Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

So for the past one and a half year I've been developing two forks. One is a C1 and the other is a C4 extenders based one latest acis files downgraded.

 

I am gonna start developing a server that will launch at early May this year and I was wondering if it worths picking one of these clients to do so. C1 would be low rate while c4 would be mid around x35.

 

Let me know your opinion please.

 

Ps: thats what C1 looked like

Edited by Elfosass
Posted (edited)

I don't understand... Isn't it better to take a newer client which has less flaws, and just remove unused UI stuff like L2Classic?

Edited by MiDnEx
Posted

No I did code from scratch though the whole server registration system, character creation and all that Shit that no l2j pack ever did. Even l2jserver themselves.

Posted

Don't see the point.

 

Ok, maybe nostalgia kicks in. It will prolly last for like a week though. 

 

From a strategic POV IMO newer clients, even when downgraded in players access (to mimic older chronicles), simply offer more assets (models, animations, new packets, etc) to work with.

 

I think it's not worth to dwell on how well the past was. If it was THAT good it would have been present, but it isn't. Hence any opinion of it "being" good is just personal bias. 

Posted

Nah we both know people will play it. Other than elite tthere is no other c4 server up these days And elite is just impossible to join and compete.

Posted

Ok, maybe nostalgia kicks in. It will prolly last for like a week though. 

 

Don't think so since, probably, just 1% of the current Lineage2 community was actually playing c1-c4 game version.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Posts

    • try this one instead. The one he shared affects every single NPC/player character in the game, the one I posted only affects player characters  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UtccbD9e50x3WEnQBab2PTZnBHwpcGYM/view?usp=sharing or perhaps i misunderstood; if you could please post a full explanation of the problem you're having with the files, unfortunately i think whatever you're using to translate to english is a bit bad
    • <dailyReward days="28" autoOpen="true" minimumOnlineTimeSeconds="30" oneRewardPerIP="true" resetIfMissDay="true">   For now, I have these settings in the XML—this is the V1 version I created, though I plan to make further improvements over time. Of course, I’ll also add more protections—MAC, HWID, and perhaps others like account-based restrictions—to make it more secure. We can also implement non-tradable items to further enhance the system's security. I’ll keep posting updates and refining both the system and the interface. I might make a video tomorrow; if you look at the top, you'll see the "auto-open" feature can be toggled on or off, allowing users to rely solely on the `.daily` command. Cheers! Note: If I sell it in this state, I’ll provide support and roll out updates to users. I’m not forcing anyone to buy anything; I’d even provide the patch files so that anyone with the necessary skills can add features, modify it, or improve it further.
    • If the problem is that the target is lost, the action of aiming at another character, upon losing collision, does not allow aiming.   This one works as it should, allowing you to target characters
    • MICROTEXT AND WATERMARKS BREAK MOST RENDERINGS Microtext and watermarks aren’t just small decorative details. They are one of the most common reasons a document fails verification, even when it looks decent at first glance. The issue is that these elements are almost impossible to reproduce “by eye.” Microtext requires precise geometry and legibility at a very small size, while a watermark needs the correct density, transparency, and accurate placement relative to other security features. Any deviation becomes obvious during detailed inspection. ▪ What’s most often done wrong: - microtext is drawn too thick or blurry - the watermark is made either too visible or almost invisible - the positioning between microtext and watermark is ignored - the original printing technology isn’t taken into account when choosing density and shape - The stronger the document’s security features, the less room there is for approximation. What matters here isn’t visual similarity, but accurate reproduction of the original technical characteristics. If your document contains microtext and watermarks, this is always an area that requires extra attention. Write to us in DMs. We’ll review your case and point out exactly which details need the highest precision during rendering. › TG: @mustang_service_ms ( https:// t.me/ mustang_service_ms ) › Channel: Mustang Service ( https:// t.me/ +JPpJCETg-xM1NjNl ) #drawing #microtext #photoshop #editing #watermarks
  • 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..