Valhalla Legends Archive

Why not try a remote SQL server? One that runs on a 24/7 Web Server? Unless im going in the wrong direction...

Aegis is no longer an active project but yes it will run on multiple platforms including linux.
I don't think that it had many flaws other than the simple ones that I created (meaning it had nothing to do with the language it was coded in).
There were, however, a few workarounds for certain things that didn't really NEED them if it hadn't of been a REALbasic app.

But, all in all, it was a good bot. Runs in command line interface, uses virtually no resources, and can maintain a steady connection with multiple profiles loaded. It also had a unique configuration method which I think was very useful and convinient to people. :\

Eric (The author of BNCSutil.dll) released ownership of the project to the public. The source code is available on the BNCSutil website. He no longer works on it so don't expect it to be fixed

I agree 100%, but like you said, why spend time coding something if the infrastructure is going to change... Anyways, I don't see any restrictions with using BNLS for non NLS products (OLS?) because the majority of the packets that I need do have cookies. However, if I were to want to implement the NLS products into my client (which I do want to do), I would need to redo my entire connection class. So I guess its really up to which one of us is willing to work on our projects, though it seems at this point I'm more willing than you ;-p

Whos writing their checkrevisions anyhow? Have you spoken with them? Or are you just as oblivious as the rest of us as to the whereabouts of the Battle.net coders. I have a feeling you may know something because of your previous statements ;-p (no real accusations of course.)
Thx

Yeah see thats my issue. The connection class I created allows for multiple connections to work together simultaneously. And at the moment, its no problem because I am using sub-classed BNLS sockets as well. The reason I want to use single-socket BNLS is because you have it limited to 7 connections per ip (understandable). Why exactly can't you add Cookies to the NLS packets though... I know you gave the reason, but it doesn't make sense to me in the way you put it. Also, if you are planning on adding cookies, when can I expect to see them?

Thx

Just a suggestion...
Do you guys think you could implement a Cookie for every BNLS packet? I know it seems useless to a lot of people, but it would save me a lot of work. Its easier to organize a single BNLS socket with cookies than without. Things such as BNLS_CREATEACCOUNT and BNLS_CHOOSENLSREVISION for starters, but it would be really nice to have them all cookie'd ;-D

If not, I would like some assistance ><

Why do people put version bytes in their configs for bots ;-p

Thanks Hdx, I was completely unaware of that :-D
That will help out in my connection process ^^
<3

... I never didn't understand.
I don't think you do though.

Quote from: Hdx on November 23, 2006, 11:47 PM

Code Select Expand

BNCS Connect
BNCS C->S 0x50 Config.VerByte
BNCS S->C 0x50
BNLS Connect
BNLS C->S 0x1A
BNLS S->C 0x1A
  If 0x1A.VerByte != Config.VerByte Then
    Config.VerByte = 0x1A.VerByte
    Connection.Reconnect()
  Else
    BNCS C->S 0x51
  End If

Understand now?
~-~(HDX)~-~

S->C 0x50?
The server wouldn't send you the data you need in order to proceed, it would tell you that the game version is out of date because the versionbyte is old.

how do you get the latest versionbyte from 0x1a if you can't send it without the current version byte. (because of the need to send 0x50 first)

If the verbyte DID happen to change, and you were still using 0x1a, you would never obtain the newest version byte because you 'eliminated' 0x10

Thanks Hdx,
That makes a little more sense, but the real question behind it is I guess, why did they actually state that it would eliminate the need for BNLS_REQUESTVERSION when in fact, it doesn't do that at all...

Ok, I'm not sure if this is on topic for this forum, but I was reading the BNLS Prot Spec (http://www.valhallalegends.com/yoni/BNLSProtocolSpec.txt) and I noticed something odd...
It claims that using BNLS_VERSIONCHECKEX2 (0x1A) will

request the current version code for the given product (eliminating the need for BNLS_REQUESTVERSIONBYTE)

And I'm not sure I understand the purpose...
In order to get the reply from this packet and actually use the versionbyte from it, is to send the packet with the data received from SID_AUTH_INFO which is the only place you need the version byte (AFAIK), so why does this packet send the versionbyte, and why does it state that it eliminates the need for BNLS_REQUESTVERSIONBYTE?!?!
Can someone shed some light? Or maybe revise the Protocol Spec? thx

Right, all he needs is an SSH terminal account that would allow him to do so. Not hard really...

If he has control over the website, I can easily create him a remote SQL Server. That is if he actually has the database backed up on his computer or something. Or has a way to transfer it over. Not sure if thats the way he would want to go though lol.