LucasForums

LucasForums (http://www.lucasforums.com/index.php)
-   Galactic Discussion (http://www.lucasforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=586)
-   -   Rancor kills General Veers' AT-AT in 4 hits... (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?t=160222)

DalamarS@ 02-09-2006 04:04 PM

Rancor kills General Veers' AT-AT in 4 hits...
 
That is one mighty powerful Rancor. I hope that's just a "feature" of the Demo. The best part is "Target Maximum Firepower" took half the health of the Rancor.

Darth Phantom 02-09-2006 05:10 PM

Eh...Rancors are powerful. What do you expect? Plus....it's a video game.

darthfergie 02-09-2006 06:00 PM

lol, wow...that's a little odd.
then again, AT-AT's probably don't have anti-flesh bonuses as much as they have anti-armor bonuses.

Athanasios 02-09-2006 06:06 PM

And not only, it is invalnurable to bombs too :^:

gswift 02-09-2006 06:14 PM

Fear the Rancor
 
I wouldn't mind if that's the way it is in the release version. After all, the Rancor is neutral, just like the ____ tornado. Also, it's not as unrealistic as it first seems. (I know, it's a game based on a movie, so nothing about it is 'real') With that aside, think about how vulnerable the walkers' legs are and if the Rancor can wipe out an AT-ST or T2-B in one blow, then how long would it take to remove a walker leg. A three-legged walker wouldn't last long.

One more thing: If the Rancor was weak, it wouldn't be fun or worth wile baiting it into the middle of the enemy base. There's nothing more fun than watching him snack on enemy troops.

Athanasios 02-09-2006 06:17 PM

...you may change your opinion about the "neutral" Rancor when you'll see it as the Emperor's puppy, strolling around in your base... :)

Thrawn 02-09-2006 06:39 PM

Force Corrupt is a wonderful thing:D

gswift 02-09-2006 06:50 PM

The Emperor's puppy
 
Good point. I didn't think about that one. I hope we can do that, and not just the Rancor, the Wampus is probably cool too. I wonder how many different creatures there are? Will swamp planets have droid-eating serpents for example?

Jmaster3265 02-09-2006 07:29 PM

What mod was this where it allowed you to have Veers land battle unit? As far as the rancor destroying him that is very odd. That has never happened to me. Then again i'm not dumb to bring my AT-AT to a rancor. (no offense) My advice is to STAY AWY from rancors.

popcorn2008 02-09-2006 08:50 PM

Well rancors can follow you, ya know. It's not fun. But Jmaster is right, im pretty sure you purposfully moved the at-at to the rancor. At least, im hoping. But thats just anouther element of strategy, looking out for indigenous species.

Thrawn 02-09-2006 10:03 PM

And rocks. Rocks can throw your entire operation into chaos, because well, they're just in the way.


I have no idea where I was trying to go with that joke...

endurell 02-10-2006 12:10 AM

I think we need a video of Veers getting pwnt by a rancor....

...please? :)

Crazyviking03 02-10-2006 05:41 AM

"Yes my lord, I've reached the main power generators. The shield will be down in OH MY GOD! AGGGHHRLLR"

"General?"

Dagobahn Eagle 02-10-2006 06:05 AM

Quote:

Rancors are powerful. What do you expect?
Given that this is a modern-day SW game, not much. They threw accuracy, realism, and common sense out the window ages ago:(.

Quote:

Plus....it's a video game.
I hate worthless cliché "arguments":rolleyes:.

Yes, it's a game, but it needs to make sense, too.

Quote:

After all, the Rancor is neutral, just like the ____ tornado.
And that's got what to do with how strong it is?

Quote:

Also, it's not as unrealistic as it first seems.
I know. It's worse.

Quote:

With that aside, think about how vulnerable the walkers' legs are and if the Rancor can wipe out an AT-ST or T2-B in one blow (...)
The AT-AT is blaster-proof, friend. What is more, it appears to be heavy laser-proof, too. It can't just be ripped apart by a three metres tall creature.

And the legs aren't more vulnerable than the rest of the thing. I don't see your reasoning for why it should be, at least, seeing they hold the thing up and thus need to be pretty strong, as they're what the enemy will target.

