Messages

3421

General Discussion / Re: The Blockland Bulletin [News Blog]

« on: August 31, 2011, 07:44:59 PM »

Considering this whole article is pretty much just interviewing people, it's opinion. Sure, opinions from different people but still opinions from random people.
Instead of interviewing a bunch of people you could have had someone who knew what they were doing look at the code to see if there is any way this could be intentional.

Every time I try to read RTB's code without knowing exactly what I'm looking for and where to find it, I get lost easily. It's like trying to read a book with a high density of big words I don't understand really quickly. I get through it without remembering a thing about what I just skimmed over, but with the urge to proceed anyway rather to try and read it again.

3422

General Discussion / Re: The Blockland Bulletin [News Blog]

« on: August 31, 2011, 07:33:13 PM »

How has this topic not been moved to the Fail Bin by Ephi? I'm sure he really wants to.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Because Ephi seems to find it hilarious. Kinda like that Blockland Cloud development thread.

3423

Suggestions & Requests / Re: The (Near) Solution to Build Stealing

« on: August 31, 2011, 06:44:32 PM »

I just thought of a very simple process.

Convert your base bricks and downloaded bricks into ones with different names.
The bricks will now be different from the standard bricks.
Therefore, upon saving and loading these bricks, it wouldn't load anything unless the person owned the exact files.

Wouldn't that also mean you'd have problems loading your own saves that used default brick names?

3424

Games / Re: The Portal 2 Thread: Not enough space.

« on: August 31, 2011, 10:41:56 AM »

What DLC? Have I missed something?

Yes.

3425

Suggestions & Requests / Re: The (Near) Solution to Build Stealing

« on: August 29, 2011, 05:44:14 PM »

No it can't. It's just one of those 'what if' things, where in the case that someone actually does find a way to disable saving, he would crap-on the add-on and probably protect some of the save functions.

Theoretically, if he disabled certain client side functions and methods, specifically those that get the details of individual bricks, he could disable client side saving, or enable it by reactivating them. It could also be set up as the server's decision, for example, by making it impossible to get the type of brick from a ghosted object, and retrieving such information by requesting it from the server.

However, through scripting, yeah, it's doubtful there is a way to do this, and there definitely isn't one he can't make impossible.

It would be nice if people who knew how to script didn't try to break the principles of the game, or design scripts to exploit and abuse the game, because that just leads to less modding functionality when Badspot disables things. We can't change the names above the heads of players or bots because some jackasses used it to impersonate other people.

3426

Off Topic / Re: ehhh, 13 and weed, NEED HELP!!!!!!

« on: August 29, 2011, 09:52:21 AM »

wasn't he always this stupid

I think he used to be that lemurdecatta/lewnaja guy. So yes.

3427

Suggestions & Requests / Re: The (Near) Solution to Build Stealing

« on: August 28, 2011, 06:02:43 PM »

He said that he would not fix it and anyone who does he would disable it, meaning it can be solved but he chooses not to.

He's not "fixing" it because it isn't a problem.

Here's the full post I quoted from: http://forum.blockland.us/index.php?topic=18084.msg253802#msg253802
And here's his beliefs about the issue phrased in a less hostile way:

It's not a matter of me not respecting your wishes as a customer, it's a matter of respecting my customer base at large.  Most of them are decent people who just want to go on servers and save builds so they can play with them.  There are a few bad apples who will try to take credit but I'm not going to cripple the game just to slow them down a little. 

Build something cool, post screenshots in the gallery, and all of the people who matter will know that you built it.  The idiots won't know, but they're idiots - nothing that you or I can do will change that.  You have to concentrate on making the experience better for the good players, not making it worse for the bad ones. 

Not that it matters; I think you've pretty much screwed yourself when you said:

Badspot can go forget himself.

3428

Suggestions & Requests / Re: The (Near) Solution to Build Stealing

« on: August 28, 2011, 04:02:38 PM »

On top of that, if someone does create a mod to stop build saving somehow, Badspot said he'd disable it.

The game is about finding builds online, saving them, and doing what you like with them.  I'm not changing it and if you find some crazy way to stop saves from working, I will patch the game in order to fix it (already done it once, please don't waste any more of my time). 

3429

Modification Help / Re: RTB Development

« on: August 27, 2011, 06:33:01 PM »

Add an option to choose whether the mod has an API. Then, when pushing an update, let the user choose whether it's a major version, minor version or patch version (semver, major versions contain backwards-incompatible API changes, minor versions contain backwards-compatible API changes, patch versions don't change the API).

Sounds like a pretty specific way to do it. We probably don't need to go into 3-part versions for just add-ons. True, one idea is a checkbox for a user to specify that it is an add-on that would take advantage of multi-part versions, but I don't think some users could be trusted to make that decision intelligently. Perhaps the reviewer could determine if that attribute is appropriate, but it may be simpler to just give the checkbox to the person reviewing the mod.

3430

Modification Help / Re: RTB Development

« on: August 27, 2011, 04:01:52 PM »

This was actually a feature in RTB v2's add-on uploading system but I removed it since I didn't see much value in it and nobody really used it. The most I'd be willing to implement would be a "minor update" checkbox which would just increment the version number by .1 but I can't really see the benefit in having huge granularity for version numbers.

Add-ons are usually pretty minor on their own, compared to the game as a whole. RTB makes use of it pretty well, separating major content updates from bugfixes, but I doubt that would mean as much when used to identify an update to a shotgun, which doesn't have much room for major content updates. On top of that, you'd have to worry about the variety of opinions on what constitutes a minor update. Some people may never even use it so you get inconsistent version numbering between add-on developers.

However, as I mentioned, larger add-ons like RTB make use of it well, so there is some room for it. Perhaps large scale moods like Team Deathmatch, CityRPG mods, large content packs, and other minigames, could have a use for it if they are the kind of thing that may have either kind of update.

I say only put that feature in if it comes with a way to determine which add-ons would have need for that distinction, and then only apply it to those ones.

3431

Help / Re: Hacking?

« on: August 27, 2011, 02:37:41 PM »

If you repeatedly exploited either the game or a bug in a wide-spread mod to screw with servers, the consequences could be as severe as a key deactivation.

If you took advantage of an uncommon, crap-onned, or private mod on the server to screw with it, the result would be a controversial drama topic, split between people calling you a richard for doing it and people blaming the host for running the add-on. These opinions would probably not be tied into each individual's personal beliefs so much as their opinions of you and the victim, so you may want to take that into account. You probably would not get in trouble; if I were to take a guess at Badspot's stance, I assume he'd blame the host.

If you used third-party software to screw with another person's computer by any means, it would probably have the same effect as above, but with a more interesting drama topic and probably a higher chance of being banned depending on how you pulled it off.

3432

Drama / Re: "Ghetto monday rp"

« on: August 26, 2011, 07:00:04 PM »

stuff... spelled it wrong... I meant waste.

Too late.

3433

AoT General / Re: Where do I get Mega Mod 13/15?

« on: August 25, 2011, 07:18:46 PM »

AoTmod was a terrible piece of stuff riddled with bugs and other stuff. What's the point in it?

Could you check the dates before posting? I know everything from the past few months is on the front page, so I wouldn't exactly call it bumping, but still this this discussion is over a month old.

3434

AoT General / Re: now what with darksilences aot v3

« on: August 25, 2011, 07:12:25 PM »

Technically it's his V3 mod but he's actually working on it from something else so it's not a mod.

I don't understand what you mean. It's his V3 mod that isn't a mod?

3435

AoT General / Re: What is left?

« on: August 25, 2011, 07:10:49 PM »

If you're admin, then why don't you have that halo above your head that Badspot has? Eh?

Because he doesn't have to use god mode either. I've seen Badspot without the halo too. He usually puts it on pretty quickly, though.