2012/11/16 - Blockland r1766

Author Topic: 2012/11/16 - Blockland r1766  (Read 93442 times)


Wait, how the hell did I not notice this update til now?
brb playing with my balls


Trying too hard
OR you are just stupid. I found it pretty funny.

OR you are just stupid. I found it pretty funny.

i didn't really find it funny either so i guess i'm stupid too

Im an average intelligence

OR you are just stupid. I found it pretty funny.

I have a different sense of humor than you, that must mean I'm stupid!!

I have a different sense of humor than you, that must mean I'm stupid!!
you said it....

why are people arguing about a simple joke here

a lot of people here love dumb fad topics like "my snake is bleeding" but hate it when someone posts anything like this...i still can't really understand this community.


why are people arguing about a simple joke here

a lot of people here love dumb fad topics like "my snake is bleeding" but hate it when someone posts anything like this...i still can't really understand this community.
Fad topic..? The only funny "My snake is bleeding" topic was the original one.

These are some quality balls. :3 :cookie:


I'm not sure in what version this stopped working (was recent though), but I can no longer update certain datablocks to clients already connected to the server like I used to be able to.



For example, with these done in parallel, the property did not update:

Quote from: Server
==> echo(200.uiName);
1x1
200.uiName = "Test";
==> echo(200.uiName);
Test
TransmitDatablocks();
==> echo(200.uiName);
Test
Quote from: Client
==> echo(200.uiName);
1x1




==> echo(200.uiName);
1x1

However, I was told that it still works with other datablocks and tried it:

Quote from: Server
==> echo(38.canJet);
1
38.canJet = 0;
==> echo(38.canJet);
0
TransmitDatablocks();
==> echo(38.canJet);
0
Quote from: Client
==> echo(38.canJet);
1




==> echo(38.canJet);
0

* Note that in place of TransmitDatablocks() I have also tried
findClientByName("Truce").transmitDatabocks(0) and, although only at the suggestion of someone else, commandToClient(findClientByName("Truce"),'MissionStartPhase3'), neither with any success.



Was this change intentional or an unintended side effect of some other change?

I'm pretty sure he's just breaking some anti-save mods with that. Seeing how your example only affected brick UI names.