Did an AT-AT card with -Attack 2

- Agility 0

- Hull 9

- Shields 0

- Actions Focus, Target Lock

- Pilot Maximilion Veers

- Pilot Skill 6

- Points 21

- Maneuver Forward 1 (Green), L/R Bank 1 (White), Stationary

- Ability, When stationary roll 1 additional attack die.

Feel free to pic it to peices.

If I knew how to post pics I wouid show it.

Well here it is, remember its just for fun. You may think the AT-AT moving one is too slow but the logic was it would be on a longer base so measuring from front to back on a maneuver template still gives it some distance.

As for upgrades???????

Remember Hoth? He needs way more shields than that, that chassis is almost impenatrable…

Rowdy said:

Not bad. The speed is spot on. I would not give them the capability of turning, though (hence the 0 Agility). I would put Gen. Veers' cost up there with Darth Vader; not standard pilot.

SteveSpikes said:

That was my logic with regards to agility vs turning. Also I'd envisage scenarios where Ties provide escort to these as they lumber forward to destroy a ground target that only their weapons can defeat. Rebel fighters obviously aiming to stop this. AT-ATs can lose a turn of moving closer to the target if they wish to gain an additional attack die.

As for Gen Veers points, there was no thought to this as I have no idea how to grade the various pilots.

Either way if FFG never release the walker I'll probably pic a few up from other suppliers and go with this scenario and a few more of these cards.

Thanks for helping.

P,S, I don't know if AT-ATs had sheilds so hence a hull of 9

Very well done!

If we get Turbo Laser turrets for the Death Star, why not other ground units? They'd be scenario-based but it would still be pretty cool. I have some MicroMachine AT-ATs that could be used for such scenarios.

Olethros said:

almost impenatrable to speeders , however

With Ties aiming to shoot down rebel fighters I would expect the rebel player is in the position of

A. do I clear the Ties and conentrate on the potentially close range AT-ATs with my squadron.

or

B. Concentrate on the AT-ATs and hope the Ties roll poorly in attack in order to have any ships remaining.

So playtesting will focus on finding balance depending on the number of fighters, AT-ATs, distance to close to target (which would require a target lock) etc.

If I do the maths and assume the AT-AT fits on the Falcons base size and on a 4' table the AT-AT should be in firing range in 5 moves (assuming it is never staionary). It has an escort of 3 Ties against 2 X-wing and 1Y-Wing. (I'd assume due to the inclusion of the walker that the Ties will be low pilot skills and the Rebels a higher quality with a few upgrades). With a hull 9, its survivability will depend on point A and B above. Also I would expect the Target will have some sheilds, these my be reduced by the Ties (no target lock) however the final blow must come from the walker.

Rowdy said:

Dude that is Awesome! I've been thinking up AT-AT vs snow speeder scenarios for awhile. The creation of this card greatly helps. I think you have the specs dead on. But personally I think it should have a point value of around 40-50. May I ask what software or how you came by designing this card? Because its pretty rad!

Thanks Mate

This is the link I used however it is limited, can only select points up to 30, no ship icons and it doesn't cover every upgrade available.

http://home.comcast.net/~jason.fuller/cardGenerator.html

looks cool, but I imagine for that much hull it would be a little more costly.

Again the card generator only allows up to 30 points. Idealy I'd like a point value of 40-50 points

In game terms, I think the speed is too fast.
Yes I concider the 1 forward being too fast if compared to ships. I'd give it ½ a movement forward concidering it's top speed was 60km/h.
Also concidering the fact that if you'd like to circle that thing 3times when trying to use the towcable, it would move too fast.

If I remember correctly, an AT-AT has to stop in order to turn an then it rotates on spot to a new heading before moving forward again. So it should have a move dial of ½ forward, S left, S, S right ("S" being stationary).

"When making a Stationary turn, rotate the model up to 90degrees" Would this make sense?

But othervise I like the stats.

