| From: | 87902166@******.UWW.EDU |
|---|---|
| Subject: | How POWERFUL of a deck is TOO POWERFUL? |
| Date: | Wed, 7 Apr 93 02:01:58 CDT |
I thought this topic was "dead", but I guess not. I was afraid
to post replies to this thread, because I didn't want them to be
viewed as flames. *I* don't flame, I just try to give
constructive criticism - if something may sound like a flame, it
is not intended.
>wrote that a long time ago. What I failed to mention, is that
>the stats have the potential to run with 8 hardening, 4 response
>increase, etc. I realize that everything depends on the MPCP.
The level 4 response increase is assuming that the GM (I believe
that's you) allows this. I thought about this too (see below),
but decided against it at the time - I might be changing my mind
though.
>It is currently running at the current levels. And if you can
>have a satellite uplink in your head, can you not have it in a
>deck? Just wondering. The Platinum self retracting cranial
I'm just curious where you found that you could have a Sat. link
in your head? I sent some Virtual Realities quotes to the list a
few days ago that basically gave the idea that you can't be
moving a Sat. link antenna without losing the connection.
>jack is just a standard head jack from the deck that uses a
>platinum electrocoating that seems to be the "style" with young
>urban deckers these days. Seems to be a statis symbol. And it
>retracts into the deck with just the slightest of pulls to
>disengage the friction device holding the line in place. I have
Cool idea, I honestly never thought of that. Interesting role-
playing device.
>troll. Sony did finance this deck. They had to be one up on
>Fairlight, whom was starting to take over a large portion of the
>share of market. Apparently, their own deckers, and scientists
>couldn't come up with something that was fresh. The
>availability rating is really, really high. 'Tis very, very
>hard to get. And only 3 will be produced per year for two years
>in the test market of Seattle. They are trying to find a way to
>produce them more cheaply for mass production.
-Just some plot ideas here: I am wondering though, why would Sony
only call it a CTY-910? (That's what it's called right?) Don't
you think that they would want some cool name that would sound
better than "Fairlight Excalibur" to attract deckers by the name
alone? ex. the "Matrix Annihilator" or the "Madaski Enforcer" :)
>The nanotech was thought up by a P.C. of mine. I thought that
>after shadowtech came out, that I could apply them to this deck.
>Still, don't know if I can, or can't.
That's up to each GM to decide how advanced the Tech is in their
campaign and how it is used.
>To everyone, I apologize for my vulgarity. T'was a bad day to
>begin with. I had not expected this much response, since I have
>only been on this server for 2.5 weeks.
I also got defensive when I first posted something on the
listserv after I had been on for a few weeks. (Older Chummers-
Remember the Time/Date Stamp discussion AWHILE back where Cyclops
posted a failed attempt to change it and others ripped on him?
(some did at least) -I felt that they were insulting me as a
person, not my character. When actually, they were just having
fun with my character.)
>There is a lot of verygood stuff coming from this server. Many
>good ideas. I aplogize also for the Sesame Street thing. I
>have never blown up like that at strangers. That was indeed a
>first. I think that I would still like to listen, but I won't
>comment on anything.
Take some time to learn about the people that congregate on this
list. I have found that some chummers are very against some
ideas (and they have a right to) and at times the flame wars get
so heated (pardon the pun) that I wouldn't even want to post to
the list and think about "jacking out" too. But soon everyone
comes to reality and calms down. Still- there are those few that
feel very strong about how they interpret the rules and such on
various topics, and you're better off to respect their
viewpoints.
>Thank You
>Scott Madaski
Your welcome,
Cyclops
-Please continue reading:
I also had the idea to create the "ultimate" deck. I wanted to
use a MPCP of 16, because anything higher looked just to hard. I
also wanted to max out every option. But when I began to
calculate everything for this deck, I realized that a deck of
those proportions would be VERY hard to create, nonetheless.
(If my #'s are incorrect, please inform me - my calculator is on
the fritz but I did each calc. twice.)
My proposed deck contained the following goals (each are at max):
MPCP: 16 Hardening: 8
Active Memory: 800 MP Storage Memory: 10,000 MP
Load Speed: 160 MP I/O Speed: 80 MP
Response Level: 3
The rest I will not bother with as they are negligible.
First, I'll start with the "small" stuff. The active memory was
the easiest to do. Base Time (BT) of 8 days, Target Number (TN#)
of 3, total price $64,000.
Next, came the storage memory. BT of 100 days, TN# of 3 also,
and a total of $25,000. <Ok, those weren't too hard.>
Following that comes the MPCP. The BT to create this is a
remarkable 2048 days! The minimum computer skill requirement was
11 and the TN# was 16. The cost was $204,800.
Then the next hardest is the response level. According to the
rules, Max level = MPCP/4, yes you could have level 4. But above
this rule, in the description, it states that 3 is the maximum.
My rational (IMO as you will see shortly) is that if a decker
_could_ build this deck, heck - why not level 4 response? (but
at increased difficulty of course.) But I still only used level
3. The BT to do this is 720 days. With a TN# of 19 and a total
cost of $230,400.
OK, now to the REALLY hard stuff. The Hardening! (pun intended)
The BT to put this stuff together is, oh, 2560 days!!! (That's
just over 7 years for those without a calculator!) Now, you
thought that was bad? Try getting the TN# of 24! The odds for
doing this is 1 in 1296! (For those without a calc.) Now the
easy part - getting together the $1,048,576 to purchase it.
All that is left is the Load and I/O speeds. You would think
that these would be no problem. NOT! They may be cheap and
quick to build, but just try to build them! The Load speed has a
BT of 103 days with a cost of $12,800. The I/O speed has a BT of
128 days with a cost of $32,000. Now, both of these units have a
TN# of a mere 26! (With the odds slightly greater than the
above.)
To give you an idea of how hard it is to get a 26 with 6 siders.
Some friends and I sat down with a box of 36 dice and rolled
them. (Now, take into consideration the fact. -Who will be able
to roll this many dice at one time? -Only da best of da best.)
We sat down and rolled these dice for 2 hours straight. (Yes, we
had been drinking, but we had fun.) The highest we were able to
achieve is a TN# 22 on 36 dice!!! I wouldn't even begin to
estimate the number of failures we had... Now, as I had a
friend tell me, that under SR1 rules, all you needed was alot of
buncha old karma and you could buy auto successes and have it
done in no time. (I never used that rule because it was too
"convenient" for things like this - Glad they changed it in SR2.)
Now, (again for those without calculators handy), the TOTAL BT
for this cyberdeck would be 5667 days! (~15.5 years!!!) - not
including the cook time of 205 days, but this can be done during
other programming. All this going for a grand total of
$1,617,576 NY!!!
And as I understand it, to UPGRADE from a Fairlight Excalibur it
would take the same amount of money, same target numbers, but at
a reduced time requirement. "The New Time Value - The Old Time
Value = Time Required To Upgrade." (5667 - 2565) = 3102 days!
(~8.5 years!!!) Just to UPGRADE from the best cyberdeck money
could buy!
To summarize, I felt (and still feel) that a deck of these
proportions is NOT impossible - just improbable. It is my
opinion that the skill levels required, the time and NY necessary
to perform either the straight build OR the upgrade, would
require a character above even elite status in the Shadowrun
world. (I do not know the attributes or stats of the character
Scott states built his deck, so am I NOT passing judgement
whether or not he could build it. I do agree with his decision
to remove the character from game play though, while he builds
the deck.) I also think that the "best" way to go is to max out
the abilities of the Excalibur and just upgrade those. As
someone stated before, there is a point of diminishing returns.
My final opinion is that it is not the power of the deck that the
decker uses, but the skill at which the decker uses the deck.
I'll be keeping AN EYE out for a response,
Cyclops
