CSB Hash Connect INSIDE

[phvckmeh]

i use CSB and bot works great  

anyway, dont take it personally but BNLS is rather slow for me, and i see other bots using hases to connect. Is it possible to use hashes to connect with CSB (cleanslatebot) and/or what would i do/need to incorporate them as i am rather clueless when it comes to hashes

Thx Guys!

[Eric]

No, CleanSlateBot does not support local hashing.

[CodeMaster]

Hashes may seem faster to connect with, but most public CheckRevision functions are slower than the BNLS Check Revision, therefore you usually get a better ping time when using BNLS. (At least this is the case for me)

[Forged]

You can use Hashes with exileasy.ocx though

[phvckmeh]

and exileasy.ocx is???

[Eric]

Hashes may seem faster to connect with, but most public CheckRevision functions are slower than the BNLS Check Revision, therefore you usually get a better ping time when using BNLS. (At least this is the case for me)

Despite the fact that the CheckRevision() BNLS uses is slightly faster than most, the time it takes for you to transfer the data received from Battle.net to BNLS, BNLS to transfer it back to you hashed and then sending it to Battle.net, in most cases, would take much longer than just localy hashing the values and sending them directly to Battle.net.

[Soul Taker]

Hashes may seem faster to connect with, but most public CheckRevision functions are slower than the BNLS Check Revision, therefore you usually get a better ping time when using BNLS. (At least this is the case for me)

Calculating the results for 0x51 should not effect the speed at which you reply to 0x25.

[phvckmeh]

and exileasy.ocx is???

anyone know? im interested
searched google, nothing
searched here, nothing

[Maddox]

The time CheckRevision takes to complete has nothing to do with your ping time.

[Soul Taker]

The time CheckRevision takes to complete has nothing to do with your ping time.

Calculating the results for 0x51 should not effect the speed at which you reply to 0x25.

[UserLoser.]

Hashes may seem faster to connect with, but most public CheckRevision functions are slower than the BNLS Check Revision, therefore you usually get a better ping time when using BNLS. (At least this is the case for me)

Despite the fact that the CheckRevision() BNLS uses is slightly faster than most, the time it takes for you to transfer the data received from Battle.net to BNLS, BNLS to transfer it back to you hashed and then sending it to Battle.net, in most cases, would take much longer than just localy hashing the values and sending them directly to Battle.net.

Actually I don't believe that's true.  I've timed the time it takes from when I sent the packet, to when BNLS sent it back to me, and it was roughly one 3rd of the time it takes to do it locally with Yobguls' function - Try it your self on the War3 files

[hismajesty]

and exileasy.ocx is???

anyone know? im interested
searched google, nothing
searched here, nothing

Something clan exile made.

[Adron]

Actually I don't believe that's true.  I've timed the time it takes from when I sent the packet, to when BNLS sent it back to me, and it was roughly one 3rd of the time it takes to do it locally with Yobguls' function - Try it your self on the War3 files

This is likely to be very dependent on your ping time to vl.com. What times did you get when you measured it?

[iago]

The time CheckRevision takes to complete has nothing to do with your ping time.

Calculating the results for 0x51 should not effect the speed at which you reply to 0x25.

I was going to say that too.  Ah, what the hell.

The speed that you do checkrevision doesn't affect your ping.  Unless you're sending your SID_PING to bnls and waiting for it to tell you how to respond.

[Soul Taker]

The time CheckRevision takes to complete has nothing to do with your ping time.

Calculating the results for 0x51 should not effect the speed at which you reply to 0x25.

I was going to say that too.  Ah, what the hell.

The speed that you do checkrevision doesn't affect your ping.  Unless you're sending your SID_PING to bnls and waiting for it to tell you how to respond.

Then you'll be getting a -1 ping, or won't be logging on at all, depending on how you handle the situation.