The T'Rakk

  • Thread starter Thread starter H
  • Start date Start date
Reaverman said:
Burger said:
I'm all for a Narn ship with these stats, and all for a ship made from a T'Loth wing.. but they should be 2 different ships.
The T'Loth is a honking big brick, because it an amalgam of two T'Takks and a dodgy navigation system. Also, the T'Rakk is just all power plant, and thats it. Its a pimped reactor, with guns and thrusters :)
Dread to think what your listening post is capable of, then :P
Sorry still don't buy it. Put 2 SM ships together, weld a bit of bridge and a gun in the middle, and it suddenly becomes 1/45?
 
It's speed 10 and a Narn play can field TEN of them in a 5 pt Raid game?!

Sorry but it looks completely out of other skirmish ships league...almost as good as a Shadow Scout? Yeah right, I'd take 5 of these over 5 Shadow Scouts, let alone TEN of them!!! Tt has a huge number of attack dice all round (10 on port and starboard...even weak, that a crit hunting whore, OUCH!

Ok ok, I know, I need to playtest etc before I whine massively FINE.

...but SM is a massive strategic advantage, and at speed 10, skirmish it is multiplied MASSIVELY....right, I'm off to sell my Shadows on e-bay and buy a Narn fleet with the proceeds....

MER MER MER!

...
...

EDIT: ok I admit I'm just pissed off another race can outmaneuver Shadows now - what's next, a Narn skirmish ship with a triple damage weaponry!? Oh wait....

EDIT2: At least it doesn't carry Frazi as well!
 
When will Mongoose release the model?

Bridge looks too Centauri, or Trek. I hate it.

SM seems wrong for Narn, but otherwise, stats look okay.

Darn, finally get the ship and it's ... well, not quite right, imo.


(Would it kill Mongoose to float the stats for a new ship on the board before printing them? Get everyone's input before it becomes "law"?)

EDIT: To answer my own question, I guess it would create a flame war like this one. Still it might point out obvious errors - more proofreaders :D The error here is a Narn SM ship.
 
animus said:
EDIT: To answer my own question, I guess it would create a flame war like this one. Still it might point out obvious errors - more proofreaders :D The error here is a Narn SM ship.

Not a flame war, a heated, but friendly, discussion :D
 
Hash said:
It's speed 10 and a Narn play can field TEN of them in a 5 pt Raid game?!

Sorry but it looks completely out of other skirmish ships league...almost as good as a Shadow Scout? Yeah right, I'd take 5 of these over 5 Shadow Scouts, let alone TEN of them!!! Tt has a huge number of attack dice all round (10 on port and starboard...even weak, that a crit hunting whore, OUCH!

Ok ok, I know, I need to playtest etc before I whine massively FINE.

...but SM is a massive strategic advantage, and at speed 10, skirmish it is multiplied MASSIVELY....right, I'm off to sell my Shadows on e-bay and buy a Narn fleet with the proceeds....

MER MER MER!

...
...

EDIT: ok I admit I'm just pissed off another race can outmaneuver Shadows now - what's next, a Narn skirmish ship with a triple damage weaponry!? Oh wait....

EDIT2: At least it doesn't carry Frazi as well!

180px-Cheese_39_bg_053006b.jpg


A little Cheese with your Whine :twisted:
 
Are we sure the SM rating isn't a typo?

This ship is basically an extemporised lash-up. It seems odd that with more damage and crew points than a Hyperion she can out-turn a Sho'Kar, a Vorchan or even a White Star.

Maybe the EA can weld the axehead and rear sections of an Omega together minus the spin hab and call that SM too? :?
 
I'm a bit surpised that Mongoose went the SM route for Narn. If they wanted an agile ship they could've done a lot of other things like:

1/90 or
2/90 or
1/180 or even
3/45 or
a bit of both 1/45, 1/90 or
just give it a SM special rule similar to the Vree

And if we gave it more time I'm sure we can think of a lot more- but what do I know...
 
MustEatBrains said:
Why not? Adds new tactical options to the Narn, instead of adding more of the "Same old same old". See no problems here...

so too would a SM Vorlon ship but it wouldn't FIT

Where do the Narn get SM ships from, especially one of the earliest ships they build!?
 
I've been playtesting this ship pretty much when it it came out. From our games I have concluded that;

1. Im sure this ship would be fine at 2/45 turns. Sort of the Narn attempt to match the hyperion?

2. If it wants a solid place in the Narn "Raid" level fleets, the forward particle beams could lose the weak trait and bump this ship up to a raid level choice.

3. If it has to be kept at skirmish lose at least 2AD on the A,P+S arcs.

4. Weak weapons should have -1 to the critical table rolls (preventing vital system hits) seeing as in all games this thing caused Catastrophic explosions with suposedly 'weak' weaponry.

Out of interest how can this thing pump so much firepower out of its arcs? Unless that bridge (which is a unique structure I have to say!) has a load of guns on it i don't see why they would attach them to a hull of a Tloth for a general weapons downgrade?. If so, could i have the firepower of both trakks on my T'loth from now on?

Stop flaming everyone, your burning my beef with the T'Rakk.
 
emperorpenguin said:
animus said:
Nomad said:
Are we sure the SM rating isn't a typo?

Yes, it must be a typo... (here's your chance Mongoose, fix it while it's fresh....) :oops:

but then I thought the lack of particle beams on the Saggitarius in the last S&P was a typo.... :wink:
Exactly, it's probably to do with the future of the Sagittarius in 2nd ed ;)
 
I wonder what the reasoning is behind the SM is. It certainly looks very out of place in the Narn list.

(Other then a possibly copy 'n paste error from using the stat table from the Tiger, just forgot to change that cell).
 
Back
Top