Why did the Republic have a Massive Preference for Vehicles with LEGS vs WHEELS

It's for style, duh
Join Geetsly's Clone Army Now & Get Access to Exclusive Perks! 💥
/ @geetslys
Check out some of the music we use in our videos!🎶
•bit.ly/RelaxJackYT
Join My Discord to Chat with Myself & the Community💻:
• / discord
Geetsly's Gaming Community🎮:
• / discord
#geetsly #starwars #clonewars
For business inquiries and to learn about our team check out our website🌐:
frontiermediaco.com
Chapters
0:00 Intro
0:47 Tanks VS Walkers
1:38 Disadvantages?
4:51 All Terrain
7:23 Terror Factor
9:38 Outro

[@void2240]

The Empire loves Walkers, I mean the Emperor's apprentice is literally named Skywalker not Skyroller.

[@kosherkoala1013]

how is this not more popular?

[@hekkrjs2698]

Good one! Not going to lie 😂

[@HardGayMoose]

oof, i'm reporting this

[@johnadler6987]

Lmao.

[@5idi]

Awesome 🤣

[@hunterkiller1440]

I guess stomping on the enemy is more satisfying than rolling over them.

[@Asraeks]

not really, when you roll over someone with a tank their body is crushed piece by piece, with very satisfying head pop like a crushed grape at the end. Meanwhile stomping someone with walker is instant death you dont even see.

[@phurian_6560]

@@Asraeks this comment was very disturbing

[@robertpatience5141]

Thinking back to Empire at War: Eh both are good.

[@CollinMcLean]

@@Asraeks I'm pretty sure getting crushed by either is instant death. Whether you're getting rolled over or stepped on, at that size you're just a fleshy gogurt tube.

[@geetslys]

Bro 😂

[@NinjatoBlade]

The fear factor makes a lot of sense for the empire, but it’s kind of silly to bring up for the republic. As 95% of their conflicts involved fighting droids, having a tactic of psychological warfare seems silly

[@jellydoughnut8620]

Yeah, but the GAR wasn’t designed to fight droids, it was designed to fight an unknown powerful threat to the galaxy

[@silverfoxdelta290]

​@@jellydoughnut8620 no, the GAR was designed to be a pawn in palpatines plan

[@andrewmeyer3599]

@@jellydoughnut8620 Many actually believe that the Clones were only made and trained TO fight Droids and pretty much struggle with anything else and that is kinda true in the struggling part

[@MrChewie1138]

@@andrewmeyer3599 they annihilated many organic military forces, including Geonosians, Umbarans and Death Watch Mandalorians, and suppressed early rebellions against the Empire.

[@andrewmeyer3599]

@@MrChewie1138 Geonosis almost ended in disaster each time, Umbara was a very very long siege and in the Umbara arc we see that it was not at all easy for them, and with Death Watch they also had their own Mandalorians helping them out. Regardless, everytime we see the Clones up against organics it's a much much tougher fight for them

[@StraightOtohGunga]

The other thing about tall walkers like the ATAT is that they rendered dug in trenches utterly useless. The height gave the walkers a perfect angle of attack on such emplacements

[@darthmalgus9267]

Yes, tho the exact same thing can be seen as a disadvandage, as they are high up and thus an easy target.

[@StraightOtohGunga]

@@darthmalgus9267 an easy up armored target with a great field of view and heavy weaponry

[@darthmalgus9267]

@@StraightOtohGunga yes

[@UGNAvalon]

Stormtrooper Academy graduate hits the broad side of an AT-AT: “Nice! Too bad that armor’s too strong for blasters…”

[@ssrbgangimaribotan6thofthe12]

@@StraightOtohGunga but don't forget the cost and logistic disadvantage tho, changing those legs must be a pain in the ass and field change might as well be impossible. manufacturing disadvantage too, as more speeder tanks might be more cost efficient than AT-AT with the same number of resources and money can produce way more speeder tanks. it cost more money, resources and manpower to produce and maintain so i don't think its a good military vehicle, meanwhile AT-TE is pretty ok overall and that magnetic feets are like the best and useful feature that can make unorthodox tactics available. AT-RT in the other hand is the best infantry support walkers in star wars universe, fast, small, cheap. just add a blaster shield/glass and it will be the perfect infantry support vehicle. meanwhile there is the AT-ST which is like a mixed breed between AT-RT and AT-AT and its kinda half-baked in my opinion, pretty fast but not as fast and maneuverable as AT-RT, small but still pretty big, armored but not as durable as AT-AT, and they are also not as powerful as AT-AT in terms of firepower. role of AT-St is still a confusing thing for me as speeder is much faster smaller and better at recon and AT-AT is much better at infantry support.

[@lerneanlion]

The Stormtroopers are not the only group in Star Wars ruined by powers of the plot armor. The walkers too have suffered the same fate when facing the protagonists.

[@derrickstorm6976]

Yea, the list also includes probably every single main character. What's your point? xD

[@lerneanlion]

@@derrickstorm6976 To start adding the walkers so that the Stormtroopers will not be alone in this whole "being ruiend by the plot armor" anymore. XD

[@TheRyujinLP]

Yeah, Stromtroopers went from elite trained soldiers with actually good aim that could over run an hostile ship with the attackers having all the advantages with minimum casualties to jokes all because ppl forget that they were ordered to let the rebels go in a New Hope so were missing on purposes. Same thing happened to the TIE fighter. In a New Hope it could out run X-Wings and were pretty much a death sentence if they got in a close in furball to being portrayed as death traps the exploded like pop corn if you sneeze at them wrong (largely do to how they were shown in the battle at the end of Return of the Jedi do to limitations of having that many ships on screen at once in the early 80's while forgetting that the Rebel fighters were also going down in droves).

[@angryh9392]

I just had a thought. It would be cool to see a show of the empire just annihilating various rebel cells.

[@ElysianEverlasting]

@@angryh9392 I'd like to see a dark show of the reign of the Empire from their perspective.

[@inquisitorichijou883]

Not only did the people of Dantooine give offerings to imperial walkers, they also had images of the tattooed on their bodies.

[@JeanLucCaptain]

ALL HAIL THE GOD ENGINES!!!

[@RenegadeGR721]

ALL HAIL THE OMNISSIAH!!!

[@geetslys]

Big walker = Religion

[@ventgoblin330]

FROM THE MOMENT I UNDERSTOOD THE WEAKNESS OF MY FLESH I CRAVED THE CERTAINTY AND STRENGTH OF STEEL. I ASPIRED TO THE PURITY OF THE BLESSED MACHINE. YOUR KIND CLING TO YOUR FLESH, AS IF IT WILL NOT DECAY AND FAIL YOU. ONE DAY, THE CRUDE BIOMASS THAT YOU CALL A TEMPLE WILL WITHER, AND YOU WILL BEG MY KIND TO SAVE YOU BUT I AM ALREADY SAVED. FOR THE MACHINE. IS. IMMORTAL

[@JeanLucCaptain]

@@geetslys you should do a video on the 40kifief eclipse class super star destroyer! There's a fanart of it.

[@TheWarmachine375]

6:09 Clone Trooper: "We're surrounded!" Captain Rex: "Good, we can fire in all directions!"

[@greytodoroki9479]

Geonosis noises intensifies

[@mikevasquez1103]

My issue with the AT-AT is its lack of side and rear firing arcs.

[@buck342443]

And the thing can't move, yes it has front line speed but if it has to turn you're pretty much screwed.

[@kylepessell1350]

What they lack in versatile offense they make up for in durability. Don't forget that an AT-AT is an All-Terrain Armored-Transport. Their main purpose is to safely deliver troops to a target destination (usually highly fortified) so the majority of the vehicle is just empty space and armor that protects that space. Additional weapons would take up more space and not necessarily help them perform their primary job.

[@mikevasquez1103]

@@kylepessell1350 Yeah, but a platform like that can easily be outfitted in a manner that affords a nearly 360ﾟ field of fire. Hell, the entire Rothana AT series is based on a modular layout.

[@hendrikgreiner8449]

I think thats also due a bit to imperial mentality. Since the Imperium envisioned itself to always be attacking and never have to deal with things like flanking maneuvers from the enemy, just forward facing firepower seemed to be enough. Since they probably would deploy enough troops to secure the flanks, so that additional armament wouldn't be needed. So the good ol' arrogant empire just planted forward facing weapons and was happy with the result.

[@mikevasquez1103]

@@hendrikgreiner8449 Yeah, but an unchecked forward advance makes flanking inevitable. When you break the line, you are now behind enemy lines. Besides, it is also pretty demoralizing for an enemy tobTHINK they have successfully executed a flanking maneuver to be blasted by someone who barely noticed them.

[@isaackim7675]

Rex, "How many legs do they got?" Gregor, "Four." Rex, "Four? Then, how come they have not fallen over?"

[@sheilaolfieway1885]

To be fair Rex and the clones are from a diffrent time with less advanced technology.... even though the AT-AT was actually created by the republic in the later parts of the clone wars.

[@goodmind4940]

did they miss Republic AT-ATs? :P

[@ericolsen5592]

@@goodmind4940 Everyone else seems to have

[@cr90captain89]

@@sheilaolfieway1885 what's impressive it that an AT-AT did not fall onto its head, AFTER they rammed it at full speed with their own walker

[@sheilaolfieway1885]

@@cr90captain89 probably had equal weight... but yeah the aT-te has 6 legs..

[@jellydoughnut8620]

I think another benefit of walkers, especially the taller ones of the empire would be the angle of attack, it’s just portable armed high ground

[@watch50er]

Definitely

[@StraightOtohGunga]

My point exactly, which is why the rebels flee from their trenchs on hoth

[@TheStoner420PotHead]

Obi-Wan approved

[@DrakeOola]

The armor is kind've pointless when all it takes is a single tiny explosive to blow up one of the feet and topple the entire thing tho... As for high ground, aircrafts are dead trivial to manufacture in that time period or even hovercrafts. Even kids have hoverbikes like we have bicycles today... Honestly makes no sense why they don't abuse the hell out of armored aircrafts, they're a lot speedier than walkers, a lot harder to hit, and don't have a glaring weakness like toothpick legs... You can also get the high ground anywhere and they're infinitely more portable like say if the enemy were perched atop a mountain fortress walkers no longer have the high ground and they have no way to even line up a shot...

[@watch50er]

@@DrakeOola - if I had to hazard a guess, I suspect the movies simply featured situations where star fighters in atmosphere were not suited more so than walkers with high powered blasters (more cost effective than explosives at scale)/ the available fighters were not suited at all for the mission, or doctrine has them going for the metal fist while considering the air dagger as a lesser third option. I also suspect that anti air defenses are disturbingly effective and usually ray shielded and bombing the target from orbit isn’t viable because the objective is to capture, not obliterate. By then, even tactical bombing is likely to be high casualty even if successful (last Jedi flashbacks) and I suspect training new quality pilots is harder than replacing infantry and armor drivers…. Starwars is kinda convenient like that - and while I don’t doubt it’s possible to enact “modern” style tactics to the mix, if it can be done, I suspect inevitably the cost would limit production and scale is a must when occupying a planet let alone swaths of the galaxy

[@chengzhou8711]

“ I saw a few benefits of the “walker” design. Their platforms had a variety of designs and sizes and can usually resist being knocked over because of how the weight is distributed and how it changes as it locomotes. Secondly, walkers were good in many terrains due to their mass or maneuverability. They also provide unmatched crew visibility, and they’re not fun to stand under, especially when they’re on the move. However, they are still likely to get bogged down in the mud, like most vehicles that have some kind of ground contact involvement or some kind of ground effect.” -CS/CT-8711-12 “Cheng”, former Captain and Scout of the 442nd Siege Battalion

[@wet_weather_imp]

Great to see another member of the 442nd Siege Battalion, Captain.

[@Chrisspru]

not as easy as conventional vehicles. a wheeled / treaded vehicle has to dig itself out of its footprint and can dig themself in. walkers can step out of their footprint as long as its not deeper than the leg can be raised and the suction allows for leg movement, you are fine. legs can also mind their step. loss of traction is an issue for any vehicle regardless of movement methode. legs are less good on pressure sensitive cave in prone ground. where the raw ground pressure instead of the footprint depth is the issue. on cover less open ground/ easy terrain, conventional vehicles are better.

[@chengzhou8711]

@@wet_weather_imp Cheers, kid

[@muninrob]

@@Chrisspru put 2 tons on a 1 foot diameter shaft, and you're punching through most soft rocks (I use a lighter weight and larger shaft to crush marble scraps into gravel). Put 2 tons on four 16 inch tires and you're able to drive in mud & sand. (My f300 bouncing over the beach) With Star Wars walkers, my biggest problem was the contact area Vs weight - the ice of Hoth and mud of Yavin have to be made of something harder than solid brass or the walkers would just drive the leg deeper down instead of driving the body upward. (The one with the extra legs & big gun might actually work - more feet give you more ground surface to support your weight)

[@Chrisspru]

@@muninrob physicaly plausible design is not star wars strong side in any case. real walkers in the multi ton region would need clown feet indeed

[@slicerneons3300]

They could have used the traditional Rubber Shortage reason. AT-XT from the Clone Wars game will always be the best walker.

[@Noah-zz8uw]

That thing was a complete beast! Locking on to enemy vehicles to hit them with vollies of laser cannon fire, followed up with a salvo of powerful mortar shots never got old, and never ceased to destroy everything in the way!

[@alejandroelluxray5298]

AT-TE is the superior vehicle to me, but the XT is also good

[@galaktiker4]

totally agree!

[@explosivesun8608]

4:22 " some Walkers could be quite maneuverable, take the AT-RT for example." That thing could barely even be considered a walker tank, it was just a gun with legs.

[@eddapultstab2078]

Some times that's enough. Remember, the A-10 is often considered a gun with wings rather than a plane.

[@olafgurke4699]

@@eddapultstab2078 Hehe, brrrrrrrrt.

[@kabakaprime5127]

Even the ATTE even though it's a heavy walker can hardly be described as a tank given the poor design. The driver is sitting almost outside in front of the tank in a fragile glass cabin and the main turret gunner is half exposed and vulnerable to even small arms crossfire and can neither easily get into the tank when in danger nor be replaced when shot dead. Frontal assault seems ridiculous with this thing. Could be fixed by giving it heavy front armor and a bigger armored turret operated from inside the tank much like the one on the CIS AAT (which seems to be a way better and more realistically designed vehicle). But even then the ATTE should probably have additional shields or some kind of missile defense system to make up for the slomo turtle movement that make it an easy target for artillery, aircraft and pretty much everything else as well. I kind of like the idea of a heavily armored turtle/bug/armadillo tank but the ATTE is not it. Just seems like a poorly designed semi-artillery gun with unnecessarily heavy legs that is neither particularly suited for assault tank nor artillery roles.

[@eddapultstab2078]

@@kabakaprime5127 my guess is that the vehicle is a derivative of a civilian design. It would make sense because designing a whole new military vehicle would have been extremely expensive and create a much bigger paper trail than up gunning and armoring an existing work vehicle.

[@kabakaprime5127]

@@eddapultstab2078 that explanation could work, I could see a civilian recovery/towing vehicle in the ATTE with a crane or a mining arm. The cabin style definitely looks reminiscent of a civilian vehicle. But most likely it's just rule of cool and they didn't really put much practical thought in that vehicle and it's specific role in warfare in general. For a walking infantry bunker with an anti tank gun it seemed too easy to disable as portrayed in the movies (Episode II where just 1 hellfire missile on the front completely wrecks an ATTE) nor did clones actually use it much as infantry fighting vehicle to safely get to a different position given that it walks in slomo and isn't that well armored despite the looks. At least we see them all running outside hipfiring at the enemy trying to not get trampled.

[@chance20m]

The U.S. Army tested large walkers in the 60s for rough terrain cargo movement. They also are testing smaller robotic walkers today. For probably 99% of applications wheels or treads will be the better option. For that 1% though, in a combat situation legs will be irreplaceable.

[@andrewmeyer3599]

Walkers would probably only be good for longrange support. I feel like having something like that take a MBT role would be asking to have them destroyed. Now, put an artillery piece on that thing and set it up in the back like we see GAR do with their artillery and it would probably fit

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

It's not 1% it's alot more than that. Rocky and rubbly terrain and steep terrain were identified as good terrain for legged vehicles. So mountain, naval landing and urban combat. Bipedal walkers were also identified as bbeing far more agile than wheels or tracks and would thus be useful in any close terrain like woods and jungle s. Plus legs can be made more well armoured than tracks or wheels and thus could be very good ooccupation counter insergant vehicles. T The main issues found was they need more internal volume than wheeled or ttraced vvehicles and thus have worse gweight for the same armour, made worse by llss ground contact and thus worse ground pressures and they are more costly in materials and time for repairs and maintainance. They are also less efficient at sspeed they are thus worse on good tterrain.

[@Tombud-ti7gn]

And thats why you will always have infantry type combatants in all wars

[@FalconWindblader]

One thing to consider. Even the most advanced walker we have today couldn't compare to those of SW universe. We aren't talking just about mechanical constructs mimicking movements of organics, we're talking about mechanical constructs that move organically BETTER than organics could. We're years, if not decades, away from such tech, yet such tech is actually commonplace in SW.

[@DrakeOola]

@@andrewmeyer3599 Why would you need legs on it if it's designed for long range combat? With range like that it'll never need to go near trenches or in rough terrain so there's bound to be flat land you could park it on, flat land that wheels would benefit more from... You'd also want it to be mobile so it can run away when enemies start marching towards it, keep your long range weapons at long range, with a slow ass walker you'd never be able to outrun advancing enemies. Walkers only make sense when fighting against trench warfare but even then the enemy will just use a rocket launcher on one of the inevitably thin legs and render the entire thing inoperable when they break a single leg... It's also set in a time where space travel is trivial, practically every craft can travel at warp speed billions of lightyears away in seconds and hovercrafts are like motorbikes that kids can easily get their hands on, super common like bicycles today... It just doesn't make sense why they wouldn't use hovercrafts or airplanes over walkers any day. Even modern warfare relies upon bomber crafts. Tanks and ground crafts are pretty obsolete and walkers are just way too clunky and impossible to armor the toothpick legs, impossible to make them tip proof either especially how all the ones in star wars are built. The taller they are the more weight you need to put into the feet but they're all built top heavy and the legs aren't spread out at all, a single light force push or even a tiny explosive near the top will inevitably tip them over and they presumably have no way to function after toppling...

[@jeremyleonjonas7657]

A walker rarely spoken about or even seen: the AT-AP. I remember getting my hands on the lego set years ago, so seeing background to it would be really cool.

[@meh4062]

Oh cool new type I never saw

[@rainbowpeanut2568]

The thing about tracked and wheeled tanks is if they lose their tracks or wheels the just stop. A walker loses a leg and it comes crashing down, which is undoubtedly a hard process to reverse. Walkers do still of course have a mobility advantage in most cases, but in the event of immobilization I'd prefer to be in a conventional tank.

[@dantai68]

Yeah. AT-ST is 8.6m meaning a fall if they were just standing is equal to a 46km/h car crash. If they were moving at 90km/h with the added height the fall would no doubt be fatal. The AT-AT is in a simialr boat. Being 22m high the crew is going to be going through a 77km/h crash if they aren't moving at all. If they are moving at 60km/h it would likely be an equally poor disaster.

[@Ruzzky_Bly4t]

What mobility advantage? The lore is absolute bonkers when it comes to the speed of those walkers. The AT-AT is supposed to move at 60 km/h? That's 16 meters every second. That thing would have to gallop to achieve those speeds, and everybody inside would die. I don't see why people try to justify walkers, instead of embracing that they're just really badass, but inconvenient in reality.

[@rainbowpeanut2568]

@@Ruzzky_Bly4t I'm not referring to speed when I say mobility, I'm referring to how well it can cross uneven terrain

[@rainbowpeanut2568]

@@Ruzzky_Bly4t and as for the speed, it is important to remember that it doesn't need to move it's legs as fast since they are so long. Because of this, it can achieve greater speeds just by length of it's stride. I still agree they are inconvenient and absurd, but I can see some interesting advantages in the concept

[@Ruzzky_Bly4t]

@@rainbowpeanut2568 Oh, ok. The mobility on uneven terrain is the only real advantage that I see with those things. If we disregard the pressure that these legs would apply on the ground, making them sink immediately. However, the AT-AT would still not be able to achieve 60 km/h. It is 26 meters long, so it would have to cross a distance equivalent to its length every 1.6 seconds. Even the long legs would not be able to sustain such speeds.

[@TheTrytix]

The whole "60 km. speed of an AT-AT" has been looked at by ECHenry, who found out that 60 km looked horrendously out of place for the AT-AT. This fact is why I am so incredibly careful with certain information from Wookieepedia. Such as the SPHA-T walker being 140 m. long, which makes zero sense.

[@Ruzzky_Bly4t]

Yeah, the lore is absolute bonkers when it comes to the speed of those walkers. The AT-AT is supposed to move at 60 km/h? That's 16 meters every second. That thing would have to gallop to achieve those speeds, and everybody inside would die.

[@CT5555_]

In my mind the ATTE is the pinnacle of Star wars tanks. The way Commander Wolf weaves it around 3 AT-ATs and still manages to win in rebels, really shows it's maneuverability, and it's overpowered mass driver cannon.

[@SovietAirCon]

I feel like the thought of tripping over a Walker is only viable for the atat, because the Atte is very low with multiple legs and a low centre of gravity

[@UGNAvalon]

Ewoks: Drops logs onto AT-ST.

[@ericolsen5592]

I remember a piece of extended universe lore saying that the AT-TE was more vulnerable to mines somehow

[@Diceroller98]

@@ericolsen5592 I mean it's entire body is lower to the ground, and it's underside does seem to be less armored because of this, why put heavy armor on a surface that the enemy often won't be able to even get a good shot at? In that case yeah a mine with enough power behind it could probably easily disable or destroy the AT-TE

[@TheWarmachine375]

0:01 The AT-AT was developed on the last years of the Clone Wars and now the Empire uses them in its Imperial Military.

[@OptimusMaximusNero]

Am I the only one who thinks the picture at 7:58 is just AMAZING? The one who made it deserves an award!

[@ThinWhiteAxe]

Aw yeah thanks for pointing it out (I usually listen and half watch)

[@loganksu8981]

Yes you are

[@watch50er]

Nah, it’s amazing. Reminds me of how immensely vast episode 3’s grievous chase deleted scene tried to convey. fighting on beaches, streets, fields, hills, landings, ports, and now every the GD WALLS!

[@alessiodecarolis]

It's strange that no one tought about introducing Mobile Suits in SW universe, perhaps the battlefields would became too one-sided for the Empire? After all, with their robotic tecnology they could've effectively build such a weapon system.

[@Toramai-pi8wx]

So Gundam for the Empire?

[@alessiodecarolis]

@@Toramai-pi8wx why not, after all seems that the experimental mix btw anime & SW was appreciated, so a refresh of either franchises could be interesting

[@legofisch9753]

Not that Mobile Suits Gundam style make any sense in Gundam in the first place. Because the tanks they obliterate usually are just older tech compared to the suits shown. It gets even worse for air/space fighters. A purpose build fighter built with the same drive systems as a gundam would trash a mobile suit. The real use of them is of course versatility. Jack of all trades, master of none.

[@marrqi7wini54]

Though I don't see it myself as the technology that exist in star wars probably couldn't produce a mobile suit that behaves as what we see in Gundam. They'd probably just make a worse starfighter or gunship. Though I do see something similar being used in stat wars visions. But in the main star wars saga, I personally don't think it would work all that well.

[@alessiodecarolis]

@@marrqi7wini54 well, they've FTL, artificial gravity, in general SW's universe is so tecnologically advanced that EVERYTHING in UC pales, so they really could add another weapon to their arsenals, warfare is also adaptability

[@Obiwan7100]

A question for Star Wars fans? Would you like to see a Republic New Star Destroyer capable of carrying 840 starfighters in future movies or do you prefer the Venator?

[@wetwillyis_1881]

Yes, that would be awesome.

[@nebcyt-notenoughbraincells419]

Venator is best ship

[@chengzhou8711]

It would be cool if they had enough time to research, design, and build their own models

[@NovaWolfe]

Venator gang

[@Tombud-ti7gn]

Revenge of the sith intro is one of the best ever. I like venators, but i also like close air to air combat.

[@marshalllatta2073]

Star wars sure has a lot of cool high-tech weapons they are very impressive

[@TheStoner420PotHead]

Now lets make some of them and go find us some aliens!

[@olafgurke4699]

They must be very proud.

[@Wavemaninawe]

Its a bit less awe-inspiring when we remember that nobody in that universe thought of inventing writing paper.

[@olafgurke4699]

@@Wavemaninawe Bold of you to assume that. It just got phased out already when everyone has their private datapads. Most just don't use paper anymore.

[@eddapultstab2078]

There was a military scientific study that came out recently. It tested and compared the energy to distance yield of of walking and wheeled things, including animal equivalents, and the results where the energy to distance ratios are roughly the same. Basically a legged unit is equally as viable as a wheeled unit as far as efficiency is concerned.

[@absalomdraconis]

Depends on how you build it, you need spring forces for efficiency. Also looses on the speed front for practical purposes, though it can be superior for rough terrain if there's a good enough control system.

[@Khalkara]

I'd have to see the study to be sure, but I think this is not applicable here. The main problem giant walkers have is square cube law, where if you scale something up by x2 you increase its weight by x8. Therefor the larger a walker gets (or anything, for that matter) the more energy-inefficient it will become compared to a scaled down version of it, because it has to move around disproportionally more weight which requires disproportionally more energy to do.

[@eddapultstab2078]

@@Khalkara you can use that logic on any vehicle, legged or otherwise. Most of it is really an engineering issue rather a physics one. Materials like plasteel, if such a thing could be on earth someday, has a high strength to weight ratio reducing the overall mass a potential vehicle needs to be. In star wars, their is alot of gravity control devices built into these vehicles standard issue, it would be easy, atleast in starwars, to build compensator to give the illusion that a walker or a vehicle like the juggernaut is exerting less pressure to the ground than it should be. Walkers are not going to show up tomorrow not because it's ineffective or inefficient. What's really stopping it is that the technology to make it viable or competitive just does not exist. The same exact argument came with just about every advancement in history. We thought iron clads were impossible over 200 years ago but it turns out it was just the building techniques and mathematics to do it just didn't exist yet. We didn't believe flying machines worked until the Wright Brothers proved everybody wrong. So I hate bashing on theoretical things because anybody with an armchair could do that, and one thing I learned from history is that something is impossible until someone does it.

[@Khalkara]

@@eddapultstab2078 Yes you can use my logic on any vehicle, not just walkers, I pointed this out. But you're missing my point. If you have disproportional surface area, you need disproportionally more armor, which adds disproportionally more weight (on an already disproportionally heavy vehicle) and thus makes you disproportionally (even) more energy INefficient. You can have a material with great armor-to-weight-ratio but that would always be better served on a smaller vehicle. Which makes that vehicle either faster or require less energy, making it even more energy efficient. Warfare vehicles don't need to be big, they just need to be big enough to carry big enough guns or carry enough armor to mitigate big enough guns. "What's really stopping it is that the technology to make it viable or competitive just does not exist." No tech (that we can imagine) is gonna fix square cube law. Even anti-gravity tech that already exists in the Star Wars universe. This is very much a physics issue, not an engineering one.

[@eddapultstab2078]

@@Khalkara I agree that your points are important but again, this is both a mission objective and an engineering issue. The data doesn't prove anything on a military standpoint, only on a practical basis. I'm not saying you can build a perfectly armored walker, infact even today military designers are under the constant challenge to maximize armor in many vehicles. The humvee for example had severe issues with protection and even up armoring kits could not compensate. Land mines and IEDs were of particular issues so the military designed a vehicle that had a body that was both off the ground farther and more armored underneath and aligned so it can withstand an explosive attack right below it, as well as protection all around for small arms and rpgs. It's also plagued with similar issues, Like it's weight, energy consumption and cost. I'm not saying that truck is useless, it has a very specific mission profile and was designed to do it better than similar vehicles albeit at a cost. Your argument seems to be walkers can't be armored everywhere and move, and again the same exact thing can be said about a tank or wheeled vehicle, we have hover craft and those can't be armored below but still use them and for good effect. Vehicles of all shapes and sizes have been used in war and most if not all have been literally attacked on all sides, some sides far more vulnerable than others. These are not necessarily faults on the vehicle but on the use of it. Yes there will be designs that just won't work at, but there are also designs that if used In their intended purpose will work quite well. Factoring In armor to weight, guns, the power to operate all of that is and always will be in the realm engineering. A tiger tank was a very deadly offensive tank, but used on the defense it was rather vulnerable to being flanked, even moreso without support. This not a failing of the design, it was made for offensive unit actions not holding objectives alone, but a mission issue. It is very hard to wear all the hats and do anything well, whether it has wheels, legs, tracks or even a hover skirt. It all comes down to is what is the mission the vehicle is trying to accomplish and what kind of equipment it needs to accomplish this, possibly how much a deviation of the mission you expect.

[@indianajones4321]

Wish we could have seen more Turbo Tanks/Juggernauts in action

[@GoranXII]

I have my doubts about those top speeds. it _might_ be possible for the machines to achieve them (though like all scifi walkers, you'd have to account for the shear stress of repeated rapid movement), but whether the crews would still be capable of doing anything after more than a minute of so of being shaken like beads in a rattle is something I'm decidedly less certain of. As to the actual terrains a walker could manage, significant slopes on anything other than rock-hard terrain would seem to me to pose a struggle for walkers given their high ground pressure.

[@olafgurke4699]

Well, I mean, given their advanced gyroscopic and inertia dampening systems, you'd guess the stress on the crew wouldn't be that hard. And besides, trained military crew can endure a lot of that. Tanks or other army vehicles going through a combat zone don't have smooth rides either.

[@GoranXII]

@@olafgurke4699On Hoth, Luke managed to keep up with one on foot. That doesn't say good things about their mobility.

[@olafgurke4699]

@@GoranXII Well, the question is if they were going top speed, or just cruise speed. I don't think they were in that much of a rush, IIRC

[@GoranXII]

@@olafgurke4699 If the aim on Hoth was to capture the base, they did that fine, but it would have hurt the Rebels a lot more if the Empire had been a bit faster, and captured the last few transports before they could take off.

[@klutzspecter3470]

@@olafgurke4699 The never seem to be in much of a rush 99.99% of any media showing them.

[@BovineDesigns]

Ah someone's never played MGS3. Legs allow it to go anywhere!

[@legofisch9753]

"But this applies to other tanks as well, you could knock out the wheels or threads of a tank just as easily.." Well..no. While a good hit to the threat would achieve the same as a good hit to a leg joint, GETTING that hit is so much easier on a huge, tall and, yes slow target. 60kph top speed is nothing compared to what threats can do (grandet, terrain performance of both my vary), but even disregarding that: one of them can turn. The other can change direction as easily as a charging rhino. Granted, hits like a charging rhino as well if you don't sidestep. And the body of a walker will always be weaker as a tank based on the same technology, as it is simply a bigger surface to armour and a taller target.

[@Robot_Eva]

It would be easier to destroy a tank tread with mines than it would be trying to get a shot at them, especially if they're moving

[@CollinMcLean]

Not really. The legs of a walker have a much slimmer profile than treads or repulsor lift base which would make a targeted hit very difficult. Especially if that target is moving. Plus the AT-TEs don't really need to change direction all that much since they essentially have a 360º field of fire between it's 6 laser turrets and a rotating mass driver cannon.

[@FalconWindblader]

Guess you've missed the sarcasm entirely here. It's actually destroying the legs is just as easy as destroying the treads & wheels... now then, imagine how 'easy' it is to destroy treads & wheels.

[@pieter-bashoogsteen2283]

Not to mention that a broken tank tread can be relatively easily replaced by the crew. I am pretty sure on the battlefield even. But to replace a broken leg of a walker? That would be so much harder to do and I think they couldn’t do it on the battlefield thus needing a recovery vehicle.

[@UGNAvalon]

@Pieter-Bas Hoogsteen It’d actually be pretty nice to see military support/logistic vehicles being used in the SW universe.

[@5680009]

As goofy as the AT AT can look at times in movies/shows, if I saw one looming over the horizon and stomping toward me, I'd be scared shitless.

[@joshuaposey9594]

Yes, but if a *competent and properly equipped military force* saw one coming over the horizon they'd be laughing at how easy they are to fight with readily available anti-vehicle technology. Walkers as presented in Star Wars look intimidating, but only because we don't see them fielded in an actual combat zone except in one very limited sequence (Hoth) where the enemy has almost no available anti-vehicle weaponry to spare for the ground defense. When a small handful of X-Wings are brought against walkers in Rogue One, the AT-ATs are almost instantly neutralized before the X-wings even begin engaging enemy air defenses. When a single soldier with a quality armor piercing tool is allowed into melee range, they are able to easily breach the armor and plant explosive charges in a large walker which annihilates it.

[@bardedkgaming2529]

@@joshuaposey9594 it was not AT-AT we see in Rogue one but AT-ACT or All Terrain Armored Cargo Transport, wich had a weaker midsection

[@thenerdlord8894]

@@joshuaposey9594 A competent military force would be able to recognize the difference between the AT-ATs and the AT-ACTs.

[@TheWarmachine375]

The Rebel Alliance do use some of these Republic walkers and tanks as part of their arsenal of anything they can acquire in fighting against the Galactic Empire.

[@JAKEATO]

If we use the metal Gear logic legs had natural advantage almost in any terrain

[@marrqi7wini54]

Or Mechwarrior. Speaking of which, how do you (Or anyone wanting to comment) think both would compare to these?

[@OptimusMaximusNero]

0:00 Watching AT-AT battling in the same side of the war as Obi-Wan and the rest of the Jedi Order feels weird as HELL

[@FastTquick]

As much as I really love the A6 Juggernaut, I can see why walkers are much more effective. It would’ve been so cool to see AT-ATs and Juggernauts all together in one scene complimenting each other.

[@Tombud-ti7gn]

What about the attack on the wookies?

[@pieter-bashoogsteen2283]

@@Tombud-ti7gn we need to send an attack group immediately

[@pieter-bashoogsteen2283]

How are walkers more effective?

[@hanzzel6086]

@@pieter-bashoogsteen2283 The Juggernaut is not the best designed vehicle. But neither are most of the walkers so, idk?

[@pieter-bashoogsteen2283]

@@hanzzel6086 Juggernaut seems a whole lot better than an AT AT, but probably was too expensive and too big to deploy in large numbers.

[@Sinistar123]

03:40 "Only thanks to the fancy flying of one of the galaxies best pilots." The incredibly fancy flying of slowly flying around it in a circle.

[@ttpbroadcastingcompany.4460]

Yeah. The AT-ATs are slow. I'm not buying one of those things bounding down at 60 MPH on top of rebels. The thing CREAKED with every step it took. They're meant more for intimidation.

[@Sinistar123]

@@ttpbroadcastingcompany.4460 Yeah, I don't buy that they can go 60 MPH either, that sounds like some random number a writer made up because it sounded cool rather than because it made any sense.

[@anthonydonnelly1157]

@@Sinistar123 Tbf, it was 60 k/h, not mph, which roughly equates to around 37 mph. Still sounds mildly unlikely, but not impossible, as these are likely full bore speeds not considering stress to the vehicle. The Abrams tank for example has a top speed of around 60 mph technically, but it is throttled to around 45 (on asphalt, 30 is about what it hits off road) so that it doesn't tear itself apart.

[@Sinistar123]

@@anthonydonnelly1157 37 mph sounds significantly more likely in best conditions. The way it was framed just sounded like a writer trying to justify the practicality of a design that was made purely to look cool in the movie. "It's actually super fast! Only one was ever lost! It's basically unbeatable!"

[@Ruzzky_Bly4t]

@@anthonydonnelly1157 "Mildly unlikely" is an understatement. That thing would have to cover its own length every 1.5 seconds, so it would literally have to gallop like a horse.

[@chaoticclonestudios]

I will just say walkers also have one other advantage smaller walkers like the at-rt and at-st are harder to hide under since people could hide under repulsorlift tanks and sneak behind enemy lines yes wheeled vehicles can do the same it's just easier for walkers to deal the killing blow

[@joshuaposey9594]

This is not the advantage you think it is. A vehicle close to the ground running over an enemy soldier armed with military ordnance is a vehicle running over a potential landmine or IED. And there are numerous ways to make being under a repulsorlift vehicle a lethal prospect even without the risk of the repulsor technology slamming you into the ground with all the force necessary to keep a 60 ton tank aloft.

[@jamiewalsh3349]

Short answer: Giant mechs are awesome!

[@Ruzzky_Bly4t]

Badass, and very inconvenient. Don't know why people get mad about that.

[@Viperfish9000]

Battle Droid: We should just surrender. Mace Windu on his AT-RT: So anyway i just started blasting

[@drunksquirrel2051]

AT-AT walkers are the reason I loved Empire Strikes Back so much as a kid of the 80's. I"m still to this day obsessed with them. Something so simple and so big and powerful trancends everything to basic fear and respect for something so powerful and large across all living sapient beings. I have a collection of AT-AT related stuff that is so precious to me even being 40 now

[@Redflamesoftheheart]

Look if I can’t get a 30-45 ton vehicle to move through a certain kind of terrain, then I’m about 90% sure that a significantly heavier vehicle that is also wider than the first and on a relatively more unstable propulsion system is not going through that terrain either. All in all, Fear Factor is the only point I can’t find fault with.

[@Khalkara]

Depends on the tech. I think repulser tech in Star Wars doesn't so much exert propulsion force to counteract gravity, but rather it disables the effect of gravity in a certain area. If this is the case then it doesn't matter how wide (or how heavy) the vehicle is.

[@totallynotthecia]

something not mentioned but I’d be curious if there’s in universe battle doctrines. For example a walker like the atat has its legs very thin from the front making them harder to hit, and if the battle doctrine calls for the walker to sit back and use overwhelming firepower then having basically a large gun bunker at a high elevation makes a lot of sense as it gives them better sight over the battlefield.

[@absalomdraconis]

That battle doctrine also mirrors how they were used on Hoth.

[@alwaysplotting2096]

Republic Citizens: They walk now? Republic Officials: They walk now.

[@darthmaltodextrin1899]

"The most perfect weapon ever made on ungainly, easy to trip legs" - lego General Veers

[@thomasgroesbeck9902]

I was expecting more of an explanation based on physics and tactics; this is mostly "the legs aren't vulnerable/expensive/overcomplicated/unreliable/heavy/awkward because the lore says they aren't vulnerable/expensive/overcomplicated/unreliable/heavy/awkward"

[@klutzspecter3470]

Sadly, yes irl Bipedal or rather Quadrupedal designs are ineffective. Maybe as support platform you would use it irl for extreme terrain, but you fall into the pitfall how much can I carry so I don't fall in x Terrain. Like mud, or sand, or slippery terrain. You could add grits, but like shoes they can be clogged with materials.

[@Ruzzky_Bly4t]

Yeah, basically. The lore is absolutely unrealistic when it comes to walkers. For example, the AT-AT is supposed to move at 60 km/h. That's 16 meters every second. That thing would have to gallop to achieve those speeds, and everybody inside would die. I don't see why people try to justify walkers, instead of embracing that they're just really badass, but inconvenient in reality.

[@rhithym]

Walkers are the perfect example of why "show, dont tell" will always be more satisfying than lore added post-films to justify a thing's existence. Instead of telling us atat's were "actually fast, you just didnt see it", why dont they show us? Almost every appearance of atat's in shows, movies, and even video games have all depicted it as slow, so it doesnt make it any more satisfying when lore just forces retconned info, trying to pull a fast one on us. Just look at the atrt, they dont have to tell us theyre fast when they SHOWED us onscreen. Its literally that simple.

[@Ruzzky_Bly4t]

Well, they don't show it because it's unrealistic. For an AT-AT to move at 60 km/h, it would have to gallop. If you do the math, it has to cover its own length (26 meters) every 1.5 seconds.

[@Ikcatcher]

Republic has a leg fetish

[@dylansteigerwaldart5564]

@0:38 that intro from the battlefront games gave me such harsh nastolgia of being 8 years old. I felt a disturbance in the force when I heard it for the first in years. lol.

[@evenmorecheese2785]

I feel that you could have mentioned a big prospect: both the Republic and the Empire (to a lesser extent, although many mega-corporations had been nationalised their business practices remained) had a very powerful (as in, controlled large portions of government from the shadows) runaway military-industrial complex that had a tendency to prefer expensive and impractical projects over more reasonable proposals. It could be that mega-corporations lobbied for the adoption of large, impractical vehicles in the hopes that increased costs per unit and deliberately dysfunctional designs (meaning more damage in combat) would increase sales profits. For example, most armoured vehicles (including tanks) only had front facing static weaponry, many vehicles also had really weird space utilisation (so tell me, why is 75% of your proposed APC composed of the wheels? Does it really need to be 15 meters tall?) Another possibility is that most of the Galaxy's officer corps, including high command were composed of unqualified personnel (possibly due to the entrenched aristocracies/oligarchies common in Star Wars and long periods between major conflicts), leading to militaries asking for completely insane features (which could be why so many warships have highly exposed command centers). All of this is, of course, conjecture and headcanon on my part, although I do believe that a combination of the two is quite likely.

[@claws2129]

Personally I like the AT-TE design. It can literally go up a 90° angle. If that's not "all terrain" I don't know what is.

[@The7thFleet]

Magnificent, aren't they?

[@patrickiamonfire965]

You guys are awesome. Like the editing,the script,the information and the voicing. Every single part is great. I have been watching you guys for a long time and I enjoyed all of your videos. You guys have my greatest thanks.

[@ericolsen5592]

"Tripping walkers was not a viable strategy" Sure, the Battle of Hoth made it seem that way... But did you see what happened in the next movie? The Ewoks totally blitz'd Imperial walkers using twine, rocks and logs.

[@olafgurke4699]

To be fair, they fell the smaller AT-ST's. An AT-AT would have been completely unbothered by all of that.

[@joshuaposey9594]

@@olafgurke4699 Are we sure? Because it doesn't seem to take much restrictive force to seriously mess with the stability of these walkers. And once knocked off their feet, they seem incapable of getting themselves back upright. This issue is handled in treaded vehicles by keeping the center of gravity as low as physically possible to prevent tipping over.

[@olafgurke4699]

@@joshuaposey9594 I mean, in case of the AT-AT's, the massive weight plays a role in it. They are about as easy to trip as an elephant. You throw down some cut down trees? The AT-AT just stomps through them. Veins? Snaps them. As I belief was mentioned, they could only be bothered by specialised cables.

[@klutzspecter3470]

@@olafgurke4699 Trees are heavier than you think. Considering it was endor, the trees weigh enough to tip a ATAT.

[@bruh-yq2qx]

Walkers are weak to artillery and air attack due to their profile though. Like if a real life tank is actually weaker than walker then real life jets or artillery could do the job. Also the 60 mph doesn't really align with what we have seen in the movies and series. We saw walkers slowly lumbering their way through the battlefield so there isn't really a good evidence that walkers can go that fast (unless I missed something). It really comes down to application of these walkers however that would decide whether they really are that useful or if they are impractical.

[@absalomdraconis]

For the AT-AT at least, I'd say that it's only classic trilogy uses actually reflect your points, since we only see them being used on Hoth (where they're under an enemy shield, which presumably restricts a lot of weapons options, and which they are in fact deployed specifically to _destroy)_ and the forest moon of Endor (where they're surrounded by huge trees, doubtlessly interfering with many "fast attack" options).

[@TheVoiceOfReason93]

High profiles are still an issue, though shielding could compensate for that. The greater technical complexities involved with legs compared to wheels or tracks which could complicate production and maintainence, though it should be still less than that of anti-grav repulsorlift technologies.

[@Ruzzky_Bly4t]

I mean, we all know that walkers would be ineffective in real life. Don't know why people try to justify giant walking tanks, instead of embracing that they're just super badass.

[@TheVoiceOfReason93]

@@Ruzzky_Bly4t If they can figure out how they can be possible it adds to the immersion of the sci fi work and with it the enjoyability. Plus, it opens the possibility of seeing or even piloting one in real life, which is even cooler.

[@Ruzzky_Bly4t]

@@TheVoiceOfReason93 I get it, but some people take it to the extreme and get mad when you point out that walkers are science fiction for a reason.

[@TheVoiceOfReason93]

@@Ruzzky_Bly4t You get that everywhere these days. People will always get worked up on things that ultimately don't matter.

[@Rylus571]

That would be a sight to see, an At-At galloping around at 60 Kph.

[@jonumine6250]

AT-AT: has a 20 year battle record of effortlessly mauling rebels every single time they're deployed. Farm kid, on his first time seeing them: "just use a tow cable it's not that hard"

[@wigligigly3375]

If they have legs it makes them more anthropomorphic allowing the republic to make R34 propaganda.

[@MandoMTL]

You have a knack for selecting interesting lore topics. Shame I didn't find you sooner.

[@richardched6085]

The AT-AT (In practice) had a top speed of 10 km/h at BEST. Idk where the 60 km/h myth originated lol.

[@zachariahcorvish4860]

For me the main issue with walkers is redundancy. Mechanical failures happen. A tank throws a track, it becomes a bunker. A walker has its gyro fail. It faceplants.

[@wetwillyis_1881]

I often wonder if our military is smarter for using wheels and treads, or more stupid for not using walkers.

[@Lomhow]

Here's the thing We have over a hundred years of engineering with wheels. You know (generally) how a car works. Walkers are fully a whole new section of engineering. And even if we develop it, the landscapes we use it on will define whether it's useless trash or genius.

[@TheRezro]

You people are aware that walkers in SW work only work thanks to power of fiction, aren't you? AT-AT would sink in the ground IRL.

[@silverfoxdelta290]

@@TheRezro i dont think an AT-AT would sink into the ground. yes, its sci-fi, but it still follows basic rules of physics. i dont know how heavy it is, but im sure we have buildings or vehicles in this world that are as heavy or heavier than an at at

[@trickedraptor]

@@silverfoxdelta290 The main issue is ground pressure, since all of the weight is concentrated in four relatively small feet rather than across an entire tread or wheels. Real tanks already can face significant issues in rough terrain because of this, and the ATAT would have it significantly worse

[@ak74udieby]

@@trickedraptor wheeled tanks get stuck because they spin and have no traction a walker lifts its leg and takes another step

[@hanswurst6712]

No way those walkers would be able to reach 60 or even 90kph. They would have to gallop like a horse to reach such speeds basicly. Which would probably be quiet an intresting experience for the crew. - "One crew please. Shaken, not stirred!"

[@Lankpants]

The AT-ST does sprint in quite a lot of media. I don't know how realistic 90km is, it seems a bit on the high side, but I could definitely see them being quite quick especially if there was some inbuilt suspension on the cockpit to keep the ride reasonable. I certainly think it's feasible that they could top 60km/h. The AT-AT moving at 60km/h is not feasible. It would have to be taking at least two strides every second if its strides were 1/2 its body length.

[@TheWarmachine375]

Giant Walkers are cool. Nuff said

[@mrdrprofessoroak497]

"Walkers were made to resemble predators" AT-ST: *predatory chicken noises

[@sorcererberoll4641]

If walkers could travel faster than modern tanks then how fast was Luke running on hoth ain’t no way the empire was going to slow down when time was of the essence

[@Ruzzky_Bly4t]

Modern tanks are way faster than walkers.

[@FunDipFobs]

Most modern tanks actually reach speeds of 70km/h also tanks have been able to go up inclines of 60 degrees since WW2. Love your videos man. Just do some extra research.

[@Darius-scifieart]

Your quote about tanks is incorrect. Wheeled vehicles, and tanks especially generally cannot climb a slope greater than 45°. I think the reason for your confusion is the difference between grade and angle. For example the M1 Abrams is stated to be able to climb a maximum 60% grade. Which is only a 30° angle. A 100% grade is a 45°. The M36 Patton and T72 also max out at 30°.

[@Ruzzky_Bly4t]

@@Darius-scifieart Yeah, 60 degrees would be absolutely insane. But modern tanks are indeed way faster than the walkers from star wars. The 60 km/h top speed for AT-ATs is completely unrealistic, considering that it would have to cover it's own length every 1.5 seconds, resulting in every crew member getting a concussion.

[@Darius-scifieart]

@@Ruzzky_Bly4t Hi, of course that wasn't really the point of my comment but I will still say that for some limited applications. Especially in the context of star wars. Walkers do actually make sense. They're actually is a real world kind of "walking" vehicle. A walking or spider excavator. And they are capable of traversing steeper grades than any conventional vehicle.The advantage that walking vehicles have is not one of speed but of adaptability. Wheels and tracks make lots of sense on our world. Because we fight wars with other humans. And humans tend to prefer living on relatively flat, dry open land, and we build roads. The empire in Star wars does not have this luxury. If a world were entirely covered in lush jungle. Modern tanks would be rather useless. Similarly if the culture you were trying to invade lived in a shallow everglade like swamp. Or high a top mountains. There is only one form of land locomotion which nature has proven works in all biomes. And it's not wheels.

[@Ruzzky_Bly4t]

@@Darius-scifieart Yeah, walkers do have the best "off-road" capabilities, however their speed is just too low. We're talking about the invasion of a planet, or at least a continent. This means that your tanks have to be mobile enough to go from one area to the other quickly, as you won't have enough armored vehicles to deploy at every major location on a frontline. Walkers are basically stationary turrets with some basic movement capabilities. In the movies, we saw people following alongside the walker while it was going, so you could outrun that thing on a bicycle.

[@Darius-scifieart]

@@Ruzzky_Bly4t While is true a wheeled vehicle or tracked vehicle could be faster over level ground. My point is on a world without roads there wouldn't be much level ground. In Star wars any vehicle for light purposes would simply use repulsors. So people wouldn't be as motivated to construct roads. Also you mentioned 60 km per hour being unrealistic. And I'm going to disagree there as well. A race horse can run at 78 km per hour. An AT-AT is 20 m tall at the shoulder. A horse is 2 m tall at the shoulder The machine is 10 times larger. So to reach that speed, it would only need to move its legs as frequently as a horse would when walking at 1/10th that speed. Or 6 km/h. Which seems rather reasonable, and pretty close to what we see on film. They only seem slow because of their enormous size. Also, from a logistics perspective. In this world it is possible to move land vehicles around to where they're needed with drop ships. But more importantly, from a tactics perspective something like an AT-AT is not for maintaining a battle line. It's for breaking through.

[@CollinMcLean]

Without watching... of course there is an universe explanation. As we've seen with the AT-TEs the use of legs and magnetized feet allows the walkers to travel even up vertical faces and in deep space. It's very well suited for walking across uneven terrain. And for the AT-TE specifically that broad multi point stance gave it an incredibly stable shooting platform for the use of it's multiple laser cannons and it's primary mass driver cannon. Compare this to the Separatist ATT which would appear to suffer pretty heavy kickback from it's cannons that actually moved it backwards. Some models like the republic UT-AT would solve this problem but that was a pretty unique vehicle. As for the AT-AT it's tall stance not only gave it a wide field of vision but it solved one of the problem that came from the AT-TE and many repulsor lift tanks, it wasn't close to the ground. Repulsor lift tanks aren't that high off the ground meaning they're susceptible to land mines and other ground based explosives.

[@macwade2755]

I would like to see a CIS Walker!

[@xxnightdriverxx9576]

the main problem with Walkers is ground pressure. This is already a big issue for real life tanks and they have much less ground pressure than any kind of walker due to the much larger surface area that tracks can provide compared to legs. This ground pressure problem renders Walkers useless in any kind of soft ground terrain. They should not have been able to work in the snow of Hoth, they should not work in swamps, deserts, or even on soft earth, such as agricultural areas.

[@Ruzzky_Bly4t]

Well, this is one problem among 10 or so. I don't see why people try to justify walkers instead of embracing that they are just unrealistic, but badass war machines.

[@AnkhWolf]

Upon reflection the AT-TE was kind of wasted as a troop transport, it would of been better served as a mobile heavy weapons placement if they built some turbolaser turrets or another heavy artillery weapon into the back of it or a Gungan style mass infantry bubble shield like seen in the battle of Naboo or you could of even used it as a mobile TIE refuelling station for planetary campaigns giving them more independence from Star Destroyers or Imperial bases

[@Vok250]

Fear was definitely a big factor too. At least for the empire. They liked vehicles that beat down the enemy mentally too. Even their massive hover tanks from Legends were terrifying in Rogue Squadron on N64

[@joshuaposey9594]

Size is only intimidating if it can be used effectively. Many predators evolve specifically to hunt massive herds of extremely large prey animals like bison, moose and elk by exploiting physical and mental limitations of the prey. Star Wars walkers suffer from a host of limitations directly as a result of their size and layout relative to the environments they are designed to operate in. They are almost universally poorly suited for actual combat applications in the Star Wars universe.

[@kharnatthefleshound8479]

The Warhound Titan Laughs perpetually

[@yagdtigercommander]

Thanks Geetsly for you informative opinion. I enjoy walkers and the AT-TE, AT-AT and AT M6 are among my favourite walkers because they are power houses and can achieve things that many other tanks can only dream of. In the right situations with a competent commander walkers can truly decimate anything on the battlefield. But yes they do have their own flaws but so does every tank. However I like how you stress that all 4 vehicle types have their merits and flaws and that each one can play off of each others strengths and weaknesses. Since generally speaking you want repulsor lift tanks to be fast and nimble but in do so trade armour unless your the Trade federation which prefer the use of heavily armed and armoured hover tanks. But repulsor tanks that aren't your main assault tanks you use in battle. I think would make for very good aggressive recon vehicles or raiders harassing areas the enemy is less defended and disabling enemy supplying lines and communications as well outposts basically any means that enemy can detect your main force in advance. Or even along side tread and wheeled tanks forming a vanguard force clearing a path for the main assault walkers. I mean scout walkers can do the same as light repulsor tanks can do but in star wars all these kinds of vehicles work rather well with each other than individually. Plus walkers like AT-TE , AT-AT and AT-M6 are just awesome because they can smash any defense by blasting it or stomping it to dust sure may not be the most practical but adds to the fear factor in terrorizing the enemy into surrendering while feeling powerless and hopeless to stop you. Also just because you can trip a walker and succeed with a tow cable doesn't mean you will every time also in war you want to get every advantage you can get over the enemy. So even the victors of battles will learn from past mistakes and what works to. While looking to Improve The AT-M6 was also lessons learned from building the AT-AT The First Order took into place from Empires failures and design flaws with AT-AT. The AT-M6s not only were specifically design to with stand the recoil of its mega caliber 6 rotary turbo laser but to act as cable cutters. Before you could even start to trip you cable would instantly snap. Also Improved on the AT-AT and AT-ST by adding composite armour, as well armoured side panels to protect the underbelly of the AT -AT better. Removed slow firing chin mounted lasers and side mounted medium anti air lasers for quick firing heavy multipurpose lasers as well additional stabilizing blocks that for some reason from certain angle make it like the FSO AT-AT is walking backwards. If anyone doesn't know what I am talking about with the FSO or First Order AT-AT you can google pictures of it and can see the said improvements I mentioned.

[@ClonedGamer001]

I think walkers like the AT-RT were what the original intent for walkers in-universe was, considering they seem perfect for that role of highly maneuverable scout/infantry support vehicle. Generally they seem like more effective use of that tech. Naturally people tried to expand the tech to fit a larger variety of roles, but that seems like the main thing they were made for.

[@aurelia8028]

I remember in the original star wars battlefront game where you could pilot an AT-AT on Rhen Var. You were basically unstoppable in that thing

[@lifeshowyouliveit4023]

Those are all valid points that makes sense but I can't stop thinking about that moment in Rogue one where the rebel gunship Gunner took out a walker leg with like four shots from what looks like an ion cannon

[@CharChar2121]

Hmmm...I think it's helpful to think of walkers like the A-10 or AC-130. Unopposed, they can bring a lot of firepower, but the second a half-competent adversary starts shooting out them, they get grounded. Having the height advantage does have its benefits, but it still doesn't do anything a gunship couldn't do.

[@TotallyNotAFox]

The height isn't that much of an advancement either on a battlefield - big targets are easy to hit by weapons able to take them out

[@RookieRogu]

My biggest problem with the AT-AT wasn't the high centre of gravity, or the long legs; it was the field of fire. As soon as you are not directly in front of an AT-AT, it can't shoot you without turning the whole vehicle around.

[@Ruzzky_Bly4t]

The most inconvenient engineering decision really. Mounting turrets on the sides would be much more effective.

[@scarease1]

Legs able traverse landscapes that wheeled crafts and similar to Hover types are highly effect covering landscapes . As this video said that that legs can made very durable metals and heavily armored .

[@newjerseyyouth4853]

The walkers have a line of site advantage, you can observe enemies from far away. It’s like portable surveillance/machine gun towers

[@phm6834]

The teddybears on endor did it pretty well, building traps to step over. And in a walker oriented battlefield, there would be a lot of counter measures developed. Workers are stupid, but cool.

[@theseekerofancienttruth3873]

Think of what you felt when you first saw the Scarab Walk Up and Over the building you're in/on in Halo 2. Or when you first saw the AT-ATs through the binoculars on Hoth in Empire. That is what he means.

[@samos343guiltyspark]

ATAT height is also useful for that high-ground advantage, I mean they literally bring the high-ground with them everywhere. Firing weapons from them is more affective. For combatants to have to look up and fire at them is a little more trickier, especially if done at day with the sun in the sky. They were taller than most settlement walls too, doubling as a siege tower with cannons. Their height advantage also means that they can fire direct-line-of-sight weapons such as their lazer cannons over the closer enemy lines to more preferred target further back rather than having to fight through them, also being able to target specific trenches from above rather than head on. Also they were taller than most trees, granting them perspective.

[@bjornthefellhanded5655]

8:04 and that is one of the great reasons why Titans&Knights are deemed practical in Warhammer 40ks utter madness called War

[@AzraelThanatos]

For particular Walkers, I'd love to see some about the various walkers the Republic, Imperials, and Zakuul deployed during that conflict

[@Wedgekree]

Nice! Also the height of walkers gave them a tremendous advantage in visibility. Since blasters had no 'arc' to them, they could shoot with clear line of sight for whatever range the cannons had. Look at Hoth where the AT-AT's had clear line of fire over the entire battlefield. Something heavily armored like an AT-AT would be nearly invulnerable to anything on the battlefield short of heavy artillery, being swarmed by heavy enemy armor, or being targeted by bombing runs or airstrikes. An AT-ST could in urban warfare turn and rotate rapidly where a heavy tank would not be able to rotate if it was flanked or caught in tight confines. The weaknesses of an AT-AT would be it's limited maneuverability (the thing would no doubt take multiple minutes to fully turn around) and seeming lack of any weapons other than the ones on the front. So if it could be flanked by faster enemy vehicles it would be extremely vulnerable as it couldn't get an arc to fire on them. This is why it would be escorted by smaller one sto protect the flanks. I think the AT-AT's biggest simple improvement would be the addition of cannons or smaller blasters to cover the sides/rear of it (the way the Juggernaut has rotating turrets) to give it cover on the sides.

[@joshuaposey9594]

Walker height gives them a huge *disadvantage* because it makes them massive slow moving targets vulnerable to dedicated anti-vehicle weaponry that is either easier to conceal or mounted on faster moving platforms like starships.

[@TheManofthecross]

@ 3:44 you spoke luke skywalker nicelly for he is the only one or so to trip up a walker with it. though it did not stop the whole trip up with the wire method from being cemented in to the game and other lore as a way to fight one. hell even aiming at the neck is a weak point to drop one of these machines.

[@noahstorstein7313]

Also a Walker gives you the high ground. It’s not just a meme but a highly useful thing to have

[@Blastarr1]

After Episode 1 it explains Empire and that the walkers landed outside the shield and walked. In Phantom, the droids walk through the shield but their weapons and over tanks can't. So AT-AT land outside and then walks through the shield. Also, there is a very high limit to what a repulser can lift so you have to build it with light armor and heat synchs. in the World wars track, tanks had limits too on weight, armor, and weapon. But a walker can carry more weight, have more armor, and have bigger guns.

[@frostburn3736]

You forgot one important thing to say about walkers: they have a *high ground.* 😁 (I mean they have armaments placed rather high what makes them quite good assault/support weapon platforms, using their height as an advantage with range and firing angle)

[@nonenone7585]

In battlefront 2016 you could trip a walker but it was very hard to do in game.

[@loadingerror479]

The concept art from the last film made me think of those walkers as a Cylon Walker.

[@brendanokeefe8010]

I didn’t even know I wanted an answer to this ! But I totally did ! Well done

[@EclipsePheniox]

This is a good video about mech vs tank vs grav tank

[@DIEGhostfish]

3:42 going by video games there's dozens in legends

[@sethkunert6234]

A good ATW, The advantages are as follows. Being able to see over the horizon. We are balancing the tension between the joints on both sides, so it dips and raise as it walks in addition to activating the glutes and thighs, which bear the center of mass in a straight up and down fashion; having a good center of balance actually means we want more mass there to keep it stable, meaning we can arm and armor it to the limit of the motor(s) being able to handle torque or the ground handling our weight. Being able to climb vertical steps. Greater durability. I assume, what can a .50 blacktip or incendiary do to a piece of M1A1 track? That is basically being compared to an I-beam. It can step over most obstacles, even if it is aggro for anti air tactics and ground suppression, we are talking about tons of heavy armor on a machine that would take a full battleship's arsenal to tip over. It also provides cover from artillery. We can deadass put spikes on the feet if traction is a terrain issue. Enemy sniper loses the high ground.

[@videocrowsnest5251]

5:37 - Is that a Command and Conquer: Tiberian Sun reference I spy there with the mention of Ion Storms being able to render hovering tanks immobile, or are there actually ion storms also in Star Wars?

[@declanhandley-byrne4335]

Whenever I discuss Star Wars with my co-workers, the question about why the Empire used AT-ATs at Hoth usually comes up, glad I can give them an official reason other then "Because they look badass"

[@JainZar1]

The problem with the AT-AT is that it wouldn't work in a peer level conflict. It's too large a target and it needs special landing craft and spaceships to get around. Either you shoot down the Landingbarge with a SPHA-T or melt through the AT-AT with the beam directly. Also the topspeed of a modern MBT is largely irrelevant, as they use "squad" tactics of cover and move, where acceleration and handling are essential.

[@crackingly]

2:45 AT-RT: *I am speed*