Map screwed up in-game

smoochy boys on tour

Chalace

Dedicated Member
Dedicated Member
Jan 18, 2014
1,823
275
125
I think (correct me if I'm wrong) the idea was to stop people simply dropping the maps into their own servers clients. Atleast with this they would need to do some work to get it, well, working.

I'm not 100% comfortable with it, i mean we wouldn't have much if people didn't share things. but at the same time, if i spend a month making a map, would be nice to use it a little while before its on every other server.

I literally just finished doing the above.
- New libs being used with the custom content (tested and none of it's content shows on the normal client now)
- New map type. Maps no longer load on default crystal files.

Edit: As for the flowers, you are right, they are so small i can just place them 2/3 cells above where i want them in the editor instead of re-doing the images etc. There isn't a need for huge things as middle layer.
 
Last edited:

Akaras

LOMCN Developer
Developer
Jan 14, 2014
704
158
165
Ahh right I read that about people being able to use the maps as soon as you uploaded your client but didn't connect it to the reply about creating the new map type

I would suggest at least moving the order the variables are saved (and loaded) to confuse people trying to load the maps in their own server files... at the moment all they would have to do is add a check for that header (which is easy to read by loading the map file in visual studio) and load as normal MapType100 because the data for your new MapType is saved in the same format (unless you have already thought about this and edited it hehe)

I was thinking that playing around with bitwise operators on some of the variables could make the saved data more confusing... like editing "some" of the data to be opposite (1 is 0 and 0 is 1) then when loading just reverse the changes (I've not actually tried this but I don't see why it wouldn't work hehe) I bet proper coders have some tricks for protecting their files but I'm no expert so I just guess at solutions :)

---------- Post Merged at 08:21 PM ---------- Previous Post was at 08:11 PM ----------

I'm not 100% comfortable with it, i mean we wouldn't have much if people didn't share things. but at the same time, if i spend a month making a map, would be nice to use it a little while before its on every other server.

you could lock the file as best as you can to prevent people using it straight away... then after a month or so release an unlocked version of it (saved as MapType100) so others can use it

maybe something like that would work for you?
 

Chalace

Dedicated Member
Dedicated Member
Jan 18, 2014
1,823
275
125
Ahh right I read that about people being able to use the maps as soon as you uploaded your client but didn't connect it to the reply about creating the new map type

I would suggest at least moving the order the variables are saved (and loaded) to confuse people trying to load the maps in their own server files... at the moment all they would have to do is add a check for that header (which is easy to read by loading the map file in visual studio) and load as normal MapType100 because the data for your new MapType is saved in the same format (unless you have already thought about this and edited it hehe)

I was thinking that playing around with bitwise operators on some of the variables could make the saved data more confusing... like editing "some" of the data to be opposite (1 is 0 and 0 is 1) then when loading just reverse the changes (I've not actually tried this but I don't see why it wouldn't work hehe) I bet proper coders have some tricks for protecting their files but I'm no expert so I just guess at solutions :)

---------- Post Merged at 08:21 PM ---------- Previous Post was at 08:11 PM ----------



you could lock the file as best as you can to prevent people using it straight away... then after a month or so release an unlocked version of it (saved as MapType100) so others can use it

maybe something like that would work for you?

It did cross my mind as i was applying the changes, it was exceptionally easy and fast to do. Not exactly a deterrant in it's current state. Mainly i just wanted to see if i could get it working.

I'm not sure what can/should be changed to make it more difficult to replicate . Maybe someone has some more insight into the best course of action to prevent them being used this way.
 

Far

tsniffer
Staff member
Developer
May 19, 2003
20,172
30
2,767
540
You cant prevent people from fully using your map. If they know how to read a map header they will know how to take a new map format in its entirety.

I wouldnt bother going to great lengths to stop them

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 

Chalace

Dedicated Member
Dedicated Member
Jan 18, 2014
1,823
275
125
Fair enough, in that case the change is largely pointless.
Didn't realise it was THAT easy to get the header, takes 2s when you know how.
 
Last edited:

Far

tsniffer
Staff member
Developer
May 19, 2003
20,172
30
2,767
540
Changing the header stops people with no coding knowledge.

And if you add your new object files in a different index range thats not just sequential to the existing ones itll confuse them even more. But those who want to use your map will always find a way.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 

Chalace

Dedicated Member
Dedicated Member
Jan 18, 2014
1,823
275
125
The object files I'm happy with, i gathered they were safe. No-one is going to randomly guess the indexes i used.
In all fairness it's not a big deal, as you say people that want it will always find a way.

I only though to try as you mentioned it.
 

mir2pion

TL;DR
Veteran
Feb 21, 2013
3,091
502
175
I ran into a problem placing a bridge over Bichon shoreline because the shoreline is a front layer object, same layer as the bridge.



Some shoreline image strips either cover the bridge or else are deleted (since you can only have a single tag per layer).

It took some experimenting before I found a place for the bridge where it interferes with the shoreline the least and also leaving the bridge in an acceptable position. Still the problem remains, even if minimized in extent.

Laborius way to solve this would be to cut the particular shoreline image strips into single tiles and place them on middle layer, so they appear under the bridge. Negative of this method is that it calls for a custom lib file which would complicate sharing since I am not making a server and intend to share it out.

Another way, more forward looking but out of question for me to do, would be to add a second 'front' layer to the client as Akaras described above:

... creating a new MapType would be done if you wanted to add another layer to a map, like an effects layer or something similar you would add the new variable/s to the map save method and you would then have to create a new MapType to load the saved data in the correct order including the new variables

This second front layer could be called top layer and would be placed above the current front layer. In effect it would relate to the existing front layer in the same way that middle layer now relates to the back layer - being an alternate layer for it.

It would serve not only for weather effects but also for cases such as these, when you need to place an object over another or even when you want to place them close to each other without their tags interfering...
 
Last edited: