@Koehlie _ technically the rotating turret could cover the sides but then again most vehicles in star wars don't make sense. Look at the imperial troop transport where the soldiers are literally exposed. The ones that do make sense are the MTT and AAT.
@Deutschland Mexiko I'm referring to the imperial troop transport. The one shown in the mandalorian and was made famous by its toy version. This isn't meant to be condescending btw I hope
The AT-AT had way more weak points and blind spots than the AT-TE. The armor is only tough on outer surfaces. We see in Rogue One that a single machine gun turret from a U-Wing is able to completely disable an AT-AT. Rebels proved there are about a dozen ways to take out this thing. I'd pick the AT-TE any day.
@Deutschland Mexiko True that it was an AT-ACT, but the AT-AT follows a nearly identical model with the same flaws and weaknesses. You would need extraordinary firepower to destroy an AT-AT (head-on), but far less firepower if you were smart and shot at any one of its exposed critical points. It's the same thing with the AT-TE. We see it can survive several AAT cannon shots on a main plate, but hit an exposed part like the underbelly, and of course you'd only need one shot. The AT-TE could be equipped with anti-armor shells. Hitting an AT-AT's knee with one of those bad boys and the whole thing will tumble down. The AT-AT itself wasn't that powerful. It's cannons were only comparable to the AAT's, and in a fixed direction. It's armor wasn't anything special either, only comparable to the Juggernaut's. The much smaller AT-AP had an enormous main cannon, same thing with the J-1, AV-7, RX-200, AT-HE, AT-UT, SP-HA, etc. The AT-AT is powerful yes, but could easily be destroyed by a Juggernaut, Supertank, Protodeka, Octuptarra, and many more. It's great at squashing rebels, but is nothing but average on a real battlefield.
@@calebdonaldson8770 yeah if the empire had instead kept the AT-TE low to the ground design but still made it a different vehicle or even just upgraded the tech of the AT-TE the rebels would have had a much harder time going up against Imperial walkers and ground forces
The spotter seems a more fit position to be commander. Tanks irl have the commander spot targets and observe the surroundings that way everyone else can focus on their task
0:16 Trooper is 2 time bigger here. So scale off, and walker is almost 10 meter high, and in 1:00 look like its 20 meter high if you scale it from that trooper.
I loved this walker from the moment I first saw it, it made so much more sense to be than the AT-AT, although I always felt it needed an upgrade/modification to it’s weapons, and another to it’s propulsion. For weapons it needs to add one or two of the ball anti infantry turrets to each side as well as mounting one anti Starfighter weapon turret on the back of the walker. Or just have every 6th, 8th or 10th unit have the cannon replaced with a turret with a quad barrel linked rapid fire lasers, with plenty of power to easily down Star fighters, but also able to depress the turret enough to engage enemy infantry and armor on the ground, think of turrets with Star Wars equivalent of the Soviet ZSU-23-4, which is similar to the gun turrets on the Falcon. Additionally, while the six legs were great for maneuvering on rough ground and on very uneven terrain, as well as making a stable gun platform, it should have had some sort of repulser system so it could be used to move more rapidly when possible.
It can run at a maximium speed of either 40kmps or 60kmps depending on various sources, but that is fast to me. Adding more turrets would mean more spotters and crews, with 6 crews that's nearly wayy too much already, and the thing has ground troops/Air troops to support them, so doesn't make sense to add AA on top of it, plus more dedicated crews and cost. The belly is exposed because it always walk with troops to detect land mine, and guard its belly. So yeah, very good decision imo.
The biggest changes I'd make to the AT-TE are moving the top gunner inside the turret, reducing the gunnery crew to four (two front gunners, one tail gunner, one turret gunner), making the spotter the commander of the vehicle so that the pilot can focus on driving, and beef up the belly armor to make it less vulnerable to attacks from below. Other than those changes, it's an excellent design, IMHO far superior to the top-heavy AT-AT and AT-M6.
Imo one of the front turret gunners should be placed at the back with the back gunner as they are able to have eyes on both the front and back at once.
