Open therelus opened 1 year ago
I have the same problem
I find that database-acore_world not mindmg & maxdmg field
Hmmm, i think it may be fixed in scripting but i don´t know really
Gargoyle still have not enough dmg. I create full pvp DK 6651 gears score with Shadowmourne and two best trinkets. Dr.Damage shows that strike must be ~2684 and total lifetime dmg ~38525 (with all procs around 80000). But recount shows 1595-1614 strike dmg and 36071 total dmg (gargoyle called with all procs). So it miss ~ 50%dmg. Screen with procs ~83657 lifetime dmg
Trying to figure out whether gargoyle dmg is low or not:
https://youtu.be/5Zzj5tVmg5g?t=96 feb 14 classic: gargoyle hitting over 2k per hit. 2009 3.1 comment saying that it should hit for AP*0.4
We are doing tests on our server and we are getting lower numbers: DK'S 8869 AP = gargoyle 1710 dmg per hit DK'S 4401 AP = gargoyle 810 dmg per hit
It looks like azerothcore's coeff is below AP*0.2 which is lower than what we see in the classic video and the old wotlk comments.
Original report https://github.com/andeswow/bugtracker/issues/4
i hope its gonna be fixed ASAP
Yeah,a lot of DK player notice that problem,it's need fixed
Some player has given me interesting observation. He was testing UDK and spotted that minimal interval between pet's attack is 1 second. To achieve such result you should have approximate 500 haste rating and DK buff for 20% of melee haste.
So there is weird thing: usually UDK are being built via melee haste + using haste pot to speed up Gargoyle. Maybe it is a part of problem with Garg damage
Current Behaviour
The https://wowclassicdb.com/wotlk/spell/49206 of DK does very low damage, i watched it on ofi wow that it deals more damage
Expected Blizzlike Behaviour
Gargoyle must do more damage
Source
No response
Steps to reproduce the problem
Extra Notes
No response
AC rev. hash/commit
AzerothCore rev. 96a5224d927f+ 2023-04-22 07:25:31 +0700 (npcbots_3.3.5 branch) (Win64, Release, Static) (worldserver-daemon)
Operating system
x64
Custom changes or Modules
No response