Well,... I want to learn about packet bot and how to make it. But I dont know where should i start and where i can learn about it. Can someone experienced give the newbie an instruction in it? I know a little about c++ Thanks
First you need a good language for packet bots. C++ is not really recommened.
I prefer VB.Net/C# or Java.
If you know C++ a bit, you can start with Java. Learn the language. WebRequest and TCP is important.
If you know this, you need a good Packet Sniffer.
WPE or Wireshark are good. Don't use Firefox or Chrome. If I remember right, jD said, that it don't accept dll importing, that you can't sniff.
Opera or Internet Explorer would be good.
If you have the packets, you must encrypt them. That is the most difficult part. The packets are very hard decrypted.
Just try and try, till you can login and it moves alone.
You can ask jD here in epvp too. Maybe he give you some tips, what the bot needs.
If you know Java or consider learning in it, I can tell you that your job will be A LOT easier. I don't think anybody here will be able to help you with that language, but decrypting/encrypting the packets, as well as telling the bot what to do is releated just to parsing everything with the flash objects from DO.
However, your bot will be less functional at the end (compare IBOT with PBDO-BOT as an example). It's up to you
If you know Java or consider learning in it, I can tell you that your job will be A LOT easier. I don't think anybody here will be able to help you with that language, but decrypting/encrypting the packets, as well as telling the bot what to do is releated just to parsing everything with the flash objects from DO.
However, your bot will be less functional at the end (compare IBOT with PBDO-BOT as an example). It's up to you
Good luck!!
That's stupid. PBDO didn't beat iBot because of the language, but because Profibot developers are lazy.
I said that JAVA is a lot easier to code a bot in and make it actually work, but compared to PBDO-BOT which is in C#, PBDO is really much more functional (and I think you know it).
That is true. And yes, I am sure that with 200 times more work the IBOT team can come out with a killing logic and features nobody have ever seen. But yeah, that's profibot!
I said that JAVA is a lot easier to code a bot in and make it actually work, but compared to PBDO-BOT which is in C#, PBDO is really much more functional (and I think you know it).
That is true. And yes, I am sure that with 200 times more work the IBOT team can come out with a killing logic and features nobody have ever seen. But yeah, that's profibot!
I know PBDO is better but not because of the language.
That's stupid. PBDO didn't beat iBot because of the language, but because Profibot developers are lazy.
Get your facts right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkunited
I said that JAVA is a lot easier to code a bot in and make it actually work, but compared to PBDO-BOT which is in C#, PBDO is really much more functional (and I think you know it).
That is true. And yes, I am sure that with 200 times more work the IBOT team can come out with a killing logic and features nobody have ever seen. But yeah, that's profibot!
Quote:
Originally Posted by chichi011
I know PBDO is better but not because of the language.
Your argument is invalid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mayur_kulkarni
your arguement is invalid =.=
and i bet you know nothing about programming
the difference between C# and java are the most minuscule things. if you know one you essentially know the other except for a few very small changes. nothing 2 seconds on google couldnt fix. so the comparison from ibot to PBDO, does not depend on the language but the amount of effort put into making the program, how you make it, and how you program it functon. end ofstory
C++ have with the standard libraries(?) only console design. So it wouldn't be easy to control the bot.
You must type difficult commands in the console and can't see the Map, where the ship is. Or what it shoot etc.
Yes, there are libraries for GUI, but it's hard to make one and get it right working with a "Minimap".
Thanks 
