cyberium

I think why not but : - It's not free, you will have to found necessary money. - There is lot of work to manage fundation this will take time to at least one man every week. - All kind of protection you talk about need olso money to be achieved. - You have to be sure to not enter in the bad cycle where the money needed will affect some guidline of this fundation. - You have to give some work to other trustworthy person to avoid any "fatigue". ... and probably some other point...

It's a good discution but in my logical and priority : 1- have a functional and bug free queue system 2- have a functional and bug free LFG group system 3- have a functional and bug free reward system 4- add optionnal functionality 1 and 2 are near to be functionnal, but need to be tested to cleanup bug. Only basic thing are for now implemented. (you will see what i mean) You talk about point "4" in my opinion anyway it's not bad because i can have it on my mind to make easy implementation in future. This week i was not implemented lot of thing due to lack of time. I hope release first version before next week because i need feedback to get these 2 first point much stable as possible. I olso must remind you i never used "DungeonFinder" before "i stopped to play in Wow some time after BC" so you i count on you to help me make my code work like retail Actualy work on - Queue system I must add some lock when member is in BG, have deserter dot and other things not beeing identified. I need to add faction system (actually work only with one faction) - LFG Group I don't understaind "LFG_STATUS" of the group. Actualy status "LFG_STATUS_NOT_SAVED" do the job but when i must modify this value? The group are now completly independant when it will be created. All the needed objects are declared in the Group Class but i must verify if it's enought. Some new object will be needed in the future in group class but i am focused to an light working patch for now. - Reward and last point are not implemented for now. Only some analyse are done to help me implement actual code according this next step. I changed my mind about the class implementation, i must implement class heritage in place of some individual class. My actual scheme LfgGroup class LfgQueue class <- LfgDungeon class My future sheme LfgGroup class <-LfgQueue class <-LfgDungeon class Ok for now you know enought about the situation of the code I do not promise anything but i will do my best to release code asap. Greetings

Updated with some minor change and linux part.

Already more than 2000 lines coded for DF and i am not at 50% of implementation... So for little patch i will try another time

Seem's to work well but, ... For my little server i don't see any impact. good : - Probably reduce packet processing time. (need to be verified with before/after patched on large server) - Like said if overal moving will be improved this patch is essential. not good : - Hard to detect bug caused by this so it must be verified alot before applied for some opcodes. Thanks for your good works.

On dev point, i don't coonsidere ahbot is finalised at all... Why i posted it here? Only to have guidline to know what i must do in the bases of the code before try to optimize it or add some little functionnality... I think it's possible to make ahbot work independently, but it's an option only if we get an categoric "rejected". I don't wan't to work on a independant version so if any other dev whant it, be free So we just have to wait don't be impatient... Greetings

Iam trying to understaind last modification done by Ambal. For what i understaind for each map loaded we can store some info. My idea - Load map. - Load his entry from dbc counter if exist. - Set NPC Entry according to boss name (no matter way for now, perhaps some table or sql querries if it's possible) - Moddify existed holder to update map info if entry is killed. So the new map system will be completly autonome and the info of it will be readable by LFG anytime. It's only idea i need understaind how map work before. (not an easy task if you have some link or info please show it ) About my code: LFG class is implemented for now, i can only group individual char and group is set has lfg. Teleport out/in is working. Iam still far of SPP work but it's price for complete rewrite (except some little part) Mainly for any first release i must add all possible verification like "player is in combat/ player is already grouped / player is already in LFGGroup /..." Greetings

Iam ok with this. @Mizuni Ok but in your exemple, the LFG reward is send when Herald Volazj is killed only? Is this a normal functionality? In other word, what is the requirement to gain reward? Only kill final boss? I think all we need is in dungeonEncouters. For your exemple : 212 619 0 0 0 Ancien Nadox 0 259 619 1 0 0 Ancien Nadox 0 213 619 0 1000 1 Prince Taldaram 0 260 619 1 1000 1 Prince Taldaram 0 214 619 0 2000 2 Jedoga Cherchelombre 0 261 619 1 2000 2 Jedoga Cherchelombre 0 215 619 0 3000 3 Héraut Volazj 0 262 619 1 3000 3 Amanitar 0 263 619 1 4000 4 Héraut Volazj 0 2e Field is map but don't know what is the first. Do you think there is missing boss in this dbc?

And about achievement, how it work actualy? Actualy achievement not work when we kill some specific boss? If i read wowwiki about this Achievements Normal mode * The Oculus Heroic mode * Heroic: The Oculus * Experienced Drake Rider * Make It Count * Amber Void * Emerald Void * Ruby Void So basicaly we are in the "Work in progress... zone" that's why iam not sure i will implement reward until there is more avancement about this.

Honestly iam not at this stage. But if you start this subject, i see there is some possiblility to save on the instence info number of boss killed. Total boss per instence is probably aviable in DBC. Therefore i need event (when in lfg group) when boss killed with some additionnal information like, groupid, npc entry... This is probably possible without big big hacking?

Hi thanks for some info but i know these DBC entry. First i was thinking the Queue manager will be the more complex part. But i realize when group is formed there is so much thing to do... So my approach was wrong. I finaly decided to keep some part of my queue code but restart analyse for next part. This force me to postpose any push of code for now. The next part require some hard modification of the core (group class) i must take attention to the code to keep mangos way coding and avoid as much as possible some hack. Anyway iam still working on it.

Ok

Ok perhaps my question was unclear. What is prefered to use? I actualy use _player but has i say perhaps in the future generalize use of GetPlayer() is more secure or updatable way.

in worldsession class? Why i can see both used in the code, do we are going to protect _player access and therefore i must use GetPlayer()?

Ok i see the problem. Anyway i will at least try to test this only once per update cycle. Thanks

Hi, In deep of the code when i whant use some player method and have only his ObjectGuid, i was doing something like name = sObjectMgr.GetPlayer(Guid)->GetName(); This is helpfull but... Not safe! I must do if (Player* plr = sObjectMgr.GetPlayer(Guid)) name = plr->GetName(); else name = ""; Do this test must be used as much as possible? Any other possibility to avoid this test?

Patch updated, but please refer only in the "under review" section. You only have to play with these value AuctionHouseBot.Buyer.Recheck.Interval = 20 AuctionHouseBot.Buyer.Alliance.Chance.Ratio = 3 AuctionHouseBot.Buyer.Horde.Chance.Ratio = 3 AuctionHouseBot.Buyer.Neutral.Chance.Ratio = 3 All other setting is hardcoded. If you whant to see AHBUYER in action : check for exemple AuctionHouseBot.Buyer.Recheck.Interval = 2 AuctionHouseBot.DEBUG.Buyer = 1 You will see (in console) evaluated item with their chance to be buyed and probably see why buyer don't whant to buy your item Greetings

Patch updated correct way for 10777. Greetings

I will take a look to this fix before apply it, at first look i can uderstaind it but what i don't understaind (without check the wole code) is what's item concerned, when it appen, and how i can reproduce an error. Anyway if this realy needed i suggest you to post it in "under review".

No problem i will update it but you are right i am focused to dungeon finder so if no big merge problem, no update. Anyway iam still around so just ask.

So i can make the choice of the world event. But has it linked with some event i must know where to check if event it stated or not. New question : - When player is teleported when group is formed, if he use get/out he will be teleported at this original location. But what happen if he use normal entrence of instence to get out? Sorry for all of my questions I hope i have something to show you in the middle or end of next week I think iam near than 40% of implementation but the basis are working. - Handle queue Join/Leave - Handle all dungeon operations and selection. - Handle all proposal feature. - New group is formed and teleported. I work on - Detect group change and action must be done. Still need to do : - Handle party whant to join queue. - Do all check before accepting player in the queue. - Do all check to remove player under some condition. - Detect end of dungeon. - Detect Dungeon Boss lives. - Work on reward. - Implement kick vote. and probably some other stuff that iam sure you will tell me Greetings

Traditionaly due to pagefile disabled. That can explain why, anyway 4 day uptime is not bad at all with more than 500 users. Greetings

Good to know because this avoid me to check when the player select random dungeon

For now i am implementing DF with 2 priority : - Stability. - Minimal mod to the core. For these kind of event i have see in DBC something like "World event" entry but i don't know how it realy work and if the core is ready for that. I will keep your remark on my mind and make you answear when i have more information.

You are not right, DF require large part of implementation before invovle any synchronisation with achievement class. For now iam implementing the core of the mod. In the last stage only i will take a look at : - How see how many boss killed in the instence, - If Instence is finished or not. - If any achievement are related to LFG. So tell "the entire design depending on achievements" is not correct. Absolutly not at this point