150 years of AT-AT (all variants) Canon & Legends COMPLETE Breakdown 

U mean it would be doggy paddling?

Yea the problem with the at-at wasn’t it’s design but how it was used

Rebels at at fav design due rear gun and larger then original then At act and normal then m6

It has uses, but realistically you should just use a cargo starfighter, the cargo is just so slow that you'll need a lot of big ecostly peices of machinery that have to make its way in and out the biggest advantages of to the cargo would be to support a base that HAS to keep it's shield up

@@calebbarnhouse496 guess that would depend on the status of enemy Star fighters and bombers and wether or not you would have natural concealment from the canopy.

@@calebbarnhouse496 Consider potential hostile AA capabilities, IRL equivalent to not using cargo helicopters due to MANPADS like Stinger or Igla. Heat-Seeking Ground to Air Missiles seem to exist in star wars relatively commonly, so having an all-terrain armored cargo vehicle can definitely has its use. Again to reference real life here, the US military utilizes a Swedish vehicle known as the Bandvagn 206, or in US military service M973. It is an all-terrain, multi articulated (weirdly similar to the AT-AT) tracked vehicle that they use to resupply outposts and FOB's that are inordinately difficult to reach or may be in rough terrain that can be at risk to hostile actions.

@@damascus1111 firstly, that this isn't close to the scale of an ATAT, and it's not trudging along at ATAT speeds, the reason cargo ATATs don't work is that if you want to ship material on a starwars planet you are also going to need to ship cargo into space at some point, and to do that having the same method to ship both works best, and isn't nearly as expensive as an ATAT, the reason we don't have a lot of air freight is purely because our tech dosen't allow it

I feel that the new republic would probably go for something like the AT-TE or Republic Repulsor tank from TCW, only because the AT-AT was designed to strike fear first and function well second. And because the NR wouldn’t want or need to make enemies fear them, they’d go for something that functions well over its appearance.

Also the prototype version used in Rebels. Those were noticeably smaller, had weaker chins guns on ball turrets and a rear turret.

tbf a lot of the first generation empire vehicles were already in development even during the later half of the clone wars, they even used a prototype of the AT-AT during a battle in the clone wars (I forgot what comic it comes from but its there)

​@@Cody_L._Brockwas also in fallen order on kashyyk

Same, i wish it came back

Same

Yeah its definitely a last ditch effort. Not only was it an extremely dangerous menuver, but cost the lives of numerous pilots. Especially if the ATATs had its proper escort fleet, the Rebels wouldn't have even touched them. In most assualts ATATs would serve as the fist, taking the brunt of enemy fire while serving as a powerful long range artillery. Smaller walkers, ground vehicles, and repulsor vehicles would serve on the flanks, preventing enemies from circling around and exploiting the ATATs weak neck or underbelly. These escorts would include smaller walkers like the ATST, ATAR, ATRCT, and later imperial models of the ATST like its assualt varient. Ground vehicles would include possibly the tracked CAVw PX10, A5 or B5 HAVw juggernauts, or hovercrafts like the swift assault 5. Repulsor vehicles could include tanks like the S1 Firehawke or 1H, which were not only fast (faster than Saber tanks), but packed armor and a great gun. This gun was powerful enough to take out contemporary tanks, accurate enough to shoot down low flying airspeeders, and had a range of 5km. Other repulsor vehicles include LAV chariots, RTTs, ULAVs, and the awesome A9 Floating Fortress. Vehicles like the A9 and LAV boasted incredible sensor and communications systems. Speederbikes the the 74Z or repulsor scouts/skiffs would serve as scouts and reconnaissance. Dismounted infantry would of course be used in urban or forrest environments, the bane of the ATAT. The empire was a fan of combined assault. Obviously they wouldn't use all thse vehicles in a single engagement, as that was dependent on the resources available to the naval fleet above. But contrary to popular belief, the empire didn't use the ATAT solely, especially as a one size fits all "tank".

@@undraftedboomer5055 Precisely. The worst time is whenever people compare it to the ATTE to demonstrate how weak the ATAT is even though A. They don't fulfil the same role and B. The ATTE is arguably far worse thanks to its exposed gunner and lack of protection for its pilot. Its armour is described as being heavy but this does nothing to protect the crew from anything but glancing shots, it has clear weak points which can be exploited by conventional means unlike the ATAT. The Rebel Alliance modifies the walker to fix these issues in canon, but since these aren't official changes unlike with the ATAT, all it shows is that the walker never improved.

@tk-6967 yeah I hear you. Don't get me wrong, the ATTE is iconic and has that cool factor. But if you take a deeper dive and take off the clone-fanboy goggles, it becomes very apparent how mediocre the walker is. And I'm not claiming that the ATAT is perfect. The neck is pretty blatant, and the underside is relatively vulnerable. But if the ATAT is used like how it was designed to be used, these issues are practically thrown out of the picture. The neck may still be vulnerable to closer range artillery, but for them to get more than a few shots off would be rare (ambush scenario). The argument that the ATAT is incredibly unstable is also kinda BS. Yes, it's not a squat beetle like the ATTE. But it's stands stable enough through heavy enemy artillery barrages and possible minefields. And the ATAT, with its advanced topographical sensors, as well as those found in the head, should forsee most traps, ditches, or tripping cables. Really this unstability is reference to mountainous terrain with sharp slopes and valleys. Here, the ATAT will struggle, unlike the ATTE. The ATAT is a durable long range assualt platform, aided by its height, armor, and long range weaponry. Plus, it has a decent transport capability (light walkers and/or infantry). It is designed to be complamented by other smaller vehicles. The ATTE on the other hand is a kinda confused walker. It's designed to fulfill so many things that it just ends up average at best. It's great when used defensively, or as a light assualt IFV/APC. But that's about it. And it's not like it can stiff arm the enemy, as it's design and armament are inherently mid to close range. Therefore, giving the CIS a better opportunity at exploiting the ATTE's weakspots. The cockpit is susceptible to even dwarf spider droids, and if knocked out, the walker is immobilized with 2 crew dead. The mid section is a glorified ATAT neck. The bottom is thinly armored, susceptible to mines or accurate munitions (wouldn't be a problem as most munitions in SW are short range, but the ATTE is a mid to short range walker) The mass driver is powerful, knocking out most CIS armor, but it only has a range of 2km. And the gunner is VERY susceptible to enemy sharpshooters or even nearby concussive blasts. Lastly, while the 6 laser cannons are great against infantry, they only cover frontal and real arcs, leaving the sides exposed. Again, this wouldn't be a problem if the ATTE was a longer range assualt piece. Where the flanks could more easily be guarded by GAR support vehicles. In the end, while still obviously escorted by Sabers, ATAPs, and other GAR vehicles, the ATTE is still a liability. No matter which way this thing is facing, it's showing off a weakspot. And while the clones inside are safe from enemy small arms or light artillery, the arrival of any CIS tank or any dedicated anti-armor equipment greatly jeopardizes this things survival. And yes, again it's got the mass driver, which could reliably take the first shot (Especially defensively). This is because of GAR recon and the awareness of the gunner and spotter. But at what cost? If the CIS shows up in more than 1 or 2 AATs, Hailfires, HAGms, OG9s, MTTs, Snail tanks, any number of droid repulsor/walkers, or even a the cheap droid Saber-ripoff repulsor tank, the ATTE is at serious risk.

@@undraftedboomer5055 Damn, and I thought I knew the lore. Good to see someone else who knows Expanded Universe stuff though. I've got to take notes of these facts so that I can use them against clone fanboys!

@tk-6967 it's definitely a hobby lol. I admit, I am a Empire lore guy myself. I love seeing how my Empire stacks against the other factions regarding ships, vehicles, and equipment. Maybe I get a little biased now and then lol And Hell yeah, glad to arm the populous against the ignorant, Generation-Tech watching clone fan boys haha. They're always claiming the ATTE or the Venator is goated when they are some of worst shit they have, especially compared to other ships or vehicles of the Republic. Nice chat, always looking for a reason to monolog about lore lol

AT-TE’s are better

​@@Captainrexoutrankseverythingthe ATTE is such a mediocre walker. Its frankly terrible design severely limits what it can do. The ATAT is better.

@@undraftedboomer5055 in rebels there was three AT-AT’s vs 1 AT-TE, guess who won? The AT-TE!!! And it was a old one

@Captainrexoutrankseverything bruh your source is Rebels? How bout realistically thinking about it, instead of citing a biased cartoon show, where one blind guy, a few pilots, and Mr Sato die compared to tens of thousands of bad guys. Very realistic. Besides, I don't think jedi regularly manned the mass driver, and ramming enemy vehicles as a serious tactic is goofy.

@@undraftedboomer5055 after the battle of Endor, at the battle of kuat the empire still used AT-TE’s

Never heard anyone call it that before lmao, so strange

What types of fanon AT-AT are there?

We will never have those things because they get very fast destroyed lol

Thing is pretty much everything good they did in the sequels lore wise was just rips of legends with a slightly different coat of paint. Did it look really sweet? Yes. and when I say it was rips I mean often it was barely changed at all.

I dunno the M6 looks so stupid to me. I mean the AT-AT has something frightening to me, a big towering war machine destroying everything in it's path. The M6 looks like a beefed up Gorilla to me, trying to be the cool kid in class

@dr.grizzly2215 I don't know, I think the M6 is clearly from the same family of walkers and shows a clear addressing of the ATAT's prior problems, unlike its Legends counterpart the ATAHT it at least looks like it is related to the AT line of walkers

@spartanonxy Not really. The ATM6 is a very different walker than the ATAHT, even though it is the Canon equivalent for it. The main EU idea I know was taken from the EU was the Dark Empire stuff, but from what I remember, GL said it was not true anyways.

@@tk-6967 Ok in reverse how would George know if they took from legends at that point since he was not really involved anymore. And then other then dropping the troop role the ATM6 is just "bigger gun more armor" just like the ATAHT. This might just be my distaste for the AT-AT in general since it is from a logical perspective and even a Tarkin doctrine perspective bloody stupid.

How small are you assuming a local garrison to be?

@@Commander23c Still doesn't make sense. Except for the overall layout there is basically nothing still like the original AT-AT

Agreed. It looks cool and is extremely iconic. But when you look at it from a realistic point of view it becomes clear that standing very tall and exposed isn't very great when you're beeing shot at and your underside isn't that well armoured. Additionally the exposed neck just screams: " Hit me with some precision guided munitions!" I wouldn't be surprised if you could modify a Javelin missile to hit that and take out the walker.