Don’t the sensors use their rating as a perception to detect?
They use their rating as the limit on a perception+INT or electronic warfare+INT test*, which opens up a whole other can of worms to where a normal quality camera (or any other kind of sensor) physically cannot detect someone most of the time if they have a sneak pool of 9 or more without the GM ruling that "no, you can't sneak through open ground that's covered from multiple angles by security cameras regardless of how well you roll on a sneak test"**.
* Now what's actually making those tests is another question altogether: if its the sensor array itself it'd be something like sensor rating x 2 for the dice pool; if it's an agent program it's either agent rating -1 or agent rating x 2 (because RAW agents don't have perception or ewar skills, but it makes narrative sense for one created to watch sensor grids to have it), a pilot program would be pilot rating + clearsight or ewar autosofts, and a security guard would be rolling the normal perception or ewar checks.
** Unless there's some enabling conditions like a ruthenium polymer coating on your armor or at least a chameleon suit.
I've gone and researched this entirely too many times and the best I've gotten is pretty much "tailor the narrative description to suit gameplay needs and minimize excessive dice rolling."
Now from a player perspective I jam sensors in absolutely everything, especially drones because if there's anything I've learned as a GM it's that GMs absolutely love it when you ask them to describe in meticulous detail the cyberware and weapon loadouts of literally every single person nearby, and the more pointless dice rolling you can make the more fun it is for everyone! (Or more accurately, to cover my ass and give a clear narrative impetus to spoil ambushes and any other unwelcome surprises with the implicit understanding that superfluous details don't matter and don't warrant lots of rolls.)
but Ima be honest with you while I love the world & lore actually playing/gming the game kinda gets me depressed with how close it is to actual society just without the cool shit.
Yeah. I kind of work around that as a GM by following one golden rule: the lazier and more absurd whatever description or plot point I'm giving is, the more it becomes both realistic and fantastical at the same time.
They use their rating as the limit on a perception+INT or electronic warfare+INT test*, which opens up a whole other can of worms to where a normal quality camera (or any other kind of sensor) physically cannot detect someone most of the time if they have a sneak pool of 9 or more without the GM ruling that "no, you can't sneak through open ground that's covered from multiple angles by security cameras regardless of how well you roll on a sneak test"**.
* Now what's actually making those tests is another question altogether: if its the sensor array itself it'd be something like sensor rating x 2 for the dice pool; if it's an agent program it's either agent rating -1 or agent rating x 2 (because RAW agents don't have perception or ewar skills, but it makes narrative sense for one created to watch sensor grids to have it), a pilot program would be pilot rating + clearsight or ewar autosofts, and a security guard would be rolling the normal perception or ewar checks.
** Unless there's some enabling conditions like a ruthenium polymer coating on your armor or at least a chameleon suit.
I've gone and researched this entirely too many times and the best I've gotten is pretty much "tailor the narrative description to suit gameplay needs and minimize excessive dice rolling."
Now from a player perspective I jam sensors in absolutely everything, especially drones because if there's anything I've learned as a GM it's that GMs absolutely love it when you ask them to describe in meticulous detail the cyberware and weapon loadouts of literally every single person nearby, and the more pointless dice rolling you can make the more fun it is for everyone! (Or more accurately, to cover my ass and give a clear narrative impetus to spoil ambushes and any other unwelcome surprises with the implicit understanding that superfluous details don't matter and don't warrant lots of rolls.)
Yeah. I kind of work around that as a GM by following one golden rule: the lazier and more absurd whatever description or plot point I'm giving is, the more it becomes both realistic and fantastical at the same time.