Cheat Engine

[ups2000ups]

if you ask me this should be added/fixed into next cheat engine
Thanks if you will fix it

double scan

[appalsap]

[ups2000ups]

it still being big different lol now it is -9 to 1 to 9 Oo

edit it was only if i search for "0" -.-
but still why do it take 1,99999943505605 1,11921722815164 if i search at 1 ... exactly means exactly not numbers that starta at 1 ...

[Dark Byte]

scan for 1.0

found list to ct :
That is because the foundlist does not actually SHOW them

special scan :
go to memory view->search->assembly scan andf you can there scan for stuff like :"jne *"


new way to search for pointers (becuse int1handler is detected of gameguard):
Tried the pointer scanner?

[Symbol]

Group bugs:
I see nothing wrong with the groups...

"Spaciel" scan:
Array of Bytes?
And like Dark Byte said, you can use assembly scan if you don't have the aob's, but if you have them you should use them becuase aob scan finds them all at once.

Extras:
There are in other uce's, but it would be a nice function to add a list of auto attachs like in DA Engine, so you can choose what to auto attach.

[ups2000ups]

okaj thanks dark byte for the tip but still the group option fucked for me sometimes idk why it can be my comp too idk

about found list to ct but still it shouldent lag when you add like 1000 addreses okaj like 5 sec not like 15 min something sould could fix that

dident know cheat engine haved pointer scan i always used find out what writed to blabla

Symbol
the auto attach is in a few engine yes but still thats a good option and should be added if you ask me

and the scans should be fixed so you can scan more exactly exampel double float between bigger then smaller then

and the freez shortcut .. i hope it will be added then you dont need window mode to use dupex for exampel

[me]

[SXGuy]

Just want to point somthing out about one of your so called bugs in scanning.

If you scan 0, and your results show other values, it is possible to assume, at the time of the scan, those addresses did have a value of 0, but later changed, before the scan was complete.

You cant rule that out, so i question whether its a bug at all.

My advice is, after your first scan, scan again for unchanged value, this cuts down your results to addresses which is only 0.

[ups2000ups]

well i thinked about 1 thing more

Save first scan
when you later search for "same as first scan" it should denete the stuff from the file it saves the value in and remake it (to make faster scan next time you scan for "same as first scan"

if you do it on a game thats 4gb big it will take 10-20 min for scan for "same as first scan"

[Dark Byte]

First scan saves all the results to the file
and when you do a 'same as first scan' it looks up the old addresses of the current address list from the file, and then compares it to the memory.
It does not scan the whole file to all of the current memory, also, the seek for the offsets is fast, it doesn't read till it finds the proper location, it jumps to the location in the file immediately. So reconstructing the first scan result file will result in a slower scan. (lot more cleanup to be done)

if you mean the slow start of a scan after doing a unknown initial value first and then scanning for something, that is because it is then still busy saving the results of the first scan (which is done in the background after a first scan)

[sponge]

freeze idea is useless.

[ups2000ups]

btw could you fix so we can get unicoded addresses without search for texts ?

First scan is bugging i promis ....
if is search for "same as first scan" 30 min after i scanned the first time it still wait a long time befor it start scanning

[sponge]

unicode is text.

[ups2000ups]

[Dark Byte]

then just change it to a 4 byte and find the pointer to there.
There's really no big difference between 4 bytes and a string