Hey does the use of Voice Attack fall under the “Bots and Third Party” policy?
What's Frontier's Position on Voice Attack?
- Thread starter Half-Lock
- Start date
Automation of a task is fobidden. If you are on foot and have a voice command that puts your shield on its ok. If you have a trigger that automatically puts up your shields as soon as you get hit its not ok.
It's a legal way to gain an unfair advantage over other players.
More like disadvantage. The delays caused by VA having to recognize (if you're lucky) things like firing utilities and switching fire groups isn't going to give anyone an edge in PVP.
Is it that bad?
It is not bad per se, it is just somewhat slow. And I feel that is partly systemic (reading feedback from the journal and such takes time), partly deliberate as to not give a competitive advantage. Every action you can have VA with HCS perform, an experienced player will be much faster doing it manually. VA with HCS is much more for fun and immersion than it is for competition.
Last edited:
When using HCS voicepacks there is a noticeable timing between the various actions. No doubt macro-people (is that actually permitted?) can have sequences of keypresses running at milisecond timings, in HCS it is almost sedate - maybe raw VA is "timed" too ( I don't know).
No confirmation from the mods on this, yet.
The issue seems to be the ability to make use of automated commands, aka macros, to make it so that when I say “target lock on nearest hostile” it will allow my CMDR to target the nearest Imperial station, switch my cockpit mode and weapons rig to the most powerful Plasma accelerators, launch a heat sink, switch all pips to weapons, and then begin aiming, which sort of does fall in line with the policy.
But I see streamers using it all the time, so where is the line for Frontier?
The issue seems to be the ability to make use of automated commands, aka macros, to make it so that when I say “target lock on nearest hostile” it will allow my CMDR to target the nearest Imperial station, switch my cockpit mode and weapons rig to the most powerful Plasma accelerators, launch a heat sink, switch all pips to weapons, and then begin aiming, which sort of does fall in line with the policy.
But I see streamers using it all the time, so where is the line for Frontier?
Why should the mods reply to this? They don't know more than you or I.
It is fine to replace a keypress with a voice command. It is probably still okay to replace a couple of keypresses with a single voice command, especially for commands that don't have a competitive context. PIP macros may be pushing it; everyone and their mother uses them, but it's best not to talk about them. It's not okay to automate reactions like the above cited "shields up on damage" example.
My advice: If you fear what your doing is against the automation rules, it probably is.
It is fine to replace a keypress with a voice command. It is probably still okay to replace a couple of keypresses with a single voice command, especially for commands that don't have a competitive context. PIP macros may be pushing it; everyone and their mother uses them, but it's best not to talk about them. It's not okay to automate reactions like the above cited "shields up on damage" example.
My advice: If you fear what your doing is against the automation rules, it probably is.
Addendum: The stuff the HCS profile does is probably safe, although it can do a few very elaborate things. I am guessing the devs of HCS are clearing up with Frontier what is allowed and what not. I remember up to a few updates ago the HCS profile automatically targeted a hostile NPC pulling you from SC; this stopped a few updates ago for me. Maybe Frontier asked to remove that, or HCS did it by themselves because they felt that was pushing it. Or maybe my config got borked somehow...
Voice Attack and HCS voices can be a lot of fun especially if you are thousands of light years away from the bubble and getting lonely. Both in combination require programming if you are up to it and can do some pretty advanced macros. Too much use and a player could forget how to fly the ship. You decide...
You seem to have a lot of faith in the psychological conditioning process…
We, here, in ‘Murka, confront our fears.
But I’m not tryna get kicked off the game just because I wanted to talk to me computer, is all. That would just suck.
Here's an old thread from 2015 talking about how to use Voice Attack.
forums.frontier.co.uk
If FDEV had a problem with it, they've had years and years to say so. It's pretty clearly not an issue.
There are literally hundreds of posts about it on this forum alone, over the years.
Voice Attack - Getting Voice attack to plot a course
Hi, I promised that I would write a guide to demonstrate how to get voice attack to set course for you. However my computer was destroyed by a bad windows update and I had to reinstall everything again. So here it is, if a bit late. What I want to do. tell voice attack "Set course for...
If FDEV had a problem with it, they've had years and years to say so. It's pretty clearly not an issue.
There are literally hundreds of posts about it on this forum alone, over the years.
Last edited:
No that's a bug. Or something up at your end.
Noted to check before next release.
Cheers!
And yes, we have boundaries set by Frontier as to what is and is not acceptable.
However to reiterate. Frontiers position is that one of only a handful of licensed partners for Elite is a company which uses voiceattack to enable voice control and provide scifi star responses.
And they've created the player journal and associated files for use by third party devs.
So. Frontier's position on voiceattack and by extension HCS is a positive one. Or they wouldn't have issued the license.
And they've created the player journal and associated files for use by third party devs.
So. Frontier's position on voiceattack and by extension HCS is a positive one. Or they wouldn't have issued the license.
The thing with enforcement of botting/ automation apps and the EULA is it's entirely at FDs discretion.
That is, you could have two apps with functionally similar properties... one is generally regarded as being a positive, beneficial effect for the community, and the other a generally negative effect.
Would be completely reasonable for FD to ban the latter but not the former in that instance, as it's entirely discretionary.
I think the words of the EULA suggest something like "lack of enforcement does not imply compliance with it", and just because voice attack is not banned doesn't mean it wouldn't fall afoul of those rules; it just means FD are choosing not to enforce it in this instance (because it's an overall positive thing)
That is, you could have two apps with functionally similar properties... one is generally regarded as being a positive, beneficial effect for the community, and the other a generally negative effect.
Would be completely reasonable for FD to ban the latter but not the former in that instance, as it's entirely discretionary.
I think the words of the EULA suggest something like "lack of enforcement does not imply compliance with it", and just because voice attack is not banned doesn't mean it wouldn't fall afoul of those rules; it just means FD are choosing not to enforce it in this instance (because it's an overall positive thing)
You mean you cry into your microphone: "KILL THAT DAMN ONE; KILL HIM; NOW!!"?
