serverwarp() doesn't work serverside

[Tolnaftate2004]

Originally Posted by xXziroXx

That destroy() won't be called since the player no longer is on the server.

The player object still exists for a while after logoff.

Originally Posted by cbk1994

Yes it would, it lags a bit. But, it's not a good practice in my opinion.

And this lag is of no harm to a player who is not really playing the game....

Originally Posted by Tigairius

I don't like to use an entire weapon for the sake of doing a temporary task.

And I don't like insecure triggers!

[xXziroXx]

Originally Posted by Tolnaftate2004

And I don't like insecure triggers!

So how come you and everyone else ignored my suggestion? Just cram it into a script that already uses a .05 timeout and check for client.reconnect there.

[Tolnaftate2004]

Originally Posted by xXziroXx

So how come you and everyone else ignored my suggestion? Just cram it into a script that already uses a .05 timeout and check for client.reconnect there.

Because... client. variables can be set by a... client...
I could kick you off indefinitely, I guess maybe that's why.

Also, I was not arguing with you cbk, just statin' facts.

[xXziroXx]

Originally Posted by Tolnaftate2004

Because... client. variables can be set by a... client...
I could kick you off indefinitely, I guess maybe that's why.

Yeah, but it's a such a likely scenario.


Then how about checking for clientr.reconnect, and if it is true, reconnect the player. Then, have it set to false upon login in the Control-NPC? Happy now?

[cbk1994]

Originally Posted by Tolnaftate2004

And this lag is of no harm to a player who is not really playing the game....

I basically meant that once calling serverwarp(), the player stays on the server for a few seconds.

[DustyPorViva]

Originally Posted by Tolnaftate2004

And I don't like insecure triggers!

So make them secure? I'm pretty sure something was recently added to help achieve this level of security...
Callstack Access?

[Tolnaftate2004]

Originally Posted by DustyPorViva

So make them secure? I'm pretty sure something was recently added to help achieve this level of security...
Callstack Access?

Callstack access does nothing for triggers. Good try though!

[DustyPorViva]

Originally Posted by Tolnaftate2004

Callstack access does nothing for triggers. Good try though!

Perhaps, my point remains though... you can't dismiss triggers simply because of security. Just make them more secure.