llTeleport(key agent, vector global_coordinate);

Since this feature is probably the single most requested, yet never mentioned feature, I feel it would be a good time to suggest it.

llTeleport(key agent, vector global_coordinate);
Arguments:
agent - Agent to teleport
global_coordinate - The global coordinate of the position to teleport, as expressed by llGetRegionCorner() + llGetPos().

If global_coordinate is in the same simulator, or less than 300m away, teleport directly as, if using the 'sit target trick'.

The user would recieve the standard offer-teleport dialog.

-Adam

Hmmm, could be useful. Of course, it's another exploit to add to the system. To add some protection against teleporting to unauthorized places a SummonAvatar variation could be interesting:

SummonAvatar( key kAvatar, string sMessage )

Functionally identical to "Offer Teleport". Has the advantage that the person owning the destination land can control whether people can tp into it or not.

Also, has the advantage of being consistent with client Avatar API, so internal technical implementation is probably fairly rapid.

What do you think?

Azelda

Definetly can see your point there, unfortunately, it also kill's a few potential uses for it. (such as people making list's of cool places to visit, and offering instant teleportantion to them.).

Keeping people out of your plot is hard, if you cant use say 'this' if it was ever implemented, the sit-trick still lets you, there's other ways as well.

The best way to keep someone out, is access controls, scanners' doing llTeleportAgentHome / llEjectFromLand against lists, or groups.

Summon avatar is only really feasible when we have a much better method for object<-->object communication. (email doesnt cut it, while we have silly timeslices.)

Prehaps (although definetely making it harder to implement, so I'm hesitent about suggesting it.) would be a permission/checkbox for the land. 'Allow teleporting to this parcel'.

-Adam

I've thought about this too. Its hard to make it un-greifable, but I don't think thats really possible or should be worried about when the helpfull uses of it outweigh the potential abuses.

I doubt many would actualy use it as an abuse anyway since you can just use the sit trick to get most places.

The only thing that should be made sure of is that it can't be used to circuimvent(sp) land bans, ie so you can't teleport into land you're baned from.

Other than that I don't think people will have problems with others abusing it as Adam said you can just use other scripts and such to prevent that.

I would also like to suggest a rotation value to it though so we can have all the funcationality we currently have with sittarget.

So I suggest something like llTeleport(Key agent, vector global_coord, rotation agent_facing);

That way we can still have them face a certain way when teleported.

Other precautions you could take is permissions for it PERMISSION_TELEPORT and having it only work if the object is land that the owner of the object owns, like llTeleportAgentHome.

I think with those two things it would prevent alot of abuse. If not the land owner thing then atleast the Permission, being randomly teleported places would suck.

Well... the teleport function is actually a great opportunity to replace sithack. Once teleport has been in place a few months, nerf sithack down to 10m offset max, and that's one major exploit gone.

Of course, if the teleport system itself introduces an equivalent exploit to sithack then we're back to square zero

Azelda

Dont you dare Some of us vehicle builders use sittargets greater than 10 m offsets in legitimate uses.

How about just picking a telehub? That's certainly ungreifable.

Uh, in beta we could teleport anywhere, at a cost. It was removed, and for good reason.

Telehubs suck. I'm sorry, but they do, I don't mind using them when I want to, but when I want to get to a destination right away, telehubs suck. And having llTeleport take you to a telehub would just be, eh, anoying.

Also, what was the good reason for taking away direct teleports? Most people liked it other than having to pay money. Sometimes you want to or need to get to a place quick.

I'm rethinking my Permission, only have it ask for Permissions if its over 300 meters away. So that way you don't get asking Permissions every teleporter for say a small town teleporter, but you do get it say if someone wants to teleport you to Jessie from the Welcome Area.

*concurs with Oz*