I explain and interpret the Endor ground battle another way.

The Ewoks didn’t win because they could take on the Imperial garrison man for cuddly killer bear. They won the same way the Soviets beat back the Nazis: poor Nazi supply lines plus endless waves of disposable soldiers. The Ewoks threw bodies at the problem until the stormtroopers were entirely overwhelmed.

54 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:

Well they didn't, so don't worry! They just bought time for Han to blow up the shield generator. No one ever sees that past the "Cute can't defeat tough looking!" impulse. The Ewoks are losing that battle.

Yes to all the folks pointing out how "primitive" yet committed and desperate, can beat "advanced" conscript occupying force, but even more so this.

The Ewoks were not going to 'win' their ambush. The Rebels were never going to win a stand up fight. This is a hit and run attack on Imperial infrastructure that comes at pretty big cost. The only reason the Ewoks are not exterminated in reprisals is the small detail of the Death Star's destruction and the Emparor's death!

2 hours ago, CaptainRocket said:

Yes to all the folks pointing out how "primitive" yet committed and desperate, can beat "advanced" conscript occupying force, but even more so this.

In 13 March 1884, and again in 17 January, 1885, Hadendowa tribesmen in loincloths with swords and bucklers, disordered a British infantry square, something that neither Napoleon nor England's colonial rivals could accomplish. Rudyard Kipling wrote a long involved poem in British army vernacular praising them, which is especially telling considering his usual views on non-white colonial subjects. Despite that huge moral victory, the Hadendowa suffered a tactical defeat and lost the field in both occasions. However, simply having a battle at all on 17 January 1885, had bad strategic implications for the British. The political fallout ended British rule in the Sudan for 13 years.

So never doubt the abilities of a bunch of "primitives".

"Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back always strived to be family friendly" - Tauntaunscout

Dude the first movies are about a rebellious son fighting his tyrannical father. 😂

It was a battle of generations: old vs young, father vs son.

54 minutes ago, Staelwulf said:

Dude the first movies are about a rebellious son fighting his tyrannical father. 😂

So? Art doesn’t have to be about a family getting along to be family friendly.

ANH was not about that in 1977. It’s pretty clear now the family ties were retcons.

4 hours ago, TauntaunScout said:

I heard it was more than budget: getting enough actors that tall was impossible. They didn't have a choice.

What, all the tall people were working for the NBA or something? First I ever heard this one. Stilts are a thing. Making a man taller is easy, making a man shorter, not so easy. Not sure this one is true.

10 minutes ago, Mep said:

What, all the tall people were working for the NBA or something? First I ever heard this one. Stilts are a thing. Making a man taller is easy, making a man shorter, not so easy. Not sure this one is true.

I may or may not be wrong about that being a factor and I don't recall where I heard it to try and dig it up. I can recall Lucas also citing other reasons. But he's become what future film historians would consider an unreliable source.

It goes a little past "tall people" though. The reality is Peter Mayhew was 8 inches taller than Michael Jordan and an inch taller than Shaquille O'Neal. So yeah, when you get to wookie proportions, there really aren't that many people who even come close. You can see from the cut Wampa scenes what happens when you try to work around it with 1979 technology with an actor too short for the intended creature. They look pretty hokey, you can see why they wound up on the cutting room floor. Stilts are not a great option for making an army of believable wookies. Des Webb was 6'10 and too short to make a convincing Wampa. So if you get a bunch of guys who are MBA height and try to make them wookies back then, it probably wouldn't work too well.

Mayhew at over 7 feet tall was far rarer than a person under 5 feet tall. You could use child actors if you really had to, though your filming schedule would (justifiably) be a nightmare due to child labor laws.

However, Lucas already had lots of contacts with little people actors from the jawas, and from Kenny Baker playing R2-D2.

At any rate, I'll buy wookies to use in my arctic rebel cell, and I'll buy ewoks too. Just take my money FFG.

5 hours ago, TauntaunScout said:

In 13 March 1884, and again in 17 January, 1885, Hadendowa tribesmen in loincloths with swords and bucklers, disordered a British infantry square, something that neither Napoleon nor England's colonial rivals could accomplish. Rudyard Kipling wrote a long involved poem in British army vernacular praising them, which is especially telling considering his usual views on non-white colonial subjects. Despite that huge moral victory, the Hadendowa suffered a tactical defeat and lost the field in both occasions. However, simply having a battle at all on 17 January 1885, had bad strategic implications for the British. The political fallout ended British rule in the Sudan for 13 years.

So never doubt the abilities of a bunch of "primitives".

The main objection I always had wasn’t that Ewoks were “primitive” or that they’re cute, it’s what they’re shown actually doing. AT-STs getting messed up by large logs? Someone getting KOd by a rock dropped on their head from however high the Ewok on that glider was? I’ve got no beef with that. Armored Stormtroopers getting clowned on by bolas? Arrows that don’t have enough velocity to really hurt unarmed humans taking out Stormies? No. Conceptually I’ve no beef with Ewoks helping to win that battle, it’s just portrayed oddly on screen.

On 7/7/2019 at 10:31 AM, CaptainRocket said:

You know this sentiment comes up a lot...

(text edited for running time and relevance to my attached comment...)

I can love Ewoks for being adorable space teddy bears, *and* love them for being deceptively powerful warriors that can beat an over confident and technologocally superior occupying force through a mix of cleverness and home field advantage... sometimes even I love them for both at the same time!

The thing is- the Ewoks didn’t beat the Empire. The surprise got the Ewoks off to a good start, then things quickly start going downhill for them. Once the surprise wore off, the Emperor’s troops were doing well. One Wookiee plus two Ewoks and some creative strategy on Han’s part actually beat the Empire.

Ewoks alone would have ended the battle with the Empire burning down the forest and killing everything in it.

I was very vocally anti-ewok when legion started. Mainly because I did not want to see them at the expense of another unit. But we have reached a point where we have good unit variety and I wouldn't mind seeing ewoks, jawas and the like.

30 minutes ago, devin.pike.1989 said:

I was very vocally anti-ewok when legion started. Mainly because I did not want to see them at the expense of another unit. But we have reached a point where we have good unit variety and I wouldn't mind seeing ewoks, jawas and the like.

I think people also have gotten used to the other SW games where a sculpt or three or five could introduce a concept or even be a whole faction. Legion releases have a lot more to slow things down.

Agree. Ewoks could be the Rebel factions version of battle droids with weak offense and defense but high mini count

8 hours ago, TauntaunScout said:

In 13 March 1884, and again in 17 January, 1885, Hadendowa tribesmen in loincloths with swords and bucklers, disordered a British infantry square, something that neither Napoleon nor England's colonial rivals could accomplish.

A British square was famously annihilated at Waterloo by Napoleon's troops. Many were disordered through conventional battles in Europe and elsewhere. It's something of a persistent myth that infantry squares were solid defense against cavalry charges. I won't get into the details of that as that's not your point, which is that troops perceived as technologically 'primitive' were capable of beating professional, well-armed soldiers. Of that, like infantry squares being destroyed, there are many historical examples.

Hopefully, to satisfy those that want them and represent one of the few on-screen battles, ewoks will be released. I won't buy them, but many would.

59 minutes ago, srMontresor said:

A British square was famously annihilated at Waterloo by Napoleon's troops. Many were disordered through conventional battles in Europe and elsewhere. It's something of a persistent myth that infantry squares were solid defense against cavalry charges. I won't get into the details of that as that's not your point, which is that troops perceived as technologically 'primitive' were capable of beating professional, well-armed soldiers. Of that, like infantry squares being destroyed, there are many historical examples.

Hopefully, to satisfy those that want them and represent one of the few on-screen battles, ewoks will be released. I won't buy them, but many would.

I should have specified and almost did “without artillery support” but maybe that’s not even so.

6 hours ago, KalEl814 said:

The main objection I always had wasn’t that Ewoks were “primitive” or that they’re cute, it’s what they’re shown actually doing. AT-STs getting messed up by large logs? Someone getting KOd by a rock dropped on their head from however high the Ewok on that glider was? I’ve got no beef with that. Armored Stormtroopers getting clowned on by bolas? Arrows that don’t have enough velocity to really hurt unarmed humans taking out Stormies? No. Conceptually I’ve no beef with Ewoks helping to win that battle, it’s just portrayed oddly on screen.

I think it’s so you can see something. An arrow moving at a realistic speed won’t read. Bolas read well.

It’s like how Hollywood is now obsessed with flaming arrows in every medieval battle.

4 hours ago, TauntaunScout said:

I should have specified and almost did “without artillery support” but maybe that’s not even so.

Yeah, that British square at Waterloo was destroyed by unsupported cavalry. The reality was, if a cavalry regiment held its morale on the charge, a square had no chance to stop it as the sheer mass and weight of a horse impacting at speed (dead or alive) would tear right through it. Squares relied on the enemy morale breaking enough so that the charge stalled, and that didn't happen nearly as much as the romantic conception of the infantry square would have us believe.

Kipling's view is sheer romance.

On 7/8/2019 at 7:19 AM, TauntaunScout said:

But even if they won, history if full of such things: People with swords and spears sometimes defeated armies with gatling guns and artillery and breach loading rifles in Colonial warfare. So I have no trouble believing it.

You ever go deer hunting? Animals are pretty impressive.

Implying cuteness is your issue. Would lizards have been ok in your book?

How would Zulus go against automatic hand held weapons and tanks?

You ever go child hunting? Cause furries less than 5' tall aren't very impressive.

As long as the lizards looked bad***, they would be fine. This is a design/production issue. The aliens in Jabbas' hut looked relatively good for the time.

On 7/7/2019 at 5:31 PM, CaptainRocket said:

You know this sentiment comes up a lot...

In my opinion the genius of Star Wars always was that it gave us both a family friendly pop culture experience that also created a world of dramatic space opera with a real serious respect for how that world and the characters in it were crafted.

Some of us could fall in love with the rollicking fairy tale adventure with silly robot straight men and fuzzy giant Sasquatch aliens and adorable little beeping bots, all as endearing as Dorothy's companions. Some could fall in love with the iconic heroes, that felt as exciting as a pulp serial. Some could fall in love with the attention to detail and the sci fi world that felt actually real.

As I've grown older I've grown to appreciate all sides more and now I realize I don't have to chose.

I can love Ewoks for being adorable space teddy bears, *and* love them for being deceptively powerful warriors that can beat an over confident and technologocally superior occupying force through a mix of cleverness and home field advantage... sometimes even I love them for both at the same time!

My opinion is that if they did the battle again they would have had lots and lots more ewoks so they appeared to be more of an overwhelming force. O just always got the impression that this was what they were going for but it just didn't quite work out and instead it looked a little too far fetched.

I still love this battle for what it is, it's fun and crazy in equal measure and I love to watch it with my kids who also love it.

I don't like to take these films far too seriously because they have grown with me and they will grow with my kids.

Nothing in this world is perfect and I can't be bothered stressing over it all too much.

17 hours ago, KalEl814 said:

The main objection I always had wasn’t that Ewoks were “primitive” or that they’re cute, it’s what they’re shown actually doing. AT-STs getting messed up by large logs? Someone getting KOd by a rock dropped on their head from however high the Ewok on that glider was? I’ve got no beef with that. Armored Stormtroopers getting clowned on by bolas? Arrows that don’t have enough velocity to really hurt unarmed humans taking out Stormies? No. Conceptually I’ve no beef with Ewoks helping to win that battle, it’s just portrayed oddly on screen.

Myth Busters determined that large enough logs would crush an armored car; no reason why an AT-ST wouldn't fall victim to the same thing. It might have more advanced tech, but it's still a light armored vehicle (compared to true SW tanks like the AT-AT, Juggernaught, and AT-TE). It also exists in a universe where the primary threat (blaster fire) can be overcome by differing types of absorbing armor or shields, which might not be all that effective against a lot of extremely large mass flying at it.

As for the rock, I can say that, having been smashed in the face by a very large rock in riot training, if dropped from high enough, or hitting with sufficient force (Ewok slings) it can absolutely knock someone out even through padded plastic armor. At the very least, it could hit hard enough to daze them, and cause them to fall. (which we see in the movie)

On 7/8/2019 at 7:47 AM, ScummyRebel said:

I explain and interpret the Endor ground battle another way.

The Ewoks didn’t win because they could take on the Imperial garrison man for cuddly killer bear. They won the same way the Soviets beat back the Nazis: poor Nazi supply lines plus endless waves of disposable soldiers. The Ewoks threw bodies at the problem until the stormtroopers were entirely overwhelmed.

Literally, they threw bodies. Everyone seems to forget that the Ewoks were hitting stormtroopers with two or three swinging Ewoks just to knock them over, and then mobbing them with clubs and knives.

The Essential Guide to Warfare also included a nice bit about the Ewoks using poison tipped arrows. The armor might only allow for a small scratch, but it could rapidly lead to paralysis and death. Doesn't necessarily match what we see in the film, but I tend to like it. Suits the "primitive people from a backwater" vibe I got from the movie, and helps explain a few things. And it was fun reading about a stormtrooper who had PTSD from the terrifying teddy bears.

There actually aren't that many imperial troops in that battle in RoTJ. If you look at the wide shots of them holding the rebels prisoner before the ewoks attack, there looks to be about a platoon's worth, maybe fifty or so. They stupidly run off into dense terrain that favours their opponents. Their defeat is plausible in the film. I've never liked the ewoks, but they're the least of that film's problems.

6 minutes ago, srMontresor said:

There actually aren't that many imperial troops in that battle in RoTJ. If you look at the wide shots of them holding the rebels prisoner before the ewoks attack, there looks to be about a platoon's worth, maybe fifty or so.

And to can easily see many times more that for the Ewoks. Hence, my argument for swarm tactics and sacrificing soldiers for raw overwhelming force.

Wait.... maybe this is why our game is called Legion. Palps says “an entire legion” is on the moon, but it’s pretty clear from the scenes in question that an imperial legion is nothing like the scale of a Roman legion. However, those numbers easily fit into a grand army Legion battle point wise, or maybe even a standard 800 point game if you don’t have the force organization requirements. 🤔

7 hours ago, lologrelol said:

How would Zulus go against automatic hand held weapons and tanks?

It's more about learning from how the NVA did against them, which was the comment Lucas was making. It wouldn't translate well to 15 minutes of screentime, but I'd imagine the Hadendowa (different from the Zulu) would do better than you think.

But that's kinda a huge point of the whole Star Wars trilogy, back when it was still it's own genre: you CAN make that shot without a targeting computer, and these visually unimpressive guys with spears CAN help defeat the Empire. This downplaying of technology relative to human skill and ingenuity is a big piece of the artwork, which is why most people by the time they get to ROTJ subconsciously accept the scenes in question.

Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed.

Good against remotes, that's one thing, good against the living, that's something else.

That armor's too strong for [our hi tech] blasters. Rogue Group, use [a low tech rope].

This theme comes up again and again in the old trilogy.

Quote

Quote

As long as the lizards lo

I'll have to keep you updated on my squads of Anointed People! Maybe I'll fast track the project. I've been procrastinating on it too long anyways. Are you familiar with the Anointed People? West End Games published some scant stuff about them. Basically they wanted "the ewok effect" of a bunch of primitives vs. stormtroopers, but they couldn't reuse ewoks obviously. So they had the RPG module be about a planet inhabited by medieval level reptilian humanoids. Personally I suspect it was because their gamemaster had minis of them laying around from D&D. Anyways. In the WEG miniatures battles book, they threw in a cryptic image of lizardmen fighting stormtroopers titled "A squad of Anointed People advances into combat with invading stormtroopers for the greater glory of The Godking of Masterhome." I didn't actually have the RPG module about them back then, I pretty much just had the core rulebooks for the RPG/minis game. So as grade schooler this picture was impossibly cool and mysterious. The Anointed People in that pic were a mixed bag of lizardmen minis by 3 manufacturers. I have now tracked down at least one original or re-issue of every pose pictured in that photo. So I am gonna make a small force of them. Along the way I acquired a bunch of other 80's lizardmen that don't appear in the picture: I dunno if I should include them in a massive lizard army or sell them on eBay to minimize the cost of the project.

7 hours ago, lologrelol said:

This is a design/production issue. The aliens in Jabbas' hut looked relatively good for the time.

If the scene doesn't work for you it doesn't work for you. I can't behind a lot of movies because of production choices or acting.

17 minutes ago, ScummyRebel said:

And to can easily see many times more that for the Ewoks. Hence, my argument for swarm tactics and sacrificing soldiers for raw overwhelming force.

Wait.... maybe this is why our game is called Legion. Palps says “an entire legion” is on the moon, but it’s pretty clear from the scenes in question that an imperial legion is nothing like the scale of a Roman legion. However, those numbers easily fit into a grand army Legion battle point wise, or maybe even a standard 800 point game if you don’t have the force organization requirements. 🤔

The rest of the legion was on the other side of the moon apparently 🙄 Or they lied to Palpatine. "We don't need a whole Legion on overtime and hazard pay. Just send a normal crew to run a landing platform and shield generator".

Personally I think Hoth is the unrealistic battle in the OT. A trained army, with modern technology, with good planning and so forth, accurately predicts exactly where the enemy will go and what they'll try to do, isn't able to do more than slow them down for a couple hours? A small force with outdated weapons would still be able to do some horrendous damage with that kind of intel.

26 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:

Personally I think Hoth is the unrealistic battle in the OT. A trained army, with modern technology, with good planning and so forth, accurately predicts exactly where the enemy will go and what they'll try to do, isn't able to do more than slow them down for a couple hours? A small force with outdated weapons would still be able to do some horrendous damage with that kind of intel.

I dunno, Hoth felt like the most obvious Vietnam mirror from the OT... a trained army with modern weapons, that is expecting a stand up fight, arrives with a poor plan, suffers last minute chain of command disruption, gets throw into a new mission with basically zero time for briefing, and lets the enemy slip through their fingers due to over confidence? I mean even for Lucas a Jungle planet might be too much on the nose (and similar to Yavin) so an ice planet is kinda the opposite right?

1 minute ago, CaptainRocket said:

I dunno, Hoth felt like the most obvious Vietnam mirror from the OT... a trained army with modern weapons, that is expecting a stand up fight, arrives with a poor plan, suffers last minute chain of command disruption, gets throw into a new mission with basically zero time for briefing, and lets the enemy slip through their fingers due to over confidence? I mean even for Lucas a Jungle planet might be too much on the nose (and similar to Yavin) so an ice planet is kinda the opposite right?

I guess. I mean ultimately the empire won a tactical victory but failed to achieve any of its strategic goals.