SirSmokes, on 14 February 2019 - 08:06 PM, said:
Missed the point...I think people should play the game and not let the computer play it for you. Something taking inputs out is just wrong to me.
What is playing and what is letting the computer play though? Should we be allowed to group weapons or should everyone fire each weapon independently. Isn't grouping weapons letting the computer play part of the game? Once again, chain fire is allowing the use to hold down a button and cycle weapons instead of doing it manually, that's what macros do.
What do you consider, "letting the computer play for you" and what isn't. It's not as black and white of a line as you make it seem, otherwise we'd all be playing QWOP in mechs.
I don't really consider holding a button down to keep tag on to be "playing the game". I don't play MWO to hold down a button. If you really are against letting the computer play, you should be advocating for chain fire to be removed.
Sjorpha, on 15 February 2019 - 03:09 AM, said:
But it doesn't matter, and it wouldn't even matter if the advantages were huge (except that would probably lead to a rule against macros eventually) because cheating is defined by the rules of the game and nothing else.
Agreed, cheating is breaking the stated rules. The rules allow macros so they aren't cheating, full stop.
That said, I've more been addressing the points as to why it is fine for the rules to allow macros and that's because they give little to no advantage. While the gauss macro may give you a marginal advantage in fire speed in practice you rarely if ever want to chain fire gauss rifles like that and running a charge sequence limits the manual control you have (granted a well designed macro can mitigate some of these limitations). If macros provided a significant edge, rather than more quality of life fixes, I'd be fine with banning them, as is I don't have a problem with them in game.