. Their tech works very, very well. Some of it is damn primitive, but it generally works and works well. Titans are high end and very capable. Now only if GW would standardize the size . . .

Where as every GE force will be mechanized if the mission demands it, the IoM might not be able to field a mechanized legion if they had to. While one unit of guard might have tanks centuries old the GE will have equipment younger than they are. This is a huge factor and it wouldn't be unexpected if things as ancient as Titans had their own ticks and quirks and that even with care not all of them should be expected to be at full strength.

This is, again, not a knock on Imperial technology. It is civilization that routinely builds huge ships that lasts for millennia. The IoM is a feudal society that has picked up the pieces of a galaxy spanning civilization that went through a five thousand year dark age and beset on all sides. It doesn't have the industrial infrastructure that the Galactic Empire does and that's what your complaints address, not the capabilities of the actual gear. I don't think anyone would argue against the GE having a far better industrial infrastructure and transport system and yes that matters very much when maintaining a large, well equipped military. That isn't, however, a critique of the effectiveness of a hellgun or a Titan.

[Todeswind]

That's a point against 40k, half the things you see in the field won't be fully functional or be working at anything near full efficiency.

No, it isn't. It was a Titan that had been dormant for ages and then quickly reactivated by a bunch of heretics who weren't Titan specialists. 40K stuff tends to be very durable and last forever.

So explain the fact that it isn't an uncommon sight to see Leman Russes running on things other than the fuel they were designed for, with some companies lacking things like powered turret traverse or gun stabilizers?

Vehicles manufactured on different planets and in different factories have at times drastically different technical specs. That doesn't make Imperial technology bad, it simply means that some forge worlds construct the tanks to different specifications than others do.

There are also usually reasons why the individual tanks are better or worse within the fluff. IG legions like the Steel Legion have better stabilizers in their tanks because they can't risk firing a weapon and rupturing the airtight seals for the tank hull because of Armageddons poisoned atmosphere. Likewise the vehicles used by the Valhallans have engines designed specifically to operate in sub-zero environments with a wider tread pattern to help spread weight out over the ice, apparently making the vehicle slower.

The Leman Russ knockoff used by the Blood Pack lacks the stabilizers of the Leman Russ but they also lack the more advanced support facilities of the IG.

they were designed specifically so that they could operate on substandard fuels or continue to operate without access to proper maintenance facilities during protracted campaigns. This is more or less standard in any fandom, including star wars. Half the fluff about weapons and armaments in the rebel alliance is them using vehicles and weaponry that is either substandard or being used long past its obsolescence point. It has nothing to do with "the tech being worse" it's just harder to get the ideal fuel to the forward vehicles during a war so they designed them to be able to run on damn near anything or jerry rigged them to work when they couldn't get even that.

None of this has to do with what an Imperial weapon can do to an ATAT

Or the guard having such differing levels of tech that what would be something one unit would consider junk would be a godsend to many guard legions?

I seem to remember numerous examples of understaffed and under-equipped imperial posts and worlds on the fringes of space in the Star Wars EU as well. Access to technology will never be entirely even within an entity as large as the Empire or the Imperium. Sure if you invade some backwater POS world the ATAT will wipe the floor with the local defense forces, you're invading a world where people still consider knights on horseback to be the pinnacle of warfare. That's hardly a comparison worth making.

As to the difference between legions, some worlds are richer than others and have access to better weaponry. This isn't something that counts agains the IoM, it's true of the Empire as well.

They have durable tech, but it is very uneven and often not working at full steam due to age, repair, or simply a lack of the needed technology in the first place.

Not working at full steam and not working at all are not the same thing, and when you're discussing power at the magnitude of a titan a titan at 90% is still going to wipe the floor with an ATAT without trying. Sure it may have some bizzare quirks in its machine spirit but it is still a consummate war machine.

Where as every GE force will be mechanized if the mission demands it, the IoM might not be able to field a mechanized legion if they had to. While one unit of guard might have tanks centuries old the GE will have equipment younger than they are. This is a huge factor and it wouldn't be unexpected if things as ancient as Titans had their own ticks and quirks and that even with care not all of them should be expected to be at full strength.

