Quick Answer, Blade... Sorry it took a few days, been busy.

Problem is that I did not want Augmentations for the character, and spending Nuyen to get augmentations just to get back to where I was without Augmentation is counter-productive when I could spend the resources (I did not need Nuyen, already had all my gear) in ways better fitting the concept of the character. I had all the BP/Karma I needed and did not NEED any more returned by purchasing something I did not want in the first place.

- If it is exactly the same stats for the character, just with augmentations, why should I bother when I set out to avoid Augmentations?
- Did not want a Lower Essence. Again, Counter Productive.
- I did not need more Nuyen at Chargen, contrary to your stated goal. I had all I needed for the equipment I wanted.
- Yes, raising Agility Post Gen is more expensive... so what? I see no reason to make a decision based upon how much something costs post chargen. Especially for a character who sets out to avoid Augmentations to start with. By the same token, I dot purchase many short skills and 1 massive one, just because it is more cost effective. If the Concept does not support a certain skill level, I do not purchase said skill level.

The character achieved the stated goals at chargen that were set out for him. Anything else is gravy, but not at the expense of the concept he began with. If, at a later time, augmentations become a requirement (say he lost a limb, damaged organs, neural damage, etc - we use the Severe Wounds rules), then he may have no recourse but to augment up, but until that time is forced upon him, he is happy being Unaugmented. As for Money in game, he has far too many things he spends money on without having to add in the costs of Augmentations into the mix.

Neraph had it right in Post 46.

Neraph may have hit the point in your eyes in his post 46, but actually Serbitar and Blade proved it wrong.

As they said, the fact you stay in line with your character concept may be nice, but this has nothing to do with balance.


They proved that they can have a better character than yours (pure stat-Wise) with augmentations than with none.


If you want unaugmented mundane characters to be balanced with augmented ones (which isn't the case in SR I think), you'd clearly would have here a balance problem.

No he did not... Blade proved he could have the SAME STATS as I had at start, and use some remaining resources to add functionality... That is not proof that the character he put forth is better in a pure stat-wise comparison. Nor does it prove that the character is better functionally. Only that he had the same stat ( a Lower base Agility) boosted by Ware to the same level that I started with sans Ware.

That is not a balance issue. If two characters can accomplish the same goals reliably, then they are comparatively balanced, regardless of how they got there. The Unaugmented character can often do so in more areas because the Unaugmented character is spending those valuable resources in other places that make him more useful in more areas, in the long run. He is definitely broader in his applicability (more of a Generalist, I guess). That said, there is nothing wrong with a specialist. He just will not be as competent in multiple areas as a Generalist will be.

We are likely not going to agree on this, as I approach character concept and design (as well as integration into the world ) far differently than many here do. *shrug*

What is that then:




It really looks like he can have same stats + something thanks to the saved BP, so either attributes, skill. Which, to me means:

Stats of Augmented characters > Stats of unaugmented character




Agin, he proved that his Augmented Generalist is better stat-Wise than the unaugmented one.




Honestly, this is not where we disagree. I like character concepts as an approach to design my character. Basically, I'm on the same line than you.

BUT, we're discussing about game balance.

And about the balance subject, this is true:

With augmentions, you can create a character stronger stat-Wise than an unaugmented one with very minor flaws



---------------------------------------------

Anyways, this unbalance seems right to me per design.

But what is in SR4 and 5 unbalanced and shouldn't?

I think y'all are completely missing his point. Comparatively minor flaws are still flaws, and in any case, do not fit the character concept he is playing.

Looks are often deceiving. No, He said stats were identical, and there were a few bits of remaining resources, scavenged due to reducing inherent stat and adding augmented stats to the equal of what they were in original concept, to do with what you want. If I already have what I want, and have to sacrifice Concept to utilize those phantom few remaining resources scavenged by augmenting, than that is a losing argument.



No he did not - Stats were Identical... therefore no, it is not better.



Yes, YOU CAN build stronger stat based characters with Augmentations (That does not make them better). That was never the contention. The contention was that the equal stats provided by augmentations in the above comparison somehow made you better. And I disagree with that statement.

See, I do not see a Game Imbalance here. I am actually pretty shocked that you do. *shrug*




See, I just see design as intended... you can POTENTIALLY create an Augmented Character that has stats of Max for any racial type. That does not mean the Unaugmented character cannot be key to the team (he will likely have far more skills than the Augmented character does due to opportunity costs, and they will likely be decent level, equating to comparable DP's), and highly useful. Nor does it mean the Unaugmented character is unbalanced in comparison. He is just different.

As for what is/isn't unbalanced in 5th Edition? Well, there are a few things I don't like (Like Limits), but It Works. Still prefer 4th Edition, though.

I'd say look at the difference between Street Sam and a covert ops specialist.
Street Sam: Fast Strong and really good at shooting
Covert Ops specialist: Good at multiple things and almost as fast but couldn't take on a street sam head to head.

Both ok builds but both better in different areas. So is there a balance conflict because a street sam is better at shooting than the cover ops specialist. Nope; different builds.

But I can hear the comment that a covert ops specialist isn't a gun bunny and that's fine but there isn't a build issue as they have different concept and skills.

So I pose this challenge to show the unbalance.

Post these characters: 1 w/ aug; 1 w/ adapt; 1 w/o aug built off the same concept modal and show how they would be unbalanced vice just being different? I would prefer to see the numbers.

Shadowrun is relatively balanced in the sense that while certain combinations are optimal (troll tank, elven face, etc.), character creation is generous enough that you can create a suboptimal combination (elven tank, troll face, etc.) and still have a functional character. The problem arises when newer players don't realize they are going against the grain of the system. Sure, an unaugmented mundance can be versatile, but if you make an unaugmented mundane karate expert and enter him in a pit fight, chances are the other guy with muscle augmentation and toner, dermal sheathing, move-by-wire, bone density augmentation, and a reflex recorder will have an insurmountable edge.

I did read here that Technomancers were pretty bad compard to deckers in 5th and that adepts outshined street sams in 4th.


@Tymeaus:

I think we just do not understand each other. Because we doesn't understad "balance" in the same way:



Limits aren't a balance problem.

Balance is the fact that characters profile are in average equal. The lecture grid would be : speciality-spotlight, all-aroundness, stregth in his speciality.


I'll give a few examples:

ADD: Thief was unbalanced because we was too weak in his speciality and too weak in fighting (all-aroundness) to be balanced. (Things got corrected in 3rd).
Buffy: The Slayer outshines the other PC per design (and it's fun) so the game is unbalanced per design.
L5R 4th ed: Playing a dragon and get dodge at rank 7 is totally unbalanced (he cannot be hit) but well that game is so unbalanced globally anyways....

Side note: SR3 seems pretty balanced to me even if I feel that spellcasters should have been toned down a bit.

You are being entirely too polite. The augmented guy will likely paste karate kid.

@Tymeaus:
What you are losing by sacrificing your character concept is mostly fluff (which is I big deal I agree, but as far as the stats are concerned, fluff has no value).

Let's say that you play your character and someone else plays the augmented version. He has all your stats but a few have a higher score and/or he's got more gear/tools/skills. When on the job, he will perform better than your character in most cases, and the cases where he will be in trouble compared to your character are very limited.
He will not follow your concept, but your concept brings very little edge as far as the game system is concerned.

Once again, I'm not saying that your character concept is bad, or that your character doesn't fit your expectation. I'm just saying that as far as the rules are concerned, the augmented version will be more efficient across the board.

For example, if my concept is to play a character with 300 BP in a game with characters made with 400 BP, I might be able to create the character that I want, and he might even be efficient, but the 400 BP characters will mathematically be able to do better if they invest their BP in the same fields.

