Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Macros for pvp, respecing, grabbing huttballs. Legal?

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > PvP
Macros for pvp, respecing, grabbing huttballs. Legal?
First BioWare Post First BioWare Post

Doomsdaycomes's Avatar


Doomsdaycomes
06.21.2013 , 02:33 PM | #201
Quote: Originally Posted by funkiestj View Post
It is possible to create macros (e.g. a respec macro) that act at human speeds. Heck, I can even create a macro that puts some randomness in the delay between keycode events that are sent. My understanding of the ToS is that these are also prohibited. These would probably be harder to detect.

E.g. if I could record several attempts at respeccing from DPS to tank (including gear change), select the fastest and then play back an exact recording at the press of a single key that would most definitely be more convenient that actually respeccing manually each time. It is also a clear violation of the ToS.
At that point, yes you're still violating the ToS, and it would be hard to tell. Of course, you'd lose some of the advantage in using a macro if you had it do so at a human level.

That has little to do with Voice chat though, which is that it's not a program effecting ToR's programming and even if they rule it against the ToS, it's unenforceable. It can't be detected and if it is, there's no way to tell if you're using a voip for use with ToR> For the most part the only thing that would come of them ruling it against the ToS would be anti-voip people would dance for joy on the forums, before realize it didn't change a thing in game.
Player Responsibility: Players have the responsibility to strive for improvement before asking for changes.
Player Accountability: Insufficient credits, lack of gear, poor reputation, and inability to compete is the price of laziness, incompetence, and/or unwillingness.

JackNader's Avatar


JackNader
06.21.2013 , 02:46 PM | #202
Moral of the story - Bioware should create its own macro support.

funkiestj's Avatar


funkiestj
06.21.2013 , 03:02 PM | #203
Quote: Originally Posted by Doomsdaycomes View Post
That has little to do with Voice chat though, which is that it's not a program effecting ToR's programming and even if they rule it against the ToS, it's unenforceable. It can't be detected and if it is, there's no way to tell if you're using a voip for use with ToR> For the most part the only thing that would come of them ruling it against the ToS would be anti-voip people would dance for joy on the forums, before realize it didn't change a thing in game.
If Bioware's stance is that they are the MMO equivalent of Kim Jeon-Un then the rules exist at their whim and need no justification (all hail the glorious BW from which all things good flow, glorious leader and protector of the SWTOR-verse et cetera et cetera) and comparing a "incoming west" macro (prohibited) with voice chat is irrelevant. Dixitque Bioware fiat terms of service et facta est terms of service!

In Phillip's most recent post he offered justification why the "incoming west" macro is prohibited. Justification implies that there is logical rational and not mere caprice behind the rules. If the rules are intended to be sensible then the comparison with voice chat is vital to the discussion since voice chat is unstoppable by BW (I can run any of the 3 popular chat clients on my smart phone -- good luck detecting that. I can also hold a LAN party and use VOA technology [voice over air -- i.e. normal speech]).

Mr. Hat says "BW support is the best"!
I am a bad player, so what?

apocpe's Avatar


apocpe
06.21.2013 , 03:12 PM | #204
What about handicapped peeps who lost a hand or an Arm?

And this question is serious, very serious.
Apoc - pure Tank Guardian 4 life - Das Protektorat

Phillip_BW's Avatar


Phillip_BW
06.21.2013 , 03:15 PM | #205 This is the last staff post in this thread.  

Interesting approach there funkiestj.

I thought I was pretty clear that one input action must equal only one action in game, but obviously not - so please find below red X's next to the correct answers.

Enjoy!


Quote: Originally Posted by funkiestj View Post
Use case 1
  • keycode to ability bindings (guardian class)
    • 1 - dispatch
    • 2 - guardian slash
    • 3- strike
  • user presses the '1' key on his device
  • macro system (in response to the '1' key press) sends the keycodes 1, 2, 3 with no significant delay between keycodes
  • ability bound to 2 is cast, no other abilities are cast

[ ] allowed by ToS
[X] prohibited by ToS
[ ] example to clear enough to give a ruling


Use case 2
  • keycode to ability bindings (guardian class)
    • 1 - riposte (off GCD)
    • 2 - guardian slash
    • 3 - strike
  • user presses the '1' key on his device
  • macro system (in response to the '1' key press) sends the keycodes 1, 2, 3with no significant delay between keycodes
  • ability bound to 1 is cast (off GCD), ability bound to 2 is cast.

[ ] allowed by ToS
[X] prohibited by ToS
[ ] example to clear enough to give a ruling


Use case 3
  • user positions mouse over huttball spawn
  • user presses '1' on his keyboard
  • macro system sends a steam of <right click> events for approximately the next 2 seconds
  • user successfully picks up the huttball (a single action, n'est-pas?)

[ ] allowed by ToS
[X]prohibited by ToS
[ ] example to clear enough to give a ruling


Use case 4
  • keycode to ability bindings (guardian class)
    1. 1 - riposte (off GCD)
    2. 2 - guardian slash
    3. 3 - strike
  • user presses the '1' key on his device, macro system sends keycode 1, riposte is executed
  • as quickly as possible (0.011 seconds later?), user presses '1' again, macros system sends keycode 2, guardian slash is not executed because it is on cooldown
  • as quickly as possible (0.011 seconds later?), user presses '1' again, macro system sends keycode 3, strike ability is executed (it is never on cooldown, riposte did not trigger a GCD, it requires no mana)

[X] allowed by ToS
[ ] prohibited by ToS
[ ] example to clear enough to give a ruling

----

Phillip Holmes
SWTOR Head of Security

Exly's Avatar


Exly
06.21.2013 , 03:36 PM | #206
Quote: Originally Posted by Phillip_BW View Post


One click 'enter chat, type 'inc snow!', hit enter' text macros designed to warn others is completely against the ToS. You need to make a decision - do I take the time to type 'inc snow' to the ops group, or do I just keep fighting this person... Think of it as an evaluation on if you are using a tool that gives you an unfair advantage over somebody not using that same tool.

I agree that text macros should be against the TOS. I also agree with others who think that VOIP gives an even greater advantage to player's using it in warzones than the advantage obtained by players that use text macros. So, if text macros violate the TOS then the use of VOIP during warzones should also be considered a violation.

Think of it as an evaluation on if you are using a tool (like text macros or VOIP) that gives you an unfair advantage over somebody not using that same tool (like text macros and VOIP do).

thesadplanet's Avatar


thesadplanet
06.21.2013 , 03:37 PM | #207
Quote: Originally Posted by Phillip_BW View Post

Interesting approach there funkiestj.

I thought I was pretty clear that one input action must equal only one action in game, but obviously not - so please find below red X's next to the correct answers.

Enjoy!
i dont think anyone is questioning whether or not the things mentioned are against the TOS, I think the majority of people questioning what you are saying are asking WHY some of these things are against the Terms of service.

Your justification for disallowing text macros, for example, is utterly ridiculous. If the "decision" between calling out inc, or continuing to fight someone is part of the "skill" of PvP, then why are VOIP programs allowed?

Morde_'s Avatar


Morde_
06.21.2013 , 03:47 PM | #208
I've trained my pet parrot, Rufus, to watch my games and squawk into an open mic whenever I have incoming, so that I don't have to type OR talk, thus keeping 100% of my focus on the combat.

Is this automation, breaking the ToS?

Thanks for your clarity, Phillip. Your communication is greatly appreciated.
Scold
Quote: Originally Posted by LegendaryQuan View Post
I will also offer to duel your marauder, for any amount of money
Quote: Originally Posted by LegendaryQuan View Post
i dont have cold feet. im just not going to give away $300 walking into an unwinnable situation.
Biggest welch in Bastion history.
carried by jonie

funkiestj's Avatar


funkiestj
06.21.2013 , 03:50 PM | #209
Quote: Originally Posted by Phillip_BW View Post

Interesting approach there funkiestj.

I thought I was pretty clear that one input action must equal only one action in game, but obviously not - so please find below red X's next to the correct answers.

Enjoy!
I suspect the confusion comes from our different (?) definitions of "one action in game". To me "on action in game" means "one instant , cast or channelled ability is activated". I.e. by my understanding use case #1 is allowed because every time the user presses the '1' key, exactly one of {dispatch | guardian slash | strike} abilities gets invoked (i.e. does damage). CAVEAT: if no target is selected or in range then no ability is invoked.

I'm not sure what definition of "one action in game" is that results in use case #1 being prohibited.

Perhaps your definition of "one action in game" is "one keyboard key pressed never results in more than one keycode or mouse click event being sent to SWTOR". Mouse button clicks can map to keycode events and vice versa but there can never be a "one real world event (mouse click) becomes multiple software events (keycodes 1, 2, 3, right button click) being sent".

Too me, allowing use case 4 but disallowing use case 2 makes about as much sense as allowing voice chat but prohibiting a macro that sends "incoming west" in ops chat. (I.e. no sense at all)

Given that I am unable to follow your logic, developing a body of precedents I can refer to is exceedingly valuable to me.

RAZER NAGA COMMENTARY: I'm pretty sure that, given time, I can develop macros based on use case 4 using autohotkey. All useful macro features of the Razer Naga (and related products) are useless IMO. They are not capable of use case 4. All interesting uses of the Naga involve a single key/button press translating into multiple software events. E.g. pressing '1' on the mouse thumbpad sends keycodes for "123" in rapid succession.

If you can think of an interesting use of the Razer Naga's macro facility that is also allowed by the ToS please give an example!

Mr. Hat says "BW support is the best"!
I am a bad player, so what?

funkiestj's Avatar


funkiestj
06.21.2013 , 03:52 PM | #210
Quote: Originally Posted by Morde_ View Post
I've trained my pet parrot, Rufus, to watch my games and squawk into an open mic whenever I have incoming, so that I don't have to type OR talk, thus keeping 100% of my focus on the combat.
.
Do you perchance own a breeding pair?

Mr. Hat says "BW support is the best"!
I am a bad player, so what?