Detecting wireless nodes in signal range that are in active or passive mode is automatic. For nodes in hidden mode, a test is required, but it is also possible.
In those two cases, does the hacker have any idea of the physical locations of the detected nodes? Or a direction from which the signal is coming? Or does he simply have a list of nodes in range?
I have an AI in my group and would like to know if it would be able to warn its teammates of incoming enemies by localizing their commlinks' nodes. For example: "I detect three hidden nodes 100m to the NW of your current position, they are closing in on you, fast."
Full Version: Physical location of nodes in mutual signal range
List of nodes. I believe you need to perform a Trace action to determine physical location.
Per SR4A:
and
So if you know the general location of the node you can do the first part of the "Detect Hidden Node (Scan)" action to detect the node you know the general location of. If you are just looking for a list of nodes, then the second part but it does not state whether or not you get a location or just a list. It infers a list. And I kind of look at it in terms of today. You can sit with your wireless device and get a list of all the other wireless devices out there, but you have no idea where they are. They could be in the cafe next to you, in the gas station the next street over, or in the house at the end of the block. You have no way of knowing...unless you start using triangulation and actually map the area.
The Trace User action is to track a user back to its originating node to get a location (wireless is within 50 meters).
QUOTE (SR4A @ pg. 230)
Detect Hidden Node (Scan)
You attempt to locate a hidden node. You must be aware of the node, or at least have a good guess of where the device should be (for example, if your commlink is not detecting a node for Mr. Johnson but you are pretty sure he has a PAN, or when you can see the security drone but it is operating in Hidden mode). To find the node, make a Electronic Warfare + Scan (4) Test.
You may instead make a general search for Hidden nodes that are within mutual Signal range. In this case, the test is an Electronic Warfare + Scan (15+, 1 Combat Turn) Extended Test, rather than a Complex Action.
You attempt to locate a hidden node. You must be aware of the node, or at least have a good guess of where the device should be (for example, if your commlink is not detecting a node for Mr. Johnson but you are pretty sure he has a PAN, or when you can see the security drone but it is operating in Hidden mode). To find the node, make a Electronic Warfare + Scan (4) Test.
You may instead make a general search for Hidden nodes that are within mutual Signal range. In this case, the test is an Electronic Warfare + Scan (15+, 1 Combat Turn) Extended Test, rather than a Complex Action.
and
QUOTE (SR4A @ pf 232)
Trace User (Track)
You trace an icon back to its originating node. This is a Computer + Track (10, Complex Action) Extended Test. The target may increase the threshold with the Redirect Trace action, and a Stealth program run by your target acts as a negative dice pool modifier.
When you reach the threshold of the Extended Test, you have successfully traced the target, learning the target’s access ID and the location of the device housing the originating node (usually the user’s commlink). If the target is using a wired connection to the Matrix, you learn his exact location. If he is using a wireless connection, you have his location triangulated to within about 50 meters. As long as you keep your Track program running and the target remains connected to the Matrix, you may continue to monitor the target’s location. Black IC can make the trace easier.
You can also use this action to trace a subscription to its other end. For example, you may trace the subscription from a drone to the rigger controlling it.
You trace an icon back to its originating node. This is a Computer + Track (10, Complex Action) Extended Test. The target may increase the threshold with the Redirect Trace action, and a Stealth program run by your target acts as a negative dice pool modifier.
When you reach the threshold of the Extended Test, you have successfully traced the target, learning the target’s access ID and the location of the device housing the originating node (usually the user’s commlink). If the target is using a wired connection to the Matrix, you learn his exact location. If he is using a wireless connection, you have his location triangulated to within about 50 meters. As long as you keep your Track program running and the target remains connected to the Matrix, you may continue to monitor the target’s location. Black IC can make the trace easier.
You can also use this action to trace a subscription to its other end. For example, you may trace the subscription from a drone to the rigger controlling it.
So if you know the general location of the node you can do the first part of the "Detect Hidden Node (Scan)" action to detect the node you know the general location of. If you are just looking for a list of nodes, then the second part but it does not state whether or not you get a location or just a list. It infers a list. And I kind of look at it in terms of today. You can sit with your wireless device and get a list of all the other wireless devices out there, but you have no idea where they are. They could be in the cafe next to you, in the gas station the next street over, or in the house at the end of the block. You have no way of knowing...unless you start using triangulation and actually map the area.
The Trace User action is to track a user back to its originating node to get a location (wireless is within 50 meters).
In that case, I find it strange that knowing the approximate location of a hidden node makes it easier to detect though.
Moreover, I had the impression that AROs could be displayed on your image link at the physical location of the devices emitting them. Am I wrong?
Moreover, I had the impression that AROs could be displayed on your image link at the physical location of the devices emitting them. Am I wrong?
QUOTE (Odsh @ Mar 9 2010, 04:06 PM) 
In that case, I find it strange that knowing the approximate location of a hidden node makes it easier to detect though.
Not really. I mean it's more like "I know there's a PAN there. Keep scanning" and have a narrow focus of scanning area, rather than just searching inside your entire signal range.
Arsenal, p.33:
How exactly does this system work if it is not possible to pinpoint a wireless node's exact physical location?
QUOTE
Safe Target System: The Safe Target system prevents a character from accidentally shooting at “friendly” targets. The basic system consists of modifications to the weapon’s firing mechanism and a microcomputer subscribed to the weapon’s PAN connection. The microcomputer constantly scans for a programmed RFID or PAN profile and determines the relative proximity and location of the tags that fit into this profile. If the gun is pointed at or within a radius of 1 meter of a target marked as ”safe,” the system engages the gun’s safety and prevents or holds fire. If the gun is pointed away from the safe target, the safety is automatically disengaged. Note that this feature also prevents the weapon from shooting if anything marked as safe is in front or behind of the actual target.
How exactly does this system work if it is not possible to pinpoint a wireless node's exact physical location?
From the way I understand it, once you find a "node" you see its icon in AR in location with the real world. So you would know if the hidden node you just found is the guys right next to you or the guy at the back of the bus. So if you could see. There is also an allusion to this in the SR4 Rulebook when it talks about RFID tags being in your underware and a spider noticing the tag in an off limits part of a facility. That means to me that you can see them relative to the real world.
QUOTE (Odsh @ Mar 15 2010, 10:31 AM)
Arsenal, p.33:
How exactly does this system work if it is not possible to pinpoint a wireless node's exact physical location?
How exactly does this system work if it is not possible to pinpoint a wireless node's exact physical location?
I would interpret that as a specialized piece of scanning equipment whose sole function is to determine if a "safe" node is within a very narrow location (since it really doesn't trigger unless the weapon is pointed at the "safe" PAN).
Now, with that in mind, as a GM I would probably allow a clever player to "repurpose" a safety trigger system into a wireless node detector -- they would basically detect the node, add it to their "safe PAN" list, then take an action (or a series of actions) to try to pin down where the node is by waving their gun around.
I agree, though, that the limitation of 50m radius being the best that you can pinpoint a wireless user is a little unrealistic; someone with access to the GPS functionality of someone else's cell phone could get a much tighter approximate location today, for example (though it's worth remembering that the SR universe and the real world diverged quite drastically in the 90s, so it's dangerous to assume that their tech is somehow extrapolated from *our* tech).
Page 25 Unwired
"The broad coverage of wireless towers in most sprawls enable easy GPS positioning. That means, boys and girls, that if you've got a tag on you and you're within range of a wireless tower or relay point, you can be physically tracked. Your commlink isn't the only thing broadcsting a signal, a fact you'd do well to remember."
Since every single wireless device around you is a wireless relay for every other device that means triangulation would be nearly automatic. So I don't see why it would be so hard to tell were any node is in the real world.
"The broad coverage of wireless towers in most sprawls enable easy GPS positioning. That means, boys and girls, that if you've got a tag on you and you're within range of a wireless tower or relay point, you can be physically tracked. Your commlink isn't the only thing broadcsting a signal, a fact you'd do well to remember."
Since every single wireless device around you is a wireless relay for every other device that means triangulation would be nearly automatic. So I don't see why it would be so hard to tell were any node is in the real world.
