ADVTASKWARP2.3 (beta?)

[3djoker]

@ warrene

To eliminate any possible confusion, when I get to level 65 I alter my task INI by (1) re-labeling the Dreadlands section to Dreadlands2, (2) making a new Dreadlands section immediately above the renamed one, and (3) moving to the new section only those tasks I want to run at 65. I use the 4 standard for this level (Giant Expedition, Mystic Ring, Scary Caves, Lookout Below) plus several Veksar tasks (so players in Karnor don't see me quite as often).

When I need/want to run lower level tasks, I simply remark the dreadlands2 section header. I chose this approach because I was foraging during the down time in the 15 minute cycle and wanted to be sure to minimize the time I was running tasks.

here is what you need to do when you turn 65... IN ORDER.......

1. lvl to 65.....
2. unshroud (if yer currently shrouded) and/or go to a shroudkeeper.
3. shroud to a lvl 65 gobby rogue.
4. set your hotkeys for sneak/hide.
5. zone to dreadlands. (/zone dreadlands)
6. target marana (click her OR /target marana)
7. type...... /mac advtaskwarp2 (replace advtaskwarp2 with whatever you saved the file as.)

on a side note. DO NOT change any files. UNLESS.... you need to stop doing a mission yer toon gets stuck on (then you change a =1 to a =0 on the mission it doesn't like). no files need changed as you gain lvls.

i have found that its not the missions that are screwing up. it is lag. (well at least for me.) i run 2 toons on one comp 24/7. the only time i am noticing lock up/hanging on a mission/not finishing a mission/problems , is when i have left comp. on for long periods of time with no activity. if i restart, they will do the exact same mission the fell over, flawlessly for a round or 2. then hang.

if i restart my comp, everything will be fine for another day or 2. (untill everything starts slowing down again. "infinity"

 

[Warrene]

I haven't noticed any comments re: tasks in the new environment, so here's what I found: at lvl 65 100% to AA, I still earned the usual 73pp, but received 18% AA (compared to the former 12%). That puts a full AA at 90 minutes instead of 2 hours.

A small crumb, but I'll take it. I'll check regular xp next and edit this with the results.

***Looked like 3% regular xp. Hard to tell with small increments. Once MQ2 is back up, we can determine the exact increase***

 

[lichbone]

haha, very nice, thanks!

 

[Reformed2hacker]

I haven't noticed any comments re: tasks in the new environment, so here's what I found: at lvl 65 100% to AA, I still earned the usual 73pp, but received 18% AA (compared to the former 12%). That puts a full AA at 90 minutes instead of 2 hours.

A small crumb, but I'll take it. I'll check regular xp next and edit this with the results.

***Looked like 3% regular xp. Hard to tell with small increments. Once MQ2 is back up, we can determine the exact increase***

Oh, I'll definitely take that.

 

[3djoker]

ok. i'm gonna retest this tonight. but as of now. i left this running today while at work and here is what i come up with ATM......

1. still get same pp after each completed task.
2. they NERFED the exp given for each task.
3. only a couple (2 so far that i have seen, don't work)

usually i got about 5-7 aa every day at work while i left it running. today i came home to 2 aa (barely). not even worth keeping this updated. (the warp/danger ratio is not worth it.)

like i said. imma run it over night, and see what happens. if i only get 1-2 aa from now till tomorrow morning. i will keep everyone posted. as of now. don't use it. NOT WORTH GETTING BANNED. (only reason i'm doing it is cuase it's a junk account.)

 

[Warrene]

3djoker, are you running this shrouded? If so, from what level down to what level? It seems the wider the gap in levels, the more penalty they apply in decreased AA xp. My numbers were from a lvl 65 running at lvl 65. Perhaps they changed it again!

 

[3djoker]

running from 70 to 65 and from a 61 to a 60.

from what i can see i am no longer getting exp shrouded running this macro. nothing.

completed 29 missions and not the slightest movement of my bar.

on a plus side, ran it un shrouded and works fine. getting exp now. bad thing, if you dont have sneak and hide yer screwed on some missions. plus you need no weight limit crack on too.

 

[someoneorsomething]

We could make it /cast invis that wouldnt be to hard to implement

 

[Warrene]

My unscientific test of task rewards:
100% to AA, /echo ${Me.AAExp} before and after task

1. 65 Ranger, not shrouded -- increase in AAExp of 60, approximately 18%
2. 65 Ranger shrouded to 65 rogue -- increase in AAExp of 60, approximately 18%
3. 71 Warrior shrouded to 65 rogue -- increase in AAExp of 0...nada, zilch

This matches what others have reported. I don't have any toons between 66 and 70, nor did I shroud down from 65 to 60. It looks like it's the down-shrouding that is the problem. Let's hope it is a glitch that will be corrected in the patch.

Based on 9/27 patch:
4. 71 Warrior shrouded to 65 rogue -- increase in AAExp of 0...GRRRR!

Re-tested 10/5:
5. 71 Warrior shrouded to 65 Rogue -- increase in AAExp of 29....8.78%...woohoo! (back to where it was....gonna check regular xp now)

 

[Warrene]

My unscientific test of task rewards:
100% to AA, /echo ${Me.AAExp} before and after task

1. 65 Ranger, not shrouded -- increase in AAExp of 60, approximately 18%
2. 65 Ranger shrouded to 65 rogue -- increase in AAExp of 60, approximately 18%
3. 71 Warrior shrouded to 65 rogue -- increase in AAExp of 0...nada, zilch

This matches what others have reported. I don't have any toons between 66 and 70, nor did I shroud down from 65 to 60. It looks like it's the down-shrouding that is the problem. Let's hope it is a glitch that will be corrected in the patch.

Based on 9/27 patch:
4. 71 Warrior shrouded to 65 rogue -- increase in AAExp of 0...GRRRR!

Re-tested 10/5:
5. 71 Warrior shrouded to 65 Rogue -- increase in AAExp of 29....8.78%...woohoo! (back to where it was....gonna check regular xp now)

6. 71 Warrior shrouded to 65 rogue, 100% to regular xp -- increase in Exp of 3 ... .91%...small, but there nonetheless

 

[adol]

Hey guys the the piggyback zone stuff how does one reset the place you warp into zone I want to change it for all the zones I normally use. to the zi areas not the succor. seems to make sense to pop in at normal zi's going to zone in note loc the use that loc in the piggyback. So while I pop through zones I should zone in at the normal zi yes??

 

[Cycotic]

Add this to the bottom of your MQPiggyZone.ini file for each zone (Shortname).
The template should be

[ZoneShortName]
default=YLoc XLoc ZLoc Heading

Example...

[PoKnowledge]
default=-306.00 1398.00 -124.82 230.63

 

[someoneorsomething]

My junk account got banned today useing this just fyi

 

[fierymomof2]

This is a GREAT macro! Redcents incoming However I do have a question/problem. I got everything downloaded where it should be, I shrouded as a 40 gobbie rogue, targeted Marana, and let it fly. When it goes to zone me to Timorous, it does target the translocator, but it kicks hide and sneak on, so she doesn't TL me...I tried unhiding and sneaking, and then triggering for the TL,and she zones me to timorous, but alas it stops there.
I'm somewhat of a semi-noob now (You have gotten better at Noobish! (150)) and can *usually* figure things out, but this one just has me bumfuzzled. Usually the obvious is right in front of my face, but I'm not seeing it.
Any help? PM if ya want
Thanks so much!

 

[someoneorsomething]

it does target the translocator, but it kicks hide and sneak on, so she doesn't TL me...I tried unhiding and sneaking, and then triggering for the TL,and she zones me to timorous, but alas it stops there.

You need to go into the task in question and change it so it kicks the hide sneak off. Very easy to do. What task is it, and I can look at it.

On a side note this is very dangerous. My junk account is completely banned, my main account was caught also, and my RL friends account has been suspended 10 days. This all has happened in a month. There is no one doing this on my server ATM. There used to be 7+ all the time. Don’t know if they stopped or got caught. Im going to a hunter macro myself now.

 

[trxdraxon]

This is working pretty well. I have it running on an alt account. Character is 67 shrouded down to 65, I am getting about 1% per task. Been running for the past couple hours flawlessly.

 

[fierymomof2]

You need to go into the task in question and change it so it kicks the hide sneak off. Very easy to do. What task is it, and I can look at it.

On a side note this is very dangerous. My junk account is completely banned, my main account was caught also, and my RL friends account has been suspended 10 days. This all has happened in a month. There is no one doing this on my server ATM. There used to be 7+ all the time. Don’t know if they stopped or got caught. Im going to a hunter macro myself now.

It's the first task assigned in the dreadlands, I'm shrouded from 73 to 50. it goes to the translocator, and of course she wont' TL me because I'm hidden..I kick off hide and sneak, and it still won't do it. I've studied the macro and I'm not seeing where to turn off the hide/sneak after getting the quest. i'm really studying this and trying my best, but I have a feeling I'm just not seeing the obvious
Many, many thanks for helping me out on this I love learning as much as I can, and while I'm not ready to attempt writing a code or a macro yet, someday.....

*edit* Note: I realized I had shrouded from 73 to 45 before, and when I just now tried to shroud to 50, it finally gave me a task and off I went. Will see how it goes....

 

[Warrene]

I have used this macro to great advantage...but disabled all the tasks that use the translocator. It was too buggy to spend time trying to fix when there are plenty of other tasks to use. For educational purposes? Dig into it. For practical purposes? 86 those few tasks.

 

[Alatyami]

I fully agree with Warrene, MQ2PiggyZone has never truly used the Translocators as it was intended. "86" them.

 

[someoneorsomething]

I'm shrouded from 73 to 50

shroud to 65. 50 quests give you less xp/aaxp. And there is less zoneing with the 65 tasks. I will say since TSS it isnt very unstable also. It likes to LD or just drop to server select. For small periods of time its works flawless. I also noticed windowed mode is unstable also. hopefully SOE fixes these.

 

[Devlin]

Going along with what sos said and how unstable things are--

I've noticed the longer the macro the less time it would run

for example(this is just what i noticed and may NOT be true)

34KB macro runs for 4 hours
25KB macro runs for 5 hours
10KB macro runs for 8 hours
5KB macro runs for 20 hours
2KB macro runs for 34 hours
etc.

 

[tradertesla]

I've noticed the longer the macro the less time it would run

That may be true, but I would want to see a lot more data before I agree with that.

I think it is much more likely to be a function of the complexity of the macro rather than it's length. the more complex (and longer) the macro, the more likely that timing and lag issues will affect it over time. We all know (well, ok, I believe) that timing due to lag (often caused by cumulative client performance issues) is what really kills you on most of these. Otherwise, why does a restart clear up lag?

Rather than fix the EQ client, which would probably require a whole rewrite, they added the spawn/res option. SOE recognizes the issue, but put a bandaide on it rather than fixing it. The symptoms are much like a memory leak, where previously allocated memory doesn't always get released when it is no longer needed. just my 2bits and getting a little off topic.

The point is that you can generally extend the effective run time of most macros by exaggerating delays and by repeating commands 2 or even 3 times at key points in the action.

I have one that is mediumly complex/medium long at 15K. I run 6 instances of EQ/MQ on the same machine (theoretically multiplying instability factors X6), and this one is generally reliable to an average of 12-18 hours. Two computer restarts a day keeps it humming along pretty well.

This was NOT the case using the theretically correct code. It would run fine a few times and then something would go wrong. We have all experienced this, I imagine. What I had to do is insert a lot of debug code, status alerts, etc., to pinpoint the most frequent error locations, and then add or increase delays. In one case, I had to repeat a certain mouse click three times with a 5 second delay between each one in order to push past the 8-hour stability limit. Other problems are intercepted through error checks. i.e. Am I in the zone that I expect to be in right now? If I am in a group, are all my group members present? What is the distance between me and a key targetable object/NPC, If I am too far away I need to do something. Is a certain dialog window still open, even though its supposed to be closed? Do I have aggro? Lots and lots of conditionals (if statements) and as many event-driven error corrections as I could think of. These made the macro a lot longer, naturally. I may not be decreasing instability, but I am certainly decreasing sensitivity to it.

So, I am more-or-less agreeing with you, but also stating that there are other factors involved, some of which are under your control.

 

[Learningcurve]

The kunark landing task is broken-- zones you to FV, once you target the gnome translocator then it will hail and warps you to a wrong location:

lizardtour=-580.40 2480.15 -24 243

and just drops you in the middle of the water past the zone wall on the sw side of the map, does nothing else.

DUnno if anyone ever said but the old warp used xyz coordinates the new one lately uses yxz coordiantes so you would get thrown in to the wrong area using the coordiantes as listed in the INI from someone that used the other coodinate setup

oh and the last post, yeah the bigger the file the more chance for it to find a conditional that may be in error, sometimes its hard to debug a peice of code you put in just in case but don't really get a chance to debug it cause it doesnt happen all the time. But as fora size only thing I don't think thats really a factor

 

[trxdraxon]

Just a meaningless suggestion i had was maybe put in a timer so you can tell how long until the next mission would start.