Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

LiquidBounce Forum

  1. Home
  2. General Discussion
  3. Why forks don't merge their changes with legacy liquidbounce and dont helping in developement?

Why forks don't merge their changes with legacy liquidbounce and dont helping in developement?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Unsolved General Discussion
custombuildliquidbouncebypasscodemerging changes
24 Posts 7 Posters 7.1k Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • kawaiinekololisK kawaiinekololis

    Especially when I see people actively contributing to forks or other clients, I wonder what we did wrong.

    G Offline
    G Offline
    Gabriel
    wrote on last edited by Gabriel
    #8

    @kawaiinekololis I think that LB forks are becoming more known than LiquidBounce itself due to a snowball effect, being:

    • Minecraft Cheating dying in general
    • People making a ton of videos about LiquidBounce forks
    • People starting to forget about LiquidBounce itself
    • Some unique fork bypasses not being added to LiquidBounce, due to some people knowing what LiquidBounce+ Reborn is, but not knowing what LiquidBounce is, therefore not being able to contribute
    • Because of people not being able to contribute because they don't even know LiquidBounce exists, the remaining people switch to forks because they have more bypasses

    Only a few people such as @CzechHek, @mems, and I, are actually contributing to LiquidBounce, and making it better; but remember, YOU, dear viewer of this post, can make a difference, you just have to learn a tiny bit of coding, and step by step, you'll be way better off.

    R cxtspnzwzdC 2 Replies Last reply
    1
    • G Gabriel

      @kawaiinekololis I think that LB forks are becoming more known than LiquidBounce itself due to a snowball effect, being:

      • Minecraft Cheating dying in general
      • People making a ton of videos about LiquidBounce forks
      • People starting to forget about LiquidBounce itself
      • Some unique fork bypasses not being added to LiquidBounce, due to some people knowing what LiquidBounce+ Reborn is, but not knowing what LiquidBounce is, therefore not being able to contribute
      • Because of people not being able to contribute because they don't even know LiquidBounce exists, the remaining people switch to forks because they have more bypasses

      Only a few people such as @CzechHek, @mems, and I, are actually contributing to LiquidBounce, and making it better; but remember, YOU, dear viewer of this post, can make a difference, you just have to learn a tiny bit of coding, and step by step, you'll be way better off.

      R Offline
      R Offline
      Razzy
      wrote on last edited by
      #9

      @Gabriel I tend to agree with the snowball effect. The problem is that Liquidbounce doesn't have any built in bypasses they all have to be made yourself. This became worse with when scripts started to die off. To bring some new players back the Legacy UI needs to be redone it's looking hella dated at this point and is really a turn off compared to some of the forks. I'd be happy to help but I can't code so and Gpt4 still isn't at a usable state.

      G 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • R Razzy

        @Gabriel I tend to agree with the snowball effect. The problem is that Liquidbounce doesn't have any built in bypasses they all have to be made yourself. This became worse with when scripts started to die off. To bring some new players back the Legacy UI needs to be redone it's looking hella dated at this point and is really a turn off compared to some of the forks. I'd be happy to help but I can't code so and Gpt4 still isn't at a usable state.

        G Offline
        G Offline
        Gabriel
        wrote on last edited by Gabriel
        #10

        @Razzy LiquidBounce actually doesn't look dated; if you look at FDPClient, it's in a much worse state, + LiquidBounce+ Reborn has a ton of issues, including 1k+ errors a minute (literally), and nearly reducing the FPS to zero. Oh, and also; you can still make configs, that can help even more, due to the already existing potential in LiquidBounce.

        R 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • G Gabriel

          @Razzy LiquidBounce actually doesn't look dated; if you look at FDPClient, it's in a much worse state, + LiquidBounce+ Reborn has a ton of issues, including 1k+ errors a minute (literally), and nearly reducing the FPS to zero. Oh, and also; you can still make configs, that can help even more, due to the already existing potential in LiquidBounce.

          R Offline
          R Offline
          Razzy
          wrote on last edited by
          #11

          @Gabriel Yeah, the UI doesn't look dated but it doesn't look "modern" to say the least.
          Also on the config side there's just a few things missing which would be a great help, for example Vulcan speed which could be easily taken from LB+R or fdp. I also have no alts to use anymore to make configs and with thealtening being dead and easymc support being removed there's not much I can do.

          G 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • R Razzy

            @Gabriel Yeah, the UI doesn't look dated but it doesn't look "modern" to say the least.
            Also on the config side there's just a few things missing which would be a great help, for example Vulcan speed which could be easily taken from LB+R or fdp. I also have no alts to use anymore to make configs and with thealtening being dead and easymc support being removed there's not much I can do.

            G Offline
            G Offline
            Gabriel
            wrote on last edited by Gabriel
            #12

            @Razzy Here's the thing, we don't want to skid any code, so we would probably need to make our own Vulcan speed…

            CzechHekC 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • G Gabriel

              @Razzy Here's the thing, we don't want to skid any code, so we would probably need to make our own Vulcan speed…

              CzechHekC Offline
              CzechHekC Offline
              CzechHek
              wrote on last edited by CzechHek
              #13

              @Gabriel Should taking code from forks of your GNU v3 repo be considered as skidding tho?

              G 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • CzechHekC CzechHek

                @Gabriel Should taking code from forks of your GNU v3 repo be considered as skidding tho?

                G Offline
                G Offline
                Gabriel
                wrote on last edited by
                #14

                @CzechHek Well, it's indirectly skidding, since all of those bypasses ARE skidded, so…

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • G Gabriel

                  @kawaiinekololis I think that LB forks are becoming more known than LiquidBounce itself due to a snowball effect, being:

                  • Minecraft Cheating dying in general
                  • People making a ton of videos about LiquidBounce forks
                  • People starting to forget about LiquidBounce itself
                  • Some unique fork bypasses not being added to LiquidBounce, due to some people knowing what LiquidBounce+ Reborn is, but not knowing what LiquidBounce is, therefore not being able to contribute
                  • Because of people not being able to contribute because they don't even know LiquidBounce exists, the remaining people switch to forks because they have more bypasses

                  Only a few people such as @CzechHek, @mems, and I, are actually contributing to LiquidBounce, and making it better; but remember, YOU, dear viewer of this post, can make a difference, you just have to learn a tiny bit of coding, and step by step, you'll be way better off.

                  cxtspnzwzdC Offline
                  cxtspnzwzdC Offline
                  cxtspnzwzd
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #15

                  @Gabriel I am agree with snowball effect. In addition I can say I caught myself on what I am more interesting for any project fork, instead original project. Maybe it is one of reason, why forks 'more active' than original liquidbounce.

                  G 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • cxtspnzwzdC cxtspnzwzd

                    @Gabriel I am agree with snowball effect. In addition I can say I caught myself on what I am more interesting for any project fork, instead original project. Maybe it is one of reason, why forks 'more active' than original liquidbounce.

                    G Offline
                    G Offline
                    Gabriel
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #16

                    @cxtspnzwzd People also think that LiquidBounce is discontinued, which is totally false.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • ? Offline
                      ? Offline
                      A Former User
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #17

                      I don't expect people not to think that the client is discontinued when b73 took almost 2 years to release because of a severe screw-up. With that being said there are some who don't even know that b73 got updated, they probably don't even know the client's version is 10 numbers ahead lol

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      2
                      • cxtspnzwzdC cxtspnzwzd marked this topic as a question on
                      • CzechHekC Offline
                        CzechHekC Offline
                        CzechHek
                        wrote on last edited by CzechHek
                        #18

                        After all those recently rejected pull requests with "skidded" code, I came to the conclusion that this is the main cause of inactivity when compared with other forks.

                        Perhaps such code should be tolerated, if it gets modified to work within LB or even if it works better than original?

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • ? Offline
                          ? Offline
                          A Former User
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #19

                          I would happily merge any pull request under these rules:

                          A person actually came up with this bypass
                          The code is ORIGINALLY from a LiquidBounce fork and then it may have been used by paid clients / clients that don't share the same license as LiquidBounce.

                          And as we speak, this lad uploaded a new pull request:

                          https://github.com/CCBlueX/LiquidBounce/pull/1339/files

                          How can I now know if this is really not stolen and he actually came up with this? Secondly and no disrespect towards him, but it has been repeatedly shown he doesn't really know how to code or have some sort of idea how to put something in a module and make it work. By the bad indentation I can tell he simply pasted the code from some client that as of now I don't know if it's from a LiquidBounce fork.

                          NCPUser opened this pull request in CCBlueX/LiquidBounce

                          closed added new crit mode. #1339

                          R G 2 Replies Last reply
                          0
                          • ? A Former User

                            I would happily merge any pull request under these rules:

                            A person actually came up with this bypass
                            The code is ORIGINALLY from a LiquidBounce fork and then it may have been used by paid clients / clients that don't share the same license as LiquidBounce.