@@Sonof_DRN2004 Most attacks are going to come from the front and sides, so the turret gunner (who can swivel 360 degrees) can cover the back if needed along with the tailgunner, since the front guns can each cover their respective side as far as I know.
@@kitirena_koneko belly army would likely slow the vehicle, strain its automatic parts, and may make it harder for the drop ships. There is no reason for the AT-TE to need four ball other turrets along with its main turret. The lower two should be removed and the belly armor issue should instead be remedied with a two-plane 360 ball turret on the belly to fend off any infantry that come too close to the walker while still being able to support the forward two ball turrets since it should ideally be able to elevate to at least horizontal, similar to the ball turrets on American WW2 bombers
@@Insert-Retarded-Reply-Here I have to respectfully disagree about belly armor--a slight increase, say about an extra 1cm of thickness, would help protect from attacks like what Luke Skywalker did to one At-AT in Empire Strikes Back, as well as what happened to way too many American APCs in Iraq and Afghanistan but not strain the motors too excessively. I do agree that the lower pair of forward turrets should be moved to the sides and given a 180 degree fire field, which would be an improvement, but adding a ventral ball turret is a bad idea because its field of fire would be blocked by all six legs. As a compromise, how about a pair of heavy antipersonnel blasters, one forward of the center legs and one aft, that could retract inside the armored shell like the one mounted on the Millenium Falcon in ESB? That way, the crew could defend against attackers trying to use anti-armor tactics under the AT-TE but without the limitations of yet another full-size cannon. As I read your reply I remembered the times when I was designing new mecha for BattleTech and how I had to balance engine, armor, and weapons against each other in a series of tradeoffs--too much armor and the mech is impregnable but can't move, too many weapons and there's no room for armor, too big of an engine and the mech moves like a bat out of hell but has tissue paper for armor and can't afford any weight for weapons. Same basic idea here with the AT-TE, just like with real-world armor.
I never knew there were so many ball turret gunners in the tank. I assumed by playing the Battlefronts that the driver controlled the front 4 cannons or at least a single gunner did, as well as 1 gunner for the rear.
Anyone else remember in the original battlefront1 if u turned the rear guns to the way left or right it would shoot a single endless beam of green heavy lasers? Good times
Halfscreen: You really need to do the LAAT troop transport gunship/AT-TE carrier gunship vehicle used during the Clone wars. I'm surprised you haven't done it yet. It would tie in the few videos already done for the Clone Wars time period together.
U know the AT-TE is one of my favorite Heavy Artillery vehicles and the second is the clone turbo tank can u do a video of the clone turbo tank please and thank u my friend.
I like how the ATAT is kinda bad but has to be the improvment of the ATTE from the Clone Wars. Continuity restored to have a cooler design but officially is worse than his upgrade
I would have made it 5 meters taller and 7 meters longer. Change the top turret to smaller but faster shooting turrets to defend against air attacks and intercept missiles. The six other turrets I would make them sightly stronger and double barreled. The armor would be upgraded and the final upgrade would be some kind of missile launcher on the top to take on targets further distance away.
I believe that over all the AT-TE was a better vehicle than the AT-AT. What the AT-TE needed is an upgrading of it's armor (including armor curtains to protect it's belly from all sides), some side guns, and the ability to squat down.
Another good example of how incongruous the visual design of the new "old" episodes were with the "later" ones. It just had to be cooler looking, didn't it.
Very nice animation - just wondering tho, there's an episode of TCW (the one on Ryloth, you showed a clip of it at the end) where the AT-TEs deploy AT-RTs, but there isn't room for them in your model. Is the AT-RT transport a modified variant with the rear passenger compartment converted?
