Hello All, Does anyone have a copy of the cards for Rattler & Cobra. I haven't purchased them yet and wanted to see what I'm getting myself into. Thanx.
Rattler & Cobra
There are no stats out for warfare yet but the tactics stats can be found on dust-models.com The warfare stats should be in the SSU rulebook that should be out soon but here are the cards to give you some idea on what you can expect.
I only hope the Acis Dual Heavy Laser Kanone are going to be as broken as I fear that 180 Phaser Canon is going to be. And when the SSU helos start hovering your local battlefield, you'll want 2 of those Rattlers. MHO only.
I'll probably pick up two of each as they will be very useful against the SSU copters and enemy walkers.
Huh, so 40mm guns are only just as effective against armor as 20mm guns. Hmm, this just goes to show me that the Tactics rules writers really need to study anti-armor warfare more…they're quite off about penetration, which is the actual measure of anti-armor warfare. (Their downgrade of the M2 .50 cal vs. infantry class 3 shows they don't know a **** thing about armor penetration, and they're just winging it. That's fine for imaginary weapons, like a bolter, but when you have real stuff, with quite well-known characteristics, then you'd better have your ducks in a row…)
Warboss Krag said:
Huh, so 40mm guns are only just as effective against armor as 20mm guns. Hmm, this just goes to show me that the Tactics rules writers really need to study anti-armor warfare more…they're quite off about penetration, which is the actual measure of anti-armor warfare. (Their downgrade of the M2 .50 cal vs. infantry class 3 shows they don't know a **** thing about armor penetration, and they're just winging it. That's fine for imaginary weapons, like a bolter, but when you have real stuff, with quite well-known characteristics, then you'd better have your ducks in a row…)
Or maybe they are working towards game balance and not simulationist perfection?
Warboss Krag said:
Huh, so 40mm guns are only just as effective against armor as 20mm guns. Hmm, this just goes to show me that the Tactics rules writers really need to study anti-armor warfare more…they're quite off about penetration, which is the actual measure of anti-armor warfare. (Their downgrade of the M2 .50 cal vs. infantry class 3 shows they don't know a **** thing about armor penetration, and they're just winging it. That's fine for imaginary weapons, like a bolter, but when you have real stuff, with quite well-known characteristics, then you'd better have your ducks in a row…)
Totally agree with you for the most part as their are some really strange stat lines, but you also have to remember that the weapon stat is not just AP but rate of fire too. Historically the AA tank that this is based on does actually have 20mm guns in which case the stat line is ok. FFG tend to do that with their weapon names, either name the to big or to small. I mean how much damage will a gun do that has the power of a light bulb as in the phasers?
The 'phaser' is actually one of the quirkiest miracles of reality: Ball lightning. We've actually managed to produce it, by the way, and it's a lot higher energy than the fanciful numbers given. (Never heard of the Japanese screwing up technical details in anime, oh, no, never!) The U.S, military actually worked with the idea of making weapons that work that way for years. Largely during the 50s and 60s; I don't know if they're still trying to weaponize ball lightning or not.
I hope they're not still wasting money on it. Even the natural stuff, of which we have no idea how it's generated, is the quirkiest energy around. A ball of this contained energy can and does pass through solid matter, roll around on the ground, follow electrically-conductive material, explode violently, or just earth itself with a relative lack of harm. Or it can just fizzle out of existence. How all these characteristics? We don't know.
Apparently, the Vrill managed to harness and weaponize a variant of ball lightning, and that's a 'phaser.' Wish he hadn't called it the same name as the Star Trek weapon; it gives the wrong impression.
(I've family history with ball lightning: My maternal grandmother was struck by the stuff while she was on the phone, back in the late 19-teens. My grandfather and her brother were watching; a ball-shaped glow 'rolled' down the phone wire and out the handle, and Estelle was knocked to the floor. Simple electrical shock. Granddad never did say if the date they were supposed to go on came off after that incident or not…)