Limit for rank dont work
BunnyLoveU opened this issue ยท 12 comments
I tried this https://github.com/marcelo-mason/PreciousStones/wiki/Limits but doesnt work for me in 1.8 :,) what should i do? os there any new way to do it?
I dont know how to set a general max limit in the config,i only know how to set a limit for each stone
https://imgur.com/a/3jTkg
i wanna set a max general limit of stones for every rank ,please help
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07l2LJHssqw i uploaded a video
and this http://preciousstones.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Field_Flag_Reference#limits dont works :,)
You'd need to paste your permissions groups and config, otherwise there is no way to check or test. :)
Hi, please pastebin your config, and your permission groups for those limits (not youtube..), pastebin can at worst be copied across as a file and tested, video's cant :)
Are you using a permissions plugin? That is just a config paste of the PS plugin config?
"permission groups for those limits"
I just wanna put a general limit for the stones,i conly can set for example 1-coal 1-emerald and i wanna set 2 emerald and 0 coal (its a example)
Hi, I'm a bit confused by what you mean with a general max limit? If you have set the limits per group (as is obvious in your config), why would you then have a limit for a group that doesn't exist? :)
I thought the initial issue was that those limits weren't working? "but doesnt work for me in 1.8"
a limit, and a general max limit for a group are the same thing, a limit, is a limit .. :)
i wanna set a limit of stones for example 5 stones in general not 1 coal 1 emerald 3 diamond for example
I presume you are looking for a limit 'overall' as opposed to by stone then, I'm not aware of this plugin having that function? The limits are permission based per block type (we don't use that option).
You may need to find an alternate plugin to manage sprcific block count (combined). Personally I don't see the benefit since you can set the 'per block type' limit....
Alternatively you could ask the dev as an enhancement, but his argument may be that the limit for 'per block' is already there, so why bother with combined.