25 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.

          • Steve Bannon

            Yeah, Scarif being an assignment for the lazy, well-connected, or about to retire makes a lot of sense, and is frankly the only justification for a lot of the stuff that happens in Rogue One. My headcanon for the horrible performance of the two ISDs defending the orbital shield-gate is that 70% of the crews are planetside when Raddus shows up, and the 30% unlucky enough to be on duty that shift are hung over, with corresponding lack of competence.
            Regarding the ion torpedo strike on a localized shield failure, it seems that after a couple of rewatchings, the ion torpedoes impacted all over the dorsal hull, superstructure, and bridge tower rather than being a pinpoint strike on any individual panel. Perhaps the shields suffered total failure under capital ship bombardment, or were never fully raised due to on-leave/hung-over/plain-stupid shield systems crew.

          • Thanks for the reply but I still don’t really believe that the power failure on the ISD was localized. I can clearly recall one of the crew member saying to it’s superior that they suffer total engine failure (and we even see the thrusters of the ship going dark). The only way it could happen with an impact in the dorsal superstructure is if the whole thing is fried. I see what you mean by redundancy (after all everyone in the bridge tower is still stuck to the ground) but I still don’t understand why the other, intact, ship is instantly cut in two (those babies are suppose to be able to take way more than that).
            And for the AT-ACT, a repulsorlift transport vehicle would have make a lot more sense (close to the ground, so easy to access, better speed, ability to travel on liquid surface which would be perfect for Scariff… ).
            The principal advantages of a giant walker are fear factor, long range bombardments, limiting the effectiveness of landmine, and the ability to travel through enemy shield. Literally none of those matter in that case.

          • Fractalsponge

            I don’t like the ISD performance any more than you do. It’s possible both ships were basically disabled towards the end of the battle. Note that the second ship isn’t really firing, which wouldn’t make any sense otherwise. Still, I thought the whole Hammerhead sequence was stupid. Just make one of the ISDs explode and badly damage the shield gate!

            I’m not saying an AVRE walker makes sense at Scarif. I mean in the context of how walkers are used (shield assaults) – such a vehicle makes sense. The Scarif garrison may have just repurposed their allotment to cargo work, given that they won’t ever do shield assaults. Otherwise, yes, repulsorlifts all the way.

          • Yeah, I was excited over the perspective of finally seeing an ISD exploit it’s devastating capabilities to their full extent. When I first saw the gigantic explosion(of Jehda but we didn’t know that at the time) on one of the trailer, I thought to myself that, maybe, we were about to see a BDZ on screen for the first time, and my heart instantly jumped to 500 pulsations a minute.
            The scene of the explosion was awesome, but not death star-level awesome.
            But, well, what is done is done.
            Thanks for the reply, and I realize I have not spoken a single word about the piece of art above and that need to change. Right now!
            Excellent work as usual, I am glad to see some new mandalorian design.
            Keep it up and may the force be with you.

          • Steve Bannon

            Xegang, you could argue the Devastator’s hyperspace assault on Raddus was an ISD at full potential.
            It broke the spine of a Nebulon-B, disabled an MC-75, and took out several corvettes in what was more or less a single continuous volley.
            Fractal, in the old legends EU there existed repulsorlift jamming systems that could affect at least several dozen square kilometers, rendering something like a hovertank immobile. It’s not inconceivable that well-stocked Imperial bases may have deployed such systems, making walkers or tanks necessary.
            Any decently sized armored formation (regiment equivalent or above?) is going to have AVRE vehicles attached, and if such a formation was assigned to Scarif, the presence of AVRE vehicles press-ganged to serve as transports doesn’t take a lot of suspension of disbelief to accept.

          • steve, after rewatching the scene, I must admit that the devastator performance was a lot better than I remembered it. It’s a shame, the devastator being a just standard star destroyer, the two other could probably have reduced the rebel fleet to a sub-atomic dust cloud in a heartbeat if not for the absence of half of their crewmembers and (probably) any decent officer onboard.
            For the anti-repulsorlift system, I am a little skeptical. I don’t really see the interest of deploying that kind of device in a “safe” base, and if there was one at Scariff, wouldn’t it affect every flying object, like shuttle and tie striker, who both use repulsorlifts to take off?
            For the AT-ACT, thanks for the clarifications. I broke my brain in half trying to rationalize it after seeing the movie.

  4. juste merci pour cette créativité

Leave a Reply