Critias: Presumably, b/c of the break down in the listing below:
Rating 1:
MBW: +2 REA, +1 Dodge, +1 IP, Skillwire 2, Essence 2, Cost 50k
SW(R:2)+WR: +1 REA, +1 IP, Skillwire 2, Essence 2.4, Cost 15k
Rating 2:
MBW: +2 REA, +1 Dodge, +2 IP, Skillwire 3, Essence 3, Cost 85k
SW(R:3)+WR: +2 REA, +2 IP, Skillwire 3, Essence 3.6, Cost 38k
Rating 3:
MBW: +2 REA, +1 Dodge, +3 IP, Skillwire 5, Essence 5, Cost 175k
SW(R:5)+WR: +3 REA, +3 IP, Skillwire 5, Essence 6, Cost 110k
So, until you hit Rating 3, SW+WR only offers an advantage in price. In exchange for that price, you get +1 Dodge and 0.4 - 0.6 Essence (and at R1, an extra point of REA). At R3, without going to alpha ware or better, you're looking at flatlining from Essence loss if you go SW+WR.
For my money, though, it seems like the text could go either way, a comma prior to "per point of rating" would make it clearly attributable to all three bonuses, but as written, it still could be read that way. Which works better, regardless of whatever the RAI might be, is up in the air. It seems excessive to me, for example, to pull +6 Reaction out of my hat, even given the price tag. Consider if that table I wrote up went more like this:
Rating 1:
MBW: +2 REA, +1 Dodge, +1 IP, Skillwire 2, Essence 2, Cost 50k
SW(R:2)+WR: +1 REA, +1 IP, Skillwire 2, Essence 2.4, Cost 15k
Rating 2:
MBW: +4 REA, +2 Dodge, +2 IP, Skillwire 3, Essence 3, Cost 85k
SW(R:3)+WR: +2 REA, +2 IP, Skillwire 3, Essence 3.6, Cost 38k
Rating 3:
MBW: +6 REA, +3 Dodge, +3 IP, Skillwire 5, Essence 5, Cost 175k
SW(R:5)+WR: +3 REA, +3 IP, Skillwire 5, Essence 6, Cost 110k
That seems too good for something that has a better Essence pay out than the alternative. Now, if ratings 2 and 3 only granted +1 to REA (for a final of +4 REA), it'd be a smoother and more logical progression.