We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
http://dayzepoch.com/forum/index.php?/topic/4791-can-you-remove-feature-please/
Can add a toggle to check for building tanktraps, wire, sandbag for allowing roadblocks
also can add a mission toggle to bypass that section altogether.
thoughts from the other devs?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Merge pull request #901 from dayz10k/master
75bb72d
#894 Allow tanktraps on road, global toggle for road building
I still want the tank traps to require a plot pole by default.
Lets just keep it simple and use DZE_BuildOnRoads to control if anything can be built on roads.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Ok...so currently there's really not much that can be built for "tactical" roadblocking. I guess you could roadblock with workbenches.
I'll fix the isonroad check to remove the allowing of tanktraps
Normally no one uses them for that purpose and usually plops them down anywhere and everywhere without regard to tactics.
Requiring the plot pole should make it an actual tactical device as the person has to make plans to even get a pole in the first place.
If server owners want they can enable build on roads with DZE_BuildOnRoads = true then could also disable the plot pole requirement.
DZE_BuildOnRoads = true
Merge pull request #917 from dayz10k/master
2a003be
#894 tweaks after (remove hedgehog from allowed on roads)
dayz10k
No branches or pull requests
http://dayzepoch.com/forum/index.php?/topic/4791-can-you-remove-feature-please/
Can add a toggle to check for building tanktraps, wire, sandbag for allowing roadblocks
also can add a mission toggle to bypass that section altogether.
thoughts from the other devs?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: