I was looking at some of that, but hadn't got around to drafting a post yet. It's really a bit of a mess. Especially when you consider that the Hackable characteristic is just defined as "can be hacked", so should the existence of Spotlight make everyone have the Hackable characteristic? On the flip side, it specifies that Spotlight works on things without Hackable, but Hackable by itself tells you nothing because there are programs that work on Hackable TAGs but not HI, or REMs exclusively, or HI.... It seems a bit like the Hackable characteristic was written early on, and then all the different Hacking programs were written much more specifically, but no one went back and re-assessed how well the Hackable characteristic now fit in this revision of the Hacking rules.
Also, there's a single unit in game where the Hacking Device is listed as equipment on their profile instead of in the guns, CC weapon and cost row like on "SECURITATE Hacker (Hacking Device)" - Isobel McGregor, and she's not marked as Hackable.
Sounds like that needs to be filed somewhere near the top of "needs an errata or FAQ. Preferably both."
Same for Szally Pilot who has KHD listed as equipment on the profile instead of being on the loadout line, and she's not Hackable. Only her TAG is.
Kinda. If the Kanren KHD hides as 3 Kanren KHDs then you don't need to divulge the Hackability* of the markers because it is Markers that aren't using the Holo 1 state. But if you combine Holo 2 with Holo 1 then you must apply the rules of Holo 1: ie whether the model is 'Hackable' or not is open information (this being an effect of the Holo 1 state). And yes: Hackable, HD and Holo 1 rules were written at different times and were not designed to work with each other. Personally I find the easiest and best way around this is applying 'common sense' RAI: 1. Models (or markers) benefitting from Holo 1 state have to divulge their (h)ackable status: their electronic signature is not hidden. 2. HDs are entitled to know which of their programmes work; they're not supposed to fail simply because you guessed the wrong programme. Instead they should fail because you chose the wrong Echo. 3. It's far simpler/cleaner/politer/expected/not-a-dick-act to proactively provide this information rather than forcing your opponent to ask repetitively if anything has changed. *Note, that because nothing is obscuring the Hackabilitiy it would already be known, I think. TBH it's easier to think of this as the Kanren KHD using Holo 1 to appear as a Kanren KHD rather than not using Holo 1 at all.
