voke bot in progress

[Duke Newrise]

Did you use the windower? This data is realtime data so you'll need to look at it in realtime. This means use of a windower.

[Izlude]

welll..... what is a windower?
i played ffxi and hit debug

[TinyTerror]

The windower is software that allows you to play FFXI in non-fullscreen mode. The game might only take up 3/4 of your screen when in windowed mode. THis allows you to do other non game related stuff like IM people or look at the internet. This is also a realy goot way of starting and stopping scripts. The only thing you need to look out for is that FFXI has focus after you run your script so that the keystrokes go to the right window.

[Izlude]

wow i have been waiting for something just like this, where can i get one?
also how do i use the ffact tool with my script, do i target the mob and then do ssomething with the info?

[TinyTerror]

The website for the windower is listed in the windower section of the tools of the trade subforum. If you want to use FFACT in your scripts, take a look at Duke's updated version of my FFXI_Helper script.

[Izlude]

ok i have the windower working, how do i use this with a script?
btw thanks alot for all the help ^^;
also, i have just a quick question, why does the number of posts i due not change? it is stuck at 30

[TinyTerror]

You use scripts like you would normally. I don't know why your post count isnt growing. Try posting again and seeing if it goes to 31.

[Izlude]

how do i use ffact? i don't quite understand it all, please tell lme where i can learn or even if ya could gimme a rundown on it

[idmankn]

hi,

why do you need to learn FFACT??? from my understanding, it only gives debug info which you can't read yourself (unless you're expert?), so there's FFXI_Helper that reads it for you and return in human-readable form ^^ thanks to Duke/Tiny

[TinyTerror]

The thing is, FFACT does give it to you in human readable form. FFXI Helper makes it usable for your computer. The info provided by such tools completely eliminates the need for pixel based scripts, and give a tremendous advantage in terms of speed and flexability.

[idmankn]

hmmm Tiny, let's say:

you have a plain AutoIT script that just tab and check the pixel color for 5 sets of coordinates
COMPARE TO:
running the FFACT, AutoTerror (well I guess this is the same as running old AutoIT) and FFXI_Helper is included in the myscript then the myscript just tabs and checks the name of the target instead of pixel colors.

My question is checking pixel color for 5 sets of coordinates is slower than running all that for myscript?

I guess/know how noob my question is, and I'm not saying Tiny is wrong or whatever, just wanna know why the first way is slower than the other. Perhaps I just don't know how AutoIt scans the pixel colors VS FFXI_Helper scans for the name instead?

[TinyTerror]

There are two types of pixel checking methods. Basic pixel checking is most commonly used, and isn't all that slow as long as you only check a few pixels. The problem with this method is that it is prone to failure or false positives and negatives. The other method is using checksums to fingerprint a section of the screen this method is slow, but fool proof.

The biggest problem with pixel based methods is that they dont usually work accross different resolutions or computers. FFACT based methods work on all resolutions and computers, and are equal to or faster than any pixel based operations. They also never fail.

I guess its a matter of personal opinion. I've tried my hand at some fairly insane pixel based scripts (none for voking) and the pixel check speeds are very slow when you do alot of them. FFACT queries execute instantly with no waiting, and are always accurate. I think its also easier to use than pixels, since you dont have to have screenshots and such.

[idmankn]

so if i'm only checking 5 sets of coordinates and use pixelgetcolor(x,y) and running on my computer only with a set resolution 800x600 for example, then is it faster than FFXI_Helper's getTargetName() and yes both use tabbing to check.

Thanks Tiny

[Dragutin]

It seems when i read these, I get lost... maybe my mind is just so crowded with all kinds of information... that it's hard to focus.. idk

Sorry for the A.D.D moment

[TinyTerror]

idmankn said:

so if i'm only checking 5 sets of coordinates and use pixelgetcolor(x,y) and running on my computer only with a set resolution 800x600 for example, then is it faster than FFXI_Helper's getTargetName() and yes both use tabbing to check.

Thanks Tiny

Having messed with both methods on the programming level, I can say that a 5 pixel check operation and a ffxi_helper query take about the same ammount of time. FFACT based ops in this case might be faster by a milisecond, but that really isnt enough to make a difference. Things might change if you run the pixel ops in a tight loop where they are being called constantly. In that case FFACT would have a serious speed advantage, as miliseconds tend to pile up quickly in tight loops.