Armydude71490 Posted October 31, 2004 Posted October 31, 2004 The AT-AT rocks And so does the AT-TE They would never fight so lets plz not flame about them any more! Comparing facts is fine and dandy but can we stop the constant arguing that I took part it!
LukeKatarn Posted October 31, 2004 Posted October 31, 2004 Sorry. It's just that, I LOVE the ATAT SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much more.
Armydude71490 Posted October 31, 2004 Posted October 31, 2004 I do too, check my post that was really long ago! I once got 80 kills in an At-At The thing that makes At-Te's not as good is relying on the main gunner in the at-at you only rely on your self which is my kind of vehicle!
Armydude71490 Posted October 31, 2004 Posted October 31, 2004 Look at this post It made everyone hate me:( Quote Originally posted by Armydude71490 The AT-AT Its cannons are way stronger for one, though slow and its armor is far better the rebels were firing anti vehicle turrets at it (dish turret battle of hoth eps. 5) and the coulden't even hurt it! First off to put it in the game they had to WEAKEN it because of huge balance problums! The At-TE was STRENGHED for this game first off it could only carry 20 troops so less of a moble spawn! The At-at however could carry 40 troops with living quarters and speeder bikes, or 2 AT-ST so WTF learn your starwars! AT-AT http://www.starwars.com/databank/vehicle/atat/index.html AT-TE http://www.starwars.com/databank/vehicle/atte/index.html Be sure to read the Expanded universe section 2:atat: I was just stating facts when everyone was like woh facts that will make me look bad so I better flame! Yes It was an angry post but come on!
SwordFish95 Posted October 31, 2004 Posted October 31, 2004 I definitely favor the AT-TE over the AT-AT. It has front and rear cannons, and a main cannon. If put against each other, the AT-TE would win because it could walk right next to it and not take any fire. It is much more maneuverable and can cause more havoc!
LukeKatarn Posted October 31, 2004 Posted October 31, 2004 Ah, but before the AT-TE could get next to the ATAT it would be destroyed. If they started at diffrent sides of the map, the ATAT WOULD win because their lasers are stronger and would RIP APART the ATTE.
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 1, 2004 Posted November 1, 2004 Like I said, the AT-AT is better at long range. I highly doubt we will ever see them fightin in close range. Most comparisons given by most people here rely on a retarded pilot on one side and a half decent one in the other.
Armydude71490 Posted November 1, 2004 Posted November 1, 2004 Quote Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad Like I said, the AT-AT is better at long range. I highly doubt we will ever see them fightin in close range. Most comparisons given by most people here rely on a retarded pilot on one side and a half decent one in the other. And that is why I hate comparisons on forums!
MandalorianRage Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 The AT-AT. Sure, it can be taken out easily by itself by Snowspeeders, but if you have the AT-ST defending it, or you have another AT-AT to walk beside, AND if you have two Imp pilots inside it, you're a devastating force. The way I see it, is that AT-AT's are big moveable bases with a powerful cannon. the AT-TE's are more of a weapon. The AT-TE can get along fine by itself, while the AT-AT needs support.
Syzerian Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 Neither, the AT-TE gets owned by the Seperatist tanks and the AT-AT gets owned by snow speeders. But if I had to make a choice it would be the AT-AT. The AT-AT lasers are actually quite fast its just that you are so high up it takes a while for them to hit the target giving the illusion of slow moving lasers plus it can move its head around to make up for its slow turning but the AT-TE takes half an hour to attack a target a few pixels away from the crosshair. You may say that the top cannon makes up for this but the lasers fired from it are so slow and are easyer to dodge than grenades and have almost no blast radius.
Evil Dark Jedi Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 AT-AT since the AT-TE goes down quicker.
Masterme5 Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 AT-AT! AT-TE sucks. SO weak firepower. except for the gunturret on the top of it.
Masterme5 Posted November 21, 2004 Posted November 21, 2004 Quote Originally posted by Darth Alec What?? vanguards can't even hurt the AT-AT (well mayby but not much) and who teamkill's like that (ark troopers are on team with the AT-TE). yes they can. and still, at-te sucks. by the way, the at-at can transport troops. too bad that it can't in this game.
Cpt. Bannon Posted November 21, 2004 Posted November 21, 2004 I think that, once the Jabba's palace map comes out (more importantly, the modifications that come with it), we'll be able to line up a match between the two on Hoth and settle the whole matter once and for all.
Mountainforest Posted November 21, 2004 Posted November 21, 2004 What would happen if you pack 3 pilots in the AT-TE on Rhen Var. It should regenerate health real fast. Anyone tried this?
Pho3nix Posted November 21, 2004 Posted November 21, 2004 yes, I think i had 2 pilots in an AT-TE but it seemed to make no difference <_<
Global Strike Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 From xbox.com. AT-TE: The Heaviest Artillery The AT-TE is the biggest, baddest, and, unfortunately, slowest vehicle in the game. It deals out more damage than any other vehicle, but the key is to have it fully manned. That should help clear things up. :jawa
Cpt. Bannon Posted November 27, 2004 Posted November 27, 2004 Nope, as not all of it's firepowr is forward facing, and it's nowhere near as heavily armored as the atat. Unfortuantely there is going to have to be a couple of matches between the two before any side concedes.
Darth Alec Posted November 28, 2004 Posted November 28, 2004 Quote Originally posted by GlobalStrike From xbox.com. AT-TE: The Heaviest Artillery The AT-TE is the biggest, baddest, and, unfortunately, slowest vehicle in the game. It deals out more damage than any other vehicle, but the key is to have it fully manned. They probebly ment the clone/cis era Since: the AT-AT is bigger many think it's badder (like me:) ) and it's probebly a little slower. And the AT-AT has way more powerfull armor, i think that's proven.
Masterme5 Posted November 28, 2004 Posted November 28, 2004 Quote Originally posted by Darth Alec They probebly ment the clone/cis era Since: the AT-AT is bigger many think it's badder (like me:) ) and it's probebly a little slower. And the AT-AT has way more powerfull armor, i think that's proven. yupp. they probably ment that the at-at is biggest and baddest in the clone war era. the at-at is bigger and badder. and probably many people think that. (at least I think so)
Mono_Giganto Posted November 28, 2004 Posted November 28, 2004 Even if they were set up in a fight, it would all depend on position. Lets say they start at opposite ends of the map, AT-AT wins. Close together, AT-TE wins. And just for the record, the AT-TE may have more guns, but one gun can ONLY fire forward, and one can ONLY fire backward. So they only place an AT-TE could possibly use ALL of its guns on the AT-AT is under it. But the AT-AT would blow it to bits before it got there. (Unless it spawned there.)
Jan Gaarni Posted November 29, 2004 Posted November 29, 2004 The correct way to test the firepower and armor on the two, is to place them well within firing range, and let both fire all (or in the case of the AT-TE, the top gun plus forward guns/rear guns) their weapons at eachother, to see who drops first. They both have to start at the same time. Do this for a few times to eliminate any lag issues, maybe switch the gunners and drivers around between the vehicles.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.