[welldressedgent]

Seems like a good idea, as tacsofts are expensive and difficult availability.
You could start your tacsoft network at level 3.

Is it legal? I don't know.

Nor do I know if all commlinks need the optimization, or only the master commlink.

-g

[Crimsondude]

I would allow it, but it would definitely have to be done to all the commlinks in order for anyone to get advantage of the extra dice.

[Kontact]

It's questionable whether you "use" TacNet software to take an action which it adds a DP modifier for. 

I say no.  I say that you use your gun, and the software aids by providing information.  I don't think that you interact with the software like you do with a hacking action.

But, I'm prejudiced against TacNet software in general.  I don't think that it can possibly justify the kind of bonuses it provides.

[Mirikon]

You use a tacnet like you use a smartlink. You don't actually take an action to dial into the smartgun's info, do you? It is just there.

[All4BigGuns]

I think he may be more talking about whatever it was that made it so the program could run at a rating higher than your Response. Speaking of which, I just can't seem to find the option for doing that in Chummer.

[Kontact]

No, I mean that I don't believe that you operate Tacsofts. 
You don't "use" it from a mechanical standpoint.   To remotely operate a drone, you use a command program, and if that drone is running a TacNet, then it receives a bonus on that action equal to the TacSoft's rating.  You don't use the TacSoft.  You use Command and the TacSoft simply aids the action.  You shoot your gun, and, if you are running a TacNet, then you receive a bonus on that shot equal to the TacSoft's rating.  You did not use the TacSoft to fire your gun.  You fired; it helped.  You did not interact with a program to preform an action.  You preformed an action with positive instruction from a digital display.

From a fluff standpoint, TacSoft ratings are capped at 4.  This means that more processor cycles aren't going to make it more effective, so optimizing for a TacSoft fails that test.

From a play perspective, does further dice pool bloat from already overpowered tech make the game better?  I suppose that's a personal and situational question, but I've got a hard time accepting an affirmative answer there..

[All4BigGuns]

No, I mean that I don't believe that you operate Tacsofts. 
You don't "use" it from a mechanical standpoint.   To remotely operate a drone, you use a command program, and if that drone is running a TacNet, then it receives a bonus on that action equal to the TacSoft's rating.  You don't use the TacSoft.  You use Command and the TacSoft simply aids the action.  You shoot your gun, and, if you are running a TacNet, then you receive a bonus on that shot equal to the TacSoft's rating.  You did not use the TacSoft to fire your gun.  You fired; it helped.  You did not interact with a program to preform an action.  You preformed an action with positive instruction from a digital display.

From a fluff standpoint, TacSoft ratings are capped at 4.  This means that more processor cycles aren't going to make it more effective, so optimizing for a TacSoft fails that test.

From a play perspective, does further dice pool bloat from already overpowered tech make the game better?  I suppose that's a personal and situational question, but I've got a hard time accepting an affirmative answer there..

While the rating for tactical software is pretty much set at four, you can still use optimization so that a Response 2 or Response 3 comm can run the program without issue. Throw in ergonomic and you probably don't have to sacrifice what little security you had in the device to do so.