Schmoozerd

Gnomeregan, Emi Shortfuse in comment: "Blastmaster Emi Shortfuse says: Get this, Caverndeep Ambusher off of me!" Packet sent with $n (and this structure) More details can be found in gnomeGrubisThermodraht.rar, that is: http://paste2.org/p/981142

"Another wall of text, that about 4 users will read." "Sorry for "bit long" post," No, really, here are many guys who take glimpses at the code, but don't really know what the code is about, but these "long, stupid, boring" texts are the most intersting things around in mangos forums at all, because they show where the _problems_ are, and what solutions could be used, that's by far more intersting then a "added patch for recent rev" post. So, what I am saying: Keep up these long posts, they are intersting for all of us who are interested in design questions And btw thank you for your work, mmaps are both important and interesting!

What bug does the patch fix? What features does the patch add? * Implements functionality to actually use a (no player) target for MonsterSay (and similar) I.e. $n will now work for Creature-Targets * Remove old redundant Corpse::Say, Creature::Say, etc.. For which repository revision was the patch created? - 10536, merges and compiles fine with 10637 - 10757 only rough tested (not tested yet with sd2 changes) Is there a thread in the bug report section or at lighthouse? If yes, please add a link to the thread. no Who has been writing this patch? Please include either forum user names or email addresses. me Only rough tested! (Rev 10757) Patch http://paste2.org/p/1100350 or Incremental: http://paste2.org/p/1100349 ( (1)remove obsolete code | (2)implement unit-target | (3)a bit cleanup related to the changes) Remaining open: Player::PlayerSay (etc) are quite similar, but they have a different Opcode, so I didn't touch them, but this could also be done.. (SD2-patch for testing) http://paste2.org/p/981820 Old-Version http://paste2.org/p/986157 (corrected typo found by NoFantasy) (10458) http://paste2.org/p/992483 (10502) http://paste2.org/p/1003469 (normal) - http://paste2.org/p/1003477(incremental)

perhaps I should have described the - in my opinion - bug more detailed: in dungeons, if we have three units, A B C, where A->IsHostileTo(B) but not B->IsHostileTo(A), and A attacks C, if then A comes in range to B, B is set into combat, and evades on next Tick, and I think this is a bug and rabbits clearly should attack:

Mangos Version: 10438 Custom Patches: no related SD2 Version: ~1815 Database Name and Version : udb392 How it SHOULD work: "I don't like anyone who doesn't like me" How it DOES work: "Whom I like doesn't depend on who likes me" (a bit stupid) Example: Faction 119 and 63 is asymmetric: 63->IsHostileTo(119), but not 119->IsHostileTo(63) This results in ugly aggro bugs (EnterCombat, not call AttackStart, leave combat on next tick) You can construct the bug with: in dungeons, if we have three units, A B C, where A->IsHostileTo(B) but not B->IsHostileTo(A), and A attacks C, if then A comes in range to B, B is set into combat, and evades on next Tick, and I think this is a bug Suggestion was to make the IsHostileTo - faction check to be symmetric, but removed (as stated by vladimir it is the wrong way to handle this thing)

A small idea about the abs problem: perhaps you should ask vladimir about a new platform specific define MANGOS_ABS which replaces all std::abs or abs functions (and works for int and float) ? Movement in Logs: Monsters _do_ get a couple of waypoints, but I doubt that they are because of pathfinding, but I had the impression that they are sent due to 'normal' interpolation between waypoints. However that this can work the MovementGenerator needs the list of the next waypoints, because otherwise it couldn't interpolate Also the interpolation waypoints are sent in some other format (kind of diffs, they are just parsed there), so that's no surprise they weren't working I'll give you an example: http://paste2.org/p/978740

yes, I am sure btw, magnetic pull are: feugen should cast http://www.wowhead.com/spell=54517 with himself and stalagg as targets and then they should make their tanks cast 54485 at the other boss

this is right ofc, but not a reason to introduce more, new "bad"things

I think there is no need for you to resume work with thaddius I've everything except the missing mangos spells (and ofc they have some influence on the way to code the things proper) My version atm looks nice for me, except the Tesla have a 'strange' UpdateAI, because the Aggro-management needs special treatment The tesla coils should be spawned by DB To the way it should work (visual) Chain from Tesla to Add if exceed 60y, then remove chain, do Emote-text * start casting shocks * if add back to 60y reapply chain, stop casting shocks * if wipe, add resets, reapply chain then Edit: http://paste2.org/p/955134 my sd2 script, I am already quite happy with it, but without more feedback regarding these chain-spells I cannot 'finish' it ;(

nvm - wrong foot this morning ;(

perhaps naive, but isn't this depending on the movement of the target (players mostly) If you checked on their movement, if they jump, go into water, teleport, blink, etc and in this case trigger a new calculation of the path of the chaser, it should work well

Description of the feature? Put a new param to SelectHostileTarget to prefer enemies in MeleeRange, also add return value depending on what kind of enemy was selected For which repository revision was the patch created? 10439 Is there a thread in the bug report section or at lighthouse? no Who has been writing this patch? me New version - totally lacks support of good control which mobs should behave this way- however the internal backend is much better I think http://paste2.org/p/1400454 * Needed for bosses: Lurker Below (my testing patch: http://paste2.org/p/975486) Ragnaros, Thaddius, Ouro, Murmur, Al'ar, Archimonde, Kologarn, perhaps a few from Uludar or newer Comments welcome -- history http://paste2.org/p/975479 http://paste2.org/p/1385211 (reuploaded version, no idea what this actually was Edit: Most of this patch is added to master. The main problems: Which mobs should prefer melee targets when is still open, and for me still unknown how to handle best.

the last lines of scriptedEffect: // normal DB scripted effect if (!unitTarget) return; DEBUG_FILTER_LOG(LOG_FILTER_SPELL_CAST, "Spell ScriptStart spellid %u in EffectScriptEffect ", m_spellInfo->Id); m_caster->GetMap()->ScriptsStart(sSpellScripts, m_spellInfo->Id, m_caster, unitTarget); So it should be possible to assing a DB script (table spell_scipts) However, these scripts have no possibility afaik to do a random say.. As some of these spells (like your example) are casted onto players, we cannot use a usual SD2 hook, would be needed something like table Scripted_Spell, and the hook like ProcessScriptedSpellEffect. I think you should poke NoFantasy about this, because if he wants a SD2 hook, he is the man anyways

sr for double post, but I started a _draft_ how it might be possible to "fix" the problem: http://paste2.org/p/973176 I don't know how to check if spell-dmg is caused by melee-spell, ranged-spell or AoE spell, and it surely will have some side-effects, but perhaps it is a step to the right direction to handle it - However there is no spell which doesn't have all three of these procFlags, so this won't hurt

as you can see in Creature: if(m_GlobalCooldown <= diff) m_GlobalCooldown = 0; else m_GlobalCooldown -= diff; Why didn''t you move this simple code to Unit, and changed it, that GCD takes latency and haste into account? (latency - perhaps there is a simple "guesswork" like 80% enough to handle this gcd check accurate enough

git pull; git reset --hard cee592b7c9 is perhaps not the best way, but will work

it's funny that there is taken care of copyright notes in a project that mainly tries to reprogram features from blizzard... Besides copy-right "wars" are always a bit strange, as we all stand on the shoulders of work done by others - and especially in such a dynamic environment with many different projects, who can you tell is the remaining author? * the one who wrote original ideas? * the one with first partly working version? * the one who read these things, and rewrote them? * the one who copied these things and changed small things? (and even if it was white-space) * the one who ported something from one project to another? What I am saying is: It is so often impossible to give correct credits, so we all will have to live with it, and accept, that the "credits" are more or less a hint who might have done extremely much towards this patch

hmm, most of these spells have 664232 as procflag. this is PROC_FLAG_TAKEN_MELEE_HIT = 0x00000008, // 03 Taken damage from melee auto attack hit PROC_FLAG_TAKEN_MELEE_SPELL_HIT = 0x00000020, // 05 Taken damage by Spell that use melee weapon PROC_FLAG_TAKEN_RANGED_HIT = 0x00000080, // 07 Taken damage from ranged auto attack PROC_FLAG_TAKEN_RANGED_SPELL_HIT = 0x00000200, // 09 Taken damage by Spell that use ranged weapon PROC_FLAG_TAKEN_AOE_SPELL_HIT = 0x00002000, // 13 Taken AoE damage spell hit (not 100% shure unused) PROC_FLAG_TAKEN_NEGATIVE_SPELL_HIT = 0x00020000, // 17 Taken negative spell (by default only on damage) PROC_FLAG_ON_TAKE_PERIODIC = 0x00080000, // 19 Taken spell periodic (damage / healing, determined from 14-17 flags) if these descriptions had some motivation - to use them would be convinient here

hmm, this doesn't look too bad, however if the procflags are right, then quite a few spells have wrong description: Spells with "%interrupt%" description are (for fear and root): 49, whereas only one (61385) has not the procflags Spells without interrupt description (for root) 399, but from them have 60 spells the procFlags Spells without interrupt description (for fear) 166, but from them have 7 spells the procFlags (5246-wowhead comments indicate that the desc. is missing, 19134, 19725, 35474)

nothing wrong, but it is better (redundancy!) to move similar code into one place, and this is for looting-objects either WorldObject or like qsa did it: a new class which is only used by lootable objects Now only a dev would need to say something how he thinks this should be handled best

in case the directory is really messy, it helps to delete everything except the git dir, before running git reset --hard origin/master

Mangos Version: 10342 Custom Patches: none SD2 Version: 1780 Database Name and Version : YTDB 560 How it DOES work: A debuffed(with a paladin spell Judgement of Light) unit attacking the paladin with spell 56405 gets healed by 2% How it SHOULD work: There should be no healing of the attacking unit Sorry I cannot provide the SpellId of the Paladin's Judgement of Light, but the name is not unique in wowhead ;( A bit more information: Spell 56405 is an attack spell, directed at an enemy, however it has as second effect a SPELL_EFFECT_SCRIPT_EFFECT on self. I _suspect_ that any similar spells (having an effect on self) will trigger healing of the unit in combination with the judgement, so I think this is a major bug of the paladin spell.

I can only tell my experience from SD2 (where I used the search often): I often find extremely helpfull hints in threads that are 2 years old, and I am really glad that no one deleted these old threads (with on activity) Hence I think also with mangos there are problems that come up now and then, never really get solved, their threads have no activity, but they still might hold information about promising and bad approaches

wowhead, search for lockpicking then simply do .cast <SpellIdOfTheTopmostResult>

if it is not published to "the world" the cleanest and easiest way is git rebase -i (see git rebase --help) if it published, you shouldn't rebase, because you will corrupt your history, in such a case git revert --help should help you