I keep getting a 404 when trying to download any of these. I think they got deleted or something.
EDIT: Nvm, it’s working for me now.
I believe the Rath CON boost is because he mysteriously loses 1 CON between Lyn mode and Eliwood/Hector mode.
For the enemy luck autolevel fix, you can simply paste this at 0x17ACA:
C0 B4 06 26 60 68 80 19 C0 7E 29 1C 11 F0 95 FD 37 19 00 2E 00 D1 7F 1E F9 7C 40 18 F8 74 76 1E F0 D5 C0 BC 30 BD
Doc is down due to lack of funds, you should consider donating either to bring it back up or to develop new content here
You should also check out the monetized videos on my channel (typically they will be in the “Beast” playlist and/or of a game hack if they are monetized) because you can help me out by watching them with the ads
where’s the support hack
oh and the mag/res hack
Due to lack of funds?
You already made the hacks, and people have already donated to you before, right?
Why take them down if they’re free to keep up?
so are you gonna sue people if they start re-uploading stuff?
They haven’t been separated out from the other stuff yet, but if you need them they are available upon request
I will try putting them up real quick
edit: Event Supports was considered compatible with FEditor, so it’s in there
e2: other already-funded stuff will go back up as requested until I automate the process and put it all up at once (mostly because I don’t remember which is which off the top of my head and don’t see a point looking through everything when I will have to do it again later anyway)
If they do not follow the original license it was released under then I will do what is appropriate
i just don’t understand why you’d take them down in the first place.
Modus Tollens tells us that given “if p, then q”, one can conclude “not p” if it is known that “not q”.
Hextator’s Doc was released with the label “If you like this software, feel free to donate”. People did not feel free to donate, so they must not have liked the software.
The offensive material was thus removed.
Ah, but there’s an assumption that people didn’t feel free to donate. Feeling free to do something, and actually doing it, are entirely seperate things. I, for one, feel free enough to run down the street at 3 AM screaming because there’s a huge spider on my pillow, but I don’t exercise that freedom. In the same way, I feel completely free to donate, but don’t, considering I lack the funds.
Having a freedom =/= exercising the freedom.
so that’s a yes.
Oh pants with that modus tollens bs.
Donating is an option, and you’re asking money for something that literally everyone else does for free (Finding new stuff in the game, showing everyone, making a patch). You just sound like your throwing the word ‘donation’ around because it sounds less bad than “I want money or gtfo.”
Maybe if it costed money to keep up, like a website, then that’d be different, but its not. Maybe if they never donated despite you asking, then that’d be different. Buuuut people already donated to you for stuff that you already made.
Even if you want to work with the ‘Donate or piss off’ mindset, then just don’t take requests without pay in the future, like everyone does anyway. Taking down shit that’s already donated for now just comes off as insanely dickish.
That’s the tricky part about translating language to logic; “feel free to” implies a liberty of choice, and now anyone that referenced your docs now has to contend with the hidden consequence of that choice. Now, the philosophy of “liberty” itself is quite fascinating. Does liberty imply a freedom from consequences? A meaty topic in its own right, most definitely. If you are “free to” do something, you are not forced, right? Retroactively taking down the doc institutes a punishment after-the-fact, the threat of which nobody was actually privy to until you took everything down.
P = you “like this software”
Q = you “feel free to donate”
Furthermore, how does one capture “freedom” in logical expression? The most correct translation of “free” would require a disjunctive statement (Q ∨ ¬Q) in order to express the meaning of the original sentence. No matter the value of Q, it will come out “true.”
You want it to say: P -> ¬Q
What it actually says is: P -> (Q ∨ ¬Q)
Ergo, you can’t justifiably conclude ¬P.
I used to tutor people on this shit in college.
And then we allllll go to jail on multiple counts of piracy. Great plan.
Get a fucking job, @Hextator If you need money, restaurants always need dishes washed.
The size of your ego is hilarious when weighed against the fact that you couldn’t actually land a legitimate coding gig if you tried.
I wouldn’t worry too much, @Alusq, anyone who has to beg for donations for their deliberately obtuse documentation on a a twelve year old GBA game lacks the funds to press a court case, and that’s disregarding the fact that any judge would laugh him off for how preposterous his claim is.
Come on hex I thought you were better than this I mean it’s not like dropbox costs money unless you’re paying for some stupid amount of storage space
omg stfu nerd
but what if he sends me a letter of sauce-and-decease?!?!?!?