Another request for additional macros.

[Squintina]

I want this. (Though I have a feeling I know why they probably won't do it...)

[radioactive_lego]

I want this. (Though I have a feeling I know why they probably won't do it...)

Do tell! I can't think of a single con by implementing such a thing.

[Squintina]

Do tell! I can't think of a single con by implementing such a thing.

To prevent people from creating macro sequences by having macro one call key A, which has macro 2, which calls key B, which has macro 3, etc.. thus allowing people even longer macros for crafting and such.

[radioactive_lego]

To prevent people from creating macro sequences by having macro one call key A, which has macro 2, which calls key B, which has macro 3, etc.. thus allowing people even longer macros for crafting and such.

ahh. i see. hmmm.

the caviat would have to be that they would have to prevent or exclude /ks 0-9,-,+ (the hotbar buttons)

edit:
on second thought, there is really no difference between this and hotbar switching. press

[Bixby]

the caviat would have to be that they would have to prevent or exclude /ks 0-9,-,+ (the hotbar buttons)

The hotbar keys can be reassigned. They'd have to make the exception based on what's actually bound to hotbar slots.

And then there's automating things outside of looping macros, too. /ks whatever your confirm button is, /ks down three times, /ks confirm <wait.3> /ks confirm <wait.3>.... one-click mining.

With all the tangles that'd go with it, I agree with Niwashi, it'd be better to just add macros for the functions that are missing.