19 Responses

  1. Awesome. How many troops does this carry? Also where is this from?

  2. AdmiralStrang

    Tra’kad?

  3. Between the gold trim, firepower & nifty rotating-thruster limbs, this one pretty much nails that Mando feel. Happen to recall its dimensions?

    • Fractalsponge

      Something like ~40m. I’ll have to check for sure. Definitely on the bigger end of dropship.

      • Ah, so that top turret’s in the LTL range. Overall a snazzy blend of nimble & nasty.

        • Fractalsponge

          It uses heavy laser barrels. The mount could take LTL if it had to, but I figured I shouldn’t go overboard 🙂

          • gorkmalork

            Correction appreciated. Suppose ion cannons drawing similar juice might be handy against tensor-field-dependent targets (as R1 demonstrated with that U-wing doorgunner & a cargo walker).

          • Steve Bannon

            Holy crap that R1 scene now makes sense to me. Wow. I guess that AT-ACT deficiency must have been noted and fixed by Hoth though.

          • gorkmalork

            @Steve
            Just cracked open DK’s Visual Guide for R1, and apparently the AT-AT came first; -ACTs, for their part, were scaled-up enough to compromise knee integrity (roughly 31.8 meters to an AT-AT’s 22.5), hence the tensor workaround. I’d have gone with cargo-specialized Juggernaut flavors, but Imperial procurement evidently has one helluva mecha lobby.

          • Steve Bannon

            I see the AT-ACT as more of a combat engineering vehicle than a bulk transport. That big hull cavity could be really modular and fit in all sorts of dedicated engineering equipment to support an armored advance, with the best real world analogy being an AVRE tank. Mine clearance, deployable bridges, recovering and repairing damaged and knocked out walkers, that sort of thing.

          • Fractalsponge

            I like this concept for the ACT. I also did not know that the ACT was bigger than an AT. Makes the R1 scene make much more sense.

          • gorkmalork

            @Steve
            Neat analogy, though most of its support equipment might be scaled for repulsorcraft & light (e.g. AT-ST ballpark) walkers as opposed to vehicles in the -ACT’s size range. I suppose you *could* pack on most field-replaceable AT-AT parts short of full leg assemblies, but cargo Juggies strike me as potentially more efficient in that regard. One wacky thought: packing an -ACT with Hailfire droid-style missile pods & a datalink system allowing friendly vehicles/troops to target-designate before the walker hits line-of-sight range.

          • Steve Bannon

            Well now we’ve got to see how Fractal can put together an Imperial MRLS system on a walker or repulsortank chassis. Prior to Episode II, I always thought surface to surface missiles weren’t really used in star wars due to mass proliferation of cheap laser point defense, but apparently not given how both sides in the Clone Wars love guided rockets.

          • gorkmalork

            @Fractal
            Yep, that particular stat had me raising an eyebrow too-so far as I can tell an ACT’s roof would just about scrape your AT-SP’s underside. Suppose it also retcon-explains what some of those defensive turrets on Hoth were trying to do-exploit an Achilles heel demonstrated by the frontline walkers’ bigger, thinner-shielded(?) sibling. Didn’t work out so hot, but it still beats getting vaporized from orbit.

            @Steve
            Reliable missile defense (whether speed, EW, shielding, direct fire, or combinations thereof) might be more economic for starships; TFA did show us TIE-scale turrets capable of picking off point-defense rounds. Dirtside engagements could be more conducive to a sensor/jammer/vehicle shielding arms race due to vastly shorter distances & terrain masking. ‘Course, all that’s assuming one or most sides involved aren’t operating at ‘bounty hunter with a couple thermal detonators’ level.

          • Am I the only one who see a gigantic discrepancy in the structural integrity field explication for the destruction of the walker in R1.
            I mean I would accept it if we hadn’t seen in the exact same movie an ISD
            being completely shut down by a volley of ion torpedo and then suffering pretty
            much no deformation after being hit by a corvette and another ISD who, HIM,
            has still (supposedly) intact SIF and shielding
            Hell,if ion weapon could disabled SIF, simply pushing the ship around would have torn it apart or the hammerhead would have gone right through it’s hull!
            And I must add to this that using an scale up version of the at-at as a material transport is probably the worst use of walker I have ever seen.

          • Fractalsponge

            An ISD probably has redundancies and the ion torpedoes were aiming for a shield gap so had more localized effects, while the walker getting hit completely fries anything within the leg? Plus an ISD can use much stronger (heavier) materials than a ground vehicle?

            I think, while all mecha are sorta dumb, an AVRE walker actually does make sense. As a material transport it’s totally insane, but that might just be a “make do” sort of attitude for otherwise useless engineering assets for a base that doesn’t seem particularly active or stressed for efficiency.

  4. juste merci pour cette créativité

Leave a Reply