13 minutes ago, dotswarlock said:

I will only say this: if this is just an AT-AT in a new skin, then I will be dissapointed. If it is a new AT-AT with some cool tricks other than artillery, then it will gain in popularity. The front leg designs, for example, could be used in some cool way... I just have no idea how.

So it's supposedly more "simian" in appearance, so I'm thinking the front legs are longer than the back? Maybe it moves faster? Time will tell.

None of this is surprising, the First Order Emulates the Galactic Empire but "improves" on their designs due to "limited" resources. Quality over quantity.

-A walker that's faster, more powerful and looks like it could get back up again if it fell based on those front legs

-A executor type ship that has first order flair

I admit that design wise it's sort of boring but once again, not surprising based on what the First Order is all about.

30 minutes ago, Parakitor said:

...But seriously, I agree. Same thing happened with the plot of TFA. The prequels got bashed so hard, the company decided to go back to its roots, and TFA got bashed, too. It's not a fair assessment. I, personally, loved The Force Awakens. It took a couple of viewings to grow on me, but it's a great show that can be watched over and over. But I guess there's just no pleasing some people.

No, crappy execution of two different ideas doesn't mean people are tough to please. It means two things were done poorly for a franchise as monolithic and pervasive as Star Wars

Prequels got bashed for horrible dialogue, massive plot holes, cringe worthy romance, and groans instead of laughs at hamfisted humor. Fans holistically liked most of the tech

Ep7, retold a story with some plot holes, and massive nonsensical missuse of in universe tech and blatant disregard for distances between systems that 2nd graders can point out (mine did).

Was it better? Yes. Was it meeting the expectations of an adequately crafted piece of film? No. Did new tech look right for the universe and look better than prequel stuff? Not really... other than minor tweaks and recolored older stuff (which I'm fine with).

1 hour ago, Praetorate of the Empire said:

Actually Maul in his ship, the Scimitar , a heavily modified Sienar Systems Star Courier. While it has a similar silhouette shape as an Eta 2, it is quite a bit bigger.

As for the rest of the conversation going on here, I have some beef. These ship styles have been established for a very long time in this universe. Why are you complaining now?! The Executor was just a huge Star Destroyer (Dreadnought, sorry), and even in The Old Republic and other early games big, triangular ships that are called, by class categorization, Star Destroyers, exist. Thus, someone figured that this was the best kind of ship at what it did.

So, coming to TFA onward, a war-torn galaxy would likely be trying to simply produce new ships quickly, and how does one do that? By building off of what you already know. Or going to a big, established shipyard (Kuat Drive Yards) and asking for an upgrade. Bam, they produce what you want on a modified chassis of a design that has been firmly established as a good ship.

Stop asking for "new looks". Not going to happen, everything really should be similar to something else unless it has a completely different manufacturer, which I'm assuming is pretty unlikely at this point unless we get into the Unknown Regions or unfamiliar parts of the galaxy. Mass producers of tech and machinery would be very unlikely to discard solid previous designs to work out a new line of anything, especially in the midst of high-demand economy for their warships.

I don't have any problem with vaguely triangular ships. Both prequels and TFA have nice, Imperial-looking, yet fresh and creative ships.

But this thing is just atrocious, it would look bad in any movie, Star Wars or not, it would look bad if it was the first ship to appear in the original cut of ANH.

3 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

The Poe Dameron 'Black Squadron' comic series are actually rather good.

Thanks, I was thinking of getting that. So far I've only enjoyed Bloodlines so was hesitant to get it.

Long front legs make sense if they are for super elevation for long range shots, or to employ the cannon in a counter-orbit mode. The EU-canon ground-to-orbit defenses were largely static, so introducing a mobile version is a pretty good advancement, and it's only logical to evolve a design from proven tech if possible.

Holy crap.. it seems people forget that these movies are made for kids.

I was 4 years old when Empire came put. I loved my AT-AT toy.. it was cool. I showed my now 4 year old son the new walker and he thought it was awesome. He wanted to get one.. so, The new movies, they instil the sense of awe and imagination in my son that the originals instilled in me.

I think that is something we man (and woman) children should inderstand. These new movies aren't meant for us. They are for our children. If we can get some enjoyment, and I do, excellent. If not, then I must ask.. why are you here?

11 hours ago, OneKelvin said:

But why use an AT-AT chassis?

The AT-AT can already destroy fortifications once through the shield, there's no reason to put your artillery guns on a frontline combat chassis. A chassis from the last war. They built a planet that could suck up stars don't tell me they didn't have the resources for a new artillery platform.

And even if they can justify it from a lore perspective that doesn't mean I have to be happy about them re-using assets until all the interest is worn out of them. It's an AT-AT. With a shoulder gun and flippers. For the Clone Wars they spit out so many new and interesting designs: some you only saw for a second or two. Every movie was worth watching again and again, even if you didn't like the plot there was so much new stuff to see.

Pod races, Naboo, Felucia, Utapau, Mustafar, all of the clone weapons and vehicles, all of the droid weapons and vehicles, new species, and so many new ships. Padme alone had like 4 different star cruisers. I was disappointed to see in TFA re-hash Tatooine, re-hash Yaviny planet, re-hash pretty much everything. There were new things: Starship graveyard on Jakku, Flametroopers, the Single star destroyer was kind of new, the Stormtrooper armor was a little different. But the TIEs were just re-colors, and the X-wings were just re-colors with engine mods, they blew up the Death Star 3 and I've seen it all before but done better and with more soul in the originals.

I've seen the old Star Wars.

For the new Star Wars I want to see something new : don't you?

Edit: And it's not that hard. They pump out new ships and vehicles and story lines for tabletop games, and computer games. New planets, interesting stories. They can't put the same effort into the actual movie? Look at these:

Background ships for an MMO. Later they added a module where you can explode the little ones by the bucketfull. That's too much to ask for a multi-million dollar movie?

I'm sorry. It's not you, and I might be too worked up over it. It's just Star Wars was a big part of my life, and it's disappointing to see them spreading it thin instead of whipping up something fresh..

Well, originally, I was only attempting to answer your question of, "why put artillery on an AT-AT when you have orbital strikes," which you do have some good commentary on rehashing old content. To start with the fictional side: "why use an AT-AT chassis?"

The walker pattern is an established in-universe engineering pattern for armored vehicles for the Republic come Empire. The did show some tank like vehicles during the Clone Wars which also progressed and showed again in Rogue One in the battle at Jedha. But walkers were used in the Clone Wars as mobile artillery with the AT-TE (1) which was followed up with the AT-AT (2) which lost the main battle cannon, but increased in size and was, to my understanding, more a troop transport rather than artillery piece. Continuing the use of a walker for mobile artillery with the AT-M6 (3) doesn't seem to be that far of a stretch.

To be fair to the Republic and Empire engineers, here on Earth we first rolled out armored vehicles with tracked propulsion and main battle cannons back during World War I, and here some 100 years later we are still using the same design pattern with our modern day battle tanks. I think we can forgive the First Order still favoring armored walkers.

Now, as to why they, Disney/Lucasfilm/etc., appear to be rehashing the same content over and over again. My suspicion is because of the extreme pushback against the prequels, they are risk-adverse to changing things up too much, and are giving the viewers something familiar. We hear the very same arguments every day here on these very forums when people try to push for the N1 starfighter to be brought into the game, or when people saw the Kimogila as not being "Star Warsy" enough for their taste.

Only the fans yelling about the movies are much louder than the fans yelling about X-Wing TMG.

(1) (2) (3)

i dont get why the dread is flat.

Theres a reason the typical SD is a wedge-shaped ship with an arched top/bottom. It allows for maximum firepower to point forward. Flat tops means they can only all fire if the target is above them, or they dip their nose down (which means they arent getting closer as quick).

Just now, Vineheart01 said:

i dont get why the dread is flat.

Theres a reason the typical SD is a wedge-shaped ship with an arched top/bottom. It allows for maximum firepower to point forward. Flat tops means they can only all fire if the target is above them, or they dip their nose down (which means they arent getting closer as quick).

Because it is meant to bombard a planet. It's target will be below it.

18 hours ago, eMeM said:

This is the worst ship design in the history of science fiction.

Au contraire. Superior to:

The Firespray (Boba Fett: worst character in Star Wars. "Hey, the most impressive thing I ever did was get killed by a blind man but dude check out my armor I rule. Also my ship looks awful, so bonus. Make a movie about me!")

The Punisher

The Kihraxz

The Scurrg

The Star Viper

The initial Raider model, although Armada and Battlefront II have successfully salvaged the aesthetics of the design.

The Kimogilamonster

The HWK-290

The E-Wing

The Scyck

The YV-666 (also, lol. Star wars names)

Mist Hunter

Punishing One

And that's just an incomplete list of stuff you see in X-Wing.

In particular, I like the design links back to the new, canon Interdictor design.

3 minutes ago, That Blasted Samophlange said:

Because it is meant to bombard a planet. It's target will be below it.

Also, it feels like this ship is meant to come in after all the enemy capital ships are gone, meaning it only really should have to worry about snub-fighters, hence the ridiculous amount of AAA batteries.

2 minutes ago, ianediger said:

Also, it feels like this ship is meant to come in after all the enemy capital ships are gone, meaning it only really should have to worry about snub-fighters, hence the ridiculous amount of AAA batteries.

Shame every point defence gun is placed on the top and the fighters can harras the bottom uninterrupted.

1 hour ago, mxlm said:

Au contraire. Superior to:

The Firespray (Boba Fett: worst character in Star Wars. "Hey, the most impressive thing I ever did was get killed by a blind man but dude check out my armor I rule. Also my ship looks awful, so bonus. Make a movie about me!")

The Punisher

The Kihraxz

The Scurrg

The Star Viper

The initial Raider model, although Armada and Battlefront II have successfully salvaged the aesthetics of the design.

The Kimogilamonster

The HWK-290

The E-Wing

The Scyck

The YV-666 (also, lol. Star wars names)

Mist Hunter

Punishing One

And that's just an incomplete list of stuff you see in X-Wing.

In particular, I like the design links back to the new, canon Interdictor design.

20 hours ago, Imperial Advisor Arem Heshvaun said:

New Dreadnaught and Walker Reveal

"New"

2 hours ago, That Blasted Samophlange said:

Holy crap.. it seems people forget that these movies are made for kids.

I was 4 years old when Empire came put. I loved my AT-AT toy.. it was cool. I showed my now 4 year old son the new walker and he thought it was awesome. He wanted to get one.. so, The new movies, they instil the sense of awe and imagination in my son that the originals instilled in me.

I think that is something we man (and woman) children should inderstand. These new movies aren't meant for us. They are for our children. If we can get some enjoyment, and I do, excellent. If not, then I must ask.. why are you here?

"For kids" is not an excuse. Even the prequels dealt with Anakin chopping up kids and force strangling his wife, and getting burned alive and disfigured. How kid-appropriate is that?

Y'all is a bunch of spoiled man children. The new designs are awesome. Cant wait to see them in Star Wars. Because I like Star Wars.

2 hours ago, That Blasted Samophlange said:

Holy crap.. it seems people forget that these movies are made for kids.

I was 4 years old when Empire came put. I loved my AT-AT toy.. it was cool. I showed my now 4 year old son the new walker and he thought it was awesome. He wanted to get one.. so, The new movies, they instil the sense of awe and imagination in my son that the originals instilled in me.

I think that is something we man (and woman) children should inderstand. These new movies aren't meant for us. They are for our children. If we can get some enjoyment, and I do, excellent. If not, then I must ask.. why are you here?

I find it amusing when people call new design illogical or impractical, yet never seem to levy that criticism at the original AT-AT. What's really practical about the AT-AT? It's got some decently heavy guns, but they're restricted in aiming to what the head can swivel to, on a chassis that doesn't offer much in the way of rapid mobility. It's meant to be a "transport", but I've never been able to figure out how the things that are transported are supposed to get from the armored compartment to the ground without some sort of installation (see: RotJ AT-AT in the forest walking up next to the platform). Seriously, that's a long way to drop for the troops coming out of those things. Those legs are just far too long, which also leads to them being top-heavy... and thus vulnerable to the very attacks we see in ESB with the tow hooks from snowspeeders.

On the other hand, they look awesome! Especially to any kid. I mean, they're basically giant robot dinosaurs with guns. Highly impractical, but look totally cool. And that, in a nutshell, really is the Stars Wars aesthetic.

13 minutes ago, Koing907 said:

"For kids" is not an excuse. Even the prequels dealt with Anakin chopping up kids and force strangling his wife, and getting burned alive and disfigured. How kid-appropriate is that?

Even if it was for kids, it shouldn't be wrote by kids.

3 minutes ago, Odanan said:

Even if it was for kids, it shouldn't be wrote by kids.

"Written"

Just now, AldousSnow said:

"Written"

Thanks. I'll try to remember that, but as I use English only here, it will be hard.

the name of the walker tho.... the name?!

24 minutes ago, Freeptop said:

I find it amusing when people call new design illogical or impractical, yet never seem to levy that criticism at the original AT-AT. What's really practical about the AT-AT? It's got some decently heavy guns, but they're restricted in aiming to what the head can swivel to, on a chassis that doesn't offer much in the way of rapid mobility. It's meant to be a "transport", but I've never been able to figure out how the things that are transported are supposed to get from the armored compartment to the ground without some sort of installation (see: RotJ AT-AT in the forest walking up next to the platform). Seriously, that's a long way to drop for the troops coming out of those things. Those legs are just far too long, which also leads to them being top-heavy... and thus vulnerable to the very attacks we see in ESB with the tow hooks from snowspeeders.

Troops deploy from repel cords and the design of most of the empire stuff favors phsycological terror vs practicality. Remember first and foremost the Galactic Empire was a police force keeping systems and citizens in line through fear and propaganda

2 minutes ago, Phoenix5454 said:

Troops deploy from repel cords and the design of most of the empire stuff favors phsycological terror vs practicality. Remember first and foremost the Galactic Empire was a police force keeping systems and citizens in line through fear and propaganda

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.

I'm not sure what everyone is expecting from these ships or walkers, lets be perfectly honest about the Star Wars universe. It was a pretty crummy place even pre empire, its was constantly at war, Sith war, mandalorian war, Jedi Wars etc.

The senate was corrupt, corporations were corrupt. Most of the citizens lived in poverty, gangs and bounty hunters operated with little resistance.

The clone wars depleted lots of wealth and resources prior to the official empire. The empire burned credits, how much you think it costs to build and rebuild a deathstar? Vadar was always force choking employees. They murdered the scientist that work on the Death Star, they poisoned the geonosions. They used slaves to build everything, it makes complete sense the designs would be goofy.

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.

The first order has more in common to North Korea than any other modern millitary.