Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Same old GW release; beautiful models, but price and game suck fething donkey taint.

BrianDavion wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
So since the Grey Knights technically have their own "Forgeworld" do they get their own color scheme? Eh eh?

According to "the Emperor's gift" the preists who manage demnios use only silver and such "pure metals" utilizing no bronze etc.

While I doubt very much the place has skitarii, I imagine if they did, the trick would be to use silver, steel and iron, and avoid all over metallics.

Nah man, I heard those priests are all about hot pink, lavender and mauve.

Azreal13 wrote:

 Frozen Ocean wrote:
I wish they'd used a different word than "Taser", because it's a brand name that doesn't have any meaning of its own.

You mean if someone were to tell you they'd been tasered, you'd need further explanation?

Would you require further explanation if someone said they were hit by a Peugeot or a Lamborghini?

Azreal13 wrote:Brand names frequently become genericised, this is one of them.

Or do you not take a couple of aspirin washed down with coke if the noise of the hoover aggravates your headache?

I wouldn't no, but Coke and aspirin are very bad examples (though I would still say "painkiller"). Not only because both are names for materials/substance, whereas, like "Hoover", "Taser" is not.

Aspirin is a particularly bad example because its use as a generic term is a complicated matter. Firstly, chemical compounds have a discoverer and a subsequent naming scheme; it is inherently a generic term; "aspirin" and "acetylsalicylic acid" are inseparable just as "spotted bass" is inseparable from "Micropterus punctulatus", but there is a barrier in place because of the trademark placed on the compound due to its value, so people are making aspirin but are not allowed to refer to it as such due to copyright. It's complicated further by the loss of the trademark in many countries for many reasons, losing that barrier completely, and both the sheer age and reproducibility of the compound. However, the main reason I wouldn't refer to a painkiller as "aspirin" is because not all painkillers contain aspirin.

"I wouldn't refer to Pepsi as "Coke", though I might refer to a supermarket-brand cola as "Coke" because it is in clear imitation of Coca-Cola. You can market anything you like as a "cola", even though the term did come from the original Coca-Cola from 1886 (from kola nut).

I would not call a vacuum cleaner a "Hoover" unless it was actually manufactured by Hoover; my Dyson is a vacuum, my Hoover is a vacuum. My Hoover is not a Dyson; my Dyson is not a Hoover. Just because it's fairly common slang doesn't make it correct or accurate.

Calling them "Taser" weapons is no different to referring to giving the Mechanicus a "Glock Lance" or giving their walkers the "Porsche" special rule and "Microsoft Windows" in place of "Doctrina Imperialis". Besides, it's not even right, as the rules don't reflect anything to do with them being stun weapons. They could have called them electro weapons, a callback to the electro-priest everyone keeps mentioning, or they could have called them electroshock weapons or something else that better carries the implication that the weapon's lethal electricity is arcing between targets or frying single ones.

drbored wrote:
So are words like 'Xerox' and 'Escalator'. Brands that became used for more than their brand.

Referring to just about everything by a brand name is really more of an American thing (e.g. Jell-O).

The worst part about it being called "Taser" isn't that it's wrong, though, it's that it's a real-world company that makes real products with that name. It just seems so unfitting next to things like "plasma caliver" and "radium jezzail". At least the Necron obsession with human physicists is based on the names Gauss and Tesla being long-standing sci-fi tropes.

So what's better on those Sicarian Infiltrators, flechettes + tasers or subcarbines + power sword ?

It's good that no one googled brands that have become words...

So I did some converting and it seems like the special edition AdMech codex is only $71.51 without tax. Is this right?

"I wouldn't refer to Pepsi as "Coke", though I might refer to a supermarket-brand cola as "Coke" because it is in clear imitation of Coca-Cola. You can market anything you like as a "cola", even though the term did come from the original Coca-Cola from 1886 (from kola nut).

you wouldn't but in some areas "coke" is used to refer to ANY soda.

BrianDavion wrote:

"I wouldn't refer to Pepsi as "Coke", though I might refer to a supermarket-brand cola as "Coke" because it is in clear imitation of Coca-Cola. You can market anything you like as a "cola", even though the term did come from the original Coca-Cola from 1886 (from kola nut).

you wouldn't but in some areas "coke" is used to refer to ANY soda.

