Dev's Limit Breaking 101 Techniques
-
fox, add this offset by M0tah to the list.
Greetings
goldsearEDIT:
ChangeIn HUD:Limits: freelancer.exe D5984 7E->EB = remove speed display limit of 999 (alternative to above) ~Unknown freelancer.exe D5936 0F85->90E9 = remove cruise display limit of 300 ~Unknown ```toIn HUD:Limits:
freelancer.exe D5984 7E->EB = remove speed display limit of 999 (alternative to above) ~StoneD
freelancer.exe D5936 0F85->90E9 = remove cruise display limit of 300 ~StoneDand addfreelancer.exe 1D7E80 300f = cruise speed display limit ~M0tah (note: same offset as Schmackbolzen’s tradelane waypoint reached distance)
greetings, Gold_Sear -
Good evening, old friends and perhaps soon-to-be new ones.
So, since I last saw this thread it has about tripled in length, and from what I gather some of the wiki page is out of date although there seems to be an effort of gathering and recovering all the offsets found in the recent years.
The particular one I am looking for seems to either not been found or not to be recoverable by search parameters I managed to intuit, so here goes.I noticed at a velocity of about 1200 m/s and higher effects like space dust no longer render. I thought this was a matter of the ale, so I went in there and started coding away. Increasing emitter size, making effect alpha and size time-independent seemed, while otherwise making expected changes, not to break through what hitherto seemed to be an emergent limit. So my modder-senses tell me it must be hardcoded given that parameter any of the ini code seems to refer to is responsible.
Does anybody know this offset? And if it hasn’t been found, would someone versed with the appropriate tools and know-how kindly have a look for it?
And while we’re at it, what is responsible for the shaking during a system jump? it happens in both the target and the origin system irrespective of the properties of the tunnel. Is there perhaps a multiplier for that?
Many thanks!
-
Hi Gisteron
Assuming your question regarding the “shake” is about the screen shake:
I don´t think there is a way to prevent it for this particular event (jumping in or out of a system) but only for hull hits and shield hits.
Anyway… you can remove it completely.
Check out this offset:freelancer.exe 11DB44 74->EB = remove screen shake altogether ~adoxaGreetings
J.R. -
I noticed at a velocity of about 1200 m/s and higher effects like space dust no longer render.
I expanded Manhattan’s atmosphere dust and changed cruise speed to 2500 m/s and that still seemed to be rendered.
And while we’re at it, what is responsible for the shaking during a system jump?
freelancer.exe 103E49 041F5D->3C3F50 = screen shake during jump PART 1 ~adoxa freelancer.exe 103E7B 041F5D->3C3F50 = screen shake during jump PART 2 ~adoxa freelancer.exe 103E8B 041F5D->3C3F50 = screen shake during jump PART 3 ~adoxa freelancer.exe 103F3C 90909090->0.015f = screen shake during jump PART 4 ~adoxa ```(The original value is at 1D1F04, but that is used by other functions, so this moves it to 103F3C.) -
adoxa wrote:
I noticed at a velocity of about 1200 m/s and higher effects like space dust no longer render.
I expanded Manhattan’s atmosphere dust and changed cruise speed to 2500 m/s and that still seemed to be rendered.
Hmm, weird, the regular motion dust disappears completely. Maybe it is something in the ale after all, I shall compare it thusly with the atmosphere dust. Thanks for now…
[jump shake hack]
So many thanks! Still baffled how you do it but aren’t we lucky to have you goes off to bother someone else with his happiness
-
Maybe crazy question…
Does anyone know the distance for the aimbot to lock on the target crosshair?
What I mean is the following.
When hostiles come into fire range of your currently activated weapons, a small red dot appears at the screen, for any of the hostiles. You can move your mouse over them just fine, but when you shoot, within a small range of the red dot the fire direction ‘locks’ on the red dot, when there are two near each other it will lock on the nearest.Does anyone know the offset to change this small range?
greetings,
Gold_Sear -
Since this would be usable for cheating, there will be no answer to this question. Any answer will be summarily deleted.
-
FriendlyFire wrote:
Since this would be usable for cheating, there will be no answer to this question. Any answer will be summarily deleted.<deleted some=“” text=“” here=“”>EDIT: since people are still playing FL online, I have to agree with FF, and I should read the rules better…</deleted>
-
I don’t care what you think, no answer will be allowed. I would recommend you don’t try to argue any further.
-
Far distances with this dot will lag your client.
Nice notice but i agree with FF - useless. -
Considering weapon_equip.ini can be modified for cheating, then we don’t have to talk about it too… And about FreeLancer modding. Don’t be disappointed but this is strange.
If he modified any type of files, then, if he goes on a server, the flhook anticheat do the job very well, that’s really effective, tested many times with a few players. A server owner have to protect his playground against cheaters.
Why not have a try on this, the FL modding is an so vast and interesting subject
When i’m here i want to thank all the people on this topic, it helped me a lot from the past !
-
FLHook anticheat cannot detect those kinds of cheats. You really don’t know what you’re talking about, and it’s a bit irritating that you jump in this when I have clearly said that no answer will be allowed
-
weapon_equip.ini cheats are easy to detect
flhook, which should be running in every server meanwhile can detect themother changes are not that easy to detect and it would be very hard for server admins to observe every file for possible changes
Im not saying that it is impossible since there clearly are methods to get that done but that would require all server owners to have alot of knowledge.
Some information is restricted for good reason. Accept it.
-
I’m very sure of what i’m talking about, it detects CRC of a given file and compares it with CRC in its configuration file, i’ve tested it a couple of times with a lot of file types dll, exe, ini, txt, works very well. When you modify a file it changes its CRC and the flhook anticheat will detect it (CRC cheat) and send the player with the modified file in a “prison” base.
That’s not so difficult to do, i can make a short tutorial about that. Servers admins have to know a bit. Anyway they are almost all empty.
Some information is restricted for good reason. Accept it.
And it’s very harmful for the rest of the modding community to keep these kind of knowledge. It’s like M$ who don’t want to release the FL source code.
Enough said, au revoir.
-
Nobody of that generation cheaters are actually playing this 13 year old dx8-based game that has neither cockpits
, neither real size planets
, neither realistic physics
. Time is gone.I don’t mind against roll & shoot / 90-flip & follow professional terminators, but to look at only, I hardly fight against current npc implementation even.
-
1. In order to check crcs a specific flhook version is needed. A version that is not used on all servers. FLhook development took a different path on various servers. There are servers using the latest plugin version…. there are servers which have custom hooks based on the 1.5.5. sources. Many servers simply dont have such a crc detection and for some of them switching to the newest hook version would mean to loose custom features that are unique on these servers.
2. Checking for CRCs would require to know which files have to be checked. Checking ALL files could cause performance problems and delays in client responses.
3. Its not that MS does not want to release the source code… it is known that they can not release it.
-
Thank you for the explanation, I have not though of these kind of thing with flhook versions and custom features.
Sure you have to have a specific version and you have to have a client for it. Checking CRCs is to do on most important files, you can’t do it on all files because of what you said and because it really takes a lot of time to do it.
There are others existing anticheat but I never used it and can’t speak about.
I really think that is the server owner responsibility to protect against cheaters. If I go on a server and I found a lot of cheat, I don’t blame players first, but the admins who haven’t protected their playground, and by this fact I don’t want to play on it anymore. By expecting cheaters are everywere, we modders don’t have access to some kind of information, it stuck us in some ignorance. Anyway time is gone for this game to find a real importance about hundred of cheaters who can invade servers.
I had read here on TSP that source code had been lost by M$, if you speak about that, but I don’t trust it anymore, it’s more easy to say that you can’t when you don’t want, I think it’s just to stop the campaign for obtaining the sources that they said that. They have the power to change theirs rules to give the sources if they want.
It don’t prevent modding community to do some awesome work here, like on this thread.
-
You don’t seem to realize that this is a hell of a lot more difficult than it appears. How do you check for that hack? Scan Freelancer.exe or whatever DLL the change is in? Nope, it’s trivial to just write a patch that works in memory and doesn’t change the file. Scan dacom.ini? You’ve just prevented people from using certain entirely valid changes like HudShift, and they can sideload through a d3d injector too.
But wait, you can just not release that information (because it has EXACTLY ZERO PURPOSE aside from cheating) and solve the problem for everyone. The Starport will not facilitate cheating, and that’s the end of it.
As for the source code, get over it. Microsoft are under no obligations to release it, they don’t have to explain why (and they haven’t, everything is just rumors or speculations) and they don’t have to talk to us about any of it. It’s not them being evil, it’s not them being selfish, it’s not greed either, it’s what 99.95% of game developers do.
