[lua/sql] Sarcopsylla NM #5625
[lua/sql] Sarcopsylla NM #5625
Conversation
| ----------------------------------- | ||
| mixins = { require('scripts/mixins/families/chigoe') } | ||
| mixins = { require('scripts/mixins/families/chigoe_nm') } | ||
| ----------------------------------- | ||
| local entity = {} | ||
|
|
||
| entity.onMobInitialize = function(mob) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can you add a TODO: check immunites
bg wiki claims it has some
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We added this nm's immunities to the mob pool, I'll confirm when I rebase tomorrow
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh right, I forgot you can do it through that too
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yea group defines: 65559 = 65536 + 16 + 4 + 2 + 1 (sleep, grav, bind, silence, petrify)
Would you prefer we use the addImmunity binding in the mob init moving forward (or convert this one)? Definitely seems cleaner and easier to review
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I dunnow if that binding works properly. But if it does, I would definatelly prefer to use that. It would at least make it clear whats going on
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree.
I would add to that one more thing related to this:
Right now we have
- SLEEP
- SLEEP_LIGHT
- SLEEP_DARK
We dont need all 3, at all. SLEEP_LIGHT + SLEEP_DARK == SLEEP.
I would propose to also start normalizing using DARK and LIGHT and 0ing regular sleep, for a future removal/substitution. We are missing ADDLE, for instance, iirc.
I know the cases where one mob is trully immune to 1 without the other can be counted with one hand, but still, I dont think that justifies having 3 sleeps.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
SLEEP_LIGHT and SLEEP_DARK were added for server custom bs purposes so they could separate them without polluting upstream while we upstream only ever used SLEEP, because at that time upstream did not belive any retail mob could be immune rather than highly resistant to just one of the 2
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I remember. Still, now that we know the cases exist, we should just embrace those 2 and say bye bye to the old one, couse, again, it aint needed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Updated to set immunities via mob init and confirmed it works:
Also Xaver requested I go ahead and split out sleep immunities now:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Still, now that we know the cases exist
murder it is then!
* [sql] Sarcopsylla NM * [lua] Sarcopsylla NM
I affirm:
What does this pull request do?
Implements retail accuracy for Sarcopsylla
Steps to test these changes
Goto the mob in grauberg, fight it and see that
!getstatsshows proper data, casts the right set of spells, and it doesn't instagib from JA/crit/ws