Imperial Advisor Arem Heshvaun

New Dreadnaught and Walker Reveal

91 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, Freeptop said:

Man, if I were defending against a troop transport that forced the troops to rappel down from a large height in order to be deployed, I'd love it. Easy targets for snipers, since their hands are occupied! Not to mention that causes a large bottleneck for troop deployment, so instead of having to face the entire group of troops being transported, you get to take advantage of their own self-inflicted choke point. Which, again, makes it easier for a smaller number of snipers to pick them off.

As a said, impractical, but cool looking. And I'm fine with that. It's Star Wars, which only rarely flirts with realism.

Right... except the AT-AT would fire on the snipers, it's impractical and meant to inspire fear but it's also tall with a great field of view so I get what you're saying but the troops are deploying from a walking watch tower with big guns. As for choke points there's a actually booms that deploy on each side of the walker so the troops are not as clustered I assume. The Walker also isn't a way to deploy troops under fire, it's a way to stomp into the enemy fortification and then deploy. A LAAT would be more of what is used for a hot LZ and according to wookipedia the empire made an updated version of the LAAT after the clone wars called the Imperial Drop ship Transport (very clever name...) as well as using LAATs from the Grand Army of the Republic into the Galactic Civil War.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stew00m said:

Look all the way to the old republic, technology really didn't progress that much. Honestly your looking at a period of time more like the the Dark Ages than the post industrial revolution.

Contrary to popular belief, the most salient feature of the dark ages is that we don't know much about them. Which is why they're dark (well, were dark. We know a fair bit about them due to recentish scholarship). As for the "no progress" thing, well. Tidal power was invented in the seventh century (perhaps earlier), so...yeah. 

We do know a fair bit about the Republic, and it's therefore not really like the dark ages at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Phoenix5454 said:

Right... except the AT-AT would fire on the snipers, it's impractical and meant to inspire fear but it's also tall with a great field of view so I get what you're saying but the troops are deploying from a walking watch tower with big guns. As for choke points there's a actually booms that deploy on each side of the walker so the troops are not as clustered I assume. The Walker also isn't a way to deploy troops under fire, it's a way to stomp into the enemy fortification and then deploy. A LAAT would be more of what is used for a hot LZ and according to wookipedia the empire made an updated version of the LAAT after the clone wars called the Imperial Drop ship Transport (very clever name...) as well as using LAATs from the Grand Army of the Republic into the Galactic Civil War.

 

Low Altitude Assault Transport/Infantry isn't all that much better which is why we just call it a Republic Gunship or the like. Imperial Droid ship Transport sounds much better using an acronym too, IDT. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, mxlm said:

Contrary to popular belief, the most salient feature of the dark ages is that we don't know much about them. Which is why they're dark (well, were dark. We know a fair bit about them due to recentish scholarship). As for the "no progress" thing, well. Tidal power was invented in the seventh century (perhaps earlier), so...yeah. 

We do know a fair bit about the Republic, and it's therefore not really like the dark ages at all. 

I'm not entirely sure that is correct. We actually know quite a bit about the dark ages.
The reason the dark ages are dark is (from my understanding) because much of the knowledge and infrastructure of previous eras was lost during the fall of Rome, and thus left the later kingdoms in a technological dark.

To phrase it differently; it's not that we don't know about the dark ages, its that they didn't know much about the ears before them. Architecture, metallurgy, roads, sanitation and pluming, mathematics, and art all took a big step back after the fall of the Roman empire.

Before you had large cities, with public areas for political discourse, paved roads, a standing army of citizens all with plate armor and decent equipment using unit tactics, baths, scientific progress, concrete buildings, running water with aqueducts, and realistic arts from sculpture to motifs.

Afterwards you have feudalism, dirt roads, infrequent bathing due to a lack of pubic baths and access to water, medieval art, and so on until the Renaissance. Much of the "light" of civilization had been lost.



I think the Republic is like.... the Roman Republic. Progress is made slowly, but the primary tech boost came from assimilating other cultures and engineering their discoveries to serve the Republic. 

As for Star Wars it might just be that they've reached the limits of technology. Believe it or not, there is only so much to learn in the universe, and once you know it all, it comes down to innovation and engineering rather than discovery of new principles. 

Stew00m likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Phoenix5454 said:

Right... except the AT-AT would fire on the snipers, it's impractical and meant to inspire fear but it's also tall with a great field of view so I get what you're saying but the troops are deploying from a walking watch tower with big guns. As for choke points there's a actually booms that deploy on each side of the walker so the troops are not as clustered I assume. The Walker also isn't a way to deploy troops under fire, it's a way to stomp into the enemy fortification and then deploy. A LAAT would be more of what is used for a hot LZ and according to wookipedia the empire made an updated version of the LAAT after the clone wars called the Imperial Drop ship Transport (very clever name...) as well as using LAATs from the Grand Army of the Republic into the Galactic Civil War.

 

AT-AT can't fire on the snipers if they're flanking it. That whole problem with the ability to maneuver the aiming of the guns on that thing comes into play there...

My point about deployment isn't about clustering - it's about putting them in vulnerable positions while also limiting the rate at which they can exit the transport. So, we're talking about a known point of departure, the inability to provide cover fire for the deployment (assuming the defenders can stealthily move into a flanking position), and restricted number of troops that can deploy at once.

If it's not for deploying troops under fire, then why is it armed and armored? It's basically stuck trying to do two different jobs and isn't really well designed for either. Tanks and/or artillery would be better designed for breaking fortifications, which would then allow you to use dedicated troop transports for the deployment of soldiers. With a proper design, you can still provide armor and weapons on the troop transport while still providing the ability to rapidly deploy the soldiers, either in battle or after the fortifications are destroyed (think Stryker or Bradley).

As for being a mobile watchtower - with the advent of aircraft, such a design is not really an advantage as a primary means of combat...

In any case, I don't actually want to argue against AT-ATs! :lol:

I like them. I just don't feel the need to try to twist logic into pretzels to justify them. Star Wars has all sorts of ways in which it doesn't follow real-world physics or logic, so it's just not worth getting worked up over, in my opinion. Star Wars is the ultimate Rule of Cool. I'm fine with that. I admit to being a little annoyed by "mega-caliber" and "everything's bigger!", but then I think how I would have felt about it when I was a kid and pouring through the old WEG sourcebooks, and how when Dark Empire came out, the Sovereign and Eclipse were so cool, so while I think those are a bit silly now, I remember how that felt then... and I find I'm at peace with these new designs :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just FYI: Dark Ages (not just the post-Rome European one) are when society becomes less sophisticated, less ordered, and holistically less civilized. While our current understanding of what is generally called Late Antiquity now makes it less dark, there are certainly elements of a dark age to the time period formerly known as the Dark Age. 

I do see parallels in SW. 

OneKelvin, Odanan and Stew00m like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/08/2017 at 6:35 AM, kris40k said:

 Timestamp at 1:05

Edit:

I guess we know what Armada players are getting for X-Mas. Too bad the AT-M6 is too large for Imperial Assault or Legion. I'm sure @Joe Boss Red Seven will find a way.

Isnt that ship 5x longer than the ISD?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, spacelion said:

Isnt that ship 5x longer than the ISD?

Yes, but in a universe where you had ships as big as the Executor, as has been stated many times already, that doesn't seem to be that big a deal.  As big as the First Order seems to want to build things, they haven't gone Super Star Destroyer, yet.

My biggest problem with the Dreadnought is that it seems to have no defensive armaments on the surface which houses the big guns, which makes them stupidly vulnerable.  

The aesthetic design unites the classic Empire with the First Order; specifically, the big hexagonal inset on the dorsal structure is reminiscent of elements of Starkiller base (which I don't really think the First Order built so much as found and refit; maybe an ancient artifact of the Infinite Empire- drawing its power from the sun does kind of echo of the Star Forge, as much as Kylo is kind of the Emo-Revan...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

18 minutes ago, MarekMandalore said:

Yes, but in a universe where you had ships as big as the Executor, as has been stated many times already, that doesn't seem to be that big a deal.  As big as the First Order seems to want to build things, they haven't gone Super Star Destroyer, yet.

My biggest problem with the Dreadnought is that it seems to have no defensive armaments on the surface which houses the big guns, which makes them stupidly vulnerable.  

The aesthetic design unites the classic Empire with the First Order; specifically, the big hexagonal inset on the dorsal structure is reminiscent of elements of Starkiller base (which I don't really think the First Order built so much as found and refit; maybe an ancient artifact of the Infinite Empire- drawing its power from the sun does kind of echo of the Star Forge, as much as Kylo is kind of the Emo-Revan...).

the guy I quoted said the ship would be in Armada. I can't imagine fielding a ship 5x the length of Armada ISD on the table.

