The T'Rakk

  • Thread starter Thread starter H
  • Start date Start date
emperorpenguin said:
a typo would be my opinion, Mongoose do seem to suffer a lot of them

Yeah but some suspected typos turn into the, "rule as written", take the Anti-Fighter trait on the Aft Arc Beam weapon of the Drakh Cruiser for example...

Upon reflection, I have to concurr my only real gripe with the ship is that SM doesn't fit the theme of the Narn fleet. Give it 2x45 turns and I think the ship is great...
 
I would drop the turns to 2/45 and create a Crusade Era variant with SM, a better weapons load out and up it to Raid. Explain that when the Narn received artificial gravity technology from the ISA they quickly built gravitic drives. Too big for their smallest ships, they fit in perfectly on the T'rakk. Combined with the vessels over powered reactors, it gave the ship frightening maneuverability.
 
Hash said:
emperorpenguin said:
a typo would be my opinion, Mongoose do seem to suffer a lot of them

Yeah but some suspected typos turn into the, "rule as written", take the Anti-Fighter trait on the Aft Arc Beam weapon of the Drakh Cruiser for example...
...

I know, when I pointed that out my post was deleted... :roll:
 
Everyone keeps talking about the T'Rakk bridge and how out of place it looks. Don't you all see? It is basically a copy of the proto Star Destroyers as seen in Star Wars episode III?

Besides, taking the wing of a ship, you gotta stick the bridges somewhere and since the Narn seem to be the Russians of the space world, i.e. "It is adiquate", welding on a bridge superstructure on top of the "wing" doesn't seem to far out of place.
 
It is basically a copy of the proto Star Destroyers as seen in Star Wars episode III?

LOL!

...but, scarily, possibly true.

I'd house rule the thing to 2/45, which is plausible and still pretty good for the Narns.
 
The Venator is quite an interesting ship; what you actually saw in Revenge of the Sith (Go, Sith, Go...) was them being used in spectacularly inappropriate circumstances. They are fast but not that agile, they are intended primarily as carriers, five wings to the Imperator's one, with a small number of main turrets- each upper surface beside the superstructure- of very heavy weapons designed to provide long range fire support to the fighter wing. The closest ACtA equivalent, stat- wise, would be some sort of Avenger-Apollo crossbreed, with the engine block off a Marathon.
The Recusant is supposedly a fast, forward arc heavy pack hunter, almost Drazi- esque; what actually happened onscreen was the mutual cluster- £^%& after both battle plans had come apart, neither ship at it's best.

Supermaneuvrable does seem far too good, or that date, for that class. How come they forgot to add it to ships with far heavier boresight armament? Outlier, a fluke in a fleet where several skirmish ships only have 1/45. Not too unhappy about the firepower of the thing- compared to the Ka'Tan and Ka'Toc, it's not a problem.
 
See here for further official revision of the T'Rakk stats:

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=326123&highlight=#326123

2/45 it is.

LBH
 
Back
Top