I didn’t even read that for some reason. Have a great day Huginn Lachesis!
We all know the reason: you’re a useless troll who can’t defend the terrible ideas he posts, and so all you can do is whine about unrelated stuff like killboard records for a forum alt.
Well you wrote:
So either the client is monitoring key and mouse input and then sending an “ECS” message to the server, or even worse, it’s sending the data to the server so the game servers can control when your capsule enters ECS. It has to be one of those two, otherwise how could your suggestion even work at all (and how are you proposing to address the security issuesof your proposal as you’ve described it)?
Here, type it in for yourself. Here’s a 5 minute implementation in Python with pynput. It’s a trivial thing to do in many different languages:
1 Like
And if you want a 15 minute implementation it would be pretty easy to add an extra layer of randomness and have mouse.move make a series of steps to mimic an actual flick of the mouse, making it harder for CCP to detect the automation.
1 Like
I never wrote that moving the mouse sends messages to the server. You do know that a mouse has buttons yes?
Well “mouse input” (which is what you proposed) means both moving the mouse and button presses. If you only mean one of those, then be more precise in what you write, otherwise your words will be taken as they are written.
So it’s keyboard input and mouse button presses. How does this make it any better? The security issues of your proposal still remain and you haven’t addressed them.
Cool. It looks easier than I thought. But how random is it? Will it issue commands to the ship?
I don’t see that in your proposal. All you’ve said is "have a timer where without enough variety of keyboard/ mouse input".
So no it doesn’t, because your proposal doesn’t require that.
Doing that is also trivial (and against the EULA, as opposed to the approach above, which isn’t, but still trivial to do and we know people break with EULA all the time with scripts).
And again, how are you proposing to address the security issues of your proposal?
Come on. This is desperate. Obviously I did not mean input to the player’s computer but input to the server which would be mouse clicking (even earlier said clicking specifically). It just seems like you were desperate to find something crazy to accuse me of, failed miserably, and now dig in your heels refusing to admit you never should have falsely attempted that nitpick.
So you do mean input to the server then?
Jeez, just above you asked me to quote where that’s what you meant. Get your proposal straight. Also, it’s your proposal. Nothing desperate in my responses. I’m just taking your words as written. It’s not on me to explain your proposal. That’s on you.
Now, since you still aren’t answering questions, how are you proposing to address the security concerns that your proposal causes?
This is blatantly moving the goalposts, but yes, you could have it issue commands to the ship. It would be trivially easy to define a “safe” area of the screen where you won’t be clicking any interface buttons and have the mouse move to a random spot in the box and double click to slightly adjust your ship’s course.
I never proposed a program to avoid the AFK penalty. I may have mentioned one being made, but I did not “propose” such a thing.
But the situation obviously does. You are saying that my AFK penalty proposal would be gotten around with a random input application by so many people that my proposal is useless. But NOBODY is going to use that application if the result is going to be things like turning off the cloaking module or warping to zero while AFK.
You thought I meant input to the player’s computer which the servers cannot detect? Come on man, you cannot be serious now.
That’s what I’ve been wondering about you. You are clearly out of your depth of knowledge.
What you have proposed/suggested/written/made inference to (however you want to interpret what you wrote above), it’s ineffective as currently explained, not detailed at all, and you can’t even address questions when asked (and you continue to not answer questions).
This is my first post here in this thread. Please review it.
This is the one we have been discussing:
ie. the one that starts “Another idea I had…”
I’m not going to go read a different proposal when the existing one we’ve been discussing is so poorly formed (and despite suggesting that it can be questioned, you won’t actually address the questions asked).
So you have not bothered with my first post which brought up the idea, seek to just ignore it and brush past it, and instead criticize a following post for not being clear enough for you? DUDE, like seriously, WTF. The only way to please you would be to link every previous post just so I could say “its in there”. Nobody does that.
If you decided to start from the middle and find yourself getting things wrong for it, the proper response is to own your mistake and laziness, not accuse the other person of failing to repeat to infinity every god damn thing they said every post.
There’s almost 7000 posts in this thread. So no, like any sane person I haven’t been back through them all. I saw your proposal “Another idea…” above and asked questions (which you invited people to do). You are still refusing to answer them. That is definitely a WTF, yes.
That’s it. I am done with you. You literally responded to my very first proposal within minutes and I obvioiusly did not change from mouse input (clicks) to mouse input (motion) in the second proposal despite the fact I never said “motion”. You made that up yourself.
Now you act like you have no idea about my first proposal and post? Take a flying leap.
I never refused to answer your questions. I may have missed them. Plus I was trying to resolve a separate issue. But now I refuse. We are done here.
How are you proposing to address the security concerns of your “Another idea…”?
What part of “I am done with you” or “now I refuse (to answer your questions)” has confused you?