WTF Replay.

[Garquillex]

I think the idea is that the archer would be even better if he could consistently hit any specific part of the bullseye that he wanted to.

Edit: Unless I'm not following the discussion.

[foxfire667]

Originally Posted by Punk Kitten

Now all we need is for an Admin to read this and go: "WTF our people could fix this."

I hoped that they might have considered updating the replay player during the FFR random update (if they told people about the update in some FFR thread, I didn't read it, so it was random to me), but it doesn't look like they did. Oh well.

I hope I can, or that I get lucky. Ugh, it is more annoying trying to edit and replace code in an swf than I thought it was going to be. I had to get a few programs and to export a few files, and now I am left with the FFR replay SWF as a .fla file, that I replaced the code exported from the updated FFR game, but I believe I need Macromedia flash to convert all of these scripts back into an SWF. I'll see what more I can do, and hopefully I can get some results. My god, I thought I could just edit the SWF in the flash decompiler I obtained, but no...I have to do some trial and error...the VERY long and boring way.

[OneHandNow]

Foxfire, you can do it!

[bLasTamos]

Originally Posted by foxfire667

My god, I thought I could just edit the SWF in the flash decompiler I obtained, but no...I have to do some trial and error...the VERY long and boring way.

LOL

have fun.
Honestly I don't even know why you care.

[emerald000]

I'm pretty sure NSane (or some other admin) said they already had an avmiss free replay engine. They are simply keeping this one to look for hackers. I still don't understand why they won't simply put BOTH though...

[MrRubix]

One thing I've never understood about FFR is that they have all this stuff that they COULD release, and choose not to. There's really no good reason why they shouldn't.

[AniMeowzerz]

Originally Posted by emerald000

I'm pretty sure NSane (or some other admin) said they already had an avmiss free replay engine. They are simply keeping this one to look for hackers. I still don't understand why they won't simply put BOTH though...

It'd make sense to use both IMO, Perhaps have it so normal members Can access the new system while if there's high suspicion of a hacker, the mods/admins would have the ability to access that users avmiss version of the replay.

Or the side-by-side comparison like someone mentioned earlier.

[bLasTamos]

This excuse of having avmiss glitchy engine to detect cheating is completely bull****.
First, they can only detect cheating on hard files that have at least 4-framers.
Second, if people can make bots to accurately hit the arrows in time, they can make bots to accurately hit arrows NOT in time, so this is completely useless and makes people realise they are fooling us and have no fixed engine for the replays.

[devonin]

First, they can only detect cheating on hard files that have at least 4-framers.

Name me any file that the people who complain about hacked scores complains about, that -isn't- hard and -doesn't- have framers.

[bLasTamos]

Well that doesn't really matter, you can't say if a player is cheating if you just look at the replay information.

[Silver_Brian]

Originally Posted by jimerax

btw avmiss s-token is utterly outdated and doesn't make sense at all now, even though it's meant to be an anti skill token, it only lives in widgets and replays now.

The Five used to be really hard to get, I killed myself trying to get it =(

[devonin]

Originally Posted by bLasTamos

Well that doesn't really matter, you can't say if a player is cheating if you just look at the replay information.

Depending on how they cheated, you can absolutely tell they cheated just by looking at replay information.

[MrRubix]

Regardless of whether or not the file is easy or not, and regardless of whether or not you use an avmiss engine or a "correct" engine to replay the song, you can tell if someone's cheating or not. It's just easier to tell with avmisses enabled.

[bLasTamos]

Then make a program that takes replay info and outputs the percentage of hits on the correct frame. No need to have an avmiss engine to do this.

[mhss1992]

Why did the original program give more importance to the arrow that came after the current arrow, in the first place? Was this just a default, automatic thing the program made or was it someone's mistake?

[qqwref]

Originally Posted by bLasTamos

Then make a program that takes replay info and outputs the percentage of hits on the correct frame. No need to have an avmiss engine to do this.

Ooh, that's actually a really good idea. If you reported the accuracy by frame instead of by judgment, you'd have 7 total slots plus miss/boo, right? It would be really easy to check if someone was cheating this way, too, because you wouldn't even have to go through the whole replay, just look at some data.

Originally Posted by mhss1992

Why did the original program give more importance to the arrow that came after the current arrow, in the first place? Was this just a default, automatic thing the program made or was it someone's mistake?

From what I've seen on the code - and please correct me if I'm wrong here - what it'd do was just go through the arrows after the last one that had been hit, and if your keypress was in the window of that arrow it would write the accuracy and which arrow was hit into a variable somewhere. The problem with that approach is that if you're in the window of two arrows it will go to the first one and write down the judgment, but then go to check the second one and *overwrite* that with the second arrow's judgment. Since it was then considered hit, I think the program wouldn't allow you to hit the first one ever again.

[mhss1992]

Originally Posted by qqwref

From what I've seen on the code - and please correct me if I'm wrong here - what it'd do was just go through the arrows after the last one that had been hit, and if your keypress was in the window of that arrow it would write the accuracy and which arrow was hit into a variable somewhere. The problem with that approach is that if you're in the window of two arrows it will go to the first one and write down the judgment, but then go to check the second one and *overwrite* that with the second arrow's judgment. Since it was then considered hit, I think the program wouldn't allow you to hit the first one ever again.

It would be fine if this "overwrite" part didn't exist. I mean, it makes absolutely no sense, a hit isn't supposed to be recorded, then overwritten by something else...