Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "B. Gilbert" <brett@***.liv.ac.uk>
Subject: MPCP and memory
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 11:35:47 +0000 (GMT)
Does the MPCP and deck stats take up memory?

Brett

brett@***.liv.ac.uk
Message no. 2
From: Robert Watkins <robertdw@*******.com.au>
Subject: Re: MPCP and memory
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 23:26:06 +1100 (EST)
>Does the MPCP and deck stats take up memory?

No. They are seperate chips, with dedicated memory.

On a slight tangent: did anyone notice a restriction on the amount of
memory you can have in VR2.0? In VR 1, you had the limit of (Active
Memory = MPCP x 50 Mp). The only restraint I saw in VR 2 was that it uses
up bandwidth.


--
Robert Watkins robertdw@*******.com.au
Real Programmers never work 9 to 5. If any real programmers
are around at 9 am, it's because they were up all night.
Message no. 3
From: "Mark Steedman" <M.J.Steedman@***.rgu.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: MPCP and memory
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 13:09:16 GMT
Robert Watkins writes

> On a slight tangent: did anyone notice a restriction on the amount of
> memory you can have in VR2.0? In VR 1, you had the limit of (Active
> Memory = MPCP x 50 Mp). The only restraint I saw in VR 2 was that it uses
> up bandwidth.
>

you are correct there is no limit in the new rules on any sort of
memory. Thats probably because things like program frames get so big,
even FASA's reasonable example was something like 1400MP and you
need to get them in active memory to upload.

Mark
Message no. 4
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: MPCP and memory
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 10:29:17 +0100
Robert Watkins said on 17 Jan 96...

> On a slight tangent: did anyone notice a restriction on the amount of
> memory you can have in VR2.0? In VR 1, you had the limit of (Active
> Memory = MPCP x 50 Mp). The only restraint I saw in VR 2 was that it uses
> up bandwidth.

I think it say somewhere that there is no limit to the amount memory you
can install in a Matrix 2.0 deck. The bandwidth rule, if used, is the only
restriction, I guess, and even then it's up to the decker to decide how
much bandwidth (s)he is willing to trade for memory capacity.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Iedereen gelooft wel ergens in, in God of in het 8 Uur Journaal.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b+@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(----) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 5
From: "Sedah Drol" <CCRODRIG@****.indstate.edu>
Subject: Re: MPCP and memory
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 12:04:33 EST
> >Does the MPCP and deck stats take up memory?
>
> No. They are seperate chips, with dedicated memory.
>
> On a slight tangent: did anyone notice a restriction on the amount of
> memory you can have in VR2.0? In VR 1, you had the limit of (Active
> Memory = MPCP x 50 Mp). The only restraint I saw in VR 2 was that it uses
> up bandwidth.
In VR2 there is not a maximum of the amount of active memory for a
deck. Did you also notice that the maximum rating of the hardening
program a deck can have is equal to the mpcp rating.
---Sedah Drol
Message no. 6
From: "Sedah Drol" <CCRODRIG@****.indstate.edu>
Subject: Re: MPCP and memory
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 12:05:05 EST
> Does the MPCP and deck stats take up memory?
>

Yes it takes up the memory of the chip that it is cooked on, but it does
not take up any active or storage memory.
---Sedah Drol
Message no. 7
From: seb@***.ripco.com (Sebastian Wiers)
Subject: Re: MPCP and memory
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 13:46:58 -0600 (CST)
> > On a slight tangent: did anyone notice a restriction on the amount of
> > memory you can have in VR2.0? In VR 1, you had the limit of (Active
> > Memory = MPCP x 50 Mp). The only restraint I saw in VR 2 was that it uses
> > up bandwidth.
> In VR2 there is not a maximum of the amount of active memory for a
> deck. Did you also notice that the maximum rating of the hardening
> program a deck can have is equal to the mpcp rating.
> ---Sedah Drol
>
I did not notice ANY limit to hardening, aside from getting and cooking the
code. Or do you mean all p[rograms are limited to mpcp, so hardening must
be? I did get thrown for a loop by the price table including mpcp as the
determinant of PF, but the text and the table in the apendix use the hardening
rating.
SEB
>


--
() _
/\ /) //
/ ) o _, // o // _
/__/__<_(_) o //__<_</_</_
/| />
|/ </
Message no. 8
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: MPCP and memory
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 17:42:04 -0500 (EST)
On Thu, 18 Jan 1996, Sedah Drol wrote:

> In VR2 there is not a maximum of the amount of active memory for a
> deck. Did you also notice that the maximum rating of the hardening
> program a deck can have is equal to the mpcp rating.

Yes, but Hardening isn't "auto-successes" anymore, it merely
reduces the MPCP's resistance target number. As such, the target number
can never decrease below a 2 regardless of the amount of hardening you
have. Plus also, it's expensive as hell.

Marc
Message no. 9
From: The Digital Mage <mn3rge@****.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: MPCP and memory
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 1996 18:07:01 +0000 (GMT)
On Thu, 18 Jan 1996, Marc A Renouf wrote:

> Yes, but Hardening isn't "auto-successes" anymore, it merely
> reduces the MPCP's resistance target number. As such, the target number
> can never decrease below a 2 regardless of the amount of hardening you
> have. Plus also, it's expensive as hell.
It doesn't even do that in VR2.0 as far as I know, it merely adds to the
base TN (of MPCP rating) for Blaster IC, Rippers etc to permanently damage
the deck.

Armour prog reduces teh power of teh attack, like armour in the SR real
world.

The Digital Mage : mn3rge@****.ac.uk
"Life is a choice, Death....an obligation."-Me
Shadowrun WWW site at http://www.bath.ac.uk/~mn3rge/Shadowrun
Message no. 10
From: sedahdro@*****.com (Victor Rodriguez, Jr)
Subject: Re: MPCP and memory
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 96 12:33 EST
> Yes, but Hardening isn't "auto-successes" anymore, it merely
>reduces the MPCP's resistance target number. As such, the target number
>can never decrease below a 2 regardless of the amount of hardening you
>have. Plus also, it's expensive as hell.
Yeah if you don't have the source code. But if you do it isn't that expensive.
---Sedah Drol
--
Home page: Better Homes and Gardens page 36 volume 3 March 1995:)(sorry
couln't resist)
---
ATTN: Due to lack of interest, tomorrow has been canceled.
---
GC3.1
GO>CS d- s:--- a21 C++++>$ U--- P L-- E? W+>W+++ N o? K? w+>w++++ O--- M-- V
PS+++ PE Y+ PGP- t++ 5+ X++ R++>+++$ tv++ b- DI++ D+ G++ e* h r++ y++
Message no. 11
From: Zaeki@***.com
Subject: Re: MPCP and memory
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 1996 18:01:51 -0500
In a message dated 96-01-17 07:30:58 EST, you write:

>On a slight tangent: did anyone notice a restriction on the amount of
>memory you can have in VR2.0? In VR 1, you had the limit of (Active
>Memory = MPCP x 50 Mp). The only restraint I saw in VR 2 was that it uses
>up bandwidth.
>
>

There's mention of Active Mem limits in the SRII book....
ALSO: Is there any storage memory limitations on a cyberdeck, or limit on #
of files? I've had runners with 3000 MP Off-line storage fill it all and
sell the data for >100,000 nuyen.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about MPCP and memory, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!