Getting a list of what is in range, and where something is in range are two different things. While knowing where something is will also tell you if it is in range, knowing if something is in range won't tell you exactly where it is.
You also need to consider that most devices that provide access, the ones that tell you that they are there, also probably tell you where they are as well.
You also need to consider that most devices that provide access, the ones that tell you that they are there, also probably tell you where they are as well.
First of all, the Trace action is for use in the Matrix, where you often just have a Icon to work with who may be anywhere in the world.
When two devices are within signal range of one another however, it's a whole other story. Now someone pointed out that knowing where to scan somehow helped in finding hidden nodes because you could focus the scan in a particular area. But using the same logic, would one not also be able to scan in a specific direction and thus knowing the direction of nodes found there? And if you could increase and decrease signal range, or even use different scanning devices with different signal strengths, you should be able to get an estimated or even exact distance. And then it isn't far off doing the same with other nodes and triangulating.
Or... you have Scan program that does all this for you in a few seconds or minutes.
They knew how to locate radio signals in already WWII. This is 2070.
When two devices are within signal range of one another however, it's a whole other story. Now someone pointed out that knowing where to scan somehow helped in finding hidden nodes because you could focus the scan in a particular area. But using the same logic, would one not also be able to scan in a specific direction and thus knowing the direction of nodes found there? And if you could increase and decrease signal range, or even use different scanning devices with different signal strengths, you should be able to get an estimated or even exact distance. And then it isn't far off doing the same with other nodes and triangulating.
Or... you have Scan program that does all this for you in a few seconds or minutes.
They knew how to locate radio signals in already WWII. This is 2070.
QUOTE (FriendoftheDork @ Mar 15 2010, 04:43 PM)
First of all, the Trace action is for use in the Matrix, where you often just have a Icon to work with who may be anywhere in the world.
When two devices are within signal range of one another however, it's a whole other story. Now someone pointed out that knowing where to scan somehow helped in finding hidden nodes because you could focus the scan in a particular area. But using the same logic, would one not also be able to scan in a specific direction and thus knowing the direction of nodes found there? And if you could increase and decrease signal range, or even use different scanning devices with different signal strengths, you should be able to get an estimated or even exact distance. And then it isn't far off doing the same with other nodes and triangulating.
Or... you have Scan program that does all this for you in a few seconds or minutes.
They knew how to locate radio signals in already WWII. This is 2070.
When two devices are within signal range of one another however, it's a whole other story. Now someone pointed out that knowing where to scan somehow helped in finding hidden nodes because you could focus the scan in a particular area. But using the same logic, would one not also be able to scan in a specific direction and thus knowing the direction of nodes found there? And if you could increase and decrease signal range, or even use different scanning devices with different signal strengths, you should be able to get an estimated or even exact distance. And then it isn't far off doing the same with other nodes and triangulating.
Or... you have Scan program that does all this for you in a few seconds or minutes.
They knew how to locate radio signals in already WWII. This is 2070.
Several of us own wireless devices. I'm typing on one now. I don't believe my wireless card has any sort of directional capability. Does yours have the option to "show a list of all wireless hotspots west of me"?
If the smartlink's friend-or-foe recognition system works, I don't see why this wouldn't be possible.
Moreover, I believe you can have some kind of AR "decoration" on walls or people in SR4 (or am I confusing this with Eclipse Phase?). For this to work, your commlink has to know how and where those decorations need to be displayed on your image link, i.e. it needs to know the relative positions of the nodes emitting these signals with great accuracy.
Moreover, I believe you can have some kind of AR "decoration" on walls or people in SR4 (or am I confusing this with Eclipse Phase?). For this to work, your commlink has to know how and where those decorations need to be displayed on your image link, i.e. it needs to know the relative positions of the nodes emitting these signals with great accuracy.
QUOTE (DireRadiant @ Mar 15 2010, 03:20 PM)
You also need to consider that most devices that provide access, the ones that tell you that they are there, also probably tell you where they are as well.
You mean they all have a GPS and communicate their absolute position?
I don't want to get involved in the whole debate (as I see some agree and some disagree) but I just came across this, so take it with a grain of salt.
