New Codetypes Suggestion(s)

[Bully@Wiiplaza]

Retrying F6 hooks:
F6QQQQNN XXXXYYYY
ZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZ
ZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZ

QQQQ: Amount of milliseconds (or whatever) between retries (0000 means no retrying at all to not break existing codes. We never want to search more than 256 code lines anyways, 8bit is enough for that)

Purpoise:
Working on moving assembly also without super long and complex custom retries like I´ve seen

Multi hooking (String write style):
C8000000 YYYYQQQQ
XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX
...            
ZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZ
...

YYYY: Amount of addresses to hook (count XXXXXXXX values)
QQQQ: Amount of instructions (count ZZZZZZZZ values)
XXXXXXXX: Memory addresses
ZZZZZZZZ: Assembly

Purpoise:
Shorten multiple C2 codes that use the same assembly, but are randomly in memory (can be just 1 instruction also!)

Multi hooking (serial write style):
CA000000 YYYYQQQQ
0000SSSS XXXXXXXX
...            
ZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZ
...

YYYY: Amount of additional addresses to hook up (starting at address XXXXXXXX)
QQQQ: Amount of instructions (count ZZZZZZZZ values)
XXXXXXXX: Starting address
SSSS: Offset between addresses
ZZZZZZZZ: Assembly

Purpoise:
Shorten multiple C2 codes that use the same assembly and have equal offsets between each other (can be just 1 instruction also!)

---

Don´t bash me, these are just suggestions. Even if nobody cares or ever will implement these.
I definitely think they are missing a little. Be it similar or exactly like described by me.

Maybe killing C6, replacing with my C8 solution from above and putting my CA code as C8.
Nobody uses the current C6 codetype anyways how it seems.

[Welohabi]

I think they are rather cool ideas.

[Bully@Wiiplaza]

Bump!
That´s it with reactions?
Took me some tinkering to come up with these.

[Stuff]

No I think you're on to something. A while ago, I thought about new codetypes too. I haven't looked at codes in a while, so I don't remember what I had in mind. Something about C2. I like CA a lot. Too bad I'm in no position to do something about it.

[James0x57]

These are interesting ideas.
I'm not sure how often you would need to hook multiple spots to branch to the same asm though.
Has it come up multiple times for you? Maybe with specific types of codes?

If I were to change F6, I'd say make QQQQ specify a flag for re-doing the search if it's inside a conditional, similar to the CC on/off switch.

[Bully@Wiiplaza]

These are interesting ideas.
I'm not sure how often you would need to hook multiple spots to branch to the same asm though.
Has it come up multiple times for you? Maybe with specific types of codes?

Yes, it occured.
A few times so far where I got different instructions for the same address every time I played another game mode or something.

Example:

WiFi Waiting Room Character Modifier [Bully@Wiiplaza]
F6000001 80008100
93D10020 9BD10013
14000020 380000KK <-
14000E9C 386000KK <-
14001F1C 386000KK <-
14002C40 386000KK <-
F6000001 80008100
989E0016 881D00B8
14000004 380000KK <-
E0000000 80008000
Imagine I had to C2 hook all of them 5 times with the same like I did with a single instruction. It´s annoying already to fill in a value 5 times. There´s no way so far to handle it any better I think.

If I were to change F6, I'd say make QQQQ specify a flag for re-doing the search if it's inside a conditional, similar to the CC on/off switch.

Yeah, if an F6 code is inside a condition, it would only activate once and the first time it´s true. Never again afterwards (afaik)... that´s really bad if memory/assembly changes which is the case on a lot of games. That often makes F6 unusable. Especially if people push the activator too early and complain it´s not working.