Widget signing gadget (request)

[SirMaverick]

In many games like in BA you are not supposed to be able to tell the dots apart. Which is also part of "the point of the game" as you say. So it is a cheat and provides you with an unfair advantage.

"Ghosted Buildings" is enabled by default in BA

Many people know how to scout. If you do this, this radar cheat widget becomes pointless.

[Regret]

The widget that allowed to nap moving coms was widely considered cheat, because this is not something you can do manually.

Wrong. I did it manually by zooming in.

"Ghosted Buildings" is enabled by default in BA

I read buildings. Do you know the big difference between a building and a unit? A building is static, it does not move.

Your opinion. In my opinion its not a cheat if the widget does only things automated the (experienced) user would be able to do anyways.

The user would not be able to do the same automated thing AND something else in the meantime. Even an experienced user can't micro his 100 units all over the map at the same time. Your reasoning is flawed.

[CarRepairer]

Your opinion. In my opinion its not a cheat if the widget does only things automated the (experienced) user would be able to do anyways.

The user would not be able to do the same automated thing AND something else in the meantime. Even an experienced user can't micro his 100 units all over the map at the same time. Your reasoning is flawed.

Okay let's bring this up again. Wittle down cheating to a more general definition: if one player finds a way to get an advantage that's not the intent of the developers (and thus not known to other players), it's a cheat. And even then, if becomes so public that everyone knows about it, it's no longer an advantage. At that point it's hardly a "cheat" anymore. Just a bug.

Do not add more to this definition. Don't discuss micro, automation or anything else, because they don't apply to every video game. Just keep it general.

In the case of Spring, Spring devs made lua scripting an option and so it's their intent to have it available. All mod makers are aware of this, so they can't claim it was not their intent to release a game that allows lua scripting, on an engine that allows lua scripting.

[SeanHeron]

And if they really didn't want it to be done, they'd just block any widgets being used (besides the mods included ones) - problem (if so perceived) solved.

[Regret]

Do not add more to this definition. Don't discuss micro, automation or anything else, because they don't apply to every video game. Just keep it general.

I don't care they don't apply to every videogame, I specifically said BA.

And if they really didn't want it to be done, they'd just block any widgets being used (besides the mods included ones) - problem (if so perceived) solved.

Restating what was already restated is always useful!

[dizekat]

Note how the biggest complain about widgets comes from mediocre BADSD players with lot of ingame time. Whom would indeed have very little over newbies should noobtraps be fixed at least somewhat.

Why, of course that auto-micro won't matter in 1v1 because it still totally sucks compared to human micro. Just in a huge team game it would somewhat improve the weakest link (most noob/distracted/afk player) so you couldn't anymore lure his units into heavy defense.

[Regret]

Note how the biggest complain about widgets comes from mediocre BADSD players with lot of ingame time. Whom would indeed have very little over newbies should noobtraps be fixed at least somewhat.

Statistics out of your ass?

[dizekat]

Note how the biggest complain about widgets comes from mediocre BADSD players with lot of ingame time. Whom would indeed have very little over newbies should noobtraps be fixed at least somewhat.

Statistics out of your ass?

no, out of this thread, mister yet another BADSD player.

[Caydr]

Let me make sure I have this clearly in my mind: If something gives people the power to do something the game developer does not intend them to do, you feel it's a cheat. But once that cheat becomes known, it's now only an exploit, so it's not so bad, because there's a level playing field.

That seems reasonable, until you follow it to its natural conclusion. Let's say there's a widget which has a massive effect on the gameplay. Now, everyone gets it, so it's only an exploit - but it's an exploit which makes the game no longer fun to play.

How is this a tolerable situation? If aimbots become popular in FPS games, should we just give all players aimbots by default so it's fair? Or how about if all players start buying a laptop, setting it next to them, and "spectating" the game while also playing it. Is it OK as long as everyone does it?

I'm hoping that you say "no, that would be wrong". If you don't, you need to sterilize yourself for the sake of future generations.

Now, what would be the advantage in having a second computer in which you spectate the game? The biggest one would be to know exactly where your enemies' units are. Wait, this sounds familiar. Isn't that precisely what the aforementioned radar widget accomplishes?

Why are you even trying to argue this? What is your malfunction that leads you to actually try to defend something so obviously unfair and unenjoyable?

[REVENGE]

yes, out of my ass, mister yet another noob.

Whew, thought I misread your post for a second there.

[CarRepairer]

Let me make sure I have this clearly in my mind: If something gives people the power to do something the game developer does not intend them to do, you feel it's a cheat. But once that cheat becomes known, it's now only an exploit, so it's not so bad, because there's a level playing field.

That seems reasonable, until you follow it to its natural conclusion. Let's say there's a widget which has a massive effect on the gameplay. Now, everyone gets it, so it's only an exploit - but it's an exploit which makes the game no longer fun to play.

How is this a tolerable situation? If aimbots become popular in FPS games, should we just give all players aimbots by default so it's fair? Or how about if all players start buying a laptop, setting it next to them, and "spectating" the game while also playing it. Is it OK as long as everyone does it?

I'm hoping that you say "no, that would be wrong". If you don't, you need to sterilize yourself for the sake of future generations.

Now, what would be the advantage in having a second computer in which you spectate the game? The biggest one would be to know exactly where your enemies' units are. Wait, this sounds familiar. Isn't that precisely what the aforementioned radar widget accomplishes?

Why are you even trying to argue this? What is your malfunction that leads you to actually try to defend something so obviously unfair and unenjoyable?

I assume this less than tactful response is addressed to me.

Or how about if all players start buying a laptop, setting it next to them, and "spectating" the game while also playing it. Is it OK as long as everyone does it?

No because it's not the intent of the developers for the game to be played that way. Obviously there will always be things that can't be avoided if you go far enough to come up with crazy examples. I can hire someone to set my opponent's house on fire while we're playing so I can win. That's not the intent of the developers either.

The biggest one would be to know exactly where your enemies' units are. Wait, this sounds familiar. Isn't that precisely what the aforementioned radar widget accomplishes?

That widget is known to exploit a bug in the engine. The developers intended to allow lua to let you automate actions that the player can otherwise perform, and streamline information that the player would otherwise receive. They did not intend for the every unit's true ID to be known to LuaUI. So that widget falls outside the realm of developer intent and it's a cheat, yes. However he made it public so clearly very_bad_soldier was not out to hurt the game but rather help it, because he knows that someone else might make the widget secretly so better that everyone has the same ability.

Edit: Just to be clear again I mistook the widget you were originally talking about when I first responded to you. I thought you were talking about a different widget. I'm not defending the exploit, it should be fixed on the engine side.

[very_bad_soldier]

How is this a tolerable situation? If aimbots become popular in FPS games, should we just give all players aimbots by default so it's fair? Or how about if all players start buying a laptop, setting it next to them, and "spectating" the game while also playing it. Is it OK as long as everyone does it?

Did you read the thread already? It covers probably most aspects.
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=15686

My opinion: It's a cheat. But seems hard to fix engine-side. But until that happens it will be better to keep it freely available for everyone. (Its still damn easy to write it yourself even if we would delete it from download sites).

EDIT:
Btw: I use it ingame. But its really not half as useful as it might seem at first glance, seriously. Still worth to fix.

[SirMaverick]

"Ghosted Buildings" is enabled by default in BA

I read buildings.

Me too.

Do you know the big difference between a building and a unit? A building is static, it does not move.

A building is a static unit. So this reduces the discussion to mobile units.

Your opinion. In my opinion its not a cheat if the widget does only things automated the (experienced) user would be able to do anyways.

The user would not be able to do the same automated thing AND something else in the meantime.

With just one mouse, keyboard and 2 hands the user is restricted in a certain way. Yes.

Even an experienced user can't micro his 100 units all over the map at the same time.

The amout that will be automatically controlled matters? What about queues, auto stockpile etc. and coop mode? These are all cheats that way.

[Regret]

The amout that will be automatically controlled matters? What about queues, auto stockpile etc. and coop mode? These are all cheats that way.

They have to be done manually. They are not made for the user automatically based on complex calculations.

[CarRepairer]

Micromanagement has been a controversial aspect of game design for many years: some gamers regard it as an unwelcomed distraction from higher levels of strategic thinking, and some games try to minimize it; some players and designers treat it as an important skill, and one that is necessary if the game is to support top-level competitions; and some enjoy opportunities to use tactical skill in combat but dislike having to do a lot of detailed work when managing their economies.

It is a feature in many games on Spring. So yes, a widget "jinking" your units automatically is a cheat in those games.

No it's not a cheat in BA. The makers of BA made a mod for an engine that supports lua scripts. Autoswarm doesn't exploit anything beyond the engine's intentions of lua usage.

[JohannesH]

Micromanagement has been a controversial aspect of game design for many years: some gamers regard it as an unwelcomed distraction from higher levels of strategic thinking, and some games try to minimize it; some players and designers treat it as an important skill, and one that is necessary if the game is to support top-level competitions; and some enjoy opportunities to use tactical skill in combat but dislike having to do a lot of detailed work when managing their economies.

It is a feature in many games on Spring. So yes, a widget "jinking" your units automatically is a cheat in those games.

No it's not a cheat in BA. The makers of BA made a mod for an engine that supports lua scripts. Autoswarm doesn't exploit anything beyond the engine's intentions of lua usage.

So the ENGINE intends that Lua should be freely used in BA?

[SirMaverick]

So the ENGINE intends that Lua should be freely used in BA?

The engine makes it possible, the mod dev can disable it.

[Google_Frog]

Arrg, arguing the middle ground for Ghost Radar is so hard. It's really two separate topics.

The current Ghost Radar widget in it's current form on this version of the engine is a bug. It gives the player information that was not intended to be given to them. This is different to all other information(UI) widgets as they only organize the information that they player is able of knowing in a more accessible way.

The idea behind Ghost Radar identical to giving every unit in the game an identical map icon type. Even in a game with identical dots players could still stare intently at all the radar dots which have been in LOS and remember the identity of each one.

On Auto Skirm, it's little more than an extra movestate. Would you say the Maneuver movestate should be removed because it automatically micros your units into range?

If people are going to go and make click frenzy games then yes they should lock lua. Widget automation will break the point of a click frenzy game. Maybe this discussion doesn't work because we're not actually discussing the same game.

[smoth]

, it misses a couple callins, namely all the UnitDestroyed, UnitCreated, UnitDamaged, etc... This is probably a bug or an overlook.

have these been addressed?

[momfreeek]

I want to gloat so bad but more importantly I want people to not just throw their hands up and hope for the best anymore. Please, for goodness sake, could the developers just *try* to see if there's a way to prevent these sorts of things from happening?

Engine dev's are doing things in exactly the right way imo: working to prevent individual exploits when they are presented. Simply blocking or criminalising widgets is crazy.. if widgets weren't so easy to use and make there wouldn't be nearly so much cool stuff to put in your mod.

Regardless, you can block user widgets from your mod if you like.. you don't need any engine changes for that anyway. Its possible to hack around that by making changes to the engine but there's far worse cheating they could get up to by hacking the engine once you've forced them down that route.

Actively fighting user modification would just start an arms race. It would be a lot of effort to secure this sort of thing in any suitable way.. but it would not be unbreakable. There is no solution and it would just be a sink that drains development time.. time that should be used to make the game better.

Efforts to block user customisation deter progress.