i didnt say it made sense 
I just think the common sense approach as you are showing gets us into two many grey areas which make it difficult to communicate to the player base (you read the forum. we are not smart) and even more difficult to enforce. From a rule maker point of view its far neater and cleaner just to say no……binding two weapon groups to one key is a not allowed.
I might be pleasantly surprised when the official response is in. But i suspect not.
What if I could bind the actions of
to a macro that does one action per one press of the macro key?
It would be just like a WoW rotation macro for convenience. And it would be dangerously close to botting a hauler in EVE.
WoW macros are great and I loved making and using them for my Druid (with 5 different actions bound to one key based on different states/forms), but I don’t think macros have a place in EVE.
If those commands all have their individual shortcuts, this should be fine, because it doesn’t matter what physical (or virtual) key a command is running from. It’s not “botting” because botting implies automation without user input. Here you’d actually be pressing the keys. CCP would only be able to differentiate this based on the delay between key strokes. They can’t tell whether you hit “A” or a number pad key that has been rebound to act as the “A” key (unless they have something watching you between your input device and the device driver, which would be legally shady).
Hypothetically, this creates the possibility of false positives if you’re really good at timing your keys consistently. Botters get around this by implementing randomized delays between key strokes. CCP fights back by looking at the software that’s running on your system, and using heuristic analysis to check for suspicious input delay patterns. The botters fight back by using FPGA boards to get rid of software signatures and simulate physical media inputs, etc. etc. Well, maybe not most botters. Most probably just do it the simple way and accept occasional bans as a sunk cost.
Whether CCP can tell if you’re using a macro and whether macros that combine multiple actions are allowed are two separate topics.
It’s kinda weird that you can’t see how “stringing together actions that all have their own individual shortcuts is fine, because hey I could press them all separately at the same time” is pretty much exactly what CCP is banning.
You’ve also got a hefty dose of “it’s fine if they can’t catch me” in there. I guess that’s making sacrifices for the good of the game. Or something.
If they punish someone for having a key that presses F1+F2 at the same time, they should also punish people who press F1+F2 at the same time with their fingers. There’s no practical difference between the two whatsoever.
I’m starting to think maybe the BttF joke with “Density” is appropriate here.
Of course there’s a practical difference. It facilitates more and multiple weapon groups across different weapon types than the game allows. It is faster and less prone to error. It leads to saying "oh hey I can press “Activate webber” and “activate scrambler” and “overload rack” and “fire weapon group 1” and “turn on neutralizer” all individually, and I could map them so if I mash my fist just right on the keypad they all go off, so yes of course it would be fine to set up a mouse button macro for all those.
At any rate, there are none so blind as those who refuse to see past their own viewpoint.
Here’s the rule:
Highlighted the important bit.
Nothing about replacing hitting two keys with two fingers at the same time with one key with one finger “accelerates” the acquisition of anything in the game.
Well, it certainly won’t hurt to get an updated reply from a GM on this. There is the EULA wording, and then there is CCP’s interpretation of that wording. The “one action per keypress” standard has been pretty solidly accepted since this post in 2015:
https://forums-archive.eveonline.com/topic/387571
With the specific references being:
" Input Automation
Input Automation refers to actions that are commonly also referred to as botting or macroing. This term is used to describe, but is not limited to, the automation of actions which have consequences in the EVE universe.
Input Broadcasting & Input Multiplexing
Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing refer to the multiplication of inputs, actions and events to multiple instances of the game.
Going Forward
As of 15th of March 2013 we have been policing input automation based on a two-strike policy
• 1st strike for input automation is a 30 day ban
• 2nd strike for input automation is a permanent ban
Input Automation remains strictly prohibited, and is policed under our suspension and ban policy."
And:
"Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing of actions with consequences in the EVE universe, are prohibited and will be policed in the same manner as Input Automation.
This includes, but isn’t limited to:
• Activation and control of ships and modules
• Navigation and movement within the EVE universe
• Movement of assets and items within the EVE universe
• Interaction with other characters"
Of course people can say “Well that ISD isn’t official, that GM wasn’t the right one, CCP Falcon isn’t part of CCP anymore”. And be correct, frankly. CCP has always applied their rules when, where and how they see fit.
They don’t apply their rules consistently, they don’t catch everyone, and they don’t even make an effort to. The rules and interpretation of the rules are basically there to give them some kind of footing if they look at your account activity, decide they don’t like it, and want to ban you. (See the recent forum posts from the “I got banned for playing too efficiently” person… I don’t have the link right now).
So as stated, anyone can rules-lawyer all they want. It won’t make one whit of difference if they decide to ban you. One action per keystroke is simple and acceptable. Go past that and you’re inviting CCP to “interpret” you into a ban. Maybe. If you’re caught. And you haven’t paid them enough to look the other way.
I don’t think that even 0.1% of players are going to look for obscure forum posts “just in case” before binding two modules to the same key in their mouse driver software. I bet there are thousands of new players doing that exact thing with their fancy gaming hardware.
None of these seem to cover the specific use case of binding a few modules to a single manual key press for convenience.
Then why have the EULA?
I did, and I think that person was lying. They gave no details of what they were doing, and only maintained their innocence.
Agreed.
Close to agreed.
Still agreed.
More agreed, although hard to tell with that one, since no actual representation of the facts was given.
The point isn’t that CCP’s stance is logical, provable, sensible, or even has much impact on 99.5% of EVE gameplay. If I was playing enough, and needed to bind 5 actions to a mouse button in order to significantly cut down on RSI, I probably would. But if I did, I’d at least want to be aware that I was crossing a line into a grey area by CCP interpretation of their rules, and take steps to balance the risk and reward to me.
I’d very much not want to do it and be completely blindsided when my main account with billions of ISK and piles of Plex gets banned because I was ignorant of CCP’s policies/bahavior.
Sounds like it’s time to revisit the rules and bring them to par with the decade. I use a mouse with 12 side buttons, a keyboard with on-the-fly macros, and a gaming keypad. I’d sure like to be able to bind different combinations of ship module commands to be able to switch tactical postures on the fly without contorting my hands into weird shapes to hit those keys. None of it is gainful automation, and it seems that the community is accepting these vague rules without any particular reason, as true botting and automation have nothing to do with these convenience features.
I respectfully doff my cap to you, Destiny!
You can macro the normal keypresses like alt+p because it’s seen as one command. So things like stop ship, open window, overheat module/rack, change t3d mode are all fine.
It’s this one:
But I just bought the new EVGA stuff (haven’t set it up yet):
For anyone who doesn’t know, both have a third ring finger button that you can use to toggle sensitivity (which is extremely useful in FPS games), or remap to any other function.
It would be pretty cool to have legit combinations like “approach, hardeners on, drones out” with a single button press. Like switching your posture, essentially. Or for example, cutting all offensive modules. It would definitely feel like we’re more in control of our own ships that way.
This is exactly the kind of thread I mean when I say that CCP refuses to communicate clearly. This could be settled in a post.
I had that mouse, kept clicking random thumb buttons by accident (as a sidenote, don’t get a new Logitech mouse, pretty much all of them have issues).
The macros you’re describing are very much a no-no and would give people who use them a clear advantage but from a player’s perspective it would be cool.
I kinda make that work by changing the drone keybinds to something way easier, hardeners can be activated before dropping warp.
Really now?
Or maybe they don’t want to bother playing techs for a game. I can spend hours tinkering with my PC for important things I want to do but for a game? Nah, my greed isn’t that bad, lol.
Seems like it would be suitable for solo players indeed.
It is what it is, I guess, especially if CCP approves. As for the ragequit, I’m not thirsty for salt water.
I’m sure there are good bot detection tools out there, it’s all up to CCP to take care of that.
Yea, I have no problems with players playing the game as intended and what you describe is cheating but every MMO has cheaters and if certain people feel a strong urge of cheating in a video game, well, what can I tell you, it’s simply pathetic but we all have our quirks.
If botting is against CCP’s EULA then I hope they’re doing their best to take care of the cheaters.
o7
Player Experience team cannot sanction or otherwise authorize the use of specific third party programs of setups. I hope you understand that we cannot realistically do so given the multitude of programs, user cases and user setups that can emerge. There is also the fact that CCP Games has no direct control over the development of programs created by third parties; a program which complies with the EVE Online EULA today may be updated tomorrow with a feature which violates the EULA. Therefore the Player Experience team cannot make any direct statements concerning your particular inquiry.
In short, support is not provided beyond that listed in our official policies and public statements on the matter. Use of any third party tool is done entirely at the risk of the user and we cannot publish a comprehensive list of allowed and prohibited configurations.
I can point you to the following resources and statements on the use of third party programs. I hope this proves useful to you in determining if what you want to do is permitted by the EULA or not.
https://forums-archive.eveonline.com/message/5241022
any use of third party tools is done entirely at your own risk and there may be severe repercussions, up to and including a permanent suspension of your account(s).
So ultimately I can only recommend that you do not use any sort of third party program which assists with EVE gameplay and/or changes the way the game is played. A good rule of thumb to keep in mind is that if you are inclined to ask then the activity in question is probably prohibited.
Well, I got a big fat non-answer with nothing but deflection and a link to the EULA, Falcon’s post from 2014 and related stuff.
