253 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

Its the lighted keys that make it OP for me! I mean needed. This way I don't have to have lights on at 2:30 in the morning! Gotta be mindful of the ones I love!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 25 April 2013 - 08:47 AM.

[silentD11]

Roadbeer, on 25 April 2013 - 08:38 AM, said:

When you get down to it, what's the difference between macros and effectively using weapon groups?

I mean, is the macro doing anything you really can't do yourself? Does it increase the cycle time of weapons? or just how you use them?

All they are doing is firing the weapons at the most optimal time so it's the fastest you can technically do it. You can't make a macro do something the game isn't capable of it. All you're doing is automating a series of steps you will use regularly to the maximum potential.

Quote

Macros are for ******* that can't man up and learn how to play for real.

You could say the same for high end mouse sensors, multi button mice, DPI toggling mice and the slew of other features on gaming products that are far more advantageous than a simple macro.

[Roadbeer]

I guess using an nostromo and a joystick is OP and cheating as well.
I mean, having all those buttons easy to reach rather than moving my hand all over a keyboard is obviously cheating.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I'm gonna devil's advocate a little. I don't have strong feelings on this either way.

I'm not sure it's fair that if we put two people in similar Mechs with similar loadouts and the same skill level against eachother; that if one uses a special macro and the other does not for whatever reason, they should have an advantage.

In WoW, for hunters at one point, there were ways to macro your shots with pauses to do more DPS than someone who manually did it. It became a requirement for raiding hunters to use that macro.

It really takes a portion of skill out from the game.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 25 April 2013 - 08:46 AM.

[Roadbeer]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 25 April 2013 - 08:45 AM, said:

I'm gonna devil's advocate a little. I don't have strong feelings on this either way.

I'm not sure it's fair that if we put two people in similar Mechs with similar loadouts and the same skill level against eachother; that if one uses a special macro and the other does not for whatever reason, they should have an advantage.

In WoW, for hunters at one point, there were ways to macro your shots with pauses to do more DPS than someone who manually did it. It became a requirement for raiding hunters to use that macro.

It really takes a portion of skill out from the game.

Feeling the same as I don't really have a dog in this race.

But couldn't the same be said for reaction time and reflexes, computer specs, etc,etc,etc?
There are so many random elements that can skew the playing field. IMO Macros are just a tool to use.

[Joseph Mallan]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 25 April 2013 - 08:45 AM, said:

I'm gonna devil's advocate a little. I don't have strong feelings on this either way.

I'm not sure it's fair that if we put two people in similar Mechs with similar loadouts and the same skill level against eachother; that if one uses a special macro and the other does not for whatever reason, they should have an advantage.

In WoW, for hunters at one point, there were ways to macro your shots with pauses to do more DPS than someone who manually did it. It became a requirement for raiding hunters to use that macro.

It really takes a portion of skill out from the game.

See you are looking at it wrong. It is legal, it is an advantage. If I have AC10s and my enemy has Gauss(Better range) is he cheating? Does he have better skill?

Maybe its my ability to Improvise, adapt an overcome that I don't see it as cheating, Just something new to crush.

[Gladewolf]

Macros, IMO are a slippery slope. If they are allowed, so be it, but I'd rather everyone use the same basic control features for the game. I've seen this sort of thing become almost a requirement in other pvp games and I'd rather just not go down that path at all.

[pencilboom]

Mister Blastman, on 25 April 2013 - 08:39 AM, said:

Macros are for ******* that can't man up and learn how to play for real.

u mad?

but seriously. fast firing ac/2s are not effective. I use my 5 ac/2 jager quite often. Even had ~850 damage in a game with it. but the deal is, rapid firing ac/2 are just for fun. get it? they're not effective as group firing them all together.

rapid firing = fun for me + annoyance for the enemy. effective? debatable, but leaning towards no because the damage is going to be spread out

[Roadbeer]

pencilboom, on 25 April 2013 - 09:22 AM, said:

u mad?

but seriously. fast firing ac/2s are not effective. I use my 5 ac/2 jager quite often. Even had ~850 damage in a game with it. but the deal is, rapid firing ac/2 are just for fun. get it? they're not effective as group firing them all together.

rapid firing = fun for me + annoyance for the enemy. effective? debatable, but leaning towards no because the damage is going to be spread out

I do the same thing with my 2 ER PPC, 6 MG Jager. I can't honestly say that the MGs do anything but make cool dakkadakka noise, but my component destruction is higher on that mech than any of my others, aside from my Boomcat.

