Pip Macros - TOS Violation?
- Thread starter Oh Seven Commander
- Start date
Frontier does not need to give us reasons for their decisions since this is not a court or trial, it's simply what they say is law. If Frontier said "Pip Macros are ok, but fleet carrier automation ones are not" and when asked, their reasoning was "Because we said so" that's fine. They don't need to explain to us why. People may want an explanation, but people want a lot of things.
What they've basically said is that any pip macro which receives one button press, but does more than any one single action, is against EULA. A pip macro where you, for instance, hit the 2 button, and it moves your pips to 2-4-0 would be in violation of the EULA because it has moved your pips around many times to arrive a predetermined config.
I think that's what Helmut was getting to... it's there in black and white in the EULA. Automation software is against the EULA, so it was always obvious (no matter how much people want to deny what's right in front of them)
Are keyboard macros (including ones which change pips) against the EULA? Of course they are.
Are FD going to punish someone because you went to them saying "I've got video proof of someone using a keyboard macro to change their pips!"... probably not. Which is what I was getting to here... as you're explaining right now... FD can say and do virtually whatever they like within this context, and apply discretion as-needs.
It's the Voice Attack discussion again (see https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/whats-frontiers-position-on-voice-attack.619301/). Agree with Jmanis on making a Hotel California for these discussions. It's always a breach of the ToS, but enforcing or not always depends on balancing effort and effect (anyone being extra competitive on PvP/leaderboards/CGs with macros will likely get enforced).
Different than Voice Attack at least, Frontier may be able to do it themselves (and thus, add that bit of QoL with maybe not so much work). Something like, holding down the reset pip to save current configuration to the next d-pad direction you press (change the RST to MEM on the dashboard to show it's on memory mode), and holding down that d-pad direction to switch to that saved pip setting. Someone probably already suggested that on the Suggestions board, most likely. Maybe drop there and boost the suggestion request. Personally, I like the feeling of the d-pad and the rapid switching, so I'm fine without it, but QoL is always welcome.
Different than Voice Attack at least, Frontier may be able to do it themselves (and thus, add that bit of QoL with maybe not so much work). Something like, holding down the reset pip to save current configuration to the next d-pad direction you press (change the RST to MEM on the dashboard to show it's on memory mode), and holding down that d-pad direction to switch to that saved pip setting. Someone probably already suggested that on the Suggestions board, most likely. Maybe drop there and boost the suggestion request. Personally, I like the feeling of the d-pad and the rapid switching, so I'm fine without it, but QoL is always welcome.
Also, check your laws. The speed limit laws on each country/state/municipality have strict limits on the threshold that constitutes speeding violation. These thresholds also change depending on the speed itself and/or the zoning. Residential areas/lower speeds often have just a few units added to it, while others may have a +10% rounded up (mentioned as a holdover from mechanical detectors accuracy). Automatic speed radars will follow these limits (often, "sometimes" cops don't follow laws), and a ticket that has a registered speed which is below the threshold can be challenged on court with self representation ("glare/light reflection didn't allow you to see the units properly", or "next planned maintenance for the car was still due for another 6 months, so you expected it to still be accurate", since saying "It's below the threshold" isn't going to win a judge). Laws regarding numbers are black and white, and it's the crooks in the way that get you, not the "how 'hard' you broke the law". When campaigns for "the number is the limit" appear, it's either because legislators are getting bombarded with safety and health issues regarding car crashes and don't want the backlash of reducing speed limits, or because the cops want to make more money (second option most frequent).
It really might not have been, though depending on how broad of strokes Frontier paints in. If Frontier interpreted their own rules very widely, changing pips could have been "one action". Requesting docking, for instance, is multiple button presses, but if I asked someone who was requesting docking what they were doing, they would not say "navigating the left panel two clicks right and two clicks down and now one click right and clicking the space bar". They would just say "I'm requesting docking". A broad stroke outlook would have requesting docking considered as one action, but a narrower view is going to call it multiple actions.
The inquiry was simply to find out how broad of strokes Frontier paints in.
They will never comment on it with anything than a generic statement designed to support the EULA.
It's also not a topic to be debated on the forums.
Anything TOS Violation related should be dealt with using the in-game report system or email directly to FDev.
And you will still not get any answer on that, even if they deem the TOS breach is worth an investigation
As been pointed out, TOS is a very broad and lose frame - and it will be enforced by FDev when they think they should
Also, it's not even needed to be mentioned at all in the TOS - they can say it breaks the spirit of the game (whatever that may be) and you cannot do anything about - except maybe drag them to the small court claims and maybe get your 30 pounds back or whatever you have payed initially on the game.
So i think it should be dropped.
They were very specific, also helpful, and courteous when they responded to me when I gave them specific and well known examples of what I was asking about.
What boggles my mind is automating the pips..
It very quickly becomes muscle memory and changing pips is done in less than a second.
