Mount Bug

[dTantra]

As I said.. you are codecaving in ASM
//snip

No issue exists with changing the compared ID of the current player in the middle of the function.

What is the point of how you kick users? Are you trying to say yours achieves some different effect just because your function is longer? This is all it takes.

SendClientMessage(CurrentPlayer, "Connection Closed.");
CloseUser(CurrentPlayer);

As to why I have not posted mine, I posted everything that is needed to do it in this thread. The address you can hook, the variable to extract, and the logic needed to make it work. I have not posted my code verbatim because it is built into a plugin framework for dynamic deployment and the functions will obviously not work without the complete code. All code snips are C++ friendly, I cannot attest to them working on C#.

__asm 
    {    
        POP RetAddr
        MOV BYTE PTR DS:[EBX + 0x0C], 0
        MOVZX EAX, BYTE PTR DS:[EBX + 0x0D]
        MOV CurrentPlayer, EDI
        PUSHAD
        PUSHFD
    }
    //Call your function to process the current player here, if you want the mount to success, make sure CurrentPlayer is returned with their real player id, otherwise just set it to 1001.
    __asm
    {
        POPFD
        POPAD
        MOV EDI, CurrentPlayer
        PUSH RetAddr
        ret
    }

[Reaguee]

No issue exists with changing the compared ID of the current player in the middle of the function.

Thats what you want to believe, and if is ok for you, then continue doing that. I just want to let others (those that dont know about coding) know that doing that is a BIG mistake on the code. Those who knows about programming well know that to avoid server process the request, you just need to do a return. Of course you cannot do that return because the way you are codecaving.

What is the point of how you kick users? Are you trying to say yours achieves some different effect just because your function is longer?

Probably you are confuse with my kickout function and for that you think is longer than yours. If you read it again you will see that on the declaration, the flag of kickout is set by default to false, what means that i do not kickout anyone unless i decide to kick. so what it does by default is just to send a message to the client.

Now if we talk about any of the delegates i use in my code, none of then are longer, all them are shorter than yours, because what i do is a call to the original function, I don't have the need as you do, to rewrite the function.

As to why I have not posted mine, I posted everything that is needed to do it in this thread. The address you can hook, the variable to extract, and the logic needed to make it work.

No you didn't, but I think no one cares you didn't. As you said previously, every one have its own way of coding, all i have to add to that, is that those ways depends a lot on how good you are in understanding the code you are fixing.

[dTantra]

Thats what you want to believe, and if is ok for you, then continue doing that. I just want to let others (those that dont know about coding) know that doing that is a BIG mistake on the code. Those who knows about programming well know that to avoid server process the request, you just need to do a return. Of course you cannot do that return because the way you are codecaving.

If that's what you want to believe, keep believing it, but I just want to let the others know that it does not create a problem at all for that function. Once the function is returned the reference to the id is disregarded, it does not carry over to any other function and is destroyed. Also, I can trigger a return by jmping to the end of the function if needed.

Probably you are confuse with my kickout function and for that you think is longer than yours. If you read it again you will see that on the declaration, the flag of kickout is set by default to false, what means that i do not kickout anyone unless i decide to kick. so what it does by default is just to send a message to the client.

I am not referring to your function in which you process the mount bug trigger, I was referring to how you kept going on and on about your kick function?

Now if we talk about any of the delegates i use in my code, none of then are longer, all them are shorter than yours, because what i do is a call to the original function, I don't have the need as you do, to rewrite the function.

I don't have to rewrite the functions ever, as you can see from my posted function, I call the original game function with the required original arguments and let the server process it as it would normally.

No you didn't, but I think no one cares you didn't. As you said previously, every one have its own way of coding, all i have to add to that, is that those ways depends a lot on how good you are in understanding the code you are fixing.

Really?

/snip
Info about the mount request can be extracted from 0x48BE87, information about the mount equip / unequip can be extracted from 0x43DBA0.

/snip
Address 0x48BE87 gets called every single time someone tries to use a mount, before it is processed. When it is called the EDI register contains the player id number. You can create an array of structures for each possible player and use the player id to reference the player actions.

struct PlayerMounts{ int ID; int MsgCount; clock_t LastUse;};

When the action is used, check the structure to see if the player id has a LastUse time set, if it does not, set it to the current time and process normally. If the LastUse is under your desired time limit, call SendClientMessage and give them some sort of notice, and set the EDI register to 0x3E9, this will prevent the call from processing. If the LastUse is over your desired time limit, set the LastUse to the current time and process the request as normal.

But hey, keep on doing you!

[Reaguee]

Got it!!. Hope anyone who reads this thread follow your code. You are the best dTantra!! same as you was (if was you) when disabled mail, ZP and portals to avoid dupes, instead of fixing the real problem that cause the dupe issue.

Hope you feel better since I already deleted how I did for fixing

BTW would you show me the way you manage buff/debuff bug? or you didn't fix that too. Im just curious on what solution you have for that bug, because my server already have it fixed.


Superiority? Yesssssss, because even all things your team (or the team were you belonged => "Damodar's team") do to me, Im still alive since 6 years from now, w/o ever do a roll back or changing name to hide from ppl and so on.

Regards

[rogers1973]

chill guys.both of you are a good developer. by the way dtantra what software did you use to read that code.
sorry im newbie 😕

[dTantra]

@Reaguee I don't know who you are or what relation you have to tantra or anyone else. I don't get into all the bullshit, I simply write code.

same as you was (if was you) when disabled mail, ZP and portals to avoid dupes, instead of fixing the real problem that cause the dupe issue.

Actually I did write a fix for those things, none of them were disabled to fix the problem. Ironically enough that was log related.

chill guys.both of you are a good developer. by the way dtantra what software did you use to read that code.
sorry im newbie ������

You will have to be a bit more specific, what code are you asking about? You mean zonesrv.exe ? Or the code pieces I posted?

[rogers1973]

yes the code you posted. and the zonesrv.exe

thank you sir.

[master_unknown]

Its C++ with ASM.
If you dont even know or at least follow their discussion, dont bother.
It will lead you to nowhere.

[rogers1973]

Up for this one.

- - - Updated - - -

Up for this one.

- - - Updated - - -

Up for this one.