Forums » Suggestions
I'm a strong believer that although the exposed Lua API is great for modifying the interface and adding new functions that make managing things easier, it shouldn't be able to control any aspect of flight (movement was already removed). I personally consider shooting weapons to be included in "flight", and as such, the ability to fire weapons, engage mining beams, etc should also be removed.
Also as an after thought, the ability to jettison cargo should also be looked into. Yes it may make many miners unhappy, but is AFK mining till full of good ore/or forever part of the games design? I think it is not, and that's already been addressed once (when I used to jam down the j + a keys with a pen lid, it was considered bad and removed).
Yes, I'm an idiot. Yes I am a bad bad man. Now we got that out of the way, discuss!
Also as an after thought, the ability to jettison cargo should also be looked into. Yes it may make many miners unhappy, but is AFK mining till full of good ore/or forever part of the games design? I think it is not, and that's already been addressed once (when I used to jam down the j + a keys with a pen lid, it was considered bad and removed).
Yes, I'm an idiot. Yes I am a bad bad man. Now we got that out of the way, discuss!
Heck no. Goddamn purist! First prove how lua +shooting is hurting the game. I suspect you can't.
Where did I say it was hurting the game? I said I believe shooting is a form of flight control. And as the other means of controlling flight have been removed...
[edit]
If you do need an example of abuse though, just think about chainfire + hornet + charged cannons = infini fire + infini turbo.
[edit 2]
Another plugin which isn't public springs to mind. turretspam. Selects a turret, shoots missiles (its useless with anything but) at the current target, then hops back to pilot seat for a second + repeat. Does this in seconds so the trident owner never really loses control. (edited now i tried it)
[edit 3]
http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/1/30264
(if it was the same as autofire on Android, why isn't autofire available on PC?)
[edit]
If you do need an example of abuse though, just think about chainfire + hornet + charged cannons = infini fire + infini turbo.
[edit 2]
Another plugin which isn't public springs to mind. turretspam. Selects a turret, shoots missiles (its useless with anything but) at the current target, then hops back to pilot seat for a second + repeat. Does this in seconds so the trident owner never really loses control. (edited now i tried it)
[edit 3]
http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/1/30264
(if it was the same as autofire on Android, why isn't autofire available on PC?)
Does this in milliseconds so the trident owner never really loses control.
This is greatly exaggerated. The fastest you can reliably switch between the pilot's seat and a turret is about 1/3 of a second, which in game-time is a pretty big deal. If you try and go faster than that, bad things happen like your ship dropping out of turbo and controls getting stuck.
-100 to OP.
This would make it impossible for things like Chainfire or NFZ safety to exist while solving no gameplay problems.
If you want Tridents to use less missile turrets, put one of their turrets somewhere where an energy weapon can actually be useful.
This is greatly exaggerated. The fastest you can reliably switch between the pilot's seat and a turret is about 1/3 of a second, which in game-time is a pretty big deal. If you try and go faster than that, bad things happen like your ship dropping out of turbo and controls getting stuck.
-100 to OP.
This would make it impossible for things like Chainfire or NFZ safety to exist while solving no gameplay problems.
If you want Tridents to use less missile turrets, put one of their turrets somewhere where an energy weapon can actually be useful.
Why does chainfire need to exist? Do you use it? Can you not chainfire without plugins? As for NFZ saftey, that uses groups to disable weapons afaik, not shooting. Did you actually read the linked thread? This isn't about tridents, that was just an example for greeny.
[edit]
Also, if chainfire and turretspam are not a problem, why was dodge assist?
[edit 2]
No gameplay problems? I think 1 person using 4 clients to attack something IS a problem, and just as bad as tarrenty and his supposed dodge assist. That's just my opinion of course.
[edit]
Also, if chainfire and turretspam are not a problem, why was dodge assist?
[edit 2]
No gameplay problems? I think 1 person using 4 clients to attack something IS a problem, and just as bad as tarrenty and his supposed dodge assist. That's just my opinion of course.
-1 to OP.
None of the examples you listed bother me.
"if it was the same as autofire on Android, why isn't autofire available on PC?"
Probably because the devs didn't figure anybody on PC would actually want it? I have no problem with making autofire avialable on PC, so long as it's optional.
"(movement was already removed)"
"Where did I say it was hurting the game? I said I believe shooting is a form of flight control. And as the other means of controlling flight have been removed..."
Actually, only strafing and rotation were removed. Plugins can still control turbo, the brakes, and the FA-mode throttle. Clearly it is not part of the dev's agenda to completely remove any impact plugins might have on flight. Your argument basically amounts to "they missed a spot", but there are far too many "missed" spots for it to not have been intentional. So if you want it removed, you are going to have to show how it is harmful. If you can't, then it shouldn't be removed.
"This would make it impossible for things like Chainfire"
Not impossible, Arf, just uglier. You could still do it with aliases.
A better example of something that needs plugin-controlled shooting is using AnalogToDigital to allow firing your guns with an analog control (like an Xbox controller's triggers).
None of the examples you listed bother me.
"if it was the same as autofire on Android, why isn't autofire available on PC?"
Probably because the devs didn't figure anybody on PC would actually want it? I have no problem with making autofire avialable on PC, so long as it's optional.
"(movement was already removed)"
"Where did I say it was hurting the game? I said I believe shooting is a form of flight control. And as the other means of controlling flight have been removed..."
Actually, only strafing and rotation were removed. Plugins can still control turbo, the brakes, and the FA-mode throttle. Clearly it is not part of the dev's agenda to completely remove any impact plugins might have on flight. Your argument basically amounts to "they missed a spot", but there are far too many "missed" spots for it to not have been intentional. So if you want it removed, you are going to have to show how it is harmful. If you can't, then it shouldn't be removed.
"This would make it impossible for things like Chainfire"
Not impossible, Arf, just uglier. You could still do it with aliases.
A better example of something that needs plugin-controlled shooting is using AnalogToDigital to allow firing your guns with an analog control (like an Xbox controller's triggers).
To be honest, I'm not bothered either. I wasn't by dodge assist, it just made people in to predicatble flare-bait. Just thought I would take the discussion away from ethics/bad mouthing to a suggestion. The only other way I can think to solve the problem as mentioned is to only allow 1 instance of VO to run at a time.
Which I may suggest too. Lesser of two evils, kind of thing. No doubt that would be -1'd by most of you too. I guess that kind of answers Bojans original question and makes Lisa's plugins ethical.
[edit]
I actually use AnalogToDigital and would hate to lose it, but if I had to I could always use something OS side to remap the buttons.
Which I may suggest too. Lesser of two evils, kind of thing. No doubt that would be -1'd by most of you too. I guess that kind of answers Bojans original question and makes Lisa's plugins ethical.
[edit]
I actually use AnalogToDigital and would hate to lose it, but if I had to I could always use something OS side to remap the buttons.
Interesting, in contrast to you all I actually agree with Yoda's suggestion. I think it would level the field somewhat between heavy plug-in users and everyone else.
I am a computer programmer. I know how to cheat. I don't cheat, because then my victories would be tainted. I do not expect this philosophy from all other players. Some players will cheat. Some players are so desperate for a victory, any victory, that even a tainted victory is better than nothing.
I do not like partial solutions. Removing +shoot# from lua would not stop me from having lua issue a shoot command, by other means. It would only stop non programmers. I do not wish VO to be a "hackers game", where only the technically advanced can win.
Unless the solution is server side, there is no way to stop a program from issuing a shoot command. There is no way to make sure a single computer is only running one instance of VO. The technically advanced can bypass any limitations implemented client side.
A simplistic strategy to eliminating cheating, is to enable all players to cheat equally. If every one is cheating equally, it isn't cheating anymore, it is "game mechanics".
Please do not implement half assed fixes, like disallowing 'a' to be bound to the jet command, and then allowing lua to jet stuff. i should not have to load a plugin to jet stuff, when a penny in the keyboard worked fine.
I wish to also add a comment about thread: Discussion about ethical use of plug-ins in VO
Public logs are evidence. Personal attacks are by definition, not evidence, or evidence that is not relevant to the claim. wiktionary "personal attack"
there should be some forum, somewhere on the vo boards, that allows substantive debate. That a specific set of evidence may be shameful to one or more persons, is not reason to exclude it. Evidence is evidence, and as long as it is verifiable, and relevant, should be treated as such. This in itself does not permit all forms of evidence. The topic itself would need to be in the interest of VO. But as long as the topic is in the interest of VO, all supporting and relevant evidence should be admissible.
I do not like partial solutions. Removing +shoot# from lua would not stop me from having lua issue a shoot command, by other means. It would only stop non programmers. I do not wish VO to be a "hackers game", where only the technically advanced can win.
Unless the solution is server side, there is no way to stop a program from issuing a shoot command. There is no way to make sure a single computer is only running one instance of VO. The technically advanced can bypass any limitations implemented client side.
A simplistic strategy to eliminating cheating, is to enable all players to cheat equally. If every one is cheating equally, it isn't cheating anymore, it is "game mechanics".
