Jump to content
  • 0

[Help] Pets dont hit Characters


Question

Posted

Hi, i need some help here.

Tryskell tryed to explain me that but i dont understand it so much :S

I need help to make the pets dont hit the players.

I think something like:

 

if L2Character,
  pet can hit=false;
  return;

9 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Posted

if L2Character,
 pet can hit=false;
 return;

this i will tell you is just an example: you need something like:

boolean canhit = false
if (this instanceof L2PetInstance)
canhit = false;

if (!x.canhit)
return;

 

Now, where to add them i can't tell you i dont have eclipse to explain you now. but that's the way i think

  • 0
Posted

if L2Character,
 pet can hit=false;
 return;

this i will tell you is just an example: you need something like:

boolean canhit = false
if (this instanceof L2PetInstance)
canhit = false;

if (!x.canhit)
return;

 

Now, where to add them i can't tell you i dont have eclipse to explain you now. but that's the way i think

 

<______________________________< It's not really better than FFs "idea code".

 


 

RequestActionUse clientpacket, search for case 22: // Attack (pet attack)

 

You got the whole code about the "green attack button" from pet panel.

 

The 3 useful variables are pet, activeChar and target. There are already many checks in this part of code you can compare and code your idea using it.

  • 0
Posted

Thanx, my friend Rizel helped me and it works with this code:

		if(this instanceof L2PetInstance && target instanceof L2PcInstance)
			return;

 

But now i need pets dont hit with skills.

How i do that or where i put this code?

  • 0
Posted

From not reworked IL to last beta HI5, it's useSkill().

 

I still talk of RequestActionUse clientpacket.

 

Fixed, close the topic :)

Thanx Rizel and Thanx Tryskell :)

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • LIVE VERIFICATION? SUMSUB? “IMPOSSIBLE”? ▪ Spoiler: it is possible — if you know who to work with. A client came in with a task to pass **live verification** on **WantToPay**, a Telegram virtual card service. On the platform side — **Sumsub**: liveness check, SMS, manual review. “Fast” and “by eye” simply don’t work here. › What was done: → analyzed the verification scenario and Sumsub requirements → built the correct flow: phone number, email, timing → **completed live verification remotely, without account handover** → handled SMS and confirmation codes → brought the process to final approval ▪ Result: → verification passed → access granted → no flags or repeat requests ▪ Live verification is not luck. It’s scenario-based preparation — not hope. › TG: @mustang_service ( https:// t.me/ mustang_service ) › Channel: Mustang Service ( https:// t.me/ +6RAKokIn5ItmYjEx ) *All data is published with the client’s consent.* #verification #sumsub #livecheck #kyc #case
    • IMPORTANT INFO: In a few days, I will switch to completely new code, written from scratch with a new download system, patch building and management system. The Updater will become true 2026 code with "foolproof systems". I'm going to create a Discord server for customers to request new ideas and features. FIRST CUSTOMERS ARE ALREADY USING THE NEW UPDATER ON LIVE SERVERS! Watch this topic for upcoming info because the new updater is around the corner! Yes, you can still use self-update on the previous updater! No, the new updater won't be compatible with the old patch system! A new build is required, but players who already have game files won't have to download the entire patch again! New templates and updates to existing templates are coming soon! Sneak peek:  
    • i used guytis IL project and source. i found in his project there are 3 Client version source... 1,CliExt_H5   --->this one cant be compiled in VS2005,i did know why..is it for H5 client? 2,CliExtNew  --->this one is IL version ,but when i compiled it and use it.player cant login game,MD5Checksum wrong.i check the source code,but not found any hints. 3,L2Server    --->this one for HB client?im not sure...   so my question is what are the differences between these three versions of cliext.dll?how can i fix the issue of the MD5Checksum not matching problem?   01/29/2026 21:04:11.366, [CCliExt::HandleCheckSum] Invalid Checksum[1130415144] vs [-721420287] packet[dd] len[29] sum[2698] key[30] HWID[] Account[]! 01/29/2026 21:04:11.366, SocketLimiter::UserSocketBadunknownprotocol 11111111111 01/29/2026 21:04:11.366, [usersocket]unknown protocol from ip[113.137.149.115]!      
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This community uses essential cookies to function properly. Non-essential cookies and third-party services are used only with your consent. Read our Privacy Policy and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..