-
Posts
5,919 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
199
Content Type
Profiles
Warranty Claims
Downloads
Forums
Store
Services
Downloads Plus Support
DOWNLOADS EXTRA
Everything posted by nivex
-
- 634 comments
-
- 2
-
-
- #rust
- #rust plugin
- (and 6 more)
-
Added by request for @IIIaKa Added `Explosive Costs` to profiles for users to input costs for each base, shown in the map marker shop window. Alternatively, use this to display approximate or potential raid rewards These are not requirements and are not enforced in the plugin. This serves as information for you to easily relay to your players. These costs are not determined automatically (and probably never will be as I have no clue how to do that) Each base will have an example that is disabled by default. You can edit and change to the correct values and enable them to have them visible in the map marker shop window. If you don't want the examples cluttering your profiles then you can remove them all with the command rb.config noexplosivecosts This indeed would be a great addition for Easy and Medium profiles to show relative costs for raiding those bases to new players so they can get a better grasp at how raiding works
-
@NoxiousPluK hi, you can add remove to Blacklisted Commands in the config to block that plugin this will only work for the above command. if players have privileges to use the below commands then it will not work properly. Remover Tool does not call the canRemove hook for the below commands: /remove all /remove structure, or /remove s /remove external, or /remove e /remove admin (it is intended that this command not be blocked if you activate it outside of the event first) noclip (same as /remove admin) it can be fixed if Tryhard were to implement call hooks for canRemove in each of those functions. otherwise I don't think there is anything I can do to prevent it.
-
- 634 comments
-
- 1
-
-
- #rust
- #rust plugin
- (and 6 more)
-
- 634 comments
-
- 1
-
-
- #rust
- #rust plugin
- (and 6 more)
-
- 634 comments
-
- 1
-
-
- #rust
- #rust plugin
- (and 6 more)
-
yes, the smaller base next to the larger base is preventing the conversion as you suspected because the smaller base is active. I will have to fix it, but that requires properly identifying external TC versus a whole base. edit: removed some information since I cannot think clearly enough the joy. lots to think about and fix
- 634 comments
-
- 1
-
-
- #rust
- #rust plugin
- (and 6 more)
-
- 634 comments
-
- #rust
- #rust plugin
- (and 6 more)
-
- 634 comments
-
- 1
-
-
- #rust
- #rust plugin
- (and 6 more)
-
- 634 comments
-
- 1
-
-
- #rust
- #rust plugin
- (and 6 more)
-
- 634 comments
-
- 1
-
-
- #rust
- #rust plugin
- (and 6 more)
-
@NoxiousPluK hi, that is nothing to worry about and won't affect any bases that aren't abandoned. you can reduce Sphere Radius or enable Use Dynamic Sphere Radius, but it will still overlap bases when players build too closely. I recommend enabling Use Dynamic Sphere Radius so that it doesn't use Sphere Radius of 50 for every base. if you adjust Sphere Radius and it's too small and a base is larger than the actual radius of the base then it cannot work properly. by using Use Dynamic Sphere Radius it will make the radius the size it should be, and pad it slightly with Padding Added Onto Dynamic Radius. the radius will not exceed Max Dynamic Radius, so if you have large bases on your server then you will need to adjust it to accommodate the larger size bases "Sphere Radius": 50.0, "Sphere Radius (Legacy Shelter)": 25.0, "Use Dynamic Sphere Radius": true, "Max Dynamic Radius": 75.0, "Padding Added Onto Dynamic Radius": 9.0, "Min Custom Sphere Radius": 25.0, "Max Custom Sphere Radius": 75.0,
- 634 comments
-
- 1
-
-
- #rust
- #rust plugin
- (and 6 more)
-
- 634 comments
-
- 2
-
-
-
- #rust
- #rust plugin
- (and 6 more)