Please do not implement half assed fixes, like disallowing 'a' to be bound to the jet command, and then allowing lua to jet stuff. i should not have to load a plugin to jet stuff, when a penny in the keyboard worked fine.
I wish to also add a comment about thread: Discussion about ethical use of plug-ins in VO
Public logs are evidence. Personal attacks are by definition, not evidence, or evidence that is not relevant to the claim. wiktionary "personal attack"
there should be some forum, somewhere on the vo boards, that allows substantive debate. That a specific set of evidence may be shameful to one or more persons, is not reason to exclude it. Evidence is evidence, and as long as it is verifiable, and relevant, should be treated as such. This in itself does not permit all forms of evidence. The topic itself would need to be in the interest of VO. But as long as the topic is in the interest of VO, all supporting and relevant evidence should be admissible.
Your argument basically amounts to "they missed a spot", but there are far too many "missed" spots for it to not have been intentional. So if you want it removed, you are going to have to show how it is harmful. If you can't, then it shouldn't be removed.
I'm +1 for the OP, though I was annoyed when the ability to program automatic dodge patterns was removed because once you figured out how to set the pattern for some bots you could almost AFK mine while they just blasted away ineffectually. But hey, either go all the way or fucking forget it.
To address Rin's point, it's at least as harmful to the game as the aspects they removed originally - they removed aspects of automatic control that were useful for combat, because people were whining about how the (strikingly ineffectual in PvP) auto-dodge binds were cheating - even though players could do that exact same thing themselves, the bind's automation was cheating because it took a small amount of skill and attention requirement off the table. Auto-shoot is basically the same: yes, you could do it if you were at the keys/mouse/stick, but it does it for you.
I'd be fine with seeing the other aspects (turbo, brake, F/A throttle) similarly removed from automatic control. Though I suspect we'd all miss turbo lock.
I'm +1 for the OP, though I was annoyed when the ability to program automatic dodge patterns was removed because once you figured out how to set the pattern for some bots you could almost AFK mine while they just blasted away ineffectually. But hey, either go all the way or fucking forget it.
To address Rin's point, it's at least as harmful to the game as the aspects they removed originally - they removed aspects of automatic control that were useful for combat, because people were whining about how the (strikingly ineffectual in PvP) auto-dodge binds were cheating - even though players could do that exact same thing themselves, the bind's automation was cheating because it took a small amount of skill and attention requirement off the table. Auto-shoot is basically the same: yes, you could do it if you were at the keys/mouse/stick, but it does it for you.
I'd be fine with seeing the other aspects (turbo, brake, F/A throttle) similarly removed from automatic control. Though I suspect we'd all miss turbo lock.
Maybe this is irrelevant but, the only way i can bind trigger to my stick fire buttons is using the /bind button +shoot. My stick have some "mode" button that is always activated and prevent me from using the graphic interface:
It would be always the mode button that would be selected instead of the trigger.
It would be always the mode button that would be selected instead of the trigger.
Binding to a button/key would not be removed. Just access via the Lua API, and maybe some aliases would break.
I'd be fine with seeing the other aspects (turbo, brake, F/A throttle) similarly removed from automatic control. Though I suspect we'd all miss turbo lock.
I thought throttle was gone already, but seems Rin is right, flight assist throttle is still available. (strange how forwards/backward got removed tho?)
and especially don't assume that unannounced changes were intentional. In fact, it is almost always the case that unannounced changes are bugs.
ooops, they missed a spot.
I'd be fine with seeing the other aspects (turbo, brake, F/A throttle) similarly removed from automatic control. Though I suspect we'd all miss turbo lock.
I thought throttle was gone already, but seems Rin is right, flight assist throttle is still available. (strange how forwards/backward got removed tho?)
and especially don't assume that unannounced changes were intentional. In fact, it is almost always the case that unannounced changes are bugs.
ooops, they missed a spot.
I wish to also add a comment about thread: Discussion about ethical use of plug-ins in VO
Public logs are evidence. Personal attacks are by definition, not evidence, or evidence that is not relevant to the claim. wiktionary "personal attack"
there should be some forum, somewhere on the vo boards, that allows substantive debate. That a specific set of evidence may be shameful to one or more persons, is not reason to exclude it. Evidence is evidence, and as long as it is verifiable, and relevant, should be treated as such. This in itself does not permit all forms of evidence. The topic itself would need to be in the interest of VO. But as long as the topic is in the interest of VO, all supporting and relevant evidence should be admissible.
