Solution for the scv floating bug

Not “removing the shift command” who ever said that?

You’re pretty much asking for this in your post. You’d be falsely flagging people who queue commands (why assign a loss/draw when you can remove it, they are basically the same thing). Just because you don’t use a game feature doesn’t mean others don’t. How about using waypoints to scout different base locations on the map with a dark templar or vulture which can exceed the waypoint limit? “Waypoint is full” is a game mechanic and not an issue. You’re asking them to break the game even more, that’s messed up. Fixing the bug would take an hour or two at most. Instead of that you want to give losses to people who use legitimate game mechanics because those mechanics just happen to have a perceived relationship with an exploit according to you. Please never do game development.

For the record you can do this without ever getting “waypoint is full” to appear. So the “solution” doesn’t even work. There are more exploits than this, that doesn’t mean we should remove rally points and other mechanics from the game (nor assigning draws/losses based on using them). It’s absolute lunacy to even remotely consider this.

1 Like

I once again agree with what @Heinermann said in his post.
I’m a noob and I still use queuing up commands in melee games, similar to what @Heinermann pointed out. I even recall people discussing on Youtube about Bisu’s godlike micro, where someone pointed out that parts of his intensive micro are due to queuing up commands. I’m 100% sure Bisu is using queueing up commands apart from his intensive micro.

About using the floating SCV bug in UMS, no, not all UMS should have it allowed. There are player vs player UMS maps, for example Team melee on Lost Temple. Having the bug enabled for that map, would ruin my mood if the other players would keep abusing the bug, even if it’s not ladder. That’s why I mentioned about a whitelist or only to allow UMS maps where players go against a CPU.

Calm down dear BWAPI project team lead, I like both THE100YOU and you, your knowledge about C++ and the game structure is indeed a lot bigger than this hillbilly guy :stuck_out_tongue:, everyone talks relative to his amount of knowledge, I’m also a hillbilly compared to you.

I really wish Bli :zzz: ard would hire some1 like you to fix that SCR curse, and make BWAPI in SCR, a reality.

  1. A regular player will NEVER get to Waypoint full in a normal RANK game, that just never happens

  2. I am a game developer for almost 5 years now

  3. As you seem to know so much abut how SC is programmed then you would understand that “fixing” this bug will require to change the way Real Time registers events, tho, you understand that THOSE Engine events still run on C99 base code (For old 16 bits compatibility that still have not been changed), like literally using unary operators to change from variable stack to stack. Today we use Garbage collection back then it would just remain loaded. for a period of time, this has not change in essence, and they been clear that it never will. The only thing they did with 64 Bits and change to modern Graphica Frameworks is to “warp” all into neat C++ classes that allow the compiling of said engine to run in different modern Environments, and example of this is the new Graphical Engine, but on the inside the code is the same…still loading a sprite on 16, 256 colors, or 32 bits (in reality 2 16 bits registers one next to the other pre loaded in an old implemented stack), all those registers are still the same. Then you will understand that making it so you CANNOT to the SCV floating is a nightmare, but they have already done it on Shield Battery (how? i dont know)

  4. There are other ways to activate SCV floating bug without making the Waypoint Full appear?, i had no idea about it maybe then my idea is not that good, had no idea about it.

  5. The reason i wanted this is that Walking ramp, Floating Drone, Infinite Nuke and Now floating SCV they all use Waypoint is Full so i thought that would be a nice idea.

Wow :hushed:, a game developer ? you mean not hillbilly? would like see some of your projects actually…

Also you told me b4 you joined my discord, and actually made a BWAPI AI by yourself !!, I would like to see if those 3 things are true?, I really hate liars man, I’ll be shocked if you’re1.

Yes, the the100you is a meme account, real name you will never know.

Ok, thats one thing, what about you’re a BWAPI AI developer, or game developer?

  1. Do you have definitive proof, that in 100% of ALL games EVER PLAYED, that not one single player has ever hit waypoint full in any ranked game in the game’s 20 year history? You don’t, and that makes it an objectively bad decision.

  2. If your proposal is to hand losses to players using a legitimate mechanic instead of fixing the actual bug you shouldn’t be.

  3. 100% wrong. I’ve reverse engineered this game several times over and resetting collision when ORD_STOP is processed should be trivial.

