to-hit rolls once TAG has been aquired

[Weirdo]

Something tells me the S-G LRMs haven't been rare for quite some time...

[Warpimp]

When I stopped playing years ago the world was at about 3055. I'm still working my way back in...

[ANS Kamas P81]

Don't forget the benefits to the spotter.  Normally a spotter has a +1 to their own weapons fire while spotting for indirect LRM fire.  Using TAG to spot with instead of your regular spotting means that your weapons fire no longer has that +1 "firing while spotting" penalty.  It doesn't help your indirect fire, unfortunately.  This lets your close attack TAG-equipped units spot for indirect fire as normal, but they're actually more useful in the close-attack role they're participating in and aren't standing around whiffing as much.

[Warpimp]

and that is without S-G ammo?

[Col.Hengist]

and that is without S-G ammo?

 Once again,lrm round need to be sg to get the benefit of the tag. You can tag for regular lrm's all day but the tag does nothing other than make a pretty hologram.

 As Weirdo and others have posted. Tag only works with guided arrow IV,sg lrm's, copperheads and orbital strikes...not Indirect without sg.

[ANS Kamas P81]

and that is without S-G ammo?

If you were replying to my post, the ammo type doesn't matter.  That only affects the indirect firing unit - the unit with the TAG designator won't be firing indirectly, but it can directly-fire SG LRMs of its own and ignore the target movement if it successfully TAGs.  The TAG itself still has to take target movement into account, but you only need to make one roll for it - and if you have a lot of LRM launchers, well, you can always not fire them if the TAG misses and save ammo; TAG coming in the indirect phase means you'll be able to decide before weapons fire.

And like it's been said, TAG also works for artillery and other goodness, not just semiguided.

[Weirdo]

If you were replying to my post, the ammo type doesn't matter.  That only affects the indirect firing unit - the unit with the TAG designator won't be firing indirectly, but it can directly-fire SG LRMs of its own and ignore the target movement if it successfully TAGs.  The TAG itself still has to take target movement into account, but you only need to make one roll for it - and if you have a lot of LRM launchers, well, you can always not fire them if the TAG misses and save ammo; TAG coming in the indirect phase means you'll be able to decide before weapons fire.

And like it's been said, TAG also works for artillery and other goodness, not just semiguided.

TAGging does indeed enable the spotter to fire normally, but you should remember that if you're going to fire non-S-G LRMs indirectly, you're still going to need a non-TAG spotter. The TAG laser is about as relevant to non-S-G indirect fire as the Magic game at the next table is.

[Col.Hengist]

Saying that you don't have to pay the +1 for the second target after you taged while indirect even when not using sg rounds is bad rules lawyering and imo very unsportsmanlike.

[pensiveswetness]

Derp.  O0

[Weirdo]

Saying that you don't have to pay the +1 for the second target after you taged while indirect even when not using sg rounds is bad rules lawyering and imo very unsportsmanlike.

It's also outright cheating, unless it's a previously agreed-upon house rule.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Saying that you don't have to pay the +1 for the second target after you taged while indirect even when not using sg rounds is bad rules lawyering and imo very unsportsmanlike.

It's not rules lawyering, it's flat out ignoring the rules.

[willydstyle]

It's not rules lawyering, it's flat out ignoring the rules.

"Rules Lawyer" is a term much like "munchkin" that really doesn't have a strict meaning.  For some people a rules lawyer is simply someone who knows the rules really well and expects their opponent to play by official rules.  For some people a rules lawyer is someone who "bends" the rules in their favor.  For some people a rules lawyer is someone who just flat-out cheats, but tries to use the rules to do so.

[ANS Kamas P81]

Saying that you don't have to pay the +1 for the second target after you taged while indirect even when not using sg rounds is bad rules lawyering and imo very unsportsmanlike.

I wasn't saying anything about second targets; my only comment that might be rules lawyering was that you can decide whether to fire your own S-G LRMs (if you have them) and get the no-target-movement-modifier bonus after you resolve whether or not you TAG that target.

[SCC]

TAG, unlike C3 spotter, needs full LOS right? So one 'Mech can't both TAG a target and in-direct fire upon it with SG in the same turn, right?

[Ghostbear_Gurdel]

correct. But if you can TAG for your own SG missiles, you can at least remove the pesky Target movement modifier from the equation.

[Weirdo]

I wasn't saying anything about second targets; my only comment that might be rules lawyering was that you can decide whether to fire your own S-G LRMs (if you have them) and get the no-target-movement-modifier bonus after you resolve whether or not you TAG that target.

That's not rules-lawyering, that's outright legal. TAG is fired and resolved in the spotting phase, before all normal weapons fire and declarations are made. Therefore, nothing at all requires you to lock yourself into firing S-Gs when you decide to fire your TAG. It's like a Hunchback deciding not to fire his AC/20 after all, because he failed his initiative roll and his opponent moved behind him. Nothing  in the initiative or movement phase locked him into firing the cannon, and for the same reason, nothing in the TAG roll locks you into firing S-Gs.

TAG, unlike C3 spotter, needs full LOS right? So one 'Mech can't both TAG a target and in-direct fire upon it with SG in the same turn, right?

correct. But if you can TAG for your own SG missiles, you can at least remove the pesky Target movement modifier from the equation.

Correct. S-Gs benefit from TAG in both indirect and direct shots.

[SCC]

It was more that you couldn't do something silly, like park behind some trees that block LOS, TAG someone trough said trees then because you lack LOS indirect and get better mods

[brotherelf]

It was more that you couldn't do something silly, like park behind some trees that block LOS, TAG someone trough said trees then because you lack LOS indirect and get better mods

MaxTech had Mast Mounts for VTOLs which let you (IIRC) mount one of: C3s, TAG, Beagle as if it were one level higher. Scratch that, it let you trace LOS as if you were one level higher and couldn't mount a TAG in there, so even then, a VTOL couldn't TAG for its own indirect fire.

[theothersarah]

MaxTech had Mast Mounts for VTOLs which let you (IIRC) mount one of: C3s, TAG, Beagle as if it were one level higher. Scratch that, it let you trace LOS as if you were one level higher and couldn't mount a TAG in there, so even then, a VTOL couldn't TAG for its own indirect fire.

Not TAG, but mast mounts let you spot for LRM indirect fire, and the recent TacOps errata lets a VTOL spot for itself! So far the only canon VTOL that can make use of that is the Hawk Moth with a Thunderbolt launcher.