QUOTE (Epicedion @ Aug 17 2013, 04:55 PM)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7c6ef/7c6ef7af56bd21253ca9874bebd785a2e1dff051" alt="*"
It's not "exactly how it should have worked" if the rest of the game made it undesirable or otherwise useless to try and incorporate hacking into combat, and you start from the premise that hacking should somehow be useful in combat. You seem to be arguing on one hand that hacking was useful but not useful, and on the other hand that hacking should be allowable but not allowable.
But it DOES work as it should have worked in SR4A. Resolution was fast (Orders of magnitude faster than previous editions) and yet not Ludicrous (Hacks taking 0.75 Seconds). Hacks should take 10-30 seconds, rather than being instantaneous. SO in that regard, SR4A was perfect. Additionally, I consider "In Combat" to be inclusive of the combat, as well as some stuff being outside of the combat. Example: I am taking care of the door, and it takes me 10 seconds to bypass it... Guard comes around the corner and my Street Sam engages him in Melee combat (Range was pretty close). Yes, the Street Sam of Uberness could indeed waste him in 1 to 2 passes (3 seconds or less), but if that is the only encounter in that 10 second timeframe, the hacker still participated "in combat" even though he did not fire a shot. Now, if you track your game in 0.75 Second increments, and never move away from that time frame (obviously your Sam has 4 passes), then no, your hacker may fee left out (I doubt it, though, since his slowest action cost is 1.0 Seconds). On the other hand, if your Hacker (like mine) moves in 0.6 increment time slices, then your Street Sam may feel left out if he has less than 4 passes. I would doubt it, though. Both contribute to the success of the mission, and neither take up any appreciable in-game time to do so.
QUOTE
If magic rules were such that it took two or three combat turns to cast a combat spell, would you see many fireballs or stunbolts flying around the field? Would you be making an argument that even though combat spells were made useless by the speed at which other actions could be accomplished, they were somehow still available and useful?
Apples and Oranges. A HAcker is not a Mage, and should never consider himself to be. And THAT is the issue. HAckers want their cake and the ability to eat it too. Everyone has their niche, and a Hacker's niche is not spells, or guns. He can pick up a gun when needed (if not, why is he even there) or when the Hacking is not yet required, but his niche is dealing with MATRIX threats, not with bricking someone else's cyberware because he is bored.
QUOTE
You're on both sides of the in-game/out-of-game argument again. The effects something has on the in-game world are different from a discussion of the ruleset.
And yet, they are intrinsically linked. A Poorly thought out implementation in-game results in that implementation never being adopted, and you see it die on the vine. Wireless bonuses and Cyberware Hacking is just such a poorly implemented in-world phenomenon.
QUOTE
Are you implying that players should have some sort of intrinsic right to unhackable gear for their characters? This seems contrary to the nothing-is-invulnerable theme of cyberpunk in general.
Cyberpunk does not care about the BS of Hacking/Bricking of the common man's equipment (Because the common man is irrelevant in Cyberpunk). Really, you want to Hack Cyber in a Cyberpunk manner, Direct Connect it. THAT is cyberpunk. HACKING the MATRIX... THAT is Cyberpunk and always has been. Hacking the Man's communications and communications devices... Cyberpunk... Hacking Security Systems and altering feeds directly and in real time... Cyberpunk. Bricking someone's Wired Reflexes wirelessly... Absolutely not. That is BS.
QUOTE
You can't on one hand argue that wireless bonuses are idiocy and on the other hand argue that better wireless bonuses would be appropriate and interesting. Is your issue conceptually broad or numerically specific?
Wireless bonuses are an interesting idea. However their current implementation is complete and total lunacy, with a hefty helping of idiocy. I really wish they had found someone who actually cared about the design principles, who had a good idea about the logical consequences of their choices, and who had better direction from on high. Rule of Cool fails here, and fails miserably, as you can see from the absolute craziness of this thread topic. There is absolutely no bonus listed that is in any way incentivized. The logic fails when you look at it. There is no choice, at this point, because the drawbacks are so screwed up in comparison to the benefit that no one would ever activate the wireless. So, the design goal failed, and Hackers still suck, if you follow the design's paradigm, because there is no true incentive (Really, look at those Wireless bonuses again) that offsets the potential drawback. No Professional would ever risk it. And therefore, Hackers will continue to moan that they have nothing to do in Combat. *sigh*