Which tanks are you referring to specifically? Leman Russes and most of the non-superheavy tanks are churned out at a prodigious rate. Sure they'll work them till they die and then some but they have the ability to make an infinite number of the damn things. It's only the superheavy technology that is "lost" which is to say that there are a limited number of forge worlds capable of making them or with the infrastructure to support their construction.

Is the ATAT really is equivalent to a titan in terms of its survivability and armaments? In terms of size I'm completely on board with you that it's the size of a knight titan, however I'm skeptical that it's as well armored as a even a Knight Titan. If nothing else it lacks the shields that the Titans use to protect themselves from harm. In terms of giving it a quantitative value I could easily see the ATAT as being as armored (or better) than a bane-blade but I think it would be easier to kill than a Titan.

Easier to kill, yes, but built and armored to the same scale- more than capable of shrugging off all but the heaviest Imperium man-portable antitank weapons, if it can handle snowspeeder blaster cannon. I really think that in 40k it would be a superheavy with structure points, just not with shielding. It might not be a really powerful superheavy, but it'd be up in that range.

And yes, the Imperium certainly has weapons to take care of such problems. It's just outside the province of the 40k equivalent of infantry with bazookas.

I could easily see the ATAT as an armor 13, 13, 12 superheavy with two structure points. But honestly I don't see its weaponry as being substantially better than two twin-linked lascannons with co-axial mounted multi-lasers.

EDIT: Now that I think about it they probably should be S 9 AP 2 Blast versions of a lascannon.

[Norade]

Vehicles manufactured on different planets and in different factories have at times drastically different technical specs. That doesn't make Imperial technology bad, it simply means that some forge worlds construct the tanks to different specifications than others do.

There are also usually reasons why the individual tanks are better or worse within the fluff. IG legions like the Steel Legion have better stabilizers in their tanks because they can't risk firing a weapon and rupturing the airtight seals for the tank hull because of Armageddons poisoned atmosphere. Likewise the vehicles used by the Valhallans have engines designed specifically to operate in sub-zero environments with a wider tread pattern to help spread weight out over the ice, apparently making the vehicle slower.

The Leman Russ knockoff used by the Blood Pack lacks the stabilizers of the Leman Russ but they also lack the more advanced support facilities of the IG.

they were designed specifically so that they could operate on substandard fuels or continue to operate without access to proper maintenance facilities during protracted campaigns. This is more or less standard in any fandom, including star wars. Half the fluff about weapons and armaments in the rebel alliance is them using vehicles and weaponry that is either substandard or being used long past its obsolescence point. It has nothing to do with "the tech being worse" it's just harder to get the ideal fuel to the forward vehicles during a war so they designed them to be able to run on damn near anything or jerry rigged them to work when they couldn't get even that.

None of this has to do with what an Imperial weapon can do to an ATAT

I know all about the reasons for the tech being different, but that doesn't mean that you're going to finder lesser tech more often than you would see better tech or that the tech you see will be working at full tilt. Also while the rebels made due with lesser gear, the Imperials rarely suffered that issue with even backwater worlds still getting high quality tech even if it was slightly off pace with the best units.

No, it doesn't but seeing as that question is next to impossible to answer you get this.

Or the guard having such differing levels of tech that what would be something one unit would consider junk would be a godsend to many guard legions?

I seem to remember numerous examples of understaffed and under-equipped imperial posts and worlds on the fringes of space in the Star Wars EU as well. Access to technology will never be entirely even within an entity as large as the Empire or the Imperium. Sure if you invade some backwater POS world the ATAT will wipe the floor with the local defense forces, you're invading a world where people still consider knights on horseback to be the pinnacle of warfare. That's hardly a comparison worth making.

As to the difference between legions, some worlds are richer than others and have access to better weaponry. This isn't something that counts agains the IoM, it's true of the Empire as well.

Given that some guard legions don't even have mechanized transports I'd think more IoM worlds would suffer than GE worlds. Also, the worst you'll see for tech difference is some ISD's lacking an extra wing of Interceptors or maybe having a slightly older model of TIE as a line fighter. That's not even close to the tech gaps that IoM face.

They have durable tech, but it is very uneven and often not working at full steam due to age, repair, or simply a lack of the needed technology in the first place.

Not working at full steam and not working at all are not the same thing, and when you're discussing power at the magnitude of a titan a titan at 90% is still going to wipe the floor with an ATAT without trying. Sure it may have some bizzare quirks in its machine spirit but it is still a consummate war machine.

You assert that, but any titan of the same size as an AT-AT will be in tough given the durability of an AT-AT. IIRC even fighters strafing them with lasers have issues with AT-AT's so much so that torpedoes are the weapon of choice to kill them*. That means that AT-AT's can tank low kiloton blasts and keep fighting which makes them at least on par with a Titan for durability if not slightly tougher in some ways.

*This is from the NJO series I think, it's been a long while.

Where as every GE force will be mechanized if the mission demands it, the IoM might not be able to field a mechanized legion if they had to. While one unit of guard might have tanks centuries old the GE will have equipment younger than they are. This is a huge factor and it wouldn't be unexpected if things as ancient as Titans had their own ticks and quirks and that even with care not all of them should be expected to be at full strength.

Which tanks are you referring to specifically? Leman Russes and most of the non-superheavy tanks are churned out at a prodigious rate. Sure they'll work them till they die and then some but they have the ability to make an infinite number of the damn things. It's only the superheavy technology that is "lost" which is to say that there are a limited number of forge worlds capable of making them or with the infrastructure to support their construction.

I was talking about things as simple as Chimera transports being uncommon and the stunning lack of mechanization in the guard as a whole. Not to mention that really any GE world could build tanks if required and we've seen how fast they can churn out tech when they want to. So I doubt the IoM could keep pace in a war of attrition if the GE could stomach it. Any such war would doubtless see GE leadership pushing for clones and battle droids as an emergency measure and we know that Palpatine was working on such things.

I could easily see the ATAT as an armor 13, 13, 12 superheavy with two structure points. But honestly I don't see its weaponry as being substantially better than two twin-linked lascannons with co-axial mounted multi-lasers.

EDIT: Now that I think about it they probably should be S 9 AP 2 Blast versions of a lascannon.

Sorry, but game stats have no real bearing here and you still haven't gotten the proof I've asked for about the lascannons. Seeing as you seem unwilling to do the math yourself I would suggest PMing Connor MacLeod about it as he's the guy for 40k numbers.

[Todeswind]

I seem to remember numerous examples of understaffed and under-equipped imperial posts and worlds on the fringes of space in the Star Wars EU as well. Access to technology will never be entirely even within an entity as large as the Empire or the Imperium. Sure if you invade some backwater POS world the ATAT will wipe the floor with the local defense forces, you're invading a world where people still consider knights on horseback to be the pinnacle of warfare. That's hardly a comparison worth making.

As to the difference between legions, some worlds are richer than others and have access to better weaponry. This isn't something that counts agains the IoM, it's true of the Empire as well.

Given that some guard legions don't even have mechanized transports I'd think more IoM worlds would suffer than GE worlds. Also, the worst you'll see for tech difference is some ISD's lacking an extra wing of Interceptors or maybe having a slightly older model of TIE as a line fighter. That's not even close to the tech gaps that IoM face.

Name a single IG legion that does not have access to a mechanized transport.

They have durable tech, but it is very uneven and often not working at full steam due to age, repair, or simply a lack of the needed technology in the first place.

Not working at full steam and not working at all are not the same thing, and when you're discussing power at the magnitude of a titan a titan at 90% is still going to wipe the floor with an ATAT without trying. Sure it may have some bizzare quirks in its machine spirit but it is still a consummate war machine.

You assert that, but any titan of the same size as an AT-AT will be in tough given the durability of an AT-AT. IIRC even fighters strafing them with lasers have issues with AT-AT's so much so that torpedoes are the weapon of choice to kill them*. That means that AT-AT's can tank low kiloton blasts and keep fighting which makes them at least on par with a Titan for durability if not slightly tougher in some ways.

*This is from the NJO series I think, it's been a long while.

I hope you don't mind if I ask you to source that. Those estimates for the durability of the AT-AT seem generous considering that they were destroyed by tangling up their legs and shooting them in a weak spot, or are the NJO AT-AT's improved versions of the AT-AT used at the battle of Hoth?

Where as every GE force will be mechanized if the mission demands it, the IoM might not be able to field a mechanized legion if they had to. While one unit of guard might have tanks centuries old the GE will have equipment younger than they are. This is a huge factor and it wouldn't be unexpected if things as ancient as Titans had their own ticks and quirks and that even with care not all of them should be expected to be at full strength.

Which tanks are you referring to specifically? Leman Russes and most of the non-superheavy tanks are churned out at a prodigious rate. Sure they'll work them till they die and then some but they have the ability to make an infinite number of the damn things. It's only the superheavy technology that is "lost" which is to say that there are a limited number of forge worlds capable of making them or with the infrastructure to support their construction.

I was talking about things as simple as Chimera transports being uncommon and the stunning lack of mechanization in the guard as a whole. Not to mention that really any GE world could build tanks if required and we've seen how fast they can churn out tech when they want to. So I doubt the IoM could keep pace in a war of attrition if the GE could stomach it. Any such war would doubtless see GE leadership pushing for clones and battle droids as an emergency measure and we know that Palpatine was working on such things.

That isn't what we're discussing at the moment and it's more or less irrelevant to the question at hand.

I could easily see the ATAT as an armor 13, 13, 12 superheavy with two structure points. But honestly I don't see its weaponry as being substantially better than two twin-linked lascannons with co-axial mounted multi-lasers.

EDIT: Now that I think about it they probably should be S 9 AP 2 Blast versions of a lascannon.

Sorry, but game stats have no real bearing here and you still haven't gotten the proof I've asked for about the lascannons. Seeing as you seem unwilling to do the math yourself I would suggest PMing Connor MacLeod about it as he's the guy for 40k numbers.

I needed some sort of frame of reference to describe what I was trying to express. Putting up a stat line seemed like as good as any.

I have already sent a PM to MacLeod. I'm sure you'll see that I did in fact consult him for the figures within this very thread in addition to that. I do not have the figures to provide you, do not mistake me not having the information to give you as of yet for me being unwilling to discuss the matter further once I do have the relevant statistics.

Until I have all the relevant information I remain seriously skeptical that the primary armament of the AT-AT is substantially more powerful than the lascannon, if only based upon their uses and descriptions within the respective canon materials.

[Purple]

I think you all missed one major thing. The same major thing the rebells missed.
AT-AT walkers are huge freaking walkers. Just attack the ground beneath them. Detonate an earthshaker round between their legs and even if they don't get blown up they will still fall into the resulting pit quite nicely. And Emperor knows the IOM has more than enough HE rounds to go around.

[Srelex]

I think you all missed one major thing. The same major thing the rebells missed.
AT-AT walkers are huge freaking walkers. Just attack the ground beneath them. Detonate an earthshaker round between their legs and even if they don't get blown up they will still fall into the resulting pit quite nicely. And Emperor knows the IOM has more than enough HE rounds to go around.

Theoretically you could do the same with Titans, or at least with the ground around them. Yet this doesn't seem to have occurred to pretty much everyone in 40k.

Would IOM artillery even be that precise? It'd be more likely to hit the side of the walker.

[Brother-Captain Gaius]

Would IOM artillery even be that precise? It'd be more likely to hit the side of the walker.

?

i'm pretty sure most artillery is precise enough to hit the ground

Seriously though, you underestimate the precision artillery has been capable of since WWI.

[Norade]

Name a single IG legion that does not have access to a mechanized transport.

Gaunt tends to get the shaft when it comes to mechanization in his first novel. Most feral legions would also be without such luxuries depending on where they're being sent. I'm sure I could dig up more examples if needed.

I hope you don't mind if I ask you to source that. Those estimates for the durability of the AT-AT seem generous considering that they were destroyed by tangling up their legs and shooting them in a weak spot, or are the NJO AT-AT's improved versions of the AT-AT used at the battle of Hoth?

They never mention the AT-AT's being improved though they did mention that they were upgraded X-Wings. I think the event in question happened in the battle of Dantooine in Dark Tide I: Onslaught. I may have to grab a copy of the book to be 100% sure, but if you have it feel free to check.

[That isn't what we're discussing at the moment and it's more or less irrelevant to the question at hand.

Supply is more relevant than if a weapon can harm a vehicle or not in the outcome of a war, the sooner you understand that the better.

I needed some sort of frame of reference to describe what I was trying to express. Putting up a stat line seemed like as good as any.

Except those stats are so abstract as to be meaningless. I mean which is more powerful, Psybolts, a Heavy Bolter, or a Pulse Rifle? Each is strength 5 and two of them are AP 5 as well. Also who's stronger an ork boy, or an imperial guardsman with furious charge? See, I can have fun with pointless stats from the table top too.

I have already sent a PM to MacLeod. I'm sure you'll see that I did in fact consult him for the figures within this very thread in addition to that. I do not have the figures to provide you, do not mistake me not having the information to give you as of yet for me being unwilling to discuss the matter further once I do have the relevant statistics.

Until I have all the relevant information I remain seriously skeptical that the primary armament of the AT-AT is substantially more powerful than the lascannon, if only based upon their uses and descriptions within the respective canon materials.

At least you're trying, though if you actually did the work for yourself it would be better than just cribbing off somebody else.

[Purple]

Theoretically you could do the same with Titans, or at least with the ground around them. Yet this doesn't seem to have occurred to pretty much everyone in 40k.

Would IOM artillery even be that precise? It'd be more likely to hit the side of the walker.

It's not a function of precision. 40K titans have bubble shields that cover the ground around them as well. So you can't hit the ground under the titan without getting through the shield first. An AT-AT has no such protection.

[Norade]

Theoretically you could do the same with Titans, or at least with the ground around them. Yet this doesn't seem to have occurred to pretty much everyone in 40k.

Would IOM artillery even be that precise? It'd be more likely to hit the side of the walker.

It's not a function of precision. 40K titans have bubble shields that cover the ground around them as well. So you can't hit the ground under the titan without getting through the shield first. An AT-AT has no such protection.

You can hit the ground in front of the damn thing so it can't advance without falling in. You could also shell a damn moat around the thing with guided weapons if you were feeling really gung-ho but nobody ever seems to bother. Perhaps because it isn't as easy or effective as you might think. It's the same reason nobody aims to blow holes in front of tanks when you can blow the tank up instead.

[Purple]

You can hit the ground in front of the damn thing so it can't advance without falling in. You could also shell a damn moat around the thing with guided weapons if you were feeling really gung-ho but nobody ever seems to bother. Perhaps because it isn't as easy or effective as you might think. It's the same reason nobody aims to blow holes in front of tanks when you can blow the tank up instead.

I think you need to think before you post.

Hitting the ground around or in front of the target is NOT the same as hitting the ground under it. After all, if a target can not advance at you it can still shoot you. A tank that can not drive toward you can still blast you with it's gun. The strategy only works if you can dig a hole directly under the vehicle so that it falls in without any chance of dodging it by things like say putting on the brakes. And the reason why we don't do it today is simple. Most of our vehicles are low enough to the ground that the only way to hit it would be to fire through said vehicle. Walkers give you an unique situation in that respect.

[Todeswind]

Name a single IG legion that does not have access to a mechanized transport.

Gaunt tends to get the shaft when it comes to mechanization in his first novel. Most feral legions would also be without such luxuries depending on where they're being sent. I'm sure I could dig up more examples if needed.

Mechanized transport doesn't make sense for a number of the missions they conduct, especially considering that they are a search and reconnaissance legion. That is not the same as not being able to get mechanized transports or tank support, which they are able to on numerous occasions.

You still need to name a legion that doesn't have access to mechanized transport.

I hope you don't mind if I ask you to source that. Those estimates for the durability of the AT-AT seem generous considering that they were destroyed by tangling up their legs and shooting them in a weak spot, or are the NJO AT-AT's improved versions of the AT-AT used at the battle of Hoth?

They never mention the AT-AT's being improved though they did mention that they were upgraded X-Wings. I think the event in question happened in the battle of Dantooine in Dark Tide I: Onslaught. I may have to grab a copy of the book to be 100% sure, but if you have it feel free to check.

I do not have access to a copy of that book at the moment however the Star Wars Encyclopedia (via Wookieepedia) says the following.

The AT-AT also lacked armor covering on its underbelly, leaving the spot vulnerable to mounted guns or portable missile launchers. To remedy this weakness, AT-STs were usually stationed around the flank of the walker to ensure nothing was given a clear shot at the AT-AT's weak underside

So unless the portable missile launchers in star wars are WAY more powerful than in 40k it seems unlikely that they are designed to take quite as much punishment as you believe they can.

That isn't what we're discussing at the moment and it's more or less irrelevant to the question at hand.

Supply is more relevant than if a weapon can harm a vehicle or not in the outcome of a war, the sooner you understand that the better.

[/quote]

Relevant for a war, irrelevant for the current discussion. We aren't discussing who would win in a protracted conflict we're discussing what weapons, specifically infantry ones, would be able to damage or destroy an ATAT.

I have already sent a PM to MacLeod. I'm sure you'll see that I did in fact consult him for the figures within this very thread in addition to that. I do not have the figures to provide you, do not mistake me not having the information to give you as of yet for me being unwilling to discuss the matter further once I do have the relevant statistics.

Until I have all the relevant information I remain seriously skeptical that the primary armament of the AT-AT is substantially more powerful than the lascannon, if only based upon their uses and descriptions within the respective canon materials.

At least you're trying, though if you actually did the work for yourself it would be better than just cribbing off somebody else.

[/quote]

Frankly Norade even if I weren't grading close to three thousand essays this week and had the free time to do it I don't think I have an appropriate basis in Mathematics and Science by which to generate those figures accurately. It seemed better to simply ask someone who actually understands how one would go about quantifying that sort of information than to end up essentially making up the figures and getting called out on it later.

[Darth Hoth]

Sigh.

Excuse me. I do not know or care where that 60 km/hour figure comes from, I really don't. I'm just sick of having the same "LOL AT-ATs" argument over and over.

Forget I said anything about the speed.

60 kph is the canon speed since back I-have-no-idea-when. (I would bet it derives from some early WEG book, though; probably the original Star Wars Sourcebook, if not the basic RPG book itself.) It was reprinted in the Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology, the original trilogy ICS, and numerous other books.

They never mention the AT-AT's being improved though they did mention that they were upgraded X-Wings. I think the event in question happened in the battle of Dantooine in Dark Tide I: Onslaught. I may have to grab a copy of the book to be 100% sure, but if you have it feel free to check.

AT-ATs upgraded with superior firepower, at least, were operable as of Dark Empire II (in Imperial service). About shielding, I have no idea.

Somewhat on topic, some of the wankier EU armoured vehicles and 'droids can supposedly be equipped with firepower equivalent to capital ship-grade turbolasers (explicitly stated for the X-1 Viper from Dark Empire II; source would be the original Essential Guide to Droids). Presumably those would be the very lightest kind, but that should still mean walkers substantially smaller than AT-ATs can wield multi-megatons if we take that seriously. So there is at least no theoretical reason why an upgunned AT-AT or dedicated artillery platform should not be able to dish out figures in that ballpark. Which should be equal or superior to what I understand to be the higher-end Titan figures. (I might be wrong, though, not having read many/most of the Titans-related books and basing substantial parts of my knowledge of them off what is posted on this board.)

Whether these designs are common or what the trade-offs are in terms of cost, fuel usage and so on is another matter, of course.