|
On September 04 2009 13:03 zulu_nation8 wrote:
pretty much the same in terms of starcraft.
Wok I think this is a nice program you made, and it will drastically improve gameplay. It's comparable to latency changer. But until Blizzard or ICCUP or someone implements the code and standardizes its use, people should not use it without an explicit agreement between both players.
But dude. You don't msg the guy in the chat asking what mouse he has, and quit if its a razor or something do you?
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.
Are these assumptions or do you have some kind of backup? Either way. I'm not totally against your argument I just think this is a step up for SCBW not a step down, and it's nothing to fear.
|
On September 04 2009 20:26 lazz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2009 12:56 armed_ wrote:On September 04 2009 12:48 lazz wrote:
i honestly don't give a shit if my opponent is playing with one less key on the keyboard. i do care if he's running a script in the background which lets him more efficiently/easily execute commands in the game. You act as if there's some magic boundary between the computer and its peripherals that makes input modification on one side absolutely okay but a cardinal sin on the other. If a macro that gives you a click mouseup action is not okay, why is a good-quality mouse that's simply mechanically built to rebound quickly okay? It gives exactly the same advantage(actually moreso since it provides greater control.) Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting. you got it exactly right. running scripts on the software side of things is hacking. having good physical hardware is not. of course there's 0 tolerance, of course it's a cardinal sin. as soon as we start running scripts to fix "a serious flaw in the way BW was programmed" what's next? fixing a serious flaw in how many units we can select? fixing a serious problem in only being able to run the game in a shitty low resolution? this is the best place to draw the line. not to mention it's just terrible for the game if suddenly this rebound fix becomes so widespread that everyone is using it, forcing everyone else to get it etc. prisoner's dilemma. just because we could both run the script to improve our game doesn't mean we should. i like my starcraft the way it is right now thank you very much. edit: "Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting." hahahah omg you have to be kidding me. you're justifying using something simply because it's undetectable and unenforceable? awesome logic bro
wow, you're dumb too. so if I make myself an own Mouse driver with exactly this behaviour its not cheating because its hardware? or is that to much software for you? so i should go and link an FPGA between Mouse,KeyB and the USB-Port and simulate this behaviour? or is this again to much software? should i build this behaviour with descreet logic chips? you dont get the point, so it would be the best to either get it or just shut the fuck up.
On September 04 2009 22:22 G.s)NarutO wrote:
If everyone could use it it would be good, this way its just a hack for me because as the OP said, it gives you a competetive edge.
another candidate for the "DUMB" stamp on his forehead. it does give you as much of a competitive edge as a good mouse you can buy in a store does. so if you're against this software you should also consider this mouse you can buy and play with as a "hack".
|
As far as I'm concerned. This is NOT a hack!
Let me explain why. A few months ago, I posted on a thread called "Odd delay with hotkeys" (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=89988¤tpage=2), in which I stated that I too noticed the problem the OP is stating when playing on Windows but NOT when playing on Mac (on mac I can 1a2a3a4a as fast as I can and never miss a control group).
How could removing this event buffer problem be a hack, if playing starcraft in a mac is not a hack and you don't have this issue there? Are we mac users hackers?
So yeah, I wouldn't call it a hack, I'd just call it a plugin that removes this "Windows only" problem.
|
This is an interesting discussion, about what constitutes cheating. I was on the fence, myself: reading the different opinions posted, I was seeing both sides of it. But after thinking about it, it seems to me that perhaps the different definitions given are missing the point.
Many of the distinctions being drawn have to do with modifying game memory vs. not modifying the memory, or simulable by hardware vs. not simulable by hardware. These distinctions may be more or less convincing, but I think that the most important distinction to draw is a fuzzier one: would the opponent care if he knew.
After all, the most essential part of cheating is that something - not covered by the rules--i.e. something that the opponent has a right not to expect
- that gives one an advantage in the game--i.e. something that the opponent might reasonably decline to play against
- is done without the opponent's knowledge/consent.
If both sides agree to play with a hack on, it may not be a standard game of Starcraft, but few people, if any, would say that someone is cheating. Even if the agreement is to let only one of the players use a hack, as long as both have agreed on this, it is doubtful that anyone would consider the "hacking" player a cheater.
In the example given of "better hardware", I think that the salient points are
1) Is it likely that the opponent cares? and, relatedly,
2) If he does care, on whom is the burden to stipulate the details under which the game is being played.
Since most people accept the possibility and associated slight handicap of having a worse mouse than their opponent, it is fair to presume that they do not object to this, and furthermore, that if they did, it should be their responsibility to stipulate it before the game ("microsoft mouse only").
In this case, where the code is new, and that presumption may not exist, the question becomes, "If I told my opponent before the game that I am using this script, would he still agree to play the game?" If the answer is a presumptive "yes", it is fair to use it. If it is a presumptive "no", it is not fair to use it. If the answer is in doubt, why not ask the question explicitly?
In fact, I believe that this question is a litmus test for any "hack" or "cheat". Questions of how the hack works, or whether there is a "legal" equivalent, while tangentially relevant, blur the essential issue of whether the opponent can be presumed to accept his handicap. The ethically wrong thing about cheating is NOT the modification (if any) to Starcraft, nor yet the advantage thereby obtained, but rather the deception of using it under false pretenses.
|
On September 04 2009 22:27 WhuazGoodJaggah wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2009 20:26 lazz wrote:On September 04 2009 12:56 armed_ wrote:On September 04 2009 12:48 lazz wrote:
i honestly don't give a shit if my opponent is playing with one less key on the keyboard. i do care if he's running a script in the background which lets him more efficiently/easily execute commands in the game. You act as if there's some magic boundary between the computer and its peripherals that makes input modification on one side absolutely okay but a cardinal sin on the other. If a macro that gives you a click mouseup action is not okay, why is a good-quality mouse that's simply mechanically built to rebound quickly okay? It gives exactly the same advantage(actually moreso since it provides greater control.) Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting. you got it exactly right. running scripts on the software side of things is hacking. having good physical hardware is not. of course there's 0 tolerance, of course it's a cardinal sin. as soon as we start running scripts to fix "a serious flaw in the way BW was programmed" what's next? fixing a serious flaw in how many units we can select? fixing a serious problem in only being able to run the game in a shitty low resolution? this is the best place to draw the line. not to mention it's just terrible for the game if suddenly this rebound fix becomes so widespread that everyone is using it, forcing everyone else to get it etc. prisoner's dilemma. just because we could both run the script to improve our game doesn't mean we should. i like my starcraft the way it is right now thank you very much. edit: "Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting." hahahah omg you have to be kidding me. you're justifying using something simply because it's undetectable and unenforceable? awesome logic bro wow, you're dumb too. so if I make myself an own Mouse driver with exactly this behaviour its not cheating because its hardware? or is that to much software for you? so i should go and link an FPGA between Mouse,KeyB and the USB-Port and simulate this behaviour? or is this again to much software? should i build this behaviour with descreet logic chips? you dont get the point, so it would be the best to either get it or just shut the fuck up.
No, YOU don't get the point. How about you don't fucking automate this behaviour and learn it yourself? You have ~4-5 minutes of just spamming your main hotkey/left click an SCV. How hard can it be, just make sure you're not holding the mouse button while pushing 1 or w/e. This is CLEARLY cheating to the same degree as making MBS scripts, because it is exactly that, a script. Someone needs to start throwing bans around in this thread, too many hack-supporters.
|
On September 04 2009 22:14 Too_MuchZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2009 22:05 Sadist wrote:On September 04 2009 20:26 lazz wrote:On September 04 2009 12:56 armed_ wrote:On September 04 2009 12:48 lazz wrote:
i honestly don't give a shit if my opponent is playing with one less key on the keyboard. i do care if he's running a script in the background which lets him more efficiently/easily execute commands in the game. You act as if there's some magic boundary between the computer and its peripherals that makes input modification on one side absolutely okay but a cardinal sin on the other. If a macro that gives you a click mouseup action is not okay, why is a good-quality mouse that's simply mechanically built to rebound quickly okay? It gives exactly the same advantage(actually moreso since it provides greater control.) Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting. you got it exactly right. running scripts on the software side of things is hacking. having good physical hardware is not. of course there's 0 tolerance, of course it's a cardinal sin. as soon as we start running scripts to fix "a serious flaw in the way BW was programmed" what's next? fixing a serious flaw in how many units we can select? fixing a serious problem in only being able to run the game in a shitty low resolution? this is the best place to draw the line. not to mention it's just terrible for the game if suddenly this rebound fix becomes so widespread that everyone is using it, forcing everyone else to get it etc. prisoner's dilemma. just because we could both run the script to improve our game doesn't mean we should. i like my starcraft the way it is right now thank you very much. edit: "Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting." hahahah omg you have to be kidding me. you're justifying using something simply because it's undetectable and unenforceable? awesome logic bro You are a moron. So you can buy your way out of a problem if you have the time and money and thats ok. But a simple fix that ANYONE CAN USE IF THEY CHOOSE TO is CHEATING AND HACKING AND BAD. People like you who somehow think that the shitty programing in bw make the game what it is are fucking dumb. How about we allow people on iccup to leave games before 2 minutes and not get a loss if you scout their cheese? AFTERALL BLIZZARD CODED 2 MINUTES INTO THE WIN/LOSS SCREEN. You really must not understand what this does. Its making the fucking mouse work the way its supposed to. You have to run out and get the fix? No you dont......play on the fucked up coding if you want nobody is stopping you. Everyone plays on lan lat now. Did you bitch when you had to go out and download the iccup launcher or chaos? Calm down. Anyways I am waiting to Iccup to add it to their launcher, if they don't add I just continue playing way its right now. I am not too much hassle adding too much extra stuff when I play broodwar, just iccup laucher is enough for me right now.
i guess thats the proper way to go, and since wok is willing to give away the source-code of an unsigged version if its allowed, i dont see any trouble for iccup to implement this as additional feature (added to Chaos/LL), if they want to ofc
...on another note, totally non-StarCraft: i guess you could write a program that provides a generic script and a UI in which non-code-crafty ppl can alter the script to whatever there needs, thus generating a program that would make godly (and expensive) mouses obsolete by 'software-patching'... (just a thought, results could be impressive)
thx anyways for sharing information 
|
On September 04 2009 22:34 Adeny wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2009 22:27 WhuazGoodJaggah wrote:On September 04 2009 20:26 lazz wrote:On September 04 2009 12:56 armed_ wrote:On September 04 2009 12:48 lazz wrote:
i honestly don't give a shit if my opponent is playing with one less key on the keyboard. i do care if he's running a script in the background which lets him more efficiently/easily execute commands in the game. You act as if there's some magic boundary between the computer and its peripherals that makes input modification on one side absolutely okay but a cardinal sin on the other. If a macro that gives you a click mouseup action is not okay, why is a good-quality mouse that's simply mechanically built to rebound quickly okay? It gives exactly the same advantage(actually moreso since it provides greater control.) Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting. you got it exactly right. running scripts on the software side of things is hacking. having good physical hardware is not. of course there's 0 tolerance, of course it's a cardinal sin. as soon as we start running scripts to fix "a serious flaw in the way BW was programmed" what's next? fixing a serious flaw in how many units we can select? fixing a serious problem in only being able to run the game in a shitty low resolution? this is the best place to draw the line. not to mention it's just terrible for the game if suddenly this rebound fix becomes so widespread that everyone is using it, forcing everyone else to get it etc. prisoner's dilemma. just because we could both run the script to improve our game doesn't mean we should. i like my starcraft the way it is right now thank you very much. edit: "Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting." hahahah omg you have to be kidding me. you're justifying using something simply because it's undetectable and unenforceable? awesome logic bro wow, you're dumb too. so if I make myself an own Mouse driver with exactly this behaviour its not cheating because its hardware? or is that to much software for you? so i should go and link an FPGA between Mouse,KeyB and the USB-Port and simulate this behaviour? or is this again to much software? should i build this behaviour with descreet logic chips? you dont get the point, so it would be the best to either get it or just shut the fuck up. No, YOU don't get the point. How about you don't fucking automate this behaviour and learn it yourself? You have ~4-5 minutes of just spamming your main hotkey/left click an SCV. How hard can it be, just make sure you're not holding the mouse button while pushing 1 or w/e. This is CLEARLY cheating to the same degree as making MBS scripts, because it is exactly that, a script. Someone needs to start throwing bans around in this thread, too many hack-supporters.
Yay some dipshit is crying for mods to ban people who have been here for years. Read the fucking thread before you post jesus christ. HARDWARE DOES THE SAME THING.
|
On September 04 2009 22:34 Adeny wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2009 22:27 WhuazGoodJaggah wrote:On September 04 2009 20:26 lazz wrote:On September 04 2009 12:56 armed_ wrote:On September 04 2009 12:48 lazz wrote:
i honestly don't give a shit if my opponent is playing with one less key on the keyboard. i do care if he's running a script in the background which lets him more efficiently/easily execute commands in the game. You act as if there's some magic boundary between the computer and its peripherals that makes input modification on one side absolutely okay but a cardinal sin on the other. If a macro that gives you a click mouseup action is not okay, why is a good-quality mouse that's simply mechanically built to rebound quickly okay? It gives exactly the same advantage(actually moreso since it provides greater control.) Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting. you got it exactly right. running scripts on the software side of things is hacking. having good physical hardware is not. of course there's 0 tolerance, of course it's a cardinal sin. as soon as we start running scripts to fix "a serious flaw in the way BW was programmed" what's next? fixing a serious flaw in how many units we can select? fixing a serious problem in only being able to run the game in a shitty low resolution? this is the best place to draw the line. not to mention it's just terrible for the game if suddenly this rebound fix becomes so widespread that everyone is using it, forcing everyone else to get it etc. prisoner's dilemma. just because we could both run the script to improve our game doesn't mean we should. i like my starcraft the way it is right now thank you very much. edit: "Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting." hahahah omg you have to be kidding me. you're justifying using something simply because it's undetectable and unenforceable? awesome logic bro wow, you're dumb too. so if I make myself an own Mouse driver with exactly this behaviour its not cheating because its hardware? or is that to much software for you? so i should go and link an FPGA between Mouse,KeyB and the USB-Port and simulate this behaviour? or is this again to much software? should i build this behaviour with descreet logic chips? you dont get the point, so it would be the best to either get it or just shut the fuck up. No, YOU don't get the point. How about you don't fucking automate this behaviour and learn it yourself? You have ~4-5 minutes of just spamming your main hotkey/left click an SCV. How hard can it be, just make sure you're not holding the mouse button while pushing 1 or w/e. This is CLEARLY cheating to the same degree as making MBS scripts, because it is exactly that, a script. Someone needs to start throwing bans around in this thread, too many hack-supporters.
muahahaha, another candidate for the "DUMB" stamp on his forehead.
there is 2 cases:
Case A:
you went to an electronicstore yesterday and bought a brand new gaming mouse. you install it and suddenly you feel that your 1a2a3a works way better.
Case B:
you went on tl.net and found an amazing thread about a software which fixes an issue with mous input. after using that program you feel that 1a2a3a works way better.
now explain me mister, why is "Case B" cheating and "Case A" is not? its both doing the exact same thing, except that you need to spend money and waste energy for "Case A"?
|
On September 04 2009 22:42 WhuazGoodJaggah wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2009 22:34 Adeny wrote:On September 04 2009 22:27 WhuazGoodJaggah wrote:On September 04 2009 20:26 lazz wrote:On September 04 2009 12:56 armed_ wrote:On September 04 2009 12:48 lazz wrote:
i honestly don't give a shit if my opponent is playing with one less key on the keyboard. i do care if he's running a script in the background which lets him more efficiently/easily execute commands in the game. You act as if there's some magic boundary between the computer and its peripherals that makes input modification on one side absolutely okay but a cardinal sin on the other. If a macro that gives you a click mouseup action is not okay, why is a good-quality mouse that's simply mechanically built to rebound quickly okay? It gives exactly the same advantage(actually moreso since it provides greater control.) Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting. you got it exactly right. running scripts on the software side of things is hacking. having good physical hardware is not. of course there's 0 tolerance, of course it's a cardinal sin. as soon as we start running scripts to fix "a serious flaw in the way BW was programmed" what's next? fixing a serious flaw in how many units we can select? fixing a serious problem in only being able to run the game in a shitty low resolution? this is the best place to draw the line. not to mention it's just terrible for the game if suddenly this rebound fix becomes so widespread that everyone is using it, forcing everyone else to get it etc. prisoner's dilemma. just because we could both run the script to improve our game doesn't mean we should. i like my starcraft the way it is right now thank you very much. edit: "Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting." hahahah omg you have to be kidding me. you're justifying using something simply because it's undetectable and unenforceable? awesome logic bro wow, you're dumb too. so if I make myself an own Mouse driver with exactly this behaviour its not cheating because its hardware? or is that to much software for you? so i should go and link an FPGA between Mouse,KeyB and the USB-Port and simulate this behaviour? or is this again to much software? should i build this behaviour with descreet logic chips? you dont get the point, so it would be the best to either get it or just shut the fuck up. No, YOU don't get the point. How about you don't fucking automate this behaviour and learn it yourself? You have ~4-5 minutes of just spamming your main hotkey/left click an SCV. How hard can it be, just make sure you're not holding the mouse button while pushing 1 or w/e. This is CLEARLY cheating to the same degree as making MBS scripts, because it is exactly that, a script. Someone needs to start throwing bans around in this thread, too many hack-supporters. muahahaha, another candidate for the "DUMB" stamp on his forehead. there is 2 cases: Case A: you went to an electronicstore yesterday and bought a brand new gaming mouse. you install it and suddenly you feel that your 1a2a3a works way better. Case B: you went on tl.net and found an amazing thread about a software which fixes an issue with mous input. after using that program you feel that 1a2a3a works way better. now explain me mister, why is "Case B" cheating and "Case A" is not? its both doing the exact same thing, except that you need to spend money and waste energy for "Case A"?
No. Okay, I'll try to make you understand but it's probably going to be a waste of time. This script will make the computer (close to) instantly perform a second task, after task A (mouse click) is performed. Not only can it do this at speeds you won't be able to get consistantly with a mouse (I'm talking real clicks, not you tapping the button to try to get a low score on the rebound test or whatever). If we were to use a similar function, but replace the second task with say, pressing the M button instead of left click again, you have an insta-marine auto-macro button. You could use it to create all kinds of silly shit, like auto 1a2a3a4a with the press of a button, and the only difference would be changing scan-codes or w/e in the script, or adding additional ones.
Using software SCRIPTS that automatically PERFORM ACTIONS to compensate for bad hardware is NOT OKAY. You have to draw the line somewhere and TL's line is at zero tolerence.
Now excuse me while I go smash my keyboard with a shoe until it's so broken there's only 5 buttons left so that I can create auto-macros for all of them and get A+ macro.