Mostly a Southern thing in the U.S.

http://popvssoda.com/

 Frozen Ocean wrote:

Spoiler:

Azreal13 wrote:

 Frozen Ocean wrote:
I wish they'd used a different word than "Taser", because it's a brand name that doesn't have any meaning of its own.

You mean if someone were to tell you they'd been tasered, you'd need further explanation?

Would you require further explanation if someone said they were hit by a Peugeot or a Lamborghini?

Azreal13 wrote:Brand names frequently become genericised, this is one of them.

Or do you not take a couple of aspirin washed down with coke if the noise of the hoover aggravates your headache?

I wouldn't no, but Coke and aspirin are very bad examples (though I would still say "painkiller"). Not only because both are names for materials/substance, whereas, like "Hoover", "Taser" is not.

Aspirin is a particularly bad example because its use as a generic term is a complicated matter. Firstly, chemical compounds have a discoverer and a subsequent naming scheme; it is inherently a generic term; "aspirin" and "acetylsalicylic acid" are inseparable just as "spotted bass" is inseparable from "Micropterus punctulatus", but there is a barrier in place because of the trademark placed on the compound due to its value, so people are making aspirin but are not allowed to refer to it as such due to copyright. It's complicated further by the loss of the trademark in many countries for many reasons, losing that barrier completely, and both the sheer age and reproducibility of the compound. However, the main reason I wouldn't refer to a painkiller as "aspirin" is because not all painkillers contain aspirin.

"I wouldn't refer to Pepsi as "Coke", though I might refer to a supermarket-brand cola as "Coke" because it is in clear imitation of Coca-Cola. You can market anything you like as a "cola", even though the term did come from the original Coca-Cola from 1886 (from kola nut).

I would not call a vacuum cleaner a "Hoover" unless it was actually manufactured by Hoover; my Dyson is a vacuum, my Hoover is a vacuum. My Hoover is not a Dyson; my Dyson is not a Hoover. Just because it's fairly common slang doesn't make it correct or accurate.

Calling them "Taser" weapons is no different to referring to giving the Mechanicus a "Glock Lance" or giving their walkers the "Porsche" special rule and "Microsoft Windows" in place of "Doctrina Imperialis". Besides, it's not even right, as the rules don't reflect anything to do with them being stun weapons. They could have called them electro weapons, a callback to the electro-priest everyone keeps mentioning, or they could have called them electroshock weapons or something else that better carries the implication that the weapon's lethal electricity is arcing between targets or frying single ones.

drbored wrote:
So are words like 'Xerox' and 'Escalator'. Brands that became used for more than their brand.

Referring to just about everything by a brand name is really more of an American thing (e.g. Jell-O).

The worst part about it being called "Taser" isn't that it's wrong, though, it's that it's a real-world company that makes real products with that name. It just seems so unfitting next to things like "plasma caliver" and "radium jezzail". At least the Necron obsession with human physicists is based on the names Gauss and Tesla being long-standing sci-fi tropes.

Genericised trademarks are categorically not an "American" thing, they can, and do, occur everywhere. You may refer to all vacuum cleaners as "vacuums" but life has taught me you're relatively unusual, or simply being contrary to try and support your point. It is perfectly acceptable because the trademark 'Hoover' has been widely accepted as a generic term for all vacuum cleaners, and to pretend it is somehow incorrect because technically not all vacuums are Hoovers is the sort of argument you only ever seem to get on the Internet.

But then I'm sure all the staff in Wetherspoons love the fact that they don't have to tell you that the cola they serve is Pepsi every time you order one, because it isn't like they have to do that a million times every shift for all the other people.

I also challenge that you've ever referred to aspirin as acetylsalicylic acid in your life unless you're a medical student. You're quite right that not all painkillers are aspirin, but the same logic is why I don't call my iron a Hoover. Neither does your example of Latin/common classification really hold up, because it isn't unheard of for various very similar species to attract the same common name, nor is it unheard of for an identical species to attract different common names based on locality.

But what all this boils down to is that to object to a term which is perfectly descriptive of the weapon's operation on the grounds that the very thing that brought the image of that operation into the wider consciousness of the population so vividly it has become synonymous with it is somehow inappropriate is, let's be fair, pretty nitpicky.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:
It's good that no one googled brands that have become words...

You got that impression too, huh?

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Frozen Ocean wrote:

Spoiler:

Azreal13 wrote:

 Frozen Ocean wrote:
I wish they'd used a different word than "Taser", because it's a brand name that doesn't have any meaning of its own.

You mean if someone were to tell you they'd been tasered, you'd need further explanation?

Would you require further explanation if someone said they were hit by a Peugeot or a Lamborghini?

Azreal13 wrote:Brand names frequently become genericised, this is one of them.

Or do you not take a couple of aspirin washed down with coke if the noise of the hoover aggravates your headache?

I wouldn't no, but Coke and aspirin are very bad examples (though I would still say "painkiller"). Not only because both are names for materials/substance, whereas, like "Hoover", "Taser" is not.

Aspirin is a particularly bad example because its use as a generic term is a complicated matter. Firstly, chemical compounds have a discoverer and a subsequent naming scheme; it is inherently a generic term; "aspirin" and "acetylsalicylic acid" are inseparable just as "spotted bass" is inseparable from "Micropterus punctulatus", but there is a barrier in place because of the trademark placed on the compound due to its value, so people are making aspirin but are not allowed to refer to it as such due to copyright. It's complicated further by the loss of the trademark in many countries for many reasons, losing that barrier completely, and both the sheer age and reproducibility of the compound. However, the main reason I wouldn't refer to a painkiller as "aspirin" is because not all painkillers contain aspirin.

"I wouldn't refer to Pepsi as "Coke", though I might refer to a supermarket-brand cola as "Coke" because it is in clear imitation of Coca-Cola. You can market anything you like as a "cola", even though the term did come from the original Coca-Cola from 1886 (from kola nut).

I would not call a vacuum cleaner a "Hoover" unless it was actually manufactured by Hoover; my Dyson is a vacuum, my Hoover is a vacuum. My Hoover is not a Dyson; my Dyson is not a Hoover. Just because it's fairly common slang doesn't make it correct or accurate.

Calling them "Taser" weapons is no different to referring to giving the Mechanicus a "Glock Lance" or giving their walkers the "Porsche" special rule and "Microsoft Windows" in place of "Doctrina Imperialis". Besides, it's not even right, as the rules don't reflect anything to do with them being stun weapons. They could have called them electro weapons, a callback to the electro-priest everyone keeps mentioning, or they could have called them electroshock weapons or something else that better carries the implication that the weapon's lethal electricity is arcing between targets or frying single ones.

drbored wrote:
So are words like 'Xerox' and 'Escalator'. Brands that became used for more than their brand.

Referring to just about everything by a brand name is really more of an American thing (e.g. Jell-O).

The worst part about it being called "Taser" isn't that it's wrong, though, it's that it's a real-world company that makes real products with that name. It just seems so unfitting next to things like "plasma caliver" and "radium jezzail". At least the Necron obsession with human physicists is based on the names Gauss and Tesla being long-standing sci-fi tropes.

Genericised trademarks are categorically not an "American" thing, they can, and do, occur everywhere. You may refer to all vacuum cleaners as "vacuums" but life has taught me you're relatively unusual, or simply being contrary to try and support your point. It is perfectly acceptable because the trademark 'Hoover' has been widely accepted as a generic term for all vacuum cleaners, and to pretend it is somehow incorrect because technically not all vacuums are Hoovers is the sort of argument you only ever seem to get on the Internet.

But then I'm sure all the staff in Wetherspoons love the fact that they don't have to tell you that the cola they serve is Pepsi every time you order one, because it isn't like they have to do that a million times every shift for all the other people.

I also challenge that you've ever referred to aspirin as acetylsalicylic acid in your life unless you're a medical student. You're quite right that not all painkillers are aspirin, but the same logic is why I don't call my iron a Hoover. Neither does your example of Latin/common classification really hold up, because it isn't unheard of for various very similar species to attract the same common name, nor is it unheard of for an identical species to attract different common names based on locality.

But what all this boils down to is that to object to a term which is perfectly descriptive of the weapon's operation on the grounds that the very thing that brought the image of that operation into the wider consciousness of the population so vividly it has become synonymous with it is somehow inappropriate is, let's be fair, pretty nitpicky.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:
It's good that no one googled brands that have become words...

You got that impression too, huh?

Really, a lot of the things you're discussing are just regional slang or colloquialisms- the "Coke" thing is a prime example. Up by the Great Lakes region of the US, We use "Vacuums", drink "Pop", wipe our noses with "Kleenex", arm ourselves with "Stun Guns", etc. etc. It varies all over.

However, the point being made (not sure by who- too many nested quotes) about Taser(R) being a registered Trademark is a valid issue- it's exactly the same thing that GW took Chapterhouse to court over a couple years ago- the use of a Brand Name on/in a product that doesn't own it and isn't affiliated with it. Honestly, you'd think their legal department would have caught that, now surely being Copyright and Trademark experts~.

 RedFox wrote:
So what's better on those Sicarian Infiltrators, flechettes + tasers or subcarbines + power sword ?

I really like the pistol + Taser.

The sword are a little better against Ws 3 T3 3+(sisters of battle)
Carbibes are better against T6 and 7 and between 13" and 18" range.

Otherwise the pistols + tazers are better

Anvildude wrote:
Really, a lot of the things you're discussing are just regional slang or colloquialisms- the "Coke" thing is a prime example. Up by the Great Lakes region of the US, We use "Vacuums", drink "Pop", wipe our noses with "Kleenex", arm ourselves with "Stun Guns", etc. etc. It varies all over.

However, the point being made (not sure by who- too many nested quotes) about Taser(R) being a registered Trademark is a valid issue- it's exactly the same thing that GW took Chapterhouse to court over a couple years ago- the use of a Brand Name on/in a product that doesn't own it and isn't affiliated with it. Honestly, you'd think their legal department would have caught that, now surely being Copyright and Trademark experts~.

The other point is that it's just laziness or poor writing when creating your fantasy universe in the 410th century to go around using 21st century colloquialisms based on 21st company names.

If anywhere in 40k they used terms like "hoover", "coke", "sharpie", "kleenex", etc I would want to beat the writer over the head with a "maglite".

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Anvildude wrote:
Really, a lot of the things you're discussing are just regional slang or colloquialisms- the "Coke" thing is a prime example. Up by the Great Lakes region of the US, We use "Vacuums", drink "Pop", wipe our noses with "Kleenex", arm ourselves with "Stun Guns", etc. etc. It varies all over.

However, the point being made (not sure by who- too many nested quotes) about Taser(R) being a registered Trademark is a valid issue- it's exactly the same thing that GW took Chapterhouse to court over a couple years ago- the use of a Brand Name on/in a product that doesn't own it and isn't affiliated with it. Honestly, you'd think their legal department would have caught that, now surely being Copyright and Trademark experts~.

The other point is that it's just laziness or poor writing when creating your fantasy universe in the 410th century to go around using 21st century colloquialisms based on 21st company names.

If anywhere in 40k they used terms like "hoover", "coke", "sharpie", "kleenex", etc I would want to beat the writer over the head with a "maglite".

I felt the same way about the Necron's Tesla guns.

Bazillion year old killer robots named their guns after a 19th century inventor?

Even if it's just the Imperial name for them, why is the Imperium using a dated reference like that?

And, out of character, it just doesn't feel properly grimdark.

Ah well.

We'll live.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In conclusion, MOAR PRETTY PICTURES PLEASE!

Well, tesla is also a unit of measurement.

Are you also complaining about galvanic rifles? Galvanization is named after Galvani, after all...

I do agree that GW is really treading on dangerous ground referring to this as a taser rifle, as it is a clearly trademarked name. Given their own legal pettiness, I think they might have chosen to be a little more careful about this.

I do dispute, very strongly, that the 'taser' association is purely with the company and their product. The TASER Corporation came up with that name based on the "Thomas A. Swift Electric Rifle", from the very cool, old Tom Swift novels. There's a pre-existing literary influence, which inspired the company, who had developed a product analogous to Tom Swift's fictional one. Then that product became so synonymous with 'conducted energy weapons' (CEW) that it basically serves as a common term for CEW, even with people who have no idea of the original literary influence.

I'm willing to bet that GW's writers are totally aware of the Tom Swift association, but I'll be damned if I can figure out how the obvious risk of a lawsuit slipped by them.

I'm calling it here. Collectors should pick up a copy of this rulebook ASAP, as GW will have to either pull it off the shelf, or change the name in subsequent printings.

via an anonymous source on Faeit 212
On The skitarii building sheet (or whatever it is named in english), is a black and white picture of all the new Skitarii models.
Two Onager walkers along with Vanguard, Rangers, and both of this weeks unit options. They are fighting Tau Warriors.
No other new models are shown. Most likely saying that this is it.

This doesn't bode well for our theoretical HQ. That's literally all we need for it to be a complete army. Though, that would be in character for GW to do that to us. Though, if a full Ad-Mech codex DOES end up happening, then that will fix this. Hopefully.

 Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:
It's good that no one googled brands that have become words...

Still, TASER are actively fighting brand dillution. They frequently send notes to newspapers and journos regarding the proper use of their brand, and even have a pdf up on their site with the guidelines to do so.

http://www.taser.com/images/resources-and-legal/trademark-use/downloads/taser-tm-guidelines.pdf

Gah. This is a sore misstep on an otherwise flawless release. I wonder what the consequences will be.

 c0j1r0 wrote:
via an anonymous source on Faeit 212
On The skitarii building sheet (or whatever it is named in english), is a black and white picture of all the new Skitarii models.
Two Onager walkers along with Vanguard, Rangers, and both of this weeks unit options. They are fighting Tau Warriors.
No other new models are shown. Most likely saying that this is it.

This doesn't bode well for our theoretical HQ. That's literally all we need for it to be a complete army. Though, that would be in character for GW to do that to us. Though, if a full Ad-Mech codex DOES end up happening, then that will fix this. Hopefully.

Indeed... Will be much like the Harlequin dex, then, possibly limited to allying only through formations, which would, ironically, limit how much you could do with the army unless you made it your main :\

Ah well. Still excited to see the rest, and see the full Admech Codex, whenever it drops. Really want to see the different options that Onager has!! But that's another week away...

for now, I'd be content with English rules sheets for the Sicarians!

Edit: Also, c'mon people, the models are beautiful, the rules are interesting, and you're hung up on the word 'taser' on a few of them? If GW have to fight another legal battle, let them. Not our problem.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Anvildude wrote:
Really, a lot of the things you're discussing are just regional slang or colloquialisms- the "Coke" thing is a prime example. Up by the Great Lakes region of the US, We use "Vacuums", drink "Pop", wipe our noses with "Kleenex", arm ourselves with "Stun Guns", etc. etc. It varies all over.

However, the point being made (not sure by who- too many nested quotes) about Taser(R) being a registered Trademark is a valid issue- it's exactly the same thing that GW took Chapterhouse to court over a couple years ago- the use of a Brand Name on/in a product that doesn't own it and isn't affiliated with it. Honestly, you'd think their legal department would have caught that, now surely being Copyright and Trademark experts~.

The other point is that it's just laziness or poor writing when creating your fantasy universe in the 410th century to go around using 21st century colloquialisms based on 21st company names.

If anywhere in 40k they used terms like "hoover", "coke", "sharpie", "kleenex", etc I would want to beat the writer over the head with a "maglite".

I felt the same way about the Necron's Tesla guns.

Bazillion year old killer robots named their guns after a 19th century inventor?

Even if it's just the Imperial name for them, why is the Imperium using a dated reference like that?

And, out of character, it just doesn't feel properly grimdark.

Ah well.

We'll live.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In conclusion, MOAR PRETTY PICTURES PLEASE!

I think it's a bit more conceivable that a unit of measure survives all that time (though probably not, I think it's more reasonable than a company name). Gauss weapons, after all, are named for the unit of gauss, magnetic flux density, which is named after the Carl Friedrich Gauss.

Most of our units are based on 17th-19th century people.

 c0j1r0 wrote:
via an anonymous source on Faeit 212
On The skitarii building sheet (or whatever it is named in english), is a black and white picture of all the new Skitarii models.
Two Onager walkers along with Vanguard, Rangers, and both of this weeks unit options. They are fighting Tau Warriors.
No other new models are shown. Most likely saying that this is it.

This doesn't bode well for our theoretical HQ. That's literally all we need for it to be a complete army. Though, that would be in character for GW to do that to us. Though, if a full Ad-Mech codex DOES end up happening, then that will fix this. Hopefully.

I'm not suprised. I've always kinda figured a "Alpha prime" was just what they call an alpha whose your warlord

Since when did they trust THIS GUY:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5e/Alpha_5_power_rangers.jpg

To be an infiltrator!?

Well at least we have the first 'miss' of the Skitarii.

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
Since when did they trust THIS GUY:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5e/Alpha_5_power_rangers.jpg

To be an infiltrator!?

Well at least we have the first 'miss' of the Skitarii.

Only in your (totally wrong) opinion.

Aye yai yai yai!

I'm not going to argue against personal preferences (though, Azreal13, I have only ever referred to painkiller tablets as "painkillers" or by the specific name on the box - Ibuprofen, etc - and have referred to aspirin as "acetylsalicylic acid" because I had to write an essay about it). I'm not arguing to be contrary, I was talking about my personal preferences and how I speak (you did ask what I would say, specifically).

However, to those who disagree with what I said, I feel like my other point is still a very valid concern - that "Taser", regardless of whether it's correct, is very out of theme (and doesn't even describe what they do).

I wrote:The worst part about it being called "Taser" isn't that it's wrong, though, it's that it's a real-world company that makes real products with that name. It just seems so unfitting next to things like "plasma caliver" and "radium jezzail". At least the Necron obsession with human physicists is based on the names Gauss and Tesla being long-standing sci-fi tropes.

That said, I agree with Kid_Kyoto on the Necrons, but like I said, it's less jarring because they are well-used names in sci-fi for those types of weapon. It's the same with Tau vehicles; why are they all named after species of fish that the Imperium would have no knowledge of?

A thought occurred that they could have an HQ slot in the codex for the 'Alpha Prime' that you can build out of the Ranger or Vanguard box.

Though more likely, you'll simply nominate one of your Vanguard or Ranger Primes to be your Warlord, and hope that there are some relics that can give him higher toughness and armor and such :I

drbored wrote:
A thought occurred that they could have an HQ slot in the codex for the 'Alpha Prime' that you can build out of the Ranger or Vanguard box.

Though more likely, you'll simply nominate one of your Vanguard or Ranger Primes to be your Warlord, and hope that there are some relics that can give him higher toughness and armor and such :I

or run allies depending on the value of the admech warlord table.

The naming discussion seems a bit absurd... I mean, why would the people in the 41st millennium be using 20th century English in the first place? In that context, the etymology of a single word seems quite meaningless.

I always figured that since codexes are written from a imperial perspective we are given the imperial name for things unless it is obviously something that the tau word is known for.

Basically similar to nato reporting names for non nato planes etc. so an xv88 broadside is called something totally different by the tau but who cares they are irrelevant to the reader. The same would apply to weapons (can you ask a necron for his weapon names)

clemash wrote:I always figured that since codexes are written from a imperial perspective we are given the imperial name for things unless it is obviously something that the tau word is known for.

Basically similar to nato reporting names for non nato planes etc. so an xv88 broadside is called something totally different by the tau but who cares they are irrelevant to the reader. The same would apply to weapons (can you ask a necron for his weapon names)

That is the explanation, but the Imperium shouldn't know those names. Those fish don't exist anymore, and probably haven't for an incredibly long time.

Mymearan wrote:The naming discussion seems a bit absurd... I mean, why would the people in the 41st millennium be using 20th century English in the first place? In that context, the etymology of a single word seems quite meaningless.

This is why the above mention of Tau naming schemes don't bother me, because language in sci-fi always has to take significant liberties in order to be understandable. The Taser thing does, though, just because of how totally out-of-place it sounds.

for the record, this isn't the first sci-fi war game to use the term Taser with regards to such a weapon. Battletech a few years ago introduced "Mech Tasers" and yes it's EXACTLY what it sounds like.