Skip to content
New issue

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

PvP balancing. #1304

Closed
1 of 4 tasks
ryantheleach opened this issue Jul 7, 2016 · 5 comments
Closed
1 of 4 tasks

PvP balancing. #1304

ryantheleach opened this issue Jul 7, 2016 · 5 comments

Comments

@ryantheleach
Copy link
Contributor

ryantheleach commented Jul 7, 2016

Heavy PvP servers often use custom builds of minecraft / mods / plugins in order to re-balance what gear is possible to obtain in Minecraft.

To make Sponge more appealing to those servers, I suggest that API(or mixin configuration) be available that can accomplish the following.

  • Limiting the max natural enchanting level of enchantments.
  • Being able to modify the enchanting pools to remove certain enchants, or enchanting levels completely.
  • Being able to limit what potions are obtainable to players, possibly via removing their recipes, or cancelling their recipe events.
  • Change AttackSpeed attributes back to pre 1.9 behavior

This would make SpongeAPI more attractive to heavy PvP servers who feel the need to re-balance the game or "kits".

@AlphaModder
Copy link
Contributor

This seems like two seperate issues: Modifying the enchantment pool / generation algorithm, and changing the properties of objects supplied by vanilla.

@ryantheleach
Copy link
Contributor Author

@AlphaModder You are correct, it was meant more as a tracking issue much like events or data.

@liach
Copy link
Contributor

liach commented Nov 24, 2017

I suggest putting them in the extra package.

@parlough parlough self-assigned this Nov 24, 2017
@parlough
Copy link
Contributor

Part of this will covered by attributes which is already an open PR by Kashike. It's on my list to update and merge.

@ImMorpheus
Copy link
Contributor

Closed by #2085 #1898 #1954

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants