[Mod] Shared automatic ban [v0.1.3 beta] [shared_autoban]

4aiman
Member
 
Posts: 1208
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2012 05:47

[Mod] Shared automatic ban [v0.1.3 beta] [shared_autoban]

by 4aiman » Sat Feb 23, 2013 12:29

I'm glad to represent you one more "protective" mod.
This one combines protect feature with suggested by me autoban feature. It also makes it possible to grant "interact" within your land to a particular person. Not for all your buildings, but just any number of areas you select by yourself!

Downloads:
Initial release: v 0.1.1 beta
Made things configurable: v 0.1.2 beta
Multiple owners check, diagonal blocks check: v 0.1.3 beta
Browse code at GitHub: https://github.com/4aiman/shared_autoban.git (may be not working/partially working version)
Licence is inside the init.lua. It's permissive ;)
Dependencies: default.



FAQ:
Code: Select all
shared_autoban
==============

This mod adds autoban feature based on something that personally I call "land auto claim" along with
the means of sharing parts of claimed land with different players.

Licence is inside init.lua, so if you would use this mod, you won't end up without it anyway.

How things work
---------------

Digging:
- a certain player places a block
- that block now belongs to that player
- if someone wants to destroy that block he won't succeed
- instead of removing that block he would receive a warning message
- he ignores that messages 3 times and the 4th would be last one - he would be banned in 5 seconds

Building:
- a certain player places a block
- that block now belongs to that player
- if someone wants to place his own block adjacent to the first one he won't succeed
- instead of placing that block he would receive a warning message
- he ignores that messages 3 times and the 4th would be last one - he would be banned within 5 seconds

Isn't that great? Sertainly it is ;)

Questions & Answers
-------------------

Q: If I can't place a block directly next to someone else's block, then where I can do that?

A: You can't place blocks only at adjacent positions. Say, someone's block is placed at some "position".
   Then you can't place blocks only at the following positions:
   
        - position = {position.x-1, position.y,   position.z  };         
        - position = {position.x+1, position.y,   position.z  };         
        - position = {position.x,   position.y-1, position.z  };         
        - position = {position.x,   position.y+1, position.z  };         
        - position = {position.x,   position.y,   position.z-1};         
        - position = {position.z,   position.y,   position.z+1}.
       
   That means you can place block diagonally at position like {position.x-1, position.y-1, position.z}.

Q: What if someone didn't know that he tried to dig someone else's blocks?

A: Well, that's totally NOT possile. Once someone punch a block which is owned by a different person,
   he/she would see a red splash. Sometimes digger would lose 1 HP after punch, but that's only
   if he/she insists on punching what isn't his/hers.
   So you see a splash as if you were punched - you know that you're at someone's place.

Q: Okay, but what if I want to build stuff WITH someone's help? Is there any way to grant "interact" within
   a certain area to a certain player?

A: Of cource there is!

Q: So, what do I need to do that?

A: First you must craft a "markup pencil". With that you can select areas: just punch
   any block with that tool and you would set either the start or the end position.
   Recipe for a pencil is as follows:
   
        {'',              'shared_autoban:coal_dust',   ''           },     
        {'default:stick', 'shared_autoban:coal_dust', 'default:stick'},         
        {'default:stick', 'shared_autoban:coal_dust', 'default:stick'}.

   Shared_autoban:coal_dust can be crafted from a coal_lump like so:
   
        {'default:coal_lump'}

Q: Why do I need that stupid pencil? Can't I live happily without it?

A: Well, you don't realy need to use a pencil to set positions. It's still possible to set that positions
   without a pencil, but you'll need at least 1 pencil to craft a PC.

Q: Okay, and just why do I need that PC of yours? Or it's optional too?

A: "PC" isn't optional. PC is a node that allows you to grant or to revoke "interact" within defined positions.
    Crafting recipe for a PC is as follows:
     
        {'default:cobble',  'default:cobble',               'default:cobble'},
        {'default:cobble',  'shared_autoban:markup_pencil', 'default:cobble'},
        {'default:cobble',  'default:cobble',               'default:cobble'}.

Q: I've made a PC , then what?

A: Great! Place it anywhere you can and click with right mouse button on it.
   You would see a form with 3 fields and 2 buttons. Fields are named so that anyone should figure out
   what to put in them. Buttons functions correspond to their names: "Grant" grants and "Revoke" revokes
   "interact" to/from a player with a "Playername" name within area from Pos1 to Pos2.   

Q: And what if I grant "interact" within my land, so that "granted" area would be within "non-granted"?

A: If you grant someone not all of your land, then that very "someone" would be able to destroy your
blocks within area from Pos1 to Pos2, but he/she won't be able to place a block near the edge of "granded"
   area, 'cause there are your blocks around. You can't place a block adjacent to someone else's block,
   remember? ;)

Q: You vere saying that pencil can set Pos1 and Pos2 for me, but it doesn't work at all! What I'm doing wrong?

A: To "paste" your start and end positions into the PC's fields you need to punch it. Yep, select 2 positions
   and then punch your (or someone else's) PC. Then right-click on it as usual and you would see selected
   positions are pasted in the fields "Pos1" and "Pos2".

Q: Can I revoke "interact" partially? Say, pos1 is {0,0,0} and pos2 is {100,100,100}, how can I "shrink" that
   to {20,20,20} .. {80,80,80}?

A: You can't atm. You must revoke "interact" from the whole area and then grant again to a smaller one.

Q: Okay, how do I revoke "interact"?

A: Just select pos1 and pos2 so that one of them would be smaller or equal to the pos1 of the granted area and
   the second one would be bigger or equal to the pos2 of the granted area.
   To make it simplier to understand, let's say you have granted to 4aiman (yep, that's me) "interact"
   from {0,0,0} to {10,10,10}.
   To revoke "interact" you should set pos1 and pos2 as follows:     
      pos1 = {0,0,0} pos = {10,10,10}       
   or     
      pos1 = {0-whatever,0-whatever,0-whatever} pos = {10+whatever,10+whatever,10+whatever}       
   or     
      pos1 = {0-whatever,10+whatever,0-whatever} pos = {10+whatever,0-whatever,10+whatever}       
   etc...
   
   As you can see above, all you really need is to select an area without paying any special attention
   to the Pos1 and Pos2 values. Just make sure you've selected area which is bigger or equal to the "granted" one.

Q: What if there are 2 owners in the area? Should I ask them both to grant me "interact"?

A: Yes, you should. You may build to/break only those blocks of someone who granted you to do that.
   And that only within that "granted" area.

Q: So, if he/she had granted me "interact" and I have built something there then that person wouldn't be able to
   destroy/build to my block until I grant him/her "interact"?

A: Precisely so. So be nice and grant him/her "interact" too.

Q: Is there any moderator tool planned?

A: There is, but it would be usable only by trusted players. And I mean that - "trusted" by server community, not
   by administration ;)
   
Q: So, I can build a house without changing ground and... would anyone be able to destroy the floor an d fill my
   house with some hideous stuff?

A: Sure. So make a basement for your house too. If you won't - the blockspamming would be your problem, not this mod's.

Q: Can I break unowned blocks in the granted only to someone else area?

A: Yes, you can. This mod do not protect not owned stuff.

Q: If I would grant someone "interact" and then build something inside granted area - would new blocks be granted
   as well?

A: They would.

Q: How many times can I violate someone's property safely?

A: 9 to EACH owner. So yes, anyone may try to annoy everyone else for 9 times and still be unbanned.

Q: Is there any way to change how many violations one can issue?

A: Sure - just change warnings_before_ban variable in the init.lua.

Q: Why do I get messages that I can't place a block, because it's mine?

A: It's a bug. I'll fix that anytime soon. If that happens, then there is a block, owned by someone else.
   Do not insist on building, find out who is the onwner and ask him to grant you "interact". Also, try to
   /forgive yourself.
   
Q: What are you talking about? There're chatcommands available, aren't they?

A: Yes, there are. One can use this commands:

   /area_grant <playername>            - grants interact to <playername> in the selected area (use pencil)
   
   /area_revoke <playername>           - revokes interact from <playername> in the selected area (use pencil)
   
   /area_grant_all <playername>        - grants interact to all in the selected area (use pencil)
   
   /area_revoke_all <playername>       - revokes interact from all in the selected area (use pencil)
   
   /forgive <playername>               - drops violaton counter of <playername> to 0
   
   /vote <playername>                  - +1 to reputation of <playername>
   
   /devote <playername>                - -1 to reputation of <playername>
   
   /forgive will check whether there are someone else who is griefed/annoyed by <playername>. If there's no such
            person, then <playername> have good chances to be unbanned*.

