My apologies, I should have read it closer. The point you mention in parenthesis is what confused me.
What Constitutes as Cheating
- Thread starter Deaf Space
- Start date
My apologies, I should have read it closer. The point you mention in parenthesis is what confused me.
I fear that's taking the 'easy' route.. And I doubt it'd be profitable. Right now, everyone on the same servers and everything is confined and FDev can make whatever changes they want to one code base.
Going your route, the company would inflict upon themselves a double set of problems. Catering for the 'legal' version and then catering for the 'moddable' version..
I think we also need to distinguish that there is a huge difference between 'modding' and cheating.
Modding allows the playerbase to add to, extend, change imagery to their liking.
Cheating is changing something or how the game works to gain an explicit advantage over other players.
Take me for example
I'm the former. A modder, an extender. I add things or abilities to extend or enhance my game play. I have no interest in being God on the server. In fact, I'm perfectly happy if no-one else was playing. I'm not playing to win, I'm playing to enjoy myself.The cheater is looking for ways to make them better than all others. To make them or their ship invincible. To annihilate all other players at no risk to themselves.
When I played FlighSim, I had a home built 737 cockpit, with everything working. over a thousand switches, and running across 5 servers, and 7 19 inch flat panels. When I flew online, no one else knew I was in a cockpit with woprking thrusters, reverse thrusters, lights, full FMS, full TCAS. It didn't effect anyone else, but my enjoyment of the building process, the learning of electronics to make it all work.
When others did learn through discussion, they asked for some of my code, my frameworks, my gauges etc. And they too enjoyed the extra functionality. At no point did anyone modify Microsoft code. Yet we [cockpit builders] enjoyed a huge array of extras. So much so, Microsoft saw the benefits and even provided extra data and data views to in memory statuses.
I do not condone cheating in any form. Modding something to make it better or enhance your time spent on the gamsim, absolutely.
While FDev have to (depending on their expected lifetime of Elite D) address cheating. On the other hand, they should be welcoming modders with open arms.
All above opinionated
o7
For all the people going on about voice attack and keyboard macros, let's compare old MUDs.
If I make a macro that consists of all the commands to cast every buff spell I have so I don't have to type them out manually and instead just go full Ainz before I walk into a dungeon, that's perfectly fine. I'm not doing anything the game won't let me do - in fact, the game will queue up the commands and execute them in order in the middle of a fight, so if I enter a giant string of attacks while I'm fighting a monster, whether I type them manually or use a macro, it'll dutifully have my guy perform those attacks when he's able to, without getting any advantage from the macro as the game only allows one action per turn regardless of how it's entered.
Likewise, MUD clients allow triggers to be set up that respond with commands in certain situations - some MUDs frown on overusing them for grinding, such as sitting in one spot and having a script to attack any monsters that spawn in the room, but that's functionally the same as the AFK turretboats in this game. Certainly nobody complained about my maxed-out mage/cleric cheesemunchkin character sitting in the town square once I hit the level cap openly holding a sign reading "say
The key thing about all these triggers and macros is that none of them allow you to do anything that isn't possible within the framework of the game. If I saw someone asking for a buff, I could blast them with every buff under the sun just as easily by hand as I could with the script.
What did get you told off was abusing glitches in the game code to obtain effects that you couldn't get otherwise, or doing things like, say, levelling an alt up to use the Wish spell (which cost you permanent stats) to give your main character obscene buffs, then deleting the alt. That fell outwith the bounds of what you could do on a single character, and so was considered cheating.
If I make a macro that consists of all the commands to cast every buff spell I have so I don't have to type them out manually and instead just go full Ainz before I walk into a dungeon, that's perfectly fine. I'm not doing anything the game won't let me do - in fact, the game will queue up the commands and execute them in order in the middle of a fight, so if I enter a giant string of attacks while I'm fighting a monster, whether I type them manually or use a macro, it'll dutifully have my guy perform those attacks when he's able to, without getting any advantage from the macro as the game only allows one action per turn regardless of how it's entered.
Likewise, MUD clients allow triggers to be set up that respond with commands in certain situations - some MUDs frown on overusing them for grinding, such as sitting in one spot and having a script to attack any monsters that spawn in the room, but that's functionally the same as the AFK turretboats in this game. Certainly nobody complained about my maxed-out mage/cleric cheesemunchkin character sitting in the town square once I hit the level cap openly holding a sign reading "say
Scree, buff me for buffs" and a trigger set to spam them with an obscene amount of powerups if they said the phrase.The key thing about all these triggers and macros is that none of them allow you to do anything that isn't possible within the framework of the game. If I saw someone asking for a buff, I could blast them with every buff under the sun just as easily by hand as I could with the script.
What did get you told off was abusing glitches in the game code to obtain effects that you couldn't get otherwise, or doing things like, say, levelling an alt up to use the Wish spell (which cost you permanent stats) to give your main character obscene buffs, then deleting the alt. That fell outwith the bounds of what you could do on a single character, and so was considered cheating.
