rechapa79

updated again. i think its mostly ready to go to the "under review" section

why no one told me the patch was unusable? updated again

looking into the DBCs Im getting the feeling AURA_STATE_IMMOLATE is a misnomer, because it indicates if it is possible to cast Conflagrate on the target so it should be something like AURA_STATE_CONFLAGRATE. if its true(not saying that it is, just looking for confirmation here), that would mean: - On the event of Shadowflame DOT removal, it should be checked the existence of a Immolate debuff and vice versa before the removal of the Aura State. - The current implementation of Incinerate should be changed because it checks for AURA_STATE_IMMOLATE instead of searching for the actual Immolate debuff. So: should i file bug for this?

patch updated

Here is a patch for applying DOT effect of the warlock spell "shadowflame" and ranks. Updated: 4/17/09: changelog: -modified code so ShadowFlame DOT triggers AURA_STATE_IMMOLATE (yes this is a hackfix) -conflagrate will remove the shadowflame dot. Updated 4/18/09 Changelog: -Reimplemented incinerate so it looks for an actual Immolate aura instead of AURA_STATE_IMMOLATE -AURA_STATE_IMMOLATE will stay on as long there is a Shadowflame DOT or an Immolate aura -Use SpellFamilyFlags2 for Shadowflame DOT TODO?: -modify conflagate to search for the aura with the least duration instead the first one that pops up? -rename AURA_STATE_IMMOLATE to AURA_STATE_CONFLAGRATE? (I think it is the proper name) diff --git a/src/game/Spell.cpp b/src/game/Spell.cpp index f3140cb..af14380 100644 --- a/src/game/Spell.cpp +++ b/src/game/Spell.cpp @@ -2388,7 +2388,7 @@ void Spell::cast(bool skipCheck) Unit::AuraList const &mPeriodic = m_targets.getUnitTarget()->GetAurasByType(SPELL_AURA_PERIODIC_DAMAGE); for(Unit::AuraList::const_iterator i = mPeriodic.begin(); i != mPeriodic.end(); ++i) { - if( (*i)->GetSpellProto()->SpellFamilyName == SPELLFAMILY_WARLOCK && ((*i)->GetSpellProto()->SpellFamilyFlags & 4) && + if( (*i)->GetSpellProto()->SpellFamilyName == SPELLFAMILY_WARLOCK && (((*i)->GetSpellProto()->SpellFamilyFlags & 4) || ((*i)->GetSpellProto()->SpellFamilyFlags2 & 2) ) && (*i)->GetCasterGUID()==m_caster->GetGUID() ) { m_targets.getUnitTarget()->RemoveAura((*i)->GetId(), (*i)->GetEffIndex()); diff --git a/src/game/SpellAuras.cpp b/src/game/SpellAuras.cpp index a02ea15..59e2d90 100644 --- a/src/game/SpellAuras.cpp +++ b/src/game/SpellAuras.cpp @@ -978,9 +978,9 @@ void Aura::_AddAura() if (IsSealSpell(m_spellProto)) m_target->ModifyAuraState(AURA_STATE_JUDGEMENT, true); - // Conflagrate aura state on Immolate - if (m_spellProto->SpellFamilyName == SPELLFAMILY_WARLOCK && m_spellProto->SpellFamilyFlags & 4) - m_target->ModifyAuraState(AURA_STATE_IMMOLATE, true); + // Conflagrate aura state on Immolate and Shadowflame + if (m_spellProto->SpellFamilyName == SPELLFAMILY_WARLOCK && ((m_spellProto->SpellFamilyFlags & 4) || (m_spellProto->SpellFamilyFlags2 & 2))) + m_target->ModifyAuraState(AURA_STATE_IMMOLATE, true); // Faerie Fire (druid versions) if (m_spellProto->SpellFamilyName == SPELLFAMILY_DRUID && m_spellProto->SpellFamilyFlags & 0x0000000000000400LL) @@ -1082,8 +1082,37 @@ void Aura::_RemoveAura() removeState = AURA_STATE_JUDGEMENT; // Update Seals information break; case SPELLFAMILY_WARLOCK: - if(m_spellProto->SpellFamilyFlags & 4) - removeState = AURA_STATE_IMMOLATE; // Conflagrate aura state + if(m_spellProto->SpellFamilyFlags & 4){ + //check if there is a shadowflame DOT present, if not, remove AURA_STATE_IMMOLATE + Unit::AuraList const& SFDOT = m_target->GetAurasByType(SPELL_AURA_PERIODIC_DAMAGE); + bool removeAuraState=true; + for(Unit::AuraList::const_iterator i = SFDOT.begin(); i != SFDOT.end(); ++i) + { + if((*i)->GetSpellProto()->SpellFamilyName == SPELLFAMILY_WARLOCK && ((*i)->GetSpellProto()->SpellFamilyFlags2 & 2)) + { + removeAuraState=false; + break; + } + } + if(removeAuraState) + removeState = AURA_STATE_IMMOLATE; + } + else if(m_spellProto->SpellFamilyFlags2 & 2){ + //check if there is a Immolate DOT present, if not, remove AURA_STATE_IMMOLATE + Unit::AuraList const& IMDOT = m_target->GetAurasByType(SPELL_AURA_PERIODIC_DAMAGE); + bool removeAuraState=true; + for(Unit::AuraList::const_iterator i = IMDOT.begin(); i != IMDOT.end(); ++i) + { + if((*i)->GetSpellProto()->SpellFamilyName == SPELLFAMILY_WARLOCK && ((*i)->GetSpellProto()->SpellFamilyFlags & 4)) + { + removeAuraState=false; + break; + } + } + if(removeAuraState) + removeState = AURA_STATE_IMMOLATE; + } + break; case SPELLFAMILY_DRUID: if(m_spellProto->SpellFamilyFlags & 0x0000000000000400LL) diff --git a/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp b/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp index 13d1f03..eeebd89 100644 --- a/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp +++ b/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp @@ -400,8 +400,29 @@ void Spell::EffectSchoolDMG(uint32 effect_idx) if((m_spellInfo->SpellFamilyFlags & 0x00004000000000LL) && m_spellInfo->SpellIconID==2128) { // Incinerate does more dmg (dmg*0.25) if the target is Immolated. - if(unitTarget->HasAuraState(AURA_STATE_IMMOLATE)) - damage += int32(damage*0.25f); + Unit::AuraList const& RejorRegr = unitTarget->GetAurasByType(SPELL_AURA_PERIODIC_DAMAGE); + + for(Unit::AuraList::const_iterator i = RejorRegr.begin(); i != RejorRegr.end(); ++i) + { + if((*i)->GetSpellProto()->SpellFamilyName == SPELLFAMILY_WARLOCK && ((*i)->GetSpellProto()->SpellFamilyFlags & 4)) + { + + damage += int32(damage*0.25f); + break; + } + } + } + // Shadowflame DOT + else if (m_spellInfo->SpellFamilyFlags & 0x0001000000000000LL) + { + switch(m_spellInfo->Id) + { + case 47897: m_caster->CastSpell(unitTarget, 47960, true); break; + case 61290: m_caster->CastSpell(unitTarget, 61291, true); break; + default: + sLog.outError("Spell::EffectDummy: Unhandeled Shadowflame spell rank %u",m_spellInfo->Id); + break; + } } break; }

if i understood you correctly, with this patch, Ranged and melee based attacks wont benefit from spell power and magic based attacks will not benefit from attack power. if that is the case, wouldn't that screw paladin's damage calculation completely? i mean, as patch 3.x most paladins damage dealing abilities benefit from AP and SP. in ie: Seal of Command, witch is Melee based, benefits from spell power. Judgements, Exorcisms, and Consecration are "magic" based abilities and they benefit from attack power.

silly me. if Nourish reacts to all Druid HOTs, then is useless to check for individual auras. patch updated EDIT: 3.1.0 is not out yet, so lets not get ahead of ourselves

you are right, i missed lifebloom. ill update the patch after i can test it

Who wrote this patch: me again,with special thanks to gsa and Sarjuuk for their imput What this patch does: Increase the amount healed by Nourish by 20% when the target is affected by regrow, rejuvenation, lifebloom or wild grown For what revision this patch was made: 7553+ any thread reporting this bug: None that i could find. If there is one please tell --- mangos/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp 2009-03-27 14:41:29.000000000 -0300 +++ patch/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp 2009-03-27 14:22:00.000000000 -0300 @@ -2473,6 +2473,23 @@ addhealth += tickheal * tickcount; } + //Nourish 20% of heal increase if target is afected by Druids HOTs + else if(m_spellInfo->SpellFamilyFlags&0x0200000000000000LL){ + Unit::AuraList const& RejorRegr = unitTarget->GetAurasByType(SPELL_AURA_PERIODIC_HEAL); + + for(Unit::AuraList::const_iterator i = RejorRegr.begin(); i != RejorRegr.end(); ++i) + { + if((*i)->GetSpellProto()->SpellFamilyName == SPELLFAMILY_DRUID) + { + addhealth+=addhealth*0.2; + break; + } + } + + + + } else addhealth = caster->SpellHealingBonus(unitTarget, m_spellInfo, addhealth, HEAL);

corrected patch in here

you are right. i missed that percentMana=(player->GetPower(POWER_MANA)*100)/player->GetMaxPower(POWER_MANA); that would be the correct way to do it. odd this problem hasnt shown up on the first patch

1)??? weird. you could try and replace it by percentMana=((player->GetPower(POWER_MANA)/player->GetMaxPower(POWER_MANA) * 100); 2) i guess i'd never thought of using the object for some player thats not mana based. the replenishment function filters them out. however someone might do something nasty. this check on the constructor will prevent that ReplenishPlayerWraper(Player* player):Player(player) { if(Target->getPowerType() == POWER_MANA) percentMana=((player->GetPower(POWER_MANA)/player->GetMaxPower(POWER_MANA) * 100); else percentMana=101; }

there are two versions of the patch: 1-the unoptimized but most tested version 2- the optimized but mostly untested version both are in all-in one diff format. the second version removes redundant calculation of the filled mana percentages, so it should be quicker

if is not causing cpu spikes then thats ok

hove anyone tested the patches?