Death

Our Black Friday event is now live! Explore hundreds of amazing deals on files across our site at https://codefling.com/deals. Find exciting new content for your Rust servers and save big! Join us on our Discord and participate in giveaways every day all week with over a thousand dollars worth of prizes! https://discord.gg/codefling Gift Card Giveaway - $500 in total prizes Enter to win 1 of 10 $50 gift cards for Codefling by completing any of the actions below. The more you complete, the better chance you'll be drawn! https://gleam.io/1qwgE/codefling-gift-card-giveaway

The old IP would be set in your startup batch file. You'll need to change it there.

That sounds cursed

Ah yeah I do recall the trigger for player inside monument is larger than the no build zone for some monuments.

This could be related to a teleport plugin not properly disposing of the monument kill timer. If a player teleports from a monument and logs out, the game will think they're still at a monument and kill them after the specified time. Solution would be to identify these plugins and ask the author to add: player.CancelInvoke(new Action(player.ScheduledDeath)); in their teleport method or simply just prevent players from teleporting from a monument.

It's not relevant anymore. There was a massive update to Rust that changed a lot of prefabs so a lot of stuff had to be remade and branded as HDRP compatible, which was what Facepunch referred to the branch as. It's to the point where almost everything is updated which is why you rarely see it included in newer files.

There are two options that provide different levels of notifications. When you download a file, you automatically subscribe to update notifications. Optionally, you can follow the file to be notified of everything you have specified in your Notification Settings. So, in short, stop following files or modify your notification settings. You do not need to do anything special to get basic update notifications. That's done automatically for you. You can enable or disable update notifications on the file page as shown:

test

@Mercury

I'll admit we're struggling with over moderation as we establish a consistent bias across the moderation team. Generally speaking, a review that lacks substance, I.E any mention of the users experience, is not approved. Furthermore, reviews highlighting issues where the author has made no effort to seek help are also not approved. That may seem controversial but it's there to ensure users are actively reporting issues so the author is aware and not posting grudge reviews that most often never get updated even long after the author has resolved the issue. Our review moderation is to ensure only relevant reviews are approved. Reviews customers can get a quick insight onto the experience other customers have received. If your review lacks any context to your experience it won't be approved. Even if your review revolves around praising the author, it wont be approved unless it's specific to the product you're reviewing. I'd argue that not letting reviews in that are simple "good product" "responsive dev" makes reviews less bland. If you spent any decent amount of time on a review there's rarely a chance it'll lack any context to your experience, therefore would have been approved. If this is contrary to what you've experience please reach out. But I often review deleted reviews to ensure the tolerance threshold is met and to combat any inconsistencies. Right off the bat, it sounds like you refused to reach out for support and instead attempted to leave a grudge review. If you make no effort to submit a support request then it's possible the author doesn't know it exists. Why leave a negative review instead of using the appropriate channel for support? Seems a bit personal IMO. Summary Our review process isn't typical. We want reviews to be a valuable tool for customers to get a quick glimpse at what they can expect from the product to reduce the chance of buyers remorse. Applying such scrutiny protects reviews from a lot of the examples provided above. Forced reviews (I.E people who received for free in exchange for a review), random author praising that has zero value to the specific product, and most importantly "lazy reviews" that provide absolutely no insight into the customers experience. Of course you'll find contrary reviews out in the wild and that's simply because our guidelines for reviews have evolved over the years to push the usefulness of them beyond a confuckulation of forced reviews to boost a product's rating. It's still a work in progress and I hope you see what we're trying to achieve.

Okay then lower their damage?

Not seeing a permission for VIP, though I do see there's a config option to specify rates for "vip". I think this may have been overlooked by @Raul-Sorin Sorban

Hey there. I had a look at your review and I can see that your review is centered around the lack of support, however, you had only posted your support request a few hours prior to submitting your review. I had a look at your support request as well and it's not actually a support issue, rather a suggestion. In terms of your actual review, I think it's fine. You're explaining your experience and expressing your disappointment for lack of features and usability issues. All the other information you were given by Mals is irrelevant. Please give the author at least 48 hours before leaving a review based on lack of response to support inquires. Also, your review is not yet deleted and I'll ensure it isn't. We'll keep an eye on your support request and give the author time to respond before making your review public.

@Mevent your assistance is needed. Thank you!

Not sure what this is intended to be, but a player can go down inside of it and see under some terrain.