   /vote is possible only 1 time for each EXISTING <playername>.
   
         So: - No, you can't "create" trusted player by yourself.
             - Yes, even if you cooperate with someone, you can't give your votes for some inexistent person.

   /devote is also possible only 1 time for each EXISTING <playername> and only if you've voted for that person.
   
   * It's up to settings to decide whether you'll be banned/unbanned or not. See init.lua lines 15-31.
   
Q: Why do I need to vote?

A: There's no need in that, but if min_trust_level% would vote for someone, then he/she would be able to use
   admin Super tools.
   
Q: Wow! Supertool! What's that?

A: That's a pickaxe, crafted like this:
 
        {'default:pick_*material*'}
        {'shared_autoban:markup_pencil'}   
   
   There are wooden, stone, steel and mese pickaxes. They are equal to their prototypes in all terms, but can break
   owned by a third person blocks. (Only if it's wielder is trusted amongst server population).

Q: Where can I learn more about this mod?

A: Check init.lua contents. This mod is commented rather well. In fact, you could've get answers on all the questions
   above by doing that ;)


This mod is tested as thoroughly as I could permit myself. But I can't guarantee it's free of bugs. Please, tell me if you find any.
Last edited by 4aiman on Wed Feb 27, 2013 21:01, edited 1 time in total.
 

User avatar
Topywo
Member
 
Posts: 1720
Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 20:27

by Topywo » Sat Feb 23, 2013 13:15

I have my doubts with the autoban. If some troll changes randomly dirt, papyrus, tree, water source(?) nodes normal players might be autobanned.

Just some questions that came up
- Is it 3 times during a session or 3 times overall?
- If I build a house or make a garden (square 10 x 10), without changing the ground, someone can build in my house/garden?
- The protection is based on nodes and the 1 block area around it. The interact grant is based on areas. Does the interact cover later placed nodes inside that area? Does the grant interact make the whole area, including not changed nodes) protected towards thirds?
- When dirt changes into dirt with grass, does the protection stay?
-Will this mod make a moderator/administrator able to remove protection from players.

This mod might just be the necessary fine-tuning of existing protection mods.
 

User avatar
Mito551
Member
 
Posts: 1271
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 15:03

by Mito551 » Sat Feb 23, 2013 15:39

3 times is too little, to my mind. That should be around 5 or 10, he isn't going to dig it anyway.
 

4aiman
Member
 
Posts: 1208
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2012 05:47

by 4aiman » Sat Feb 23, 2013 16:09

Topywo wrote:I have my doubts with the autoban. If some troll changes randomly dirt, papyrus, tree, water source(?) nodes normal players might be autobanned.

Just some questions that came up
- Is it 3 times during a session or 3 times overall?
- If I build a house or make a garden (square 10 x 10), without changing the ground, someone can build in my house/garden?
- The protection is based on nodes and the 1 block area around it. The interact grant is based on areas. Does the interact cover later placed nodes inside that area? Does the grant interact make the whole area, including not changed nodes) protected towards thirds?
- When dirt changes into dirt with grass, does the protection stay?
-Will this mod make a moderator/administrator able to remove protection from players.

This mod might just be the necessary fine-tuning of existing protection mods.


- You always would know that some block wasn't placed by mapgen - there would be red splash. Also a troll always find a way to troll. This mod is about protecting what is built already.
- It's 3 times overall. Fourth would be ban. One can try break/build up to 3 blocks belonging to different persons. Ban would be given if a player would try to "annoy" one certain player 4 times.
- Someone would be able to dig all the ground beneath your home and fill it with blocks. So you need to make a floor too.
- interact grant works for any block placed within granted area and is indifferent to the time any block is placed there. Also if there are not owned by anyone blocks inside the area, then anyone can build on those.
- If one block become another without saving meta (like furnace does), then no, dirt with grass wouldn't be protected. As well as if the sand, placed by a player would fall. I can't predict where it end up. As for ABMs - it's up to them to save meta.
- atm there's no admin tool, but I can make one. But a moderator could be a troll as well. What if he/she would destroy something?
I'm open for suggestions.
 

User avatar
Topywo
Member
 
Posts: 1720
Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 20:27

by Topywo » Sat Feb 23, 2013 17:19

Thanks for the clear explanation!

One question about the red splash. Does the red splash count for the 3 strike is out or is that just a warning?

If a moderator is a troll, the administrator/server owner should take action. If that one is a troll as well, bad luck. But chances are smaller than for 'normal' players.

Edit: typo
Last edited by Topywo on Sat Feb 23, 2013 17:20, edited 1 time in total.
 

User avatar
Mito551
Member
 
Posts: 1271
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 15:03

by Mito551 » Sat Feb 23, 2013 17:34

red splash is just a warning, but as far i understand, it doesn't count as one.
 

Sokomine
Member
 
Posts: 3616
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 17:31
GitHub: Sokomine

by Sokomine » Sat Feb 23, 2013 17:41

As far as I like the idea of protecting blocks by just placing them (very simple for players to use since it happens automaticly), there are some points which make this mod useless in its current implementation on any server designed for building. It may still be useful for PvP servers (can't really tell what they need).

The theory that everyone who tries to dig a block someone else has placed is a griefer is plain simply wrong. Resons might be that the block cannot be distinguished from one naturally found at that position (i.e. dirt, stone, plants, tree), or that a fast digging tool was wielded and the block broke simply by accidently clicking once (if you play for a long time that will eventually happen), or that a player wants to connect his house to a road and has to build some stairs up to the main highway (ok, the player won't be able to connect his staircase anyway, so this is impossible in this szenario). In some cases it might even be a good idea to modify structures slightly so that old and new building can coexist better. This of course implies to ask the owner of the other building and revert ones changes if the owner does not agree with them.

The second error is to assume that three warnings are enough. They're not. Sometimes there is so much lag on a server that it takes a long time until the server reports back what it thought about your modifications. Sometimes you end up in stone instead of a newly digged tunnel in your mine. Thus, players might easily get banned without ever noticing why. And placing "traps" that take away health if one tries to dig them is rather the work of griefers than that of serious builders.

Griefers usually cause damage by destroying blocks in buildings. But that's not the only way they work. There are also those that cause damage by spamming blocks, water and lava everywhere. With your protection mod, block spammers could very easily do a lot of damage by making regions inaccessible to other players, blocking players from finishing their buildings, destroying the appearance of a building or a garden, making roads inaccessible.

4aiman wrote:- atm there's no admin tool, but I can make one. But a moderator could be a troll as well. What if he/she would destroy something?

If you do not trust your moderators, fire them and get ones you trust. If a moderator on a server misbehaves, contact the owner of the server. If the problem cannot be solved, leave the server.
And do not assume that all destructions are miscivous. Some may just be the moderator doing his/her job! I.e. removing blockspam or obstacles on roads. Or removing things that cannot be kept on the server because they have to be removed by RL laws. Or which are against the server rules (i.e. signs that insult other people).

Now, after all these complaints, please don't misunderstand this: I really like the very idea of storing who placed a block and to protect that from modification. That *can* be a very helpful tool. New players could be given interact privilege and be forbidden from removing blocks placed by others. They'd simply get a message of who placed this block and an internal counter gets incremented. If a moderator later on has a look at the data of that player, he/she ought to see that value and can take it as indicator - *not* as proof of anything. The interpretation of the value requires human intelligence.

Trusted players may be given a special tool with which they could remove blockspam placed by that type of griefer and do the connections necessary for new buildings.
A list of my mods can be found here.
 

