This is the talk page for the article "All Terrain Scout Transport/Legends."

This space is used for discussion relating to changes to the article, not for a discussion about the topic in question. For general questions about the article's topic, please visit the Knowledge Bank. Please remember to stay civil and sign all of your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Click here to start a new topic.

"Chicken walker"? Does that really belong in Overview and not in Behind the scenes, since I've never heard of there being any chickens in the Galaxy Far Far Away?

  • Actually, in Star Wars Battlefront 2, one of the Rebel Smuggler's lines is, "Chicken walkers!" So, yes, this still belongs. Crowe 14:01, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Hey, there are dogs, cats, and ducks in Star Wars, so why not chickens? Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) Imperial Emblem 14:04, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I'd actually call it a "giant ostrich" due to their long legs and egg shaped body. Does that seem more logical? --Nad Nutter (talk) 14:18, December 26, 2012 (UTC)Wednesday, December 26, 2012

New Republic service?Edit

Seeing as these guys faught in the Battle of Gyndine, do you think that we should add the New Republic to the affiliation list?

Command and Conquer 3Edit

Why is this little tidbit here? The only similarity between the AT-ST and the c&c mech is the bird like legs. There are a million other mechs that look a lot similar to the AT-ST than said mech, just play a game of MechWarrior. Also there is no evidence that the two machines are in anyway related. I doubt that the designers of the new c&c game had the AT-ST in mind, not to mention the fact that command and conquer has nothing to do with Star Wars. Leader 20:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

  • That's why I asked for an image in that note I added. Do you happen to have one? Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 21:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Nevermind; I didn't check the article. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 21:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
      • It looks very similar to the AT-ST. Just change around the head a bit and voila! I don't know about you lot, but for me the similarity is more than noticeable. Unit 8311 11:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
        • Sorry, but no. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 12:14, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
          • Hmph. Oh yeah, and let me also point out that other C&C games have also had units similar to SW things: there was a GDI mech that beared more than a passing resemblance to the AT-AT, and in Red Alert 2 there was a thing called the Desolator which very similar to Darth Vader. Unit 8311 13:24, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
            • Well, that vehicle you provided an image of doesn't look like an AT-ST. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 20:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
              • Well, it does to me. You've got to admit, it at least bears a passing resemblance to the AT-ST. Unit 8311 12:45, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
                • Yeah, the legs bear a passing resemblance to the AT-ST. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 15:30, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
                  • As does the head. Well, if I can't put this in, could I put something in along the lines of 'there are many mechs in other sci-fi franchises bearing resemblance or homage to the AT-ST'? Unit 8311 13:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Silly removal of pictureEdit

I find it unbeliveable that the model from the films themselves is considered too poor-quality to be used as a profile image. Can't we please reinstate it? VT-16 21:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Are you serious? That fuzzy, low-quality image has no place in an article. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 23:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
    • I darkened it and removed that atrocious NEGVV pic, secondary source pictures that can't follow the dimensions of movie vehicles, just won't do. If you want more clarity on the various parts, look at the schematics picture. VT-16 13:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
      • That's not good enough. If you can get a clearer, better-quality version of that image, we'll use it. Otherwise, we're not. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 13:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
        • The NEGVV picture wasn't that bad. Not as bad as that model picture, anyway...Unit 8311 18:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
          • In fact, if you want one from the movies, why not use this one? Unit 8311 18:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


  • Is the section about the battles necessary? Especially considering that it says they were first deployed during the Battle of Hoth, whereas they were first employed at the the end of the Clone Wars. Any thoughts before I remove it? Vryce 03:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Anyone? Vryce 06:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Saw this today, too. I suggest removing whatever is not confirmed by any source (either the employment in the clone wars or the "first use" on Hoth).
  • The ATST was first used on Hoth, as noted in the Star Wars Databank. It was an eailer model that was used before this conflict. What we should ask is if the earler moleds should be considered part of this page, in which case they should be added to the Battles section, made into a new page, or simply left in the history section.
    • Information from the Battles section could also be added into the History section, which seems to have some of the same information. Or the infomation in the History Secton could be moved into the battles section. What do you think?


  • In the new Star Wars Miniatures: The Force Unleashed expansion set, a "wookiee hunter AT-ST" is included. This miniature has a camoflauge paint job and what appear to be two "arms" from the sides which could be flamethrowers. Does anyone know anything else about this variant because including it in this article, or a link, would be appropriate in my opinion. Thanks. mrobviousjosh 19:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
  • It can be seen on one of the Force Unleashed concept art pictures. It's available on the game's webpage, I think. VT-16 21:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
  • I also saw some footage of the protagonist of Force Unleashed rolling up an AT-ST like a paper ball, wrapping the 'mech's limbs around the "head". It had the same hexagonal arms as some MechWarrior 'mechs, and I was wondering why it had arms. Is this another possible variant or did I just perceive the arms wrong? I am interested. 00:20, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I found it. I took a picture: http ://img150.(that shack with the images).us/img150/2903/variantio6.png They may just be beta wookie hunters, but they are a different one and I personally like them alot. They really do look like Mechwarrior weapons pods though--I redlined the shape of the pod. 00:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

CIS serviceEdit

I wasnt aware that the Confederacy of Independent Systems used the AT-ST! Wheres the source of this info and should it be added to the Affiliation list? 3...2...1...ACTIVATE! 19:12, October 31, 2011 (UTC)Phthinosuchusisanancestor

Time for a Rain Check Edit

Let's start from the beginning of C&C taking hints at Star Wars. In C&C Red Alert 2, the Desolators have a slight resemblance to Vader. The Mammoth Mk.II in C&C2 is scarily visually similar to the AT-AT, but not functionally. The Titan and wolverine walkers in C&C2 and later the expansion of C&C3 are quite similar to the AT-ST visually (both are walkers with a cockpit/weapon platform on thin legs that certain enemies (the Nod commando and Ewoks/Rebels respectively) can exploit as weak points). The sickle in C&C:RA2 and its successor are quite reminiscent of spider droids. The C&C:RA3 striker VX and Mecha Tengu are walkers like the others, but they have to land from flying (the tengu hovers just above the ground though). The C&C:RA3 and C&C3/4 King Onis and Avatar/ Purifier/Redeemer walkers are similar to AT models, but having a more humanoid body style. The C&C2 cyborg Reaper resembles a spider droid. Lastly, the C&C3 Nod MCV and some C&C4 crawlers resemble the AT-AT. Get over each individual similarity. Wait, the Scrin fleet vaguely resembles a Republic or Imperial fleet. --AoBzealot0812 (talk) 00:31, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

  • And your point being... what? If you're asking to put that in a BTS, it's speculation and original research. Cade Calrayn StupidRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit 00:54, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

Can someone please stop crediting Bill George on this page for the creation of the AT-ST walker? He did not even work at ILM when the first Hoth AT-ST was created. Joe Johnston is the creator of the original AT-ST concept model that George Lucas liked enough to include in the background scenes with the AT-AT's. They expanded on the design to give them more of an appearance in Jedi.

Alternate TFU2 model. Edit

In the Force Unleashed 2's PC version the AT-STs are... odd to say the least Those two boxes actually form a boxy U-shape that wraps around the head, and their grenades were (Undoubtedly for gameplay purposes) nearly a foot an a half long.SargeLIVES (talk) 01:43, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

Is this a noteworthy variant? Or something that can be chalked up to art design?

Why are all these "variations" on the AT-ST listed when, clearly, they're unique walker designs? An AT-ST Variation shouldn't be a wholely separate walker designation. It's like the AT-RT being listed as a variation, or the AT-PT.

Or for a more earthy analogy, it's like listing a Panzer IV as a variation of a Tiger-I. Variations and being in the same category aren't the same thing is all I'm saying.

Re. Playable appearances in Video Games: Edit

Both Jedi Knight II (Jedi Outcast) and Jedi Academy have levels/missions where the player can legitimately use AT-STs. Those are Yavin_Canyon in JK:JO and the Dosuun Mission in Academy. A cheat code can also place the player character inside one (and allow it to be operated) anywhere there is enough space for it to materialize around the player. --Tim Battershell (talk) 04:53, October 26, 2013 (UTC)

AT-ST armor source?? Edit

Ok so the source stating that the AT-ST has durasteel grade armor doesn't seem to be correct. I have the Visual Dictionary and nowhere in it does it bring up an AT-STs capabilities as far as armor goes, just the pilots but it doesn't say anything about the AT-ST itself.

So shouldn't this source be changed? Because unless I'm blind, I ain't seeing it in the visual dictionary and it's clearly a false information source for that particular bit. Wolfscar45 (talk) 00:31, October 4, 2014 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+