mirror of
https://github.com/EQEmu/Server.git
synced 2025-12-13 06:21:28 +00:00
Fixed issue with SE_StackingCommand_Overwrite
SE_StackingCommand_Overwite uses the calc to figure out the slot to check. Seems that calc 202 is slot 1 and 201 is actually something special. It could be any slot, but need further investigation, for now, just ignore it.
This commit is contained in:
parent
b4fce37c14
commit
a7ce852ca5
@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
|
||||
EQEMu Changelog (Started on Sept 24, 2003 15:50)
|
||||
-------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
== 11/27/2013 ==
|
||||
demonstar55: Fixed issue with SE_StackingCommand_Overwrite getting the wrong slots, still need to figure out what it means when the calc is 201.
|
||||
|
||||
== 11/23/2013 ==
|
||||
Secrets: Fixed an issue related to a zone crash where the count of the abilities in an AA was 0, leading to a size 0 buffer issue.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@ -2571,16 +2571,18 @@ int Mob::CheckStackConflict(uint16 spellid1, int caster_level1, uint16 spellid2,
|
||||
if(effect2 == SE_StackingCommand_Overwrite)
|
||||
{
|
||||
overwrite_effect = sp2.base[i];
|
||||
overwrite_slot = sp2.formula[i] - 201; //they use base 1 for slots, we use base 0
|
||||
// TODO: seems 201 is special (any?), need to figure it out, 202 is slot 1 (index 0 for us)
|
||||
overwrite_slot = sp2.formula[i] - 202; //they use base 1 for slots, we use base 0
|
||||
overwrite_below_value = sp2.max[i];
|
||||
if(sp1.effectid[overwrite_slot] == overwrite_effect)
|
||||
if(overwrite_slot >= 0 && sp1.effectid[overwrite_slot] == overwrite_effect)
|
||||
{
|
||||
sp1_value = CalcSpellEffectValue(spellid1, overwrite_slot, caster_level1);
|
||||
sp2_value = CalcSpellEffectValue(spellid2, overwrite_slot, caster_level2);
|
||||
|
||||
mlog(SPELLS__STACKING, "%s (%d) overwrites existing spell if effect %d on slot %d is below %d. Old spell has value %d on that slot/effect. %s.",
|
||||
sp2.name, spellid2, overwrite_effect, overwrite_slot, overwrite_below_value, sp1_value, (sp1_value < overwrite_below_value)?"Overwriting":"Not overwriting");
|
||||
sp2.name, spellid2, overwrite_effect, overwrite_slot, overwrite_below_value, sp1_value, (sp1_value < overwrite_below_value && sp1_value <= sp2_value)?"Overwriting":"Not overwriting");
|
||||
|
||||
if(sp1_value < overwrite_below_value)
|
||||
if(sp1_value < overwrite_below_value && sp1_value <= sp2_value)
|
||||
{
|
||||
mlog(SPELLS__STACKING, "Overwrite spell because sp1_value < overwrite_below_value");
|
||||
return 1; // overwrite spell if its value is less
|
||||
@ -2588,7 +2590,6 @@ int Mob::CheckStackConflict(uint16 spellid1, int caster_level1, uint16 spellid2,
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
mlog(SPELLS__STACKING, "%s (%d) overwrites existing spell if effect %d on slot %d is below %d, but we do not have that effect on that slot. Ignored.",
|
||||
sp2.name, spellid2, overwrite_effect, overwrite_slot, overwrite_below_value);
|
||||
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user