| 1 |
Is that worth the 1000's of commands it spams out most of which aren't completable?
|
1 |
Is that worth the 1000's of commands it spams out most of which aren't completable?
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
[q]Gives players an advantage over those that don't use it (aka cheating). [/q]
|
3 |
[q]Gives players an advantage over those that don't use it (aka cheating). [/q]
|
| 4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
| 5 |
This is not cheating and goes against zk design philosophy. Cheating in the sense of zk should be limited to the following applications:
|
5 |
This is not cheating and goes against zk design philosophy. Cheating in the sense of zk should be limited to the following applications:
|
| 6 |
1.) Gaining intelligence that would under normal circumstances be unobtainable (EG: map hack, cheat gadgets, speccheating)
|
6 |
1.) Gaining intelligence that would under normal circumstances be unobtainable (EG: map hack, cheat gadgets, speccheating)
|
| 7 |
2.) Gaining an unfair state due to programmatic interference (EG: drophack, on-command desyncs)
|
7 |
2.) Gaining an unfair state due to programmatic interference (EG: drophack, on-command desyncs)
|
| 8 |
3.) Circumventing existing fair play aperture through modification of game files, data or ram (EG: removal of projectile hiding)
|
8 |
3.) Circumventing existing fair play aperture through modification of game files, data or ram (EG: removal of projectile hiding)
|
| 9 |
4.) Generating network interference through deliberate action to create unfavorable network conditions for other players (EG: spamming 100000's of build lotus commands)
|
9 |
4.) Generating network interference through deliberate action to create unfavorable network conditions for other players (EG: spamming 100000's of build lotus commands)
|
| 10 |
5.) Any sort of AI that plays the game for you with full autonomy. Individual unit AI scripts are permissible because said units cannot make their own high level decisions. (EG: adding a helper ai to play the game for you)
|
10 |
5.) Any sort of AI that plays the game for you with full autonomy. Individual unit AI scripts are permissible because said units cannot make their own high level decisions. (EG: adding a helper ai to play the game for you)
|
| 11 |
\n
|
11 |
\n
|
| 12 |
A
helper
widget
like
Attrition
Counter
is
not
cheating
because
it
does
not
violate
these
points
(
not
because
it
is
a
built
in
widget
that's
DISABLED
BY
DEFAULT)
.
A
helper
widget
that
tracks
enemy
unit
counts
as
they
enter
los
would
not
be
cheating
because
it
does
not
violate
these
points.
This
broad
definition
leads
to
some
unfair
judgement
calls
such
as
the
use
of
colvols
to
become
untargetable.
As
multiple
player
testimonials
here
demonstrate
that
your
definition
of
"cheating"
is
flawed
and
would
not
illegitimatize
the
use
of
such
a
script
(
in
the
sense
that
such
a
script
gives
near
0
advantage
while
providing
major
disadvantages)
.
Under
the
above
guidelines,
the
script
could
be
illegitimate
by
violating
point
4.
|
12 |
A
helper
widget
like
Attrition
Counter
is
not
cheating
because
it
does
not
violate
these
points
(
not
because
it
is
a
built
in
widget
that's
DISABLED
BY
DEFAULT)
.
A
helper
widget
that
tracks
enemy
unit
counts
as
they
enter
los
would
not
be
cheating
because
it
does
not
violate
these
points.
This
broad
definition
leads
to
some
unfair
judgement
calls
such
as
the
use
of
colvols
to
become
untargetable.
As
multiple
player
testimonials
here
demonstrate
that
your
definition
of
"cheating"
is
flawed
and
would
not
illegitimatize
the
use
of
such
a
script
(
in
the
sense
that
such
a
script
gives
near
0
advantage
while
providing
major
disadvantages)
.
Under
the
above
guidelines,
the
script
could
be
illegitimate
by
violating
point
4
while
allowing
for
legit
developers
to
create
user-generated
content
freely.
This
I
feel
is
the
best
middle
ground
here
short
of
major
development
work
for
enforcement
and
overhead
for
developers.
|
Party llts