[patch] Use DBC spell bonus data

[qsa]

Hello,

Fields 229-231 in spell.dbc hold spell bonus data since 3.2.0

This patch loads this data instead/in addition to the data in spell_bonus_data table.

Entries in spell_bonus_data table will override the default DBC data.

NOTES:

1) The patch uses existing mSpellBonusMap to load the DBC data into instead of more logical solution of directly using the data from sSpellStore.

Why? much simpler and centralized code. There are not that many spells anyway.

2) DBC provide us data per-effect, while mangos spell system assumes bonuses are per-spell. I guess we'll have to change it someday. Not directly related to the patch.

It works since so far there are no spells with two or more dots/direct effects.

3) Those fields hold only spell bonus data, no AP bonuses. Therefore we still need spell_bonus_data table for some spells and overrides.

4) At the moment mangos loads only first rank of the spell and assigns same bonus to all ranks, this is wrong. Different ranks may have different bonuses. eg: healing touch ( most 10+rank spells actually).

Data loaded from DBC will properly load the bonuses for different ranks, while data loaded from spell_bonus_data will work as it does now.

5) For now, NPC spells are NOT loaded. Do we need this data?

Can be enabled by commenting line 44 in patch.

6) sql cleanup added for redudndant data in spell_bonus_data table - most of entries in there. Simply since the data provided by DBC is accurate and mostly complete.

TODO: properly test, we may have problems with some hardcoded bonuses for spells.

diff against revision 10408

patch : http://paste2.org/p/969586

sql cleanup : http://paste2.org/p/969587

Testing, remarks and suggestions are always welcome/needed

[zergtmn]

Maybe you can find some good ideas here: http://code.google.com/p/trinitycore/source/detail?r=8d26854d19f3247c1216019b14a0ee6ba9d0a591

[qsa]

Maybe you can find some good ideas here: http://code.google.com/p/trinitycore/source/detail?r=8d26854d19f3247c1216019b14a0ee6ba9d0a591

Thanks for linking.

Unfortunately it is unrelated, nothing to do with my patch, beside changing the field name from unknown.

[zergtmn]

Thanks for linking.

Unfortunately it is unrelated, nothing to do with my patch, beside changing the field name from unknown.

Ah I see, I was thinking QAston already implemented it.