In a game, there comes a point where game mechanics, specially balance mechanics, trump the Real World.
Mechanics should never trump common logic. Especially balance mechanics. You design them around logic. Sure, everything has a price, but the price and benefit both need to make sense.
Let's look at the laser sight.
It puts a dot on the target. Somehow, this doesn't help you hit the target. It just makes it so that you can hit the target better if you were hitting already. However, if it wirelessly connects to the matrix, it somehow puts this dot on the target in a way that helps you shoot as well.
Ok, so the price is wireless on/matrix. The reward is a bonus die to hit. However, where is the logic behind it? That is why it fails, there is no rhyme or reason other than balance, which is poor design.
Actually, a dot on the target does help you hit your target. If your accuracy is normally 4, and you roll 7 Hits, and your target rolls 4 hits, you miss. That laser sight now lets you keep 5 hits, resulting in one net hit. That laser sight is directly responsible for you hitting your target in that case. Just because it doesn't provide a bonus die to roll doesn't mean it isn't helping. Limit increases can help just as much as, if not more than, a bonus die in some cases.
As for having the hack-proof device.. Most companies probably ship their product as-is because they are running into a hard deadline, and further testing, and refitting, could mean the difference of a successful product, and loss of a contract. But sure, if you really want it in your game, then introduce it. Considering the time it took to hack each and every aspect of the thing, and to replace each and every faulty portion of the thing, the cost would likely be 10-100x the list cost, with an increased availability as well, because they are probably custom jobs, and not mass produced models.
I disagree. It could say "The firing pin on an assault rifle doesn't work, but it's bayonet works..." The two sentences are not the same.
Except that one sentence requires speaking with perfect form and grammar, and the other is a common way of phrasing things... "We might not have any money, but we can still go out window shopping".. Sure, you can tell people that they are not grammatically correct, but people speak they way they want to speak. Being overly critical doesn't change the left-out context of that line and what it meant overall.
In the end, At your table, it's your game. Leave out Wireless bonuses and consequences if you want.