Totally off topic, but I thought I'd share that

[Mister Blastman]

silentD11, on 25 April 2013 - 08:45 AM, said:

You could say the same for high end mouse sensors, multi button mice, DPI toggling mice and the slew of other features on gaming products that are far more advantageous than a simple macro.

Macros are a crutch, though.

High end mouse sensors give a "perceived" advantage. In reality--they don't. I competed at the highest level of Team Fortress 2 using...

a. A cloth mousepad
b. A older optical sensor mouse with low DPI
c. A PS/2 Keyboard

I eventually got a better mouse/keyboard but did they help? No, not at all. In fact, the only reason I upgraded was because my old stuff wore out.

So your point is moot.

Macros on the other hand take the place of the human brain, making decisions for the player and actions for them in their place. It takes a processing load off the mind so the player can focus on other things (or less things). They're a crutch and a cheat. There's a huge difference between them and hardware upgrades.

Think of it this way--A macro is like giving a tennis player a racket that automatically extends the arm when needed to hit a ball or deflect it in such a way to allow them to make a shot they might have messed up otherwise. Fancy keyboards (provided you don't use macros) and mice don't do this for you. The onus is still on the operator to make them perform.

There's little to no effort required for the player once they make the macro. The macro takes care of the rest.

Macros are a pathetic crutch.

[Jman5]

There is no stopping people from using macros. Even if they forbid it, people could get away with it.

Instead of banning them, or leaving things as is, PGI should be working to tweak their system whereby macros are obsolete and unnecessary. Otherwise you create a tier-skill system where in order to compete you have to use a macro function.

[Mister Blastman]

Jman5, on 25 April 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

There is no stopping people from using macros. Even if they forbid it, people could get away with it.

Instead of banning them, or leaving things as is, PGI should be working to tweak their system whereby macros are obsolete and unnecessary. Otherwise you create a tier-skill system where in order to compete you have to use a macro function.

Absolutely. There's no reason they couldn't structure the mechanics of the game to subvert macro usage. MW:LL did a fine job of this.

[pencilboom]

so the fault is on PGI then. not the macro users
lets say the next of these whining threads should be like "PGI please create a fast chain fire for ac/2s so we can compete~"

[Roadbeer]

Mister Blastman, on 25 April 2013 - 09:34 AM, said:

Absolutely. There's no reason they couldn't structure the mechanics of the game to subvert macro usage. MW:LL did a fine job of this.

Explain.
Not having an opinion, I'd be interested in hearing what your solution is.

[silentD11]

Mister Blastman, on 25 April 2013 - 09:34 AM, said:

Absolutely. There's no reason they couldn't structure the mechanics of the game to subvert macro usage. MW:LL did a fine job of this.

They'd get into a holy war with Razer, Microsoft, Logitech, Steelseries and everyone else who sells gaming hardware. And I'm willing to bet those guys would easily be able to figure out a way to make their products work as advertized within other games on a hardware, driver, or software level. This isn't a fight that you can win.

[Ph30nix]

IT DOES'T MAKE THEM FIRE ANY FASTER
each AC/2 still has the same RoF its just you are firing at least one at atll times, so while 3/4/5 are on cooldown your firing your one that isnt

THATS ALL THAT HAPPENS

[C E Dwyer]

Roadbeer, on 25 April 2013 - 09:27 AM, said:

I do the same thing with my 2 ER PPC, 6 MG Jager. I can't honestly say that the MGs do anything but make cool dakkadakka noise, but my component destruction is higher on that mech than any of my others, aside from my Boomcat.

Totally off topic, but I thought I'd share that

Nerf MG's !!

[Joseph Mallan]

Mister Blastman, on 25 April 2013 - 09:30 AM, said:

Macros are a crutch, though.

High end mouse sensors give a "perceived" advantage. In reality--they don't. I competed at the highest level of Team Fortress 2 using...

a. A cloth mousepad
b. A older optical sensor mouse with low DPI
c. A PS/2 Keyboard

I eventually got a better mouse/keyboard but did they help? No, not at all. In fact, the only reason I upgraded was because my old stuff wore out.

So your point is moot.

Macros on the other hand take the place of the human brain, making decisions for the player and actions for them in their place. It takes a processing load off the mind so the player can focus on other things (or less things). They're a crutch and a cheat. There's a huge difference between them and hardware upgrades.

Think of it this way--A macro is like giving a tennis player a racket that automatically extends the arm when needed to hit a ball or deflect it in such a way to allow them to make a shot they might have messed up otherwise. Fancy keyboards (provided you don't use macros) and mice don't do this for you. The onus is still on the operator to make them perform.

There's little to no effort required for the player once they make the macro. The macro takes care of the rest.

Macros are a pathetic crutch.

I don't use them, I prefer big honking death dealing weapons over sandblasters. If this is the way they wanna play, and it is within the game developers acceptance, so be it.

There are folk here complaining about Alpha Striking to much, and every other thing they don't like. Your opinion is yours, you are entitled to give it, and I respect it, but that also means I am entitled to give mine, which is, it is not cheating nor is it lame, I can still beat these Mechs without a chain macro. I could care less if they are using it. If I decide it is a problem I have a Naga, I can meet them on a level playing field if I need to.

[C E Dwyer]

silentD11, on 25 April 2013 - 09:48 AM, said:

They'd get into a holy war with Razer, Microsoft, Logitech, Steelseries and everyone else who sells gaming hardware. And I'm willing to bet those guys would easily be able to figure out a way to make their products work as advertized within other games on a hardware, driver, or software level. This isn't a fight that you can win.

Seem to remember just before closed beta, finnished, or was it just after, PGI did a deal with a gaming hardware co, I could be wrong but I seem to remember use this companies fluff for MWO, adverts everywhere I looked for mech info on the net but it could be to many mushrooms

[Mister Blastman]

Roadbeer, on 25 April 2013 - 09:40 AM, said:

Explain.
Not having an opinion, I'd be interested in hearing what your solution is.

It is pretty simple, actually.

PGI partially did the UAC right. Partially. After much complaining about the unjam mechanic (remember that?) giving macro users an advantage, they went to a forced cooldown system. They unjammed over time regardless of input. This was a huge plus being put in the game.

The downside of UACs is the random jamming mechanic. There is a near-perfect firing sequence right now that can avoid it for the most part. Now, the developers have put code in to detect a perfect-case macro scenario but supposedly even that isn't working right as people can still macro them. Whatever. If they would move to a heat scenario per UAC like MW:LL uses (fire 5 times in a row and you're fine... fire a 6th time in a row in fast-fire and you jam for several seconds--MW:LL uses a heat bar for the UAC weapons that goes up fast when you fire out of standard-fire interval) then they'd be perfect. Macros can't really abuse this as the player has to keep an eye on the heat bar and stop firing at the right time. Sure, macros can be scripted for slow intervals but the heat is the same and added every time you fire beyond the single fire interval equally.

Now, lets take AC/2 chaining--it is very amusing to say the least. I'm fine with it. However, the problem with MWO that causes people to use macros is the chain fire system. Now wait--the macros allow infinite fire, maximum dakka. That's great! Fun stuff, right?

Why can't chain fire do this? Why can't MWO have a chain fire system that looks at the weapon group and says... hey, look, they want to chain fire. Hmm... Well, they want to chain-fire nonstop. So have a toggle switch for chain fire--the toggle allows you to go from standard chain-fire to perpetual chain-fire. Perpetual chain-fire has one difference. The game would take the weapon group, figure out via maths (not hard to program) the optimal firing sequence to allow the weapons to fire nonstop using their cooldown/firetime numbers and fire them in sequence at that interval via code.

Viola! No more macros needed. Everyone has the same edge. They can choose between maximum firing via chain fire or nonstop firing via alternate chain firing.

That's just one of many ideas I could come up with and they aren't hard to implement, either. Well, as long as you assume the programmer is competent at their job--it is a single day addition to the code or less since it is engine/mechanics code.