Expression Editor

Ask for Help on Using the Language With Memory Hacking Software

Moderators: g3nuin3, SpeedWing, WhiteHat, mezzo

Expression Editor

Postby minorutono » Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:18 am

Ok, I'm looking for pointers to how much gold a mine has..
I got this far, each time entering the expression into the expression editor.

Code: Select all
[[[[0x8bc22e0+0x8]+0x40]+0x30]+0x54]+0x198


Now, Expression Editor returns this :

Code: Select all
79576436 (4BE3D74)


Which is the same as my orignal address, so all good.


When Pointer Search 0x8bc22e0, and I Disassemble/AutoHack, I'm just looking around at the new values and plugging those into the Expression Editor when I notice my last entry ([[[[0x8bc22e0+0x8]+0x40]+0x30]+0x54]+0x198) now doesn't say 4BE3D74, it says "Unresolvable".


Why did it change? I didn't change or lock any values. All I did was Pointer Search and AutoHack. Didn't NOP anything..

This has happened before, and I don't understand why.

Pros, plz explain/
User avatar
minorutono
i R t3h nUB!!111
 
Posts: 944
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:10 am
Location: 2845 Vista Verde Way Cameron Park CA 95682

Re: Expression Editor

Postby WhiteHat » Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:06 pm

I’m not quite sure but if i’m correct, but please allow me to try to help...

From your expression: [[[[0x8bc22e0+0x8]+0x40]+0x30]+0x54]+0x198,
the bold-ed expression is quite ’suspicious’..

I would dig the 0x8bc22e0 pointer deeper if i were you. I don’t think that’s
a static pointer yet... That’s all i can think of...


Please correct me if i’m wrong..
.. to boldly go where no eagle has gone before...
User avatar
WhiteHat
Elang Djawa
 
Posts: 1059
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 12:49 pm
Location: Away for a while...

Re: Expression Editor

Postby minorutono » Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:00 am

Whitehat wrote:I’m not quite sure but if i’m correct, but please allow me to try to help...

From your expression: [[[[0x8bc22e0+0x8]+0x40]+0x30]+0x54]+0x198,
the bold-ed expression is quite ’suspicious’..

I would dig the 0x8bc22e0 pointer deeper if i were you. I don’t think that’s
a static pointer yet... That’s all i can think of...


Please correct me if i’m wrong..


Well, see...

I know this isn't the static. I'm on my way to getting the static.

When I move to the next search, I find some stuff in the Auto Hack.

When I look back at the expression editor to input the new data, I see that my last entry is now Unresolvable

So, I guess my question is really this : "If the expression editor returns 'unresolvable' after initially returning the correct base addy, is it ok to continue going down the path that the now-unresolvable pointer showed me?"
User avatar
minorutono
i R t3h nUB!!111
 
Posts: 944
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:10 am
Location: 2845 Vista Verde Way Cameron Park CA 95682

Postby SpeedWing » Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:08 am

if your answer is this: "do i need to continue searching with that invalid pointers" well then the answer is no.


, is the game you are trying pointer searches on warcraft 3?
User avatar
SpeedWing
Defragler
 
Posts: 2031
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 1:00 am
Location: If there is a Will there is a Solution.

Postby minorutono » Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:12 am

SpeedWing wrote:if your answer is this: "do i need to continue searching with that invalid pointers" well then the answer is no.


, is the game you are trying pointer searches on warcraft 3?


Well when I got them they weren't invalid. They showed up fine at first, and even entered.. Then I looked back later and they were "unresolvable". So is that still invalid?

And yes, it is WC III
User avatar
minorutono
i R t3h nUB!!111
 
Posts: 944
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:10 am
Location: 2845 Vista Verde Way Cameron Park CA 95682

Postby liqmysaq » Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:49 pm

try going further, ive had games that half way thru the pointer search its unresolvable but the next address i found turned it back to normal. i should also mention that every pointer in the game was like that, so i assume its part of the anti cheat or somethin.

like whitehat said, that address [0x8bc22e0+0x8] doesnt look right, maybe its supposed to be [0x8bc22e0]+0x8] ? that would be a likely cause of your problem too.
User avatar
liqmysaq
I Know Your Poop
 
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 2:02 am

Postby JB Gzn » Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:05 am

[0x8bc22e0+0x8] wouldn't this be teh same as [0x8bc22e8]?
well anyway - try still using the unresovable one, i had it qwith WT, it showed unresolvable but when i added it into my cheat table, it just got the right address, but the pointer still said unresolvable.
Image
ImageImage

famous wrote:What's worth the price is always worth the fight


famous wrote:Every second counts cause there's no second try
User avatar
JB Gzn
Pro++
 
Posts: 1985
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 7:56 pm
Location: Unknown, please use a pointer.

Postby minorutono » Fri Feb 27, 2009 1:37 am

Alright, thanks guys, I'll keep going with it. I wasn't sure if it was worth it to go all the way through with the pointer searches if halfway through I failed.
User avatar
minorutono
i R t3h nUB!!111
 
Posts: 944
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 10:10 am
Location: 2845 Vista Verde Way Cameron Park CA 95682

Postby SpeedWing » Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:04 am

with pointer searches in loa i learned, that if you get a sort of looping in the same area your pointer will turn out wrong

for example, if your base would stay in the area of 0x732000, then you would be wrong, then try a new first pointer.

( if so then start all over from the address that you want to point to )
User avatar
SpeedWing
Defragler
 
Posts: 2031
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 1:00 am
Location: If there is a Will there is a Solution.


Return to Help

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron