Stev

How were they contacted within 5 minutes last time, and this time has taken 3+ days? Also, I too would like to see this e-mail; both sent and received. The reason being, if I went up to authorities and said, "These people are botting and trying to say they are not with the following functions... Mind setting them straight?" What do you think the reply is going to be? Thanks.

Yeah, this might get rid of the one or two bot here and there, but the bot companies (Which are the real problem here) wouldn't hesitate to develop or even buy readily available software which could beat captcha. Captcha is not the way to go.

The idiot who posted porn and was banned from here for doing so had no prior affiliation to our "group" at the time. As for the other claim, do you even have proof it was from our "group"? *Gulp*. Srs stuff. :P.

Well, if it's something like a phone call or text message then how the hell do you provide proof? Better yet, how do you show them the functions/script in question?

Well chances are they probably just said "that's against the rules" which is why we're waiting for a more detailed and informative email from them so this whole fiasco can be resolved by fully understanding what is and isn't allowed on both sides. I'm defending my work here. I code to help people out. I play RuneScape to help people out (That's why I give away about 1B+ per week to friends FFS). I'm not about to be called a botter and say I promote botting when I write functions that abide by the rules. Quote of my response which was ignored: The thing with your example there is that it would only be ok if 1:1 means that as long as the number of keys pressed to call the function equals the number of actions that the function does. Personally I've always understood that by 1:1 it means press key -> move mouse press key 2 -> click mouse Because essentially nothing happens with your script until the last key is pressed so then the previous keys wouldn't matter would they? This is what needs to be cleared up with Jagex because if it is ok to press 3 keys together and then have 3 actions performed then most of your functions are perfectly fine (also assuming that Jagex is ok with moving to a point on the screen which there also seems to be controversy over). However I think what a lot of people are understanding is that an action must be performed after each keypress and not press 3 keys = 3 actions. I missed that post, most likely as it was when I was concerned about my posts begin removed. I was not under the impression that that was the issue at all. What is the different between pressing 3 buttons, then 3 actions being produced... Or press button 1, action, press button 2, action, press button 3, action? I'm simply doing what Jagex refuses to: Make a customizable game/interface. Why the whole issue about it, I have no idea. Like really, think about the Click_T(). it simply makes it so when called, it opens another tab (Such as friends chat, options, etc). The following example is illegal, but what is honestly the problem with it: F2:: Click_T("Options") Return Ofc, you could make it 2 inputs, such as Ctrl-F2, but for arguments sake, let's keep it as 1 input. Jagex has already made pressing F1 open the inventory. F2 open the equipped. WHY would/should there be a problem with remapping F2 to instantly open your attack styles instead?

I'd like to see things worked out. However, all of my posts are ignored. I made a 56 line reply explaining why my scripts were legal (For those who aren't AHK-literate) and 2 pages later I see: I'm defending my work here. I code to help people out. I have written countless programs both for free and for pay for those with disabilities... To help people out. I play RuneScape to help people out (That's why I give away about 1B+ per week to friends FFS). I'm not about to be called a botter and say I promote botting when I write functions that abide by the rules.

You caught me. Funny thing is, some would even admit/have admitted to rule breaking in the past but it gets deleted. Did you miss my 56 line post?

I just viewed the large post in which you pointed out every little bit of the AutoHotkey. and Wicked's RuneScape Functions... And Scripts in which you didn't like. I found it hysterical that each and every one of my functions was listed. Now tell me, what was it about my functions that made them "against the rules"? Was it the fact that they don't obey the 1:1 rule? Now, forget what ever the hell you were thinking if it was along the lines, "Ofc, you idiot. It's obvious that they disobey the 1:1 rule". Yes, my functions could technically produce hundreds of actions. Does this make them wrong? Not at all. Why aren't they wrong, you ask? Because I do not set the required number on inputs to call each function. I created the functions for other to copy and paste, so instead of having to make hotkeys with incredible amounts of duplicate information, and having the hassle of searching coordinates and such, it's a simple copy and paste. Look at the function Click_M(). It right clicks, moves the mouse, and clicks again. Against the rules? Nope. The reason is because it's up to the user of such functions to require the same amount of inputs as actions generated. So, the following is legal: ^+m:: ;~ 3 actions are required to call Click_M(). Pressing Ctrl. Pressing Shift. And pressing M. Click_M(1) ;~ This function produces 3 actions. 3:3. Return Just because a user may not want to require 3 inputs does not make my functions against the rules. If this was the case, mousekeys would be illegal because they too can be set and used against the rules. It's all up to the user. If I post a link to a C++ forum, will you remove it too? It can be used to control mouse movements and send/receive keystrokes.

Board index » General » Metagame Development » Wicked's RuneScape Functions... And Scripts Board index » General » Metagame Development » Autohotkey.

I fully agree and can say I've had the same situation happen to me. One JMod says yes, another says no. Also something that would swing their answer is when approached with an already biased question. "Hey, Mod _____. These guys are trying to say these bot functions are legal when they are clearly disobeying the 1:1 rule." What do you think the response is going to be? They're also not disobeying the 1:1 rule to begin with. And if anyone can point out a script that we have on that site that does produce more actions then inputs, I'm more then interested. For one, the functions can not be against the 1:1 rule anyways... They're functions! They have no set input required to call them! Just like mousekeys, it is up to the user to set them up. It's up to the user to ensure they pressing two buttons to call a function that results in two actions. And a quote directly from the first post in the thread itself before any functions/scripts are even listed: And again, in-case you guys have missed it, please read my previous post found here since I've seen many admins and mods view this thread without so much as a response to it.

I will repeat my view on this subject. I do not believe the problem is individuals who bot. You can't blame them. It's the companies with thousands of them running at a time. I don't think there's enough individual players who bot that really make an effect.

Incorrect. If you search RuneScape, that's closely related to their RuneScape RWT and gold farming advertisements and so will be displayed whether or not you search for them.

My turn? Actually it was to make the scripts more human-like. And it's not +- 5, it clicks anywhere within the button's width and height. I thought this would seem more professional and realistic. The same reason I've used more realistic mouse movements rather then straight lines. Although, sorry to tell you, that really is all it takes to bypass Jagex's bot-detection system... Despite what you think, DarkDude98, I'm not some script kiddie pretending that he knows how to code. I make a living out of scripting and programming. I'm 22 and own my own house (Not paying for... Own). Selling programs that aid people with disabilities and handicaps. Also writting software for Norton's support agents. Do you maybe think these functions weren't written to bot as much as to simply make the gaming easier/more enjoyable? Had you taken the time, you'd see in the same thread as that function that we say if a function produces more then one action, require the same amount of inputs to call such a function. I don't give a [bleep] how many actions a function produces. Look at my Click_IN(). They could have it click all 28 items in their inventory. I don't decide what inputs are required, that's up to them. But saying that my functions are against the rules; that's utter bull-[cabbage]. So this is saying it's ok to be posting botting scripts as long as there's a disclaimer telling people they have to make them 1:1 themselves? That's like directing someone to a RWT site, telling them how to use it, and then saying they can't pay for gold as it doesn't fit within Jagex's rules. I shouldn't even bother replying to this crap, but I guess I will. I provide functions for people who may not know as much about scripting. I'm not going to write a complete [bleep]ing program with pre-assigned hotkeys/hotstrings. The point of simply releasing functions is so that they can do what Jagex fails to develope; a customizable gameplay. Y'know, mousekeys could be used against Jagex's rules, so ban everyone who posts about those too please? I provide the foundation for the scripts so that they themselves can build around it. None of my functions disobey the 1:1 rule because they have no set inputs. Sent 13 November 2010 - 03:13 AM. And no, I was in a conversation and simply said that you seemed as though you believed that anything AHK related was against the rules. I simply copied a few conversations. That's what I don't get... You say they disobey the 1:1 rule, right? Yet nowhere is the input required even listed. And in the scripts posted, when a functions produces more then one action, it also requires the same amount of inputs to be called. Therefore, this argument is completely false. When the script moves the mouse and clicks, that's two actions. We require that two inputs be needed, therefore obeying the 1:1 rule. Again, your argument is completely false. Again, the functions posted on that site also have a speed parameter so that the mouse actually moves rather then jumps. Read into it. Thus, all the crap about the mouse "jumping" to a given position is false. If I accepted a response from just any JMod, I would have been happy with DarkDude98's. Oh wait... What? Yeah, how about that. And also the fact that I too have asked JMods who were on my friends list about my simple gear switch, for example, in which I got a reply that it was fine. Maybe that's why I won't take one JMod's response, especially one not in that department. Now about the absolute/relative mouse movements. As of now, the functions work like this: Desired_Click_X = 200 Desired_Click_Y = 400 MouseMove, % Desired_Click_X, % Desired_Click_Y Hmmm... Now that you mention it, I could make it relative and completely: MouseGetPos, Current_Mouse_X, Current_Mouse_Y Desired_Mouse_X = 200 Desired_Mouse_Y = 400 MouseMove, % (Current_Mouse_X>Desired_Mouse_X) ? Current_Mouse_X-Desired_Mouse_X:Desired_Mouse_X-Current_Mouse_X, % (Current_Mouse_Y>Desired_Mouse_Y) ? Current_Mouse_Y-Desired_Mouse_Y:Desired_Mouse_Y-Current_Mouse_Y,, R Lol, imagine that. Now it uses relative mouse movements. Legal. But I'm sure y'all will find a problem with it. Also, how about PMing the one who's functions you claim are against the rules. *Raises hand*. I'm curious to know exactly what about my functions breaks the rules. Until I CBA to type more, Stev.

You've yet to prove it, yet you're taking action without regards to that. and there you go again deleting links in signatures without providing proof. TheAncient was sent a detailed pm about exactly what was wrong with the scripts posted. We've reiterated time and time again that if the offending scripts are removed, links will once again be allowed. And now that they've been removed it takes how long for you to review it as "safe".

I can't speak for what other staff members are saying in PM but we have already clearly indicated exactly what the problem is with (some of) the scripts hosted on your forums. And I have completely clarified that you were incorrect in my post. None of our scripts use image/iconsearch... Even though there's nothing wrong with it. No scripts move to predefined positions. We encourage, and all scripts posted abide by, the 1:1 rule. Thanks, Stev.

*Good thing that the functions on Grimy's forum move to random, not predefined/specific, positions. They move the mouse to anywhere within the item/button's width and height, not one given pixel. **Funny, I was unaware that using an imagesearch on my PC was against RuneScape rules. Why exactly do you believe it's against Jagex's rules to locate the position of a button based on imagesearch? And there was one post that mentioned looking for icons which was followed by me saying, "No, I don't use icon/imagesearch." All the functions on TEF use mathematical formulas to locate buttons and items, not icons. And one last thing... You're telling me their has to be an action for moving the x of the mouse, and another for moving the y? Lol? Where do you get this stuff?

This is TIF. What on earth did you expect? Lol. The mods have stated many times that you can say, "I was thinkin' about botting," but nothing along the lines of, "I botted a while back." This is TIF... They live in the same cotton-candy land as Jagex where they cover there eyes to the real world and plug their ears to believe that nothing goes wrong and there's no bad people in the world. Odd thing is, TIF gives more of a rats ass then Jagex does about their own rules. Lol.

I must have missed something?

That post was to all the people who got mad at things like those who got lucky with climbing boots. :P.

How are they risking an account? Jagex doesn't give a [bleep] and bots don't get banned. They are risking nothing as there is no risk. Botting: It's like staking with a 100% chance of success.

A lot of people was the majority of our member list. They weren't buying our hacks to win every game. Hell, a simple chams hack could achieve that. They wanted the fun abilities that came with it (Ex. Unlimited ammo, speed hack, fly hack, etc). If it was all about wins, every hacker would simply sit there with OPK on every single game. And many of our members have been playing these games and the series' for years. Not the typical, "Try it. Don't like it. Hack it. Leave it." But cheating does and can make a game more fun. Whether it be while your cheating (Like in an FPS) or after you've cheated the levels/money.

Well, no. While I couldn't care less about botters on MMO's, because of how braindead the grind is, hacking 100% PVP based games is pretty lame. You talk about fun? If you need a hack to win on a FPS, then it's that you're desperate to win against others. And if you're desperate in the first place it's because you're taking the game too seriously. Surprisingly, most people who hack don't do it to win. And a lot of people who do hack could completely wipe the floor against an opponent hack free. They do it because it's more fun jumping 600 feet in the air, launching a million RPGs a second and blowing everything up. :P. I do it because I make good amounts of money for taking a short time to write/maintain/update an undetected VIP hack. However, the topic is botting, RWT, and such. My hack example was just that; an example. People cheat because it's fun. They cheat because when they are done cheating, they now have the levels to do the fun things in a game.

But see, why should we care if someone gets an advantage over us? Look at the penguin glitch. I wasn't on and missed it (Or I'd have abused the [bleep] out of it). Did I care that these people all got millions and millions of XP for no work? Not at all. Good on them. Climbing boots. Why do people get upset when others made instant millions? Who cares if I log in the next day with the same value bank I left with... While a pal logs in with 15M more? I, and others should, play this game for me. Others can do/gain what ever they like. If anything, that's motivation to get bigger and better. It shouldn't have to be that way. Seems to me the recent trend in MMOs is to eliminate or shorten the grind. If they did remove the grind, they'd see a few less bots, yes. However, it wouldn't stop the companies with thousands. But then again, if they took away the grind and made it fun... Wouldn't the skilling locations fill up with people now wanting to do that skill? :P.

Haha, that's neat! Good snatch. :D. *Gets geared to go BKing* (Bot killing). :P.

How many of the people saying, "Botters are scum and immoral," have never used a cheat code on a gameboy/sega/playstation? Same thing. A lot of people have a strong opinion. As I said earlier... I hack. Writing hacks for Battlefield and other FPS. I constantly get, "If you can't play without cheating, why play at all?" One of the biggest people saying this was my own father. Then I asked them... Sit down and play one game with a hack. Just try it. If you don't like it, don't use it again. My dad will no longer play if he's not got one of my hacks. These people who used to say, "Dirty hackers! You can't play so you hack!" then say, "Omg! It's so fun to hack!" You can make a game that orinially is not fun fun by cheating. It's undeniable. Same general idea. I'm sure if you all actually tried a "cheat" for RuneScape and came back on to a few extra bucks/levels, your perspectives would change. Not saying that I have (For RuneScape)... But it's the same for every game.