unlimited pickaxe #1702

New Issue

aliwoto · 2022-04-08T00:08:22Z

aliwoto commented

2022-04-08 00:08:22 +00:00

steps to reproduce

Set the replacer to a node which needs mesemaker priv to be placed (for example "Addjustable vaccuming tube".
Then try to use the replacer somewhere (works on any node).

Unexpected thing is that replacer will dig the node, but won't place anything in that position; this way it will just act as "unlimited pickaxe"... without getting any damage itself

I tried to test this on other nodes (or rather, all available nodes (TNT included)); seems like for the time being only nodes which need mesemaker priv works for this; also after seeing xp_redo's code, now I'm sure all tools which dig immediately won't give any xp (including replacer)

Not sure what's the difference of mesemaker nodes and TNT... seems like there is a completely separated checker for "tools which are not allowed to be placed on server" (even before checker for protection)

### steps to reproduce Set the replacer to a node which needs `mesemaker` priv to be placed (for example "Addjustable vaccuming tube". Then try to use the replacer somewhere (works on any node). Unexpected thing is that replacer will dig the node, but won't place anything in that position; this way it will just act as "unlimited pickaxe"... without getting any damage itself I tried to test this on other nodes (or rather, all available nodes (TNT included)); seems like for the time being only nodes which need mesemaker priv works for this; also after seeing xp_redo's code, now I'm sure all tools which dig immediately won't give any xp (including replacer) Not sure what's the difference of mesemaker nodes and TNT... seems like there is a completely separated checker for "tools which are not allowed to be placed on server" (even before checker for protection)

AliasAlreadyTaken added the

1. kind/bug

2. prio/critical

labels 2022-04-08 00:09:08 +00:00

flux commented

2022-04-08 00:27:43 +00:00

The node replacer already is an unlimited, instant pickaxe. I use it for mining nether basalt/ivory for that reason.

AliasAlreadyTaken commented

2022-04-08 00:33:50 +00:00

If the replacer makes a better mining tool than all the others together, then there's no point ever making a pickaxe?

In this case, the replacer needs rebalancing.

If the replacer makes a better mining tool than all the others together, then there's no point ever making a pickaxe? In this case, the replacer needs rebalancing.

AliasAlreadyTaken added the

1. kind/balancing

label 2022-04-08 00:33:59 +00:00

flux commented

2022-04-08 00:36:01 +00:00

On second thought, this actually is worse than the exploit that's fundamental to the tool existing in the first place.

On second thought, this actually *is* worse than the exploit that's fundamental to the tool existing in the first place.

flux commented

2022-04-08 00:39:29 +00:00

the tool 100% needs to not "take" a node if it cannot "place" a node, no matter what the other considerations are.
As a further step, perhaps the replacer shouldn't be able to replace a node that's on a higher "level" than the replacement?

1. the tool 100% needs to not "take" a node if it cannot "place" a node, no matter what the other considerations are. 1. As a further step, perhaps the replacer shouldn't be able to replace a node that's on a higher "level" than the replacement?

AliasAlreadyTaken commented

2022-04-08 00:43:28 +00:00

Or we could make the replacer only work in an owned area. That would rule out use in mining (unless the player took the extra step to make the area theirs temporarily. It would also rule out use in the nether, where it is most valuable and where no areas can exist.

flux commented

2022-04-08 01:23:53 +00:00

hm.

only working in areas that you own would also keep people from digging lots of things over a large swath of area w/out removing/replacing the areas regularly, which seems desirable.

refusing to replace nodes when you can't "take" anything would also prevent people from using them to build on top of water, whether the area is protected or not. i've got a feeling that my "ocean building" update doesn't take the replacer into account.

further problems:

use an apple as the template. such a node can only be placed "on top" of another node, allowing you to replace any node that's not directly over a solid node to be replaced w/out cost

hm. only working in areas that you own would also keep people from digging lots of things over a large swath of area w/out removing/replacing the areas regularly, which seems desirable. refusing to replace nodes when you can't "take" anything would also prevent people from using them to build on top of water, whether the area is protected or not. i've got a feeling that my "ocean building" update doesn't take the replacer into account. further problems: use an apple as the template. such a node can only be placed "on top" of another node, allowing you to replace any node that's not directly over a solid node to be replaced w/out cost

flux commented

2022-04-08 01:27:24 +00:00

@AliasAlreadyTaken my "ocean builder" update doesn't seem to be live on the test server even? I assume because of that crash earlier? Which should be fixed? #1545

AliasAlreadyTaken commented

2022-04-08 17:40:29 +00:00

It's live on the testserver now, I'll test it this weekend

flux self-assigned this 2022-04-15 01:29:39 +00:00

flux added the

3. source/integration

label 2022-04-17 20:28:19 +00:00

flux commented

2022-06-25 23:06:11 +00:00

https://github.com/fluxionary/minetest-replacer_redo

i've been using it locally and it seems stable.

https://github.com/fluxionary/minetest-replacer_redo i've been using it locally and it seems stable.

flux added this to the flux's TODO list project 2022-07-02 20:33:08 +00:00

flux added the

4. step/discussion

label 2022-09-20 20:05:13 +00:00

AliasAlreadyTaken commented

2023-01-05 11:07:54 +00:00

With the discussion around restricting builders flight to owned areas in #3453 we could use a similar mechanic to restrict the replacer.

This would cause the replacer to become a builders tool, instead of a nether/mining/everywhere exploit.

With the discussion around restricting builders flight to owned areas in #3453 we could use a similar mechanic to restrict the replacer. This would cause the replacer to become a builders tool, instead of a nether/mining/everywhere exploit.

👍 1

flux referenced this issue

2023-02-26 21:44:38 +00:00

AspireMint reports: [Replacer] If you try to repla ... #3899

flux added

4. step/ready to QA test

and removed

4. step/discussion

labels 2023-03-04 20:04:10 +00:00

flux commented

2023-03-04 20:05:34 +00:00

i've added all of the restricted mesecons devices to the replacer blacklist: 8c7c894ac0

restricting use of the replacer to ones own protected areas will become another issue.

i've added all of the restricted mesecons devices to the replacer blacklist: https://gitea.your-land.de/your-land/yl_commons/commit/8c7c894ac00b0d18a3ca8df21b8d86719a865715 restricting use of the replacer to ones own protected areas will become another issue.

👍 1

flux referenced this issue

2023-03-04 20:06:17 +00:00

restrict usage of replacer to player's own protection areas #3932

AliasAlreadyTaken added this to the 1.1.118 milestone 2023-04-13 19:25:15 +00:00

AliasAlreadyTaken commented

2023-04-13 19:28:56 +00:00

QA

There are also blocks on a blacklist on "nonmovables" by pistons. Do they overlap?

However, blacklist works

QA There are also blocks on a blacklist on "nonmovables" by pistons. Do they overlap? However, blacklist works

AliasAlreadyTaken added the

ugh/QA OK

label 2023-04-13 19:29:02 +00:00

flux commented

2023-04-14 04:10:16 +00:00

There are also blocks on a blacklist on "nonmovables" by pistons. Do they overlap?

there is certainly overlap, but not because the semantics are the same. there's not need to make both lists identical, or one a subset of the other, at least in the context of this issue.

> There are also blocks on a blacklist on "nonmovables" by pistons. Do they overlap? there is certainly overlap, but not because the semantics are the same. there's not need to make both lists identical, or one a subset of the other, at least in the context of this issue.

👍 1

flux added

5. result/fixed

and removed

4. step/ready to QA test

labels 2023-04-25 20:28:07 +00:00

flux removed this from the flux's TODO list project 2023-04-25 20:28:11 +00:00

flux removed their assignment 2023-04-25 20:28:13 +00:00

flux commented

2023-04-25 20:28:28 +00:00

this is live

flux closed this issue

2023-04-25 20:28:29 +00:00

Bla referenced this issue

2023-04-26 08:39:36 +00:00

niceride reports: 'Replacing nodes of type "pipe ... #4289

niceride commented

2023-04-26 08:46:53 +00:00

Breaks all legitimate use of mesemaker priv and node replacer to aid alignment in layout. Seems like the "nuclear option" instead of fixing the bug?

AliasAlreadyTaken commented

2023-04-26 13:16:52 +00:00

Breaks all legitimate use of mesemaker priv and node replacer to aid alignment in layout. Seems like the "nuclear option" instead of fixing the bug?

This is entirely not true. Expecially not "all legitimate use of mesemaker priv and node replacer" is broken. Your usecase creates a non-intended result: The replacer is able to create a state where tubes connect to a different machine part when the should not.

The "nuclear option" you are talking about is the minimum solution we can apply. Feel free to suggest a different (technical) solution and we will investigate it.

> Breaks all legitimate use of mesemaker priv and node replacer to aid alignment in layout. Seems like the "nuclear option" instead of fixing the bug? This is entirely not true. Expecially not "all legitimate use of mesemaker priv and node replacer" is broken. Your usecase creates a non-intended result: The replacer is able to create a state where tubes connect to a different machine part when the should not. The "nuclear option" you are talking about is the minimum solution we can apply. Feel free to suggest a different (technical) solution and we will investigate it.

flux referenced this issue

2023-04-29 00:12:30 +00:00

niceride reports: 'Replacing nodes of type "pipe ... #4289

flux commented

2023-04-29 00:54:09 +00:00

Breaks all legitimate use of mesemaker priv and node replacer to aid alignment in layout. Seems like the "nuclear option" instead of fixing the bug?

This is entirely not true. Expecially not "all legitimate use of mesemaker priv and node replacer" is broken. Your usecase creates a non-intended result: The replacer is able to create a state where tubes connect to a different machine part when the should not.

The "nuclear option" you are talking about is the minimum solution we can apply. Feel free to suggest a different (technical) solution and we will investigate it.

see what i wrote in #4289. it's possible create a mechanic to blacklist nodes dependent on player privileges, but not easily, if you don't want to break other things.

if you just want to rotate nodes once placed, the screwdriver/rhotator should work. if the screwdriver doesn't work, that's what we should fix. if you want rotation to not trigger callbacks that disconnect tubes, we should instead allow tubes to connect to more sides of the machines.

> > Breaks all legitimate use of mesemaker priv and node replacer to aid alignment in layout. Seems like the "nuclear option" instead of fixing the bug? > > This is entirely not true. Expecially not "all legitimate use of mesemaker priv and node replacer" is broken. Your usecase creates a non-intended result: The replacer is able to create a state where tubes connect to a different machine part when the should not. > > The "nuclear option" you are talking about is the minimum solution we can apply. Feel free to suggest a different (technical) solution and we will investigate it. see what i wrote in #4289. it's possible create a mechanic to blacklist nodes dependent on player privileges, but not easily, if you don't want to break other things. if you just want to rotate nodes once placed, the screwdriver/rhotator should work. if the screwdriver doesn't work, that's what we should fix. if you want rotation to not trigger callbacks that disconnect tubes, we should instead allow tubes to connect to more sides of the machines.

Sign in to join this conversation.