Though interesting; this ice falls flat on it's face once the Runner reads it and realises they are better off only breaking the first subroutine; rendering the second one a risk or a credit drain for the Corp; especially if the runner has R&D interfaces for their multi-access.
Reasonable but not amazing when the runner can't break it; a mere 4-5 credit tax and a credit drain at best once they can.
This ICE should either have been strength 7 to counterbalance the credit drain, or the first subroutine should have been an on-encounter ability; heck, it would be better if it simply didn't have that second subroutine, or better yet, if it was pay to force the access instead of pay to prevent!
Does a 5 credit tax for 6 credits really qualify as "falling flat on its face"? I think a brief look at most other ICE would reveal that statement doesn't make any sense. And how would the ICE be better without the second subroutine? It gives the corp more control. You can run them into a trap, or a card you don't mind them seeing. And if all 3 cards are agendas or assets you don't want being touched, you can CHOOSE to effectively end the run. These are all good things...
—
Bigguyforyou518
I think what he's trying to say is that if the runner can break the first subroutine, then the Corp must pay 1 additional credit every time they encounter the ice so they don't get to access a random card off RnD. So in addition to the 6 to rez it's 1 to keep the Runner from accessing more cards then they should. Admittedly against Jinteki random accesses of RnD are dangerous but there's definitely a possibility of them pulling agendas they shouldn't have.
—
StashAugustine
If this is the inside ice on R&D then why would the corp need to pay 1 as the Runner will be achieving the access in the first place.
—
Zail