My experience, over multiple Editions, has not borne out that opinion (Not saying that you do not have a point, because you just might, it is just that I have not seen it - probably because we always discuss what we are going to do as characters prior to a campaign, so we know what to expect from characters going in). Few characters (I would say None) at our table have more Gear (esoteric or not)/Tools/Skills... When you are not spending Hundreds of Thousands on Cyber/Bio, you can afford a ton of equipment.

As a note, no one intentionally plays less BP/Karma than the rest, but builds are different, even within the same general concept, and I have yet to really see anything unbalanced about the way those characters are put together. There may be a few issues (Like Technomancers in 5th getting the shaft), but even that can be maneuvered around with careful crafting of character so that it does not affect the game.

True, I've played unaugmented characters who may loose in a fight but still walked over the augmented characters in other area. It really depends on the build and what they plan on doing with them. Most of the time I find the lack of balance in a perception thing such as"MY character can't do X while such character can do X"

The unaugmented character supplemented the lack of cyber with lest costly equipment.

A brilliant flash of insight. Welcome to the club.


The "balance" argument is now largely an argument of semantics against shadows. There does not exist a balance issue when all elements of the game are taken into consideration.

EDIT:
Except an AI PC who clusters micro drones with chameleon coating and signal masking together as a home node. That is only "unbalanced" because it's a literally unkillable character - a techno-lich.

Heh... He said Techno-Lich.

[quote name='Neraph' post='1316447' date='Sep 10 2015, 09:11 AM'
Except an AI PC who clusters micro drones with chameleon coating and signal masking together as a home node. That is only "unbalanced" because it's a literally unkillable character - a techno-lich.[/quote]


EMP Bombs... Lots of them...
Hello dark ages.... MWAHAHAHA!!!!!!

If you have enough EMP bombs to coat a city.... You're not playing the same game I am. Signal 8 in a web means you're looking at a very, very large area. And remember, you miss even one of those suckers and that AI is still alive.

Here's the important part: Balanced is a *relative* term.

If everyone is running high-powered, but equally effective characters, nothing is truly unbalanced. In the same vein, if everyone is playing scrappy underdogs who aren't highly effective, no one is unbalanced either.

The problem is when effectiveness is unequal. If you have two scrappy underdogs, and two gods of the shadows, you're going to have problems in the game. Highly effective characters tend to not only get more spotlight time, but better quality spotlight time as well. This can lead to lots of hard feelings out of game.

Shadowrun has the "benefit" of being played at many levels. However, the lack of a standard power level means it's far too easy to get a God of the Shadows running right alongside a scrappy underdog in current Shadowrun. That's where things get unbalanced.

On top of that, there are certain options that are clearly "better" than others, at least from a mechanical perspective. That encourages min/maxing, which isn't a problem in and of itself; but it can easily lead to unbalanced game play.

A robust system, with good balanced mechanics, helps the GM minimize this problem. Obviously, the GM has to do some of this by themself, but the system is supposed to aid the GM in making play run smoothly. Current editions of Shadowrun do not do this.

And here I was thinking more along the line of a terrorist oorganization that planted the bombs, holding the city ransom but a group of runnners stumble upon it and stop it themselves because everyone else is looking in the wrong direction. Like a standard action movie.

The problem here is that, mehanically speaking, there is literally nothing the unaugmented mundane can do that an augmented or magical (or worse, both) character can't do better. A lot better, in many cases.

If your entire group is built around those concepts, this isn't necessarily a problem. But if you've got hyperspecialists in the party, who can do impossible things while brushing their teeth, the plucky mundane who struggles to keep up becomes much less attractive as a concept.

Oh. In that case, thanks for underscoring the fact that that particular method is only killable by Plot Device.

It shouldn't be doable anyway.


The writing choice to have AI be supportable by anything less than an Ultraviolet system was a terrible, terrible worldbuilding call in hindsight, and a direct contributor to the current metaplot being on the 'whoops, killed the planet' level of dumb.

In my opinion, the writing choice to allow AI's as PC's is what led to where we are, not their system requirements (which have never really scaled well, anyways). AI's work best as Plot Devices, not Player Characters.

Oh, I didn't know you were a freelancer for the system.