Page 264 SR4A
Wi-Fi Detection
Many security networks—especially those monitored by spiders—
automatically scan local wireless networks within range for signs of
unusual activity. These networks will take note of new networks, perhaps
even intercepting the signal to monitor or sniff out illicit activity.
Security may even triangulate a network using multiple signals to determine
if the network is originating from within its own boundaries.
For this reason smart shadowrunners operate in hidden mode while on
runs. For more details on detecting networks, see p. 229.
By that token, any device with a signal can be used to triangulate? Even your wireless coffee maker, if the node is close enough.
And
Page 218 SR4A
Comm links
Commlinks are the ultimate personal networking tool, used by almost
everyone. They are a combination portable computer, wireless router,
cell phone, PDA, GPS unit, chip reader, digital camera, wallet/credstick,
and mobile gaming device, all in one easy-to-carry package that fits
inside a pocket, belt-clip, or wrist-clip. Commlinks come in a dizzying
array of shapes, sizes, and colors, from stylized head-sets or faux jewelry
to cranial implants and commlinks woven into the fabric of your jacket.
Obviously these points mainly (or exclusively) only refer to commlinks, but take it with a grain of salt.
Page 264 SR4A
Wi-Fi Detection
Many security networks—especially those monitored by spiders—
automatically scan local wireless networks within range for signs of
unusual activity. These networks will take note of new networks, perhaps
even intercepting the signal to monitor or sniff out illicit activity.
Security may even triangulate a network using multiple signals to determine
if the network is originating from within its own boundaries.
For this reason smart shadowrunners operate in hidden mode while on
runs. For more details on detecting networks, see p. 229.
By that token, any device with a signal can be used to triangulate? Even your wireless coffee maker, if the node is close enough.
And
Page 218 SR4A
Comm links
Commlinks are the ultimate personal networking tool, used by almost
everyone. They are a combination portable computer, wireless router,
cell phone, PDA, GPS unit, chip reader, digital camera, wallet/credstick,
and mobile gaming device, all in one easy-to-carry package that fits
inside a pocket, belt-clip, or wrist-clip. Commlinks come in a dizzying
array of shapes, sizes, and colors, from stylized head-sets or faux jewelry
to cranial implants and commlinks woven into the fabric of your jacket.
Obviously these points mainly (or exclusively) only refer to commlinks, but take it with a grain of salt.
I always thought of AR as an active system - that is, for an ARO to appear in your field of view, a device should be sending data about it - that's how AR makeup and virtual persona programs work for all I know. Same with virtual wallpapers, except the home node suggests where to put each texture.
Thus, naturally, you should be able to just turn receiving this data off, and see the world without AROs.
And when using the safe target thingy, you can always say it has a narrow directional antenna to determine if you're pointing the gun the wrong way - and minding that the Signal stat of identifying RFIDs is known, you can judge distance by the strength of returning signals.
Thus, naturally, you should be able to just turn receiving this data off, and see the world without AROs.
And when using the safe target thingy, you can always say it has a narrow directional antenna to determine if you're pointing the gun the wrong way - and minding that the Signal stat of identifying RFIDs is known, you can judge distance by the strength of returning signals.
QUOTE (nemafow @ Mar 15 2010, 07:40 PM)
Security may even triangulate a network using multiple signals to determine
if the network is originating from within its own boundaries.
For this reason smart shadowrunners operate in hidden mode while on
runs. For more details on detecting networks, see p. 229.
if the network is originating from within its own boundaries.
For this reason smart shadowrunners operate in hidden mode while on
runs. For more details on detecting networks, see p. 229.
Hmm...I had forgotten that the rules specifically call out the fact that security in particular zones are able to pinpoint if a particular person walking in their area is running in Active mode or not. (For that matter, the example of searching for the hidden node of the Johnson sitting across the table from you sort of implies that there is at least *some* expectation of being able to relate AR icons/nodes to actual physical proximity).
The main reason for the "50m rule" is *probably* to defend players who have the misfortune of making a dreadful error while hacking in somewhere from having Firewatch getting their *exact* address from a wireless trace...it has the beneficial side-effect of adventure writers not having to worry about players getting an exact location of their target via a "simple" trace.
The problem, though, is that the rule fails the Realism Test, on at least two counts:
a) It's entirely possible with technology we have *today* to get a fix on a wireless device that's much closer than 50m. Sure, there's plenty of caveats to it, but it *is* possible. Hell, OnStar spends quite a bit of their advertising budget grousing about how they can pinpoint a stolent vehicle just like THAT *snaps fingers*.
b) One of the primary conceits to how the Wireless Matrix works is that pretty much *everything* is a wireless repeater. There should be more than enough devices within various signal ranges to a particular node to get a fairly accurate fix on its physical location. (The Devil's Advocate in me supposes that the shear volume of potential sources could act as a limiting factor to the feasibility of getting a tighter location on someone than 50m). As has been brought up in previous posts, though, there are plenty of references in the rules (and fluff) to devices being able to know that your PAN is *right there* -- the idea that a VENDING MACHINE can know you're walking past it but (for example) the megacorp who happens to own that machine could (per RAW) *at best* know that you were within 50m of it is pretty ridiculous. Likewise, it's silly that a Lone Star LEBD-1 wandering past a hacker (who happens to be in the process of hacking a node at the Lone Star corporate offices...poorly) can immediately know that said hacker is *not* running in Active mode, but the spider in charge of Lone Star security can only trace that same hacker back to within 50m.
QUOTE (RedeemerofOgar @ Mar 16 2010, 01:08 AM)
Several of us own wireless devices. I'm typing on one now. I don't believe my wireless card has any sort of directional capability. Does yours have the option to "show a list of all wireless hotspots west of me"?
'
Well I'm guessing your Scan program just isn't up to the task. Don't feel bad about that
Pinpointing wireless devices just isn't needed for today's wireless user, except the operators who can locate say your mobile phone by triangulation. In the future where communication in AR, reading AROs etc are common then you'll need to be able to locate them somehow. How can you chat with Bob in active mode who's walking down the street 30 meters away if your commlink can't find him? How can it creatre AR imagery overlaid his physical person without this? How can AR-games like Mirace Shooter work at all if you can't at least pinpoint wireless devices through line of sight?
QUOTE (rumanchu @ Mar 16 2010, 08:36 AM)
Hmm...I had forgotten that the rules specifically call out the fact that security in particular zones are able to pinpoint if a particular person walking in their area is running in Active mode or not. (For that matter, the example of searching for the hidden node of the Johnson sitting across the table from you sort of implies that there is at least *some* expectation of being able to relate AR icons/nodes to actual physical proximity).
The main reason for the "50m rule" is *probably* to defend players who have the misfortune of making a dreadful error while hacking in somewhere from having Firewatch getting their *exact* address from a wireless trace...it has the beneficial side-effect of adventure writers not having to worry about players getting an exact location of their target via a "simple" trace.
The problem, though, is that the rule fails the Realism Test, on at least two counts:
a) It's entirely possible with technology we have *today* to get a fix on a wireless device that's much closer than 50m. Sure, there's plenty of caveats to it, but it *is* possible. Hell, OnStar spends quite a bit of their advertising budget grousing about how they can pinpoint a stolent vehicle just like THAT *snaps fingers*.
b) One of the primary conceits to how the Wireless Matrix works is that pretty much *everything* is a wireless repeater. There should be more than enough devices within various signal ranges to a particular node to get a fairly accurate fix on its physical location. (The Devil's Advocate in me supposes that the shear volume of potential sources could act as a limiting factor to the feasibility of getting a tighter location on someone than 50m). As has been brought up in previous posts, though, there are plenty of references in the rules (and fluff) to devices being able to know that your PAN is *right there* -- the idea that a VENDING MACHINE can know you're walking past it but (for example) the megacorp who happens to own that machine could (per RAW) *at best* know that you were within 50m of it is pretty ridiculous. Likewise, it's silly that a Lone Star LEBD-1 wandering past a hacker (who happens to be in the process of hacking a node at the Lone Star corporate offices...poorly) can immediately know that said hacker is *not* running in Active mode, but the spider in charge of Lone Star security can only trace that same hacker back to within 50m.
