56 replies to this topic

[blinkin]

i am sure everyone here has seen the dozens of debates about whether macros are cheating or not.

everyone has chosen a side and now we take shots at each other from our respective trenches.

i want to know the underlying reasons why people do or do not support the use of macros.

yes the poll is multiple choice because some of the opinions listed there can overlap.


THIS IS NOT A DEBATE ABOUT WHETHER MACROS ARE GOOD OR BAD. this is an attempt to clear up some of the misunderstandings between the two sides.

if there are opinions that aren't properly expressed in the poll that you would like to see put there, then please:



underline the statement you would like to see added and place it at the very bottom of your post separate from the other text.

Edited by blinkin, 13 July 2013 - 10:59 PM.

[King Arthur IV]

macros are useless.

a macro ac2 mech only has one advantage, it sounds better. that is it, the stream of bullets is actually a gimp to yourself. group fire ac2 deplete ammo faster and has better pin point damage. the cockpit shake difference from group and macro is negligible because there is no need to make you shake more if you cant aim anyway from the shake caused by group fire. macro ac2 will generate heat slower but it also means your dps and effective pin point damage is reduced greatly. a 5x ac2 build can do 20 pin point damage per second, a macro version may only deal 10-15 a second and its not pin point (you might aswell take lasers at this point) group fire is not only deadly in close range but far surpass macro at range aswell.

play marco for the sound but do not think for one second its more op or should be banned because its a choice to gimp yourself.

Edited by King Arthur IV, 14 July 2013 - 01:10 AM.

[xenoglyph]

General rule of thumb when designing online games IMO: don't give macroers the opportunity to have an unfair advantage, because you can't stop them and macros are incredibly easy to make.

To clarify: I support the use of macros in games, but I also support the idea of designing things in such a way that macroers can't gain an advantage.

Edited by xenoglyph, 14 July 2013 - 01:34 AM.

[Mystere]

PGI allows their use. End of story.

[GODzillaGSPB]

They should rework chainfire! It should be different for each kind of weapon. When I put two ac5 in my Dragon 5N back then, I expected it to work like this: shot...shot...shot...shot. A constant stream of fire. Instead it worked like this: shot-shot......shot-shot......

Chainfire therefore made no sense, so I just stopped using it and fired them both together.

With a bad implementation like this, PGI shouldn't wonder why people use makros.

[Fire and Salt]

Just a few features need to be added that will make up for most of the real or perceived advantage of macros:

1) And a 2nd chain mode (say - backspace twice) that fires weapons at a rate of (fastest recycle in group) / (# of weapons in group)
For a group of 4AC2s - that would be once every 0.125 seconds - or more importantly - the first AC2 would recycle just after the last one fired. This is the classic "Dakka Dakka" AC2 macro, for all. (For lasers use recycle time + duration in the formula. This would be the "most constant" beam possible - small groups have some gaps, but possibly with some 2x overlap... Using this formula: Ex: 5+ medlas would overlap. 4x medlas would be identical to how they work now in a group. 8x would be 2 at once, although there would be a .5 second delay before the 2nd one fired.)

2) Ultra AC5 should have an additional effect that can be applied to a group - activated just like chain mode, but with the "\" key for example. When activated, they will only fire after their complete recycle - they will never Jam. Note that you could have 1 "No Jam" group and 1 "Max Fire" group.

3) Add some control options for "toggle group 1" "toggle group 2" etc. For the tag people that don't like to hold it down, etc.

4) A real "toggle arm lock" in addition to the current "hold to lock arms" would be useful as well. Although maybe I am the only one who thinks so because I never hear this mentioned...

Edited by Fire and Salt, 14 July 2013 - 03:44 AM.

[AZA311]

Option 3 and 6 are the same. If something provides an unfair advantage - that is cheating.

I voted 3 to add to the vote accumulation.

The unfair advantage is that you are relying on a computer software to do the work for you.

[Modo44]

Rework chainfire, and ban macros. I would be fine with macros if it wasn't for the apparent performance dip for nearby mechs they are now creating. That constitutes an obviously unintended game advantage, which can be considered a cheat/exploit.

[PhoenixFire55]

Everything that makes a competitive game easier for people using it over people who don't use it is cheating. Macro isn't any different from an aimbot. If it makes using AC2s, UAC5s, Tag whatever easier then it would have been without it then its a cheat.

[Fire and Salt]

Having a 5 button mouse and a 23" monitor is cheating!

Edit: Actually, my mouse has 6 if you count the little button that changes the pointer speed on the fly. FEAR ME!

Edited by Fire and Salt, 14 July 2013 - 05:20 AM.

[Farix]

The functionality of some of the macros should be incorporated into the UI, UAC/5 double tap toggle, tag laser on/off toggle and arm lock toggle. Maybe incorporate a slider to adjust the timing between shots when chain-firing. This would eliminate the need for most of the macros.

PhoenixFire55, on 14 July 2013 - 04:50 AM, said:

Everything that makes a competitive game easier for people using it over people who don't use it is cheating. Macro isn't any different from an aimbot. If it makes using AC2s, UAC5s, Tag whatever easier then it would have been without it then its a cheat.

Using third-party VoIP clients (Teamspeak, Ventrilo, Skype, Mumble, etc.) allows players to more easily coordinate than those who don't. So using your logic, those VoIP clients are cheats.

[PhoenixFire55]

Farix, on 14 July 2013 - 05:06 AM, said:

Using third-party VoIP clients (Teamspeak, Ventrilo, Skype, Mumble, etc.) allows players to more easily coordinate than those who don't. So using your logic, those VoIP clients are cheats.

Debatable. I've seen a no-comms PUG teams cooperate better then on-comms premades. You just need a tactical understanding of the game and spatial awareness. It depends on skill really. And anyway, its PGI's fault for not providing every player with an in-game easy-to-use voice chat. Macros are different. Regardless of your level of skill it IS easier to fire UAC5s without jamming using a macro or fire AC2s at a rapid rate etc.

There is also one other major difference between VoIP and macros. People use VoIP because they want to play with friends and chat between themselves during game not necesserily about the game. On the other hand only reason to use macros is to be more competitive.

Only reason PGI allows the use of macros is because they can't track it or prove it.

[Huntsman]

None of those options sound quite right. What a macro is depends on the macro. A macro could be merely used for convenience, or it could provide an edge to the player. The devs need to monitor which changes they make to the game allow for former (which is acceptable) or the latter (which is not).

[PhoenixFire55]

Huntsman, on 14 July 2013 - 07:12 AM, said:

None of those options sound quite right. What a macro is depends on the macro. A macro could be merely used for convenience, or it could provide an edge to the player. The devs need to monitor which changes they make to the game allow for former (which is acceptable) or the latter (which is not).

Convenience is that edge. It means you can pay attention to more important things without distractions. You can technically rapid fire 4+ AC2s by just assigning them all to different weapon groups and pushing those buttons in rapid succession. Needless to say that will occupy all or nearly all your attention as well as all your fingers.

[AZA311]

VOIP, a 6 buttoned mouse nor a 23" screen does the work for you.

Macro programs imitate human behaviour at flawless computer speeds and accuracy.

Employing outside devices such as macro - eliminate human error

VOIP, a 6 button mouse nor a 23" screen can accomplish that.

That is where the unfair advantage is.

If the elimination of human error is your aim, I suggest using an aimbot software.

All you have to do is click once. That program will achieve your goal with perfect synthesized accuracy.

[seymourbalzac]

King Arthur IV, on 14 July 2013 - 01:07 AM, said:

macros are useless.

a macro ac2 mech only has one advantage, it sounds better. that is it, the stream of bullets is actually a gimp to yourself. group fire ac2 deplete ammo faster and has better pin point damage. the cockpit shake difference from group and macro is negligible because there is no need to make you shake more if you cant aim anyway from the shake caused by group fire. macro ac2 will generate heat slower but it also means your dps and effective pin point damage is reduced greatly. a 5x ac2 build can do 20 pin point damage per second, a macro version may only deal 10-15 a second and its not pin point (you might aswell take lasers at this point) group fire is not only deadly in close range but far surpass macro at range aswell.

play marco for the sound but do not think for one second its more op or should be banned because its a choice to gimp yourself.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[seymourbalzac]

PhoenixFire55, on 14 July 2013 - 07:16 AM, said:

Convenience is that edge. It means you can pay attention to more important things without distractions. You can technically rapid fire 4+ AC2s by just assigning them all to different weapon groups and pushing those buttons in rapid succession. Needless to say that will occupy all or nearly all your attention as well as all your fingers.

So if you ban macros I'll just fire all 4/5 of my ac 2's at once, achieve the same dps with more pinpoint damage as well as allowing me time to twist my torso between shots to disperse enemy damage on me, would you rather that or me using a macro which chain fires my ac 2's because it sounds cool but I have to keep my ct facing you the whole time so it's easier for you to kill me as well and having my damage spread across your mech? Seems like to me that taking away macros will just make these builds better.

[PhoenixFire55]

seymourbalzac, on 14 July 2013 - 08:55 AM, said:

So if you ban macros I'll just fire all 4/5 of my ac 2's at once, achieve the same dps with more pinpoint damage as well as allowing me time to twist my torso between shots to disperse enemy damage on me, would you rather that or me using a macro which chain fires my ac 2's because it sounds cool but I have to keep my ct facing you the whole time so it's easier for you to kill me as well and having my damage spread across your mech? Seems like to me that taking away macros will just make these builds better.

lol

If alpha with AC2s is so much better then macro-chain-fire why then everybody wants to macro-chain-fire eh? And AC2s recycle in 0.5 seconds... if you are so awesome you can torso twist side and back inside those 0.5 seconds, well ...

I soooo want to believe that you use macros for the 'cool sound' but sorry, I just can't.

Edited by PhoenixFire55, 14 July 2013 - 09:41 AM.

[Oneirocide]

King Arthur IV, on 14 July 2013 - 01:07 AM, said:

*snip*
macro ac2 will generate heat slower but it also means your dps and effective pin point damage is reduced greatly. a 5x ac2 build can do 20 pin point damage per second, a macro version may only deal 10-15 a second and its not pin point (you might aswell take lasers at this point) group fire is not only deadly in close range but far surpass macro at range aswell.

play marco for the sound but do not think for one second its more op or should be banned because its a choice to gimp yourself.

You're doing it wrong. The DPS is the same when done properly, though the pinpoint damage definitely suffers.

PhoenixFire55, on 14 July 2013 - 07:16 AM, said:

Convenience is that edge. It means you can pay attention to more important things without distractions. You can technically rapid fire 4+ AC2s by just assigning them all to different weapon groups and pushing those buttons in rapid succession. Needless to say that will occupy all or nearly all your attention as well as all your fingers.

Getting closer...


You don't need a macro to chain fire with even intervals. You also don't need to sit there and hit 1-2-3-4-etc until your fingers fall off or you die because you can't move and aim at the same time. The method has been posted before on the forums, and it works well - especially if you aren't running more than 4 ac/2s. You even get an easy option between group- and chain-fire without having to toggle with backspace, again WITHOUT A MACRO.

[PhoenixFire55]

Oneirocide, on 14 July 2013 - 10:00 AM, said:

You don't need a macro to chain fire with even intervals. You also don't need to sit there and hit 1-2-3-4-etc until your fingers fall off or you die because you can't move and aim at the same time. The method has been posted before on the forums, and it works well - especially if you aren't running more than 4 ac/2s. You even get an easy option between group- and chain-fire without having to toggle with backspace, again WITHOUT A MACRO.

And I DON'T have a problem with people who do that without a macro. But really ... how many of such people are out there? 10% vs 90% who use macros?