74 replies to this topic

[TehSBGX]

Scarface1978, on 29 April 2013 - 10:53 AM, said:

so u telling me using no jam UAC5 macro is OK ? i dont think so...

Agreed, the OP is breaking the game with that script. UACs jam for a reason, you know because they'd be utter BS if they didn't jam.

[Dr B00t]

Inkarnus, on 02 May 2013 - 02:40 PM, said:

putting this here so someppl might reconsider using macroscripts

nice way to take the quote completely out of context...next time you post you should get your facts straight

[Dreamslave]

Man, I'm trying really hard to get this autohotkey Script thingy in the OP to work, but I am so computer illiterate. I copy/pasted the ac/2 script into a new autohotkey script by right clicking on my desktop and going to "new" - autohotkey script. Then I pasted the OP's script in there, went into the game and hit ctrl + shift+ alt+ right click and nothing happens. Im so bad at this stuff...

[Goregrimm]

Yeah. I would like to do the AC/2 thing but I have no idea how any of this works.

[evilC]

I have written a much better one with a GUI to select options and profiles to save different setups.







http://mwomercs.com/...n-fire-for-mwo/

And to all people talking of cheating, it is not. PGI have stated that autofire macros are OK.
All that people like the OP and myself are doing is levelling the playing field - ensuring that everyone has access to the same tools, not just the people with fancy mice or programming knowledge

[Gargoth]

Ok, i will give my opinion to this.
So, people think macros are evil and are ruining the game.
Imagine the situation where you would have the chance to improve your mech, personalize it, if you will.
Do custom interface, audio, maybe leather seats and totally, plainly just to make your mech your own.
And you would have chance to program interface to your liking.
...
Interface to your liking, you are mechwarrior, one with your mech, one with the cockpit, one with the whole system. you know every crook and every sound of twisting metal your mech makes.
And then, you get to program your mech controls.

Ofcourse, at this point you WILL make additions to fire control such as chainfire, group fire and weapon grouping.
so why in the name of nine hells you wouldnt chance your weapon firing rate?
...
oh yeah, because it is cheating, and no-one in the battlefield wants to cheat, not that enemy wielding autocannon 20 at your face with his finger on the flush coolant button at least.
.
yup, scripts are bad, mmmkay?
/sarcasm off.

[Shikata nai]

Simply one answer:
Because it's something that isn't implemented in the game by default and it improves your weapons -> you get an advantage over others which is not inteded -> you cheat.

It's just not working as intended by the game developers and creating an advantage you shouldn't have.
You can't compare this with chainfire because chainfire is an option which is given to you by the gamedevelopers because they want it this game to have this option. If they would have wanted that you can fire your UAC5 without jamming at 1,1sec speed they just would have implemented it. Achieving this by accessing the game with scripts is just plain cheating.
With the latest patch PGI imho made really clear that they feel the same about this because they changed the UAC5 also to 1,5sec and Macros are now useless since you can just mount an AC5 instead if you dont like the chance to jam.

You also can't compare visual changes with macros affecting Weapon-usage since visual changes don't give you an advantage in the game itsself (nevertheless imho every ingame changes from outside the actual game itself are not the right thing to do).

[uglydisease]

The problem is that games are not and have never been level playing fields, I remember once I wrote a script for bf3 that allowed the pilot of an attack helicopter to have access to the tv missile by switching seats quickly and doing some quick timing in a script, after they blocked ahk I was able to do the exact same thing using my Logitech mouse software. Someone without a gaming mouse would of course be at a disadvantage. The same can be said for graphics cards, cpus, internet connections. In star trek online the game developers allow multiple and fairly complex key binding through config files, which many players think is a kind of cheating despite the fact that its supported from inside the game. Then there are game developers that sell assets and reputation enhancements through pay to win. In my opinion as long as somebody isn't breaking the game by injecting byte code into the executable it isn't cheating.

[Gargoth]

Lachesis Muta, on 21 September 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

Simply one answer:
Because it's something that isn't implemented in the game by default and it improves your weapons -> you get an advantage over others which is not inteded -> you cheat.

You also can't compare visual changes with macros affecting Weapon-usage since visual changes don't give you an advantage in the game itsself (nevertheless imho every ingame changes from outside the actual game itself are not the right thing to do).

So by buying gaming keyboard, or gaming mouse, that have ability to bind different options to different buttons in a variety of different timings, i am therefore a cheater, because game developers did not configure their game to these precise instruments?
Sorry then, i have news for you, Mad Catz M.M.O mouse, Corsair K70 keyboard and logitech G13 gaming pad in use here.
call me a cheater.

uglydisease, on 21 September 2013 - 10:51 PM, said:

The problem is that games are not and have never been level playing fields. Someone without a gaming mouse would of course be at a disadvantage. The same can be said for graphics cards, cpus, internet connections. In star trek online the game developers allow multiple and fairly complex key binding through config files, which many players think is a kind of cheating despite the fact that its supported from inside the game. Then there are game developers that sell assets and reputation enhancements through pay to win. In my opinion as long as somebody isn't breaking the game by injecting byte code into the executable it isn't cheating.

^this, you invest in gaming by buying gaming peripherals, and equip your computer with powerful hardware, nope, not cheating.
You should try to get mouse and keyboard to PS3, and go to play call of duty or battlefield.
You have ridiculous advantage and nope, not cheating.
And same goes for p2w, you actually pay money to the game you like, you should get something special compared to those who do not pay a single dime.
You have invested in game, and therefore you should have right to be above free players.
Cheating?
(sorry, i shortened your replies a bit in hopes of not turning this in to a wall of text)

Edited by Gargoth, 22 September 2013 - 12:40 AM.

[Shikata nai]

I think there is a slight but important difference between buying a Keyboard with more options which is supported by the game directly (You can adjust it in the game itsself) compared to changing a game softwarewise by using a Macro wich obviously is not direclty supported by the game (You can not adjust this in the Game itsself).
By adjusting your keyboard to the game you also can not override a mechanic in the game itsself - by binding a Weapon or something else to a certain key you still need to be skilled enough to use it as you need it.
If you bind your UAC5 shot to a Mousekey of a gaming mouse means you maybe can hit it better but it shoots as it is intended and you need Timingskills to use Single or Multishot to avoid jammings.
If you use a Macro on your UAC5 shot you just change the game mechanic that you dont need any timing skills. You just know that it will shoot with the most efficient pattern by accessing the game in a way it is not intended.

[evilC]

Riiiight. Chain fire is a totally "not intended" feature.

You do realise that no matter how many of a weapon you put in a group, it only fires at the rate of 1?
So in effect chain fire as implemented is basically useless?

It is clearly obvious what chain fire is meant to do, but it does not do it.

All my software is to fix what I perceive to be bugs in MWO. If you cannot see that chain fire is clearly bugged, then you are blind to the facts.

UAC double shot is also often referred to as "double tap". The implication being that in order to activate it, you had to "double tap" the trigger - simply holding the trigger should only ever fire in single shot mode.
And let's use our brain a little here - no super advanced war machine would have such a stupid setup where by default a weapon used the more risky double shot mode which could jam.

Edited by evilC, 22 September 2013 - 04:28 AM.

[Appogee]

These scripts should be of great use to those lacking the skill or ethical standards to say no to artificial performance enhancements.

I will continue to play the game as provided - flaws and all - because that is the level playing field on which we're being asked to compete.

No macros to artificially optimise my firing rate, no gamma adjustments to make dark environments easier to see, no reduction in graphics settings to remove potential enemy cover.

As a result, when I win, I can be proud that I won fair and square, without needing to cheat.

Edited by Appogee, 22 September 2013 - 04:50 AM.

[Shikata nai]

Chain fire is not useless - for example it can be used to manage heatissues.
I agree in a certain extent that chainfire should adept to the weapon cooldown.

But the Problem with the UAC5 macro or the TAG macro is not related to chainfire. The Problem is that you were able to groupfire them with a 1.1 sec cooldown without triggering the jammechanic making the AC5 totally obsolete and it gave you just an overall advantage over other people who used the UAC5 and trying to make it work with pure skill! Its also unimportant what you think a super advanced warmachine should do - its a fictional game and to be honest a super advanced warmachine shouldnt have completely ridiculous weaponranges too. So if you think that way you should completely change everything in the weaponmechnics.

Also i dont agree that you think you have the right to decide which things are bugs in your mind and change them. With the latest balancepatch PGI imho made it crystalclear that macros especially concerning the UAC5 were not what they wanted to happen, thus changing the the rate of fire to a normal AC5 making the macro obsolete since you can now just equip a AC5 instead of a UAC5 with a macro if you dont want the jamming with the double "attackspeed" anyway. The only improvement from the AC5 to the UAC5 was always the double rate of fire with the jamming chance - macros just abused the machanic to make the UAC5 a better weapon in every way.

[evilC]

For myself and many others (At least 1000 people a month download Fire Control) do not see this as cheating.

If I thought of this as cheating, do you really think I would post it up on the official forums?

If PGI thought it was cheating, do you really think they would let my Fire Control thread become the second highest player-started thread in it's forum?


Think about my motivations a second before you start slinging mud around - I am genuinely trying to do the community a favour here.

How about directing some of those questions at PGI?

Why did you spend time coding Max Alpha when clearly users have little other option to Alpha because chain fire is so useless? Surely it would take a lot less time to code fixes for chain fire as that is a purely client-side change. Give users an option and they may not have to resort to always Alpha Striking.

Why did you break binding zoom to mouse wheel almost a year ago and not fix it yet?

But oh no, you instead attack the person who is trying to address these issues instead.

Edited by evilC, 22 September 2013 - 05:12 AM.

[Appogee]

evilC, on 22 September 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

For myself and many others (At least 1000 people a month download Fire Control) do not see this as cheating.

I'm here to assist your understanding. Artificially enhancing your ability to win a game is a form of cheating... regardless of how popular cheating is with other people.

evilC, on 22 September 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

If I thought of this as cheating, do you really think I would post it up on the official forums?

Ignoring for a moment that your handle is actually ''EvilC'' or what your motivations might be for helping more people cheat, I'll accept in good faith that you didn't think using macros was cheating. However, now you know.

evilC, on 22 September 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

If PGI thought it was cheating, do you really think they would let my Fire Control thread become the second highest player-started thread in it's forum?

I think PGI barely even read their own forums. Further, given they can't even be bothered completing basic features of their game prior to launching it, I expect their lack of action on things like this are more reflective of their ''different priorities'' than any considered stance on use of macros and cheating.

evilC, on 22 September 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

Think about my motivations a second before you start slinging mud around - I am genuinely trying to do the community a favour here.

You are trying to help more people cheat. You didn't know that when you posted, but now you do.

evilC, on 22 September 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

How about directing some of those questions at PGI?

I have no questions. I am playing the game as provided, not post-rationalizing how my cheating is justified because it addresses whatever I happen to consider to be a functionality gap in the game.

Edited by Appogee, 22 September 2013 - 05:27 AM.

[uglydisease]

Gargoth, on 22 September 2013 - 12:38 AM, said:

^this, you invest in gaming by buying gaming peripherals, and equip your computer with powerful hardware, nope, not cheating.
You should try to get mouse and keyboard to PS3, and go to play call of duty or battlefield.
You have ridiculous advantage and nope, not cheating.
And same goes for p2w, you actually pay money to the game you like, you should get something special compared to those who do not pay a single dime.
You have invested in game, and therefore you should have right to be above free players.
Cheating?
(sorry, i shortened your replies a bit in hopes of not turning this in to a wall of text)

I think you may have misunderstood my point here, I am in fact suggesting the opposite. That these advantages do NOT amount to cheating. As I said...

uglydisease, on 21 September 2013 - 10:51 PM, said:

In my opinion as long as somebody isn't breaking the game by injecting byte code into the executable it isn't cheating.

[ArmageddonKnight]

Some people here have a twisted sense of what cheating is or isnt.

There is a fine line between cheating and not cheating when it coms to Macro's. And in most casses it is decided by the game developer. Eve online for example will not allow macro mining, its banable, however smaller simpler macro's are allowed.

it is usualy stated somthing like this "Macro's that give a 'siginificant' advantage and/or breaks game mechanics are not allowed'.

Now simple keystroke macro's are not game breaking or giving any significant advantage.
A macro script that detects certain things then makes decision bassed on timing ..thats an advanatge. Like for example the macro that allow u to use Gauss + PPC's with a single click whilst only fireing if the gauss is charged, and doesnt fire the PPC if ur gauss charge runs out and u let go of the fire button. THAT is the kind of macro that is considered cheating by most.
A simple macro that by all intents and purposes, runs a digital finger along ur fire keys, like for the old AC2 rapid fire macro, is not cheating.
A macro that does somthing that most people agree 'should' be in the game already (the ability to choose whether to doulbe tap or not) again, is not cheating. And tbh at this point in time if ur not gunna double tap an UAC5 , then why the hell use one, the AC5 has the exact same rof.

So tbh, this whole argument is moot. AC2's have broken heat now and cant be rapid fired. UAC5's have the same non double shot rof as normal AC5, so if ur not double shotting them, dont equip them. And the Gauss + PPC macro is so blatently complex compared to a simple kaystroke script that its hardly worth argueing over.

Also i might add that whislt 'cheating' sounds really bad, and it is. P2W isnt 'cheating' but its just as frowned apon by the majority of the gaming community, why do u think people, who like MWO, strongly argue against calling MC only mechs P2W, argue so strongly in the first place ..becouse caling somthing P2W is just as bad (though different) as calling somthing a cheat.

Edited by ArmageddonKnight, 22 September 2013 - 01:25 PM.

[Shikata nai]

The Problem of the UAC5 Macro _was_ that the UAC5 had a lower cooldown then the AC5 making the UAC5 a far better AC5 with the usage of a macro. I considre this as cheating and i think everyone who uses Macros for the UAC5 now did this before too.

Basically also the AC2 Macro in my opinion is cheating. Why do you think you can decide if something is working as intended or not? I agree that it doesnt give you an advantage with the AC2 but imho it makes a huge difference if you change the Chainfiremode for example for the AC5. In any possible way you are changing gamemechanics on your own - in my opinion clearly cheating.
Same too the TAG-laser by the way... it just makes the game way easier for you compared to others who accept that the developers decided to implement it like it is implemented and need to press the button all day long if they want to tag.

I agree with you that the recent patch made the macro problem smaller, but still i think it's not the right of anybody to decide what should be in the game. Instead you should learn to _play_ the game how it is without creating an unfair advantage by changing up things. I agree that PGI should change some things (especially the TAG-laser mechanic) but untill they change it imho macros aren't the way to go because you gain an advantage over others.

[evilC]

Appogee, on 22 September 2013 - 05:23 AM, said:

I'm here to assist your understanding. Artificially enhancing your ability to win a game is a form of cheating... regardless of how popular cheating is with other people.

Can be a form of cheating. Cheating is more doing something to give yourself an advantage that other players cannot possibly do without also cheating.
It *is* possible to click at the same rate as the macro (if you were a really good drummer for example), or hold down a TAG (If you have nimble fingers or a mouse with lots of buttons) so this isn't really cheating per se.

Appogee, on 22 September 2013 - 05:23 AM, said:

Ignoring for a moment that your handle is actually ''EvilC'' or what your motivations might be for helping more people cheat, I'll accept in good faith that you didn't think using macros was cheating. However, now you know.

I own evilC,com, all my software links to my home page. I am not trying to hide my identity in any way.
As a leg founder, my real name is in the credits, and from that you can deduce evilC is simply my first name backwards.
You really think I hadn't considered everything you have raised? You aren't telling me anything bud, especially not in that condescending tone.

Appogee, on 22 September 2013 - 05:23 AM, said:

I think PGI barely even read their own forums. Further, given they can't even be bothered completing basic features of their game prior to launching it, I expect their lack of action on things like this are more reflective of their ''different priorities'' than any considered stance on use of macros and cheating.

PGI staff and/or moderators have commented on my macros in the past and OKed them.

Appogee, on 22 September 2013 - 05:23 AM, said:

You are trying to help more people cheat. You didn't know that when you posted, but now you do.

Again, stop with the holier-than thou condescending tone. There are other people (inc founders etc) defending me - it is clear this is not a cut and dry case. I understand that there are concerns, but part of the reason I make these macros is to maybe show PGI how it SHOULD be done and give them some ideas.

Appogee, on 22 September 2013 - 05:23 AM, said:

I have no questions. I am playing the game as provided, not post-rationalizing how my cheating is justified because it addresses whatever I happen to consider to be a functionality gap in the game.

So by the same measure, the software I wrote to let joystick users actually play the game is also cheating? They should stick with the provided options?

[Poptimus Rhyme Wallace]

Macros ARE like steroids, legal, but completely pathetic and only worthless people use this kind of crutch...