| Ridkacez1 wrote: > Certainly! Here's a more professionally phrased version: > > --- ILY ^_^ > > Your point is well …
|
|
4 |
|
|
| I think view_buffer would be a better variable name.
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
| Before the Map Editor overhaul, when you had an area selected on the map and would right-click an object and select …
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
| I had this same issue a while back (also using NFO). Not sure how but it resolved itself after a long time of me …
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
| I am suggesting a new variable, client.zoom, which would affect the way view is calculated and enforced. By default, …
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
| Yes and no. I expected a non-blurry scale, but not the ugliness I saw. It wasn't until Zane mentioned something about …
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
| I see some new shit since I last been on. Pure dope as expected.. Should be checking in within the next week or so …
|
|
5 |
|
|
