HoTT / Multiple Targets

[expmonk]

I was wondering if any sort of offset hack / plugin exists to unlock the use of Health of Target's Target without actually having the group or raid leadership AA for it? Or if there is any way to have multiple target boxes for multiple mobs?

Would be an interesting project if anyone has the know-how to work on this.. as in having a button to tag a mob for extra targeting. Say you target a mob, hit this button, and it pops up an extra target window keeping that mob in it.. showing percentage of health like the regular target window.. but you would still be able to target other mobs with your regular EQ target window.

This would be invaluable with dealing with adds in certain macro's and plugins.

Just a thought!
-expmonk

 

[Swazafix]

That would be pretty nice..

 

[Vladus2000]

The servers do not send you the necessary data for that to work.

 

[expmonk]

What about using HoTT Vlad? Is that strictly server-side?

 

[Vladus2000]

It appears that way yes.

 

[Vladus2000]

As an aside, MQ2 has been around for how long? HoTT has been around for how long? Don't you think that if this was possible it would have been done long ago? I swear someone asks this once a month.

 

[expmonk]

The only stupid question is the one that wasn't asked. You didn't have to reply if it bothered you that much.

There will always be newbies to the hacking scene, it's a fact of life. And as long as there is an open forum dedicated to asking questions, there will always be questions asked.

/boggle

 

[hawthorne]

His point is that if you had bothered to do a search for HoTT using the nifty search feature, you would have seen it asked, several times. And gotten your answer.

 

[expmonk]

Well damn, you caught me! I was being lazy!

Oh, and it was a post that contained in-depth questions other than just getting HoTT working.

Lighten up imo.

 

[Bearcub]

Yes...you were being lazy.

Vlad was being flippant.

Nothing against you, but Vlad contributes a hell of a lot to this place and is anything but lazy. Don't be lazy. You're not the first and it gets on peoples nerves that have been dealing with it for a while.

Lazy people suck!

Love,

ME!

 

[SneakyDaddy]

His point is that if you had bothered to do a search for HoTT using the nifty search feature, you would have seen it asked, several times. And gotten your answer.

And when people use the search and resurrect the thread the find, they get hammered for that too...hehe noobs can't win...thats in the rulebook!

 

[Bearcub]

I don't think I've EVER seen Vlad hammer someone for ressurecting an old thread with an intelligent, researched question. Hell, not even JJ is overly mean if someone does their homework and asks/resurrects for an answer.

Kisses and hugs!

 

[SneakyDaddy]

Forgive me if it sounded like I was saying Vlad did it. I was just saying it does happen...and sometimes people that are normally very helpful can be a little rough on noobs for make silly mistakes in etiquette.

 

[Bearcub]

I know you didn't accuse Vlad of anything. I just think that most folks won't bitch about a rez'd thread if it's an intelligent post.

However, normally what happens on rez'd posts with questions is that somewhere on page 5 it says that it's a dead issue and the item is controlled serverside.

There's another page of general BS before it dies, and then someone reads page 1, about what the hack or whatever was, and then jumps to the last page and opens it back up without ever bothering to read the damn thread.

Either way, welcome to MMOBugs, Expmonk. Believe it or not, we're happy to have ya.

 

[SneakyDaddy]

Not everyone can be as smart us BC, sometimes reading thru 10 pages of differing opinions about a topic without the context of knowing who really knows whats going and who is spouting BS can be pretty hard.

I am not defending the guy who resurrects a thread that he scrolled down to on the main forum page (without search) and posts a question without reading a least the first and last few pages, I am defending the guy that does a search, finds 30 threads, reads the first page of the ones that seem relevant and at least the last 4-5 pages of the one they are resurrecting. Just because they have now read the information, does not mean the understood it. I personally think anyone that does a search, finds something they think is relevant, posts a "STUPID" question that we all know the answer to, deserves a pass on the initial flames just for putting out the effort to search...

I believe all the veterans here agree "SEARCH IS GOOD", so don't flame those that try even if they do it poorly...

 

[expmonk]

If I wanted to start a flame-fest I'd post for active hacks in the MQ2 Community ... there's no real difference in bumping an old post about this topic or starting a new thread. You guys make it seem like you have some obligation to replying to the question, stupid or not, when you really don't. Like I said, if it bothered you that much, you should have passed it by and let someone else answer it.

Oh, and fyi, I did use your spectacular search tool, but reading through outdated posts from various unreliable sources bores me.

Thanks for the replies anyways

 

[hawthorne]

Outated /= Dated

Dated /= Not Pertinent

If a thread from a year ago says HoTT, for example, is controlled serverside, then although it is dated, it is still pertinent in that it answers whether it is possible to get HoTT with MQ2.

Your other query, about multiple target windows, actually has some merit. I would also be interested if there were a way to create multiple target windows, however, my gut tells me that it's likely impossible due to code restrictions in EQ, not MQ2.

 

[JimJohnson]

At least Vlad replied before I read the forums.

 

[Arune]

Actually the only reason why this doesn't work right now is Vlad. It is ALWAYS Vlad's fault. 8P

 

[expmonk]

See, I don't know a whole lot about actual EQ packet or offset hacking. If it were possible to have multiple target windows I'd assume you might have to manipulate the packets that are sent to the server telling it what you have targeted? Perhaps trick the server into thinking you have more than one mob targeted so that it sends your client back the information about the mob, such as the percent HP? And then you could split this information up into the separate target windows.

Or instead of telling the server that you had multiple mobs targeted at the same time, send the packet(s) of information telling it you had the first target so that it sent back the info, then send the next packet of information to get the server to send back the next target info back to you... do this fast enough so that it is updated in practical time intervals.. this would sort of work like swapping targets on your side repeatedly like some macro's do to keep track of health, but without actually switching targets. (Confusing I know, hope it made sense)


Like I said, just a thought. No idea if these thoughts are of any valid use, trying to help!