|
On September 04 2009 23:12 Adeny wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2009 22:42 WhuazGoodJaggah wrote:On September 04 2009 22:34 Adeny wrote:On September 04 2009 22:27 WhuazGoodJaggah wrote:On September 04 2009 20:26 lazz wrote:On September 04 2009 12:56 armed_ wrote:On September 04 2009 12:48 lazz wrote:
i honestly don't give a shit if my opponent is playing with one less key on the keyboard. i do care if he's running a script in the background which lets him more efficiently/easily execute commands in the game. You act as if there's some magic boundary between the computer and its peripherals that makes input modification on one side absolutely okay but a cardinal sin on the other. If a macro that gives you a click mouseup action is not okay, why is a good-quality mouse that's simply mechanically built to rebound quickly okay? It gives exactly the same advantage(actually moreso since it provides greater control.) Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting. you got it exactly right. running scripts on the software side of things is hacking. having good physical hardware is not. of course there's 0 tolerance, of course it's a cardinal sin. as soon as we start running scripts to fix "a serious flaw in the way BW was programmed" what's next? fixing a serious flaw in how many units we can select? fixing a serious problem in only being able to run the game in a shitty low resolution? this is the best place to draw the line. not to mention it's just terrible for the game if suddenly this rebound fix becomes so widespread that everyone is using it, forcing everyone else to get it etc. prisoner's dilemma. just because we could both run the script to improve our game doesn't mean we should. i like my starcraft the way it is right now thank you very much. edit: "Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting." hahahah omg you have to be kidding me. you're justifying using something simply because it's undetectable and unenforceable? awesome logic bro wow, you're dumb too. so if I make myself an own Mouse driver with exactly this behaviour its not cheating because its hardware? or is that to much software for you? so i should go and link an FPGA between Mouse,KeyB and the USB-Port and simulate this behaviour? or is this again to much software? should i build this behaviour with descreet logic chips? you dont get the point, so it would be the best to either get it or just shut the fuck up. No, YOU don't get the point. How about you don't fucking automate this behaviour and learn it yourself? You have ~4-5 minutes of just spamming your main hotkey/left click an SCV. How hard can it be, just make sure you're not holding the mouse button while pushing 1 or w/e. This is CLEARLY cheating to the same degree as making MBS scripts, because it is exactly that, a script. Someone needs to start throwing bans around in this thread, too many hack-supporters. muahahaha, another candidate for the "DUMB" stamp on his forehead. there is 2 cases: Case A: you went to an electronicstore yesterday and bought a brand new gaming mouse. you install it and suddenly you feel that your 1a2a3a works way better. Case B: you went on tl.net and found an amazing thread about a software which fixes an issue with mous input. after using that program you feel that 1a2a3a works way better. now explain me mister, why is "Case B" cheating and "Case A" is not? its both doing the exact same thing, except that you need to spend money and waste energy for "Case A"? No. Okay, I'll try to make you understand but it's probably going to be a waste of time. This script will make the computer (close to) instantly perform a second task, after task A (mouse click) is performed. Not only can it do this at speeds you won't be able to get consistantly with a mouse (I'm talking real clicks, not you tapping the button to try to get a low score on the rebound test or whatever). If we were to use a similar function, but replace the second task with say, pressing the M button instead of left click again, you have an insta-marine auto-macro button. You could use it to create all kinds of silly shit, like auto 1a2a3a4a with the press of a button, and the only difference would be changing scan-codes or w/e in the script, or adding additional ones. Using software SCRIPTS that automatically PERFORM ACTIONS to compensate for bad hardware is NOT OKAY. You have to draw the line somewhere and TL's line is at zero tolerence. Now excuse me while I go smash my keyboard with a shoe until it's so broken there's only 5 buttons left so that I can create auto-macros for all of them and get A+ macro.
dude, I perfectly understand what this script does and what it is compensating.
but what you fail to understand is, that software is constantly used to perform tasks such as this one. if you want to filter out a frequency of a signal you can either make a bandpassfilter with an OPAMP, some resistors and some capacitors, or you can simply process it in software which saves you hardware, it does the exact same thing. software is very powerful in such cases as it saves a lot of energy and often also distortion of signals (whatever they may be).
you accept it if someone puts a spring into his mouse but you dont allow someone to put that spring into the mouse with software.
|
Face it, kid - you're not a pro
Micro's poor and mouse is slow
Spam your clicks - it's all for show
APM's still hella low
Lose to noobs when toe-to-toe
But you want them all to know
That you're not an average Joe
Hacking's just the way to go.
Yeah, wok. I'm calling you out 
+ Show Spoiler +
EDIT: Lesson learned - don't post in a thread where hotheaded idiots are locked in a heated battle over next to nothing.
|
On September 04 2009 23:12 Adeny wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2009 22:42 WhuazGoodJaggah wrote:On September 04 2009 22:34 Adeny wrote:On September 04 2009 22:27 WhuazGoodJaggah wrote:On September 04 2009 20:26 lazz wrote:On September 04 2009 12:56 armed_ wrote:On September 04 2009 12:48 lazz wrote:
i honestly don't give a shit if my opponent is playing with one less key on the keyboard. i do care if he's running a script in the background which lets him more efficiently/easily execute commands in the game. You act as if there's some magic boundary between the computer and its peripherals that makes input modification on one side absolutely okay but a cardinal sin on the other. If a macro that gives you a click mouseup action is not okay, why is a good-quality mouse that's simply mechanically built to rebound quickly okay? It gives exactly the same advantage(actually moreso since it provides greater control.) Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting. you got it exactly right. running scripts on the software side of things is hacking. having good physical hardware is not. of course there's 0 tolerance, of course it's a cardinal sin. as soon as we start running scripts to fix "a serious flaw in the way BW was programmed" what's next? fixing a serious flaw in how many units we can select? fixing a serious problem in only being able to run the game in a shitty low resolution? this is the best place to draw the line. not to mention it's just terrible for the game if suddenly this rebound fix becomes so widespread that everyone is using it, forcing everyone else to get it etc. prisoner's dilemma. just because we could both run the script to improve our game doesn't mean we should. i like my starcraft the way it is right now thank you very much. edit: "Not to mention that realistically this is completely undetectable if done right, so it's simply not feasible to enforce a ban on it in any online setting." hahahah omg you have to be kidding me. you're justifying using something simply because it's undetectable and unenforceable? awesome logic bro wow, you're dumb too. so if I make myself an own Mouse driver with exactly this behaviour its not cheating because its hardware? or is that to much software for you? so i should go and link an FPGA between Mouse,KeyB and the USB-Port and simulate this behaviour? or is this again to much software? should i build this behaviour with descreet logic chips? you dont get the point, so it would be the best to either get it or just shut the fuck up. No, YOU don't get the point. How about you don't fucking automate this behaviour and learn it yourself? You have ~4-5 minutes of just spamming your main hotkey/left click an SCV. How hard can it be, just make sure you're not holding the mouse button while pushing 1 or w/e. This is CLEARLY cheating to the same degree as making MBS scripts, because it is exactly that, a script. Someone needs to start throwing bans around in this thread, too many hack-supporters. muahahaha, another candidate for the "DUMB" stamp on his forehead. there is 2 cases: Case A: you went to an electronicstore yesterday and bought a brand new gaming mouse. you install it and suddenly you feel that your 1a2a3a works way better. Case B: you went on tl.net and found an amazing thread about a software which fixes an issue with mous input. after using that program you feel that 1a2a3a works way better. now explain me mister, why is "Case B" cheating and "Case A" is not? its both doing the exact same thing, except that you need to spend money and waste energy for "Case A"? No. Okay, I'll try to make you understand but it's probably going to be a waste of time. This script will make the computer (close to) instantly perform a second task, after task A (mouse click) is performed. Not only can it do this at speeds you won't be able to get consistantly with a mouse (I'm talking real clicks, not you tapping the button to try to get a low score on the rebound test or whatever). If we were to use a similar function, but replace the second task with say, pressing the M button instead of left click again, you have an insta-marine auto-macro button. You could use it to create all kinds of silly shit, like auto 1a2a3a4a with the press of a button, and the only difference would be changing scan-codes or w/e in the script, or adding additional ones. Using software SCRIPTS that automatically PERFORM ACTIONS to compensate for bad hardware is NOT OKAY. You have to draw the line somewhere and TL's line is at zero tolerence. Now excuse me while I go smash my keyboard with a shoe until it's so broken there's only 5 buttons left so that I can create auto-macros for all of them and get A+ macro.
You are completely ignoring his argument..... hardware vs software. One costs money and gives and advantage, the other is free and gives an advantage. Either way there is an advantage. So what is the problem?
|
Adeny: If someone hacks in a macro key, they do less work than I do for the same action. That's a problem. That's why programmable keyboards/mice aren't allowed in tourneys.
This hack doesn't do that. Unless, of course, you're complaining that people using it don't have to let go of their mouse button as quickly as you, even though they still need to let go of it before they perform their next action. And if that's what you're saying, I think you're a very marginal case. Very few people would care about that.
|
The most important question is: Do progamers use a 'fix' like this?
Which of course leads to...
Why not? If they don't need it, why do we? What resources are they privy to that we are not?
Obviously this is way different than LAN latency. If the top competitive gaming occurred on iccup for some weird reason, then the best players would most certainly want LAN latency. They might not, however, want/need to use this. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
|
No, you're still not catching it. By allowing a script made in AHKey, you're allowing all scripts made in AHKey. What your personal intention is with an AHKey script doesn't mean a rat's ass. How about I start playing with a maphack to practice my timings? Or use auto-macro scripts to ease the macro bit so I can focus on learning tactics in a game? I could probably make the latter in AHKey, and you wouldn't even know when playing me. It's not about hardware vs. software etc.
|
On September 04 2009 23:12 Adeny wrote:
No. Okay, I'll try to make you understand but it's probably going to be a waste of time. This script will make the computer (close to) instantly perform a second task, after task A (mouse click) is performed. Not only can it do this at speeds you won't be able to get consistantly with a mouse (I'm talking real clicks, not you tapping the button to try to get a low score on the rebound test or whatever). If we were to use a similar function, but replace the second task with say, pressing the M button instead of left click again, you have an insta-marine auto-macro button. You could use it to create all kinds of silly shit, like auto 1a2a3a4a with the press of a button, and the only difference would be changing scan-codes or w/e in the script, or adding additional ones.
I catch your point, but we are not talking about the lecity of a GENERAL PURPOSE script who can let you do basically what you want... we are discussing about this particular one. The "changin of scan-code or w/e" can be easily figured out.
On September 04 2009 23:12 Adeny wrote:
Using software SCRIPTS that automatically PERFORM ACTIONS to compensate for bad hardware is NOT OKAY.
I don't see why, if those "performed actions" act exactly as the better hardware do.
If there's no difference, why shouldn't be it ok?
On September 04 2009 23:12 Adeny wrote:
You have to draw the line somewhere and TL's line is at zero tolerence.
Now excuse me while I go smash my keyboard with a shoe until it's so broken there's only 5 buttons left so that I can create auto-macros for all of them and get A+ macro.
Your example simply doesn't fit.
You ask for a script that whould CLEARLY made the operations linked to your hipotetically 5 buttons be different by the ones linked to the same 5 buttons of another standard keyboard.
A player clicking with a good mouse does the same shit a player clicking with a bad one do, why should the second be penalized so? I don't see any problems to use a script to even the cases.
|
On September 05 2009 00:35 QibingZero wrote:
The most important question is: Do progamers use a 'fix' like this?
Which of course leads to...
Why not? If they don't need it, why do we? What resources are they privy to that we are not?
Obviously this is way different than LAN latency. If the top competitive gaming occurred on iccup for some weird reason, then the best players would most certainly want LAN latency. They might not, however, want/need to use this. Let's not compare apples and oranges.
they're privy to playing 10 hrs a day with coaches and im sure they have as nice of equipment as they so choose.
|
On September 05 2009 00:57 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2009 00:35 QibingZero wrote:
The most important question is: Do progamers use a 'fix' like this?
Which of course leads to...
Why not? If they don't need it, why do we? What resources are they privy to that we are not?
Obviously this is way different than LAN latency. If the top competitive gaming occurred on iccup for some weird reason, then the best players would most certainly want LAN latency. They might not, however, want/need to use this. Let's not compare apples and oranges. they're privy to playing 10 hrs a day with coaches and im sure they have as nice of equipment as they so choose.
Which usually ends up being cheaper mice/keyboards than most of us use to begin with. What is the explanation for this?
|
I think it should be put in the Iccup launcher.
|
I like it; there are some mouse drivers that allow the click to register instantly, so why would this be considered a hack?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
