Because their code is exact whereas yours is not and theirs makes no use of the mouse or keyboard and, as such, can be run in the background without messing with user input.
Because their code is exact whereas yours is not and theirs makes no use of the mouse or keyboard and, as such, can be run in the background without messing with user input.
Thanks
Understanding the benefits of their method, i wander what are the downsides...
Can't mr. warden just add a watch on the defined movement key/mouse binds and the movement process and spot the change? Or compare the messages received from the hardware with the actual movement of the character?
I had the exact same problem with setfacing yesterday. I fixed it the same way, by patching the memory location and then restoring it after my call. I might be looking more into it later because its an ugly ass solution.
Does anyone solve this in a different way?
"Always code as if the guy who ends up maintaining your code will be a violent psychopath who knows where you live." - Martin Golding
"I cried a little earlier when I had to poop" - Sku
Okay, I figured it out last night. You need to enable Click-to-Move. That way you wont have to patch. Which means one less offset to update between patches![]()