Edited by spacelion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough, but keep in mind that Armada uses a sliding scale.  Otherwise, the Star Destroyer would have to be around 10x the length of the Corellian Corvette. The Zvezda model kit is in that neighborhood, I think; something like 2 feet long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, OneKelvin said:

I'm not entirely sure that is correct. We actually know quite a bit about the dark ages.
The reason the dark ages are dark is (from my understanding) because much of the knowledge and infrastructure of previous eras was lost during the fall of Rome, and thus left the later kingdoms in a technological dark.

To phrase it differently; it's not that we don't know about the dark ages, its that they didn't know much about the ears before them. Architecture, metallurgy, roads, sanitation and pluming, mathematics, and art all took a big step back after the fall of the Roman empire.

Before you had large cities, with public areas for political discourse, paved roads, a standing army of citizens all with plate armor and decent equipment using unit tactics, baths, scientific progress, concrete buildings, running water with aqueducts, and realistic arts from sculpture to motifs.

Afterwards you have feudalism, dirt roads, infrequent bathing due to a lack of pubic baths and access to water, medieval art, and so on until the Renaissance. Much of the "light" of civilization had been lost.



I think the Republic is like.... the Roman Republic. Progress is made slowly, but the primary tech boost came from assimilating other cultures and engineering their discoveries to serve the Republic. 

As for Star Wars it might just be that they've reached the limits of technology. Believe it or not, there is only so much to learn in the universe, and once you know it all, it comes down to innovation and engineering rather than discovery of new principles. 

Middle Ages weren't half as bad as the Enlightenment historians tried to make it to be and historians usually avoid using the term "Dark Ages" due to a huge number of pop history myths and misconceptions. But yes, during the Middle Ages the Western/South Western Europe (remember that the Eastern Roman Empire didn't fall in the 5th century!) became less centralised and that's why large cities and mass production weren't a thing.

 

But that's not what's happening in Star Wars, Republic is ruling the whole Galaxy, then the Emprie is ruling the whole Galaxy, then the New Republic is ruling the whole Galaxy.

 

Also note that all we know about the Republic before the prequels are just legends. Pablo Hidalgo of the Stort Group repeatedly said that he doesn't like the technological stagnation introduced by KotOR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Freeptop said:

AT-AT can't fire on the snipers if they're flanking it. That whole problem with the ability to maneuver the aiming of the guns on that thing comes into play there...

My point about deployment isn't about clustering - it's about putting them in vulnerable positions while also limiting the rate at which they can exit the transport. So, we're talking about a known point of departure, the inability to provide cover fire for the deployment (assuming the defenders can stealthily move into a flanking position), and restricted number of troops that can deploy at once.

If it's not for deploying troops under fire, then why is it armed and armored? It's basically stuck trying to do two different jobs and isn't really well designed for either. Tanks and/or artillery would be better designed for breaking fortifications, which would then allow you to use dedicated troop transports for the deployment of soldiers. With a proper design, you can still provide armor and weapons on the troop transport while still providing the ability to rapidly deploy the soldiers, either in battle or after the fortifications are destroyed (think Stryker or Bradley).

As for being a mobile watchtower - with the advent of aircraft, such a design is not really an advantage as a primary means of combat...

In any case, I don't actually want to argue against AT-ATs! :lol:

I like them. I just don't feel the need to try to twist logic into pretzels to justify them. Star Wars has all sorts of ways in which it doesn't follow real-world physics or logic, so it's just not worth getting worked up over, in my opinion. Star Wars is the ultimate Rule of Cool. I'm fine with that. I admit to being a little annoyed by "mega-caliber" and "everything's bigger!", but then I think how I would have felt about it when I was a kid and pouring through the old WEG sourcebooks, and how when Dark Empire came out, the Sovereign and Eclipse were so cool, so while I think those are a bit silly now, I remember how that felt then... and I find I'm at peace with these new designs :)

 

