Inherent trade-offs with equipment, hacking edition

[Strung Nether]

Some people like equipment options that aren't strictly "better" per say, but simply "different". For example: Light machine guns are big guns that have a lot of bullets to shoot. They do a lot of damage and are scary. However, they are also big and heavy and difficult to aim/move with. A machine pistol is everything a light machine gun isn't, but you can fit it in your pocket and can walk downtown with it without obtaining kill-on-sight status from everyone around you.

Already there is a real world "that makes sense" solution for ways to differentiate different certain guns from other guns by making them situationally useful in different ways.

Here is the problem: How do we do the same thing for software, hardware, and hacking?

[rasmuswagner]

I think you're asking the wrong question, or at least the wrong question at this step in your design process. What does a hacker character do? What does a hacker player do?

[angelfromanotherpin]

You come up with metrics that matter and justify things into having more-or-less balanced trade-offs. A program that is more powerful may take up more RAM, restricting how many other programs can be run. A store-bought program is nondescript and anonymous compared to a home-written program, but is predictable and more likely to be countered by commonly-used ICE. Defenses can be weighted to succeed well (hard to penetrate) or fail well (raise alarm if penetrated).

A lot depends on what the base hacking system looks like.

[Strung Nether]

I should have clarified. I was running off of the assumption that a "ends of the matrix" style hacking would be in play.