The main reason for the "50m rule" is *probably* to defend players who have the misfortune of making a dreadful error while hacking in somewhere from having Firewatch getting their *exact* address from a wireless trace...it has the beneficial side-effect of adventure writers not having to worry about players getting an exact location of their target via a "simple" trace.
The problem, though, is that the rule fails the Realism Test, on at least two counts:
a) It's entirely possible with technology we have *today* to get a fix on a wireless device that's much closer than 50m. Sure, there's plenty of caveats to it, but it *is* possible. Hell, OnStar spends quite a bit of their advertising budget grousing about how they can pinpoint a stolent vehicle just like THAT *snaps fingers*.
b) One of the primary conceits to how the Wireless Matrix works is that pretty much *everything* is a wireless repeater. There should be more than enough devices within various signal ranges to a particular node to get a fairly accurate fix on its physical location. (The Devil's Advocate in me supposes that the shear volume of potential sources could act as a limiting factor to the feasibility of getting a tighter location on someone than 50m). As has been brought up in previous posts, though, there are plenty of references in the rules (and fluff) to devices being able to know that your PAN is *right there* -- the idea that a VENDING MACHINE can know you're walking past it but (for example) the megacorp who happens to own that machine could (per RAW) *at best* know that you were within 50m of it is pretty ridiculous. Likewise, it's silly that a Lone Star LEBD-1 wandering past a hacker (who happens to be in the process of hacking a node at the Lone Star corporate offices...poorly) can immediately know that said hacker is *not* running in Active mode, but the spider in charge of Lone Star security can only trace that same hacker back to within 50m.
The 50 meter rule is probably based on mobile phone tracking of today, the wikipedia article lists 50 meters as the precision for qualifed services. Remember though that LS or whatever can get your exact address if you hack from home and have a wired connection there.
I don't think the LS example is silly though - the Spider is tracing through the matrix and may be on the other side of the planet. The guard however just visually glances over the hacker and can just see in AR that he is not in Active mode just as easily as I can see which of my friends are online and Available or Away in Messenger.
I think the physical location of a hidden device can be discovered easily with triangulation, just not in a single scan action.
QUOTE (DireRadiant @ Mar 16 2010, 03:15 PM)
I think the physical location of a hidden device can be discovered easily with triangulation, just not in a single scan action.
Then do the Extended test instead. I have no problems with the single test though, which is actually very hard (4 hits). Most of the triangulation work is calculations, which I think the super processors of 2070 should be able to handle in seconds.
QUOTE (rumanchu @ Mar 16 2010, 02:36 AM)
a) It's entirely possible with technology we have *today* to get a fix on a wireless device that's much closer than 50m. Sure, there's plenty of caveats to it, but it *is* possible. Hell, OnStar spends quite a bit of their advertising budget grousing about how they can pinpoint a stolent vehicle just like THAT *snaps fingers*.
Just as a point of reference (hehe, bad pun is bad) with technology available today we can determine the exact location anywhere in interstellar space down to an accuracy of 1 cubic meter, IIRC (and takes into account realization speeds to boot).
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/27/1446206
QUOTE (FriendoftheDork @ Mar 16 2010, 09:02 AM)
Then do the Extended test instead. I have no problems with the single test though, which is actually very hard (4 hits). Most of the triangulation work is calculations, which I think the super processors of 2070 should be able to handle in seconds.
All perfectly fine. I just personally would avoid the physical location in a single scan, it's not explicitly in the Scan action description, nor is it in the list of possible information you glean from matrix Perception. So I'd stick with the the single action gets you an idea what's around you, and subsequent ones inform you of the physical mapping.
QUOTE (FriendoftheDork @ Mar 16 2010, 10:02 AM)
Then do the Extended test instead. I have no problems with the single test though, which is actually very hard (4 hits). Most of the triangulation work is calculations, which I think the super processors of 2070 should be able to handle in seconds.
Notably, that's finding a hidden node on a passive scan of "everything around you." You're trying to equate the scan test to looking around your living room and finding all of the books you see and going "ah ha! Moby Dick is under the couch!"
