 microtrancievers vs. commlinks, which makes more sense |
  |
 Oct 5 2006, 07:55 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 164 Joined: 9-December 04 From: former Bug City, now CFS Member No.: 6,875  |
When on a run, doesn't it make more sense for a group of characters to use microtrancievers rather than commlinks for communication purposes?
They get you a better Signal for less cost, and don't have all the "baggage" (read: identifying information) that comes along with using a commlink. Just a thought. |
 |
 
|
|
Oct 5 2006, 09:10 AM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,925 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 948 |
It all comes down to convenience for me. The Tranceiver is very god for having spoken communication through a wireless encrypted medium, and they can be loaded with agents and databombs so that they can be somewhat protected.
What you CAN'T do is that you cannot send live videofeed, silent communications and text and imagefiles important to the mission. The commlinks don't HAVE to send sensitive information as you can put them all in hidden mode but I'd advice you to have a stand-alone commlink (Response 5) running 9 programs and agents (thus lowering its response to 4). This is your Firewall that ALL communications are piped through. The Bad: Expensive The Good: 5 agents doing Analyze tests 3IP's each. That's 15 X 8D6 Analyze tests per combat turn. or 5 tests per second. Anyone trying to hack the communications are in for a little problem. Sniffing the wireless connection might be a problem though but that's a problem for any wireless connection, and the tranceiver usually have a higher rating and thus people farther away can sniff it. Short range communications are less risky. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 5 2006, 12:09 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
*del*
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 5 2006, 01:50 PM
Post
#4
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 619 Joined: 18-April 03 From: The UV Nexus Member No.: 4,474 |
Perhaps what you want is BOTH. You need the commlink to decipher the encrypted AR. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 5 2006, 04:35 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 394 Joined: 19-May 03 From: In your base eating your food. Member No.: 4,607 |
Early on we learned to turn off our comlinks in combat situations/infiltrations.
They're just too damn easy to hack and track. We use microtrancievers instead. When a piece of equipment becomes a liability it's time to ditch it. Which is a shame because in SR3 we ran with a full battleTac suite. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 5 2006, 04:56 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
The back-up plan Group: Retired Admins Posts: 8,423 Joined: 15-January 03 From: San Diego Member No.: 3,910 |
If the team was willing to fork out the cash for BattleTac, the money involved in upgrading a set of work only commlinks with heavy encryption etc sholdn't be that bad.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 5 2006, 05:12 PM
Post
#7
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 914 Joined: 26-August 05 From: Louisville, KY (Well, Memphis, IN technically but you won't know where that is.) Member No.: 7,626 |
Which is why contermeasures were developed; BattleTac was just too useful for anyone not to try to interfere with it. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 5 2006, 05:54 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
...I miss the old Transducer implant, no need to subvocalise through your micro transceiver.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 5 2006, 07:13 PM
Post
#9
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 315 Joined: 6-August 06 Member No.: 9,032 |
Do you really want this to exist? EVERY Corp wold have it.. EDIT: ..multiple times, of course ;-) |
||
|
|
|
||
 Oct 5 2006, 07:48 PM
Post
#10
|
|||
|
jacked in Group: Admin Posts: 9,546 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 463 |
Isn't a datajack enough for that now? Bye Thanee |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 5 2006, 08:43 PM
Post
#11
|
|||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,925 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 948 |
Well, it works. Of course it can be used by the opposition but it takes a LOT of system power. Still it might be cut down to 3 tests per second or so with two agents doing Spoof's instead of analyze. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 5 2006, 08:52 PM
Post
#12
|
|||||
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
...maybe, but much of the headware seems awfully vague. It isn't even clear whether the 2070s DJ is a standard connector plug in or induction pad. Too bad that skinlink doesn't work for electronics other than commlink subscribed devices. Both Leela and Night Angel had induction DJs wired to their Transducers with the Micro Transceivers disguised as costume jewelry necklaces (with ECCM & signal encryption of course). I miss the pre Commlink days, things were a lot simpler and more secure. Basically a character didn't really need to spend BPs/Karma on computer skills to get around back then. BTW all my SR4 characters still use MTs on the job, just got to wait for the various tech supplements to come out to see if there are any fun new options they can add |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 5 2006, 09:17 PM
Post
#13
|
|
|
The Dragon Never Sleeps Group: Admin Posts: 6,924 Joined: 1-September 05 Member No.: 7,667 |
Datajack provides DNI and hardwired connection for devices. So for the transceiver and datajack combo that would work. Though as noted there is that queston of whether the datajack is wireless, but as everything is wireless by default I'd make it a given. What I would though is add a skinlink to both to reduce emissions.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 5 2006, 10:02 PM
Post
#14
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 394 Joined: 19-May 03 From: In your base eating your food. Member No.: 4,607 |
Agreed. Hmm you just gave me a great idea though. I think i'm going to get our rigger to run a 'link with false data just to let them hack it. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Oct 6 2006, 01:07 AM
Post
#15
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
You mean you don't set aside starting cash for a dummy 'link?
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 6 2006, 03:33 AM
Post
#16
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 394 Joined: 19-May 03 From: In your base eating your food. Member No.: 4,607 |
I'm a mage, what do I care? I don't even use the damn things. Usually we just take other people's and upgrade that way. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 6 2006, 08:53 PM
Post
#17
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 914 Joined: 26-August 05 From: Louisville, KY (Well, Memphis, IN technically but you won't know where that is.) Member No.: 7,626 |
It's been suggested before but that doesn't make it stop being a good idea. We got some cheap comms with minimal amount of encryption on them so they weren't wide open. Most of the time we rely on transceivers for communication but once the drek hit the fan we'd fire up those cheap comms and play the audio track from an action Sim over it, with each person having a different point-of-view track so the data was more rational. The technomancer would, from time to time, go hunting invading hackers in the faux-comm subnet. We were trying to get a hold of a set of smartlink diagnostic units to connect to the comms, so there appeared to be weapons linked up to them with ammunition being cycled to further sucker the attack hackers, but the game ended before the GM let us have them. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 12th July 2025 - 01:16 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.