Page 1 of 1

*settings secret

Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:42 pm
by wes773
Thanks to mark420, there is now a new way to do *settings. Mark told me that if you use *set 0 0 0 , you can set settings without going through the menu. It took us a few minutes to figure out exactly how it works. First, visit,

http://www.tuwr.net/tuwr/pmwiki.php?n=Settings.Settings

Take a look at the links on that page to see what I mean.

in *set 0 0 0, the first number is for the Menu selection. For example, for world rules settings, you use 0. for economy settings, you use 1, and so on.

The second number is the setting that you want to change. So if you click on world rules settings, setting the second one to 5 would mean that you want to adjust "crows."
Settings that are "unused" are also counted, so you can adjust those by accident if you count wrong.

The third number is what you want to set that setting to. 0 0 0 sets world settings / vehicles / 0 ( players cannot change thier vehicle and vehicle is reset to 1 on login )

As far as vehicles and robocrows go, I haven't figured this out yet, (possibly a fourth digit?) I'll post when I figure this out.


What does this mean for the game? Well, it means that people who have client crashes when they use *settings (me) can set settings without a crash. It also means that world owners can script settings to change based on player input. Mark and I came up with a few ideas that I can't mention here. Well, I hope this helps somebody else.

Edit: I've changed some stuff, if you find something that's wrong, please correct me and I'll edit it further.

Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:11 am
by Fooli
It's hardly secret, but it's also hardly well-documented. I can't find any official documents for the process, but yes, world owners can change settings via command line (ie chat, as you're doing). I think morb understands this, zaroba prolly too...

The bigger issue is why your client crashes when you use *settings... that ain't normal. I'd suggest posting a bug report, if you haven't already done so, but I doubt mit will look at it any time soon.

f