The_Game_Master

Very true.

I know there was a command bt full something and would show everything but i just can't remember it atm.

Just a quick question.

How can you reverse a pull?

I think this script needs to be updated.

Can anybody confirm that this is not working anymore?

-- Fire bomb script

DELETE FROM `creature_ai_scripts` WHERE `creature_id` = 18225;
INSERT INTO `creature_ai_scripts`(`creature_id`,`event_type`,`event_inverse_phase_mask`,`event_chance`
,`event_flags`,`event_param1`,`event_param2`,`event_param3`,`event_param4`,`action1_type`,`action1_param1`
,`action1_param2`,`action1_param3`,`action2_type`,`action2_param1`,`action2_param2`,`action2_param3`,
`action3_type`,`action3_param1`,`action3_param2`,`action3_param3`,`comment`) VALUES
(18225,11,0,100,0,0,0,0,0,11,31961,0,4,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,'Fire Bomb Target cast Fire Bomb on Spawn'),
(18225,0,100,5000,0,5000,0,0,0,37,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,'Fire Bomb Target Despawn');

UPDATE creature_template SET AIName = 'EventAI', ScriptName='' WHERE `entry` = 18225;

I was wondering, couldn't PetTameFailureReason be extracted from a dbc file?

Just a quick question. Under how mutch load this patch needs to be tested?

I works ok. Allready tested it.

Hello,

i recently got a crash on Spell.cpp line "ASSERT( Caster != NULL && info != NULL );" on linux.

I was wondering why do we use these 2 ASSERTS here

    ASSERT( Caster != NULL && info != NULL );
   ASSERT( info == sSpellStore.LookupEntry( info->Id ) && "`info` must be pointer to sSpellStore element");

As far as i know in the release method the ASSERT command, or more commonly used as small letters assert is skipped.

Why do we need them, and why can't we just use small caps "assert" there?

Or just better remove them all.

I used

LDFLAGS=-L/usr/local/lib
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/lib
CXXFLAGS=-I/usr/local/include

autoreconf -ifv
autoconf

CFLAGS="-fno-strict-aliasing -O2" \\
CFLAGS="-fno-delete-null-pointer-checks -O2" \\
CXXFLAGS="-fno-strict-aliasing -O2" \\
../configure \\

to compile, so i'm guessing that the compiler didn't ignore all the aserts, or that line is used for something else inside the code and thats just stupid. What's the difference between "assert" and "ASSERT"?

Anybody got any ideea with what "SendUpdateObjectToAllExcept" was replaced with?

../../../src/game/OutdoorPvPEP.cpp: In member function 'virtual bool OutdoorPvPObjectiveEP_EWT::Update(uint32)':
../../../src/game/OutdoorPvPEP.cpp:109: error: 'class GameObject' has no member named 'SendUpdateObjectToAllExcept'
../../../src/game/OutdoorPvPEP.cpp:114: error: 'class GameObject' has no member named 'SendUpdateObjectToAllExcept'
../../../src/game/OutdoorPvPEP.cpp: In member function 'virtual bool OutdoorPvPObjectiveEP_NPT::Update(uint32)':
../../../src/game/OutdoorPvPEP.cpp:280: error: 'class GameObject' has no member named 'SendUpdateObjectToAllExcept'
../../../src/game/OutdoorPvPEP.cpp:285: error: 'class GameObject' has no member named 'SendUpdateObjectToAllExcept'
../../../src/game/OutdoorPvPEP.cpp: In member function 'virtual bool OutdoorPvPObjectiveEP_CGT::Update(uint32)':
../../../src/game/OutdoorPvPEP.cpp:445: error: 'class GameObject' has no member named 'SendUpdateObjectToAllExcept'
../../../src/game/OutdoorPvPEP.cpp:450: error: 'class GameObject' has no member named 'SendUpdateObjectToAllExcept'
../../../src/game/OutdoorPvPEP.cpp: In member function 'virtual bool OutdoorPvPObjectiveEP_PWT::Update(uint32)':
../../../src/game/OutdoorPvPEP.cpp:611: error: 'class GameObject' has no member named 'SendUpdateObjectToAllExcept'
../../../src/game/OutdoorPvPEP.cpp:616: error: 'class GameObject' has no member named 'SendUpdateObjectToAllExcept'
make[3]: *** [OutdoorPvPEP.o] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory `/root/mangos/

http://github.com/mangos/mangos/commit/3209e0a7dfaf44d6db43c02f985a89a4b99c9437

What are the advantages to switching to the latest libmpq?

I think it's rather funny.

Retested on a clean mangos core.

Does not remove http://www.wowhead.com/?spell=642

It does remove http://www.wowhead.com/?spell=498

I don't think RemoveAurasDueToMechanic is the best way to deal with this spell.

This is a database/scriptdev2 problem.

After you kill whatever it is that you need to kill, the gameobjects or npc's, in case they are allready there will spawn.

Bump! This is not fixed yet!

I knew of 1 day as well.

No, it does not remove abilityes like http://www.wowhead.com/?spell=642

My bad, i didn't read the coments, just reviewed the patch.

Man, aura 262 is allso used here. http://www.wowhead.com/?spell=52437 You can't rename an antire aura only for one spell.

I think you're the proper man to finish this patch.

As far as i read i understood that you implemented some random code into the sended/received pachets. Is that correct?

Acually this patch will do nothing more then just completely remove the damage part from Hammer of Wrath.

I think pItem->SendUpdateToPlayer( _player ); was good enough as a name.

Ok sorry. :lol:

You missed the part when i said that it required some extra functions for master.

I think it requires some extra functions, but with the current bg2db patch in master this should not be needed anymore.

Thank you!

3k/year for a opensource project? wtf? What a nerve!