Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Well, Mobius used our base of l2junity (from free version).  That means only we did good job (as we do now) because he went with it into private as fast it was possible to start again l2jmobius (with new source). 

It's up to him if he can fix critical issues which were in free version, make it stable and move on with missing features.

 

Our free files are accessable to everyone. You can check and compare it with old mobius files to see differences and make your own opinion about this.

Posted

I used your sources after a couple (former?), team members of L2jUnity prohibited me to do so.

You stoped and publicated your project. After I went private, you decided to do it as well...

Good luck working without your team. At least I am used to work alone.

 

I can give some pointers to anyone that wants to test the your free files.

Try skill enchanting, using Sweeper skill, enter a buff zone like Fantasy Isle.

 

UnAfraid said in his L2J post that the files where not perfect, but damn...

all your pro-talk all those months is proven shit after seen these things.

Posted

It's only your problem that you are working alone. And you can check https://forums.l2junity.org/index.php?board=9.0#forum and see what was fixed already. 

You just involved "EXPLOIT" in one of your commits after few days when you started to use our files.... how more bad can you just be lol. Not even talking that there was exploit in mobius files from ertheia for several months...

You would be still without any single working crap if we didn't share it. Just be glad for it because you can't do any simple feature or rework by yourself.

Posted

Just stop the popcorn topic :/

 

Yes, the free shared version suffers big rework side effect, but nothing you can't fix in a few if you have bug report, which we lacked.

 

Yes there is/was missing features, but that's our choice mostly. There was no point doing enchanting till we fully fixed skill format, behavior and all. And I saw you didn't even notice support for it.

Posted

As I said Snehulak, you where full of shit and still are.

Your posts so far in mxc combined with the files released by UnAfraid proves it.

 
There nothing more to be said from my side.
Keep up the awesome work...
:troll:

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

    • <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
    • GoldRush launches tomorrow! July 18 16:00 GMT+3 Europe / International Register your account in the website, connect wallet and be ready to dominate!
  • 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..