Deployable equipment does not and should not generate AROs, as it would be very hard to use otherwise.
If you say so... I don't need to convince you anyway. After all, after linking a few examples of what I say, you keep with the same attitude, makes me thinking that anything I show will not matter to you
So I think an interesting change might be to have different kinds of repeaters have different kinds of firewalls. It's harder to move a Fugazi into position than it is to use a Pitcher or Deployable Repeater; if Pitchers and Deployable Repeaters had no firewall inherent to them, something like a Fugazi had a -3 firewall, and something like an Iguana had a -6 firewall, it would make skeeting repeaters everywhere more risky.
On the other hand a remote (or a TAG) is a more reliable repeater than a pitcher. That been said it is not a bad suggestion on face value, but needs some thinking about its functionality, first impression would be nobody would use offensively repeaters as it opens the door to be hacked.
Given that KHDs went right through repeaters last edition and I was both leveraging my own dep reps and finding myself on the receiving end of pandas and pitchers I can say you are quantifiably wrong. They didn't throw them into enemy DZs with complete abandon sure, but as has been thoroughly discussed in this thread that's a negative thing going on for the game right now and we'd be better off without it.
While this is true the hacking has drastically changed, a normal hacker cannot kill a killer hacker now, but in N3 it was a possibility, however remote.
I'm not sure how you think this is supporting your argument in any way at all. Bricking something is usually sufficient, and where it is not, bricking them and then launching guided missiles at their face is. Dep Reps losing their firewalls would do very little to discourage offensive hacking in N4. The value in assblasting shit off the table is too high, not to mention it's very easy for most factions who utilise forms of repeaters/pandas/pitchers have the simple enough ability to hide most of their hackers either behind a Tinbot Firewall or a marker state to avoid their repeater network from allowing the opponent to access it in their turn and attack them with ease. You honestly think the worst offenders like Jazz or Mary give a shit that they'd lose firewall on repeaters? Jazz sits in a -6 Tinbot link and Mary can go into Cybermask. I have limited access to repeaters in Yu Jing and my 3 most common choices for hackers are exactly the same.
Kind of...there are Hacking Device / Hacking Device Plus profiles that have lethal KHD or KHD programs; Jazz, who is continuously discussed in this thread as a particularly egregious case, is one such unit. In addition, regular Hacking Devices and AHD were merged, and regular Hacking Devices gained tons of utility in areas that they did not have last edition (e.g., being able to Spotlight in ARO, which is itself a mistake IMO). The modifications that got us here were broad but unidirectional buffs that all worked to make Hacking substantially more effective, while removing most of the opponent's ability to counter it via KHDs. There needs to be some balance here, and at present the community is saying that there is not.
All these does not change my statement it needs thinking, playtesting and evaluation a change can have cascading effects not intended by the one suggesting it.
A Remote or TAG is actually not more reliable; it can be isolated or hacked, whereas you have to shoot a deployable repeater. It's also much easier to hide a deployable repeater than even a Fugazi, let alone an Iguana. I think your first impression is wrong because people still used repeaters in N3. When deploying repeaters you'd still have the active turn advantage until you passed it; sure, a KHD popping out of HD and hacking through that repeater is scary, but it *should be.* Even if what I proposed was the case, Jazz should probably be nerfed in addition to this. And KHDs still need a bit more punch.
Pretty sure that CB wanted to make hacking easier and more viable, rather than more complicated. Also if you take away firewalls on Deployable Repeaters/Pitchers then KHD will start to dominate against like in N3.
This wouldn't make hacking any more complicated. Also, KHDs weren't as dominant as people were lead to believe; I routinely saw good players running AHDs and winning in N3. I frequently ran an EVO *and* and HD+ in OCF in N3. In order for KHDs to become as dominant as they were in N3 again you'd need N3 Redrum back, *and* they'd need to be able to ignore repeater firewall mods. Even still Spotlight and Oblivion are so much better hacking devices have utility in a vacuum.
If you want to make KHDs viable but not as over abounded as in N3 why not give KHD the "Ignore FW" like in N3 and no longer let it count as Specialist or Hacker for ITS? This way it would not be one of the cheapest specialists which was one reason why it was picked all the time in N3 imho. In the other hand, if you really want to deal with enemy hacking you could buy into an effective tool but with otherwise useless investment. It would also further distinguish Killer Hackers from KHD-lite Hackers like Jazz and bring back something unique to Mary. Maybe Killer Hackers could gain the ability to choose the repeater as target on valid hacking ARO involving it? That way they could serve a countermeasures specialist role.
@Ghost87 that would still leave them underpowered, as well as create a unique situation (a hacker that's not a specialist) that the rules would have to account for. The reason so many khd profiles were cheap is because of the whole profile, not the khd itself. Compare the ninja khd to the ninja fo, for example. Same with the Malignos.
They are also incredibly cheap due to them having an incredibly narrow focus compared to the normal hacker, and this edition they seem to have gotten more expensive when compared to their FO counterparts (Fo's seem to be about 2 points cheaper). also removing them as specialists screw a couple of factions (namely TJC) whose primary specialists are hackers and rely on hackers including the KHD to carry out missions. also a hacker that isn't a specialist just adds a layer of confusion.
In N3 I (and I was not the only one) stopped using the lieutenat option for interventor because I lost them if there were KHD (the benefit/risk were good for the KHD), so a PB6 hacker would mind losing firewalk. Yes, I know there were ways to deffend them like cybermask, but once a repeater was there, the possibilities a KHD in a repeater to kill an interventor if he tried something were not so bad for the KHD (who could also remain in marker state), more risky for a lt. KHD might not dominate N3, but dominated hacking in n3. That's why even if there were great players using all kind of hacking, there were also some that only needed one or two KHD and forfeit all other kind of hacking. KHD now lost their hability to ignore firewall malus, but trinity gained +3 to the roll, which compensates it. What hurt it most for trinity is getting from damage 16 to 14. But the big lost for KHD has been loosing redrum. Maybe leaving trinit's damage in 16 is not bad anymore because there is no redrum, even if that means a few trinity users with damage 17 or even 18. But if CB were to upgrade trinity, some trinity users (mostly non KHD) should loose their bonus IMO
In my opinion, with all of the changes that occurred to hacking in N4 I believe that deployable repeaters and pitchers have become too strong due to their immunity to ARO. Much like mines, I don't think you should be allowed to attack a repeater on the turn it is placed, but I do feel that if a repeater is used to make a hacking attack then it should be valid to declare a shooting or hacking ARO against the repeater itself (oblivion or trinity should be valid AROs against the repeater, removing it from the table if the repeater fails its save). It is both frustrating to the reactive player and counterintuitive that you can see that an enemy has landed a pitcher repeater at your feet, and yet no one is allowed to shoot at what should very obviously be a hostile threat. The leaves the reactive player in a completely passive position. Even if their trooper wins the FtF reset, the active player can keep spending orders until they succeed (with no risk of taking return damage) as unlike a dodge ARO you have no chance to move out of range of the enemy attack. And due to the flowchart of guts rolls, you are likely too deep in the repeater's hacking area to be able to leave the area of effect with a 2 inch move, which means that you then have to go prone.