EDIT:

But PCs are the best Plot Devices.

No, they are the best Protagonists...
PC's as Plot Devices end in things like Harlequin and such... again, a bad direction in my opinion. But then, I have never been a fan of the ED-Shadowrun bridge plots.

AIs you can run on a small, portable system are what make CFD possible.

Because what we really needed was the bug sprits/shedim/Horrors 'possessor from another dimension' plot yet again only this time with the Matrix instead of Astral Space.

No, Harlequin was an NPC as a Plot Device. That's, at best, a PC from another table being the plot device for your table. That almost never ends well.

What I'm talking about is how your players, in addition to being the protagonist of your story, should also be the movers and shakers for the story. The plot should move in directions that they go. The plot should respond to them. For players to properly enjoy the game, the game should be one in which the players are invested - that makes the PCs plot devices. A contact that calls them at the right time, a skill that's perfect for the exact scenario, a knowledge skill that helps them, an innovative use of terrain that only works because of some crazy scheme (and a little dash of Edge). Those are things that elevate the PCs from merely being protagonists to being full-out plot devices.

Yes, at the same time though you have a balance issue when one of your PCs is effectively immune to defeat on one of the realities the game operates in, yet can still interact with that reality and defeat others.

Someone with all their tech in Throwback mode is effectively immune to the Matrix, at the cost of not being able to interact with it, for example. A mundane is the same way as regards astral space. An AI with a distributed drone body is effectively impossible to defeat on the physical plane, but can still act on that plane. Especially if any of those drones are armed.

So very few outruns bullets forever or gratuitous use of high-explosives....
Are group of runners who've been extremely successful may have someone setup trap at various points in their careers.

But... that was exactly my point. The AI techno-lich is literally the only thing in the game that is "broken" by nearly all standards. Here's my original comment on it, if you forgot.

I wouldn't say unkillable.....
It would be a huge pain in the ass to find all the drones because of all the stealth technology being put into it but I noticed you didn't have thermal dampening so thermal imaging would see them just fine. The clustering is a bit of a weakness to as the drones have to be within range of each other. If the drones are airborne how are they staying up for so long and if they are ground based how are they staying in LOS communication. There are weak links in the armor for you AI it's just a matter of finding them and exploiting them. But once they have been found rocket launchers can do the rest and as each drone is "blown up" the AI looses resources to utilize.

First off, this isn't a competition - if it was I'd have won already anyways. I only mentioned off-handedly the capabilities of the drones. Here's the full write-up I did for a different project:

As you can see, it's extremely problematic to trace them all down. And when I say that, I mean "functionally impossible." Oh, and "cheap."

Plus, you need a reason to hunt them. Plus, you need to do so without alerting the AI. Plus, you need to hit all of them simultaneously, otherwise the AI can simply escape into the Matrix at large.

I mean, seriously? 3.5k per drone? You can easily afford 50 of them at Chargen, not including stuff to make the AI functional.

Good luck.

EDIT:
They don't require LOS. They can plug into whatever power source nearby and not even be noticed. Thermal imaging may or may not see through the chameleon coating, but it isn't avoiding the -6 size penalty. You'd need 50 rocket launchers at 50 different points over a few hundred kilometers shooting into taxis, hospitals, schools, parks, police parking lots...

Yeah, no.

Looking at your write up actually had me thinking about it a bit and I did have to go and read up on a few rules I wasn't clear on (AIS namely) and reread some rules so I make sure my thoughts are straight.

Now looking at the drone portion only:
Communications: Satellite link are only good outside as it's satellite dish needs LOS to the satellites in orbit (SR4A pg 328; Unwired pg 50-51) and is the only time they get a signal of an 8. All normal communications are still handled via their signal rating of 3 (device rating) giving a range of 400m.

The clustering portion: This is a bit more tricky because some of it is open to interpretation due to a lack of explanation on how they are actually connected. My interpretation is that it is a local connection within (device rating) range of each other functioning similar to the PAN topology. I go with that view because of the way the rules read if it was a hardline connection then it would be the hardware skill instead of computer and I ruled out the long range logical connection because VPN's have their own rules. This left a local logical connection.

