Jump to content
Forum rules

Nymphi-DoubleDee

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    356

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Nymphi-DoubleDee

  2. Posted

    On 6/13/2018 at 8:26 AM, ScarecrowXIII said:

    Then the worst golds (ones who are really silver but got unlucky just cause they're barely better than other silvers) would basically be punished until they naturally lose threat (or they intentionally DT if they don't lose gold fast enough) thus ruining the experience for others.

     

    Plus, the skill difference between the worst and best golds is pretty high to begin with so some are actually more comfortable fighting silvers and don't want to be constantly forced into losing battles.

     

    I don't actually care, but those are just some of the arguments I've seen.

    If I were only playing against Silvers, and I hit Gold, then getting my patootie handed to me a bit is okay.

     

    But if I am playing against R50 and below Bronzes, and hit Gold.... Yeah, those losers couldn't play against real Golds.

  5. Posted

    7 minutes ago, Danimal said:

    Aside from a few questionable low rank gold rank players in Bronze district, San Paro was enjoyable yesterday. 

     

    I was also on my gaming PC for once so that helped.

     

    Seriously, If I become a volunteer GM...will be be able to kick these gold's from bronze???

     

    My team mate who was gold went 16-1 and at the last stage 75% of the team quit. GG...

    Nope. You could relay, but no kick powers.

     

    But what you describe, is what I hate. Dethreaters. 

     

    I am gonna start cataloging them.

  6. Posted

    6 hours ago, Fatal1ty Pixels said:

    The old AMD cpu coolers were not that good, i only used my for about 2 months then i changed it. Cooler fan was loud and the cpu was hot. Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO was a great upgrade

    I got that right off the bat. Best $30 spent.

    4 hours ago, wiliWillow said:

    Yes, that fixes it, but it requires more money which is inconvenient. The same goes for Intel, their CPUs require good coolers.

    On the other side, RYZEN coolers keep them at an acceptable temperature, and the stronger the CPU, the better the stock cooler looks! 

     

    Yeah, but $130 AMD vs $300 Intel....

     

    I can toss $30 on a Hyper 212 cooler.

  7. Posted · Edited by Nymphi-DoubleDee

    7 hours ago, Dreadarm said:

    Why are you putting words in my mouth? Can you not make your argument without resorting to silly tactics like changing the definition of things you cite, changing your argument, and changing the context of statements?

    I put no words into your mouth.

     

    I used your logic.

     

    A macro sends mouse clicks, so that's fine.

     

    Smooth aim sends mouse movements, so that's fine?

     

    Macro automates gun fire on semi autos.

     

    Smooth aim puts the crosshair over the target.

     

    Both what the player would do, with your logic. Just automated. So that's fine?

  10. Posted · Edited by Nymphi-DoubleDee

    10 minutes ago, Dreadarm said:

    Its not the same principle, you are now moving to oranges vs apples again. Smooth aim is a feature in an aim-bot which falls under hack.

     

    And maybe I am just not picking up what you are putting down because I am not buying into your argument.

    But it's just automating what the player would do, by moving the crosshair over the target.

     

    Same principle as firing a semi auto gun full auto, according to you.

  11. Posted

    19 minutes ago, ShaiShai said:

    as a sto player myself, your completely wrong, 90% of the ships are $30 and they are not character bound, you can infact make a new character and claim that ship only ship i can think of would be lobi ships, which are like the legendary guns here, you win those by opening boxes and gaining lobi

    also the ships that are usually $60+ are bundles, 3 ships in the pack, or more

    https://i.imgur.com/VALvngQ.jpg   <<< link of star trek online's store page showing ships able to be claimed on other toons

    https://i.imgur.com/1ThQMUW.jpg   <<< link showing that most the ships are infact $30 and not $60

    Then they must have changed the character/account Bound stuff.

     

    Because that's one reason I never got Fed Carriers.

     

     

  12. Posted

    Just now, Dreadarm said:

    See, and that is where macro comes in, you are still sending mouse clicks or what ever key push you are using to fire. Its just an expansion of the instruction. There is no net benefit between a macro expansion and individual mouse clicks.

    ..............

    tell_me_i_m_pretty_by_chillguydraws-db9k

     

    Maybe... Maybe you are just too dense to pick up what I am putting down.

