Mutual signal range is not a "travesty" it is quite clear, and it is what prevents the "hack from home".

I'm not going to use the actual ranges here because I don't have them memorized, but bear with it for the following example.

Signal 5 (let's say 2 miles) for the Hacker's comm-link.

Signal 3 (let's say 1/2 mile) for the node to be hacked.

Under this example, assuming good conditions (no wi-fi blocking paint or a good ECCM) the Hacker would have to be within 1/2 mile from the node to be hacked to get in.

That's how you set up mutual signal range, yes, but you seem to have forgotten the other half of how the internet (and the matrix) works:

Every node in the matrix can relay signals. I just need to be within mutual signal range of my MSP (Matrix Service Provider) and have another relay node of my MSP be within mutual signal range of the target. Or be within signal range of an object within signal range of an object within signal range of an object within signal range of an object within signal range of an object within signal range of an object within signal range of an object within signal range of the target.

Hell, even according to the book, the player/hacker doesn't even need to know this chain. It merely needs to exist. The matrix does all the routing for him.

I think that's just a bad assumption that a lot of people are making. I haven't seen anything that specifically allows "daisy chaining" through other stuff like that...

I think that's just a bad assumption that a lot of people are making. I haven't seen anything that specifically allows "daisy chaining" through other stuff like that...

Isn't that, effectively, how the internet works now? Why would it be any different? My smartphone connects to the internet by connecting to any router in range I have access to and can log into. I can then connect to any other computer connected to the internet, and in theory, could connect to someone else's smartphone that's linked to a router elsewhere. The path between smartphone A and smartphone B isn't relevant - as long as I can detect that phone, I can in theory hack it with the proper programs.

This is where the comment I saw someone here make along the lines of "take what you know about RL computer technology and ignore it" comes into play.

Just because it worked that way in earlier editions does not mean it does now, so if you can find a specific reference (rule not fluff) to being allowed to "daisy chain" I'll accept it.

A network topology is the shape of the connections in a network.
Technically speaking, the Matrix is a ubiquitous ad-hoc wireless mesh
network. The “wireless mesh” part means that every device makes contact
with every other device it can. “Ad-hoc” means that this is done on
the fly. This is necessary because devices like vehicles and commlinks
are often constantly moving, so the topology of the Matrix has to
change over time in any given area. This creates a “cloud” of constant
wireless traffic in any area with more than one device as each device
passes connection information, data, messages, or just keeps track of
neighboring devices. There are still wired parts of the Matrix, mostly
leftovers from before the Crash 2.0, but these are mostly used as back-
bones for WANs and RTGs. All an area needs for it to stop being a
dead zone is enough wireless devices, of which at least one can reach
the rest of the Matrix.
When a wireless device needs to pass information to another
device in mutual Signal range, it simply sends the data. If the destination
is not within this range, for example when you are in the UCAS
and trying to speak to Mr. Johnson in Lisbon, the information travels
from device to device in a process called routing. When information
is routed between devices, it is non-sequentially sliced into a number
of pieces and sent to the recipient via multiple paths; this makes it
almost impossible to intercept the traffic except within Signal range
of the sender or the receiver, the only places the information is in one
readable piece (Capture Wireless Signal, p. 229). The routing functions
of a device are handled by a separate component of hardware than the
other functions of the device. This makes the routing process invisible
to the user, and allows the device’s node to connect

Once you have your commlink, you need to connect to the
Matrix. Your commlink must be able to connect to at least one device,
which must be able to connect to at least one other device, and so
on throughout the civilized world. “The Matrix” is all of these nodes,
including yours.

I think that's just a bad assumption that a lot of people are making. I haven't seen anything that specifically allows "daisy chaining" through other stuff like that...

If you wish to fix stick'n'shocks... restrict them to shotguns only. No other guns... only shotguns (perfect weapon for tossing large, slow, wierd projectiles which do wierd things).

Then you have an excuse that yes it's a big f'in amount of charge well worthy of it's 6S...

You don't even need to go full-blown R6 on Nonconductive, either. Just enough points to bring your amror rating against electrical attacks back up equal to your Impact or Ballistic rating. 3 or 4 points may be enough, much of the time.

Gameplay right now suffers from the whole AR's/BR's for everything problem unless concealability is a problem... in which case MP's/SMGs are your best option simply because automatic fire rules are so good. So this is one area where the two can merge to good results.

And beyond AP and semi-AP rounds I've seen very little development especially down in the 5.56 area. It's not until you get the whole way up to .50cal (yet another round roughly the same diameter as a shotgun slug).. that you start to see a panoply of options. So I fundamentally disagree with your assertion that bullets are getting a lot of R&D. Since most of it I've seen has been in implementing things like shock-lok, non-lethal, and even mini-grenade airburst rounds at the shotgun scale. (remember that whizbang new AR they were doing as a tech demo, smart warrior? can't recall, it had an airburst GL... the 5.56 was pretty much an underbarrel afterthought).

And if your GM has to houserule the rules constantly... there's a problem.

If one option is being continually picked over others for mechanical reasons... there's a problem which should be looked at. It may or may not be worth addressing. But a new edition is the time to look at it... and not merely lay the blame on 'the players' because the devs did a lousy job making a good place for everything in the rules.

If the GM is houseruling the game constantly, maybe he should be playing a different game. *shrug*
Any Shadowrun game that I run, runs with little to no houserules... they just take up too much effort. *shrug*

Because then turn around and look at the energy weapons in the game... peak discharge packs for powering lasers and such are nowhere near the energy density you espouse you should be able to pack into a 'mere' bullet. One full size battery pack far larger than a bullet there is only good for 5 shots out of a laser rifle. So no, I don't buy your nearly unlimited energy density take on it.

And did you forget the fact, y'know, assault rifles and battle rifles tend to be the preferred weapon of choice IRL? So it wouldn't make sense to suddenly nerf them?

And even if they did, what the hell could you want them to change?

Just a note... 12 Guage Slugs are about .72 Caliber.

Okay... so you're willing to say energy storage goes way out the wazoo in terms of efficiency....

But that lasers still aren't.

You also ignore that those are VEHICLE mounted units with some major power draw. Smaller man portables wouldn't be anywhere near as big or powerful.

My point stands... for lasers... the energy density is pathetic... to claim you get higher density in a bullet the size of a .22 is laughable.

Is there a list somewhere with all known changes so that I don't have to wade through hundreds of posts?

In chronological order, the development blog entries:

http://www.shadowruntabletop.com/2013/02/s...dice-come-from/
http://www.shadowruntabletop.com/2013/02/s...exceeding-them/
http://www.shadowruntabletop.com/2013/03/t...ng-the-awesome/

With how much their audience loves gear porn... I wouldn't worry to much.

For all we know, with 5E they've actually decided to playtest, so there are reasons to be cautiously optimistic imo.

I can confirm that there is Playtesting. I can confirm Deckers are back.

can you imagine the ammount of butthurt if TMs were still wireless and the new matrix required a wired connection again?

People are butthurt over TMs as is.

Understandably. They're almost a cool concept, if they didn't mess with the tech/magic split so absurdly. But they're really a copout game mechanics wise.