Pyramid #3/21. Console Cowboys / Netrunning / Semi-Cinematic Hacking

[vicky_molokh]

Greetings, all!

Reading over the Console Cowboys article, I'm considering using it (without the silly VR stuff, hence only referencing the first half of the title) in my campaign (at least when I can afford a special spotlight). But I never really used these rules in previous editions (Cyberpunk etc.), and I'd like to hear from people who have some experience with them. Please note that I do understand that those rules are cinematic(ish), gamist, and simplified.

Secondly, there are several things that are unclear to me. I'll post them as I encounter/recall them. Starting with:

Control seems confusing. It says that it allows one to use the standard functions of a computer (e.g. shutting down), and is Complexity 4, and only works after getting past ICE. However, if I log onto a computer using a legit password, unless I have severely restricted privileges, I should be able to shut it down. And Spoofing a Listen program seems like the game-mechanical description of sending the packets that are treated as a legit authentication. So . . . what is Control supposed to represent that is opposed to logging onto a computer (whether remotely or locally)?

Most of the important programs are Complexity 3-4, and the lowest ones are 2. But that seems to prevent hacking in retro settings (such as Æthereal Sun, where laptops/notebooks basically top out at C2 with a nasty price tag, Mainframes are C5 and Macroframes are C7). Does making C2 versions of some programs (primarily Control, Stealth, Alter, ICE) that have a built-in -2 per each Complexity removed break the system*?

The abstract rounds are wonderful for Action chases and other speedy scenes, but what about doing stuff slowly, when there is plenty of time (but details of the hack are still important)? I'm considering declaring that in routine conditions, a single round last an hour and grants +5 to active uses of programs (i.e. ones performed by a hacker or admin who is currently in charge, not automated Continuous programs). Thoughts?

Related to the above: the article seems to expect high-Complexity computers and high-Skill characters. Both of those are lower in my campaign: dedicating a constant Complexity 5 slot is mostly a luxury for an individual with a personal computer, while renting a C5 slot on a local friendly university megaframe is more affordable, but is problematic for hacking; skills are mostly floating around the 12-15 range, and the PCs are treated as reasonably competent professionals for having those levels. I'm afraid of keeping the system as-is with those numbers (especially due to the minC issue above); are my concerns justified, or does it work just fine if everything is lower than in the classical example?

On Control: if I get access to computers A, B and C, use Control to make A run Control on B to make it run Control on C to do an Analyse of some Computer D, does that count as a single program execution, or as four simultaneous programs (at -3)?

Thanks in advance!

* == the game system, that is. In a munchkinish way. Not the computer system.