It very quickly becomes muscle memory and changing pips is done in less than a second.
You're here long enough to know how salty and obnoxious the players get when they feel their entitlement violated. Just look at the amazing three threads we've had now where players whine about how unjust the Titan rewards are handed out. Multiply that by ten if they suddenly budge on one type of macro, but not another. Having HCS Voice Packs is already borderline torching the barn every time this topic comes up.
So if you ask them, you get a stern no, so all children feel treated equally unjustly.
unless you have a 60% keyboard, or a disability. I argued that it was an accessibility feature for some players, but I agree pip management is very quick and straightforward. I rebound my pip keys to 1/2/3 for easier access
Software and hardware supporting accessibility frequently falls afoul of both automated and manual cheating reviews... and events where people with accessibility needs are banned are heavily derided by observers. But conversely, I don't think anyone would deride banning such a player using an accessibility feature that gave drastic advantage over other players in a competitive game.
This just adds more weight to the idea that in Elite's case, yes, it's against the rules, but discretion applies... and that's because ED's interface design frankly isn't up to scratch.
No smoking?
I think the general rule is that you are fine as long as you are not being a duck.
They can't really say that automation is forbidden unless you are using a pip macro. Someone would just come up with a bot script that also includes a pip macro. So Frontier would need to be more specific with their rules. The problem with more specific rules is that they allow even more loopholes because they cannot cover everything so you need to be even more specific, etc. Welcome to hell. That's how we ended up with German grammar.
If you like real world examples (everyone does):
It's not allowed to cross a red light. But if you need to make place for an ambulance it's OK I guess (as long as you are being careful). But what if someone else already made place and crossing the red light was no longer needed? Or how close does the ambulance need to be?
They can't really say that automation is forbidden unless you are using a pip macro. Someone would just come up with a bot script that also includes a pip macro. So Frontier would need to be more specific with their rules. The problem with more specific rules is that they allow even more loopholes because they cannot cover everything so you need to be even more specific, etc. Welcome to hell. That's how we ended up with German grammar.
If you like real world examples (everyone does):
It's not allowed to cross a red light. But if you need to make place for an ambulance it's OK I guess (as long as you are being careful). But what if someone else already made place and crossing the red light was no longer needed? Or how close does the ambulance need to be?
I remember this discussion from several years ago and one of the arguments for PIPS macros was that NPCs switch PIPS instantly. So the macro is not really a "cheat" but just allowing Cmdrs do their power management as efficiently as NPCs do. 
I remember this discussion from several years ago and one of the arguments for PIPS macros was that NPCs switch PIPS instantly. So the macro is not really a "cheat" but just allowing Cmdrs do their power management as efficiently as NPCs do.
Interesting argument.
My personal opinion here is that its fine because you still have to make an input to get the desired pip config you want. The line would be crossed if the macro/script determined automatically what pip config was most optimal at any given moment and automatically changed your pips for you. (eg: shields getting hit, puts 4 pips in shields, weapons running low and not under attack, puts 4 pips in weapons, etc).
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
just to split hairs... this is another discretionary thing. it would take a total .... of a copper to do you for running a red light (carefully) to make space for an emergency services vehicle.................... but it IS still technically an offense and indeed i think i have read previously in totally unrelated to videogames topics where people have been given points for doing just that.
This^, plus the simple fact that the 'no pip macros' rule (if there is one) is pretty much unenforceable. How could you tell that anyone was using a macro?
Was the pip switching too fast to be humanly possible? What is humanly possible? 50 milliseconds per click? You can set up a macro to be as slow as you wish, and it's still gonna be a macro.
Most pip macros are nothing more than dumping 4 pips to some specific capacitor. That's just multiple presses of the same button. Was it a macro that did that or was it just the mouse wheel? Or was it just a faulty button that fired multiple button press events while it was being pressed?
This. Potentially keystroke analysis that labels any really fast and/or consistent patterns as suspicious could be used, but the counter is simply to deliberately add some random delay to the macro keypresses. 200±50 ms wait time between macro keypresses would be slow and random enough to mimic a well-practiced human, but fast enough for gameplay.
The main purpose of pip macros is not speed, anyway, but instead reducing pilot's workload allowing more attention to the actual flying and shooting while reducing errors made in power management, especially if you need atypical settings like 1-2-3 for AX combat. As I've said earlier, there's a reason for fighter plane designers automating and simplifying engine management over the course of WWII. Pip presets should be a part of the game in the first place.
The effort spent on detecting pip macros could be better spent on dealing with actual cheats, but this has all sorts of edge cases with weird hardware that could result in false positives - the recent CS2 example of accidentally banning people with high-DPI mice is a good cautionary tale.
So it's written down in the TOS, but it's unenforceable, not enforced and won't be enforced and enforcing it would make the game worse for everyone because you'd just end up with a long delay in switching pips for everyone so macros aren't as useful.