when placing stone variants during CTF or CTR. Includes critical DB call fix that is in the unmerged Acid update.
Basically, we had reports that when stone-reinforcing Stone variants (granite, etc.) stone would be doubleconsumed. This is the result of the fix #136 for _under_consumption of stone during CTF. Basically the fix just looked at Material instead of using the ItemStack type. There might be a more elegant way to do this but I've got it on CivTest right now and it's working, but only in Gamemode 0. Gamemode 1 refunds the cost for some reason; given that no-body but ops use gamemode 1, I don't think it's a big deal.
Note on the DB call fix; rourke had introduced a typo while updating the DB calls. This incorporates that fix as I was violently reminded of the bug when I loaded the unpatched version up on Civtest. Civtest's DB has been fixed, and the "fix" introduced here in the hopes it will be merged sooner rather the nlater.
when placing stone variants during CTF or CTR. Includes critical DB call fix that is in the unmerged Acid update.
Basically, we had reports that when stone-reinforcing Stone variants (granite, etc.) stone would be doubleconsumed. This is the result of the fix #136 for _under_consumption of stone during CTF. Basically the fix just looked at Material instead of using the ItemStack type. There might be a more elegant way to do this but I've got it on CivTest right now and it's working, but only in Gamemode 0. Gamemode 1 refunds the cost for some reason; given that no-body but ops use gamemode 1, I don't think it's a big deal.
Note on the DB call fix; rourke had introduced a typo while updating the DB calls. This incorporates that fix as I was violently reminded of the bug when I loaded the unpatched version up on Civtest. Civtest's DB has been fixed, and the "fix" introduced here in the hopes it will be merged sooner rather the nlater.