Incorrect. This is not a courtroom, and public logs are not "evidence". If the OP of the thread you linked to had felt there was cheating going on, the correct thing to do would have been to take the logs before the devs. Otherwise, this is a form of stirring up the crowd which accomplishes little over the long run except perhaps to foster additional toxicity.
If I've locked a thread, it may be because the spirit of the thread would not engender productive discussion based on my years of experience as a guide. I mentioned a personal attack in the thread you linked to, but ad hominem would be a more accurate description; this doesn't have to mean name-calling or the like (although it's not uncommon for name-calling to accompany or follow a fallacious ad hominem argument) and can be quite subtle. A character assassination dressed up in roses can be far more devastating than an overt attack.
This is certain: if an argument or debate has become about an individual or group of individuals rather than a position, we have gone well off the rails.
Let's keep this on topic.
Public logs are evidence. Personal attacks are by definition, not evidence, or evidence that is not relevant to the claim. wiktionary "personal attack"
there should be some forum, somewhere on the vo boards, that allows substantive debate. That a specific set of evidence may be shameful to one or more persons, is not reason to exclude it. Evidence is evidence, and as long as it is verifiable, and relevant, should be treated as such. This in itself does not permit all forms of evidence. The topic itself would need to be in the interest of VO. But as long as the topic is in the interest of VO, all supporting and relevant evidence should be admissible.
Incorrect. This is not a courtroom, and public logs are not "evidence". If the OP of the thread you linked to had felt there was cheating going on, the correct thing to do would have been to take the logs before the devs. Otherwise, this is a form of stirring up the crowd which accomplishes little over the long run except perhaps to foster additional toxicity.
If I've locked a thread, it may be because the spirit of the thread would not engender productive discussion based on my years of experience as a guide. I mentioned a personal attack in the thread you linked to, but ad hominem would be a more accurate description; this doesn't have to mean name-calling or the like (although it's not uncommon for name-calling to accompany or follow a fallacious ad hominem argument) and can be quite subtle. A character assassination dressed up in roses can be far more devastating than an overt attack.
This is certain: if an argument or debate has become about an individual or group of individuals rather than a position, we have gone well off the rails.
Let's keep this on topic.
the spirit of the thread would not engender productive discussion based on my years of experience as a guide
...
A character assassination dressed up in roses can be far more devastating than an overt attack
Interesting how we keep moving further and further away from what the RoC actually prohibits. Honestly, I don't have a problem with you ruling the VO forums as a philosopher-king--that's really the job of a forum mod. But you should stop making pathetic arguments from authority when said authority isn't applicable on its face; it makes you look [RoC violation goes here] and there's no need for it because you don't need any reason other than 'I'm in charge and I think X is better off locked.'
...
A character assassination dressed up in roses can be far more devastating than an overt attack
Interesting how we keep moving further and further away from what the RoC actually prohibits. Honestly, I don't have a problem with you ruling the VO forums as a philosopher-king--that's really the job of a forum mod. But you should stop making pathetic arguments from authority when said authority isn't applicable on its face; it makes you look [RoC violation goes here] and there's no need for it because you don't need any reason other than 'I'm in charge and I think X is better off locked.'
Oh ok so if I don't like this suggestion I just need to ruin the spirit of the thread to get it locked by saying TGFT are clearly master puppets of fascism and as the last VPR on the planet phaser has no choice but to be their slave for life as that was VPR's mandate!
Thanks for the advice boss
Thanks for the advice boss
In reality though I don't mind this suggestion I don't use chain fire
Well Spence, to be fair, this thread is clearly targeted at a certain guild who likes to use plugins to assert a dominance they cannot muster through force of will by utilizing their auto-fire plugin which has been used for station assaults.
I do use chainfire, so I am against this suggestion, as chainfire doesn't really provide any benefit not available by using 2 fire buttons...but I think it's clear what this suggestion is targeting.
I do use chainfire, so I am against this suggestion, as chainfire doesn't really provide any benefit not available by using 2 fire buttons...but I think it's clear what this suggestion is targeting.
This is not a courtroom...
Logic is not limited to courtrooms or legal proceedings. Evidence is the presentation of relevant fact. Public logs may qualify as evidence.
Despite the apparent intention of bojansplash to mount a personal attack, the public logs listed did contain the arguments of both sides. bojansplash, perhaps unintentionally, presented the actual facts, in the form of a log. A debate as to the ethics of the situation was in process. If the debate was to determine that the use of such plugins is acceptable, then the rest of use could accept that, and act accordingly. If the debate was to determine that such action was not well accepted by the community, then everyone would know that.
Attacking a set of action of person(s), is not "ad hominem", when the set of actions is the topic in question.
Facts are facts, and that those facts may cause embarrassment, does not inherently negate the relevance of those facts. Facts are either relevant, or not, and embarrassment is a secondary issue.
People should be aware that these plugins are in use, and to what effect. People should be aware of who is accomplishing these effects, and by what means. A discussion of limiting plugin capabilities (such as the op of this very thread) should have context.
Unnecessary embarrassment of players should be handled with a harsh hand. But embarrassment of players does not negate necessary communications of facts that affect game play.
based on my years of experience as a guide
You experience may very well prove correct. But players come and players go, and you need to leave room for the right thing to happen, even if you are confident that the wrong thing is more likely. The worst case is that you are correct, and the best case is that your past experience is proven wrong.
Logic is not limited to courtrooms or legal proceedings. Evidence is the presentation of relevant fact. Public logs may qualify as evidence.
Despite the apparent intention of bojansplash to mount a personal attack, the public logs listed did contain the arguments of both sides. bojansplash, perhaps unintentionally, presented the actual facts, in the form of a log. A debate as to the ethics of the situation was in process. If the debate was to determine that the use of such plugins is acceptable, then the rest of use could accept that, and act accordingly. If the debate was to determine that such action was not well accepted by the community, then everyone would know that.
Attacking a set of action of person(s), is not "ad hominem", when the set of actions is the topic in question.
Facts are facts, and that those facts may cause embarrassment, does not inherently negate the relevance of those facts. Facts are either relevant, or not, and embarrassment is a secondary issue.
People should be aware that these plugins are in use, and to what effect. People should be aware of who is accomplishing these effects, and by what means. A discussion of limiting plugin capabilities (such as the op of this very thread) should have context.
Unnecessary embarrassment of players should be handled with a harsh hand. But embarrassment of players does not negate necessary communications of facts that affect game play.
based on my years of experience as a guide
You experience may very well prove correct. But players come and players go, and you need to leave room for the right thing to happen, even if you are confident that the wrong thing is more likely. The worst case is that you are correct, and the best case is that your past experience is proven wrong.
I also think +shoot should not be a command that can be accessed from lua. It would be nice if it was still a bindable/aliasable command, but if the strafe commands are any indication, that goes along with the lua access. Which I think is worth it, in the end. I'll have to learn to hold buttons down.
PS: Roda, you should (harshly) stop unnecessarily embarrassing yourself.
PS: Roda, you should (harshly) stop unnecessarily embarrassing yourself.
@Savet
The TGFT thingy may have sparked the need for this thread, but I am targetting the all round use of +shoot. TGFT have not used this plugin against me, I don't care who owns the stations or who takes them in what way. I am not on SKV's side. I shoot them too. I do not consider TGFT to be cheats, or hacks. They are simply using the tools availble to them at this time. Bravo I say. (ethics aside)
I really do think that any means of ship control via Lua, be it shooting, turning, strafing, turbo and stopping (I really had no idea some of the movement control was still available) should be removed from Lua access. When the Lua interface was opened up, it was intended for people like me or you to mod the interface to our liking. Doing things that the devs didn't have the time for. Like makefriends, vo clock, targetless. But of course, the VO community is way smarter than the average one and found other things it could be used for, like dullbot, auto stack and chainfire. Like I stated above, I am actually not bothered by the use of these plugins, I just strongly believe it should not be possible.
Please do not put me in the same boat as SKV, it would be a bloodbath. (and Niki would go all AFK on me and kill me and stuff)
[edit]
@Genka
You can still bind strafe to keys, you just cannot alias it.
The TGFT thingy may have sparked the need for this thread, but I am targetting the all round use of +shoot. TGFT have not used this plugin against me, I don't care who owns the stations or who takes them in what way. I am not on SKV's side. I shoot them too. I do not consider TGFT to be cheats, or hacks. They are simply using the tools availble to them at this time. Bravo I say. (ethics aside)
I really do think that any means of ship control via Lua, be it shooting, turning, strafing, turbo and stopping (I really had no idea some of the movement control was still available) should be removed from Lua access. When the Lua interface was opened up, it was intended for people like me or you to mod the interface to our liking. Doing things that the devs didn't have the time for. Like makefriends, vo clock, targetless. But of course, the VO community is way smarter than the average one and found other things it could be used for, like dullbot, auto stack and chainfire. Like I stated above, I am actually not bothered by the use of these plugins, I just strongly believe it should not be possible.
Please do not put me in the same boat as SKV, it would be a bloodbath. (and Niki would go all AFK on me and kill me and stuff)
[edit]
@Genka
You can still bind strafe to keys, you just cannot alias it.