Brett C
Frontier
Hi all,
Cheating in Elite Dangerous is managed on a case by case basis. Applications used outside of Elite Dangerous that allow for full unattended automation of the game (known as botting) is not permitted. Using 3rd party applications tools to modify your game client to gain an unfair advantage is cheating (things like no-clip, full shields, insta teleports/insta-jumping, etc). Taking advantage of a bug in the live game that has not been disclosed or suppressed from being reported is exploiting.
As always, that isn't a full definitive list, and our Anti-Cheat team at Frontier has the final say on what is and what is not permitted to be used in conjunction with Elite Dangerous. You can view our current Elite Dangerous EULA here: https://www.frontierstore.net/ed-eula/
If you find hacks or cheats being used, please report the user via the ingame tools and file a customer support ticket at https://support.frontier.co.uk/ - thanks!
Cheating in Elite Dangerous is managed on a case by case basis. Applications used outside of Elite Dangerous that allow for full unattended automation of the game (known as botting) is not permitted. Using 3rd party applications tools to modify your game client to gain an unfair advantage is cheating (things like no-clip, full shields, insta teleports/insta-jumping, etc). Taking advantage of a bug in the live game that has not been disclosed or suppressed from being reported is exploiting.
As always, that isn't a full definitive list, and our Anti-Cheat team at Frontier has the final say on what is and what is not permitted to be used in conjunction with Elite Dangerous. You can view our current Elite Dangerous EULA here: https://www.frontierstore.net/ed-eula/
If you find hacks or cheats being used, please report the user via the ingame tools and file a customer support ticket at https://support.frontier.co.uk/ - thanks!
![[VR] M4st0d0n](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/182/182772.jpg?1569064854){kind=avatar}
What's the use of reporting botters if they're just sent to solo and could still influence BGS?
A shadow ban to solo means read-only BGS.
Where is that stated in the EULA?
We're all gentlemen here, aren't we? EULAs are for lawyers...
Michael Brookes stated it a couple of times. Shadow ban means disconnected from production BGS.
Last edited:
I have been wondering about that myself reading the recent cheating threads. I could never remember all the buttons. If i didnt have VA i probably wouldnt play.Too Soon?
The way I understand it is that as written in the EULA, VoiceAttack could potentially be considered an "outside" 3rd party app, but this is where Frontier's and articulated above by BrettC "case-by-case basis" comes in. Arguably, FD would be within their rights and EULA to take action against VA, but in all practicality, that's never going to happen.
I'd say that as written even my Warthog TARGET software is a 3rd party app. But is doesn't give an unfair advantage. VA just maps inputs differently. I wouldn't worry.
I'd say that as written even my Warthog TARGET software is a 3rd party app. But is doesn't give an unfair advantage. VA just maps inputs differently. I wouldn't worry.
Last edited:
Clearly describing somewhere the pending sentence for cheating could convince me of submitting reports. Two old posts of an undescribed feature I cant test is not enough.
thank you for taking the time to respond to my post =) and clearing my name
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Would be interested in their views on macrod pips. Or anything that gives a competitive edge not offered by ED, but a third party program.
I think it would be easier to program those few options into the game, over removing something I know a lot of my friends use with voice attack. I know a lot of people that rely on voice attack for specific reasons other than recreation.
So dont remove the programs that allow it. But give us the options to use those features in the game itself.
I dunno just a thought.
[deleted]
Why am I arguing with you here?
I can argue with you in person at the AEDC Bot Watchers HQ.
And for those in the cheap seats: "NO - the AEDC Bot Watchers don't hang around Bondi Beach all day chatting up French backpackers in thongs and G strings". (The backpackers in thongs, not the middle aged Space Sim enthusiasts, do I look like Borat?)
We do serious stuff. Like spreadsheets, and whatever that other database Python thingy is with all the blobby colours and system names scrolling across in real time like a stock market and about as hard to read. Dead serious.
Last edited:
This means using voice attack is cheating, as you can, for example, say "undock" and it will do several commands to undock the ship.
The Replicated Man
T
Thing is voiceattack on it's own without plugins doesn't modify any of the game files, it is just a glorified piece of input macro software.
You issue a command, it presses the corresponding/bound key for that action on your keyboard. It's not like it's aimbot or anything.
"On a case-by-case basis"
FDev approve of Voice Attack, accept it.
Voice attack, or programmable macro keys on a keyboard, don't do anything that you couldn't do otherwise. Like the MUD thing, it's not cheating to bind a script to enter several commands in quick succession, they only considered it cheating if you write triggered responses that allow your client to play the game while you're not physically present.
Voice attack and macro keys still require you to be there, present, at your desk, operating the controls for your ship, and make the decision to execute the macro. Whether it's one command or several isn't the issue, a player's hand is still on the button that issued them.
Voice attack and macro keys still require you to be there, present, at your desk, operating the controls for your ship, and make the decision to execute the macro. Whether it's one command or several isn't the issue, a player's hand is still on the button that issued them.