[Request] Portal Knight Cheats

Jan 9, 2015
104
5
0
Georgia
#2
So I'm trying out the cheat search option in SX OS - and if I understand it correctly (in Portal Knights) I have 277 Dirt Blocks - which I would convert to hex which is 0x115

Cheat Searcher -> New Cheat Search -> 16bit Unsigned and input 0115 -> then let it search - this returns 53,854 possible values.

Am I using the cheat searcher incorrectly? Or is this number just to low for me to be trying to find within the Cheat Engine for this game?
 

optantic

VIP Member
May 2, 2010
281
62
33
#3
So I'm trying out the cheat search option in SX OS - and if I understand it correctly (in Portal Knights) I have 277 Dirt Blocks - which I would convert to hex which is 0x115

Cheat Searcher -> New Cheat Search -> 16bit Unsigned and input 0115 -> then let it search - this returns 53,854 possible values.

Am I using the cheat searcher incorrectly? Or is this number just to low for me to be trying to find within the Cheat Engine for this game?
go back to into game and get more or lose more Dirt Blocks then search the new value, repeat until there are few results left ( best is 1 result ), if there are always at least 2 to 5 results after repeated search, then poke each result to a different value each and see which one is the right one
 
Last edited:
Jan 9, 2015
104
5
0
Georgia
#4
go back to into game and get more or lose more Dirt Blocks then search the new value, repeat until there are few results left ( best is 1 result ), if there are always at least 2 to 5 results after repeated search, then poke each result to a different value each and see which one is the right one

Thanks for the advice!

It looks like 400 is the MAX, and when I search for 400, or 200 etc I am getting several thousand results. I *thought* that there would be less hits the higher the number....

Am I going about this the wrong way?
 

eyric101

Noob Account
Jan 6, 2003
49
1
0
Baltimore, MD
#5
You have to narrow your search down. Search for your current number of blocks (say you have 200 blocks currently - search for 200 blocks). You will get lots of results. Go back in to the game and use 5 blocks. Go back into the search program and search your previous results for 195. Keep doing this until you only have 1 or a couple results.
 
Jan 9, 2015
104
5
0
Georgia
#6
You have to narrow your search down. Search for your current number of blocks (say you have 200 blocks currently - search for 200 blocks). You will get lots of results. Go back in to the game and use 5 blocks. Go back into the search program and search your previous results for 195. Keep doing this until you only have 1 or a couple results.
So my more is better approach is not accurate. It's more of a trial - and - error type scan of just arbitrarily picking numbers.
 

eyric101

Noob Account
Jan 6, 2003
49
1
0
Baltimore, MD
#7
It is not Arbitrarily picking numbers it is narrowing down memory locations. So your first search returns 500 results - there are 500 instances of the number 200 in memory. If you go back and play the game for a little while, changing the number of blocks you have in some way you can do another search, WITHIN your last search results, for the new number of blocks you now hold. Say it returns 10 of those previous 500 memory locations now contain the number 195 so you have narrowed down the possible location that holds "number of blocks" to 10 locations. If you modify your held blocks one more time, your next search only has to search those 10 locations and you should know exactly where in memory the number of blocks you have is held. Once you figure out the exact location you can change the value in that memory location to what ever the max it will hold.
 
Jan 9, 2015
104
5
0
Georgia
#8
It is not Arbitrarily picking numbers it is narrowing down memory locations. So your first search returns 500 results - there are 500 instances of the number 200 in memory. If you go back and play the game for a little while, changing the number of blocks you have in some way you can do another search, WITHIN your last search results, for the new number of blocks you now hold. Say it returns 10 of those previous 500 memory locations now contain the number 195 so you have narrowed down the possible location that holds "number of blocks" to 10 locations. If you modify your held blocks one more time, your next search only has to search those 10 locations and you should know exactly where in memory the number of blocks you have is held. Once you figure out the exact location you can change the value in that memory location to what ever the max it will hold.
I think that's where my disconnect was coming from. I was doing reset search after each look-up but based upon what you are saying I should be using NEXT search with each incremental value (change in blocks) to narrow my results as this is searching within the subset that was returned with my 1st query. Which will whittle it lower and lower until I have just a few addresses returned.
 
Jan 9, 2015
104
5
0
Georgia
#12
For further example, these are the candidates that were uncovered, but they seem to reference a specific item slot not the actual item itself. What would be my next test to find the ITEM itself and not the slot in my item slot?

HEAP+0x000370fc
HEAP+0x0e9d871c
HEAP+0x15b63252
HEAP+0x21250896
HEAP+0x3339a05c
HEAP+0x33f64272
HEAP+0x33f644ae




I had one candidate returned in MAIN but altering that to FA had no visible effect on the item itself, even when I gain/loose count.
 

Support Our Sponsors