diff options
| -rwxr-xr-x | src/server/game/Entities/Unit/Unit.cpp | 35 |
1 files changed, 14 insertions, 21 deletions
diff --git a/src/server/game/Entities/Unit/Unit.cpp b/src/server/game/Entities/Unit/Unit.cpp index 718c2e95fe5..c685417a835 100755 --- a/src/server/game/Entities/Unit/Unit.cpp +++ b/src/server/game/Entities/Unit/Unit.cpp @@ -9232,10 +9232,9 @@ ReputationRank Unit::GetReactionTo(Unit const* target) const if (GetCharmerOrOwnerOrSelf() == target->GetCharmerOrOwnerOrSelf()) return REP_FRIENDLY; - // this is 0x8 in the 13580 client - if (HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PLAYER_CONTROLLED)) + if (HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE)) { - if (target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PLAYER_CONTROLLED)) + if (target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE)) { Player const* selfPlayerOwner = GetAffectingPlayer(); Player const* targetPlayerOwner = target->GetAffectingPlayer(); @@ -12171,20 +12170,16 @@ bool Unit::_IsValidAttackTarget(Unit const* target, SpellInfo const* bySpell) co if (playerAttacker->HasFlag(PLAYER_FLAGS, PLAYER_FLAGS_UNK19)) return false; } - // check flags - // UNIT_FLAG_PLAYER_CONTROLLED is 0x8 in 13580 if (target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_NON_ATTACKABLE | UNIT_FLAG_TAXI_FLIGHT | UNIT_FLAG_NOT_ATTACKABLE_1 | UNIT_FLAG_UNK_16) - || (!HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PLAYER_CONTROLLED) && target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PASSIVE)) - || (!target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PLAYER_CONTROLLED) && HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PASSIVE)) - //! Also notable: in CGUnit_C__CanAttack the third parameter is a boolean that determines if the following flag check is exempted or not - || (HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PLAYER_CONTROLLED) && target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_OOC_NOT_ATTACKABLE)) - || (target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PLAYER_CONTROLLED) && HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_OOC_NOT_ATTACKABLE))) + || (!HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE) && target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PASSIVE)) + || (!target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE) && HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PASSIVE)) + || (HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE) && target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_OOC_NOT_ATTACKABLE)) + || (target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE) && HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_OOC_NOT_ATTACKABLE))) return false; // CvC case - can attack each other only when one of them is hostile - if (GetTypeId() == TYPEID_UNIT && !HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PLAYER_CONTROLLED) - && target->GetTypeId() == TYPEID_UNIT && !target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PLAYER_CONTROLLED)) + if (!HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE) && !target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE)) return GetReactionTo(target) <= REP_HOSTILE || target->GetReactionTo(this) <= REP_HOSTILE; // PvP, PvC, CvP case @@ -12197,8 +12192,8 @@ bool Unit::_IsValidAttackTarget(Unit const* target, SpellInfo const* bySpell) co if (creatureAttacker && creatureAttacker->GetCreatureInfo()->type_flags & CREATURE_TYPEFLAGS_UNK26) return false; - Player const* playerAffectingAttacker = GetAffectingPlayer(); - Player const* playerAffectingTarget = target->GetAffectingPlayer(); + Player const* playerAffectingAttacker = HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE) ? GetAffectingPlayer() : NULL; + Player const* playerAffectingTarget = target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE) ? target->GetAffectingPlayer() : NULL; // check duel - before sanctuary checks if (playerAffectingAttacker && playerAffectingTarget) @@ -12207,10 +12202,8 @@ bool Unit::_IsValidAttackTarget(Unit const* target, SpellInfo const* bySpell) co // PvP case - can't attack when attacker or target are in sanctuary // however, 13850 client doesn't allow to attack when one of the unit's has sanctuary flag and is pvp - //! Machiavelli edit: I don't know if the unit flag check is correct here. In the above checks UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE (0x80 in 12340) was replaced - //! with the proper flag which has 0x80 in 13580 - however I cannot find proof if this flag is correctly used here or not. - if (/*target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE) && HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE) - && */((target->GetByteValue(UNIT_FIELD_BYTES_2, 1) & UNIT_BYTE2_FLAG_SANCTUARY) || (GetByteValue(UNIT_FIELD_BYTES_2, 1) & UNIT_BYTE2_FLAG_SANCTUARY))) + if (target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE) && HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE) + && ((target->GetByteValue(UNIT_FIELD_BYTES_2, 1) & UNIT_BYTE2_FLAG_SANCTUARY) || (GetByteValue(UNIT_FIELD_BYTES_2, 1) & UNIT_BYTE2_FLAG_SANCTUARY))) return false; // additional checks - only PvP case @@ -12287,10 +12280,10 @@ bool Unit::_IsValidAssistTarget(Unit const* target, SpellInfo const* bySpell) co return false; // PvP case - if (target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PLAYER_CONTROLLED)) + if (target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE)) { Player const* targetPlayerOwner = target->GetAffectingPlayer(); - if (HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PLAYER_CONTROLLED)) + if (HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE)) { Player const* selfPlayerOwner = GetAffectingPlayer(); if (selfPlayerOwner && targetPlayerOwner) @@ -12312,7 +12305,7 @@ bool Unit::_IsValidAssistTarget(Unit const* target, SpellInfo const* bySpell) co } // PvC case - player can assist creature only if has specific type flags // !target->HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE) && - else if (HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PLAYER_CONTROLLED) + else if (HasFlag(UNIT_FIELD_FLAGS, UNIT_FLAG_PVP_ATTACKABLE) && (!bySpell || !(bySpell->AttributesEx6 & SPELL_ATTR6_UNK3)) && !((target->GetByteValue(UNIT_FIELD_BYTES_2, 1) & UNIT_BYTE2_FLAG_PVP))) { |