Difference between revisions of "Talk:Phantom Child"
m |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Awesome script. Still works as of 9/25/2008. And you can even set the object as physical! (Change the 'flexible-set' by a 'physical-set'){{unsigned|Protector Cone|16:46, 26 September 2008}} | Awesome script. Still works as of 9/25/2008. And you can even set the object as physical! (Change the 'flexible-set' by a 'physical-set'){{unsigned|Protector Cone|16:46, 26 September 2008}} | ||
== Reboot? == | |||
It has to be reseted on reboot. I wish I knew what event a server reboot causes to script, to avoid that it is not phantom for even 1 second after restart. | |||
== Bug Fix == | == Bug Fix == | ||
Revision as of 16:28, 27 January 2009
Awesome script. Still works as of 9/25/2008. And you can even set the object as physical! (Change the 'flexible-set' by a 'physical-set')—The preceding unsigned comment was added on 16:46, 26 September 2008 by Protector Cone
Reboot?
It has to be reseted on reboot. I wish I knew what event a server reboot causes to script, to avoid that it is not phantom for even 1 second after restart.
Bug Fix
Since this is an exploit of a current bug (jiralink?), would it be possible to estimate how the item reacts once the bug is fixed? Which would be the expected behaviour?
- Script silently fails, child and object staying solid?
- Script shouts an error on debug channel, child and object staying solid?
- Script works, child and object turning phantom?
I'm currently thinking about using it for a friends product but am afraid of the consequences... Others might be too. So it would be noteworthy in the article.
Greetz, 
Lynch (talk|contribs) 15:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC)