Wireless bonus rules suck., Lets write the tacnet rules they should have used. Options

[Shadow Knight]

Wireless bonus rules suck. Lets write the tacnet rules they should have used. Then we can submit them as a replacement. And use them instead. And give Deckers something they can actually do and something that would actually be worth the risk.

[Slide]

I'm on board. so would a tacnet basically count as its on grid? sorta like a LAN as opposed to the internet?

[Shadow Knight]

I'm on board. so would a tacnet basically count as its on grid? sorta like a LAN as opposed to the internet?

I think so. With the Deckers Deck acting as the Router/firewall.
The Decker would act as Burk did in aliens coordinating the team. and protecting the tacnet from intruders.

[Slide]

ok, so hes part of what I propose then, for certine bonuses like the smartgun bonuses (the book discribes it as up to the second weather conditions) you need some sort of sensors for the area to help determine the ambiant conditions. As well as running a Tacnet program on the deck that counts against the max programs for the deck. I mean computing dynamic events with thousands of variables in real time takes a ton of processing power.

[Slide]

Also with having tacnet as a program allows you to do things like complex action data processing+Smallunit Tactics[Tacnet Program] each hit increases the inititive of all plugged into the net by one up to your Tacnet Rating. If you don't think an extra 3 or 4 to inititive is worth it, just remember Han Shot first.

[Shadow Knight]

Also with having tacnet as a program allows you to do things like complex action data processing+Smallunit Tactics[Tacnet Program] each hit increases the inititive of all plugged into the net by one up to your Tacnet Rating. If you don't think an extra 3 or 4 to inititive is worth it, just remember Han Shot first.

They also allow the Decker to make perception checks in addition to the individuals to notice things thus allowing the decker to point out changes in situations.

The Decker likely pulls in relevant info from their connection to the net.

I kind of imagine the Decker playing this role
http://www.battlefield.com/battlefield-4/f.../commander-mode

[RHat]

... You do understand that they didn't just use tacnets for good reason, right? Tacnets utterly fail to meet the design goals that led to wireless bonuses.

[Slide]

... You do understand that they didn't just use tacnets for good reason, right? Tacnets utterly fail to meet the design goals that led to wireless bonuses.

Sweet, say something useful now.

[SpellBinder]

Bring back skinlinks?

[RHat]

Sweet, say something useful now.

I like the concept, but I'm just saying that it doesn't act as a replacement. With that in mind, the question becomes what the design goal of these rules should be.

[Shadow Knight]

I like the concept, but I'm just saying that it doesn't act as a replacement. With that in mind, the question becomes what the design goal of these rules should be.

The stated design goal is to make deckers useful. Wireless bonuses fail at doing that and make no sense. If I can just turn off my wireless you have not actually made deckers useful.

A tacnet if designed right can accomplish that goal. Especially if you write things such that having a tacnet is worth the risk. Or vital to the success of the mission. And the Deckers runs the tacnet. Giving that player something to do.

[RHat]

The stated design goal is to make deckers useful. Wireless bonuses fail at doing that and make no sense. If I can just turn off my wireless you have not actually made deckers useful.

A tacnet if designed right can accomplish that goal. Especially if you write things such that having a tacnet is worth the risk. Or vital to the success of the mission. And the Deckers runs the tacnet. Giving that player something to do.

The actual role of wireless bonuses is a little more complicated than that. The wireless bonuses, some of which make sense and some of which don't, do several things. First, they improve player agency by making having wireless on or off an actual DECISION. Second, they allow combat hacking to exist while keeping things nice and simple (it's worth pointing out that under the current structure, the decker is quite able to kill drones if need be). Third, they are generalizable to pretty much all situations save for a less than common handful. Fourth, they provide a direct reason for the decker to be present. Fifth, it's bound to the decker directly rather than being a function of the other people on the team. Tacnet rules simply cannot accomplish all of this - they do nothing for agency because you can't let there be very much reason not to use it (otherwise, it fails in other goals immediately), they involve the decker helping others do something rather than directly acting (the Face suffers from this to a limited extent as well, but that's inevitable), it's generalizable only under a number of conditions any one of which could easily turn out to be false, it would be very difficult to write these rules such that they work yet really don't work remotely, and the tacnet is team bound rather than character bound.

[Falconer]

Rhat cheer leads for a lot of the freelancers/line dev who made this you need to understand.


Personally Slide, I'm all for this. It very closely mirrors an idea I had as well and my assertions in other threads that making tacnets fully integrated in the core rules... instead of a stupidly good bonus system in a splatbook would have been the correct way to do this.

I wish they had done something more akin to... a smartgun enhances the equipment limit by 2. If subscribed as part of a tacnet it also provides 2 bonus dice. Not simply 'connected to the wired' (Lain reference for those who don't get it).

Things like bonus dice for perception bonus for image-enhancement or attention co-processor or the like make a lot more sense if integrated as part of a sensor awareness net as well. Instead we'll probably see the tacnet make a re-emergence as another stupidly bloated bonus dice pool yet again.

[SpellBinder]

I'd love to see the face of the street sam that gets his brand new Alpha grade Wired Reflexes 2 implant bricked by a decker first run out...

[RHat]

Rhat cheer leads for a lot of the freelancers/line dev who made this you need to understand.

You realize that casting aspersions upon someone is simply a way of demonstrating that you have no counterargument, yes?

[Shadow Knight]

The actual role of wireless bonuses is a little more complicated than that. The wireless bonuses, some of which make sense and some of which don't, do several things. First, they improve player agency by making having wireless on or off an actual DECISION. Second, they allow combat hacking to exist while keeping things nice and simple (it's worth pointing out that under the current structure, the decker is quite able to kill drones if need be). Third, they are generalizable to pretty much all situations save for a less than common handful. Fourth, they provide a direct reason for the decker to be present. Fifth, it's bound to the decker directly rather than being a function of the other people on the team. Tacnet rules simply cannot accomplish all of this - they do nothing for agency because you can't let there be very much reason not to use it (otherwise, it fails in other goals immediately), they involve the decker helping others do something rather than directly acting (the Face suffers from this to a limited extent as well, but that's inevitable), it's generalizable only under a number of conditions any one of which could easily turn out to be false, it would be very difficult to write these rules such that they work yet really don't work remotely, and the tacnet is team bound rather than character bound.

No wireless Bonuses do not do all of that.

They are not a direct reason to have a decker present. I turn my wireless off. Boom no need for a decker.

Tacnet rules on the other hand can accomplish all of this and more. If written with the intend that the Decker is the guy running your tac net. In fact by using tacnet rules you give reason to have a second decker in the party whose job is to crack the corporate tacnet. The current implementation of wireless Bonuses is in a word. Stupid. They do not make Deckers more useful. they in fact do not benefit the Decker at all.

And if you are not going to contribute to this discussion please go. Your comments are off topic. The topic is writing tacnet rules that do make deckers useful unlike the current rules.

[RHat]

No wireless Bonuses do not do all of that.

They are not a direct reason to have a decker present. I turn my wireless off. Boom no need for a decker.

Tacnet rules on the other hand can accomplish all of this and more. If written with the intend that the Decker is the guy running your tac net. In fact by using tacnet rules you give reason to have a second decker in the party whose job is to crack the corporate tacnet. The current implementation of wireless Bonuses is in a word. Stupid. They do not make Deckers more useful. they in fact do not benefit the Decker at all.

And if you are not going to contribute to this discussion please go. Your comments are off topic. The topic is writing tacnet rules that do make deckers useful unlike the current rules.

... So, turning off your wireless means that no one else is going to want the bonuses? I'd say, in setting, the majority of opponents would go for the bonus.

[Shadow Knight]

... So, turning off your wireless means that no one else is going to want the bonuses? I'd say, in setting, the majority of opponents would go for the bonus.

Again this topic is for discussing the creation of Tac Net rules that will actually make Deckers useful. Keep this up and I report you. Your comments are off topic.

[RHat]

Well, I can see a couple of challenges here: First, ideally the bonuses shouldn't tread the same ground as the Leadership bonuses, but something like a teamwork test to team members defensive rolls as an interrupt would be interesting.

[Shadow Knight]

Well, I can see a couple of challenges here: First, ideally the bonuses shouldn't tread the same ground as the Leadership bonuses, but something like a teamwork test to team members defensive rolls as an interrupt would be interesting.

i would treat Tac net rules with others as leaders as giving bonus dice to leadership same as teamwork rules do.

[RHat]

Creating a feedback situation between the two isn't a bad idea, but a tacnet should have bonuses distinct from that (that way, you don't get into a situation where the presence of one diminishes the value of the other). Bonuses to Perception, indirect fire, defense... There's a lot of space to work with there.

[Slide]

Ok, yes leadership does give initiative bonuses. What I was looking at with tacnet is honestly pretty similar to that, except the reasoning is that by the decker feeding purtinat info to the team in real time they would be able to react faster and more efficiently to changing situations.

Now while I do like the idea of a tacnet, I don't belive it really solves the issue of most wireless bonuses being illogical or not worth having wireless. i.e. smuggling or fingertip compartments being wireless to remove things as a free action. You shouldn't broadcast that you have a smuggling compartment. Needing wireless to tell what your air tank is at even if you have cyber eyes and DNI. The biggest problem that I see with the wireless thing is how much would I actually miss the bonuses if I didn't have them. If it would cripple me then thats pretty stupid. Why would I have a piece of cyberware that is only functional via internet. Thats like when I was on a submarine and wanted to play SCII but no.... Bioware says i need a fucking internet conection (nerd rage). But the problem that we really have with wireless bonuses is that most of them you can fully function without, and turning them off is unlikely to be a real handicap in a fight or any other situation.

Those are separate issues, and I think that they should all be looked at on an individual scale. Now as far as a tacnet goes, it should have risk/reward that would suite a combat situation. What happens if a hacker can infiltrate your Tacnet? what happens if you get bad info, If a decker is wirelessly connected to every piece of gear that you have and some one drops the Tacnet, what happens to all that gear? does it just return to a normal function, or would much of it have a chance that it needs to "reboot"

[Shadow Knight]

Creating a feedback situation between the two isn't a bad idea, but a tacnet should have bonuses distinct from that (that way, you don't get into a situation where the presence of one diminishes the value of the other). Bonuses to Perception, indirect fire, defense... There's a lot of space to work with there.

I agree.

I think Tacnets should be versatile. They should also provide overwatch. Giving the leader better info to base his tactics on. Give the Decker small unit tactics and they can be a back up/alt tactician.

Have a second decker and they can hack the opposition Tacnet and feed it's data into your tacnet. Giving you even better data.

How would you handle
Perception

Indirect Fire

Defense

tactical maneuvering(IE flanking etc.)

How different sensor systems feed into the tacnet.

How do riggers and drones feed into and recieve info from the tacnet.

how do the Street samurai pick up and give info to the net?

How do your magical types feed in info and pull out info?



Hacking a tacnet

Deckers defending their tacnet

Deckers attacking a tacnet

What can be done with a compromised tacnet

Anything I have not thought of?

[Medicineman]

I'd love to see the face of the street sam that gets his brand new Alpha grade Wired Reflexes 2 implant bricked by a decker first run out...

or the whole Group of Runners that tried to infiltrate a Megacorp and got bricked from a dozen Corpdeckers & another Dozen Agents/ICs.

BtT
A Decker could write/program Agents to protect each TacNet Member

With a dozen Dances
Medicineman

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

... You do understand that they didn't just use tacnets for good reason, right? Tacnets utterly fail to meet the design goals that led to wireless bonuses.

I Disagree... They did not use Tacnets because they were trying to ADD ADDITIONAL vulnerabilities that the Decker could screw with. A Task that was approached, and executed, poorly.