NEWS

Jammers versus Jamming on the fly

  • 24 Replies
  • 11185 Views

Falconer

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1112
« Reply #15 on: <05-13-12/1005:16> »
Joe, there's no point arguing this with Pax... he's new and knows it all.

He sees two costs and fails to think that maybe the developers just changed their minds.  Then tries to justify keeping both with the cost difference.  (I actually agree with him and would keep it as a house rule.... just I acknowledge that the rules governing jammers have changed).

Also I'm well aware of the assigned channels and such.  In fact there's even a 'non-standard frequencies' modification somewhere which even backs that up that comms are still put in some default frequencies.

Actually my biggest problem with jammers is they're ludicruosly short ranged.  A rating 10 jammer putting out the power of a radio station or cell tower... should be able to do far more than a 50m area (and at 50m only being rating 1).  So under normal situations ECM is no threat to a rigger... because ECCM counters any reasonably close jamming... (and also cuts through shielding like paint since it's handled like jamming).

The only jammers with any range/discretion are the directional ones... and even then I'd allow someone to use a commlink + directional antenna together.  Some others have claimed that's house ruling.  I see it as a good combo (the directional is +2 signal... the house rule is people say I'm stepping too far in applying the directional falloff rate to jamming on the fly instead of the shorter ranged area jamming).  Again I like on the fly rules because it's an opposed test and even with an inferior die pool... you still have a shot at breaking the link now and then.

Lethe

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 666
  • Every man dies. Not every man really lives.
« Reply #16 on: <05-13-12/1018:52> »
At least the price difference should be agreed on:
Area jammers jam (smartly) all active frequencies, they can find.
Smart jammers additionally have the option to exclude frequencies from the jamming.
So the area jammer works like a smart jammer, but does not have the same functionality as the smart jammer.

Digital_Viking

  • *
  • Omae
  • ***
  • Posts: 443
« Reply #17 on: <05-13-12/1031:28> »
I just wanted to know if using a jammer was worth it vs. having a commlink dedicated to jamming on the fly - not an internet knife fight!  :D
"Which is better and which is worse,I wonder - To understand or to not understand?"
"Understanding is always worse. To not understand is to never carry the burden of responsibility. Understanding is pain. But anything less is unacceptable."

CanRay

  • *
  • Freelancer
  • Mr. Johnson
  • ***
  • Posts: 11141
  • Spouter of Random Words
« Reply #18 on: <05-13-12/1129:10> »
Just let me chain their off hands together before you give them the knives, OK?  We got money on this!  ;D
Si vis pacem, para bellum

#ThisTaserGoesTo11

Falconer

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1112
« Reply #19 on: <05-13-12/1227:01> »
Joe: the answer is yes...  Yes they can be worthwhile,  Just be aware of their limitations.  There's times when the flat jamming is more usefull... but in the presence of ECCM and distance it rapidly loses effectiveness.  The problem comes in a black sense... that the broadband ones were a bit too unselective... setting one off in a large urban area was guaranteed to get you too much attention as you shut down almost everything in a 25m radius... just large enough to pinpoint the jammer and you for authorities!



Lethe if I was ignoring the new rule in SR4a...

Yes, I'd limit the basic jammer to jamming certain frequencies without discrimination (the rule says you can target individual nodes).   Then use the smartjammer to target individual nodes.  The problem is since it only works signal... and effectively everything is a commlink operating in the same band on the same frequenies... otherwise drones couldn't talk to the riggers comm... and so on.  See above comment about the drawback of blacking out everything in a small radius... and unwanted attention.  Really the only meaningful things talking outside that band would be say maybe military comms (I'd assume they get non-standard frequencies mods as a basic feature).  Or something really niche and specific like say a radio station.... (assuming most people in the 2070's don't just listen to internet radio... though they probably still do have broadcast services).

That said, I see room for differentiation between the two devices within the rules and descriptions...
Basic Jammer: jams everything except specifically named nodes excluded from it's operation.  (call it protected frequencies so you don't blind yourself).  The rules state this... so hidden nodes you might NOT want to jam get nailed if you don't know they're there.  It also states you can change the list of EXCLUDED devices with another action.  It's indiscriminate still... anything not excluded is still included...

On the other hand, the smart jammer specifically says that it can jam only a single node to the exclusion of everything else, because it adds the capability to jam only a list of nodes.  In fact, that's listed as a selling point.  That and they include a built in scanner (not present in the vanilla jammer).   So it's not as if you're not getting something extra for your money.  There is extra capability in there I'd use.  I could technically leave a smartjammer on all the time... and only give it a limited list of nodes it would automatically detect and jam for me.  Something I could never do with a vanilla jammer.

_Pax_

  • *
  • Guest
« Reply #20 on: <05-13-12/1655:51> »
I'm going to ask you to use some logic, again: what exactly are you paying for, when you pay the higher price for a Smart Jammer?
You probably don't want to use the logic excuse when dealing with Shadowrun technology.  You can use 'Developer Logic' or 'Rules Balance Logic', but don't apply the blanket 'logic' because that implies real world logic.
  Since we're talking about game rules, I rather thought "use logic as it applies to a game" was clearly implied.

Quote
And that is why radio nerds can't use logic for settling internet disputes.
O_o .... radio nerd?  Who would that be?

Xenon

  • *
  • Prime Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 6471
« Reply #21 on: <06-06-14/0345:04> »
BillieSliva,
Welcome to the boards (seeing as this is your very first post here).

The thread you replied to is more than a year old...

Dinendae

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 1340
« Reply #22 on: <06-06-14/0355:17> »
BillieSliva,
Welcome to the boards (seeing as this is your very first post here).

The thread you replied to is more than a year old...

It's a bot, and not a very good one at that.

Sendaz

  • *
  • Ace Runner
  • ****
  • Posts: 2220
  • Associate of Rywfol Emwolb Industries
« Reply #23 on: <06-06-14/0428:48> »
BillieSliva,
Welcome to the boards (seeing as this is your very first post here).

The thread you replied to is more than a year old...

It's a bot, and not a very good one at that.
Indeed, they totally forgot the jersey links....
Do you believe in a greater WIRELESS, an Invisible(WiFi) All Seeing(detecting those connected- at least if within 100'), All Knowing(all online data) Presence that we can draw upon for Wisdom(downloads & updates), Strength (wifi boni) and Comfort (porn) or do you turn your back on it  (Go Offline)?

Michael Chandra

  • *
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Prime Runner
  • ***
  • Posts: 9944
  • Question-slicing ninja
« Reply #24 on: <06-06-14/0532:47> »
Actually, I saw a post like this once and checked it a week later, it had received a spamlink by edit. Which makes the quick scan for spamlinks fail. So I report all posts like these for being future spamposts.
How am I not part of the forum?? O_O I am both active and angry!