[WellsIDidIt]

One thing to remember when you think about manual backups or designed failures, by the way:  The things represented by Attack or Sleaze actions aren't ever supposed to happen.  Hackers discover a previously unknown vulnerability, updates are issued to remove it, new vulnerabilities are found...  The whole back and forth is abstracted into these ratings.

Uhm...do you understand the concept behind manual backups and redundancy systems? They are there for the sole purpose of working in case things happen that aren't ever supposed to happen. Parachutes aren't supposed to not open, but it happens, so there is a backup. Most cars aren't supposed to wreck, but they do, every day, so we have airbags.

The back and forth covers the aspect of software fine, but it does not work when talking about a manual backup system.

I'm pointing out that we don't actually know what the smartlink requires, and thus it's entirely possible that it could require things that, should they catastrophically fail, disable the weapon.  This is especially true when you bring in ideas like the ammo skip system, but here's a simple case: what happens if the catastrophic failure (rather than normal, expected failures) of whatever allows the smartlink to move the hammer on a pistol immobilizes the hammer?

How the smartlink works is irrelevant. Firearms don't have to have a smartlink/smartgun to be bricked.

Since a smartgun can be connected to a gun as an accessory, without actually modding the weapon, it doesn't change the actual design of the weapon.

Now then, what is relevant? How the gun is fired. How would a gun be fired electrically? We can do that today. We know how guns can be fired electrically today. We've seen the flaws in not including a manual backup in the system today.

Sure bricking ammo skip systems, trigger removed systems, etc. has a much higher probability of messing up the gun because it actually is changing the fundamental design of the gun away from what we know today.

[Insaniac99]

As far as I can tell, here the steps for the fastest and most reliable way to disable a cybered up Sammy that has a variety of weapons (like they tend to have):

• Matrix perception to find commlink forming the PAN and other major devices (this could require much more than 1 action)
• Hack on the fly to get First mark on commlink
• Hack on the fly to get Second mark on commlink
• Hack on the fly to get Third mark on commlink
• Format the commlink
• Reboot the Commlink
  • At this point you have destroyed the PAN
  • have all of their devices spotted
  • The devices are now on their own rating 2 defenses
  • You can now kill each device with a single action.
  • The Sammy is definitely hunting for your limp body. (though he should have been alerted on the format)
• Data Spike wired reflexes
• Data spike primary weapon
• Data spike secondary weapon
• Find a way to kill his slow meat now that he is either running away or hunting you down with his knife and better physical stats

If the Street Sam finds you and is out to kill you before step seven then it will go like this:

• Data spike primary weapon (with the defenses of the commlink, you are unlikely to one shot)
• Street same either blasts you or pulls his pistol and blasts you if you are wearing armor, you might survive one attack

With Sam VS Decker, it seems it is all about who finds who first, because it will take a lot longer and be a lot harder for the decker to disable the sammie than it is for the sammie to geek the decker based on the number of actions required and dice pool comparisons.

[Namikaze]

You could take the -10 to your Hack on the Fly pool to try for all three marks at once, but that would probably also require spending Edge to make it feasible.

[Xenon]

1) this one - a gun is not brickable by disabling electronics

So you want hackers to be given even more power to shut down the Street Sam even though, taking into consideration hot sim bonuses, they can in a single turn completely disable every frakking cyber implant they have (which most are likely to be with the ludicrous price hike on bio implants)?!

why would the street samurai have his augmentations wireless on in the first place?


Also, free action to turn wireless OFF.


I don't see the problem.

[Insaniac99]

You could take the -10 to your Hack on the Fly pool to try for all three marks at once, but that would probably also require spending Edge to make it feasible.

I don't see it happening though, if we assume an average sammie he will have a rating 6 commlink and be on the public grid.  That means he will have 9-11 dice to defend against the hacker and the hacker will have two less dice (effectively eliminating the hot-sim bonus).  Even taking the -4 is going to make things extremely unlikely for the Decker unless he has ultra specialized in that -- the average decker is going to have to do it one mark at a time and even then he has a much slimmer margin of error than the Sam.

[Kanly]

I think this is fine. A decker isn't supposed to be able to counter a combat specialist solo. Thankfully, bricking, as fearsome as it sounds, doesn't really allow for that. Bricking is very strong against vehicles, drones, turrets, security devices and that one strategic weapon (missile launcher aimed at your rigger's van, sniper doing overwatch etc), there is no need for it to be able to disable every last weapon and cyberware realistically.

[Insaniac99]

I think this is fine. A decker isn't supposed to be able to counter a combat specialist solo. Thankfully, bricking, as fearsome as it sounds, doesn't really allow for that. Bricking is very strong against vehicles, drones, turrets, security devices and that one strategic weapon (missile launcher aimed at your rigger's van, sniper doing overwatch etc), there is no need for it to be able to disable every last weapon and cyberware realistically.

Agreed.

[RHat]

One thing to remember when you think about manual backups or designed failures, by the way:  The things represented by Attack or Sleaze actions aren't ever supposed to happen.  Hackers discover a previously unknown vulnerability, updates are issued to remove it, new vulnerabilities are found...  The whole back and forth is abstracted into these ratings.

Uhm...do you understand the concept behind manual backups and redundancy systems? They are there for the sole purpose of working in case things happen that aren't ever supposed to happen. Parachutes aren't supposed to not open, but it happens, so there is a backup. Most cars aren't supposed to wreck, but they do, every day, so we have airbags.

The back and forth covers the aspect of software fine, but it does not work when talking about a manual backup system.

Erm..  Do you not understand the difference between an anticipated failure and an unanticipated failure?  A parachute not opening isn't supposed to happen, but it's a known possibility.  The things a decker does when he bricks a device, on the other hand, are supposed to be impossible - if the manufacturer knew it was possible, they'd have made it impossible (and every time they do that, hackers find another way - which is how that back and forth is in play).

[WellsIDidIt]

And yet, it so simple to not make it happen on a standard gun, why wouldn't they? It is literally, put the electronics on the outside of the gun and allow manual override. You can even house the electronics in a shell so that it looks all pretty.

And no, when it comes to anything computer related, being bricked is something you can anticipate. If it has a chip in it, someone somewhere manages to brick it. Sure, what they use to brick it might not be anticipated. What happens when it is bricked is anticipatable though. When it comes to software design, nothing is impossible. It will break, it will corrupt, it will fail. Every software engineer learns this. No experienced software designer thinks to themselves, I don't have to worry about this getting hacked/corrupted so there is no reason to design it functionally if the electronics brick. I guess in edition to forgetting about all the design flaws in guns over the past two centuries, they also only hire sophmore year programmers as well.

Think about a parachute in SR5. What would the wireless bonus on it be? Open as a free action with DNI? That seems 100% accurate to me looking at how all other wireless bonuses are set up. So, when a parachute is bricked, it can't open? Is it not anticipatable that the chip can be fried, melted, or shot? How is that safe, not to have a manual backup? It isn't. It flies in the face of everything that we know about parachute design.

[RHat]

And yet, it so simple to not make it happen on a standard gun, why wouldn't they?

So, they can somehow have ammo tracking, typing, the functions of a mag release, and fire selection all purely external with no connection at all to the mechanical elements of a gun?  That seems like a stretch to me.  The moment the electronics interface with the mechanical element, there is some possibility for a catastrophic failure to interfere with the mechanics.

And being bricked is an umbrella that describes a wide number of things.  The specific effects of bricking on a particular weapon are NOT something you can anticipate.  There's a difference between a vague idea of "this might get hacked" versus knowing what the specific effects will be, and being bricked involves a lot more than just the nonfunctionality of the electronics.

[WellsIDidIt]

Right it involves the electronics frying, melting, catching fire, etc.

You realize that most of this can be done today right? Gunsmiths can make magazines today that track ammo by the tension in the springs. I've seen an AK catch fire with one. Melted the sensor. Magazine still worked fine. Why? Because it was designed intelligently. Mag release can be done electronically too today, as can firing electronically, and many types of  safeties. The only thing on the list I haven't seen done is fire selection, which is primarily because full-auto weapons are so heavily restricted in the U.S. or at least restricted enough people don't spend as much money tinkering with them.

Could they mess the gun up? Sure they can. I've watched people manage to mess the gun up with normal extended magazines that have no electrical parts. Well designed ones separate the electrical from the mechanical for obvious reasons. The magazines that are good keep the reader below the spring with a buffer space. It makes the mag a little longer, but doesn't screw the mag if it breaks or melts (more common than you would think in many guns, a lot of heat transfers across the brass when you fire rapidly as much gun lovers like to do). You see, that's is preparing for catastrophic failure of the sensor, which is what I'm talking about. Sure, you can't prepare for how it get's bricked, but you can prepare for the worst case scenario.

What's the worst case scenario? The thing slags and get's in the way of moving parts, or the thing locks up and prevents firing. Smart design can compensate for the former while manual backup can take care of the later. Smart design is not hard. It can be time consuming, nervewracking, and frustrating to no end at certain points, but in the end that is what R&D is for. It isn't a "this might be hacked" generality, it's a "this might melt, catch on fire, surge, etc." generality that they think about during the design.

So they weren't able to prepare for the hacker engaging the safety four times in a row, resetting the ammo counter and engaging the slide to slag the electronics. If it's built right, you click the safety back off (or hold it off if it's still engaged electronically), pull the trigger, and it goes boom. Of course, that is assuming intelligent design which is something worth researching if you're working on a project about a guns. I got a headstart there growing up with a gunsmith for a grandpa, but the leaps and bounds we've made in the past decade are astounding, and SR barely scratches the surface of what we can do today. To think in the future, it's worse is just silly.

Now, you could say that corps want their guns to slag because it's more money for them, but that ignores one of the fundamentals of marketing. Branding. You have to deliver a certain quality, or people turn to other alternatives.

[RHat]

My point is that such separation is not the perfect preventative measure you're argument calls for it to be.

And you and I clearly have different ideas of what bricking is actually doing, and what tne worst case is.

[WellsIDidIt]

My point is that such separation is not the perfect preventative measure you're argument calls for it to be.

Separation and manual override. Where is the flaw in it then? You say this, yet you aren't offering any logical reasoning behind it.

And you and I clearly have different ideas of what bricking is actually doing, and what tne worst case is.

Bricking is given this description:"Smoke, sparks, pops, bangs, sizzles, nasty smells, and occasionally even small fires are common features of a device in the process of becoming a brick."

So, what is the different idea that you have? It seems clear that the electronics are frying on the device.

[Michael Chandra]

o, they can somehow have ammo tracking, typing, the functions of a mag release, and fire selection all purely external with no connection at all to the mechanical elements of a gun?  That seems like a stretch to me.  The moment the electronics interface with the mechanical element, there is some possibility for a catastrophic failure to interfere with the mechanics.

Possibility, yes. That doesn't necessarily mean that frying the connections will immediately jam the gun. So I'm still not sure about external smartguns myself.

[Namikaze]

I feel like an external smartgun probably wouldn't brick the gun itself.  IMO, the only reason an external smartgun works is because it ties into the electronics that are already in the gun.  So bricking the gun wouldn't stop the external smartgun from working, and vice versa.