At /u/ockbald's suggestion, I am posting this here as well...
Because the book never states how cybercombat damage is calculated (either with a damage code or a statement of net hits = damage), I am doing the following in my games:
Hacking + Logic vs. Logic + Firewall; Damage = [Logic/2]S It's like cyber-punching!
This makes it more in line with melee attacks, ranged attacks, spell attacks, resonant attacks (Resonance Spike), even banishing spirits and decompiling sprites. This normalizes the rules (because no other attack delivers 1 damage per hit), and puts hacking more on par with tasking damage. There is an issue of defense though, so there is one more step:
Double all cyberdeck Firewall stats
That way a +3 (now 6) Firewall will have a similar dice pool (Logic + 6 dice) for defense as a Logic 6 Technomancer (12 dice). It also makes IC (with 15 defense dice!) a less insurmountable obstacle. Ever try to burn down IC one net success at a time? It doesn't work. One should also invest in defensive programs too, like damage reduction (which must exist because p. 46 has this, "Any Shadow Amps that reduce cybercombat damage can be used to lower the damage received.")
[Edit] I no longer recommend this. Lower Firewall but extra Condition Monitor (Matrix) is a good balance against the TM's higher defense dice but taking Matrix damage straight to Stun.
Also:
Sprites should have 3 stats, Firewall, Logic, and Edge; and 3 skills, Hacking, Tasking, Tracking.
The stats they threw up on the PDF update make no sense: They have no Firewall (so have no defense), no Tasking skill (so they cannot use their Technomancer Amps), waste stats on WIL/CHA (never had them before and cannot use them), and their stats are too low compared to spirits/IC/small children, especially considering you can only have one.
[Edit] I now think that sprites should not have Firewall; they should use LOG x2 like TMs. But their LOG needs to be boosted dramatically.
So... that's me. Let the math-hammering begin!
