are they scanned by warden?
this are btw the new patch offsets:
PATTERN_DOODADCOLLISIONINC 0x782815
PATTERN_WMOCOLLISIONINC 0x82EF8A
(maybe i messed up the order and it's the other way arround)
are they scanned by warden?
this are btw the new patch offsets:
PATTERN_DOODADCOLLISIONINC 0x782815
PATTERN_WMOCOLLISIONINC 0x82EF8A
(maybe i messed up the order and it's the other way arround)
I didn't get banned for using these for 20h on a trial account, but that doesn't mean it isn't scanned.
The wmo collision address you're looking for is probably the one already given is the dump thread.
(2.3 "DO NOT REQUEST UPDATED OFFSETS!" btw)
damn I read that too fast sry u_u
ok, i will use these instead
one question left: can you "nop" a test? (opcode 84)
.text:007A50CF 0F 84 62 01 00 00 jz loc_7A5237
changing the 84 to 85 seems to work, but i dont' know if thats the "correct" way :P
i know that nop is 90 :P i noped the 2 jumps at the other addresses
but if i nop this test (i tried 1-5 nops, no asm skills so trial and error ftw ) and it crashes everytime
then i had the idea that 74 is a jz and 75 a jnz so maybe the 85 is the "not test", so i tried 85 and it worked. then i wanted to know if 85 is really a "not test" so i googled coder32 edition | X86 Opcode and Instruction Reference 1.11 and after looking it up... i have no god damn clue what the difference between 84 and 85 really is
You must nop whole instruction, not only one byte - look at it in ida / olly
84 - test 8bit register/mem against 8bit register
85 - test 16/32bit register/mem against 16/32bit register
Tea and cake or death?!