4aiman
Member
 
Posts: 1208
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2012 05:47

by 4aiman » Sat Feb 23, 2013 20:06

1. If server glitches then it's not the problem of any mod. No one can possibly predict how bad glitches would be if any at all.
And you was right about that I could have worried about that. But there're nothing I can do about it. So the only solution - not to overload a server.
2. Red splash is "shown" on punch, not on dig. So anyone would know that smth is wrong BEFORE he/she dug a block. And even with fast tool it's unlikely a digger wouldn't notice his screen going red. Anyway, I think that considering real fast digging I can increase count to 10.
3. It's not about firing moders or admins. I just do not trust ANY of them. Even VERY good person can go angry and unjust if someone would pick on him/her. Admins are much worse. I'm not talking about all of them, but I've seen too many moders who were making fun of people if not trolling them. They seem never seen any of the Spiderman episodes (1994 series).
My point? I do not want to have ANY superusers. Yes, including myself. The power spoils. Those with admin tools would use them. Sometimes against NORMAL players. They would say "I've rebuild your stuff so it look nicer now." No one have a right for that. And if someone would build an inappropriate image (insulting, harassing etc) then this person should be banned anyway. There aren't mods which can recognize whether one's building is insulting or not.
4. Insulting signs... Huh? I believe Minetest should have some filter for abuse. So it's about filtering text BEFORE it is saved in the meta or sent to a player/broadcasted.
5. Nevertheless, if admin tool would require some privilege, which would be usable only if 90% of the server population "vote" for a person (not necessary an admin or moder). Aslo anyone should be able to "revoke" his "voice". In this case I can believe in justice. And even server owner wouldn't be able to use any admin tool then.
I want to implement that. Thanks, guys!
6. As for lava/water... There's NO way to defend from those. One can use claim mod, but what if anyone would go above the 13*13*13 area and place a lava source? The same goes for protectors. We can't prohibit to build everywhere. What's the point of the game then? We even can't check for a structures that would keep lava from flowing downwards. So either we should make bucket privileged (which isn't right - see #3) or change ABM of lava/water to make all flowing blocks inherit owner property and check for that. Then I'll need to make an ABM that would check around the owned blocks for lava and delete that block if their owners (lava's and the block's) are not the same.
7. Blockspam... I would like your suggestions how to prevent that at least semi-automatically. Otherwise I'd rather stick with "vote" concept I've just described ;)

I believe there's more... but let's discuss above ones in a key of maximum de-moderatorisation.
Be constructive, please ;)
 

Sokomine
Member
 
Posts: 3616
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 17:31
GitHub: Sokomine

by Sokomine » Sun Feb 24, 2013 20:04

4aiman wrote:No one can possibly predict how bad glitches would be if any at all.

It's hard to predict what will happen in the future. It's just that the past has shown multiple times that such errors occoured rather frequently.

4aiman wrote:My point? I do not want to have ANY superusers. Yes, including myself. The power spoils. Those with admin tools would use them. Sometimes against NORMAL players. They would say "I've rebuild your stuff so it look nicer now." No one have a right for that. And if someone would build an inappropriate image (insulting, harassing etc) then this person should be banned anyway. There aren't mods which can recognize whether one's building is insulting or not.

Hm. As server owner, you do wield the power to destroy the entire world with a single command. There is hardly any way to avoid this. After all, your job is to do maintenance, update mods, fix security holes and such. Same goes with moderators. If you want to protect your players, you could make your maps easy to download (which would be a good thing for any server).
The modifications of buildings I spoke of are minimal adaptions required by new buildings. They all require that the owner of the concerned building agrees with them afterwards. If not, they have to be undone. It is more a way of cooperative building.

4aiman wrote:There aren't mods which can recognize whether one's building is insulting or not.
4. Insulting signs... Huh? I believe Minetest should have some filter for abuse. So it's about filtering text BEFORE it is saved in the meta or sent to a player/broadcasted.

In the end, insults in language may be more frequent than problematic buildings. And harder to detect. Because filters are outright stupid. Trolls find ways around them while regular players get annoyed and confused by them. Your belief in technical solutions worries me a bit because it has too often proved not to work. But maybe you'll have to gain your own experience or find a way that works at least to some degree.

The admin tool with the voting system for trusted players sounds good. Why not? Give it a try.
A list of my mods can be found here.
 

4aiman
Member
 
Posts: 1208
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2012 05:47

by 4aiman » Mon Feb 25, 2013 08:37

First, Thanks for replies, Sokomine!
I highly appreciate that.
There are things that I never would have thought about without you drawing my attention to.

Second, I have my own comments ;)
Sokomine wrote:As server owner, you do wield the power to destroy the entire world with a single command. There is hardly any way to avoid this.

That's true. Nevertheless, as server owner, one should avoid using that kind of power. I'm talking about cases when someone have to move his server to someone else's hardware. In that case this new owner may not be worried about the server much. And there's no telling whether he/she would be gentle enough with his/her new "possession".
Anyway, this "problem" is "unresolvable", so let's move further.

Sokomine wrote:If you want to protect your players, you could make your maps easy to download (which would be a good thing for any server).

Ok. How about this: I make daily backups, someone griefed something and "my" players go to download a backup.
What next? They would ask me to restore their buildings (if severe damage were cast upon them).
And what next? Me, using worldedit to bring that buildings back?
I don't want to take any "afterwards" measures.
My "system" may seem to have "dragon-like' rules and be far from ideal (I'm sure that ideal system can't be made at all), but I believe it can be polished to be at least semi-automatic ;)

Sokomine wrote:The modifications of buildings I spoke of are minimal adaptions required by new buildings.

As I've said I don't want to take any measures "after" the disaster, but want to prevent one.
If I get it right, then I must say that grant should be first, not otherwise:
- someone grants interact to someone;
- that second someone rebuilds "connections".

Why? Well, I don't want to use rollbacks.
Why? Well, someone could build smth that just can't be "moved" or rebuild without "twitching" the whole building by several blocks - like mechanisms of MESEcons or some underground passages/hidden doors.
Besides, to break is far easier then to build. I don't want to be a prosecutor or a defense attorney and make someone who can't repair what he broke and repay with materials and his/her help in rebuilding whatever that was (second point is for builder to decide).

Making a rule not to build such things near the "main street" (or smth like that) won't help, unless there would be a major notice on every log-in.
I can implement that, but:
- that has nothing to do with shared_autoban, that would be a different mod;
- that is server-specific: not all servers may want to have;
- it's hard to say, what is the main road, where does it starts and where does it ends.
- on first login (since installation of this mod) every player will see a message sent to him (maybe using detached inventory), which would warn him about rules about buildings, whether there are "main streets" or not, and provide him/her a hint about building near that. It won't be better than wiki, but would be sufficient to say "I've warned you!" later an sufficient to make one go and read a wiki article.

That's not all, but sufficient for me to propose following:
- make a special command to define the areas which would treated as the "main street";
- no special tools required, the same pencil will do as it stores the last two positions marked by every player in a table;
- add commands like /add_to_main_street and /remove_from_main_road to mark/unmark "main street" areas;

And here I want to have some options to satisfy several different points of view:
- Areas within X,Y,Z blocks around the "main street" would be open for modifications by default.
or
- Areas within X,Y,Z blocks around the "main street" would be open for modifications only to trusted ones.
or
- No opened for modifications areas around the "main street" at all. If someone wants to make his "connection" to the "main street" be editable for everyone, then he/she just marks his/her area and use /grant_everyone command. Once all was done, he/she can issue /revoke_everyone command. This one and previous point may be combined.

This goes for the main street itself:
- all;
- no one, but trusted;
- only server owner.

Sokomine wrote:If not, they have to be undone. It is more a way of cooperative building.

Same as above - the whole reason of making this mod is to prevent what can be prevented.
Cooperative building may be done by /grant_everyone or grant particular user.
I think I should add chat commands to duplicate PC abilities.

Sokomine wrote:In the end, insults in language may be more frequent than problematic buildings. And harder to detect. Because filters are outright stupid. Trolls find ways around them while regular players get annoyed and confused by them. Your belief in technical solutions worries me a bit because it has too often proved not to work. But maybe you'll have to gain your own experience or find a way that works at least to some degree.

Well,
1. Filter won't cut entire phrase, just some words.
2. I know, that's impossible to prevent all insults, but even 10% of them not happening is a good thing.
3. I have no "belief" in anything except human mind. If something isn't working - it's human't fault, not the machine's.
4. ANY technical solution either buggy or doesn't work at all. No need to say what personally I prefer.

Anyway, filtering is definitely a feature for some other mod, not this one ;)
Besides, I rarely read signs that placed in the areas which isn't at spawn point.

Sokomine wrote:The admin tool with the voting system for trusted players sounds good. Why not? Give it a try.

I've started already. Percent of needed approval to use admin tool will be configurable.

Whew...
I thought I never finish writing this! :D
Thanks again, I'll try to make this mod better ;)
 

4aiman
Member
 
Posts: 1208
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2012 05:47

by 4aiman » Wed Feb 27, 2013 21:00

Update!
Download link in the 1st post.
Changes:
+ check for 2 & more owners on_place_node
+ increased area for searching owners. Now 3x3 area (added diagonals check)
+ fixed notify_trusted function
+ warnings_before_ban = 20 (due to new multiple owners seeking stuff)
 


Return to Mod Releases



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests