Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Inability to fire indirectly
#21
(01-18-2012, 10:14 PM)Crazy S link Wrote: I realize that we can probably debate this for a while, so I will pose this question to the devs on the official forums, and hope that they answer.

Good man! I agree it is a bit of a weird rule and needs clarification. But if it was the way MM has it right now then that would make TAG way more useful and I'd think more players would use it.
Reply
#22
I've already made my post on the forums, although I'm sure I won't get a reply until tomorrow morning at the earliest.

In any case, I do agree that the ability to use TAG for normal LRMs would be cool. I have a 'Mech with TAG in my unit for use with my Arrow IVs, but I hardly ever use it. Still, I keep the TAG anyway just for completeness in my unit's capabilities. I throw in some role-playing flavor instead of just min-maxing.
Reply
#23
It doesn't affect negatively, your shooting.  It was being compared to Spotting for indirect fire which does inflict penalties, so I assumed I didn't have to say I was talking about penalties again.  That sentence wasn't made in a vacuum Wink
Reply
#24
Ok, I've made this scenario to demonstrate who gets what bonuses/penalties... Hope this helps clear some things up...

Mech A has LRM's
Mech B is an out of LoS target
Mech C is allied with mech A and is our spotter

Scenario A.)
Attack declaration phase has just started... Mech C declares it is spotting Mech B for Mech A
Modifiers applied (Mech A's movement, Mech B's Movement, Mech C's Movement, range, cover from Mech C, +1 for Indirect fire)... If mech C were to also fire this turn both Mech C and A would have +1 penalties to shoot.

Scenario B.) (Mech C is now sporting TAG)
Just before attack declaration Mech C (who is mounting a TAG) fires and hits with TAG
Attack declaration begins
Modifiers that apply (Mech A's movement, Mech B's Movement, Mech C's Movement, range, cover from Mech C, +1 for Indirect fire)... If mech C were to also fire this turn only Mech A would have a +1 penalty to shoot.

Scenario C.) (Mech A is now sporting semi-guided LRM's and Mech C has TAG)
Just before attack declaration Mech C (who is mounting a TAG) fires and hits with TAG
Attack declaration begins
Modifiers that apply (Mech A's movement, range, cover from Mech C)... If mech C were to also fire this turn only Mech A would have a +1 penalty to shoot.
Reply
#25
And your second scenario should be wrong. Just because he has/uses TAG doesn't mean that the modifier should go away if he spots for normal indirect fire. If thats really the way the rules are written, then the rules need errata. Period.
Reply
#26
So far, the devs don't want to touch my question, so we still don't have an official answer. I did a search and found that someone else posed a similar question in the past and it didn't get answered, so I guess the devs don't know the answer, either!  :o
Reply
#27
IMO we don't need an answer, the rule is pretty clear that with TAG, the tagger doesn't get the +1 for spotting, unlike when spotting for normal indirect fire. Any other reading of that rule is IMO a misinterpretation.
Reply
#28
Well, it is a bit strange that a target laser affects missiles that don't have any equipment to use that laser tag *shrug*
Reply
#29
(01-20-2012, 12:23 PM)BeeRockxs link Wrote: IMO we don't need an answer, the rule is pretty clear that with TAG, the tagger doesn't get the +1 for spotting, unlike when spotting for normal indirect fire. Any other reading of that rule is IMO a misinterpretation.

I don't agree. The way I see it "spotting" (as in clicking SPOT) is spotting. Period. Even if you use TAG as well, it shouldn't eliminate the modifier. Now, I agree they shouldn't get the +1 for using the TAG. But the TAG doesn't count as spotting.
Reply
#30
Not to high jack a thread, but how does this all work when EW (Electronic Warfare) is used? If a unit sports an ECM, does TAG work for when in the bubble and/or penetrating the bubble? And how would this effect TAG spotting and marking? (spotting is regular munitions, marking is special munitions) Regular spotting (no TAG) doesn't care about EW, I think.

Also, does MM take EW into consideration with TAG spotting? I have yet to test it. I'll do some digging in the rules and MM and see what I can come up with. If anything is noteworthy I'll repost. Just something to consider.
Reply
#31
ECM has no effect on TAG or spotting.
Reply
#32
if you want a fluffy reason why TAG should prevent extra penalties to shooting... here is what TAG is:
"More than a simple infrared laser-based target designation system, the TAG system tied into the user’s on-board targeting and tracking systems and used its own integral tight-beam laser communications array"
This would lead me to believe that the targeting data fed is done so automatically rather than having the pilot send the data manually, which would cause a distraction to his shooting and thus give him a penalty to his shooting.
Reply
#33
Which still has no "spotting" effect. Wink
Reply
#34
spoting is nothing else than telling your friend the koordinates of a target, so he can fire at it indirectly. Pretty much the same a forward observer does for nowadays artillery.
A target laser connected to a comm array could do a similar thing, I have to admit.
Reply
#35
(01-22-2012, 09:45 PM)Akira213 link Wrote: spoting is nothing else than telling your friend the koordinates of a target, so he can fire at it indirectly. Pretty much the same a forward observer does for nowadays artillery.
A target laser connected to a comm array could do a similar thing, I have to admit.

I suppose. I just always took that to mean exactly what frequency the TAG laser was operating at and everything. Mostly because I think in terms of real world "TAG" units, such as FLIR equipped F-14s used a Forward Observers calling in strikes that they las for the incoming munitions from the other planes. You have to tell the attacking plane what your 4 digit code is, so that the homing munitions will ride the correct beam.
Reply
#36
I always thought the Tomcat was build for intercepting enemy planes with phoenix missiles and not for air-to-ground-fighting.

What you described is the use of homing arrow IV and semiguided LRM. There isn't really much of a difference I guess.

But if that target laser just meassures the angle and distance to the target, calculates a coordinate out of this and sends this via the comm-array-connection to a LRM-friend?
It could work. Maybe. *shrug*

But I'd still prefer a simple rule clarification from official side *sigh*

Reply
#37
The Tomcat has been mostly phased out now, but during the first Gulf War, once air superiority was achieved several F-14s were used as forward observers in the manner I described above Smile Very effectively I might add.

Here are a couple images of an F-14 with the FLIR module right in front of the nose wheel (the first is a model, and the 2nd is an actual "FLIR Cat" from VF-103):
[Image: f14-tomcat-diecast-model-u-s-navy-253-sl...-by-armour]
[Image: F-14B_FLIR-02.jpg]
Reply
#38
Those are models, lol!

I thought that TAG and indirect spotting rules were incompatible except with special munitions.  Spotting occurs in the Attack phase. TAGing occurs in a different phase.
Reply
#39
(01-23-2012, 10:21 PM)RedDevil link Wrote: Those are models, lol!

And? Tongue The plane actually exists. The 2nd picture is supposed to be the real one, but why its in front of a green screen I don't know.

There were a lot of F-14s outfitted with FLIR for the 1st Gulf War.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)