Odds are when you go "I'm counting books" you're not going to look under the couch. You will if you go, "wait a minute, my copy of Moby Dick isn't here" (aka "I'm not seeing Mr. J's PAN") then you'll start looking for it.
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Mar 16 2010, 04:59 PM)
Notably, that's finding a hidden node on a passive scan of "everything around you." You're trying to equate the scan test to looking around your living room and finding all of the books you see and going "ah ha! Moby Dick is under the couch!"
Odds are when you go "I'm counting books" you're not going to look under the couch. You will if you go, "wait a minute, my copy of Moby Dick isn't here" (aka "I'm not seeing Mr. J's PAN") then you'll start looking for it.
Odds are when you go "I'm counting books" you're not going to look under the couch. You will if you go, "wait a minute, my copy of Moby Dick isn't here" (aka "I'm not seeing Mr. J's PAN") then you'll start looking for it.
Well actually, that test is based on "searching the whole goddamn room until I find every possible book there might be." If you just say "I'll count the books" then it's a no-action with automatic success and lists all non-hidden nodes. If this is enough to localize and pinpoint every non-hidden node is debatable. In my old game I'd make my hacker make directional scans in order to narrow down the list and find physical locations.
QUOTE (FriendoftheDork @ Mar 17 2010, 12:24 AM)
Well actually, that test is based on "searching the whole goddamn room until I find every possible book there might be."
That's the extended test version.
QUOTE
If you just say "I'll count the books" then it's a no-action with automatic success and lists all non-hidden nodes.
I was thinking more along the lines of "Without moving, locate all books" kind of deal. A looky-loo around the room cataloging locations, but not a serious investigation (see above). Noticing the book sticking out from behind the potted plant (passive node) is more difficult than finding the ones on the shelves (active nodes), but easier than seeing the book under the couch (hidden node) when making a single scan.
QUOTE
If this is enough to localize and pinpoint every non-hidden node is debatable. In my old game I'd make my hacker make directional scans in order to narrow down the list and find physical locations.
I agree that there needs to be some kind of action taken to locate (physically) the nodes, though for the most part you're interested in one, if any, of their physical locations.
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Mar 17 2010, 04:35 PM)
That's the extended test version.
I was thinking more along the lines of "Without moving, locate all books" kind of deal. A looky-loo around the room cataloging locations, but not a serious investigation (see above). Noticing the book sticking out from behind the potted plant (passive node) is more difficult than finding the ones on the shelves (active nodes), but easier than seeing the book under the couch (hidden node) when making a single scan.
I agree that there needs to be some kind of action taken to locate (physically) the nodes, though for the most part you're interested in one, if any, of their physical locations.
I was thinking more along the lines of "Without moving, locate all books" kind of deal. A looky-loo around the room cataloging locations, but not a serious investigation (see above). Noticing the book sticking out from behind the potted plant (passive node) is more difficult than finding the ones on the shelves (active nodes), but easier than seeing the book under the couch (hidden node) when making a single scan.
I agree that there needs to be some kind of action taken to locate (physically) the nodes, though for the most part you're interested in one, if any, of their physical locations.
I was talking about the extended version.
Passive mode is as easy to find as active mode, it just doesn't accept all incoming data.
QUOTE (FriendoftheDork @ Mar 17 2010, 02:55 PM)
Passive mode is as easy to find as active mode, it just doesn't accept all incoming data.
Fair. I was just making an analogy. Forgot that passive nodes are actually the reverse of the normal term of "passive" (eg passive radar looks for signals, but doesn't send any out, a passive node sends lots of data out, but accepts very little in).
QUOTE (Draco18s @ Mar 17 2010, 07:57 PM)
Fair. I was just making an analogy. Forgot that passive nodes are actually the reverse of the normal term of "passive" (eg passive radar looks for signals, but doesn't send any out, a passive node sends lots of data out, but accepts very little in).
Ok.
Well it seems like until the developers can butt in here and give us some definite answer to what they intended we'll just have to run things as we see fit. Having hackers being able to locate and track nodes even in combat means they can have a valuable use in combat even when there are no drones or 'ware to hack. Giving the team the ability to pinpoint enemies on an overlaid GPS map sent to their comlinks like some FPS'es out there can make a good difference.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.