Hey everybody! In this changelog, we will feature some changes involving PvP regions, auctions, jobs, rules and most importantly: /back! PvP regions: Disabled access to /tphere and /tpaccept in /warp pvp and the TreasureHunt world Enabled KeepInventory and KeepExp at /warp pvp for more casual matches Auctions: The Anti-Snipe will now be triggered up to 5 times (instead of 3 times) Jobs plugin: Fixed /jobs archive Fixed rank income bonuses (will be changed by hand after the next restart) Teleportation: /back should now work with ALL kinds of teleportation, including /rtp, warps and such. Please let us know if there are any unintended interactions. Rules: Changed the rule regarding the abuse of LWC protections to be more general and to include things like placing locked blocks inside a player’s base. Specifically added auto-clickers to the list of not allowed aids/modifications to avoid any kind of confusion in the future.
This means chat will be spammed even more regarding the absence of a minimum increment. I'm curious to why the anti-snipe was increased from 3 to 5? What is meant to be the objective?
You can always toggle that off by using /auc spam. We decided to increase the number of times it is triggered to the same level we had back in T3, since there were complaints about items being sniped. I am not sure if changing the minimum increment would be a good idea though, since an increment of $100 for an item that is worth $10, would be weird, but still too low for something that is worth $50,000. Maybe increasing the default increment would be sufficient? The current values are: Minimum increment: $1 Default increment: $50
Sniping of items will happen regardless of the amount of times you trigger the anti-snipe: 3, 5, 7, 15, 25... times. It delays the inevitable bid-war, which usually ends up in one person sniping the item(s) with /bid. Instead of this message showing up 3 times max it will now show up 5 times max. imo the spamming of a default chat is kinda pointless, it's confusing and annoying. esp for newer members. You're right, it wouldn't be wise to set a minimum increment above the value of an item.