  4. All of those can be done without the waypoint full message.

2 Likes
  1. And do you have a definitive proof that anyone could have a legitimate Use Waypoint Full?. If you have ii i want to hear about it:

Is the only like actual response that i got from someone, not only here but on tl-net and from people that i have been talking with on the past day with my idea. Another one that i heard is that When playing Team Melee actually Waypoint Full could be very common.

  1. What you think your ethical invented book of who and whom not suposse to be a game developer based on deletnig features matters not. That is just an invented fact you are making in your brain. I just say that if Blizzard really care they could have said “While we are looking into ways of fixing the problem with Floating SCV any played that gets the Waypoint Full message will get a Lose”. You have to understand that this thread is 5 days old, there is already somehow of a patch for it, at least they tried and they will fix it.

  2. Anyone can reverse engineer SC with certain tools, i know you are going to claim that you made it yourself which is fine i believe you i also done some of that is fun by todays tool make it way easier than it would seem, i assume you know that. And no is not trivial, there is no way that anyone could “reverse engineer” C99 structs and the way that custom made types are done for the simple fact that the code was Loaded on object c code so you cannot reverse engineer the way that the custom types are created, you could reverse the way that the tables are saved on the heap, you can do that by creating your own text and data segment buffer, assuming you have your own hardware for it, or a very cleaver Virtual Machine. I remind you that they did not use 32 bits integers, but 2 16 bits hex integers in a stack one next to the other with unary operands that are also by the way postfix unary. A predecessor to operator overloading back then if you ever used that Nightmare. Why they did this? well the idea is that to port into 16 base systems (or incomplete 32 registers like 24 bits reg) they will just “ramp down” the Real Time clock but still be capable or using the engine code without having to code it again in exchange of using more memory calls back and forth, that is why in some SC ports the game would lag in real time but would require a significant amount of more memory calls. how do i know this?, well as a matter of fact i work closely in bringing old code to new base code that runs exactly on Real Time (for banks and old plane software etc), i did that more than a few times in my life and had to learn it the hard way by people way smarter than me (i am not an expert but i know how C99 systems use to work to be compatible with different processors and such, today we can use something magical like an interface…), curiously enough if you want some story about it you can check on how RTS games like Red Alert, C6C and others where created and ported so fast, the SAME tech was used and the people on Westwood created that, to make it work on the i486, 80486 and old Pentium for instance, though the SC code was never release i know for a fact that is the way that it was build because all the game where done the same way, specially those that could pay for programmers of said level (all of this was black science back then but there i open documentation about it online if you ever want to learn about it), very cleaver but honestly i was hoping that you knew about this because it is very much the ABC of trying to change old code if you ever work on that. Everyone that has ever work with a client that says “i need a new feature on this old system” know about it. About “collision”, i have no idea if there is an actual call to ORD_STOP and what does it return?, is it a call that happens on the Heap that you can pair with the bss exec? (Does anybody have a bss exec of SC Remastered?) if so then it could be possible, will it move other registers because of the way that unary operator works i can guarantee you that.

  3. Then the whole thread is pointless, i was of the idea that you needed to activate the Waypoint Full message to get this done, then i might have been wrong, i was of the idea that was the only way to do this.

Otherwise bro chill, this is a Forum you dont have come here to be the super nasty know it all troll that wants to debunk everyone out of their inept shoes. Take a chill pill it was only an idea i have not heard an idea from you.

By the Way i know how Shield Battery fixed it by the way, very cleaver, they just read the replay over Bwchartz and flag the sequence of events (Changing the CC from o to 1, pictures on link ), easy Bliizard is just incompetent and do not want to waste any more backend time on any process as obviously the correct way of handling this is by sending the replay to the server before the decision to give a win is even provided. They will not waste a single extra cent on SC i can also guarantee that.

ibb co/CvbD9tW
ibb co/hmV8Xwg

No way maybe one day, the problem is that all my account have my name somehow and i really dont like doxxing myself, specially on Video Games communities as when people do job interviews they always deep search and i dont want them to ever find this account or any other that i use for gamming.

So you’re are a member in my discord, but you don’t want any1 to know your real identity hyfrehyfrehyfre or any other, saying you’re a respected software developer and BWAPI AI developer, but where are you on the Internet ? nowhere… where are your projects so we can use it or even buy it, nowhere, where do you live in Peru, nowhere.

Well, let me guess, you’re not a hillbilly as I’ve thought, you’re actually Grant Davies, playing tricks with us, right ? :yawning_face:

For the last time i am not Hyfre that is a completely different person i hate that meme.

Just to educate you, if a change can break customers. You do not make that change. Changes should be made conservatively not haphazardly. It costs more money to make a bad change and roll it back than it does to make a good change. Bad changes can cost a company thousands or even millions of dollars. Further there is also a time management problem. Adding logic to hand out losses on filling the order buffer will, in my professional opinion, take more time to do on its own than just focusing on fixing the bug (this includes testing among other things). Also what about users who do legitimately fill the order buffer? The point is you don’t know if there are or aren’t, so you assume there are because it is the safest strategy to protect customers from broken software. In your scenario you assume there aren’t and this could lead to disaster as I mentioned earlier. This raised a serious red flag in my mind hence the harsh criticism, if you have the same mentality for other things there will be a lot of things breaking (because if you keep gambling you are bound to lose).

Secondly, I don’t need someone without any knowledge or experience about how Starcraft or even software development works to make stuff up for me. You are throwing jargon that makes zero sense into multiple paragraphs. Technical and knowledgeable users will see through the trolling there.

Starcraft 1.16.1 is 100% 32-bit C++ compiled with Visual Studio 2003. No idea where your 16-bit, C99, or “object c” nonsense is even coming from. Almost all of the translation units (.cpp files) are in BW Beta debug strings. Everything I say about it is verifiable, because as you say “anyone can reverse engineer SC with certain tools”, and anyone who does will come to the same conclusions I have.

4 Likes

you are just oversimplifying everything with your 3 cent logic, but is ok i know your kind, keep sleeping on that side of the bed you jsut want to feel right with you small corner of the world, is alright be you as much as you want. You are just taking everything out of context and for what is worse you just take what is convenient to you, honestly? i was like you at one point i am sure life will teach you. Of course if you reverse engineer something that was created on Object file will appear as 32 bits that does not meant that the register and the way that it works is a primitive in the standard library but instead a custom made type (we can check the BSS exce if you are inclined to put money on it), but i am sure you just wont, sorry but you just dont know and you are talking out of your league and way too protected “by the Internet” to learn from someone from which you might actually learn something for once.

That only shows me you are a Junior developer, have no idea how to make a game engine or how it works and you only use frameworks and methods. Do not worry today nobody goes to actual computer science you know to call themselves “a programmer”, its fine, come back to this thread some years from now. GG.

lol. Thanks for the laugh.

1 Like

In fact, I tried to respond to him again yesterday, but there is a rule in the forums that popped up to me saying something like that: “You answered this member 3 times already, to minimize useless argument publicly, try to pm the person”, so I couldn’t even reply.

Honestly, I found him an informative and helpful guy to some extent, I learned some things from him, but he acts so weird recently, he has some contradictions that make me want to hit my head in the wall :tired_face:, I mean he likes my CoachAI, he said that he wants to make a tutorial video about it b4, he even defended me once here, against trolls that spread lies about me, but when I ask him what’s your name in my discord, where is your software projects? he refuses to give me anything, I’m not sure why he reacted like that, I also tried to add him as a friend from Battle.net launcher b4, but he refused the request !!!

He is also a BIG fan of your BWAPI project in general and wants it very bad in SCR and talks about BWAPI in almost every post he makes, maybe he didn’t recognize you, maybe a weird arrogance virus infected him yesterday, I don’t know… :man_shrugging:, The100YOU, come back to us buddy, this planet is better, stop drinking and stop drugs, please mods, close.

That is the most Ludacris description of a non-refactoring game engine that i have ever read, you are wasting your time here, how do you even expect anyone to understand that sort of thing in a gamming forum with people that never coded an engine from scratch. You are such a troll typing TL:DR information when you could have just said games in the 90s build their own compile process from the object file, linker etc then anyone might have understood you better instead of having to read all of that. As an engine developer myself i know what you refer to, but you have to be mentally ill to take time of your day to type such a thing. Ridiculous.

1 Like

At least you know what that is.

Vangelis - Common Sense.

The real name is hyfrehyfre ofc :slight_smile: