Topic: juggernaut (Read 2136 times)

urkspleen · « **Reply #40 on:** January 04, 2009, 04:07 pm »

yeah, this is pretty much what i meant, except in a lot more detail.

KorribanKing014 · « **Reply #41 on:** January 05, 2009, 03:08 pm »

Quote from: Kerano32 on January 04, 2009, 10:30 am

Wait, I think i have an Explanation
...It also follows that AT-AT's should also have hardpoints (which has been suggested and *i think* approved)....

What would the hardpoints be. I can't think of any that you could put on an AT-AT

Argonnath · « **Reply #42 on:** January 05, 2009, 04:25 pm »

Legs, "head" , guns?

Solar · « **Reply #43 on:** January 05, 2009, 04:46 pm »

destroy any of those and the tank is ruined, hence why there is no hardpoints.

urkspleen · « **Reply #44 on:** January 05, 2009, 09:11 pm »

* All Terrain Armored Transport *

D · « **Reply #45 on:** January 06, 2009, 12:21 am »

Leg Hardpoint: Destroying one of these hardpoints doesnt mean destroying the entire AT-AT. It just cripples the AT AT and makes it slower (if this is possible, like the engine hardpoint). There would be 4 of these.

Turbolaser hardpoint: Self Xplanatory

Troop Bay Hardpoint: destroying this prevents the use of the stormtrooper ability.

urkspleen · « **Reply #46 on:** January 06, 2009, 01:17 am »

i don't know about the hardpoints on the ATAT....

for hardpointed vehicles, all of them must be destroyed until the whole thing is destroyed. Would this mess up the tow cable attack?

D · « **Reply #47 on:** January 06, 2009, 09:51 am »

No.

I remember the mods telling us that land units already have hardpoints, it just that you cant see them, or something like that.

So, if that is true, then the rebel tow cable attack should not be affected.

KorribanKing014 · « **Reply #48 on:** January 09, 2009, 12:55 am »

Almost every componet in an AT-AT is vital. Take out one and the thing is a gonner. Thus it makes the Walker to easy to eliminate and would cause it to suck... badly, for the person using it and it would take all the fun away from the attack on it.

Solar · « **Reply #49 on:** January 09, 2009, 12:03 pm »

without a leg the walker would be ruined. without the weapons it would be pointless. We would need animations for it walking on all possible combinations of legs. What happens when we only have one leg? An AT-AT hopping would be a bad look.

KorribanKing014 · « **Reply #50 on:** January 09, 2009, 11:50 pm »

Not to mention retarded

.

urkspleen · « **Reply #51 on:** January 10, 2009, 12:11 am »

i don't know about that: they do a pretty good job in star wars robot chicken 2

just kidding....

KorribanKing014 · « **Reply #52 on:** January 10, 2009, 12:13 am »

I haven't gotten to see any of that. Is it good?

urkspleen · « **Reply #53 on:** January 10, 2009, 12:15 am »

yes, indeed it is. ROFLCOPTER good

KorribanKing014 · « **Reply #54 on:** January 10, 2009, 12:17 am »

I'll have to look those up on Youtube. Now let's get back on topic.

Mr. Recluse, the Beta Tester(Greiv55) · « **Reply #55 on:** January 10, 2009, 02:52 am »

I definately agree with the Idea of the HAVw A6 Juggernaut being in and also with hardpoints as they were similar in firepower(no turbolasers yet in their place rocket/grenade launchers) and size.

So I'd say give the HAVw's hardpoints seeing as they are close to Garm's strength.(Yet without shields)

KorribanKing014 · « **Reply #56 on:** January 10, 2009, 03:15 pm »

I like the idea. But that is because I originally came up with it. Not the topic but the hardpoints part

.

D · « **Reply #57 on:** January 11, 2009, 01:17 pm »

why is it so infeasible for everyone to consider that when the hardpoint of an AT-AT leg is destroyed, in reality it is just damage to each leg, but not so that it is unusable. IT is just damaged so it cannot function at 100 percent.

let me give a situation that is kind of similar: Star ship engines. Technically if you destroy the engines the ship should not be able to move the way it does currently. It should stop dead. Secondary engines arent really an explanation, because they would also be destroyed (or at least have a hardpoint so they could be destroyed). The NET effect is to slow the ship down.

Damaging one of the ATAT legs (by destroying that hardpoint) would just slow the AT-AT down. No need for new animations. Its simple.

Solar · « **Reply #58 on:** January 11, 2009, 03:06 pm »

ok, what would this damaged leg look like? if it is brocken but stuck then the whole movement sequence is out of order and the tank will be stuck anyway.

urkspleen · « **Reply #59 on:** January 11, 2009, 03:22 pm »

Quote from: Kerano32 on January 11, 2009, 01:17 pm

let me give a situation that is kind of similar: Star ship engines. Technically if you destroy the engines the ship should not be able to move the way it does currently. It should stop dead. Secondary engines aren't really an explanation, because they would also be destroyed (or at least have a hardpoint so they could be destroyed). The NET effect is to slow the ship down.

Well, it wouldn't stop dead. Anything moving in space won't stop moving until something stops it. Newton's laws. Any object at motion or at rest will stay as such until acted upon by an outside force. From that point, the ship can rely on thrusters to turn and maneuver, but not accelerate to any great affect.

However, an ATAT without a leg can't move. In fact, it's questionable whether or not it could stay standing up.

Ultimate Empire at War

News:

Author Topic: juggernaut (Read 2136 times)