Request for a Program (Not a trainer..)
 

Okay, first off, if this is in the wrong forum, forgive me.

Okay, my idea is for someone to make a program that can change the status of triggers. It would only work if you were hosting, and you could choose to make the effect global, or only local. This could be useful for things such as Jail Break, Freeze tag, and other multiplayer levels that use trigger crates/zones. Again, it would only work if you were hosting. This could get rid of the crate limit in the levels that use them..

So, good idea? Bad idea? Possible? Impossible? I'd like to know what you think..and maybe someone could code it..not me though, I have no idea how to..:(

~KJAZZ

i think something like that program lockpick was used for.. (i think) to turn off triggers and such (i think kill created it, im not sure)

Yes, you are right. Kill made the program Lockpick, which is used for modifying triggers. But I'm pretty sure Lockpick is considered a trainer. Especially because non-hosts can use it. But lucky for us Kill uses security to prevent an outbreak of it.

Yes, that could be considered a trainer. But if the HOST is the only one that can use it (and I know this is possible by Project Controller) it is not considered cheating. And you would be able to turn on/off triggers for local AND global as well..

So, any programmers consider taking this on? I will be eternally grateful.

EDIT: Also, some features in some of Overlords programs are considered cheating, yet they are allowed. Example: You can self destruct in Project Controller, and with Project Omega you can see how many hearts the person who roasted you has. These are forms of cheating, yet they are allowed.

Good idea.
But Link, is it possible to difference local and server subjects then?

It is possible to detect if a player is the server or not, but I don't know how feasible this program would be.

As far as I know, triggers can only be modified locally, even by memory hacking. It would be impossible for the server to modify client triggers...unless...

If everybody in the server had a program, it could communicate separately from JJ2 (with winsock) and control the triggers like that.

Either that Link, or simulate the packets sent by a trigger crate somehow.

Data is also in the level to tell wether that trigger has been activated yet or not for when you first join I believe.

I never thought of that...it would probably work. Except I don't know how to do that :p

Tapping into TCP connections probably doesn't use Winsock, but some other weird DLL...if anyone knows how to do this, maybe elaborate?

Even if I could do that, it would still be hard to control stuff...like if the client got that signal, but then activated his\her OWN trigger, then that would have to be sent back to the server somehow.

Having a program on both ends would make it a lot easier, and there is a way to detect if someone is using a program (which I will not go into here) or not.

Yeah, the trigger crate effect is what I thought how it would work originally...I dunno, but if anyone wants to make it, your work will not go unappreciated..:D

Somebody named "kill" created something :lol: :roll: :D

Yes, I know this idea has been dismissed, but I am wondering if anyone would take it up? I would be grateful..please? :D

Well, i think the trigger crate would be in the UDP portion of the jj2 network. TCP deals with chatting, downloading levels, and downloading the list of people playing; UDP deals with the actual gameplay.

I know of a program called WPE (windows packet editor) that could intercept packets and either view them, edit them, or add more packets. So it could be possible via that route, but i'm not sure how. Another way would be to create some sort of proxy that would transfer data back and forth from the server, and when need be, send the trigger data. As far as i know, you might have to use two different computers for the proxy method because you can't change what port jj2 communicates on, thus you couldn't run the server and the proxy on the same computer (they'd both use the same port). And a third option would be to create a full-functional server and add in the option to send the packet request. This would be by far the most versatile, but by far the hardest.

-cheeze

J2HG! Over here ;)!