     

    But since the server, and clients would see smooth aim as mouse movements, you are okay with that? Same principle.

  13. Posted

    Just now, Dreadarm said:

    And? you cant bypass the global cap on the fire rate of any gun in the game.

    Who was talking about that? I wasn't.

     

    This is about the way a gun is designed. It is design to fire 1 round (Or 3 like the Obir) per mouse click, to firing multiple rounds per mouse click and hold, like a STAR.

     

    Go hold down your mouse button while you have the Carbine equipped. It will fire ONE round. Changing that is changing a GAME MECHANIC.

  14. Posted

    Just now, Dreadarm said:

    The client, and server and OP client still see click fire click fire click fire. not click fire fire fire.

    And?

     

    What does that have to do with changing a semi auto into full auto?

     

    The game mechanic of the Carbine is semi auto. Not full auto.

  15. Posted

    Just now, Dreadarm said:

    I sincerely disagree with you. You can not alter the game mechanics with a macro. You can abuse it, you can make it more efficient, but at the end of the day there are at-least 3 problems with macro's and simi auto weapons that negate the effects to an almost unusable point. Radical bloom, Bullet randomization, and vertical/horizontal recoil.

    Changing from

     

    click fire click fire click fire click fire

     

    to

     

    Click fire fire fire fire

     

    Is changing the mechanic of a semi auto rifle.

  16. Posted

    Just now, Dreadarm said:

    But the entire premise of my argument is that a macro nets you no significant gain over the other methods. Therefore it is harmless.

    The point of semi auto is human error in firing. Too fast, or too slow could make a difference.

     

    Automating the firing removes that.

     

    And you are changing a game mechanic.

     

    It's like the cross hair shaders. If the designers wanted them there, they would have put them there.

     

    Advantage or not, it's changing game mechanics.

  17. Posted

    Just now, Dreadarm said:

    Ok so for the sake of argument:

     

    Macro:

    Is typically recognized as an expansion of instructions or repetitive actions that are pre-recorded and do not exceed a designed game mechanic. aka "full auto" or "rapid fire" which can already be achieved in the game by basic human input or a scroll wheel.

    So then, maybe you don't understand the difference between semiauto and full auto, and why those are game mechanics.

     

    And thus, a macro is changing game mechanics, because, even if it is firing at human rate, it is changing a semi auto to a full auto.

     

    If the designers wanted the Carbine full auto, they would have made it have that mechanic.

  19. Posted

    Just now, Dreadarm said:

    You are arguing features that are only available in a script via a script engine and programming. These features are not available with a macro.

     

    You linked a definition for Macro and then ignored its actual definition and stated something different that your own definition stated.

    Quoting:

     

    "Simply put, the gaming macro key is a recording of a series of key sequences. A key sequence is a series of keyboard keystrokes, mouse actions, or menu actions that is bound to a command."

     

    So how does that contradict what I have said?

     

    You set up click, unclick to the command, in the case of pressing down the left mouse button, for it to repeat, thus firing a semi auto rifle (which requires multiple tapping) into a full auto (which would be press, and hold).

     

    But yet, you can't even convey your stance, besides some NavySeal copypasta.

  21. Posted

    22 minutes ago, Dreadarm said:

    And here is the problem with your argument, you are arguing oranges while I am arguing apples. Macro's are not Scripts. Please argue apples with apples.

    No, we are arguing oranges, while you are holding tight to vapor.

     

    You have still yet to explain your stance, besides splitting hairs on terminology.

     

    Third time asking, what is your definition of a macro? Because I linked you the common computing definition of a macro.

  24. Posted

    1 minute ago, Dreadarm said:

    Once again, you are stuck on "changing mechanics" but once again. Macro's do not change any mechanics in the game.

     

    See this is redundant. She states the same thing over and over and over.

    Then explain yourself.

     

    If you can't, you've failed in your argument on why they should be allowed.

  25. Posted

    35 minutes ago, Dreadarm said:

    My point has been clear from the beginning you just refuse to see it because you don't want to be wrong.

    Nope, clearly you have not read any of the previous posts. Are you attempting to hackusate me? interesting...

     Your point is macros should be allowed.

     

    Even if they change the mechanics of certain weapons and remove the need to click for every fire.

×
×
  • Create New...