Remember the at-te could go to a top speed of 60mph But we only see it go around 25 for plot reasons The crew wouldn't be harmed at 60mph due to the accelerator comp used in starships, which could kill a person with its acceleration As a tool of dominance and scariness, the at-at is ahead But in practical use for a war Or even militias the at-te will win But for much other type of battles, the at-at So stop comparing the two It's like clone commandos vs. arcs THEY ARE GOOD AT WHAT THEY DO AND HOW THEY DO IT
@ 5:24 - the cross section is weird because there's a small hole in between the front and rear. Dafuq. Are people suppose to crawl to get to the other side? That's ineffective. Imagine if the AT-TE is caught on fire, or abut to blow and you're trying to get out.
am i the only one who thinks this thing could use a nice retrofit? as in replace the central legs with engines, replace the cannon ontop with radars/sensors. maybe add a hull cutter under neither?
Yeah comparing to the incredible cross sections illustrations the modeled vehicle is clearly much bigger relative to the clones. They look a lot more cramped in the ICC drawing. The tunnel between compartments looks like a clone would have crawl through but in the model it appears a clone could walk through almost upright. Edit: The legends size figures are like 60% as big as the "canon" figures. Not sure which is technically more accurate relative to how the walker appears in the films.
@@Rampant16 It's basically a time constraint issue. My goal to have each animation done in a week. Having a more accurate representation would have taken me months, It's time I just don't have it on my hand.
@@Halfscreen Nah don't worry about it, it looks fantastic, especially if its done on a time crunch. As I'm sure you know the numbers on a lot of these things are up in the air anyways so a 100% definitive scale is aways going to be difficult, if not impossible to determine. For all I know the ICC scale is wrong and yours is right.
Why exactly did they chose the at-at over this one, this might not have that much armor or firepower but it could be used in stealth operations climbing walls or even in space drop off on ship hulls with the magnetic legs.
How we’re the AT-ATs transported into battle? The delivery system for the AT-TE seems really practical. I never understood what the benefit of walkers over craft that could hover. Though, the more we get of the social upheaval in the bad batch it does seem like an imposing crowd control device
I'm pretty sure the At-At's had special ships designed to hold them and drop them off. However I agree that the AT-TE has a much more practical and economic option, and it gives extra functionality to the already incredibly designed LAAT.
Well the AT-AT had some pluses that made it better than the AT-TE The AT-AT for one thing was almost invulnerable to most blaster, and projectile attacks, save for a weak spot at the neck, and its legs being vulnerable to be tripped Also it had more firepower and range, making it an all purpose ground assault vechile, that can hold its own to aircraft attacks The fact it was well armored and high, made it less vulnerable compared to the low AT-TE on the other hand the AT-TE, being low makes it less likely to be tripped but more vulnerable to mines So there’s pros and cons for both of them, but the point is, the AT-AT was better suited for the Empire’s doctrine of near unstoppable war machines on the ground
Honestly I’d say the separatists had better tanks sense they tend to be both more effective and provided better protection for the important crew members
@JaigEyesCustom Yeah, and I think there is one on Utapau. But apart from those, it’s pretty clear the exposed gunner isn’t necessary since plenty of those cannons can be seen firing.
@JaigEyesCustom It kinda makes me wonder if the external gunner was even a thing in episode 2, and they added them in the following movie simply because they were referenced in secondary material ( which itself probably stemmed from concept arts and design notes).
Why would they make the driver so exposed like that, tanks from 1916 did a better job at keeping their crew safe than people with way superior technology.
Makes zero sense that these or AT-AT's weren't fitted with shields. Why would they be unshielded when the tech was easily fitted to much smaller spaceships?
53 dislikes from reble scum. How dare you show such disrespect to the Empire. But seriously though this channel gives me so much information im enjoying each video I come across.
@@ironmask4568 yes but some stars Wars vehicule make more sense so you can't really say that (anyway it's the most logical walker the empire ever used)
Alot of this scaling between the troopers and the walker is way off, like the thumbnail. I doubt an AT-TE could that many troops. Although they can fit AT-RTs sooo.
I find it ironic that the most important people on board (the main gunner and driver) is the most exposed out of the whole crew.
@Koehlie _ technically the rotating turret could cover the sides but then again most vehicles in star wars don't make sense. Look at the imperial troop transport where the soldiers are literally exposed. The ones that do make sense are the MTT and AAT.
@@citrij3816 when the separatists vehicles make more sense than the republics 😂
It just wouldn't be Star Wars without a crippling design flaw.
@Deutschland Mexiko I'm referring to the imperial troop transport. The one shown in the mandalorian and was made famous by its toy version. This isn't meant to be condescending btw I hope
It's also called the imperial troop transport k79-80 on the star wars fandom
AT-AT: Oh my senpai AT-TE is so weak, taken out by a single rocket
AT-TE: Says the walkers who get destroyed by tow cable and a hand bomb
The AT-AT had way more weak points and blind spots than the AT-TE. The armor is only tough on outer surfaces. We see in Rogue One that a single machine gun turret from a U-Wing is able to completely disable an AT-AT. Rebels proved there are about a dozen ways to take out this thing. I'd pick the AT-TE any day.
@@calebdonaldson8770 actually in rouge one it was a AT-ACT which were made for carrying cargo
@Deutschland Mexiko True that it was an AT-ACT, but the AT-AT follows a nearly identical model with the same flaws and weaknesses. You would need extraordinary firepower to destroy an AT-AT (head-on), but far less firepower if you were smart and shot at any one of its exposed critical points. It's the same thing with the AT-TE. We see it can survive several AAT cannon shots on a main plate, but hit an exposed part like the underbelly, and of course you'd only need one shot. The AT-TE could be equipped with anti-armor shells. Hitting an AT-AT's knee with one of those bad boys and the whole thing will tumble down. The AT-AT itself wasn't that powerful. It's cannons were only comparable to the AAT's, and in a fixed direction. It's armor wasn't anything special either, only comparable to the Juggernaut's. The much smaller AT-AP had an enormous main cannon, same thing with the J-1, AV-7, RX-200, AT-HE, AT-UT, SP-HA, etc. The AT-AT is powerful yes, but could easily be destroyed by a Juggernaut, Supertank, Protodeka, Octuptarra, and many more. It's great at squashing rebels, but is nothing but average on a real battlefield.
Meanwhile baneblade: haha guns go brrr
@@calebdonaldson8770 yeah if the empire had instead kept the AT-TE low to the ground design but still made it a different vehicle or even just upgraded the tech of the AT-TE the rebels would have had a much harder time going up against Imperial walkers and ground forces
The spotter seems a more fit position to be commander. Tanks irl have the commander spot targets and observe the surroundings that way everyone else can focus on their task
You're right I was LVT-P7A1 commander in the Marines. I rarely drove.
@@omarjones1460 I know that was 2 months ago but what's that?
@@ktownyak6281 A Marine Amphibious Assault vehicle.
1:00 Isnt the scale of the troopers a little bit of? Or am I missing something?
yeah this is waaaaay out of scale, like by a factor of two. that front cockpit is a pretty tight fit for one pilot, but it looks huge in this
I dont see anything wrong
“arent you a little short for a stormtrooper?”
0:16 Trooper is 2 time bigger here. So scale off, and walker is almost 10 meter high, and in 1:00 look like its 20 meter high if you scale it from that trooper.
no the AT TE is WAAAY to big
I loved this walker from the moment I first saw it, it made so much more sense to be than the AT-AT, although I always felt it needed an upgrade/modification to it’s weapons, and another to it’s propulsion. For weapons it needs to add one or two of the ball anti infantry turrets to each side as well as mounting one anti Starfighter weapon turret on the back of the walker. Or just have every 6th, 8th or 10th unit have the cannon replaced with a turret with a quad barrel linked rapid fire lasers, with plenty of power to easily down Star fighters, but also able to depress the turret enough to engage enemy infantry and armor on the ground, think of turrets with Star Wars equivalent of the Soviet ZSU-23-4, which is similar to the gun turrets on the Falcon.
Additionally, while the six legs were great for maneuvering on rough ground and on very uneven terrain, as well as making a stable gun platform, it should have had some sort of repulser system so it could be used to move more rapidly when possible.
Thanks for the comments
It can run at a maximium speed of either 40kmps or 60kmps depending on various sources, but that is fast to me. Adding more turrets would mean more spotters and crews, with 6 crews that's nearly wayy too much already, and the thing has ground troops/Air troops to support them, so doesn't make sense to add AA on top of it, plus more dedicated crews and cost. The belly is exposed because it always walk with troops to detect land mine, and guard its belly. So yeah, very good decision imo.
I loved it since that really metal moment when they started climbing up the cliffs in that clone wars movie.
@@Halfscreen can you do Dash Rendar's Outrider
@@Mextlatec I'm not sure. YT algo isn't too friendly with an unknown subject.
The biggest changes I'd make to the AT-TE are moving the top gunner inside the turret, reducing the gunnery crew to four (two front gunners, one tail gunner, one turret gunner), making the spotter the commander of the vehicle so that the pilot can focus on driving, and beef up the belly armor to make it less vulnerable to attacks from below. Other than those changes, it's an excellent design, IMHO far superior to the top-heavy AT-AT and AT-M6.
Imo one of the front turret gunners should be placed at the back with the back gunner as they are able to have eyes on both the front and back at once.
@@Sonof_DRN2004 Most attacks are going to come from the front and sides, so the turret gunner (who can swivel 360 degrees) can cover the back if needed along with the tailgunner, since the front guns can each cover their respective side as far as I know.
@@kitirena_koneko belly army would likely slow the vehicle, strain its automatic parts, and may make it harder for the drop ships. There is no reason for the AT-TE to need four ball other turrets along with its main turret. The lower two should be removed and the belly armor issue should instead be remedied with a two-plane 360 ball turret on the belly to fend off any infantry that come too close to the walker while still being able to support the forward two ball turrets since it should ideally be able to elevate to at least horizontal, similar to the ball turrets on American WW2 bombers
@@Insert-Retarded-Reply-Here I have to respectfully disagree about belly armor--a slight increase, say about an extra 1cm of thickness, would help protect from attacks like what Luke Skywalker did to one At-AT in Empire Strikes Back, as well as what happened to way too many American APCs in Iraq and Afghanistan but not strain the motors too excessively. I do agree that the lower pair of forward turrets should be moved to the sides and given a 180 degree fire field, which would be an improvement, but adding a ventral ball turret is a bad idea because its field of fire would be blocked by all six legs. As a compromise, how about a pair of heavy antipersonnel blasters, one forward of the center legs and one aft, that could retract inside the armored shell like the one mounted on the Millenium Falcon in ESB? That way, the crew could defend against attackers trying to use anti-armor tactics under the AT-TE but without the limitations of yet another full-size cannon.
As I read your reply I remembered the times when I was designing new mecha for BattleTech and how I had to balance engine, armor, and weapons against each other in a series of tradeoffs--too much armor and the mech is impregnable but can't move, too many weapons and there's no room for armor, too big of an engine and the mech moves like a bat out of hell but has tissue paper for armor and can't afford any weight for weapons. Same basic idea here with the AT-TE, just like with real-world armor.
I Agree
This walker makes alot more sense than the ATAT
Wow. I never noticed the neck of the AT-TE before. Such a nice detail.
I never knew there were so many ball turret gunners in the tank. I assumed by playing the Battlefronts that the driver controlled the front 4 cannons or at least a single gunner did, as well as 1 gunner for the rear.
Great video of an awesome walker!
Anyone else remember in the original battlefront1 if u turned the rear guns to the way left or right it would shoot a single endless beam of green heavy lasers? Good times
The fastest way to destroy the techno union ships on geonosis was to turn the bad boi around
This channel is so underrated :/
But what do you think about inside the venator? I would like to see how you will make all hangars shots xD
Oddly enough, I'm actually working on the Venator as we speak. Hopefully, I can get it done sometime next Sunday. Thanks.
@@Halfscreen can you do the LAAT Republic Gunship
@@Mextlatec I need to find a good 3D model first.
yesss THESE ARE SOOO GOOD
I love this metal hercules beetle
Halfscreen: You really need to do the LAAT troop transport gunship/AT-TE carrier gunship vehicle used during the Clone wars. I'm surprised you haven't done it yet. It would tie in the few videos already done for the Clone Wars time period together.
I got a good 3D model, hoping to free up some time when I'm done with some of my other projects.
I LOVE this Walker
Just found your channel, brilliant 👍
Welcome aboard!
We need some wh40k stuff mainly about the titans, battle barge, baneblade and its variants
I liked these better than most vehicles in Star Wars :)
U know the AT-TE is one of my favorite Heavy Artillery vehicles and the second is the clone turbo tank can u do a video of the clone turbo tank please and thank u my friend.
I can look into it. Thanks for watching.
@@Halfscreen no problem at all dude no problem at all please have a nice afternoon ok dude 👍😁.
@@VictorPerez-hg2ed 😎
@@Halfscreen 😎👍.
I gotta make a playlist of these for me to fal asleep to its oddly relaxing to listen to these
Please do! 😜
@@Halfscreen done got 6 star wars ones so far I can't wait for the next ones
I like how the ATAT is kinda bad but has to be the improvment of the ATTE from the Clone Wars. Continuity restored to have a cooler design but officially is worse than his upgrade
Lemme just say you got the trooper sizes wrong but the video is awesome
Actually i remember some information about it the back guns were anti air guns
AWESOME!!!
Glad you think so!
I don't remember the AT-TE being this big...
📣 IN THE FUTURE WE WILL DISCONTINUE REAR CANNONS BECAUSE... UMMMMMMMM
Wasn’t there also a bay to hold AT-RT’s as seen in that episode on Ryloth
There were multiple interior designs. Some even had a command center
yeah no and this looks like a "slightly" different scale compared to that scene
Fury and Warpig The Tanks
Nice video. Please make a video of AT-ST
Yeah...i thought about it but don't have a 3D model that is to my standard in my collection. I will look into it.
The script for the latter half of the vid is the wookiepeedia article which I found interesting 👍👍
Do a sandcrawler next please
I would suggest twin E-Web Heavy Repeating blasters on the top.
Still my favorite transport vehicle
Please do one for the Republic Gunship if it hasn't been done already.
I have the 3D model in my collection, but it doesn't meet requirement.
The interesting thing about all these vehicles is that they were not autonomous, something that apparently wasn't even conceived of back then.
While the blueprint specs says 60km/h. From seeing it in the serie, You should be lucky if you even reached 30km/h
Well... it was possible for the walker to reach 60kmph it would just liquify the crew, so it was best to keep it slow to keep it effective
How often do you drive a tank wide open? Not very.
Let's see how much more vulnerable they can design a weapon.
Why were those walkers in a circle? I get that they are providing limited cover but they are not making use of most of their weapons.
The rebuplic approves this video
thanks!
@@Halfscreen no problem
I would have made it 5 meters taller and 7 meters longer. Change the top turret to smaller but faster shooting turrets to defend against air attacks and intercept missiles. The six other turrets I would make them sightly stronger and double barreled. The armor would be upgraded and the final upgrade would be some kind of missile launcher on the top to take on targets further distance away.
I believe that over all the AT-TE was a better vehicle than the AT-AT. What the AT-TE needed is an upgrading of it's armor (including armor curtains to protect it's belly from all sides), some side guns, and the ability to squat down.
Another good example of how incongruous the visual design of the new "old" episodes were with the "later" ones. It just had to be cooler looking, didn't it.
Could you do a video of Havoc Marauder from The bad batch?
Very nice animation - just wondering tho, there's an episode of TCW (the one on Ryloth, you showed a clip of it at the end) where the AT-TEs deploy AT-RTs, but there isn't room for them in your model. Is the AT-RT transport a modified variant with the rear passenger compartment converted?
To be honest, I have to resize the 3D model to make the it fit.
Wait, 60 km/h? Holy fuck that's terrifying.
Don't forget that it can walk on walls!
Remember the at-te could go to a top speed of 60mph
But we only see it go around 25 for plot reasons
The crew wouldn't be harmed at 60mph due to the accelerator comp used in starships, which could kill a person with its acceleration
As a tool of dominance and scariness, the at-at is ahead
But in practical use for a war
Or even militias the at-te will win
But for much other type of battles, the at-at
So stop comparing the two
It's like clone commandos vs. arcs
THEY ARE GOOD AT WHAT THEY DO AND HOW THEY DO IT
I wanted you to know the t 65 x-wing
I'm working on it right now.
Is there a video on the Jarwa sand crawler?
No, not yet.
@@Halfscreen you should make a video on the crawler. It was a mining vehicle that was abandoned and the Jawas took over.
@@danielnewton5867 I thought about it a while back but forgot about it.
Normally, i created something that is popular at the moment, otherwise, the video could bomb.
can you do the lucerhulk?
It's possible...
@@Halfscreen with a core ship.
@ 5:24 - the cross section is weird because there's a small hole in between the front and rear. Dafuq. Are people suppose to crawl to get to the other side? That's ineffective. Imagine if the AT-TE is caught on fire, or abut to blow and you're trying to get out.
There is a door that open at the rear of the AT-TE.
am i the only one who thinks this thing could use a nice retrofit? as in replace the central legs with engines, replace the cannon ontop with radars/sensors. maybe add a hull cutter under neither?
i think u forgot about the scenes where 1-2 at-rt are able to be put in the back with a lift like thing
Watching this after the Bad Batch episode "Common Ground"
Suggestion: Trade Federation / CIS MTT and AAT.
Now look at the scale of the ATTE vs. the giant laser cannon tanks (sorry i don’t recall the name)
SPHA walker: Self propelled heavy artillery walker
@@darthdystopian4550 thanks man
i love the prequels
Yup, me too.
inside padme next plz
But aren't there secret blasters underneath near the rear? Seen from bf2.
what do you use to model the vehicles?
3DS max mainly.
Can you do a republic frigate
Probably down the road...
I may be wrong, But to me it looks like you have made the AT-TE a bit too big in your graphics, or perhaps the clones too small.
I did some basically measurement, but you could be right.
Yeah comparing to the incredible cross sections illustrations the modeled vehicle is clearly much bigger relative to the clones. They look a lot more cramped in the ICC drawing.
The tunnel between compartments looks like a clone would have crawl through but in the model it appears a clone could walk through almost upright.
Edit: The legends size figures are like 60% as big as the "canon" figures. Not sure which is technically more accurate relative to how the walker appears in the films.
@@Rampant16 It's basically a time constraint issue. My goal to have each animation done in a week. Having a more accurate representation would have taken me months, It's time I just don't have it on my hand.
@@Halfscreen Nah don't worry about it, it looks fantastic, especially if its done on a time crunch.
As I'm sure you know the numbers on a lot of these things are up in the air anyways so a 100% definitive scale is aways going to be difficult, if not impossible to determine. For all I know the ICC scale is wrong and yours is right.
Wait I thought this thing had a small command center in one of the two moduals. Is that some kind of variation of the walker or something?
Why exactly did they chose the at-at over this one, this might not have that much armor or firepower but it could be used in stealth operations climbing walls or even in space drop off on ship hulls with the magnetic legs.
anybody else accidenly watch the entire pillow cube ad by accident
How we’re the AT-ATs transported into battle? The delivery system for the AT-TE seems really practical. I never understood what the benefit of walkers over craft that could hover. Though, the more we get of the social upheaval in the bad batch it does seem like an imposing crowd control device
I'm pretty sure the At-At's had special ships designed to hold them and drop them off. However I agree that the AT-TE has a much more practical and economic option, and it gives extra functionality to the already incredibly designed LAAT.
Who would win a fight between an AT-AT and an AT-TE?
AT-TE AKA Retirement home for clones
That diagram of the walker is so disproportionate of how the walker should be.
It's really based on the model I downloaded. You might be right.
Really cool!
How do you get those AT-TE models?
I don't remember where I downloaded the 3D model. Most of the internal were custom made.
How wide was it
Odd how this vehicle closely resembles the military mule
The speed, 60km/h is correct? Look like 1 km/h for me.
Information based on site below.
starwars.fandom.com/wiki/All_Terrain_Tactical_Enforcer
I wish to have that
Can you please make warhammer 40k details
They are so good that they get easily destroyed and never showed as a good vehicle (if you call it that) in neither films nor cartoons
AT-AT being the successor to AT-TE somehow seems backwards to me...
Well the AT-AT had some pluses that made it better than the AT-TE
The AT-AT for one thing was almost invulnerable to most blaster, and projectile attacks, save for a weak spot at the neck, and its legs being vulnerable to be tripped
Also it had more firepower and range, making it an all purpose ground assault vechile, that can hold its own to aircraft attacks
The fact it was well armored and high, made it less vulnerable compared to the low AT-TE
on the other hand the AT-TE, being low makes it less likely to be tripped but more vulnerable to mines
So there’s pros and cons for both of them, but the point is, the AT-AT was better suited for the Empire’s doctrine of near unstoppable war machines on the ground
The pic at the end shows two tail gunners instead of the one in your simulation
There are two gunners but the second one is hidden due to perspective.
Honestly I’d say the separatists had better tanks sense they tend to be both more effective and provided better protection for the important crew members
I thought they held AT-RT's as well
Always my favorite walker of the starwars saga ❤️
So... I've seen the AT-TE has side doors is that correct? Or does the back open?? How do they get in??? 😂
btw guys you can still enjoy and understand the video on mute
I what I told one of the viewer earlier. 😁
tx-130 please, its only the coolest hover tank to ever exist
it's kind of stupid to have the gunner and controls for the main gun outside of the safety of the at-te where it could be hijacked or disabled
If you look at attack of the clone and revenge of the sith, most of them aren’t operated externally.
@JaigEyesCustom
Yeah, and I think there is one on Utapau. But apart from those, it’s pretty clear the exposed gunner isn’t necessary since plenty of those cannons can be seen firing.
@JaigEyesCustom
It kinda makes me wonder if the external gunner was even a thing in episode 2, and they added them in the following movie simply because they were referenced in secondary material ( which itself probably stemmed from concept arts and design notes).
AT-AE?
all terrain tactical enforcer
@JaigEyesCustom It's fixed. Good catch!
Can u do one one the tie fighters 👉👈please
It's coming, but I'm trying to finished my next video.
Why would they make the driver so exposed like that, tanks from 1916 did a better job at keeping their crew safe than people with way superior technology.
It's star wars, nothing really make any sense.
@@Halfscreen fair enough
How would troopers enter the at-te
Who else came here to check the accuracy of their Lego version?
@2:09 "...with a TOP speed of 60 km/h..."
@3:43 "...at an AVERAGE speed of 60 km/h..."
🤔
technically both could be right if it steams ahead at full all the time
poor engine tho
Makes zero sense that these or AT-AT's weren't fitted with shields. Why would they be unshielded when the tech was easily fitted to much smaller spaceships?
60 km /h ?
Why does it seem that any star wars movie or show that happened before the OT have what seems better technology than the OT
HOW THE HELL DOES IT TURN
53 dislikes from reble scum. How dare you show such disrespect to the Empire.
But seriously though this channel gives me so much information im enjoying each video I come across.
I haven't seen any other channel creating 3D model of the interior. Thanks for watching.
"Placed in strategic place" proceed to show that the entire side if the Walker is vulnerable.
dud it`s star wars nothing is realistic
@@ironmask4568 yes but some stars Wars vehicule make more sense so you can't really say that (anyway it's the most logical walker the empire ever used)
Juggernaut Turbo Tank?
Alot of this scaling between the troopers and the walker is way off, like the thumbnail. I doubt an AT-TE could that many troops. Although they can fit AT-RTs sooo.