Conquer Club

is cheating possible in CC?

Talk about all things related to Conquer Club

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the community guidelines before posting.

Postby Rocketry on Mon Sep 24, 2007 11:49 am

Robinette wrote:Legitimate cheating is really difficult on this site...

The card hack program that i wrote just has too many bugs when playing flat rate... so don't even try right now with flat rate games, and never ever with only 2 or 3 player games. Anyway, for those who haven't seen it yet, I'm reposting the basic method to hack into the card program, but it's a bit complicated to explain without a whiteboard. Also, this is not compatible with greasemonkey, so if you want to do it you'll have to work it out just like I did, but with the info below you should be able to do it in a fraction of the time it took me.... just don't give up, it really is worth all the effort.

First off, it doesn't work with flat rate, and it doesn't work with team games. Here 's why... it is all about the Cyclomatic Code Complexity within this site. The simple part to explain is that on this site the code complexity is defined by control flow, and obviously there are different ways of measuring complexity (e.g. data complexity, module complexity, algorithmic complexity, call-to, call-by, etc.), and although these other methods are effective in the right context, it seems to be generally accepted that control flow is one of the most useful measurements of complexity, and high complexity scores have been shown to be a strong indicator of low reliability and frequent errors. That's simple enough, but it's what we do with it that's so cool... This measure provides a single ordinal number that can be compared to the complexity of other games. Because of static software metrics intended to be independent of language and language format, Cyclomatic Code Complexity becomes a measure of the number of linearly-independent paths through a program module and is calculated by counting the number of decision points found in the code. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/str/descriptions ... _body.html Stay with me people... I use a Lutz Roeders Reflector http://www.aisto.com/roeder/dotnet/ which basically allows the user to point his Reflector tool at any Common Langauge Runtime (CLR) assembly, and it will then de-compile this creating an entirely reflected treeview with all the objects from the source assembly shown, with code. Yes with code. Great stuff. http://research.microsoft.com/~emeijer/Papers/CLR.pdf Basically you can use this tool to see how any valid CLR (assuming it has not been obfuscated) assembly works. Anyway the up shot of it, is that we get a boolean to say that the current file is valid or not, that is all we care about at the moment. So if the file requested is not a valid CLR type an error message is shown, and nothing else is done. However, if the input file is a valid CLR file, it is then checked to see if the file is a "System" assembly, and if it is... eureka! I get an extra card. Ok so thats pretty much all there is to it.

A while back I started to modifiy this to work with flat rate, but I don't think it would really be worth all the effort. So if you really want this for flat rate, let me explain how far I got and you could work on finishing it. You would have to revisit the treeview with ONLY valid namespaces and ONLY valid classes created. We would also have to find the NameSpaces object which contains the list of strings (for namspaces) and for each string of ucClass objects (for the classes). The list of ucClass objects are created by this and are then ready and waiting to be placed on a suitable code. But as yet we dont know what classes the user needs, it could be all of them, or it could be 1 of them or even none of them. It depends on what the user selects from the treeview on the mainform (frmMain.cs). And that's where I got stuck. So I looked and I looked for an answer. The only thing simliar at all, was GDI+ http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms533798.aspx and in order to do something like this, a destination target needs to be created at the full string size, and then the viewable (onscreen) fragments are printed to individual page framements and saved into the destination image at the correct x/y co-ordinates. In order to do this the application has to programatically perform scrolling to get the next page fragment code to merge with the destination code. I managed to get this to work, but it was a complete nightmare, and there were definetly bugs everywhere, which resulted in losing more cards that I gained! So if there is anyone reading this that is totally rad and knarly at GDI+, and knows how to save the entire contents of a scrollable control to an exisiting code, please feel free to let me know. As for the above code, it is code that I am kind of 1/2 proud of, but would rather wasn't there. Do you know what I mean? After all, sometimes you just get completley stuck with trying to patch all these code fragments together, to form the final destination code.


So for these reasons, it only works properly with 6 player std escalating games, so that is the only type of game that I play.




cool. i can only see one flaw in this... 'legitimate cheating' does not exist.

Rocketry
User avatar
Lieutenant Rocketry
 
Posts: 1416
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 5:33 pm
Location: Westminster

Postby Metaphore on Mon Sep 24, 2007 4:43 pm

Can you explain to me why I shouldn't think that someone who takes the time to write several pages of shit on uses of the CLR and GDI to defeat a PHP site isn't simply showing signs of sexual frustration?
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metaphore
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:08 am
Location: Kharkov

Postby Wild_Tiger on Tue Sep 25, 2007 1:16 pm

LOL
Image
I got beaten by 2 privates and all I got was this lousy feedback!
General Wild_Tiger
 
Posts: 809
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 3:39 pm
Location: Netherlands

Postby JTFR on Tue Sep 25, 2007 3:59 pm

For asking a dumb question "lock er down"
<----not a troll. Puppet. P U P P E T. Puppet.
User avatar
Private 1st Class JTFR
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:59 pm
Location: Lock er down!

Postby Robinette on Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:49 pm

Metaphore wrote:Can you explain to me why I shouldn't think that someone who takes the time to write several pages of shit on uses of the CLR and GDI to defeat a PHP site isn't simply showing signs of sexual frustration?


hee hee... that one made me laugh, well done...

But since you know your stuff and work in this field, I am surprised you didn't pick up on the joke...

I've been fooling everybody saying this was a manipulation to get an extra card, when in reality it is all about manuipulating the colors of the cards...



Rocketry wrote:cool. i can only see one flaw in this... 'legitimate cheating' does not exist.

Rocketry



Cool your jets Rocket man... This is NOT cheating at all.... it's actually just exploiting a weakness in the program that allows a manipulation of the color of the cards... It does NOT give anybody an extra card... and for most people it is just too much damn work to follow these instruction to change the color of one card... Real cheaters will have to stick to de-facto double turns in freestyle games, etc.
Image
User avatar
Brigadier Robinette
 
Posts: 2944
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Northern California

Postby reverend_kyle on Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:18 am

Robinette wrote:.



Rocketry wrote:cool. i can only see one flaw in this... 'legitimate cheating' does not exist.

Rocketry



Cool your jets Rocket man... This is NOT cheating at all.... it's actually just exploiting a weakness in the program that allows a manipulation of the color of the cards... It does NOT give anybody an extra card... and for most people it is just too much damn work to follow these instruction to change the color of one card... Real cheaters will have to stick to de-facto double turns in freestyle games, etc.


Shh.. Don't tell johnnyrocket about this.
DANCING MUSTARD FOR POOP IN '08!
User avatar
Sergeant reverend_kyle
 
Posts: 9250
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:08 pm
Location: 1000 post club

Postby Hrvat on Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:22 am

adds 'Robinette' to its ignore list. CHEATS
I'll never pay for another Premium on ConquerClub.
Lieutenant Hrvat
 
Posts: 354
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 8:41 pm

Postby flashleg8 on Wed Sep 26, 2007 9:52 am

I don't need to cheat. I just paid an extra $53 to get "super plus premium". It lets me re-roll any dice once a turn if required. It also has that handy feature of guaranteeing you that you get a card each turn whether you attack or not. Though as I play mostly no cards I feel I've wasted my money slightly. Still its a good feeling to support the site, and you get your rank badge in a cool purple colour.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class flashleg8
 
Posts: 1026
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 10:21 am
Location: the Union of Soviet Socialist Scotland

Postby Robinette on Wed Sep 26, 2007 10:05 am

flashleg8 wrote:I don't need to cheat. I just paid an extra $53 to get "super plus premium". It lets me re-roll any dice once a turn if required. It also has that handy feature of guaranteeing you that you get a card each turn whether you attack or not. Though as I play mostly no cards I feel I've wasted my money slightly. Still its a good feeling to support the site, and you get your rank badge in a cool purple colour.


I thought the guaranteed card was only available with the "super platinum premium deluxe" package...
Image
User avatar
Brigadier Robinette
 
Posts: 2944
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Northern California

Postby Metaphore on Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:56 pm

Robinette wrote:I've been fooling everybody saying this was a manipulation to get an extra card, when in reality it is all about manuipulating the colors of the cards...


So you are a real person... and I thought that post came from a random SPAM generator hooked up to a CS 604 textbook. Granted, it was more random than the dice algorithm. Didn't even trend on OS.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metaphore
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:08 am
Location: Kharkov

Postby Robinette on Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:03 pm

Metaphore wrote:
Robinette wrote:I've been fooling everybody saying this was a manipulation to get an extra card, when in reality it is all about manuipulating the colors of the cards...


So you are a real person... and I thought that post came from a random SPAM generator hooked up to a CS 604 textbook. Granted, it was more random than the dice algorithm. Didn't even trend on OS.


:wink:
User avatar
Brigadier Robinette
 
Posts: 2944
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Northern California

Previous

Return to Conquer Club Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users