|
On September 04 2009 13:18 zulu_nation8 wrote:
if having better hardware gives you a competitive edge significant enough to be categorized as unfair then YES. What the fuck is the problem?
Where do you draw the line then? Should all players in any serious setting be forced to have standardized hardware? How about the fact that varying hand sizes means certain people perform better with any given input device? What's the baseline? Is it the fault of the player with worse hardware or the better hardware, and who should be forced to adjust in order for it to be a fair game? What if the player with far inferior hardware uses macros to simulate performance like that of another player's?
|
On September 04 2009 13:25 armed_ wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2009 13:18 zulu_nation8 wrote:
if having better hardware gives you a competitive edge significant enough to be categorized as unfair then YES. What the fuck is the problem? Where do you draw the line then? Should all players in any serious setting be forced to have standardized hardware? How about the fact that varying hand sizes means certain people perform better with any given input device? What's the baseline? Is it the fault of the player with worse hardware or the better hardware, and who should be forced to adjust in order for it to be a fair game? What if the player with far inferior hardware uses macros to simulate performance like that of another player's?
All very good questions armed_ any answers?
|
integral last post dedicated to you.
You're mixing up stupid shit and what they actually do.
What does a gaming mouse do better than a track mouse? it makes you click better(supposedly), but is it significant enough to be considered an advantage? No because we all know gaming equipment is more about feel and comfort than about technology. Better technology does not necessarily = better performance.
What happens if the gaming mouse can make you 1a2a3a with a better response time? Than I would say it's an unfair advantage? Not gonna explain why because it's obvious.
So when you respond with retarded shit like, "this is comparable to using a better mouse." You are implicitly confusing the two assumptions as if they are both equal, when they are in fact, as I've just shown, not.
If you don't get it ask someone else.
|
On September 04 2009 11:04 wok wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2009 11:03 sexynugget wrote:On September 04 2009 10:49 dhe95 wrote:
This is using 3rd party programs to give you a small advantage. IMO that is still cheating. Couldn't anyone come and do this stuff though? I could, in the same way, argue that having a nice computer or a nice keyboard or a precise mouse is an unfair advantage. This. What I'm trying to say is that if you have a reallly nice mouse, this won't help you very much. If you have a shitty mouse, this will help you a lot. The only issue I see is that, in many cases, shitty mouse WITH this > (if only slightly) great mouse WITHOUT.
Just out of curiosity, how would a great mouse compare to a shitty mouse if both were using the program?
|
If this is about adding it to iccup launcher, that would be completely different. Sounds like it could be a useful addition.
|
On September 04 2009 13:30 NeVeR wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2009 11:04 wok wrote:On September 04 2009 11:03 sexynugget wrote:On September 04 2009 10:49 dhe95 wrote:
This is using 3rd party programs to give you a small advantage. IMO that is still cheating. Couldn't anyone come and do this stuff though? I could, in the same way, argue that having a nice computer or a nice keyboard or a precise mouse is an unfair advantage. This. What I'm trying to say is that if you have a reallly nice mouse, this won't help you very much. If you have a shitty mouse, this will help you a lot. The only issue I see is that, in many cases, shitty mouse WITH this > (if only slightly) great mouse WITHOUT. Just out of curiosity, how would a great mouse compare to a shitty mouse if both were using the program?
They would be identical. The mousedown response time across the board is about the same. The mouseup response time varies wildly.
|
On September 04 2009 13:25 armed_ wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2009 13:18 zulu_nation8 wrote:
if having better hardware gives you a competitive edge significant enough to be categorized as unfair then YES. What the fuck is the problem? Where do you draw the line then? Should all players in any serious setting be forced to have standardized hardware? How about the fact that varying hand sizes means certain people perform better with any given input device? What's the baseline? Is it the fault of the player with worse hardware or the better hardware, and who should be forced to adjust in order for it to be a fair game? What if the player with far inferior hardware uses macros to simulate performance like that of another player's?
Should all players in any serious setting be forced to have standardized hardware?
All players should have hardware which either has or does not have this feature. If you have a really good mouse that does not have this feature, then it obviously doesn't matter does it?
How about the fact that varying hand sizes means certain people perform better with any given input device?
how the fuck does this compare to wok's program?
I think the problem is you drastically overestimate the quality of gaming equipment with actually performing better/having skill.
You can have a mouse built by nasa that does not have wok's feature and it will not compare with the advantage it gives the player who has his own normal mouse that he's comfortable with but does have the feature. This is the line.
|
On September 04 2009 13:30 zulu_nation8 wrote:
integral last post dedicated to you.
You're mixing up stupid shit and what they actually do.
What does a gaming mouse do better than a track mouse? it makes you click better(supposedly), but is it significant enough to be considered an advantage? No because we all know gaming equipment is more about feel and comfort than about technology. Better technology does not necessarily = better performance.
What happens if the gaming mouse can make you 1a2a3a with a better response time? Than I would say it's an unfair advantage? Not gonna explain why because it's obvious.
So when you respond with retarded shit like, "this is comparable to using a better mouse." You are implicitly confusing the two assumptions as if they are both equal, when they are in fact, as I've just shown, not.
If you don't get it ask someone else.
I see your confusion here. Let me explain to you, again, exactly what I'm doing. I'm eliminating the mouseup delay on the mouse. I'm not magically making 1a2a3a faster if your fingers can't handle it. I'm just making it so that 1a2a3a on a shitty mouse works as though you're using a god-perfect mouse with <20 millisecond rebound time (which is about the rebound time emulated by this program). I haven't tested and because this isn't a standard specification, I can't say for certain if <20 ms rebound mice are on the market.
For a reference, my current crappy mouse is 150-200 ms. (which is too damn slow).
FYI: I might include a macro in the OP later that will test your rebound time.
|
You can have a mouse built by nasa that does not have wok's feature and it will not compare with the advantage it gives the player who has his own normal mouse that he's comfortable with but does have the feature ... unless it empirically gives a better advantage. Then what?
OMFG HAX
|
On September 04 2009 13:30 zulu_nation8 wrote:
What happens if the gaming mouse can make you 1a2a3a with a better response time?
On September 04 2009 13:35 zulu_nation8 wrote:
You can have a mouse built by nasa that does not have wok's feature and it will not compare with the advantage it gives the player who has his own normal mouse that he's comfortable with but does have the feature. This is the line.
I can't help but suspect that you don't really understand what this script does at all. It converts what might be a long click into an extremely short one. That's all. There are certainly plenty of mouses out there that rebound from a single click more than fast enough to make this completely redundant.
In fact, because it forces you to only do short clicks for a certain timeframe after pressing a or p, anyone using this is probably at a disadvantage to a player with a decent mouse. Any time you press a or p you're restricted from drag-selecting for a moment or so. I certainly wouldn't play with it, it's incredibly clumsy and limited.
~Wok beat me. ;<
|
After reading this thread it seems pretty obvious that zulu_nation8 and Sadist clearly just have different definitions of what includes hacking/cheating
On September 04 2009 13:18 zulu_nation8 wrote:
if having better hardware gives you a competitive edge significant enough to be categorized as unfair then YES. What the fuck is the problem?
Most people would disagree with you but is beside the point. I'd say it comes down to a couple of things. First, it doesn't make sense to qualify better hardware cheater. The problem with zulunations argument is that while better hardware is an advantage, it historically has not been considered an unfair one. Online ladder brackets do not have hardware requirements. In a similar vein, this script is far more fair than having better hardware since everyone can run this script, regardless of their computer.
Iccup admins should just come out and allow this "hack". If everyone can use it, it doesn't provide an advantage to anyone. This script, unlike maphacks and other cheating methods, is not anti competitive and just fixes an issue that should have been addressed by Blizzard years ago.
|
This isn't any worse than turning off windows' mouse acceleration by modifying the registry. I don't honestly see why there's any fuss at all, because it's a software issue that exculpates hardware limitations, rather than the other way around.
Is the difference incredibly noticeable?
|
On September 04 2009 13:36 wok wrote:FYI: I might include a macro in the OP later that will test your rebound time.
This would be interesting.
I am curious about something, which you might know since you've obviously thought a lot about input delays. Sometimes when I am playing Zerg and do a key sequence like 5sz6sz7sz, I find that one of the hatcheries' larvae didn't respond to the 'z' press (so they didn't start morphing zerglings). Could this be caused by a similar issue, since maybe the game isn't responding to the 's' quickly enough due to the keyup event being late?
|
So in short, this program will not give a good mouse any upgrades, but will improve the bad mouse?
Then yes, I misunderstood the advantages afforded by newer models. However I would still advocate to not release this program until it is implemented into iccup launcher or when both parties have the programs.
The question would then be, should you use the program even though your opponent might have a shitty mouse, but at the same he could have a much better mouse than you. Then I guess yea, it's up to you. But since this program will be used everywhere soon I guess it really doesn't matter.
|
This is exactly what happens. But as said much earlier in the thread, this doesn't hope to correct any problems of keyboard hotkeys. (at least not yet.)
|
Really good players who probably have all their mouse click timings memorized for the mouse they use might not want to use this. (It shouldn't be forced on, should be an option to disable in the launcher)
|
This line in the op about how "every modern rts has fixed this" and "this is a serious flaw in bw's programming" is bs imo. Every modern rts has done alot of things to earn them total disprespect and indifference.
If the software is the same for everyone, it's fair. The only issue is that it's harder, for everyone, to alternate quickly between keypresses/clicks. I think this is just another one of those minor complications to starcraft that, minorly, make the game what it is (great). It is a skill, just like playing piano; the closer you can space notes Without overlap, the cleaner a sound you can produce. That's an appretiable skill, and it's fair. Why remove it?
I don't even feel a need to draw attention to the point of players being unequal in their exposure to and thus use of this third party mod. There's no reason why the game should be changed this way, for anybody or everybody.
|
On September 04 2009 13:55 Nevuk wrote:
Really good players who probably have all their mouse click timings memorized for the mouse they use might not want to use this. (It shouldn't be forced on, should be an option to disable in the launcher)
You guys are smearing my stuff! It's good, I promise. there is no "timing" memorized. It's just "as fast as I can that it'll still register."
|
On September 04 2009 13:40 armed_ wrote:
In fact, because it forces you to only do short clicks for a certain timeframe after pressing a or p, anyone using this is probably at a disadvantage to a player with a decent mouse. Any time you press a or p you're restricted from drag-selecting for a moment or so.
wok can you comment on this? If what he said is true, then the program doesn't seem very useful.
|
wok you have a knack for naming your thread titles provocatively and then wondering why people flame in them 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