Finding the drones will actually be difficult but not impossible as they all should be within 400m of each other (all 50 in mutual signal range). A track program will allow me to locate the signals and find them. Once I find them I don't need a rocket launcher as I can just step on them like the bugs they are to break them. But once I get the basic area all I need is 1 Rating 4 EMP (1km radius) and I knock out all the drones at once. If the AIS is home then it goes with them but if not....

It's kinda hard to say how I could take on the AIS as I don't have the stats. Once all the drones are gone then the AIS only has a period of time to gain a new home before it starts falling apart and loosing rating points (looses 1 point perm per week w/o a home).

Now you're right that it's not a competition but I wanted to point out how easily the AI could be taken out if I had a reason to.
This is all based on SR4A books

Now my curious question: What kind of AI was it as AI's will inhabit only systems similar to the system they were "born" on (Unwired pg 166, My Home is My Castle, 1st paragraph)

Okay, first off, you missed the entire intent of the post. It was not to show how amazingly powerful this concept is, but to show that this is perhaps the only example of a potentially "overpowered" character concept.

Now I will take the time to rebut each of your points, in turn, and thoroughly, then I'm done with this e-peen measuring contest.

1. Communications:
(a). Nowhere does it state that you must specifically be outdoors. In fact, in Unwired, page 50, Radio Waves, first paragraph, third sentence, it specifically states that radio waves can penetrate buildings quite easily.

(b). It does not state that only while outdoors do you get Signal 8, nor does it state that you only have signal 8 while communicating with satellites. It only states that the radar dish is signal 8. You can easily point it at something else to pick up other signals (in fact, many real-world celestial discoveries were because of accidents exactly like that). I mean, I could even argue Unwired, page 50, Satellite Link, first paragraph, first sentence's use of the word "can" (fifth word), and the implications of the choice of that specific word in that sentence (having the capability of, which implies that it is able to use the same capability for other purposes; not that it must and only is able to), but this isn't exactly a court of law.

This means that it does not use it's default signal of 3 for anything else, since it's satellite comm grants it the ability to use signal 8 instead: 100 km instead of 400m - the difference between a light-to-medium jog or multiple grid squares.

2. Clustering (Unwired, page 55):
(a). You're right - whether or not all clustered devices must be within mutual signal range is not covered, though for simplicity's sake they should be. On that note, the nodes themselves don't even have to be the same device, let alone device rating, though again, for simplicity's sake (and the ease of math) I opted to keep it that way.

1. It is important to note that the AI is not actually interacting with people from it's home node (the techno-lich's [heretofore] "PHYLACTERY"), but using that as a node from which to jump into other devices. This is an important distinction below.

(b). Again - see above in Section 1.b, we're operating with signal 8, range 100 km, not signal 3, range 400 m (by the way, that's roughly a quarter mile radius). Now you mention running a Trace to find the node - generally a fairly good idea, but I think you forget exactly how they work. Refresher is in SR4A, page 232, Trace User (Track). There's a number of ways that the trace can be delayed, but the most important bits are these:
1. You must Detect Hidden Node (SR4A, page 230, Scan). This also begs (a) being even aware of the AI, and (b) having a "good guess" as to where the signal even is. Likely this will only get you the node you are interacting with the AI through, and not it's actual home node itself.

2. At this juncture a Trace will only show you the device that you are already likely aware of. Refer to Section 2(a)1 - this is not the originating node of the AI itself, just the PHYLACTERY.

3. In order to get a lock onto the connection to the PHYLACTERY, you must be present in the same node. This requires hacking into whatever node the AI is interacting with you through - almost certainly using: SR4A, page 236, Hacking on the Fly. Here's where things start to get complicated. At this point, the interacting node is Unwired, page 55, Slaved to the PHYLACTERY, which means to hack it you must: (a) hack the interacting node, which presents its own challenges; (b) hack the master node, being automatically forwarded by the interacting node (don't worry - the hacking attempted is automatically forwarded by the interacting node [traitor], and does not grant you any information to be used on your end), which, if you cannot be in mutual signal range, it automatically fails, or (c ) by spoofing commands to the slave, which is not what you're trying to do. I'm also assuming at this point that this ignores Unwired, page 54, Routing, first paragraph, second sentence, where it states that devices do not forward connections if they are on Hidden Mode, as the AI is per Section 2(b)1, above.

4. Assuming you surmount that, you are then greeted cheerfully by Unwired, page 66, Strong Encryption, to the tune of 24 hours (for the interacting node, not the signal encryption, as that's impossible).

5. You cannot pass this point, as that interacting node is not going to sit there and let you attempt to crack it for 24 hours. For argument's sake, which is what this is all about, the next step would then be finding the AI's Icon with an Analyze Test versus his Stealth. Only after successfully completing all these steps can you then actually Track the AI to its PHYLACTERY, giving you a rough estimation to its approximate location. In any event, moving on.

3. Your fourth paragraph.
(a). Again, we're not talking about a 400 m radius, but a 100 km radius, per Section 1(b), and finding its actual node location would require Detect Hidden Node followed by Trace.

(b). Stepping/rocket launcher? Okay. Remember: as per Runner's Companion, page 90, Node Sweet Node, sixth paragraph, second sentence, if the AI gets even one Complex Action before you destroy every single member of the PHYLACTERY, it simply vanishes into the Matrix, leading you onto a wild goose chase of which you are not aware you're even on - as far as you know, it's still in the node at your feet (and by that I mean in the 100 km radius around you - even using your incorrect 400m range is daunting. You're hunting for stag beetles in a half-mile [800m] diameter circular search area).

(c ). Please direct me to this EMP device that has a Rating that determines its effect area. The only ones I am aware of are: Arsenal, page 57, Electronics, EMP grenade (10m radius, not enough) and HERF gun (requires successful ranged attack per individual drone), both of which cause the problem in Section 4(b) above, and; Street Magic, page 174, Pulse, which I know for a fact you are not boosting the radius up to 1 km (would require a Force of 1,000). I must have missed a book sometime in the three years I've been out of the loop. Even assuming such a device exists, you'd have to make sure you caught all of the PHYLACTERY in the blast, which is impossible because of Section 1(b). Assuming it to be true: congratulations, you temporarily knocked out an AI (Runner's Companion, page 90, Realignment and Restoration, third paragraph - it isn't dead yet) after significant expenditure of resources and time. Enjoy being listed a domestic terrorist for detonating a 1 km EMP device inside a sprawl.

Now that that document is finished:

1) I hope you appreciate how thoroughly not easy it really is.

2) It really doesn't matter what the explanation actually is, but the AI in question is obviously a highly sophisticated pilot(s) program from a military/megacorp experiment with clustering drones together to achieve a "hive mind."


...
...

Man, I really need to go to Law school already.

I do... I really really do.. We are 2 player passionate about the game and like many we have our own interpretation. I like little sparring matches like this because it gives me a different point of view on rules interpretation. I hope you appreciate how hard you're making it for me as well because I'm trying to stay completely in RAW as some of my RL training is communications (OTH/LOS/SATCOMM).

No, I didn't miss that. I was poking at your concept for that exact reason. In your interpretation it is an overpowered concept where in my game it wouldn't work


You took a Sat dish and pointed it at another Sat Dish (1 direction not radius). This would be a Beam Link under RAW which requires LOS (BTW Sat Link is a type of Beam Link w/ a Sat) and both targets to remain motionless.
And now the cluster is 2 not 50 and not moving.

As for the EMP I was looking at Unwired Pg 105

And I'm sure we both can keep going if we really wanted to. So in your game world it works and in mine it doesn't.

