I really like the idea behind Targeting Synchronizer. The cost is a little steep (I feel it probably should have costed 2 points), but the fact that it combos with FCS so well makes me intrigued.

I ran this list last night, and had really good success, taking out a Hera+Corran list without losing a ship (although my opponent didn't catch how TSync worked, which if he did I think would have changed his approach).

Zeta Specialist (23)
Fire-Control System (2)
Targeting Synchronizer (3)
Special Ops Training (0)

Zeta Specialist (23)
Fire-Control System (2)
Targeting Synchronizer (3)
Special Ops Training (0)

Scimitar Squadron Pilot (16)
Extra Munitions (2)
Homing Missiles (5)
Guidance Chips (0)

Scimitar Squadron Pilot (16)
Plasma Torpedoes (3)
Extra Munitions (2)
Guidance Chips (0)

Total: 100

I'm not saying this is a top tier list, but I wanted to use it as an example of the combo, which I was really surprised by. So, I wanted to hear- what are the thoughts on the Tsync and FCS combo and Tsync overall?

I'm really wanting to see a FAQ on how Targetting Synchronizer is actually supposed to work.

My take on it is that it only works when checking to see if you have a target lock to fire ordnance and to pay the cost if there is one. Using it for modifying dice or something like Colzet's ability would not work with it.

It does seem like it's made for Homing Missiles though.

5 minutes ago, WWHSD said:

I'm really wanting to see a FAQ on how Targetting Synchronizer is actually supposed to work.

My take on it is that it only works when checking to see if you have a target lock to fire ordnance and to pay the cost if there is one. Using it for modifying dice or something like Colzet's ability would not work with it.

It does seem like it's made for Homing Missiles though.

Ya I'm pretty certain you can't spend the TL traditionally. If you could, I think 3 points is spot on, but the wording for sure seems to indicate you only get to use it as a requirement to fire munitions or in niche cases like Omega Ace.

Oh i see what you did there. Took me a moment to realize wtf you were trying to do.

SF fires, gets a TL afterwords.
Bomber then fires later using the SF's TL, effectively removing the need to action up his own TL.

Thats interesting. Im also in the boat where im pretty sure you cant actually spend it except "spend your TL to perform this attack" condition but if it lets you reroll then this is even more devious.

"Backdraft" (27)
Veteran Instincts (1)
Fire-Control System (2)
Targeting Synchronizer (3)
Lightweight Frame (2)
Special Ops Training (0)

Scimitar Squadron Pilot (16)
Extra Munitions (2)
Homing Missiles (5)
Guidance Chips (0)

Sienar Test Pilot (16)
Homing Missiles (5)
Guidance Chips (0)

Sienar Test Pilot (16)
Homing Missiles (5)
Guidance Chips (0)

Total: 100

Give that alpha strike another set of Homing Missiles and make the TIE/SF Backdraft. VI could really be any other 1 or 0 point EPT. If you are just bringing a single missile the TIE Advanced costs the same as a Bomber but is a more nimble ship.

7 hours ago, WWHSD said:

I'm really wanting to see a FAQ on how Targetting Synchronizer is actually supposed to work.

My take on it is that it only works when checking to see if you have a target lock to fire ordnance and to pay the cost if there is one. Using it for modifying dice or something like Colzet's ability would not work with it.

It does seem like it's made for Homing Missiles though.

7 hours ago, Kdubb said:

Ya I'm pretty certain you can't spend the TL traditionally. If you could, I think 3 points is spot on, but the wording for sure seems to indicate you only get to use it as a requirement to fire munitions or in niche cases like Omega Ace.

Spending a TL to re-roll dice is a game mechanic. As I posted in another thread that brought it up.

The last line of the card says " If a game effect instructs that ship to spend a target lock, it may spend your target lock instead. "

It is a replacement effect. under Target lock in the rule book "While attacking, a ship can spend a target lock that it has on the defender to reroll any number of its attack dice. "

it is clearly a game effect that instructs a ship to spend a target lock. And Targeting Synchronizer replaces the target lock that is spent. While Shara bey lets anyone at range 1-2 treat her target lock as theirs. Something that another person has stated. For instance if there was a cross faction game with a Tie advance with ATC and Shara bey, the Tie advance treats shara's as its own TL which will let it add the boom result. With Targeting Synchronizer it doesn't treat the TL as another ships but lets another ship spend the TL as a replacement effect.

17 minutes ago, Oberron said:

Spending a TL to re-roll dice is a game mechanic. As I posted in another thread that brought it up.

The last line of the card says " If a game effect instructs that ship to spend a target lock, it may spend your target lock instead. "

It is a replacement effect. under Target lock in the rule book "While attacking, a ship can spend a target lock that it has on the defender to reroll any number of its attack dice. "

it is clearly a game effect that instructs a ship to spend a target lock. And Targeting Synchronizer replaces the target lock that is spent. While Shara bey lets anyone at range 1-2 treat her target lock as theirs. Something that another person has stated. For instance if there was a cross faction game with a Tie advance with ATC and Shara bey, the Tie advance treats shara's as its own TL which will let it add the boom result. With Targeting Synchronizer it doesn't treat the TL as another ships but lets another ship spend the TL as a replacement effect.

Sorry if I'm not following, but does this mean that there is effectively no difference between targeting synchronizer and Shara Bey, or were you describing how they were different and I missed it?

Pair TS (and FCS if you want) on omega ace's wingman, put swarm leader on omega ace, and the god shot (4+ crits) starts to look a little less gimmicky.

Hmmm. Really neat idea. But i think Gamma Sq Vets might be a even deadlier since they can use crackshot.

Backdraft

VI

FCS

Lightweight Frame

Title

Targeting Sync

GSV X2

Crackshot

Homing Missiles

Chimps

Wampa

99 points

Backdraft sets up the alpha strike with FCS and the Gammas can take a chimped+focus missile shot for some good burst damage. Since the enemy shields will probably be down after that Backdraft can fly past them and crit them to death. Wampa is Wampa.

You could even mess with it some more to fit EM on the bombers for a second round if you are lucky.

1 hour ago, Kdubb said:

Sorry if I'm not following, but does this mean that there is effectively no difference between targeting synchronizer and Shara Bey, or were you describing how they were different and I missed it?

I believe, if I've understood it correctly, that he is explaining how it is different. Shara lets allies treat her target lock tokens as theirs. This means, I believe, in the hypothetical ATC situation (or say Omega Leader) would work with her - they treat her target lock tokens as if they were their own. Targeting Synchronizer specifies that an ally may spend your target locks as their own, but only when attacking. As spending a target lock to reroll is a game effect, TS should work on it, along with any other abilities/upgrades which spend during an attack. But TS does not enable OL or ATC since those do not spend.

Don't see any reason not being able to spend TL form Targeting Synchronizer for re-rolls.

Back on topic: nice synergy, FCS + TS makes TIE/sf good support ship for TIE bombers saving upgrade slot for guidance chips. Worth to try.

Yes I was showing the difference. Sorry if there was any confusion.

Hello there!

Actually I had the same idea. It would be nice an powerful if it worked like this:

One ship provides a Target Lock via Targeting Synchronizer for 2 - 3 other ships, so they can fire their missiles. The Target Lock doesn't even have to be spent, if the others ships are using homing missiles. If it's necessary to reroll dice during the missile firing process, a Fire Control System should restore the Target Lock afterwards.

But honestly I think, it doesn't work like this. The problem is spending the Target Lock for rerolls and regaining it with FCS.

FCS clearly says "After you perform an attack, you may aquire a target lock on the defender".

This means: The ship which has got FCS onboard is the one, which has to perform an attack to get the Target Lock back afterwards.

If another friendly ship performs the attack and uses the Target Lock for rerolls, FCS doesn't trigger.

9 hours ago, Oberron said:

The last line of the card says " If a game effect instructs that ship to spend a target lock, it may spend your target lock instead. "

It is a replacement effect. under Target lock in the rule book "While attacking, a ship can spend a target lock that it has on the defender to reroll any number of its attack dice. "

it is clearly a game effect that instructs a ship to spend a target lock. And Targeting Synchronizer replaces the target lock that is spent. While Shara bey lets anyone at range 1-2 treat her target lock as theirs. Something that another person has stated. For instance if there was a cross faction game with a Tie advance with ATC and Shara bey, the Tie advance treats shara's as its own TL which will let it add the boom result. With Targeting Synchronizer it doesn't treat the TL as another ships but lets another ship spend the TL as a replacement effect.

Sorry, not buying it.

There is not a game effect in this example which is instructing the firing ship to spend a target lock. The game effect of spending a target lock instructs the ship to reroll attack dice. The two things are not the same. "can" and "may" are not "must".

You must have a game mechanic (upgrade card, etc) that includes the words "you must spend your target lock" for TS to apply.

At least, that's the way I interpret it.

3 hours ago, Schu81 said:

Hello there!

Actually I had the same idea. It would be nice an powerful if it worked like this:

One ship provides a Target Lock via Targeting Synchronizer for 2 - 3 other ships, so they can fire their missiles. The Target Lock doesn't even have to be spent, if the others ships are using homing missiles. If it's necessary to reroll dice during the missile firing process, a Fire Control System should restore the Target Lock afterwards.

But honestly I think, it doesn't work like this. The problem is spending the Target Lock for rerolls and regaining it with FCS.

FCS clearly says "After you perform an attack, you may aquire a target lock on the defender".

This means: The ship which has got FCS onboard is the one, which has to perform an attack to get the Target Lock back afterwards.

If another friendly ship performs the attack and uses the Target Lock for rerolls, FCS doesn't trigger.

Yeah, FCS doesn't trigger unless the ship to which it is equipped makes an attack. The synergy between FCS and Targeting Sync is that it allows low PS ships to get Target Locks to use for ordnance at the start of the combat round. This gets around two problems that low PS ordnance carriers have.

