SiRaLeX

Well, yeah. It's not hard for the calculator. But I tried doing it without and failed.

I had to divide 6 through 1.5, so I tried to do it the easy way: 6 / 1 = 6 6 / 2 = 3 The logical assumption would be: 6 / 1.5 = 4.5 Boy, I was wrong! O_o 6 / 1.5 = 4 Yes, that's right, the correct answer is 4! I mean, it's pretty logical if you think about it. Anyone else finds this confusing though? :laugh:

Strong first post! You seem like a nice person.

Agreed. That's why I don't think he's overpowered.

You say you're 20 yet you "do have 8 years of experience with C# and .NET". This doesn't quite add up. Your basic knowledge list doesn't impress me either. But the real reason for what I said might actually lie buried within CnCNetClientYR. You know, when I was a 12 year old boy (this was 13 years ago) I had my first experience with a 3 or 4 years older girl. She was taller than me by at least a head. We'd disappear into the toilet, she'd sit down, I'd sit on her lap and we were tongue kissing for half an hour. While this may have worked, there's one thing we have in common. I didn't know how to properly handle and get the most out of her and neither did you know how to properly handle and get the most out of C#. This doesn't mean that we didn't enjoy ourselves and it also doesn't mean that you're still a completely incapable phaggot either.

JellyRoll + Lil Wyte - Pop Another Pill ... let me, let me, let me pop another pill...

To me HiFi is king. The guy has serious skill and obviously knows what he's doing. I respect him as a programmer/reverse engineer. Granted some others have contributed substantial work. I'd like to mention Nyerguds here (I don't know the hierarchies and people behind CnCNet, so no offense to the other real programmers that I unintentionally left out) because those guys obviously know what they're doing as well. They all have solid programming and reverse engineering background. As for Rampastring, well, he might have made the UI and be responsible for the client (which is a lot of work, don't get me wrong) - I deem the quality of his work flaky at best. Certainly not a veteran nor a reverse engineer. Some credit is due here still. Now there are some others that did graphics design, web design work and perhaps web development too, obviously. Usually a programmer won't do graphics design himself. I give them some of the credit too. Anyone else claiming for fame about creating or helping create CnCNet are just leeches.

They don't have to pay for renewal or the server. EA covers all those costs including staff, for them. Those estimations are based on page views if the page would contain ads. XWIS doesn't show ads. They do get donations too though. AFAIK they make good money from every serial being registered to XWIS for providing support/services. No. Heck, I don't even have a clue what Sole Survivor is other having heard its name a couple of times. Apparently some sort of FFA C&C where you control 1 unit... sounds funny. Other than that I've never seen it.

I don't see why XWIS would cooperate with CnCNet. XWIS is making good money running as it is. Why would they help a competitor? Think about it - it doesn't make any sense. They're not a welfare organisation. They don't run RA2 because they're good people. XWIS would prefer you to not even know about CnCNet. This tells more than enough about the quality of the CnCNet services, IMHO. Once there's a ladder for YR, XWIS will probably be ****ed. They're on their last legs, no matter how many serials you pump into their pockets. They're even unbanning perm banned cheaters. Think about it. People who have been caught maphacking 3+ times. Who thought that was a good idea? That's correct.

No offence, but YR is actually superior to RA2. From what I gather "classic mode" is just like RA2, except on the better engine. You get the best of both worlds. What's the problem?

Fair-Play FTW! Thanks for posting!

I've got a nice INI parsing class, somewhere (very speedy and doesn't choke on Westwood INIs). :heady: A few questions: You say your engine will be flexible. Could it, one day, be made to basically be RA2? Do you guys leverage C++ templates, a lot? Or prefer to go without as much as reasonably possible? Do you guys use .CPP or .CC (hint, hint: CCHyper) file extensions for your source files? I also wanted to repeat my utmost respect for you guys and your endeavor. I especially like your Avatar, CCHyper! Spot on. :yo:

CnCNet - I'm All About That Base

From what I gather the ladder is largely done, albeit in Node.JS - so be it (tahj.cncnet.org:4007). I personally don't believe it works, yet. The next step is to make the YR client send game results to the server. This could prove to either be a brick wall or a mountain for them. Whichever way you spin it - it's going to be tricky. XD I'm sure this could take a while. How long? I don't know. Depends on the skillez of the reverse engineer, since network games don't send game results.

Now, now - that's iN-SaNe! That's a sick demeanor. Why not based on WOL?! What's the design choice, here? :ranting: How does in-game paging and all that jazz work? Well, at least you guys found a fancy way to spawn a game from a GUI - I'm sure the possibilities are endless but so are the obstacles.

That actually sounds in-sane. I really hope it works out for you guys! Otherwise you know where you can find me... Does CnCNet actually leverage the internet lobbies we know from WOL/XWIS or is it just a fancy network mode?

1. Yes. 2. Yes. 3. Yes. 4. Yes. 5. Yes. 6. I'd like to say yes, but no, not really. Anyone smart enough can and will still make their own hacks if they want to. It's not like it hasn't happened before. It all boils down to basic physics, IQ and money. 7. Yes. 8. Yes. I played a game with over 200 FPS on XWIS, before (unplayable). 9. No. I could have a try but no guarantees. Too much effort to even try and save a game I've been banned from. 10. Hacks?

Maybe with a password? You tell me. I've never played on CnCNet.

I've done a lot for the RA2 community throughout the years.

I've already posted some screenshots albeit of the ladder hack in here: http://cnc-comm.com/community/index.php?topic=4451.0 There's a reason why parts are blurred out or do you want a screenshot of a very much static web page that looks like a ladder but actually does nothing? Think about why I would be giving work away to an organisation when I can charge for it. I'm not a welfare organisation after all. :roll: Neither are XWiS nor CnCNet, although I see why you could think that the latter is.

What do you expect me to link you to?

I've done the job already.

My offer still stands: http://cnc-comm.com/community/index.php?topic=4451.0 You can start collecting donations. However, don't bother. I'm sure they've gotten enough donations to fund a proper ladder already.

The hack was created almost 2 months after my ban. I have a handful RaNk #1s. What did I steal? :laugh: A little butt hurt you can't cheat anymore, are we? :roll:

Well, it's not really affecting anything, now is it. There's a default integer for literals which is always signed and in my case 32 bits. So, you might be a little surprised, but: 0xffffffff == (char)-1 // true (unsigned)0xffffffff == (char)-1 // true ~0 == (char)-1 // true -1 == (char)-1 // true All of these assumptions, are true, which to me is not surprising, at all. Since you're always comparing -1 with -1. However, you can't assume that this is also true: 0xffffffff == (unsigned char)-1 // false Because it is not. You're comparing -1 with 0xff (255) here.