Oh, and the Rancor cannot wipe out a T2-B or AT-ST in one blow. In the game, maybe, but in "reality"? Come on, now. Maybe it could punch a hole in that pathetic AT-ST, but come on, use your reasoning.

shadowsfm 02-10-2006 06:41 AM

he means, the at-ats and sts are top heavy and easy to knock over

jedi3112 02-10-2006 08:08 AM

Rancors aren't even large enough to avoid being squased by an AT-AT's heavy feet (At-Ats in the game are too small, but that shouldn't have any impact on their statistics). I even found it annoying that General Veers couldn't step on the guy. I expect the only thing to be able to actually damage an AT-AT would be shipturbolasers (and perhaps a T3-B with both it's rockets and duallasers, but you may still need a few of them, and it's the rebels best tank). Just take a look at the Battle of Hoth, none of the rebel cannons could do any damage to the AT-ATs, only the cables did anything.

gswift 02-10-2006 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dagobahn Eagle
The AT-AT is blaster-proof, friend. What is more, it appears to be heavy laser-proof, too. It can't just be ripped apart by a three metres tall creature.

And the legs aren't more vulnerable than the rest of the thing. I don't see your reasoning for why it should be, at least, seeing they hold the thing up and thus need to be pretty strong, as they're what the enemy will target.

Oh, and the Rancor cannot wipe out a T2-B or AT-ST in one blow. In the game, maybe, but in "reality"? Come on, now. Maybe it could punch a hole in that pathetic AT-ST, but come on, use your reasoning.

I can see some of the points you're making, however the rancor is at least six meters tall, perhaps more. Do we know how stong they are when not in captivity? I've never seen one on National Geographic and I can't find anything in my Encyclopedia. HeHe. Don't get mad, I'm just having fun.

Secondly, the legs of a walker are their weakness. You said so yourself "as they're what the enemy will target". Remember the battle with the Ewoks? Just like with the tow cable on Hoth, they tripped AT-ST's with vines and rolling logs. AT-ST's are ray-shielded just like AT-AT's. That doesn't protect them from projectiles or crushing blows. Remember the head of an ST getting crushed by logs? I don't think the AT-AT was intended to be indestructable in the movie. They are just shielded from blasters. After all, they are only transports.

To make an analogy with real life engineering: You think something must be strong to hold a heavy load? Find the largest transport plane in the world. The wings hold it up, right? How hard do you think it is to poke a hole in the surface of the wing? How many holes would it take to make it crash?

Another analogy: Your legs hold you up. Try pushing sideways on your knee with the weight of your body. Did you hear something pop, crack, or snap? In fact, the heavier the load is on top, the more vulnerable the supports are.

Third, how do you know the rancor couldn't take out a light tank? There's no way to guess the actual strength of a rancor or the toughness of the tanks. Are the tanks made to resist lazer blasts, or physical blows? Since they hover, I'm guessing T2B's are constructed lightly. Remember how thick the door was in the rancor cage? Maybe it had to be that thick or the rancor would claw it's way through? Don't the rancor's claws resemble a can-opener?

Sure it may not be likely that a rancor would take out an ATAT, but it adds fun to the game.

I know, it's just imaginary stuff, but it's fun to theorise and debate. I'm a geek and proud of it!

Empirecitizen 02-10-2006 11:35 AM

Can we crush the rebels with the ATATs' legs? The should be able to crush things, even tanks. (not to mention those little infantry)

Admiral Raven 02-10-2006 11:53 AM

I am not so bothered about the amount of damage a rancor can do but the amount of damage they can take, I think surely one shot from an AT AT would kill one but as someone said the target maximum firepower attack only took half of the health off of it. I do however realise that there would be no fun to having it in the game if it was easy to kill but I think at the moment it may be a bit tough.

shadowsfm 02-10-2006 12:34 PM

in glactic battleground they where too easy

in rotj it wasnt full grown

Darth_Extas 02-10-2006 12:49 PM

An AT-AT stands for All Terrain-Assault Transport, so in fact you could concider them equal to the Moldy Crow/Millenium Falcon/Imperial Star Destroyer. Since the AT-TE was pre-form of an AT-AT, the function of the AT-AT must be at least similar, the AT-AT is an invasion walker as well as a transport. A rancor could defenity do as much damadge or more like the Ewoks in the Battle of Endor. Have any of you seen a wampa attack a vehicle before, It would be interesting to see the wampa's power vs. a walker, it might actually be the same.

Crazyviking03 02-10-2006 02:46 PM

If I remember correctly, wasn't there a scene in Courtship, where they get captured, and the imperial patrol that has them is attacked by rancors, and the AT-ST's get whalloped. I know the agruement is about AT-ATs, but I am just saying, some people are forgeting how big those rancors are supposed to be if full grown. Is the one on Tatooine supposed to be full grown? Jabba's was not.

wswordsmen 02-10-2006 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gswift
Good point. I didn't think about that one. I hope we can do that, and not just the Rancor, the Wampus is probably cool too. I wonder how many different creatures there are? Will swamp planets have droid-eating serpents for example?

Wampa isn't nearly as powerful (attack at least speed might make it more useful) look at the damage in projectiles in B&G2.6 mod. The damage ratio is like 20 to 1

Jabbas WhOr3 02-10-2006 07:04 PM

As per the www.starwars.com databanks say, a fully grown rancor can get to 10m tall while an AT-AT is listed at 15.5M. So there is a possibilty that it could inflict some damage, but I think that the laser cannons on the AT-AT would blow that thing to bits in one hit.

Rok_stoned 02-10-2006 10:48 PM

Quote:

The AT-AT is blaster-proof, friend. What is more, it appears to be heavy laser-proof, too. It can't just be ripped apart by a three metre tall creature.

And the legs aren't more vulnerable than the rest of the thing. I don't see your reasoning for why it should be, at least, seeing they hold the thing up and thus need to be pretty strong, as they're what the enemy will target.
Awesome points! Also dont forget were talkin' 'bout futuristic metals and stuff. Plus the larger animals are, the more I find that their strength-size ratio goes down (ants can lift up to 50 times their weight, lemurs are pretty strong, I can lift twice my body weigth without breaking a sweat, I doubt elephants can lift their body weigth and I know for a fact that whales cannot lift theirs). so I doubt a rancor can destroy something made a s dense as metals, particularly ones stronger than steel. Although I must say, rancors are taller than 3 metres tall; although, they still shouldn't be able to kill a walker.

Jmaster3265 02-10-2006 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth_Extas
An AT-AT stands for All Terrain-Assault Transport, so in fact you could concider them equal to the Moldy Crow/Millenium Falcon/Imperial Star Destroyer. Since the AT-TE was pre-form of an AT-AT, the function of the AT-AT must be at least similar, the AT-AT is an invasion walker as well as a transport. A rancor could defenity do as much damadge or more like the Ewoks in the Battle of Endor. Have any of you seen a wampa attack a vehicle before, It would be interesting to see the wampa's power vs. a walker, it might actually be the same.


Are you sure? if i remember correctly it was All-Terrian-ARMORED Transport.

Edit: Found proof =)

http://www.starwars.com/databank/veh...tat/index.html

Admiral Sith 02-11-2006 12:48 AM

Also, in X-Wing "Isards Revenge" a squadron of X-Wings destroyed 4 AT-ATs with only their laser cannons and implied that a single Proton Torpedo could have finished each. You have to remember that at Hoth the rebels only had very outdated weapons for their Snowspeeders and defenses, the only notable defence they had was the Ion Cannon.

Rok_stoned 02-11-2006 05:47 PM

Okay well for those of you who think a rancor could kill a AT-AT consider this: How many of you can destroy a motorcycle with your fists only? (No taking apart, rancors arn't that smart). And on top of that, add two shot guns and two pistols to the bike. And add James Bond (gotta have an experienced pilot) driving the bike. Now add 15 metres between you and the bike; and, you should be dead by now.

Jan Gaarni 02-11-2006 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jabbas WhOr3
As per the www.starwars.com databanks say, a fully grown rancor can get to 10m tall while an AT-AT is listed at 15.5M. So there is a possibilty that it could inflict some damage, but I think that the laser cannons on the AT-AT would blow that thing to bits in one hit.

That listing is incorrect.

According to the movies themselfs they appear to be around 23 meters tall.

Jabbas WhOr3 02-12-2006 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jan Gaarni
That listing is incorrect.

According to the movies themselfs they appear to be around 23 meters tall.


OH MY GOD!
You disagree with starwars,com databank! Blasphemy!

Quick someone get the holy water and purge this demon from from the forum.. :D

Jan Gaarni 02-12-2006 05:06 PM

They (StarWars.com) also claimed that the Executor was only 8,000 m long too, then 12,600 m, which really was just a change in the unit used for the 8,000 meters to 8,000 miles (which is 12,600 meters).

Guess what, they did some better research and measurements some time in the third quarter of last year, and got to 19,000 meters, which is about 1,500 meters too much, but a hell of alot closer to the truth. :p
Something I've known for about 6-7 years now, and others even longer.

Atomus 02-12-2006 05:07 PM

I think it would be more original if they put a krayte dragon on the tatooine map if you do not mind me suggesting. Rancors I would expect to be on a more harsh planet like Dathomir. Though I myself think they are somewhat overpowered.

Jan Gaarni 02-12-2006 05:09 PM

Krayts would have been much better indeed. It's actually big enough (or atleast the ancient ones can be) to knock an AT-AT down.

Jmaster3265 02-12-2006 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atomus
I think it would be more original if they put a krayte dragon on the tatooine map if you do not mind me suggesting. Rancors I would expect to be on a more harsh planet like Dathomir. Though I myself think they are somewhat overpowered.


They probably will if you remb while you were looking at the loading map for Tatooine you saw a short description of the planet. And if you noticed all the creatures it mentioned were in that map. Tuskens, Rancors, Sarlaccs, all except the dragon which might be shown and in the full version. Although it wasn't mentioned in the creatures list at the official site.

Rok_stoned 02-12-2006 08:00 PM

IMHO, the rancor should be replaced by a rancor becase a rancor, in my opinion, should be easy to kill by normal tanks multiple AT-STs; also, if they change it to krayt dragon, it would be okay to keep the stats the same way and maybe on dathomir they could have many (severely nerfed) rancors and (maybe a matriarch one).

Just my thoughts.

gswift 02-12-2006 11:12 PM

Sure, the rancor is too resistant to blasters, however the AT-AT is geatly overfeared. The legs are surely resistant to blaster bolts, but it's likely they are not very strong, otherwise a small cable wouldn't take them down. Someone argued that the legs must be strong, however I ask you to stand the core of you toilet paper roll on end on your desk. Push down on it and it will take great weight, push on it's side and it crumples easily.

Another person said that the advanced metals would be stronger than steel. Have you seen what a Stealth Bomber is made of? Composites. Graphite composites are light and strong, but can't take physical damage. They are brittle. A simple hammer will make short work of composite structures. The periodic table is what it is, and I don't think the Star Wars universe is so different from ours.

The legs of a walker are also laden with moving parts and joints, and they are long. Long, thin supports are easy to break. The walker is an all-terrain transport, designed to work on many worlds. It's not an indestructable behemoth. It's just a little much for the blasters on a speeder, or anything smaller. Walkers seem to be quite nimble for their size, supporting my theory that they are constructed lightly.

This must be a good debate. It's drawn more interest than most other threads. I must ask why the walker is thought to be so strong. I would think that a tank would be smaller but stonger than an armored transport. Does that not make sense?

boc120 02-13-2006 08:28 AM

I'm pretty sure that our periodic table rarely, if ever, applies to the Star Wars Universe. They are always talking about things like Tibanna gas, and plastisteel, or transparisteel, and a bazzillion other random minerals that each planet mines for whatever reason. Authors just make up a new one when it fits their need. I'm all for it though, there are a lot of planets in the Star Wars galaxy.

Darth Alec 02-13-2006 09:25 AM

AT-ATs are the strongest semi-artillery pieces in the galaksy. But, as someone here pointed out, a toiletpaper roll snaps easily if pushed on the side, but strong if you stand on it.

jedi3112 02-13-2006 09:33 AM

I agree with boc120, I haven't seen any material that comes even close to bacta or kolto. Unless any of you have seen some sort of healing fluid. I bet that would put medics out of business real soon, so they might just keep the fluid a secret. I know I would.

Now AT-ATs are extremely tough. Quite honestly they are the most powerfull thing seen on the ground. Rancors may be tough, but they are still nothing compared to an AT-AT. A single shot from an AT-AT should be more than enough to kill a Rancor (unless it can survive with a really big hole in it's body), and the AT-AT in the game even fires 2 bolts at once. Now a Rancor is not nearly as armored as a shield generator, and in ESB, at maximum firepower the rebel shield goes down in 1 shot, and in the game, the Rancor only loses half it's health. Besides the Rancor will be kicked by the AT-AT when it comes within melee contact. Rancor on it's back, AT-AT walks on, steps on Rancor and there you have it, 1 crushed Rancor. Rancors may be powerfull, but an AT-AT is even stronger. And an AT-TE would be even stronger against one, due to the shorter legs. At some points the AT-TE is better then an AT-AT.

Besides a Crayt Dragon would be more fitting to Tatooine, the may not be as high as an AT-AT, but they are longer in the head to tail. And they are a lot stonger than a Rancor. They eat Banthas and I doubt a bantha fits in a Rancor.

wedge2211 02-13-2006 09:34 AM

We still have Luke yelling, "that armor's too strong for blasters!" Plus there was that sequence of a Rebel turret firing a ginormous blaster bolt that struck an AT-AT in the knee (the weakest point of the leg) and did no visible damage. The things are strong--certainly not invincible, but very strong against conventional weapons. Certainly they're much stronger than a rancor; and much bigger, too, if you just watch the Return of the Jedi scene in Jabba's dungeon and the Battle of Hoth, watching Luke for scale. The door that slams down on the rancor's head is probably approximately equivalent to an AT-AT's leg squishing it, and the high-grade blasters on the Imperial Walker would probably obliterate the rancor.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:49 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.