AntiNoobRaid

Slydelix updated AntiNoobRaid with a new update entry:

1.7.8

 

Hi, i would like to point out that destroying twigs, beds in woods(outside TC) that are placed by those new players are invulnerable and it feels stupid to make twig stuff invulnerable. this could be easily taken advantage by the said "noob" player who might not even be "noob". Can you add the ability for the server owners to edit what is invulnerable and what is not?

 

Hi can you confirm please, is this:
"Time inside which new players are protected"
amount of time which they spend INGAME on server, or is it a timer that starts when they first join and, when timer ends, the protection removed?
I thought it was the latter but seems it is either the former, or broken ?

Thanks !

 

It's the first one, if you set it to 2 days the player will be raidable after 2 days spent on server

 

Cool, figured it out, thanks
May wanna make that more clear, or it's my fault idk, but it's lucky to me a player noticed... I had set 24 hours.. many people won't play that much all wipe xD

 

There will be a config option regarding twig and also option to set entities that can be destroyed outside of TC range

Because of new features that will be added the config will be wiped so I'll change the description with that

 

After yesterdays update, I am getting the following error in the log:

Code:

09:54 [Error] Failed to initialize plugin 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.8' (NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object)
  at Oxide.Plugins.AntiNoobRaid.Loaded () [0x00000] in <0175a40878dc42b89296034bde40e40f>:0
  at Oxide.Plugins.AntiNoobRaid.DirectCallHook (System.String name, System.Object& ret, System.Object[] args) [0x00268] in <0175a40878dc42b89296034bde40e40f>:0
  at Oxide.Plugins.CSharpPlugin.InvokeMethod (Oxide.Core.Plugins.HookMethod method, System.Object[] args) [0x00079] in <17b9f46063fe4ac9ae4a1000712647ce>:0
  at Oxide.Core.Plugins.CSPlugin.OnCallHook (System.String name, System.Object[] args) [0x000d8] in <ba44835247a74c58bf6cabef8b441b56>:0
  at Oxide.Plugins.CSharpPlugin.HandleAddedToManager (Oxide.Core.Plugins.PluginManager manager) [0x0006e] in <17b9f46063fe4ac9ae4a1000712647ce>:0

 

Does it happen every time you try to load? Can you try renaming AntiNoobRaid.json in oxide\data to AntiNoobRaid.json.old and try to load the plugin?

 

This worked. It was 100% my fault and I had tried to edit that file earlier.
How embarrassing

 

Slydelix updated AntiNoobRaid with a new update entry:

1.7.9

 

Any idea why OnEntityTakeDamage would be taking 8000-9000ms average? Lagging the server.

EDIT: Performance is set to True

 

Latest version of the plugin doesn't even have performance mode... Are you sure you are using the latest version?

 

I have just downloaded this plugin for the first time and performance mode is shown in the config.

Also, the console commands are not recognized, I am not able to wipe data files from console commands.

 

I've changed the plugin desc. with updated commands, as for performance mode, I've checked (again) and that config option doesn't seem to exist :/

 

Hi,

i have the protection set to 4 days, now i see that only the online time from the players will be checkt, not the AFK offline time,
is there a way that the plugin will also use the Offlinetime.. because if someone just play 2 hours a day, he will never be raidable xD

 

Protection for 4 days? Wow

 

yes, because some players always try to raid new players in 24 hours, and so i never get new players xD

 

I don't think I will be able to do anything until the plugin migration to umod is finished because I (and 1 more plugin dev so I'm guessing it's same for everyone) lost all control over the plugin (can't update or anything)

 

oh ok,
so its not possible to add a line by myself that the plugin grab also the AFKTIME and add it to the normal playtime?

i think its more difficult like this right?

 

This Plugin causing a lot of lags and delays on my Server.
it happens when someone tries to damage a protected base.

Code:

Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9601ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9669ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9655ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9684ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took 244ms [GARBAGE COLLECT]
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9692ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9671ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9630ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9631ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9621ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9597ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9552ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9548ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9600ms
Calling 'OnFireBallDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9570ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9516ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9326ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9264ms
Calling 'OnEntityTakeDamage' on 'AntiNoobRaid v1.7.9' took average 9071ms