AlliedModders - Anti-Developer

AlliedModders (https://forums.alliedmods.net/index.php)

- Unapproved/Old Plugins (https://forums.alliedmods.net/forumdisplay.php?f=27)

- - Anti-Developer (https://forums.alliedmods.net/showthread.php?t=170020)

Menethil

10-19-2011 14:28

Anti-Developer

1 Attachment(s)

Anti-Developer v1.0
by NeuTroN (aka Menethil )

-Description:
This plugin detects players and slay who have FPS more then x ( x = setable by cvar )

-Cvars:
amx_maxfps - Set the max fps allowed before apllying a punishment , this version slay.

v1.0 - First release.
Waiting for constructive critics , and ideas to update, and improuve this code.

P.S : I set theose Warnings , because i want to avoid the server lag spikes or other kind of things that may cause FPS increasing for verry short time ( under 1 second ).

enjoi.

10-19-2011 18:57

Re: Anti-Developer

slowhacking?

DarkGod

10-19-2011 22:09

Re: Anti-Developer

Quote:

Originally Posted by enjoi. (Post 1579374)

slowhacking?

Quiet.

You shouldn't use ResetHUD to check if someone spawned (unless properly filtered). I can just type 'fullupdate' in console and it will trigger a ResetHUD.

FOUTA

10-20-2011 05:58

Re: Anti-Developer

Quote:

Originally Posted by enjoi. (Post 1579374)

slowhacking?

what's slowhacking about this??
anyway good job menethil, i suggest making a variety of punishments (slay, slap, kick, ban, ...) :D

Stereo

10-20-2011 17:52

Re: Anti-Developer

You don't need check this:

task_exists(id+DEVELOPER_OFFSET)

remove_task do this

krededk99

10-21-2011 02:59

Re: Anti-Developer

*Gosh* needs to wake up. Works :)

xPaw	10-21-2011 04:56

Re: Anti-Developer

This method sucks, it's not correct way to count player's FPS.

Devil259

10-27-2011 06:20

Re: Anti-Developer

http://forums.alliedmods.net/showpos...95&postcount=1

Menethil

10-27-2011 14:41

Re: Anti-Developer

@xPaw , maybe this method sucks , but at my level of knowledge its all i know "stable"
- After long tests , i didnt recived any false-detection.

@Devil259 - that is not working , if u take a look at that code it's not writen correctly.

at least i dont know why , and how that works

new g_fps[33][10];
-why is this having that [10]
aslo this too :
g_i[id][10]
cus can't be compiled

challenge

10-29-2011 15:58

Re: Anti-Developer

It's why I hate helping peoples.

I wrote this for you in http://timepassgamers.co.in/forum/ and you posted it in alliedmodders with your name!!!!!

anyway carry on if you want to prove yourself as a coder.

But still some suggestion.
1) Use ham_spwan for spwan detection. (But I am sure you don't have any clue what is that so again ask for some help somebody else and post it with your name).

2)F**k this method and use query_client_cvar to check developer's value. If value is other than 0 punish him. (I think the above one I coded for you as you have some non steam server )

Quote:

This method sucks, it's not correct way to count player's FPS.

Can you elaborate? I wanna learn that method.

fysiks

10-29-2011 18:09

Re: Anti-Developer

I don't understand why people worry about developer, just play the freaking game.

Menethil

10-30-2011 02:21

Re: Anti-Developer

@ challenge this is what u gave me ? does them match ?

Code:

#define ANTIDEVELOPER_OFFSET   3432



public plugin_init()

{

   register_plugin(PLUGIN_NAME, PLUGIN_VERSION, PLUGIN_AUTHOR)

}



public client_putinserver(id)

{   

   set_task(0.1, "AntiDeveloper",id+ANTIDEVELOPER_OFFSET, _, _, "b")

}



public AntiDeveloper(id)

{

   id-=ANTIDEVELOPER_OFFSET

   client_cmd(id,"developer 0")

}



public client_disconnect(id)

{

   if(task_exists(id+ANTIDEVELOPER_OFFSET))

   {

      remove_task(id+ANTIDEVELOPER_OFFSET)

   }

}

also changed to ham ( by me ofc )
@ frisks , i give u only one example
Hide and Seek Mode
Without developer , u can make normal and legal jumps.
With developer u can make huge and ilegal jums :).

Matthias Vance

10-30-2011 04:40

Re: Anti-Developer

Ehm, I don't get it.

I play my game, I have very high FPS because I want it all smooth etc (and because I can), and then you go slay me?

Menethil

10-30-2011 05:48

Re: Anti-Developer

Basicaly , and default fps_max should be 101

Beacause only few people has an sistem that keeps u a high constat FPS .
So to mentain a averrage fps for all , fps_max 101 is max fps allowed to be legal.
(each can set it's own maximum fps , that why has an cvar changer )

xPaw	10-30-2011 05:48

Re: Anti-Developer

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthias Vance (Post 1586219)

Ehm, I don't get it.

I play my game, I have very high FPS because I want it all smooth etc (and because I can), and then you go slay me?

Well, in CS 1.6, you can't go higher than 100FPS without using 'developer 1'. Normally, surfing requires you 131FPS to do tricks properly, but you have way higher FPS (like 300) you can do them waaaaay easier. So it's unfair against other players.

challenge

10-30-2011 05:49

Re: Anti-Developer

this is what I PMed you.

Code:

#include <amxmodx>

#include <fakemeta>

#define DEVELOPER_OFFSET         768

#define MAXFPS 130         // Do not lower this

#define MAXWARNS 3

#define is_user_valid(%1) (1 <= %1 <= 32)

new iFrames[33]

new iWarnings[33]

new alive[33]

public plugin_init()

{

   register_plugin("Anti-developer", "1.0", "Challenge")

   register_forward(FM_PlayerPreThink, "Fwd_PlayerPreThink")

   register_event( "DeathMsg", "eventDeath", "a" ) 

   register_event("ResetHUD", "event_respawn", "b")

}



public Fwd_PlayerPreThink(id)

{

   if(!alive[id])

      return FMRES_IGNORED

   iFrames[id]++   

   return FMRES_IGNORED

}



public client_putinserver(id)

{

   iFrames[id] = 0

   set_task(1.0, "ShowFps",id+DEVELOPER_OFFSET, _, _, "b");

}



public ShowFps(id)

{   

   id-=DEVELOPER_OFFSET

     if(is_user_alive(id) && iFrames[id] >= MAXFPS)

    {

        iWarnings[id]++

        if(iWarnings[id] >= MAXWARNS)

        {

         client_cmd(id,"kill")   

        }

    }        

    iFrames[id] = 0

}



public client_disconnect(id)

{

   if(task_exists(id+DEVELOPER_OFFSET))

   {

      remove_task(id+DEVELOPER_OFFSET)

   }

}



public event_respawn(id)

{

   alive[id] = 1

   return PLUGIN_CONTINUE

}   



public eventDeath()

{

   new victim = read_data(2)

   if(is_user_valid(victim))

   {

      alive[victim] = 0

   }

}

Obviously you are one of those loosers who just know how to publish other's plugin with their own name.
You just changed my defined value to a CVAR and claiming it yours. Now I am sure you will say I don't have any proof. But the answer is I do have. The PM is not deleted yet.

Anyway keep ur work up looser. And here is some more suggestion

1. #include <hamsandwich> ( donno how ur plugin compiled after change)
2. remove fakemeta and use client_think
3. use Ham_Killed instead of eventDeath ( although not necessary)

Matthias Vance

10-30-2011 07:12

Re: Anti-Developer

Quote:

Originally Posted by xPaw (Post 1586241)

Ahh okay, thanks for the explanation! Why exactly 131 FPS though?

jackas

10-30-2011 09:10

Re: Anti-Developer

LoL

nightstalker

11-04-2011 16:52

Re: Anti-Developer

i don't see it being fair for having high fps just because they can. get mad just because they have a better computer than yours. I mean cmon.

more like a kid, a wide receiver being kicked out from a football game cause hes too good.

joshknifer

11-04-2011 16:59

Re: Anti-Developer

This plugin is clearly not the OP's work. Prob should go into unapproved, unless Challange says its okay to release.

challenge

11-05-2011 14:17

Re: Anti-Developer

I don't have any problem.

But the reason why this plugin should not be released.

1. It's not a proper way to detect developer 1 ( in steam). I wrote this for non steam server of menethil. And that looser posted it here.

2. When people lagging they will be punished with this method.

3. Better plugin can be written by doing just query_client_cvar.

4. Other better anti-developer ( cvar forcer /checker something like that) already exists in this forum. So this is a kind of redundant.

challenge

11-05-2011 14:19

Re: Anti-Developer

Quote:

Originally Posted by nightstalker (Post 1590087)

Are you sure? No leagues allows developer 1. Have you thought what is the reason?

Menethil

11-05-2011 14:48

Re: Anti-Developer

Challenge, dont u think ur lieing urself ?
IF THIS was ur code, wasn't it coded from the start as u posted above ?
Why u still argue with changing the method, when u could do that from start?
EVEN if u writed this too , you did it from my request, and u made id exactly as i asked for, the cheking method, the Warning method everything is my whole damn idea.
And you wont be punished from the lagging , only masive lag as exploit or, playing from another country far away as USA -> Asia , that why is that Warning++ there ;).
Maybe in theory this is not a good method, be sure ull never complain about false detection 98%

challenge

11-05-2011 15:18

Re: Anti-Developer

Quote:

IF THIS was ur code, wasn't it coded from the start as u posted above ?

Are you blind? You did not even changed the variable name. changing one define to CVAR does not make others code urs.

Quote:

Why u still argue with changing the method, when u could do that from start?

Because thins method sucks and offsourse you don't have any idea why!!!
You asked for non steam. If you have asked for steam I would have never been coded this one.

Quote:

EVEN if u writed this too , you did it from my request, and u made id exactly as i asked for

lolx.Just now you tried to prove that it's not mine code.
Anyway, you requested me for one plugin and I coded for you for free. It's so hard to understand that?

Quote:

the cheking method, the Warning method everything is my whole damn idea.

I hope one day you will learn coding and also learn the difference between "requesting a plugin" and "writing a plugin"

Quote:

And you wont be punished from the lagging , only masive lag as exploit or, playing from another country far away as USA -> Asia , that why is that Warning++ there ;).

wrong. If you lag for just 4 sec you will be punished.

Anyway. I request the admins to lock this topic and trash/ unapprove it.

ConnorMcLeod

11-09-2011 05:01

Re: Anti-Developer

Checking method is bad/not accurate, unapproved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:19.