Permalink
Browse files

DB/Items: Fix some startup errors

By Fateswhisper, updates #11587
  • Loading branch information...
1 parent 1aada1f commit 96c50c424c8ff1152f548199f4d9ec683f525f75 @Aokromes Aokromes committed Feb 11, 2014
Showing with 8 additions and 0 deletions.
  1. +8 −0 sql/updates/world/2014_02_11_00_world_creature_template.sql
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+--
+UPDATE item_template SET Material = -1 WHERE `entry` IN (52202, 50435, 49334, 46055, 46054, 44851, 43964, 43963, 43304, 43303, 43302, 42590, 41811, 41804, 40777, 40389, 40307, 38265, 37827, 37348, 37346, 37345, 37343, 37338, 37337, 37336, 37335, 37329, 37326, 37126, 36942, 35854, 34030, 33610, 33604, 33475, 33316, 33121, 31266, 30595, 29565, 29225, 29120, 29041, 28676, 27863, 27419, 25877, 23952, 23882, 23378, 23360, 23330, 23227, 23224, 23193, 23157, 22899, 22387, 22386, 21591, 21578, 21577, 21560, 21159, 21152, 21043, 20524, 20020, 20005, 20003, 19986, 18303, 18153, 16082, 15780, 11903, 11672, 11671, 11616, 11613, 11111, 8993, 6650, 5531, 5515, 5410, 5400, 5353, 4868, 4749, 4704, 4524, 4200, 3584, 3513, 3316, 3168, 3122, 2755, 2668, 2638, 2599, 1672, 1356, 1352, 996, 960, 958, 956, 900, 813, 734, 35840, 35777, 35555, 34967, 34746, 34745, 34744, 34743, 34742, 34741, 34740, 34739, 34738, 34737, 34735);
+UPDATE item_template SET sheath = 0 WHERE `entry` IN (20003, 20005, 38469);
+UPDATE item_template SET Material = 0 WHERE `entry`=34187;
+UPDATE item_template SET Material = 5 WHERE `entry`=34025;
+UPDATE item_template SET sheath = 1 WHERE `entry`=36603;
+UPDATE item_template SET sheath = 3 WHERE `entry`=36561;
+UPDATE item_template SET InventoryType = 12 WHERE `entry`=40727;

11 comments on commit 96c50c4

Contributor

Why are we applying Cataclysm items to Master? Did it switch from 335a? None of these items exist in the 335a database.

these items exist in dbc that pull from the client 335

Owner

They are present on 3.3.5a dbc.

Contributor

They are just in the DB which doesn't make them available.

Contributor

IMHO the WDBVerified field for these items needs to be set to -XXXXX Where XXXXX is whatever the build number is for 4.3.4 (don't remember it off the top of my head). The negative serves two purposes: 1 - these items aren't official 3.3.5a items. 2 - Changes had to be made to the template to make them work with 3.3.5a.

If they are in the DBC files of 3.3.5a, then its official ;p They're just there base on the DBC, their won't be anyone way to get them w/o using the additem gm command. Simple.

Contributor

No, the fact that they are in DBC does NOT make them official. The fact that the Material, InventoryType, and sheath had to be changed should clue you in. These were PTR items that made it into Cata. My comment about changing the WDBVerified field stands....

Contributor

Just because an item is in the DBC doesn't mean it was available in 335. There were a lot of items that were in the DBC that were not official until The Shattering patch. When you look up some of those items on the various "wiki" sites they say they were added in 4.0.1 which is The Shattering.

They're just there base on the DBC, their won't be anyone way to get them w/o using the additem gm command. Simple.

So what's the point of adding them to the 335 database? Put it on the 434 branch instead.

I don't see how hard is to accept that its actually in the 3.3.5a DBC files, go ahead and look in it yourselves. Otherwise if you don't like this simply just remove it from the database yourselves. I actually don't really care, they're just going base on the DBC files.

Wiki's are not always accurate just to let you know. Just a little tip.

Contributor

@Noxicfuse - Nobody's arguing wether they're in the DBC, the arguement is they don't belong in the DB.

Wiki's are not always accurate just to let you know. Just a little tip.

When it comes to 335a related info for details about when things were added or removed wikis are accurate enough. The inaccuracy is a concern when you use them for drop rates, drop locations or spawns because of the way they aggregate mod data (including erroneous data). In those cases you want WDB data first then wiki data if nothing else (or leave whatever it is broken if you so choose).

The question is why is it necessary if the items aren't used in game? Adding items to the DB that don't need to be there just causes unnecessary bloat and nedlessly consumes GUIDs. It reminds me of the old addage:

Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done.

Member

I'm a bit late to the party as I see....

@runningnak3d: I agree with you that these should have a negative WDBVerified (-15595). I directly used the cata data and as I commented earlier in my commit 94b912f#commitcomment-5317975 , there are some columns that are no longer there / that some of their purposes could have been changed to something a bit different which makes the core going mad and error'ing as hell.

@MrSmite, @runningnak3d: I'm disagreeing on a point, it does NOT change anything if the items are accessible or not, e.g in the 4.3.4 database there's a NPC named "Jeeves the Merciless" (which is actually Blingtron 4000) and a lot of rares that are currently in MoP. It does not mean that they aren't official, as they were requested while 4.3.4 was the main patch. So as others have said what is in the DBCs is official per se, the items don't have to be necessarily obtainable by the players and they can also be meant for an other patch / expansion or just be a test item.

Oh, and by the way, there were 8802 missing items prior to my commit, and I was only able to get 1313 of them with Item-sparse.db2

Please sign in to comment.