Page 2 of 2

Re: Another Anti-ST SB thread...

Posted: Tue May 03, 2011 1:07 pm
by Khas
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Praeothmin wrote:Actually, we heard of Klingon ground vehicules, and the Cardassian mechanized infantry, and we have seen with our own eyes the Federation Dune Buggy, most likely a light recon vehicule which, while unarmored, I'd use way before I would use an AT-ST.
The weapon is as powerful, and the vehicule is definitely faster and more maneuverable... :)
A buggy in Trek, that bobs up and down, prevents the gunner from acquiring anything, that can't even protect its passengers, and would supposedly be used to scout when tricorders do that a thousand times better? That's more like a GLA buggy with some alien artifact strapped on its back. Frankly, if I had no real plan to cross a vast distance under a limited time, I'd rather go with the AT-ST, and forget about the scout mission. At least I'd have protection, more weapons with equal accuracy (again, the buggy's weapon sucked big times), and the capacity to avoid being stuck like a buggy would.
Except that in-universe, the AT-ST's gyrostabilizers suck. And the whole thing seems to be made of explodium, since in the EU, it mentions that one Ewok saw an AT-ST explode after tripping and falling over logs.

Re: Another Anti-ST SB thread...

Posted: Tue May 03, 2011 1:18 pm
by Praeothmin
Khas, the movie itself shows us that two logs can crush the thing like a tin can, showing it barely has the resistance of a modern day van... :)

Re: Another Anti-ST SB thread...

Posted: Tue May 03, 2011 2:22 pm
by Khas
Eh, true.

On a funny note, "Star Wars: The New Essential Guide To Vehicles and Vessels" says that AT-STs are no longer deployed on planets with an abundance of trees.

Re: Another Anti-ST SB thread...

Posted: Tue May 03, 2011 2:24 pm
by Praeothmin
Or Teddy Bears... :)

Re: Another Anti-ST SB thread...

Posted: Tue May 03, 2011 9:39 pm
by Mr. Oragahn
Khas wrote:
Mr. Oragahn wrote:
Praeothmin wrote:Actually, we heard of Klingon ground vehicules, and the Cardassian mechanized infantry, and we have seen with our own eyes the Federation Dune Buggy, most likely a light recon vehicule which, while unarmored, I'd use way before I would use an AT-ST.
The weapon is as powerful, and the vehicule is definitely faster and more maneuverable... :)
A buggy in Trek, that bobs up and down, prevents the gunner from acquiring anything, that can't even protect its passengers, and would supposedly be used to scout when tricorders do that a thousand times better? That's more like a GLA buggy with some alien artifact strapped on its back. Frankly, if I had no real plan to cross a vast distance under a limited time, I'd rather go with the AT-ST, and forget about the scout mission. At least I'd have protection, more weapons with equal accuracy (again, the buggy's weapon sucked big times), and the capacity to avoid being stuck like a buggy would.
Except that in-universe, the AT-ST's gyrostabilizers suck. And the whole thing seems to be made of explodium, since in the EU, it mentions that one Ewok saw an AT-ST explode after tripping and falling over logs.
In the movies, they don't have problems on forest soil and permafrost, which is more than good enough. The gyros only sucked when the AT-ST tried to maintain balance on rolling logs, which even a human couldn't achieve on logs respectively scaled down to match the proportional sizes.
As for the explosion
It's also a good thing that an AT-ST can tank its own firepower twice on its back, then a third hit on a weapon slot, before blowing up after a final fourth shot at the same weapon slot.
The tripping scene is more problematic but it seems that just as for the log crush, the AT-ST gave a weakness around their lateral blaster piece. It could easily be the one from the movie, where the AT-ST fell on its blaster cannon, which could easily be carrying their own fuel cells. The explosion clearly originated from the inner side touching the ground, and the AT-ST fell on its left. That said it's not exactly a sturdy piece of metal. It may be good at coping with thermal damage, but the mere shock to the ground literally made the AT-ST decompose itself into its kit pieces.

Re: Another Anti-ST SB thread...

Posted: Wed May 04, 2011 8:53 am
by Picard
True. I think it's something of a anti-infantry vehicle, like Stryker, just without troop carrying ability.

Re: Another Anti-ST SB thread...

Posted: Fri May 06, 2011 12:12 am
by Mr. Oragahn
Picard wrote:True. I think it's something of a anti-infantry vehicle, like Stryker, just without troop carrying ability.
Well you can squish a couple of furries up there.

Re: Another Anti-ST SB thread...

Posted: Fri May 06, 2011 2:15 am
by Lucky
Picard wrote:True. I think it's something of a anti-infantry vehicle, like Stryker, just without troop carrying ability.
Try a humvee.