124 replies to this topic

[N0MAD]

A macro is a third party tool that allows you to do something that you cant do yourself unless you have learnt a skill (perfect timing), an aimbot is a third party tool that allows you to do something that you cant do yourself unless you have learnt a skill (perfect timing).. i see a fair bit of similarity in both.
Each to his own..

[Murku]

I got a mouse I could program to regulate UAC, but never really felt the need. I thought the whole 'server ping and respond' thing goofies the timing up?

The other 'macro' I considered is firing weapon groups 4, 5 and 6 on a single trigger, as I never really use more than 4 weapon groups. That way I could make all these linked groups chain more interestingly, useful on the 6+ energy HP builds.

Decent mice also come with a precision DPI button, that alone for sniping is surely WAY more powerful than a macro?

Edited by Murku, 21 January 2013 - 09:03 AM.

[Thomas Dziegielewski]

Well, not to me anyways. You can always teach yourself to shoot every 1.09s and never jam. Plus I have no idea how we could stop it in the first place, they are not breaking any gameplay rules.

How about games like Starcraft 2 can't you use mice magic to be awesomer too? How do they deal with it if at all?

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Thomas Dziegielewski, on 21 January 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

Well, not to me anyways. You can always teach yourself to shoot every 1.09s and never jam. Plus I have no idea how we could stop it in the first place, they are not breaking any gameplay rules.

How about games like Starcraft 2 can't you use mice magic to be awesomer too? How do they deal with it if at all?

Quite simply, they don't (or didn't when i played) because it doesn't automate gamplay, you still have to play the game, bad players with macros don't suddenly become good players/

Edited by DV McKenna, 21 January 2013 - 09:48 AM.

[mekabuser]

Thomas Dziegielewski, on 21 January 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

Well, not to me anyways. You can always teach yourself to shoot every 1.09s and never jam. Plus I have no idea how we could stop it in the first place, they are not breaking any gameplay rules.

How about games like Starcraft 2 can't you use mice magic to be awesomer too? How do they deal with it if at all?

wow. teach yourself to shoot every 1.09 seconds.. Ill tell you what.. i got a new mouse coming in the mail.. Ill save up for a new mech boating uac5s with the macro.. and you take the same mech without the macro...
Guess who is going to win .. every time... ME>.
worst dev response ever.

[Nacon]

mekabuser, on 21 January 2013 - 10:09 AM, said:

worst dev response ever.

wow... you really made sounds like there's a solution to it. Look... there ARE NO SOLUTION for macro. Deal with it, but don't go saying illogical non-sense about how one dev should respond about it.

You can leave, btw.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

mekabuser, on 21 January 2013 - 10:09 AM, said:

wow. teach yourself to shoot every 1.09 seconds.. Ill tell you what.. i got a new mouse coming in the mail.. Ill save up for a new mech boating uac5s with the macro.. and you take the same mech without the macro...
Guess who is going to win .. every time... ME>.
worst dev response ever.

Depends on more than just the macro.

[Odins Fist]

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

"Macro's.... Are They A Hack?"

.
ANSWER: "NO"
.
You're not serious right..??

[Ivanzypher]

Thomas Dziegielewski, on 21 January 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

Well, not to me anyways. You can always teach yourself to shoot every 1.09s and never jam. Plus I have no idea how we could stop it in the first place, they are not breaking any gameplay rules.

How about games like Starcraft 2 can't you use mice magic to be awesomer too? How do they deal with it if at all?

The thing is, no human is ever going to be precise enough with timing to rival a macro. It's all well and good saying you can shoot manually every 1.09 seconds, but it just isn't true. Aside from some Jazz cats maybe. Even someone with impeccable timing won't replicate the never jam effect perfectly. Even if they could, they shouldn't have to put so much effort into competing with some random with an "easymode" mouse.

The only way I can think of to stop macroing would be to design the weapons in a way where it isn't a benefit. Don't have timing affect jamming on the UAC. If you double tap, you have X% chance to jam. If you single shot, you don't jam. Problem solved.

Also, can we get toggleable TAG and a quickchat system? People shouldn't need a macro to tell their team who to target or avoid RSI.

While there is a mod here, are aimbots allowed aswell then? You can teach yourself to land every shot on target, so what's the problem? I don't see how allowing artificial assistance in some areas but not others is even remotely reasonable.

[Mackman]

Ivanzypher, on 21 January 2013 - 10:40 AM, said:

While there is a mod here, are aimbots allowed aswell then? You can teach yourself to land every shot on target, so what's the problem? I don't see how allowing artificial assistance in some areas but not others is even remotely reasonable.

There is an arbitrary line between what is acceptable and what is not. And it's up to PGI to decide where that line is drawn, not you.

If they choose, they could draw it at forcing various weapon keys to be spaced across the entire keyboard, or forcing you to press ten buttons at once in order to fire your weapon. They could take the mouse out entirely, force you to navigate and aim entirely by keyboard.

Laser/optical mice offer ease of use and precision over ball mice. Mechanical keyboards offer precision (and awesome clicky noises) over membrane keyboards. Using a mouse, remapping keys, all that stuff, is designed to make the game easier and less tedious. It's designed to let you enjoy the game without unnecessary tedium and pointless effort (like being unable to remap weapon groups, as one example).

This particular macro does that as well, to a slightly greater extent, and an aimbot does the same thing, to an even greater extent. In that way, yeah, they're the same: They both simplify certain aspects of the game so you can focus on others. But as you can see, this covers all user-interface tools. So your argument proves too much, is too unspecific, and is thus invalid. (EDIT for clarity: I'm saying that you have no reason other than "feeling" for why the line should be drawn here--at being able to macro the UAC--as opposed to there--at being able to use a mouse at all, or remap your weapon groups, or customize keys, or whatever.)

That means it's up to PGI to determine what level of ease of use/efficiency/whatever is acceptable. They've decided that firing a weapon at an optimum rate is an acceptable use for a macro, while using an aimbot to always hit your target is not acceptable. The difference, quite frankly, is whatever PGI says. And if you ask a lot of people, it makes a whole lot of sense.

Edited by Mackman, 21 January 2013 - 10:55 AM.

[Kraven Kor]

You can't make macros of the "magic mouse" variety an exploit.

All the Razer Naga does, is have one of their buttons press several buttons in succession - program it to, say, press the right control twice, then right arrow, then right control twice, etc.

Macros that actually control the game for you are another story, but just keypress macros to make a multi-key combination occur automatically are almost impossible to tell apart from a person actually pressing those keys manually.

[NitroDev]

Magnets, how do they work?

[Tikkamasala]

Thomas Dziegielewski, on 21 January 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

Well, not to me anyways. You can always teach yourself to shoot every 1.09s and never jam. Plus I have no idea how we could stop it in the first place

You "could" monitor the timing and compare it to the expected distribution for a human being, but then again that sounds awfully complicated for something minor like these kinds of macros.

The best way is probably to not require perfect timing, constant or continuous button presses when designing the interface. Like someone else suggested how about a non-jamming UAC as long as you hold down the trigger and a jam chance for double taps.

[Bommer]

From my point of view, The people who are complaining about the use of macros, are just jealous of the people who do use them. That jealousy is probably caused by the fact that the complainers lack the skill, ability, or knowledge to write a functioning macro.

I am opposed to macros that are used to circumvent the TOS or EULA, but, macros that enhance game play, or simplify mundane tasks, are useful TOOLS that everyone has access to, and I have no problem with those, as I use them myself. In all honesty, I take pride in the fact that I can write functioning macros that will do what I want them to.

[Mystere]

People here who complain about macros will abolutely hate my neurohelmet. Mouse, keyboards, and monitors are so 20th century ( ), and mech pods are so 2012 ( ).

Besides, where do we draw the line:

• el-cheapo mouse and keyboard vs. Logitech G13/G19/G500
  
• el-cheapo graphics card vs. ATI 7970
  
• 1024x768 vs 2560x1600 monitors
  
• Q6600 vs. i7-3960X CPU
  
• dial-up vs. broadband
  
• text vs. voice communications ( )
  
• PUGs vs. organized teams ( )

Edited by Mystere, 21 January 2013 - 11:58 AM.

[Psiclone]

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.

IG 88, on 21 January 2013 - 08:56 AM, said:

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

I'll go find a rock and place it on the "6" Key on my keyboard. I hope this isn't considered hacking.

[The Cheese]

Kraven Kor, on 21 January 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

Macros that actually control the game for you are another story, but just keypress macros to make a multi-key combination occur automatically are almost impossible to tell apart from a person actually pressing those keys manually.

Where do you draw the line? At some point, someone has to press a button to start that auto-play macro going.

If I had a macro that:
Pressed "R"
wait 3 seconds
Pressed "whatever weapon group I have assigned to my LRMS"
It seems like most people would be OK with that.

But what if I had one that:
Pressed "R"
Move my reticle to an enemy target
Wait 3 seconds
Pressed "LRM weapon group key"
Would people still be OK with that?

I could argue that any macro that presses more than one key is being used to "control the game for you".

For example, in Starcraft 2, a macro that presses

1+s+z+z+z+z+z (select hatchery, select larva, spawn zergling x5)
would make me very unpopular amongst other players who knew about it.

Ok that was a bad example, but you get the idea.

Edited by The Cheese, 21 January 2013 - 12:30 PM.

[Truthstar]

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.

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.

Absolutely agree.

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.

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.

Of course using a macro in this aspect is cheating. This is why I have no respect for [REDACTED] as they actively use it.

Edited by Dakkath, 23 January 2013 - 09:47 AM.
Cleaned up

[Mjilaeck]

Truthstar, on 21 January 2013 - 12:42 PM, said:

Absolutely agree.




Of course using a macro in this aspect is cheating. This is why I have no respect for [REDACTED] as they actively use it.

I have to play on 100x100 resolution display. I demand that PGI limits all clients to 100x100 so that I'm on an even playing field! It's only fair.

Edited by Dakkath, 23 January 2013 - 09:47 AM.
quote cleanup

[Lemming]

So I say, let those who play with two hands 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 with one hand, and are only using two hands because they need them. Any wins they get in the game are due to using both of their hands, and never anything they themselves did or accomplished, since accomplishment is impossible for such as they.