sart13

Sorry, but I did not publish the code again, especially in forums where it is still immediately removed. I can offer a link to a discussion of solutions from MaxXx2021 - hope it seems the moderators are not as nasty as links to R2:) http://ru-mangos.ru/showthread.php?t=4783&page=2

send this question to mangos dev team. problem been described more than a year ago, for this year appeared at least three versions of its solutions.

Problem in calculation of GO visibility distances. Require big hack or full rewrite this subsystem in mangos.

if only one possible target in search radius, 43153 be casted 9 times on his. it's true?

I have long since stopped posting "contribute in any way" - some sense in it if the messages are simply removed? but here is a discussion of code written by me, zergtmn, Machiavelly and traponinet (but not you, and not unknown to me personally kid10). at least you should correct the authorship of that.

I see my errors (corrected for almost a year ago) and my curves hacks continue to thrive in some repos :) good.

I wish you luck in realizing your beliefs:) Unfortunately, I personally can not publish anything on this forum (and some other forums) - my posts quickly removed (SmartPtr usage announcement lasted at least 4 hours, for example). so take a look at github, if you're interested ...

code is published continuously. but if you want to see it in clean mangos, you'll have to wait. Not so long ago in the core adopted some developments, maked at end of 2010.

that's it. if it is absolutely certain - we must choose between different versions of the hacks, the current (very simple and useless) or more other from various authors. info sources such as wowwiki completely exhausted more than a year ago.

your reasoning is very logical, but these proposals could be implemented if the development went into the master and custom forks in parallel, or even with a shift of 1-2 months of work. Unfortunately, case of deviations (by some lines) more than 2 years (mtmaps for example) such interaction difficult to realize ...

R2 _NOT_ a project. only custom fork of mangos project.

spell require simple AI for weapon, 2 not implemented in clean core auras and one absent in DBC spell. not may true work without this.

1. this value used not only in this place (for clean core - _may_ be used) 2. chance has hiperbolic progression, not linear. 3. default damage cup value depends not from level, but from CreateHealth()

I think you exaggerate greatly the quality of the code from the mangos team. very many commits from there cause no less questions, than most disputable commits in R2. to the same clean mangos code, at least at the present time, much less tested extensively in practice than the R2 code.

Sorry, but port most code from R2 require porting many other required code, implemented to R2 in 2010-2011. Of course it's possible - not so long ago Laise added to mangos DungeonEncounters, but at the current speed of work on Mangos - I think it takes several years to get to these sections of code ... Besides, I'm much more tolerant to small hacks than mangos team.

require implement CrowdControl calculation.

realization of this spell very difficult and require some hacks. may see on this in R2 (reimplement on clean core not possible).

mega-big patch: https://github.com/mangosR2/mangos/commit/cd577fdcd1159b5fdfac4dd99cebf9a9e0e627db now no negative effects registered.

don't check on "clean core". mangos has at least 2 errors (one sience ~200 commits) with detect ground/water pozitions -> need some corrects.

for this stupid error is always possible to define new R2 users. Close topic ... to author - RTFM/RTFAQ

mangos not have function Spell::DoSummonSnakes. in clean mangos core this trap not worked at all. "This ... is not mangos! It's some custom fork with god knows what mods and hacks. So please everyone stop flooding the forum with problems with it.." © mangos team.

Lynx3d, please do not mix everything together. I offered a lot of code in mangos, unfortunately for some of the suggestions I have no (any!) answer more than six months. And to offer something new out of package - senselessly, because it requires a prior written:) That's what I recently wrote Laise on migrating LFG. And if on this issue - people trying to cross a fork R2 and unmodified ScriptDev2. What is real, but not with his knowledge ...

I not sure that this must be. I not player. And i has only one (from author) opinion.

I myself did a hack-and-forget. big deal ...

this problem appeared after rework in 11670 (Implement in proper way ITEM_SPELLTRIGGER_ON_STORE) && 11683, many proc items (including this) disappears after proc.