The first is that high PS ships are able to avoid the alpha strike on the first round because they are out of range for a target lock when the lower PS ship activates but they are in range to be attacked during the combat phase. The high PS ships can then get inside the range of then ordnance the following round meaning one or more prdnance carriers may never get a chance to use their ordnance.

The second issue that FCS + Targeting Sync addresses is that low PS ordnance carriers often don't know which of their potential targets will be in range and arc for their attacks. FCS helps here as well.

2 hours ago, Hawkstrike said:

There is not a game effect in this example which is instructing the firing ship to spend a target lock. The game effect of spending a target lock instructs the ship to reroll attack dice. The two things are not the same.

I think this distinction is sound.

"Like" to this part specifically.

3 hours ago, Hawkstrike said:

Sorry, not buying it.

There is not a game effect in this example which is instructing the firing ship to spend a target lock. The game effect of spending a target lock instructs the ship to reroll attack dice. The two things are not the same. "can" and "may" are not "must".

You must have a game mechanic (upgrade card, etc) that includes the words "you must spend your target lock" for TS to apply.

At least, that's the way I interpret it.

Right. I think this is along the reasoning why I believed you couldn't use it for natural target lock rerolls. I think the keyword in TSync is "instructs". You aren't forced to spend a TL when you use it for rerolls. You are however, forced to do so for firing certain munitions.

Will 100% need a FAQ though.

The reason i highly doubt its basically Shara's ability is its way, way too wordy to literally behave the same way. If it was intended to literally share targetlocks it would just use Shara's wording, though perhaps remove the "Treat as their own" part so ATC and OL cant "use" it.

9 hours ago, Hawkstrike said:

Sorry, not buying it.

There is not a game effect in this example which is instructing the firing ship to spend a target lock. The game effect of spending a target lock instructs the ship to reroll attack dice. The two things are not the same. "can" and "may" are not "must".

You must have a game mechanic (upgrade card, etc) that includes the words "you must spend your target lock" for TS to apply.

At least, that's the way I interpret it.

Then there is no game effect that can ever work at all with the card since, even with munitions, it doesn't say "You must spend your target lock". There is no must/can wording with TS nor any rule with 'must' that I can find with spending TLs either

In order to gain the re-roll effect from the target lock you must spend the token. The "can" part is telling the player they have an option to do something, an instruction one might even say. Munitions have similar wording as the TL re-roll "Spend your target lock to perform this attack....", "... spend a target lock ... to reroll any number of its attack dice." Both use the same format of "spend X to do Y" which lets TS be used for either case.

Your interpretation is flawed.

6 hours ago, Vineheart01 said:

The reason i highly doubt its basically Shara's ability is its way, way too wordy to literally behave the same way. If it was intended to literally share targetlocks it would just use Shara's wording, though perhaps remove the "Treat as their own" part so ATC and OL cant "use" it.

I'm pretty sure the point of TS was so it would almost be like shara's ability but prevent abuse from tie adv ATC as well as OL from having potentially 3! Ships that can't change results. Or any other effect that requires having the attacking ship have a TL on their target (aside from munitions) But that comes from the treating "attack(targetlock)" as 'Attack".

18 hours ago, jep said:

Pair TS (and FCS if you want) on omega ace's wingman, put swarm leader on omega ace, and the god shot (4+ crits) starts to look a little less gimmicky.

God Shot would definitely have to have the combo of either Trick Shot or Searm Leader adding some dice to the crit total

Cool list!

When a friendly ship at Range 1-2 is attacking a ship you have locked, the friendly ship treats the 'ATTACK (TARGET LOCK):' header as 'ATTACK:' If a game effect instructs that ship to spend a target lock, it may spend your target lock instead.

To me, that ship means that only ships making secondary weapon attack that normally require a TL are affected and that the weapon synchonizer's lock will only be spent if the attacking ship must spend a lock to make the attack. This certainly qualifies for a faq though, perhaps also with reference to homing missiles.

Interesting combo...

Makes any high PS ship with Tech and Crew (Wpn Eng) into a facilitator for even more than one ship, without being restricted to Homers.

6 hours ago, DarthHeath said:

When a friendly ship at Range 1-2 is attacking a ship you have locked, the friendly ship treats the 'ATTACK (TARGET LOCK):' header as 'ATTACK:' If a game effect instructs that ship to spend a target lock, it may spend your target lock instead.

To me, that ship means that only ships making secondary weapon attack that normally require a TL are affected and that the weapon synchonizer's lock will only be spent if the attacking ship must spend a lock to make the attack. This certainly qualifies for a faq though, perhaps also with reference to homing missiles.

The problem with that is that the card doesn't say "when a friendly ship at range 1-2 is attacking with a secondary weapon..." There is a period after the the 'Attack (target Lock:) header as 'ATTACK:'" section, it is a new thought that adds on in relationship to the subject of the previous statement, the subject is "a friendly ship at Range 1-2 is attacking a ship you have locked" not a ship that is firing a secondary weapon. It is two different effects that tie back to the same opportunity.

Now if the wording was more akin to "If that ship does (treat the 'Attack (Target Lock):' header as 'Attack'), it may spend your target lock instead for any cost to secondary weapons"