                            And as we speak, this lad uploaded a new pull request:

                            https://github.com/CCBlueX/LiquidBounce/pull/1339/files

                            How can I now know if this is really not stolen and he actually came up with this? Secondly and no disrespect towards him, but it has been repeatedly shown he doesn't really know how to code or have some sort of idea how to put something in a module and make it work. By the bad indentation I can tell he simply pasted the code from some client that as of now I don't know if it's from a LiquidBounce fork.

                            NCPUser opened this pull request in CCBlueX/LiquidBounce

                            closed added new crit mode. #1339

                            R Offline
                            R Offline
                            Razzy
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #20

                            @mems How would you feel about me trying to merge something like this?
                            https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1JL411C7dh/?spm_id_from=333.788.recommend_more_video.0
                            (I'm not Chinese It's just the only video if it I could find.)

                            It's from KevinClient Reborn and im 99% sure no other client has this that I've found so far. Pretty sure I could make some improvements to it aswell due to the glide aspect of it being pretty inefficient.

                            Plumer ManP 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • ? Offline
                              ? Offline
                              A Former User
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #21

                              Just make sure it's under the second rule I stated:

                              The code is ORIGINALLY from a LiquidBounce fork and then it may have been used by paid clients / clients that don't share the same license as LiquidBounce.

                              If the guy who made it stole it from a non-LiquidBounce fork, then sorry but no. If not, then feel free to make one.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • R Razzy

                                @mems How would you feel about me trying to merge something like this?
                                https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1JL411C7dh/?spm_id_from=333.788.recommend_more_video.0
                                (I'm not Chinese It's just the only video if it I could find.)

                                It's from KevinClient Reborn and im 99% sure no other client has this that I've found so far. Pretty sure I could make some improvements to it aswell due to the glide aspect of it being pretty inefficient.

                                Plumer ManP Offline
                                Plumer ManP Offline
                                Plumer Man
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #22

                                real most hardest to find bypass

                                mc.thePlayer.motionY = mc.thePlayer.ticksExisted % 2 == 0 ? -0.2 : -0.1;
                                
                                R 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • Plumer ManP Plumer Man

                                  real most hardest to find bypass

                                  mc.thePlayer.motionY = mc.thePlayer.ticksExisted % 2 == 0 ? -0.2 : -0.1;
                                  
                                  R Offline
                                  R Offline
                                  Razzy
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #23

                                  @Plumer-Man yeah, i made a script out of it to try and it was terrible

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • ? A Former User

                                    I would happily merge any pull request under these rules:

                                    A person actually came up with this bypass
                                    The code is ORIGINALLY from a LiquidBounce fork and then it may have been used by paid clients / clients that don't share the same license as LiquidBounce.

                                    And as we speak, this lad uploaded a new pull request:

                                    https://github.com/CCBlueX/LiquidBounce/pull/1339/files

                                    How can I now know if this is really not stolen and he actually came up with this? Secondly and no disrespect towards him, but it has been repeatedly shown he doesn't really know how to code or have some sort of idea how to put something in a module and make it work. By the bad indentation I can tell he simply pasted the code from some client that as of now I don't know if it's from a LiquidBounce fork.

                                    NCPUser opened this pull request in CCBlueX/LiquidBounce

                                    closed added new crit mode. #1339

                                    G Offline
                                    G Offline
                                    Gabriel
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #24

                                    @mems Actually, FDPClient made the original AAC5 Fly, and had it's own AAC5 velocity values that do the same thing that Rise's later AAC5 Fly did. Also, Rise severely skidded from LiquidBounce (at least 5.90-5.100), with proof being here (I found it myself). It's just that some clients are too big to fail, so the developers resort to skidding, though I haven't seen skidded code in 6.0 yet.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    Reply
                                    • Reply as topic
                                    Log in to reply
                                    • Oldest to Newest
                                    • Newest to Oldest
                                    • Most Votes


                                    About
                                    • Terms of Service
                                    • Privacy Policy
                                    • Status
                                    • Contact Us
                                    Downloads
                                    • Releases
                                    • Source code
                                    • License
                                    Docs
                                    • Tutorials
                                    • CustomHUD
                                    • AutoSettings
                                    • ScriptAPI
                                    Community
                                    • Forum
                                    • Guilded
                                    • YouTube
                                    • Twitter
                                    • D.Tube
                                    • Login

                                    • Login or register to search.
                                    • First post
                                      Last post
                                    0
                                    • Categories
                                    • Recent
                                    • Tags
                                    • Popular
                                    • Users
                                    • Groups