StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Lagmonster wrote:The only thing that ever bothered me about AT-ATs is that, as a Canadian, I know what it's like to walk through a shit-ton of snow. I remember thinking that they probably should have gotten stuck WAY before anyone figured out the cables trick.

That depends on if it is snow or thick ice

Patroklos wrote:In the real world most fully tank designs have ammo carrier, engineering, and other versions based on the same chassis. This can be for a lot of reasons to include commonality of maintenance training and spare parts within a unit, economies of scale during production, or if you expect an entire unit to face similar threats without the benefit of a safe rear area.

It could happen.

To bring up the example of 40K as a fictional parallel, they repeat many hulls in various configurations for that purpose as well.

The Space Marines have several variants of the Rhino APC and the Land Raider.

The Guard... hoo boy... the Guard has the Chimera hull, the Leman Russ hull, the Baneblade hull...

Even the Eldar and the Tau get into the mix-- the Tau use refinements of the Devilfish APC converted into missile launcher vehicles or tanks, the Eldar use modifications of the Falcon or the Wave Serpent for light tanks and APC's.

So I have absolutely no problem with there being a specialized cargo-carrying refinement of the AT-AT for situations where repulsorlift vehicles aren't practical for whatever reason.

Or like we did in Iraq when we realized our tanks could be taking out with a RPG at the right angle, we started packing more armor on the vulnerable spots. Could be the same with the walkers, where the ones we see in TESB are packing heavier / better armor than the ones in Rogue 1.

Borgholio wrote:Or like we did in Iraq when we realized our tanks could be taking out with a RPG at the right angle, we started packing more armor on the vulnerable spots. Could be the same with the walkers, where the ones we see in TESB are packing heavier / better armor than the ones in Rogue 1.

I though of that at first too but then I remembered they had full AT- ATs in rebels that tanked fighter grade proton torpedoes.

Rebels is... unusual... in some respects. I would say it's probably semi-safe to assume that whomever is making Rogue One doesn't really care about the minutiae of a kiddie cartoon, for all they pulled Saw Guerrera from Clone Wars.

Star Wars has always been hopelessly inconsistent in terms of firepower yields in general, with the weapons being used to destroy starships but without the environmental impact one would expect. While there is often stated to be a different yield for ground units, it doesn't totally work as a solution because we see things like lightsabers working where starship weapons do not.

If you are going with the second assumption, the Ghost was not using full yield weapons in that scene because doing so would have killed Kanan and Ezra who were on the ground next to those walkers.

Elheru Aran wrote:So I have absolutely no problem with there being a specialized cargo-carrying refinement of the AT-AT for situations where repulsorlift vehicles aren't practical for whatever reason.

Is there some reason wheeled vehicles aren't viable for cargo transport? It's also worth noting this isn't an AT-AT variant- it's actually a larger but different vehicle.

Why the hell would such installations routinely require such a vehicle? Sure, some such sites are probably vulnerable to attack and need such a thing, but so many that a specific description would call those two types of locations out? Like this is what it usually does and the Empire doesn't usually use whatever their version of a flatbed truck is.These uses are more common than say, a base building operation on a hostile suppressed planet of a FOB in the outer rim. I would be like saying "this is a M113 APC. You may encounter these with a local SWAT team or delivering relief supplies after a flood." Both true, but THATS what you pick as examples?

Why the fuck can't these people spend five seconds thinking before they unload this bullshit. How did they use it in the movie again? Oh, well then that must be what its always and primarily used for. Obviously every vehicle we see is purpose built for the small glimpse of the universe we see on camera. Which is true literally, but part of a making a movie is making us not notice that!

Perhaps they're more useful for delivering cargo to elevated pads and other structures like this in hostile situations?

http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/sta ... 0308052927

Seen quite a few elevated Imperial structures in the new Battlefront game.

The international trailer is now out, though I only recognized one new element, and it probably is something of a spoiler. Though this was already leaked by an actor, it probably deserves a spoiler warning as it is an important element of character backstory. Spoiler

Patroklos wrote:Why the hell would such installations routinely require such a vehicle? Sure, some such sites are probably vulnerable to attack and need such a thing, but so many that a specific description would call those two types of locations out? Like this is what it usually does and the Empire doesn't usually use whatever their version of a flatbed truck is.These uses are more common than say, a base building operation on a hostile suppressed planet of a FOB in the outer rim. I would be like saying "this is a M113 APC. You may encounter these with a local SWAT team or delivering relief supplies after a flood." Both true, but THATS what you pick as examples?

Why the fuck can't these people spend five seconds thinking before they unload this bullshit. How did they use it in the movie again? Oh, well then that must be what its always and primarily used for. Obviously every vehicle we see is purpose built for the small glimpse of the universe we see on camera. Which is true literally, but part of a making a movie is making us not notice that!

A combination of the fluff and EU have always had this problem of assuming that what we see in the films must be the way things are used. The old EU refused to believe that a star destroyer could enter a planet's atmosphere, and that the Mon Calamari were one of the biggest shipbuilders in the galaxy. Neither of which really make all that much sense.

In some ways this is even worse in terms of overall importance to the galaxy. Han Solo owes money to Jabba the Hutt, thus Jabba must control the criminal underworld. Despite the fact that he was located on the utter backwater of Tatooine.

Adam Reynolds wrote:In some ways this is even worse in terms of overall importance to the galaxy. Han Solo owes money to Jabba the Hutt, thus Jabba must control the criminal underworld. Despite the fact that he was located on the utter backwater of Tatooine.

Is that really a thing? I always thought it was pretty obvious Jabba was a "big fish in a small pond" and only likely to be a hazard to honest hardworking smugglers on or near Tatooine (possibly even just one region on Tatooine).

SpottedKitty wrote:

Adam Reynolds wrote:In some ways this is even worse in terms of overall importance to the galaxy. Han Solo owes money to Jabba the Hutt, thus Jabba must control the criminal underworld. Despite the fact that he was located on the utter backwater of Tatooine.

Is that really a thing? I always thought it was pretty obvious Jabba was a "big fish in a small pond" and only likely to be a hazard to honest hardworking smugglers on or near Tatooine (possibly even just one region on Tatooine).

I used to think that, but then I decided that Jabba must be fairly well known throughout the galaxy for someone like Darth Vader to know who he was. Hell, Tatooine's only reason for being on the galactic map could be due to its status as Jabba's chosen homeworld.

Galvatron wrote:I used to think that, but then I decided that Jabba must be fairly well known throughout the galaxy for someone like Darth Vader to know who he was.

Is that from the "sell a carbonite-frozen Han to Jabba" plotline of ESB? Maybe... or maybe Boba Fett told him about the connection (and the Dark Lord of the Sith said "Who?").

Patroklos wrote:Why the hell would such installations routinely require such a vehicle?

Or in the trailers case, at least 3. What throws me though is that these things appear to be leading an assault. Which is entirely what we expect from AT-ATs, but would have to be a desperation measure for AT-ACTs. I wouldn't mind seeing one along side a squadron of AT-ATs, as the support vehicle, but alone they seem odd. Still maybe the movie will make sense of that.

Honestly I think it's another TIE S/F. It's a deliberate call back to classic imagery but with just enough subtle differences to make the heroes task successful.

SpottedKitty wrote:

Galvatron wrote:I used to think that, but then I decided that Jabba must be fairly well known throughout the galaxy for someone like Darth Vader to know who he was.

Is that from the "sell a carbonite-frozen Han to Jabba" plotline of ESB? Maybe... or maybe Boba Fett told him about the connection (and the Dark Lord of the Sith said "Who?").

The Dark Lord of the Sith won his freedom from slavery in a race presided over by local potentate Jabba the Hutt. That Vader knows who he is, is far from surprising.

Galvatron wrote:

SpottedKitty wrote:

Adam Reynolds wrote:In some ways this is even worse in terms of overall importance to the galaxy. Han Solo owes money to Jabba the Hutt, thus Jabba must control the criminal underworld. Despite the fact that he was located on the utter backwater of Tatooine.

Is that really a thing? I always thought it was pretty obvious Jabba was a "big fish in a small pond" and only likely to be a hazard to honest hardworking smugglers on or near Tatooine (possibly even just one region on Tatooine).

I used to think that, but then I decided that Jabba must be fairly well known throughout the galaxy for someone like Darth Vader to know who he was. Hell, Tatooine's only reason for being on the galactic map could be due to its status as Jabba's chosen homeworld.

Perhaps a good analogy for Jabba is Somali piracy.

Yes, he's from a poor, remote backwater, but he's very powerful within that area and is notable/destructive enough to garner attention on a broader scale. But minor enough/costly enough to deal with that none of the big players have stamped him out yet.

I never got the impression that he was small fry. Even in ESB Han keeps running into bounty hunters looking to claim the bounty he posted. And that's when Han's running with a guerrilla outfit.

NecronLord wrote:The Dark Lord of the Sith won his freedom from slavery in a race presided over by local potentate Jabba the Hutt. That Vader knows who he is, is far from surprising.

Good point. Sometimes I mercifully forget about the prequels and revert back to the days when the OT and the pre-1999 EU were all I had to work with.

Is it just me, or does the AT-ACT seem somewhat smaller than the AT-AT?


Here is the AT-ACT:






And here are a couple of pics of the AT-AT:








Note Luke hanging off of the tow-cable



Maybe it's the angle of the shot?

NecronLord wrote:

SpottedKitty wrote:Is that from the "sell a carbonite-frozen Han to Jabba" plotline of ESB? Maybe... or maybe Boba Fett told him about the connection (and the Dark Lord of the Sith said "Who?").

The Dark Lord of the Sith won his freedom from slavery in a race presided over by local potentate Jabba the Hutt. That Vader knows who he is, is far from surprising.

Ah, you're right, I'd completely forgotten about that.

Tribble wrote:Is it just me, or does the AT-ACT seem somewhat smaller than the AT-AT?
<snip>
Maybe it's the angle of the shot?

Pretty much has to be since official sources say it's larger.

Also:

Looks like the Imps actually do have their own vaguely land raider like tank!

Kojiro wrote:

Tribble wrote:Is it just me, or does the AT-ACT seem somewhat smaller than the AT-AT?
<snip>
Maybe it's the angle of the shot?

Pretty much has to be since official sources say it's larger.

I suppose it's also possible that the effect shot is off a bit? Here is Luke next to the AT-AT's foot:









IMO it looks like they've shrunken it a bit compared to what we see in ESB, though perhaps the actual scene would clarify things.

The final trailer!



The visuals are stunning.

And we are getting a true space battle, in space!

A nice detail that I noticed: Spoiler

Tribble wrote:

Kojiro wrote:

Tribble wrote:Is it just me, or does the AT-ACT seem somewhat smaller than the AT-AT?
<snip>
Maybe it's the angle of the shot?

Pretty much has to be since official sources say it's larger.

I suppose it's also possible that the effect shot is off a bit? Here is Luke next to the AT-AT's foot:


IMO it looks like they've shrunken it a bit compared to what we see in ESB, though perhaps the actual scene would clarify things.

From the otherwise great trailer that was released today, I think it's somewhat difficult to judge. There's a shot of two AT-ACT attacking a beach, and in that shot they look quite tall, but it's somewhat difficult to say as there's really nothing to scale them against. In one of the last shots, the foot of (presumably) an AT-ACT looks not as tall as the person running away from it.

The Death Star looks huge in the shot of it from the planet.

eMeM wrote:
A nice detail that I noticed: Spoiler

Hammerhead corvettes from Rebels - upper middle and upper right corner of the screen

Spoiler