No ones getting "worked up" I just don't think "Snipers Flanking" a AT-AT would be the answer. In the battle of Hoth the empire marched AT-ATs through the rebel defensive shield, destroyed the Rebel Fortifications and then deployed Troops in conjunction with Vader's landing party after the shield generator was down to clean out the base. While it's mobility is limited it, the AT-AT had no problem shooting down T-47 snow speeders as well as gunning down Infantry. If you're scenario of "Snipers Flanking played out with troops deploying from the AT-AT they would simply stop deploying troops, rotate and fire on your position with the chin cannons. What has been proven to work is taking out the legs either through destruction or tow cables because that is the weakest design point. Many other designs work better as a troop deployment vessel I'm not arguing that, but the AT-AT is a mind **** on the battlefield and that is the motivating factor behind much of what the Empire did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Phoenix5454 said:

No ones getting "worked up" I just don't think "Snipers Flanking" a AT-AT would be the answer. In the battle of Hoth the empire marched AT-ATs through the rebel defensive shield, destroyed the Rebel Fortifications and then deployed Troops in conjunction with Vader's landing party after the shield generator was down to clean out the base. While it's mobility is limited it, the AT-AT had no problem shooting down T-47 snow speeders as well as gunning down Infantry. If you're scenario of "Snipers Flanking played out with troops deploying from the AT-AT they would simply stop deploying troops, rotate and fire on your position with the chin cannons. What has been proven to work is taking out the legs either through destruction or tow cables because that is the weakest design point. Many other designs work better as a troop deployment vessel I'm not arguing that, but the AT-AT is a mind **** on the battlefield and that is the motivating factor behind much of what the Empire did.

The "Snipers Flanking" would specifically be for troop deployment, which we don't see depicted on camera. For all we know, the Rebels made use of that tactic to slow down the stormtroopers and buy more time for evacuation :)

As for shooting down T-47s - I really question the tactics of the Rebels there. They basically lined up and flew straight at the AT-AT heads. So they made it easier for the AT-ATs to shoot them down. Note we never saw one get shot down when it was behind an AT-AT!

Though as I think of it, that "bad tactic" may well have been on purpose. The Rebels weren't trying to win. They were trying to slow down the assault long enough to enable evacuation. Different objective leads to different tactics. The soldiers going up against the AT-ATs mostly weren't expecting to make it out of there, just delay them long enough to get the transports out... which they accomplished.
 

Anyways, we've beat this subject to death. One can try to rationalize "rule of cool" any way one wants. For Star Wars, I'm willing to just suspend by disbelief and not worry about it. Debating the "reality" can be a fun side discussion, though, which is how I let myself get sucked in this far!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

35 minutes ago, Freeptop said:

The "Snipers Flanking" would specifically be for troop deployment, which we don't see depicted on camera. For all we know, the Rebels made use of that tactic to slow down the stormtroopers and buy more time for evacuation :)

As for shooting down T-47s - I really question the tactics of the Rebels there. They basically lined up and flew straight at the AT-AT heads. So they made it easier for the AT-ATs to shoot them down. Note we never saw one get shot down when it was behind an AT-AT!

Though as I think of it, that "bad tactic" may well have been on purpose. The Rebels weren't trying to win. They were trying to slow down the assault long enough to enable evacuation. Different objective leads to different tactics. The soldiers going up against the AT-ATs mostly weren't expecting to make it out of there, just delay them long enough to get the transports out... which they accomplished.
 

Anyways, we've beat this subject to death. One can try to rationalize "rule of cool" any way one wants. For Star Wars, I'm willing to just suspend by disbelief and not worry about it. Debating the "reality" can be a fun side discussion, though, which is how I let myself get sucked in this far!

I agree that the AT-AT is not practical, it's fear propaganda on legs that happens to deploy troops. IMO vehicle designs from the clone wars served their purpose better than much of the empires catalog. AT-TE, Juggernaut, LAAT etc. The main difference being that the Army of the Galactic Republic was not a police force like the Galactic Empire was, which is why you see things like a AT-AT which practically make little sense but is physicologically fear inducing to normal citizens and militias etc. We now see the first order returning to the design language of the Galactic Republic by making things look empirish for the fear nostalgia but also making them functional, TIEs with shields, fast walkers , drop ships, star destroyers that can actually carry a good amount of stat fighters as well as have decent ship to ship combat abilities (dreadnought is clearly just for planet bombardment I'm speaking of the Resurgent Class star destroyer).

Overall I'm excited with what the First Order brings to the table as they are now more like the Army of the Galactic republic in function than the Empire which was essentially a galaxy wide police force keeping everyone in check and Control. 

I'm not trying to argue about AT-ATs I just like talking star wars lol

Edited by Phoenix5454
Spelling, Grammer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now