Rowdy said:

Just some ideas

• Stationary Ability: When stationary roll 1 additional attack die and increase agility to 1 ( Reason: In the move one of the At-At's stops, leans right, pivots its head left and nails a snow speeder coming in on its flank.If thats not agility I don't no what is )
• Escorts: Any At-At starting its movement within range 1 of a Tie Figther with escort incresases its movement by 1. ( In the Millenium Falcon package there is a new scenero which required TIE fighters escort containers in space. When the containers move any TIE fighter which has been designated as a escort increases the movement of the container if it is within range 1 of each other. You could do the same thing here giving the At-At's a little faster advance. Speed 1 would be speed 2 if escorting TIE is within range 1 or consider At-At;s are always staionary and can only move when any escorting TIE is within range 1 )
• Heavy Armor: At-At's only take damage from critical hits, take the damage card face down so don't suffer the effect. ( As in the move these beast were barly affected by the snowspeeder and rebel laser turrets )
• Sheild Generator ( Can only be affected by the heavy turbo lasers of the walkers )

• - Attack 0
• - Agility 0
• - Hull 2
• - Shields 6

BigDogg said:

Much appreciated.

Stationary ability- Reasoning was Millenium Falcon has agility 1, and I thought there was now way a walker was as agile as the falcon.

Escorts- I like this a lot and will explore it more, mainly when I have access to the new upgrade cards.

Heavy Armour- I see what you mean and while impervious to speeders I have no idea how they deal with X-Wings, protons etc as I expect that perhaps they will over time cause damage to the hull. Looking through the damage deck I noticed only 3 cards are useless as a result for the AT-AT, Structural Damage, Minor Hull Breach and Damaged Engine. Mainly because they deal with turns the AT-AT can'r preform anyway. I did toy with the idea of only crits being effective but I had to appreciate that it will take much longer to bring the walker down and therefore tip the balance that the game needs.

As yet I have not devised a way an AT-AT can recieve a stress marker. (still working on it) Since they have no red maneuver.

Shield Generators- As I said Ties can take down its shields without a Target Lock (since they don't have that luxury) however only the walker can affect its hull value (with Target Lock) so I'm happy with the target hull only being affected by the heavy lasers.

Attack 0- Not sure why you wouldn't want the walker to fire its lasers

Agility 0- I agree

Sheilds 6- I can't find any reference of the AT-AT being fitted with sheilds. If I'm wrong glad to be set straight

Hull 2 - In order to replicate its armour without sheilds 9 seemed appropriate. Even if it had sheilds with your stats its still 8 hits till it comes down so we're not that much different.

Again I really appreciate your input, Thanks

Here is my standard commanders card, again no point value as the generator only lets me set it to 30. Idealy 45.

Very cool! I will have to give this a whirl with my Hallmark ornament AT ATs. BTW, I think the stats BigDogg gave (0,0,6,2) were for the shield generator target, not the AT AT.

Zoso said:

that's correct

gallob toys use to make a series of star wars toys called fleet action and i do believe the at-at from that series would be spot on scale wise - you can still pick these up on ebay at a reasonable price

Iceplague said:

I had considered this and based on a model height of 7.4cm and a footprint of 5.5cm x 2cm it will fit on the 8x8cm large base with enough room for the stats info. A thought was to measure its movement by its base meaning the back of the base moves to where the fwd edge was as a green move. I like your turning idea as up to 90 degrees as a white move and maybe any rearward movement (probalby only to bring someone into your firing arc) as a red move and therefore we have an opportunity for stress.

Don't even know if they could walk backwards.

Either way I'm having a ball with this and that's what it's about.

Zoso said:

Your right, my bad BigDogg.

Rowdy said:

Thanks for the link! This will be very useful!

The AT-AT is based on an 80mm x 80mm base and can move:

Forward 1 (Green)

L/R Bank 1 (White) two consecutive white moves equals a stress token (red move) and

Stationary

Attack-2

Agitlity-0 (The Falcon has an agility of 1 and there is now way the walker is as agile).

Hull-9 (This was play tested to determine a balanced and idealistic level of protection)

Shields-0

Veers has the option of remaining stationary in order to roll an additional attack die. This is can be a useful option however you are slowing your advance to the target.

Ties and the walker can deplete the target shields however the hull value can only be affected by the AT-ATs heavy lasers with a Target Lock.

'Right of way' The AT-AT does not take a damage card when an overlap occurs.

AT-ATs hull is only damaged from crits and each crit is a face down damage card. Due to its heavy protection normal hits are ignored. This may sound extreme however with the walker having no agility you will find the hull will eventually be breached, depending on the effectiveness of the Tie escorts and accuracy of the Rebels.

The scenario ground target should be

Attack-0

Agility-0

Hull-3

Shields- 5

We playtested this scenario a few times on a 3'x4' board with 100 points a side with no upgrades.

Rebels- Luke Skywalker, Biggs Darklighter, Red Squadron Pilot and Rookie Pilot. (97)

Empire- AT-AT, 2x Black Squadron Pilot, 2x Academy Pilot (100)

Without going too far into gameplay, we found that the walker could not get into range until turn 7. This gave the Rebels time to hit the AT-AT hard or ping any Ties close by. The Ties, with the support of the walker had to fight hard and roll well, occassionally spearing off to ping some of the targets shields. We used different approaches, The Rebel player first opted to concentrate on the walker to deplete its hull vale, this proved costly as two X-wings went down from the Ties. Another approach was to hit the Tie escorts and concentrate all remaining attacks on the walker, this proved a little more successfull with 3 Ties shot down although the AT-AT was within range 2 and stationary (+1 attack) engaging the target. With 2 hull remaining on the target, a concentrated volly from 3 X-Wings bought the beast down (although we did see some miricle Crit rolling).

The Imperial player tried two options, first 3 Ties shot forward to deplete the targets shields (didn't go well). That left one Tie trying to escort the Walker which as you may guess ended badly too. That being said the walker was in range and the target was down to 1 Hull when the AT-AT came down. The other tactic was to provide close escort, concentrating on keeping the X-Wings busy, this worked well and in this game due to some good rolling and placement the target was destroyed. (Unfortunatly Biggs chose poorly with his maneuver overlaping the walker and rolled his last damage)

Many of the adjustments we're made by people on the forum and the games were very enjoyable, so thanks for your input.

I am loving this thread! Great work everybody, especially Rowdy.

I have two comments. You said Biggs overlapped with the AT-AT and took his last damage. Did he have that horrible critical effect that makes him take damage for overlap? Or are you considering the AT-AT more like an obstacle than a ship? I guess it makes sense because the idea behind taking no damage for fighter overlap is because both ships are avoiding eachother, so they can't attack each other. However, with such a slow vehcile, I see no reason that an X-wing that overlaps the AT-AT is simply denied it's attack, without rolling for damage. They can fly above the AT-AT, after all.

Second comment, I like the idea that Critical Hits are the only way to hurt the AT-AT because it suddenly makes Marksmanship a desirable card. And it seems in your playtesting that it resulted in good game balance.

That is awesome. NOW; could you make a card for the Starwing gunboat?

As it happens… I actually have one. In scale. Made by a GKer, it shakes out to about 1/265. That would quite fun as an unofficial addition to the game as an Imperial-era fighter type.

http://i820.photobucket.com/albums/zz127/imperator58/Starwing.jpg

Hopefully, that linkie works.

Oh bugger, now I am going to have to craete cards for a snow speeder :-)

Parakitor said:

Thanks

You are right and we did treat it as an obstacle. We have decided to change it. Initialy wanting the walker to be an obstacle however now treating it as the normal ship overlap. Much the same as Turbo lasers in the trench scenario which are not considered obstacles. Very hard to replicate three dimensional fly pasts both in space dogfighting or ground dogfights. As you said, one would fly over the walker, however we cannot place the ship on it to simulate this. Either way the walker is a 'ship' and stands by the rules. I guess what I was trying to recreate was the walker moving forward no matter what was in the way.

During our games we experimented with the option that if the AT-AT moves first it does so and any ship moving into it treats it as an overlap, however if the fighter moved first then the AT-AT occupies the same space then the fighter must move back or forward until it is touching (not overlaping) the walker.

We did not use any upgrades in order to keep the testing very clinical, upgrades will obviously bring many more variables into play.

Thoughts?