124 replies to this topic

[Rotaugen]

If macros are bad because someone bought a mouse that can use them, then more expensive computers that get high FPS are bad too, as that is a bought advantage as well. Just cap everyone at 10 FPS and only allow the smallest engine and small lasers. No more OP complaints.

[Quxudica]

Barrett Osis, on 20 January 2013 - 08:53 PM, said:

Does PGI consider a Macro a hack? Or is it against the EULA?

Just wondering what I should tell my pilots. To use or not to use.

What they do is add some seconds between the Ultra AC5 shots.

Anyone have any idea?

Would love to get that macro if you could, or point me in its direction.

[Protoculture]

Tennex, on 20 January 2013 - 09:03 PM, said:

i don't see how macro can take advantage of anything in this game

If you read the values on the Ultra AC/5 it's firing delay is 1.10 seconds but you can force it to fire faster with a high risk of it jamming and taking the gun out for the match.

He's saying they have, probably a mouse, that has programmable buttons that they have set to not fire until after that delay so their guns never jam and they don't have to learn any skill to use them at maximal efficiency.

The thing is even if it were against the EULA/TOS it's unenforceable and therefore a moot point.

Edited by Protoculture, 21 January 2013 - 06:57 AM.

[Shismar]

Macros from programmable input devices are indistinguishable from manual input. It is the task of the developers that using them does not give a serious advantage. The old un-jamming mechanic is a good example where this was the case and it is mostly fixed now.

Most MMOs also have a build in macro interface that can be used to improve communication. Text macros using place holders can be very useful and have long been the main mean of coordinating large groups of players. Before TS became usable, of course. But since the VoIP integration is practically unusable and many players do not like voice chat, it would be quite desirable.

Examples: Focus on %target . Come to %pos . Help %teammember2

Until such an interface is present, using programmable keyboards and such is the only way to give these kind of commands in a reasonable way.

Edited by Shismar, 21 January 2013 - 06:59 AM.

[Mackman]

Jakob Knight, on 21 January 2013 - 05:47 AM, said:

I suppose we'll have to see when the EULA comes out with the release of the game (this is still beta, so they probably will let people use macros so they can see what to ban later).

However, if someone decides they will use a macro, then by definition they are admitting they cannot play the game as others do. So, they are looking for a way to gain an advantage others do not have in order to make up for their own lack of ability. If that lack of ability is the result of a physical impairment, I can see using something that brings you up to competative levels. If, on the other hand, it's just a matter of the player not wanting to be bothered to play the game like everyone else, then it's no different than if they were to have their computer playing for them....it's against the spirit of competition and the purpose of the game. If people want to do that, then they have already admitted that they cannot win any other way (regardless of what they say...actions speak louder than words, and lies are the highest ideal of a hacker).

So I say, let those who macro because they want to, do so for now. They will always know, and be unable to deny, that they are inferior to players who play without, and are only using macros because they need them. Any wins they get in the game are due to their computer, and never anything they themselves did or accomplished, since accomplishment is impossible for such as they.

In short....macro users are by definition handicapped either physically or mentally. They need the macros, or they wouldn't stand a chance in the game, and they know it.

Get over yourself. First off, we already have a quote from PGI saying they're aware of it and that it's totally fine. Secondly, this particular macro with the UAC is something an actual MechWarrior would actually do. No self-respecting MechWarrior would just use his UAC's willy-nilly, nor would he trust to chance. If it has a chance of jamming if you fire it too soon, then any MW worth his pay would have a system in place to make sure it didn't do that.

If you use a UAC and jam often, while someone else uses a macro and never jams, they are, quite simply, being a much smarter MechWarrior than you are. I hope your idiotic pride gives you some sense of comfort when you get gunned down while your UAC is either always jammed or firing at a glacial pace.

(FOR THE RECORD, I don't even use a UAC 5, nor do I use any macro's. But this kind of petty self-righteousness, in the face of a direct quote from the dev's themselves, makes me wish more people would use this macro).

[Ivanzypher]

I personally consider macros for things like UAC optimal fire rates to be cheating. It's giving you a huge advantage over someone who plays the game as intended. As for things like calling out targets etc. Well, that should be in the game anyway, how a team based game can NOT have quick commands....I don't know. So that wouldn't really bother me.

[Mackman]

Ivanzypher, on 21 January 2013 - 07:49 AM, said:

I personally consider macros for things like UAC optimal fire rates to be cheating. It's giving you a huge advantage over someone who plays the game as intended. As for things like calling out targets etc. Well, that should be in the game anyway, how a team based game can NOT have quick commands....I don't know. So that wouldn't really bother me.

Who are you to say what the dev's "intended," when you have no support for your view and I have already provided support for mine? We're piloting an incredibly advanced walking tank... are you seriously suggesting that in that era, no one can slightly automate the rate of fire on their UAC to achieve maximum DPS?

[N0MAD]

So what is the difference in using a line of compuer code ( a macro) to achive something you cant do yourself as in using it so your UACs dont jam and using a line of computer code to aim because you cant as in an Aimbot..
Is using a tool to do something you cant do any different than using another tool to do something you cant do? no its not.

[Roflberry Pwncakes]

De La Fresniere, on 20 January 2013 - 09:12 PM, said:

In my book they're just a way to efficiently interface with the game.

We could have a custom text interface and input commands like "fire weapon_group=1" every time we want to shoot and "turn upper_body direction=right degrees=30" every time we want to change facing. Would that make firing and turning via hotkeys "hacks" or "frowned upon"? Of course not. They're just better ways to tell the game what you want to do.

If they're genuine ways to better interface with the game and everyone has access to them, why would using them be wrong?

Except of course if you somehow use them to bypass intended game mechanics or to perform actions that violate the ToS, EULA and whatnot, but then macros aren't to blame, the offending player is.

If that's what your book defines macros as then your book needs burned. Seriously. They're not better ways to tell the game what you want to do, or interface with it more efficiently, they're workarounds so overly competitive cheeseballers who can't stand loosing can do it faster and more precise than the competition with a minimal amount of keystrokes. The examples you gave above are probably the most harmless examples possible, and one of them is already included in the game and bound by default to the 1 key. The macros that are exploitative and cheezy are ones like might have been used before the UAC5 unjam was changed: [keystroke=(RightCtrl+RightArrow)*6]. Just one press and the macro instantly performs an action that would have taken more sporting players 12 keystrokes to do. Thanks, by the way, to all you cheeseballs who exploited the UAC5 unjam procedure. You totally wrecked one of the more unique and original dynamics of the game, and now that it's gone, the game is just a tiny, tiny bit less fun.

[Mackman]

N0MAD, on 21 January 2013 - 08:03 AM, said:

So what is the difference in using a line of compuer code ( a macro) to achive something you cant do yourself as in using it so your UACs dont jam and using a line of computer code to aim because you cant as in an Aimbot..
Is using a tool to do something you cant do any different than using another tool to do something you cant do? no its not.

You haven't provided any argument for your position, only stated the existence of two things that you think are similar (and the developer's disagree with you, by the way).

A macro doesn't interact with the game any more than your normal keyboard and mouse does. It's just a way of pressing a mouse button consistently. It doesn't involve messing with the game code or even doing anything that the dev's didn't anticipate or don't want you doing. An aimbot goes far beyond that.

If the dev's ever reverse their decision and say that macro's are not ok, then I assume they'll come up with a better way to implement UAC's so as to not benefit so much from such a simple macro. As of now, the dev's are aware of it and they're totally fine with it.

Your move, dude.

[Ivanzypher]

If the devs had intended for UACs to fire at the perfect fire interval to not jam, then they would fire at that interval. Seems pretty obvious to me. Irrelevant really though if the suggested new firing mechanics are implemented(which make much more sense to me anyway) Bringing lore into it doesn't matter. We might be in super hightech vehicles, but the whole point of a UAC is better dps, but with a chance to jam. Does the weapon make sense from a lore standpoint? Not really. Neither do mechs, or carrying AC20 shells in your feet. Nothing in Battletech makes sense.

I agree with NOMAD here aswell. Macroing is no different to aimbotting really. It's all cheating in my book, and I view anyone who proceeds with such activities as subpar human beings.

[Mackman]

Mackman, on 20 January 2013 - 09:47 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...rch_app_filters[forums][searchInKey]=&userMode=content

Several posts down on Thomas DZIEGIELEWSKI'S (Senior Gameplay Engineer) post page:

"We know about the magic mouse that you can program to fire at certain inverals, and so can you learn to fire at the same rate after a lot of practice.

You can fire an UAC5 every 1.1s without it ever jamming."

They know about, they don't consider it cheating. it's an extremely useful tool to use a weapon optimally without breaking it, and anyone who thinks otherwise really needs to get over themselves.

EDIT: looks like the link didn't work.. just go to the Dev Tracker, click on Thomas's thing, and then scroll down till you get to the "Too Much Cheating" posts.

Just gonna leave this here... I doubt you'll care, though, because you're not interested in discussion, and you're just going to ignore it anyway. I'm done with this thread. Your opinion on what constitutes cheating doesn't matter. For that matter, neither does mine. All that matters is what the dev's think, and when it comes to that, you're flat out of luck, buddy.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Macro's are hacks, that's why every modern gaming keyboard and mouse supports them.

[N0MAD]

A Macro saves you pressing the fire button at exactly the right time everytime, you can upset the firing time by pressing it just a fraction to slow or to fast therefore causing a Jam, therefore its taking over a function you need to provide (a Skill some would say)
An aimbot takes over the moving the mouse that litle bit more or less than you can do it everytime. Therefor both are taking over your personal reflex and timing, how is that not the same thing?

[Ivanzypher]

The devs saying it's fine suggests to me they can't stop people doing it, so aren't bothering to even try and ban it. As far as I know there's no way to prevent macros.

I don't see how someone can be fine with fire rate macros, but not aimbots. If my mouse aims for me instead of a script, would that suddenly be ok? If so, Razer are missing a trick here.

Whether it's allowed or not, I'll still consider it cheating, and think worse of anyone who uses it. Won't matter when the UAC changes roll out anyway.

[Jakob Knight]

Mackman, on 21 January 2013 - 07:11 AM, said:

Get over yourself. First off, we already have a quote from PGI saying they're aware of it and that it's totally fine. Secondly, this particular macro with the UAC is something an actual MechWarrior would actually do. No self-respecting MechWarrior would just use his UAC's willy-nilly, nor would he trust to chance. If it has a chance of jamming if you fire it too soon, then any MW worth his pay would have a system in place to make sure it didn't do that.

If you use a UAC and jam often, while someone else uses a macro and never jams, they are, quite simply, being a much smarter MechWarrior than you are. I hope your idiotic pride gives you some sense of comfort when you get gunned down while your UAC is either always jammed or firing at a glacial pace.

(FOR THE RECORD, I don't even use a UAC 5, nor do I use any macro's. But this kind of petty self-righteousness, in the face of a direct quote from the dev's themselves, makes me wish more people would use this macro).

Get over -yourself-. If you use Macros, then you obviously think the restrictions other players play with don't (or shouldn't) apply to you. Who's full of themselves, again?

But then, I guess you don't have any problem with me having a macro to autotarget anything in front of me (why should I be bothered to type 'r'?), fire jumpjets anytime my feet leave the ground (what, I should have to watch where I'm going?), fire weapons when I have a target in the right position to hit (the game is what's keeping me from hitting things!), or fire only enough weapons that I don't ever go over the shutdown line (I'm too busy to worry about that!)? While you're at it, you don't mind if I set up a bot to run my mech for me while I go grab some sleep? I need the xp and C-bills, and you aren't worth my time.

Where do you draw the line when you start saying it's okay for your computer to take over actions you should be doing yourself, and everyone else in the game -is- expected to do themselves?

Edited by Jakob Knight, 21 January 2013 - 08:31 AM.

[N0MAD]

DV McKenna, on 21 January 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:

Macro's are hacks, that's why every modern gaming keyboard and mouse supports them.

All Doctors Prescribe Steroids for certain conditions so its ok for everyone to use them right?

[Psiclone]

I use a macro that hits the holds the "6" key for 5 seconds toggled to repeat. 6 is my TAG. This keeps my TAG on all the time so I can use my mouse buttons for MLs and SSRMS.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

N0MAD, on 21 January 2013 - 08:33 AM, said:

All Doctors Prescribe Steroids for certain conditions so its ok for everyone to use them right?

For their intended purpose yes.

[IG 88]

Barrett Osis, on 20 January 2013 - 08:53 PM, said:

Does PGI consider a Macro a hack? Or is it against the EULA?

Just wondering what I should tell my pilots. To use or not to use.

What they do is add some seconds between the Ultra AC5 shots.

Anyone have any idea?

Third-Party Scripts, Hacks, Bots, etc. Abuse
Software that gives players an unfair and undue advantage, or otherwise exploits the game, are strictly prohibited. This includes, but is not limited to: Bots generated for running any of the above mentioned forms of griefing/exploits, scripts designed to negatively affect network connectivity, mods affecting the game UI, hacks providing information otherwise unavailable to the player, etc...
Exceptions to this are made on a case by case basis and currently including chat macros and third-party VoIP.
http://mwomercs.com/...ploitsgriefing/
the answer your looking for is : yes

Psiclone, on 21 January 2013 - 08:33 AM, said:

I use a macro that hits the holds the "6" key for 5 seconds toggled to repeat. 6 is my TAG. This keeps my TAG on all the time so I can use my mouse buttons for MLs and SSRMS.

this can get you ban, it give you a unfair advantage

Edited by IG 88, 21 January 2013 - 08:56 AM.