PlaneShift

Welcome to the PlaneShift BugTracker!

Your guide on how to use the bugtracker:
Bug report guide
Bug report process flow

Note: by default the search function only searches descriptions of open bugs. To search all use this link

When you want to report a crash, make sure you have some idea of what is causing it, so it can be reproduced. In all other cases, including hardware related crashes, use the technical support area in the forum.

link to this task | email this task | | Tasklist |

PS#4622 - Check damage calculation of flaming weapons

Attached to Project: PlaneShift
Opened by bonifarz (bonifarz) - Sunday, 25 July 2010, 11:16 UTC-4:00
Last edited by RlyDontKnow (RlyDontKnow) - Monday, 26 July 2010, 07:48 UTC-4:00
Area Engine→Magic System
Severity High
Status New
Task Type Bug Report
Version 0.5.4
State Reopened
Assigned To No-one
Percent Complete
Votes 0
Private No

Details

The extra damage dealt by the "flaming weapon" buff seems to be the same at rank 20, K=0% will 200 as at rank 100, K=100% will 200. As all other spell caps yielded integer damage values, I suspect a minor bug in the rules for this spell. Duration, mana costs etc seem to work fine.

Possible dependence: http://www.hydlaaplaza.com/flyspray/index.php?do=details&task_id=1578

This task depends upon

Comment by RlyDontKnow (RlyDontKnow) - Monday, 26 July 2010, 07:48 UTC-4:00
  • Field changed: Details
  • Field changed: Area (Magic System → Magic System)
  • Field changed: Severity (Medium → High)
  • Field changed: Status (Unconfirmed → New)

just re-checked. the spell is perfectly fine, however mathscripts seem to be very fragile against optimizations.
also there are actually 2 bugs:
1) even though the spell power should influence the damage properly just like for all other spells, it's always at maximum damage, even skill 0 and will 50 or even less
2) the damage calculation seems to be influenced by some mysterious system-dependent factor as the values maximum values reached differ on ezpc and zeroping

Comment by Lanarel (Lanarel) - Monday, 02 August 2010, 12:05 UTC-4:00

Is this a mathscript problem then? Or fparser?

Comment by RlyDontKnow (RlyDontKnow) - Monday, 02 August 2010, 17:36 UTC-4:00

not sure, yet
candidates are: fparser optimization, gcc, faulty instructions in the CPU

Loading...