peterthepigeon 0 Posted October 12, 2015 CreateFile on both files ReadFile on both get offset to code section iterate until through ( *pbOldCodeSection != *pbPatchedCodesection ) notate accordingly simple Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nyerguds 136 Posted October 12, 2015 ...what? Context, please? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peterthepigeon 0 Posted October 12, 2015 ...what? Context, please? The hackishness of your patched executable versus the clean pristine one to notate all your patches. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nyerguds 136 Posted October 12, 2015 lol. If only I were a computer, and all my problems could be solved with a simple script Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FunkyFr3sh 218 Posted October 12, 2015 I started to rewrite some of his patches in nasm source files, but it's a pain in the ass and takes ages to port Plan is to jump out and run his code in newly added sections to keep it clean and being able to modify it with ease. I made cdecl -> watcall wrapper to be able to rewrite stuff in C too http://funkyfr3sh.cncnet.org/files/temp/cnc95-v107.exe Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peterthepigeon 0 Posted October 12, 2015 My disasm engine spits out mnemonics and the works. I'm tempted to do likewise for his executable. I'd copy the original code to the new section and set a check(config parsed at startup or new map) to execute original or jump over to the patched or nopped code, then back to the regular execution. Clean, simple and efficient. As for nasm files, meh, I'd just write my own mini assembler Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FunkyFr3sh 218 Posted October 12, 2015 Not a bad idea, you should join our IRC channel and hang around there Do you know our patching systems? We turn the exe into an object file and compile our own asm/c/c++ to separate object files and afterwards link it all together Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SiRaLeX 3 Posted October 18, 2015 The only time I've ever really used patches like these is to create cheats. So, what are you guys on about? Do you really need to "patch" your little hearts out? IMHO this should be considered cheating. Now people will think a "patch" cannot be bad. Well, yeah, it can be pretty bad. It usually gives the guy who has the "patch" significant advantages. CreateFile on both files ReadFile on both [...] iterate until through ( *pbOldCodeSection != *pbPatchedCodesection ) A lot of WinAPi and hungarian notation, eh? Typical CnC hacker... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nyerguds 136 Posted October 19, 2015 So, what are you guys on about? Do you really need to "patch" your little hearts out? IMHO this should be considered cheating. I suggest you take a good look at the full change list of the 1.06 patch before you make dumb remarks like that. Start from the bottom. And again you show why we don't let you anywhere near our ladder code. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peterthepigeon 0 Posted October 22, 2015 The only time I've ever really used patches like these is to create cheats. So, what are you guys on about? Do you really need to "patch" your little hearts out? IMHO this should be considered cheating. Now people will think a "patch" cannot be bad. Well, yeah, it can be pretty bad. It usually gives the guy who has the "patch" significant advantages. CreateFile on both files ReadFile on both [...] iterate until through ( *pbOldCodeSection != *pbPatchedCodesection ) A lot of WinAPi and hungarian notation, eh? Typical CnC hacker... Grow up. I hacked FPS games long before I took a whack at CnC. It's easy to determine whether a patch gives an advantage or not, just have a whitelist. Ergo, what are you talking about. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kilkakon 37 Posted October 29, 2015 If C&C 1.06 is bad, I imagine my mod's worse XD Too many jumps in the unit tables... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
