You can go into any server with 1000 stingers. It's a cheat on the client side.
You can go into any server with 1000 stingers. It's a cheat on the client side.
When I was in the 1Cav the leader at that time was Goblin, he
stated at the time that he fixed the invis bug ( 1.5 C4). Does
anyone know off hand what PC language C4 iswritten in?? I can't remember myself.What got him off the game was he tried to fix the no-count bug but gave up, than lost interest for the game completely and moved on to something else.( BHD)
this spirit can fly under the ground on 'come and get it',
obviously he also speaks spanish beside of english.
i also noticed that he disapeared, so he either rejoined or 'resetgames'.
as i said before in this thread, im not very familar with the side of code of games. but i'd think that he either modified the client side maps or the collision detection isnt working. maybe this is the same - dont know.
hope this helps the code junkies to find out what this is.
It's not modified client side maps. The maps are downloaded from the server by all players joining the game. If you take all of the stock maps out of your C4 you still can join a server. But there are other files related to the map like bin files. These mostly contain info on waypoints/waypoint names. But thanx for the ideas. I know my grey matter is greyyer than ever lately.
I really want to stay out of this. Its been well over a year, maybe 2, since I've done any coding for C4 - and that was under some very intensive, step-by-step tutoring. I'd rather make models for the game.
A couple of things I remember from this: 1. If you fix a cheat - it could be countered. 2. If you fix a 'glitch' - someone could just 'rebuild' it.
If you want to just have fun - without people glitching/cheating, like you are mentioning here... why not just make an addon to 'capture' the ip of the player and punt/ban them - and resume the gaming. But you should be absolutely sure you are punting/banning a 'cheater' ( and not some poor kid with a poor connection ) And exactly how do you go about proving this - unless they are boasting of their accomplishment ?
I prefer to not go into much here - the mere mention of the possibility of cheats - can send even honest people on a quest to find one.
100% agree on that.A couple of things I remember from this: 1. If you fix a cheat - it could be countered. 2. If you fix a 'glitch' - someone could just 'rebuild' it.
Well I know I don't have the time or energy to build security patches for 4-5 year old game. And After you patched it, you would just have to patch it again in a month or so. It would be easier to build your own game. Monitoring your own server is the best.
No addon needed. Using Punt/Ban commands in game seems to work fine.Why not just make an addon to 'capture' the ip of the player and punt/ban them. But you should be absolutely sure you are punting/banning a 'cheater' (and not some poor kid with a poor connection). And exactly how do you go about proving this - unless they are boasting of their accomplishment ?
But yes let's try to stay more focused on info to fix Game Glitch INVIS and not make this a cheater thread.I prefer to not go into much here - the mere mention of the possibility of cheats - can send even honest people on a quest to find one.
I have been doing some reading on this matter as of late mainly because I tried to use one of these.
In other games, they use a remote or server control panel.
The one CFS made was kewl but,,, I don't believe it is good for that.
Delta Force has a Control Panel however it causes major problems in the game and some people can't join.
BF1942 has a very good control panal that shows the IP address and any fluctuations in the players ping. It has Punk Buster installed which we don't have.
However they both look almost the same.
Maybe someone could come up with something similar.
With the BHD control panel you can use different mods like Argus which is the BHD version of AE.
This is just an idea. Spank me if this is out of line.
FYI just so you all know::The one CFS made was kewl but,,, I don't believe it is good for that.
Well if you are reffering to 8H-AP, *CFS* did not build it. I built it and *CFS* does not have any claim to it. Yes I am on *CFS* but I keep C4GET and *CFS* things seperate to a point. I am also a server for *CFS* and have been allowed to use their Name Server for testing and running programs like 8H-AP. 8H-AP is part of a C4GET-Host-Manager that I am still building and testing along with ''50 million'' other projects that I am also trying to accomplish. LOL.
Yes, you are right, the Host-Manager w/8H-AP does not go into IP addies and pings. Wow I really wish I knew that much about code. At present time it only allows the adjusting of several Host Options with out pulling down the server to change them (on the fly and takes effect at next game). I have built in a 8H-AP section in the Host-Manager. I still have several bugs to fix thru out the Host-Manager and may try to release a DownSized version with less options but will include 8H-AP.
Projects to make C4 FuNnER:
Some of the projects I dig into along with the C4 Game Enhancement Team and a few others that have some code smarts:
1. INVIS
2. Game Types, recently got S&D, A&D to work, still testing
before I release anything about it. Flag Games may never happen.
3. Scoring
4. Getting the InGame Timer to work without the Player-Manager.
5. New Comanche Skins
6. Terrain & Sky Pack
7. Night Vision for Night Maps.
8. Maps
9. C4GET-Host-Manager
10. There's more but I'll stop there.
hmm my code score... lol
''50 million'' projects vs
1 release of C4GET-Player-Managerv20 w/InGame Timer
A C4 Control Panel would be wayy kewlll... hmmmm..
OK I may be a dork or something, But when I got the game 2 yrs ago (eg 2002-2003), I only noticed tha the people running XP went Invis, most of the time, What if the TCP/IP stack has a flaw in it that doesent allow for the client to sync. with the server. If the client cant sync, then that person is sending the telemetry at the wrong time. It may sound dumb, but you can do the same thing on a TCP/IP network, known as spoofing. let me know if that helps.
Vesh Fey, Stack overflow makes sense, however I believe after a few minutes of this the server would treat this as cabling and drop the client causing a sysdump.
I have been playing other games and what they do in some of the servers is, if someone stays above a certain ping level they get punted.
~NPC~ has adopted this practice in games such as DF BHD & BF1942.
What we practice and is accepted in BHD is if someone complains of seeing a certain player run through walls, disappear into the ground when they laydown, or use glitches in the map to their advantage, they get warned then punted.
~NPC~ has also noticed that imperfections in custom maps can cause problems for all maps on a server running custom maps. Meaning imperfections in the code for maps, say - alignment of tunnels or buildings turned on their side can cause problems in the coding for all maps in that server. ~NPC~ has seen this in our own server. We have dedicated members to seeking these imperfections out, note them, and fix them. If it can't be fixed then the map is scrapped.
I hope this is helpful. I hope everyone has a happy new year.
Hasta mi amogos,
I'm Outy,
TerrorX
the technology is out of scope for me, but I think c4 uses udp (not tcp), which is more or less an asynchronous variety of ip protocol (if i understand it correctly ?). I was thinking that the reason for the invis had only to do with the clients.
this is my reasoning:
premises:
clientx, y and z are playing with an invis player I
1) I may only be invis to clientx, buy clienty, and clientz can see him
2) even though clientx can't see I, his C4 game knows where he is, he is just not visible to the naked eye (his comanche 3d object is not being redrawn), as evidenced by the fact that when I fires weapons they are generated form a distinct moving location
conclusions
1) the server is updating the positions and activity of all live objects, visible and invisible (or not, see case B)
2) since clientx, y, and z are using the same exact game code, the only difference has been some part of information that they did not receive regarding the state of I
possible causes/comments:
Case A
-clientx did not receive a packet that said that client I respawned, therefore clientx is either redrawing the blown up helicopter where it last was, or cannot redraw the helicopter at its current location because there is some piece of information missing (needs a new object ID value ? in order to create the new comanche ?)
-during ci's, restartgames, and player's getting stuck there is some piece of information that involves the state of each player that, when not recieved by a client, results in invisibility only to that client
repair: write some routing that checks that all 16 choppers on clientx (actually on every client's) machine are visible and being redrawn
Case B
-clientx did not receive a packet that said that client I respawned, and therefore client I's chopper actually does not exist on clientx's computer. what clientx sees is the missles being fired, but from a point in space where they start to be drawn, not from an invisible chopper - from a nonexistant one ! why ? cause clientx did not get the tidbit of information that client I got destroyed, and cannot draw the new chopper it doesnt know exists
repair: unknown. however, since a resetgames puts things right, it seems like someone could write a shorter version of resetgames that does not involve re downloading the map, but just retrieving from server the information that clientx needs. for example, suppose clientx had a TSR running in memory that checked to see when a missle was fired, if there was a chopper within 15 meters of it, and if not, to either resetgames or do the new shortreset.
anyway, just some ideas to chew over. It may be that someone like spirit can cable and go invis, or send a malformed packet and do it. but the server is sending out the information on the positions of all the ordinance being fired on a regular basis, so it seems reasonable that either a server side fix or a clientx side fix is not out of the realm of possibility, no matter whether client I is a cheater or just went invis.
Wow some possible good ideas there. Is there any relationship to someone being INVIS and their previous death message not showing for the person that can not see the invis player?
Another thought would be: C4 has 2 basic skins that are used for online multiplayer red team / blue team, green, desert. A interesting test would be to have a server and with everyone in the server having only 1 skin available(prolly defintition file,3di file).
I know I've seen players on the same team as me that are INVIS also. But maybe the INVI player has a NULL ID or Skin. The player dies and gets a skin, but it's the wrong team skin, so that player get the next skin, but it's at the end of the list so that player gets a null skin.
I'll also experiment with a 5-8sec respawn timer in the days ahead and see what that does about INVIS. It may help in packets getting lost because of respawning to fast and define a players death slower(better).
Last edited by =AirAvenger=; 01-12-2005 at 06:03 AM.
If this is what is happening it would be pretty easy to prove, in a temporary def assign the NULL ID a mesh(e.g. Hummer) then start playing online, it a player is invis he should appear as a Hummer if thats what you made its mesh.
then we may be able to asign map markers to a new null object ID so they dont use the old ID with a mesh....
-X
Black Knights Collective Squadron Leader - Retired
PC: 2 x Intel Xeon E5-2420 V2 (Dual Socket, 12C/24T) - MSI GeForce GTX 1050 TI - 80GB ECC DDR3
LAPTOP: MSI GE600 - 8GB - 25in 2560x1080
SVR: Dell R720XD XL - 2 x Xeon E5-2640 - 192GB DDR3 - 12 TB - 26 Bays - GigE Fiber
White Hat with Black Stripe
one thing I didn't really hit on was this: if a guy is cabling, its seems as though because his position is unknown, the server either doesn't send his location, or sends out something (unknown) for his location (if someone created a server object manager/explorer this could be determined in real time). its interesting to note that, for instance, sometimes when I have a ci I wake up dead. So in that case the loss of connection didn't result in my not being killed, whereas when someone cables they disappear and the stingers go right thru them. So in the case of someone cabling, the server treats the connection differently somehow than it does for a CI. I find this very interesting, and investigating what happens during cabling might be very productive towards fixing whatever is being sent, or not being sent, to the server that determines the position and visibility of the player.
Maybe the difference between cabling and a CI is that, only the clients downstream is interupted while cabling vs. while in a CI both UP/Down stream would be interupted?? OR??
::
7-8sec respawn timer is what I'm testin in the server for now,, I'll see how that goes before I attempt the testing of a Hummer/Null skin.
UPDATE:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
7-8sec respawn timer.. I ran a TDM public server with custom maps for 7hrs+ with only 1 reported/UNconfirmed INVIS. Wow it looks very promising so far. But Still needs more testing. If this is a fix or a 99% fix for INVIS it will be in the Host-Mgr.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Last edited by =AirAvenger=; 01-13-2005 at 10:02 AM.
Posting Permissions