I will jump in because it is fun... Rather than go the links of a Sat Link (100km Range), which is doable, why not just raise the Signal to 6 (10 km Range). Still just as functionally impossible to kill in its operational radius, and you do not have to worry about LOS. Additionally, since this is obviously a Military AI, Non-Standard Wireless Link makes it harder to detect in the first place. Throw an ECCM (6+) program into the mix, and you no longer have to worry about Jamming even. And if you use Signal Masking Materials, detection is even harder. Yes, this raises the costs of the Drones a bit (significantly), but an AI has nothing by time anyways, so that is really not an issue.

LOL!!!!
Yes, I had already thought of that but I wasn't going to be the one to point it out.
And I've thought of several ways to get similar effect within the game world with my understanding of the rules (and actual definition of devices). But I do like other peoples points of view as it is a good way to learn and small debates help garner this.

Here's the issue: real-world knowledge does not equate the game world in the least. The game does not state that the satcom needs to be pointed at anything at all, it just lists that there happens to be a satellite dish and that it functions with signal 8. I know, you especially know, and many people can infer that you need to actually point it at something, but by the bloodiest-cut RAW you don't.


That's why I don't remember it. There's no price listed, therefore it's either a plot device or simply doesn't exist by virtue of having an absence of a price and availability.

Hell, just install the AI into a fleet of city busses, or Chrysler-Nissan Jackrabbits and sell them to wageslaves.

Nobody would ever look for them.

Both of them state that the systems are for talking to satellites and the ref SR4A states the LINK is a signal rating of 8 (meaning the comms with the Satellite). The only reason that it says it comes with a Sat Dish is for the people who wonder about that little detail.

I wasn't inferring anything as I'm using basic definition of terms from a dictionary for the language that the RAW came in.


The basics of language already says that's how it works (a unidirectional signal)

On a side not Neraph; I don't see either of us standing down from this little debate of ours and for a few reasons:
1) You're a Marine and the nature of Marines is to never concede.
2) As a Marine you learn regulations so you can correct fellow Marines and they do the same to correct you
3) I'm Navy with 1 and 2 applying to me as well.
4) Minor DOD rivalries...

I do really want to thank you.
After being out of the game a few years myself this has really helped my get back into the rules so I can run a game starting in a few weeks. And it is fun.

Semper Fi Marines... and a call out to you Navy Squids too, I guess.

No, I agree that your arguments would normally be very effective. The issue at hand is the difference in verbiage between some of the items, and the fact that we have "fluff" and "crunch" segments of the rules. The "radar dish" is a description of an item - it is fluff, not necessary for gameplay (explicitly). The fact that a satcom gives you Signal 8 is fully a mechanical advantage - the "crunch."

This is why interpretation is so important, and why different tables have such different rulings often times on seemingly simple things. You seem to put more emphasis on the physical description of the item, whereas I am purely only looking at the mechanical advantage.

Also: one could argue that the AI's Home Node was actually a satellite in geosynchronous orbit, and all the drones are linked to it and clustered, and your objections would evaporate. After all, I'm paying tens of thousands of nuyen a month for upkeep - may as well make it a satellite.

I did look at your arguments from just the mechanical advantage and saw the issue you posed which is exactly the reason I look at the physical description and also try to look at the way things are implied. As a GM I have to draw lines somewhere or I may end up letting my players create an imbalance. This has happened in the past and I expect it to happen in the future but this doesn't mean I'm not going to try and put things in place (like basic logic) to prevent as much as possible w/o creating a ship full of house rules.
And just how you were arguing your point of view; I'd expect may players to do the same and try and sale me on something they want to do if the rules aren't clearly defined.
For SR this is rarely the case as most of my players are way less knowledgeable than I am and don't know the full scope of what they can do and even had a GM once who had to learn real quick as I surprised him with the things I could think up of.

*I really wasn't fair to him. He asked me how knowledgeable I was and I said "I have some experience" as at the time I'd never played 4th. After I brushed up on the rules and he saw what I was doing he asked me what I meant by "some experience"and I told him 1st, 2nd, and 3rd editions but this is the first time I'd played 4th*