Welcome to OwlGaming Community

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


MindScape00 last won the day on December 17 2016

MindScape00 had the most liked content!


About MindScape00

  • Rank
    Veteran Member
  • Birthday 11/11/1995

MTA Information

  • MTA Account
  • Factions
    Vinewood Gardens
  • Characters
    Klarrisa Forrey | Alive
    Karolina Rae | Alive
    Jose Moreno | Alive
    Samuel Johnson | Jail
    Adriana Pearce | Dead

Profile Information

  • Gender

Contact Methods

  • Steam ID
    jacburn1 / MindScape
  • Skype
  • Discord

Recent Profile Visitors

2,857 profile views
  1. Mostly for the physical button, and also for the ability for players with the button to manage the permissions on the gate themselves.
  2. Name: R35PECT Comment: Nothing good so far really.
  3. Tried it once but as a 'pothole' - the effects are still too insane - watch that gif up there - who hits a speed bump and flys 300 yards?
  4. A large portion of them fixes aren't needed - is it possible to chop out the shit we no need? So basically just the palo fix?
  5. Basically yea. Preferably created just like a generic as "Name:ModelID" and then right-click and "Use" to activate or such, not really with the actual keypad interface tho (I mean - I wouldn't with keypad, cuz it could be a button or anything)
  6. What other bugs does it fix? @yannickboy15 Also, can I disabled that mapping then that tried to fix it? Doesn't really work.
  7. Name: R35PECT Bid: $350,000 Comment: I offer this as starting bid?
  8. #Bump Also, @Strobe, would something like @Hurley's suggestion (below) be possible (and would it need to be part of your system or could it be separate, idk - just thought they sounded like they'd be part of the same system all together)
  9. No - it'll activate from the real world, not your inventory. Think of it as a switch that you can click on and the gate opens. It'd be customizable via object Properties -> 'Use' to determine who can access it, and provides a physical activator for a gate. It wouldn't replace /gate or anything, just adds another option to create new unique gates.
  10. It's a quick and easy script edit to add this in. Furthermore, it's not as much targeted at actual garages for houses (although it would be used there also to enforce rules already in place, and solve issues from even occurring like that) as it is for entire properties, like farms, which have multiple interiors spread out across the land, or other compounds, ect. I could probably whip up a dirty version of this in a few minutes, but it'd take them probably just as much time to switch the functions out for newer ones (my old owl leak has outdated sql functions compared to now) as it would to just write it all up themselves. It's literally one of the easiest scripts I think I've suggested, tbh. EDIT: Plus, this stops people from buying garages as temporary storage solutions to stash shit, without buying the house, not sure how big of a problem that actually is, but good if it fixes it EDIT2: Shouldn't be voting 'no' simply because you think other scripts are more important. At that point, lets just vote no on every script suggestion until we get something important done, like a new drug system or whatever?
  11. Script Suggestion What would be the name of the script(s)?- Object to open Gates What kind of script(s) are you suggesting?- Items What is the suggestion?- Add a new object, that when placed, can be paired with a gate. When the object is 'used' it then toggles the gate open (and closed if the gate isn't an auto-closing one). The object should respect properties of the "Use" so that it can be set up to only work for certain people / factions / ect also (and that stuff is already there in the placed object properties, so no point in adding in a separate permissions for the button otherwise). What are the advantages?- +Can make new, unique gates, that can be used for a multitude of uses where /gate and it's current system can't really handle it. +Gives players the ability to have more control over their gates (i.e., can put a button, and modify on the fly who can use it, w/o an admin changing the entire /gate - for example, access doors) +Gives some new unique abilities to have gates that are more hidden, not simply by /gate, but still possible to find an activate, and create things then like escape rooms, with clues, ect. What are the disadvantages?- -None, I don't really think? Possibly hard to set up connecting the objects, but I can think of it in 2 ways; when the object is set down, you can specify what gate it uses via ID, or, in the /gates menu, add a new option for "With Gate Activator" and then the ability to specify it's world ID or such. Do you have any resources to support our scripters in making said suggestion?- No How would you go about implementing this idea?- Add in new object (or adjust current generic system to support this instead) that, when 'used' from the real world (not inventory), it activates a gate. It'd be easiest IMO to then add in a right-click menu function on the item for Admins (maybe MT also?) to 'Define Gate' and it pops up a simple UI with a text entry to enter the ID of the gate it's connected to (Also possibly with the ability to define multiple, so that side-by-side gates would both be activated, for example, so like, if I enter "11,12" it activates 11 and 12). From here, players can adjust the 'Use' in the 'Properties' of the object, to control who can open it, ect. The object should activate the gate no matter what the password on the gate is set to, and the gate itself would still work with /gate, but could easily be set instead to a random password or exciter query string and such to "disable" (because either no one has the proper password, or meets the query requirements) /gate on it.
  12. This solves lots of problems from the start instead of letting it get to a point where an admin has to jump in and do things. It also allows us to put interiors up for sale for "$0" and have the cost factored into the main interior of the entire place, without people coming along and getting it for free. Scripts that fix issues and limit the need for Admin intervention are what we've always wanted, right? This is it, and you're saying it's not needed? *shrug* Also - going through refunds and such for players is a hassle for admins and the player also, so by doing this we can prevent that as well.
  13. No affect on currently owned interiors. There'd also be no automatic detection for sub-interiors in my idea. Int's owned within other ints isn't really that big of a problem, this is mostly for property that should be connected, but multiple ints are used (i.e. - you buy a house, and there's a sub-int for a bedroom - it won't automatically detect and set any as a master here, the only way a master will be set is if an admin / MT comes along and sets it up as such).
  14. Script Suggestion What would be the name of the script(s)?- Connected Interiors (Must own one to own the other) What kind of script(s) are you suggesting?- Properties What is the suggestion?- So basically, garages and other sub-interiors have always just sat there as an interior that others can buy, without owning the main interior usually. We have rules to say that you can't own a garage attached to a house without owning the actual house, but there are so many other cases where interiors should all be apart of one bigger property, but there's no way to regulate that. My idea is to fix this with a script. The idea is very simple: You can set interiors as a 'master' or another, and in-order to purchase an interior that has a master set, you must own the master interior. - i.e., Interiors 222 and 333 are both on a property - 222 is the main building, and 333 is a garage beside it. You can set 222 as the 'master' interior over 333. Then, if you try and purchase interior 333, it'll give you a message somewhere along the lines of "You must own the main interior of the property (222) first in order to purchase this interior." if you don't own 222. If you do own 222, it'll let you purchase it as normal. I don't think there would be any need to put the restrictions on player-to-player sales tho, as there may be situations where say, one person is renting another interior on their property to another person, or such. This way that is still possible. Furthermore, I don't think there's any need to perform checks in the future over an interior's master after purchase - if they lose or sell the main int, the sub-int will still belong to them, but the future owner may purchase the main and 'evict' the sub-int person then and claim ownership. What are the advantages?- +Allow interiors to be connected, thus creating full 'properties' instead of just single interiors all separate +Rather simple system to use +Solves issues with interiors and properties and their ownership before they begin, creating less admin interference in RP, as the script is there to enforce and regulate the rule. What are the disadvantages?- -None that I can really think of - someone might get confused "Why can't I own this!?" but it's an easy answer. Do you have any resources to support our scripters in making said suggestion?- Nope, but I think it should be a pretty simple addition How would you go about implementing this idea?- 1. Create a new command, "/setintmaster [ID]", have it save that interior (setting it to 0 will remove any master, leaving it blank gives syntax response / information) 2. Modify the purchase function of interiors to include a new, very simple, check to see if it has a master, and, if it does, if the person trying to buy it is the owner of that master interior. If not, fail the purchase, give the error message. If they are, finalize just as normal.
  15. Should just post them already m8, I wanna see ur condos and shit cuz maybe they're good enough to become Official Ints if you want