mod-playerbots

mirror of https://github.com/liyunfan1223/mod-playerbots.git synced 2026-06-20 15:39:25 +02:00

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Keleborn	714bb6bca3	Shorten paths (#2396 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> This is designed to significantly shorten the overall path while maintaining the more detailed structure. I tried to follow the principle of removing any folder that had 1 or 2 files in it, shortenining dungeon/raid names to acronyms, and removing instances when the base name was in the file name (Like Raid) etc. ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> Plan and execute <!-- TRANSLATIONS: Anything new that the bots say in chat must be in a translatable format. This is done using GetBotTextOrDefault, which you can search for in the codebase to find examples. Your code needs to have English as the default fallback, while the full translations need to be in an SQL update file. The languages in the file are the nine language options supported by AzerothCore: English, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Taiwanese, Spanish, Spanish Mexico, and Russian. See data/sql/playerbots/updates/2025_12_27_ai_playerbot_fishing_text.sql as an example of a translation SQL update, whose content are called within the codebase at src/strategy/actions/FishingAction.cpp --> ## Final Checklist - - [ ] Stability is not compromised. - - [ ] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [ ] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [ ] Any new bot dialogue lines are translated. - - [ ] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. -->	2026-05-31 18:38:01 +02:00
dillyns	585027fab7	Remove fire totem override from enhancement AOE strategy (#2270 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Currently in AOE enchancement shamans are dropping magma totems. They should not be overriding the set fire totem strategy. ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> Bring an enhancement shaman into medium aoe scenario (3 enemies) They should no longer replace their fire totem with magma totem. They should only drop the fire totem that is set in their strategies. ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> - Does this change add bot messages to translate? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> - Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. -->	2026-05-31 06:41:13 -07:00
kadeshar	b430118124	Sunder Armor fixes (#2427 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Arms and Fury using Sunder Armor when there is not Protection Warrior in group ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> Invite warrior/warriors to group and check how they apply Sunder Armor on dummy target ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) Yes, expained in Pull Request Description - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> Analyze orginal behavior <!-- TRANSLATIONS: Anything new that the bots say in chat must be in a translatable format. This is done using GetBotTextOrDefault, which you can search for in the codebase to find examples. Your code needs to have English as the default fallback, while the full translations need to be in an SQL update file. The languages in the file are the nine language options supported by AzerothCore: English, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Taiwanese, Spanish, Spanish Mexico, and Russian. See data/sql/playerbots/updates/2025_12_27_ai_playerbot_fishing_text.sql as an example of a translation SQL update, whose content are called within the codebase at src/strategy/actions/FishingAction.cpp --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Any new bot dialogue lines are translated. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. -->	2026-05-30 14:14:54 -07:00
dillyns	4a63ee37e2	Shadow Priest Vampiric Embrac (#2410 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Shadow priest's Vampiric Embrace was incorrectly set as a debuff, and was in the combat strategy. Fixed it to be a buff, and move it to the noncombat strategy with other buffs ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> Get a shadow priest bot. They should now buff themselves with Vampiric Embrace. ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> <!-- TRANSLATIONS: Anything new that the bots say in chat must be in a translatable format. This is done using GetBotTextOrDefault, which you can search for in the codebase to find examples. Your code needs to have English as the default fallback, while the full translations need to be in an SQL update file. The languages in the file are the nine language options supported by AzerothCore: English, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Taiwanese, Spanish, Spanish Mexico, and Russian. See data/sql/playerbots/updates/2025_12_27_ai_playerbot_fishing_text.sql as an example of a translation SQL update, whose content are called within the codebase at src/strategy/actions/FishingAction.cpp --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Any new bot dialogue lines are translated. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. -->	2026-05-29 23:09:28 -07:00
Crow	9bba4b78dd	Overhaul party buff/greater blessing system (#2358 ) ## Pull Request Description These changes I originally made for myself because as a person who really likes to raid with bots, I felt like the current group buff system is fundamentally broken, and I needed something more consistent and optimal. I debated a lot whether to PR this because it's such an extensive overhaul that was almost entirely reliant on AI, and I know that wishmaster still has a PR open regarding the greater blessings. I decided to after a couple of conversations so at least people can look at it and see if it's something that they want. The tl;dr version is that this PR overhauls buff handling in two related areas: 1. It adds a dedicated greater blessing assignment system. 2. It generalizes party/raid reagent-buff handling for Paladins, Druids, Mages, and Priests. Under this PR, greater blessings are determined by assignments for the current group, and those assignments are determined based on: 1. a hardcoded priority list of blessings for each spec; 2. the number of Paladins in the group; and 3. whether any Paladins have talents for Blessing of Sanctuary, Improved Blessing of Might, or Improved Blessing of Wisdom. Assignment determinations are cached in a value to avoid constant reevaluation. The exact priority list is: - All casters: Kings, Wisdom, Sanctuary, Might - Physical-only DPS (Rogues, Warriors, DKs): Might, Kings, Sanctuary, N/A - Hybrid DPS (Enh, Ret, Hunters, Cats): Might, Kings, Wisdom, Sanctuary - Druid tanks: Kings, Might, Sanctuary, Wisdom - Warrior and DK tanks: Kings, Might, Sanctuary, N/A - Paladin tank: Sanctuary, Might, Wisdom, Kings Note that Sanctuary is preferred over Kings for Paladin tanks because of the mana regen component but deprioritized for other tanks because Kings provides Agility. The extra 3% damage reduction from Sanctuary does not stack with Disc Priests’ Renewed Hope, which will have 100% uptime. For group buffs, logic is centralized so that class triggers use the same gating and upgrade rules for Gift of the Wild, Arcane Brilliance, Prayer of Fortitude, Prayer of Spirit, and Prayer of Shadow Protection. Also, Shadow Protection is now a default strategy for Priests (rshadow, which existed before but wasn’t added by default). I’ve added a config setting for the greater blessing system and adjusted the current config setting for group buffs. In each case, you can pick whether to disable the feature entirely, use it in all groups, or use it only in raid groups. The default is raid only for greater blessings and all groups for group buffs. Note that for group buffs, even if the config is enabled, they will be used only if at least 3 group/raid members on the same map are missing the buff family. This is mainly to stop group buff spamming during wipe recovery as bots are revived one-by-one. I renamed the Paladin buff strategies to align them with the actual blessing names: - `bhealth` -> `bsanc` - `bmana` -> `bwisdom` - `bdps` -> `bmight` - `bstats` -> `bkings` This is an intentional breaking change for saved strategy strings. Bots will need a one-time strategy reset after update. I removed bots telling you when they are out of reagents for greater blessings. If people like that though, I can add it back. A small cleanup is also included in TankPaladinStrategy: Holy Shield was subject to three overlapping health triggers with the same priority; I removed the two lower health thresholds which have no purpose. ## Feature Evaluation - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. I’m going to let the AI answer this one. > The minimum logic is: > - a shared config-gated check for whether group/raid buff variants are allowed > - a shared way to treat single and group variants as equivalent aura families > - a shared upgrade path from single-target buff to group buff when the group variant is appropriate > - a Paladin-only cached assignment model that decides which blessing family each Paladin should cover for the current group > - trigger/action wiring that only attempts casts when a group member is actually missing the assigned buff > > This avoids scattering separate per-class heuristics across many triggers and actions. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. Processing cost should be minimal but non-zero. The general party buff changes are limited to existing buff trigger paths and mostly replace duplicated checks with shared helpers. They do not add expensive default per-tick behavior outside those existing trigger evaluations. The Paladin greater blessing logic does add extra decision-making, but it is limited to Paladins, gated by config and group eligibility, subject to a delayed trigger evaluation of only once per 4s, and cached per group assignment set instead of recomputing the full assignment model on every action attempt. This PR also increases the throttle duration for group buff triggers to limit performance impact; I’m open to adjustments to these durations: - Mark of the Wild triggers were increased from 4s to 8s - Arcane Intellect triggers were increased from 4s to 8s - Priest buff triggers were increased to 8s (previously, Fortitude was 6s, Spirit was 4s, and Shadow Protection had no throttle) - There is now a 5s delay on buffing (greater blessings and group buffs) after bots log in—I was getting bots spamming buffs as soon as they logged in even when it was not necessary I’ve tested with pmon, and the impact is minimal—these are very cheap triggers even compared to standard bot rotational ability triggers. ## How to Test the Changes 1. Try different config settings to confirm that they work to enable/disable greater blessings/group buffs in the configured scenarios 2. For greater blessing changes: - test with one Paladin in a party/raid - test with multiple Paladins in a party/raid - confirm the Paladins divide blessing coverage instead of repeatedly overwriting each other - include at least one Paladin with Improved Blessing of Might and make sure it casts Might over Paladins without the talent; check the same with a Paladin with Improved Blessing of Wisdom - do not include a Paladin that knows Sanctuary, confirm any Paladin tank receives Kings instead (you’ll need a low-level Paladin for this since Sanctuary is a prot talent) - confirm bots cast blessings only when a member is actually missing the relevant blessing family - confirm there is a 5s delay on buffing when bots log in 3. For group buff changes: - confirm there is a 5s delay on buffing when bots log in - confirm that single buffs are used when there aren’t at least three unbuffed members in the same map, even if group buffs are enabled in the config 4. For all buffs, test with reagents missing to confirm fallback to single-target buffs and single blessings 5. Confirm the Paladin buff strategy names are changed after resetting AI ## Impact Assessment - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [ ] No, not at all - - [x] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) Discussed above in processing costs. - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) Yes—that is the purpose of this PR, to change default buffing behavior. - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) Yes, but I think it’s inevitable to add complexity to get greater blessings to function consistently, given the challenges brought by their mechanic of applying across each class. ## AI Assistance Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) I used GPT-5.4 extensively for this overhaul. It’s much more complicated than I could handle on my own. I’ve done a lot of testing and have reviewed the code and provided plenty of revisions, but I cannot say I can perfectly explain each addition and how it works, not even close. ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Any new bot dialogue lines are translated. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers --------- Co-authored-by: Keleborn <22352763+Celandriel@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: bash <hermensb@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Revision <tkn963@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: kadeshar <kadeshar@gmail.com>	2026-05-29 23:08:21 -07:00
ThePenguinMan96	8ca6e42f10	Druid Overhaul (#2392 ) <img width="1274" height="952" alt="druids" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/7390d7e5-ed99-4eb3-8802-8c2f457d7c86" /> Hello playerbots community!! After my pvp gear update, I was itching to get back to class strategies. I was testing raids, and noticed that druids... Well, they kinda sucked. They had glaring issues, would randomly die from bugs, and overall felt bad. Looking at issues discussed on github/discord, I decided to start working on a druid update. I started with the boomkin, and made a boomkin PR, but there were some technical issues with the storing of the eclipse mapping not clearing, and it was not good... I closed that PR, and went back to the drawing board, with one goal in mind: Make the druid class function as best as possible WHILST keeping the code consistent with what already exists. There is a TON of _yoink and twist_ (copy and paste with or without slight edits), and anything that is custom/new is discussed in the section below. I am very proud and excited to release this though - after 45 days of coding and testing, the druid finally feels good to have in the group. Disclaimer - this PR aims to address bugs, utility, and overall performance of Druids. It will not magically make them top DPS. I have done hours of testing, and druids can occasionally top the charts - but inconsistently. Boomkins are inconsistent due to Eclipse (until later gear phases), and Feral Cats are incredibly dependent on positioning, timing, combo points, energy, clearcasting procs... The stars have to align for things to go right for the Cat (It doesn't help that all movement, targeting, and actions are ran through the same engine, so cats really suffer in boss fights with scripted movement) But the changes I have made help those situations occur a fair bit more frequently. Let's dive in! <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> A druid overhaul across all four specs — new Cat stealth and CC systems, Eclipse tracking and rotation fixes for Balance, a Bear threat rotation rework, a Resto healing priority overhaul, and a restructured CC and AoE strategy architecture. --- ## Talent & Glyph Config - Balance: Moved points out of Improved Moonfire and into Nature's Reach for threat reduction and extended cast range. - Bear: Moved points out of King of the Jungle (15% enrage damage) and into Feral Instinct for increased Swipe damage and AoE threat. - Cat: Swapped the Glyph of Typhoon (useless for feral) for Glyph of Dash, which benefits the cat a ton in prowl. - Resto: Swapped Glyph of Rejuvenation for Glyph of Nourish (better HPS for difficult content), and Glyph of Typhoon (useless for resto) for Glyph of Dash. Moved one point from Nature's Bounty to Empowered Touch. --- ## Balance - New skill - Typhoon: Added Typhoon, triggered by "enemy within melee," using cone targeting logic ported from Cone of Cold. Typhoon is from the "balance pvp" spec only, and is housed in the shared AoE strategy. - New skill - Cyclone: Added Cyclone targeting the RTI CC-marked target (default moon). Incapacitates for 6 seconds with full damage immunity — cannot be broken by AoE. Priority 24.0f > Hibernate (23.0f) > Entangling Roots (22.0f). (See CC Implementation in the code notes below.) - Bug fix - Eclipse cooldown tracking: Eclipse procs referenced a cooldown not registered in the database, so boomkins immediately reverted to the wrong filler after an Eclipse buff fell off. Fixed with manual timestamp tracking. (See Eclipse Cooldown Tracking in the code notes below.) - Bug fix — Starfall no longer pulls out-of-combat hostile enemies: Previously fired on cooldown regardless of surroundings — its 36-yard radius (the largest AoE in the game) could silently pull entire unengaged packs. Now suppressed if any non-combat hostile NPC is within 40 yards. (See Starfall Pull Safety in the code notes below.) - Filler changed to Starfire: Starfire is now the filler (priority 5.4) over Wrath (5.3). Starfire has a 100% spellpower coefficient vs. Wrath's 12%, is more mana-efficient per point of damage, and has a 100% eclipse proc chance on crit vs. Wrath's 40%. In practice this significantly reduced mana consumption, especially before level 40 when Moonkin Form's mana-on-crit passive isn't available. - Moonfire / Insect Swarm on Attacker rework: Previously tied to the light AoE trigger (2+ enemies, 13.0f), causing low-level boomkins to multi-dot instead of casting fillers — mana-inefficient at low levels where targets rarely live long enough to tick the full DoT. Re-added as dedicated on-attacker triggers at lower priority than the fillers, so they fire only as a movement fallback. The triggers have been changed to override the TTL check (time to life), similar to the warlocks DoTs. - Hurricane channel check rework: Previously cancelled based on distance from the bot — enemies could leave the AoE but remain within 30 yards, keeping the channel alive. Now reads the Hurricane DynamicObject's actual radius and counts only attackers physically inside it. (See Hurricane Channel Cancel in the code notes below.) --- ## Cat - Prowl (Stealth): Implemented using the same logic as the existing Rogue stealth system. The bot enters Prowl when out of combat and a target is within range. Engagement distances are: - 30 yards baseline - −10 yards if the target already has a victim (engaged in combat) - −10 more yards if the target is also moving (minimum 10 yards) - +15 yards in Battlegrounds or Arenas - Enemy player targets take priority over grind/DPS targets when evaluating distance. - Prowl openers: The bot approaches the target in Prowl and opens based on approach angle and level: - From behind: Ravage (learned at level 32). Before Ravage is learned, Shred is used as the opener. - From the front: Pounce (stun + bleed, learned at level 36). Before Pounce is learned, Claw is used as the opener. - New skill - Maim: Added Maim as a 5 second stun-finisher at 5 combo points, but only against player targets. It will only fire when Rip and Savage Roar are already active. - Innervate on healer: Cats now cast Innervate when a healer drops below the low mana threshold (`AiPlayerbot.LowMana`, default 15%). (See Healer Low Mana Framework in the code notes below for the shared value/trigger infrastructure backing this.) - Predator's Swiftness with CC spells: Added a twotrigger pairing Predator's Swiftness (the instant-cast proc from finishing moves) with the existing CC triggers (Cyclone, Hibernate, Entangling Roots). Feral cats can now instant-cast CC the RTI CC-marked target (default moon) after a finisher using the Predator's Swiftness proc. - Predator's Swiftness with Rebirth: Added a twotrigger pairing Predator's Swiftness with the combat resurrection trigger. Cats can now use a Predator's Swiftness proc to instantly cast Rebirth on a dead party member. - Bug fix - Autoattack no longer breaks prowl: `MeleeAction::isUseful()` now returns false while the bot has the Prowl aura, preventing autoattack from breaking stealth before an opener spell fires. The code comment notes this pattern should be reused for a future Rogue autoattack in stealth fix. - Bug fix - Non-prowl skills no longer break prowl: `isUseful()` overrides were added to Feral Charge (Cat), Mangle (Cat), Swipe (Cat), Rake to return false while Prowl is active, preventing accidental prowl breaks before the opener fires. - Bug fix - Clearcasting proc with energy spells: Added dedicated `ClearcastingTrigger` / action pairings to ensure Clearcasting procs are consumed immediately. On single target, Shred is used; on AoE, Swipe (Cat) is used. This prevents the cat from using it's valuable clearcasting proc on a low energy spell (rake, feral charge - cat, cower, etc). This also fixes a bug where Clearcasting would sometimes linger for 4+ seconds without being used, as energy-based spells do not recognize the free cast and would not fire until their energy condition was met. - Tiger's Fury rework: TF previously fired on cooldown as a default action, meaning the bot would use it at full or near-full energy and gain no benefit from the energy it generates. The trigger now requires energy to be below 30 before firing, ensuring the bot recovers the full 60 energy granted by the King of the Jungle talent. - Faerie Fire (Feral) rework for cat: With Omen of Clarity, spams on cooldown to fish for Clearcasting procs. Without it, applies as a normal debuff and does not reapply while active. (See Faerie Fire (Feral) Trigger in the code notes below.) - Feral Charge toggleable strategy: Feral Charge (Cat) is now housed in a dedicated `feral charge` strategy, enabled by default for Cat druids. It can be disabled with `co -feral charge` and re-enabled with `co +feral charge`. Disabling this strategy can be useful for encounters where charging in would be unfavorable. - Rake on Melee Attackers removed: The Rake on Melee Attackers action was removed from the Cat AoE strategy. Applying Rake to multiple attackers and spreading out combo points produced far lower AoE DPS than simply continuing the single-target rotation. - Antiquated Omen of Clarity framework removed: `OmenOfClarityTrigger` and `CastOmenOfClarityAction` were not functional and have been removed. The `ClearcastingTrigger` appropriately tracks Omen of Clarity procs. I believe this was from TBC when Omen of Clarity was a spell. --- ## Bear - Berserk tracking for Mangle: A `berserk active` trigger fires Mangle (Bear) at priority 25.0f while Berserk is up. Previously, Mangle sat at 5.5f in the default actions while Swipe (Bear) sat at 25.0f on the light AoE trigger — meaning in any 2+ enemy encounter, Swipe would always win regardless of Berserk. Now Mangle (25.0f) sits above the AoE triggers (24.5f), so it takes priority during Berserk. It's pretty cool to see a Bear's dps on pull! - Faerie Fire (Feral) rework: Previously applied once and stopped. Now spams on cooldown for continuous threat generation (~3.5k threat per cast at level 80), and serves as a ranged soft-taunt fallback on the `lose aggro` trigger when Growl is on cooldown. (See Faerie Fire (Feral) Trigger in the code notes below.) - Lacerate rework: Previously, lacerate was a low priority default action and bears had no duration awareness. They would occasionally let 5 stacks of Lacerate fall off, resulting in pretty significant threat loss. Now, `LacerateTrigger` fires when the target has no Lacerate debuff, the stack count is below 5, or the remaining duration is ≤ 6 seconds. - Demoralizing Roar on single target: Previously, Demoralizing Roar only fired on the medium AoE trigger (3+ enemies, skipped on bosses). A dedicated trigger now applies it in any encounter, provided Vindication, Demoralizing Shout, or Curse of Weakness are not already present, as they don't stack with Demoralizing Roar. - Bug fix - Rebirth on bears: Bears no longer attempt to cast Rebirth in combat. The generic combat resurrection trigger was firing for all druid specs, causing bears to shift out of Dire Bear Form mid-fight to cast Rebirth — dropping their armor and HP while still holding aggro. Lots of sudden tank deaths... - Feral Charge toggleable strategy: Feral Charge (Bear) is now housed in a dedicated `feral charge` strategy, enabled by default for Bear druids. It can be disabled with `co -feral charge` and re-enabled with `co +feral charge`. Disabling this strategy can be useful for encounters where charging in would be unfavorable. --- ## Resto - Blanketing strategy: Added a `blanketing` strategy (enabled by default, `co -blanketing` to disable) that pre-HoTs group members with Wild Growth and Rejuvenation regardless of current health, prioritizing tanks → melee → ranged to maximize Revitalize uptime. (See Blanketing Strategy in the code notes below.) - Nature's Swiftness → instant Healing Touch combo: Nature's Swiftness was previously included in the boost strategy, where it would fire proactively on cooldown regardless of context. This wasted the proc on situations where it provided no benefit. It is now exclusively reactive — triggered at high priority (56.0f) when a party member hits critical health. A paired `nature's swiftness active` trigger then immediately fires Healing Touch (55.0f) on the lowest-health party member, consuming the proc as an instant-cast emergency heal. - Lifebloom priority lowered (29.0f → 13.0f): Lifebloom on the main tank is cast on Omen of Clarity procs. At 29.0f it previously outprioritised all low health reactive healing (21.4f), meaning a Clearcasting proc while a party member was at 25–44% HP would cause the bot to cast Lifebloom on the tank instead of Swiftmend or Nourish on the injured target. Lowered to 13.0f so it fires only when no reactive healing is queued. - Healing spell priority order reworked: All three reactive categories (critical, low, medium) now follow the same sequence: Swiftmend → Wild Growth → Nourish → Regrowth → Healing Touch. - Tranquility toggleable strategy: Tranquility is now housed in a dedicated `tranquility` strategy, enabled by default for Resto druids. It can be disabled with `co -tranquility`. In raids, Tranquility only heals the druid's own group — not the full raid — making it situationally poor during raid-wide damage or heavy movement phases. Disabling this strategy lets players suppress the cast on those encounters without affecting the rest of the healing rotation. --- ## CC & Strategy - Boost strategy: The boost strategy is assigned to all druid specs by default. It is spec-gated internally — Balance druids use it for Force of Nature (treants on cooldown), and Feral druids (both cat and bear) use it for Berserk. - CC strategy enabled by default: The CC strategy was previously not assigned to druids by default. It is now enabled for Balance and Feral Cat, with behavior gated by spec: - Balance receives the full RTI CC trigger set (Cyclone, Hibernate, Entangling Roots). - Feral cats only receive RTI CC triggers when Predator's Swiftness is active (see above). - AoE strategy reorganized: All AoE spells — Hurricane, Starfall, Typhoon, Swipe (Cat), and DoTs on attackers (Moonfire, Insect Swarm) — are now handled by the shared AoE strategy, consistent with how the rest of the playerbot project structures AoE logic. This does not affect Bear druids. - Aquatic Form while submerged: The non-combat strategy now shifts into Aquatic Form when the bot is fully submerged out of combat (`LIQUID_MAP_UNDER_WATER`). If the bot is in another shapeshift (Bear, Cat, Moonkin, Tree), it first shifts to caster form as a prerequisite before entering Aquatic Form. The trigger intentionally does not fire at the water surface (`LIQUID_MAP_IN_WATER`), or use the "swimming" trigger, because it caused the druid to loop caster form and aquatic form endlessly while surfaced. --- ## Code Consolidation & Refactoring - The Bear, Cat, Heal, and Caster strategy files have been renamed to Bear, Cat, Balance, and Resto respectively, to match the naming conventions used elsewhere in the project. - The Melee and Offheal strategy files have been deleted. The offheal healing logic is preserved in full — it now lives as an optional strategy (`CatOffhealStrategy`) inside `CatDruidStrategy`, sharing the same action node factories as the base cat strategy rather than duplicating them. - All action relevance values across the druid strategies have been converted from named constants (e.g. `ACTION_NORMAL`, `ACTION_HIGH + 4`) to explicit numerical floats (e.g. `10.0f`, `24.0f`). This makes priority ordering immediately visible in the source without needing to cross-reference the constant definitions. --- ## New Code & Project References ### Eclipse Cooldown Tracking (`DruidActions.cpp`) The previous implementation tracked the Eclipse cooldown using `EclipseSolarCooldownTrigger` and `EclipseLunarCooldownTrigger`, both of which extended `SpellCooldownTrigger` and called `bot->HasSpellCooldown(48517/48518)`. `SpellCooldownTrigger` is the standard project pattern for this — it works correctly for spells whose cooldowns are registered in the database. However, Eclipse (Solar) and Eclipse (Lunar) both have Cooldown: n/a in the DB. `HasSpellCooldown` always returned false, so boomkins never respected the cooldown and would revert to the wrong filler immediately after an Eclipse buff fell off. Since the cooldown can't be read from the DB, the fix tracks it manually. When `CastWrathAction::isUseful()` or `CastStarfireAction::isUseful()` detects that the corresponding Eclipse aura has become active, it records the current timestamp and suppresses the opposing filler for 30 seconds — the actual in-game cooldown duration. The timestamps are stored using `ManualSetValue<time_t>`, the same pattern as `LastSpellCastTimeValue` (`src/Ai/Base/Value/LastSpellCastTimeValue.h`), which is already used throughout the project to record when spells were last cast. Two new value classes — `EclipseSolarProcTimeValue` and `EclipseLunarProcTimeValue` — are registered in a new `DruidValueContextInternal` factory inside `DruidAiObjectContext.cpp`, following the same factory pattern as `DruidTriggerFactoryInternal` and `DruidAiObjectContextInternal` in the same file. Because these values live in the per-bot `AiObjectContext`, they are automatically destroyed when the bot logs out — no manual cleanup needed, and no shared state between bots. --- ### Healer Low Mana Framework (`PartyMemberToHeal.h/.cpp`, `HealthTriggers.h/.cpp`, `ValueContext.h`, `TriggerContext.h`) `HealerLowMana` and `HealerLowManaTrigger` are added to the shared base framework rather than the druid-specific code. Currently used by the Cat Innervate trigger; designed so Mana Tide Totem, Hymn of Hope, and similar spells from other classes can hook into the same trigger without duplicating the group-scanning logic. The pair follows the same pattern as the existing `PartyMemberToHeal` / `PartyMemberLowHealthTrigger` — the project's standard design for "scan the group for the most in-need member, then trigger when that member crosses a threshold." Value (`HealerLowMana : PartyMemberValue`): `Calculate()` walks the group reference list, skips non-healers via the existing `IsHeal()` check, and uses `MinValueCalculator` to return the lowest-mana healer as a `Unit`. Registered in `ValueContext.h` under the key `"healer low mana"`. Trigger* (`HealerLowManaTrigger : Trigger`): `GetTargetName()` returns `"healer low mana"`, which the base `Trigger::GetTarget()` resolves against the value context — exactly how `PartyMemberLowHealthTrigger::GetTargetName()` returns `"party member to heal"`. `IsActive()` calls `GetTarget()` and checks `GetPowerPct(POWER_MANA) < sPlayerbotAIConfig.lowMana`. The trigger doesn't extend `HealthInRangeTrigger` because that class is specifically for health (it reads the `"health"` value). Mana requires a direct `GetPowerPct(POWER_MANA)` call, so a plain `Trigger` with a custom `IsActive()` is used instead. Both are registered in the global `ValueContext.h` and `TriggerContext.h` rather than a class-specific factory, consistent with how all other `PartyMemberValue` subclasses are registered in the project. --- ### Blanketing Strategy (`RestoDruidStrategy.h/.cpp`, `DruidActions.h/.cpp`, `DruidAiObjectContext.cpp`) Strategy structure: `DruidBlanketStrategy` is a standalone `Strategy` overlay, not embedded inside `RestoDruidStrategy`. This is the same pattern as `DruidTranquilityStrategy`, `DruidBoostStrategy`, and `DruidCcStrategy` — additive overlays that layer behavior on top of the base strategy and can be toggled independently via `co +/-blanketing`. Triggers: Both `"wild growth blanket"` and `"rejuvenation blanket"` are instantiated as `BuffOnPartyTrigger(ai, spellName)` — the project's existing class from `GenericTriggers.h` for party-wide buff maintenance, used throughout the codebase for things like Blessings and Mark of the Wild. `BuffOnPartyTrigger` extends `BuffTrigger` and fires when any party member is missing the named aura. No custom trigger class was needed. Actions: Both actions inherit from a shared `CastBlanketHotAction` base that itself extends `CastSpellAction`. Inheriting from `CastSpellAction` means `isPossible()` is handled for free — spell known, off cooldown, target reachable, resources available. The constructor sets `range = botAI->GetRange("heal")` to use the standard healing range. `GetBlanketTarget(auraName)`: The custom part of the implementation. Walks the group in three prioritized passes — tanks first, then melee non-tanks, then ranged — returning the first eligible member found. Eligible is defined as: alive, not a GM, within `spellDistance`, and `!botAI->HasAura(auraName, member, false, true)` (not already carrying the HoT). Returns nullptr if every member is already covered. `isUseful()`: On both actions simply returns `GetTarget() != nullptr` — fires as long as `GetBlanketTarget` finds someone without the HoT, and suppresses itself the moment all targets are covered. --- ### CC Implementation — Cyclone, Hibernate, Entangling Roots (`DruidTriggers.h/.cpp`, `DruidActions.h/.cpp`, `GenericDruidStrategy.cpp`) The druid CC spells use the project's strict RTI-only pattern rather than the fallback "best candidate" pattern used by other classes (e.g., Mage Polymorph). `"rti cc target"` value: A direct raid icon lookup. Reads the `"rti cc"` string value (default `"moon"`, configurable per-bot via `rti cc <icon>`), converts it to a raid icon index, and returns the live `Unit` for that GUID. If no CC icon is set, it returns `nullptr`. There is no fallback to a best-candidate scan. Triggers* (`CycloneTrigger`, `HibernateTrigger`, `EntanglingRootsTrigger`): All three extend `HasCcTargetTrigger` and override `IsActive()`. The first check is always `"rti cc target"` — if it returns `nullptr`, the trigger is immediately silent. If an icon is set, it checks `"cc target"` (with the spell name as a qualifier) to verify the RTI target matches and delegates to `HasCcTargetTrigger::IsActive()`, which handles the "don't re-cast while already CC'd" check. Actions (`CastCycloneCcAction`, `CastHibernateCcAction`, `CastEntanglingRootsCcAction`): All three extend `CastCrowdControlSpellAction` rather than plain `CastSpellAction`. The action names are `"cyclone on cc"`, `"hibernate on cc"`, `"entangling roots on cc"` — not the raw spell names. This matters because `CastSpellAction` stores its constructor argument as both the action name and the spell name, and `isPossible()` calls `CanCastSpell(spell, target)` using that string. Passing `"cyclone on cc"` to `CastSpellAction` would resolve to spell ID 0 and silently return false forever. `CastCrowdControlSpellAction` keeps the spell name separate from the action name, avoiding this. `GetTargetValue()` on all three returns `context->GetValue<Unit>("rti cc target")` directly. Form prerequisite:* The action nodes for `"cyclone on cc"` and `"hibernate on cc"` have `NextAction("caster form")` as a prerequisite, so the bot automatically shifts out of Bear, Cat, or Moonkin form before casting. Entangling Roots has the same prerequisite. Priority order: Cyclone (24.0f) > Hibernate (23.0f) > Entangling Roots (22.0f). Cyclone is preferred because it works on any target type and the target is immune to all damage and healing while cycloned — it cannot be broken by AoE. Hibernate is beast/dragonkin only. Entangling Roots can be broken by damage. Feral Cat CC: Wired through `TwoTrigger` pairings with `"predator's swiftness"` (see Cat section above). Because the Predator's Swiftness proc makes the spell instant-cast, no form shift is needed — the cat casts directly from Cat Form after a finisher. --- ### Ferocious Bite Execute (`DruidTriggers.h`, `DruidCatActions.h`, `CatDruidStrategy.cpp`) Two separate triggers fire the same `CastFerociousBiteAction`, which is a plain `CastMeleeSpellAction` with no custom logic — all the intelligence lives in the triggers. `FerociousBiteTimeTrigger` ("ferocious bite time", 22.5f) — the normal rotation path. Requires 5 combo points, Savage Roar active with >10 seconds remaining, and Rip active on the target with >10 seconds remaining. The duration checks prevent spending combo points on Ferocious Bite when either buff is about to fall off and needs to be refreshed first. `FerociousBiteExecuteTrigger` ("ferocious bite execute", 24.0f) — the execute window, higher priority than the time trigger. Requires only 1 combo point, and fires when the target is below both 25% HP and 20,000 absolute HP. The dual condition is the key design detail: the 25% threshold alone would trigger on a raid boss at 25% health — which could still be millions of HP remaining. The 20,000 HP cap ensures the execute behavior only activates when the target is genuinely close to death, at which point dumping even a partial combo point buildup into Ferocious Bite is better than continuing a normal builder-spender cycle. --- ### Faerie Fire (Feral) Trigger (`DruidTriggers.h`) A single `FaerieFireFeralTrigger` class handles both Bear and Cat with spec-branched behavior inside `IsActive()`. It extends `DebuffTrigger` — the project's standard class for debuff maintenance on the current target — but overrides `IsActive()` to produce three distinct behaviors depending on form and talent state: Bear: Bypasses `DebuffTrigger::IsActive()` entirely. Returns true whenever the target is alive and in world, regardless of whether the debuff is already present. Every cast generates immediate threat and damage, so there is no reason to wait for it to fall off before recasting. Cat with Omen of Clarity (talent aura 16864): Same bypass — spams on cooldown to fish for Clearcasting procs. Faerie Fire (Feral) has no energy cost, making it a free input that can proc Omen of Clarity on any hit. Cat without Omen of Clarity: Falls through to `DebuffTrigger::IsActive()` — the standard base class behavior, which checks: target alive and in world, debuff not already present (`!botAI->HasAura("faerie fire (feral)", target)`), and estimated remaining lifetime of the target is at least `needLifeTime` seconds (default 8.0f — no point applying a 30-second debuff to something about to die). Applied as a normal debuff; does not reapply while active. Both spam paths additionally guard against Prowl — `IsActive()` returns false while the bot has the Prowl aura to prevent casting from breaking stealth. Strategy wiring: - Bear: standard rotation slot at 17.0f, plus wired into the `"lose aggro"` trigger at 25.5f as a soft-taunt fallback when Growl is on cooldown. - Cat: low-priority filler at 5.0f. --- ### Starfall Pull Safety (`DruidActions.cpp`) Starfall's 36-yard AoE radius is the largest in the game. A single cast near an unengaged patrol or mob pack would silently pull everything in that area. The previous implementation fired on cooldown with no awareness of the surrounding area. `CastStarfallAction::isUseful()` now applies two guards before allowing the cast: CC safety check (standard project pattern): reads `"current cc target"` and `"aoe position"`; suppresses the cast if the CC'd target is within `aoeRadius` of the bot's AoE position. Unengaged hostile NPC scan (custom): reads `"nearest hostile npcs"` (`NearestHostileNpcsValue`), which uses the project's standard `Acore::AnyUnitInObjectRangeCheck` + `Cell::VisitObjects` grid searcher at `sightDistance` (~50 yards). The value pre-filters via `AcceptUnit()`: non-players only, and `unit->IsHostileTo(bot)` must be true — this excludes neutral-faction trigger creatures, dummies, and invisible spawns that would otherwise appear in a raw range scan. The loop then applies four additional filters: - Skip null / dead / out-of-world units (standard guard). - Skip the current target — it is the reason we're in combat; its in-combat flag is already covered. - Skip `!bot->IsValidAttackTarget(unit)` — safety net for hostile-faction trigger creatures carrying `UNIT_FLAG_NON_ATTACKABLE` that `IsHostileTo` alone doesn't filter. - Skip units beyond 40 yards — Starfall's listed radius is 36; 40 adds a small buffer for patrols about to enter range. If any remaining unit is `!unit->IsInCombat()`, the cast is suppressed — that mob is unengaged and would be pulled. Why `"nearest hostile npcs"` and not `"attackers"`: `attackers` only contains units currently targeting the bot. We need to scan all hostile units in the area, not just those already aggro'd. --- ### Hurricane Channel Cancel (`DruidTriggers.h/.cpp`, `GenericDruidStrategy.cpp`) The previous cancel condition checked whether fewer than 3 enemies were within 30 yards of the bot. This is a poor proxy — enemies could scatter laterally but still sit within that radius, keeping the channel alive while none of them were taking damage. The replacement is `HurricaneChannelCheckTrigger`, which locates the actual Hurricane `DynamicObject` on the field and measures from it directly. `IsActive()` logic: 1. Checks `bot->GetCurrentSpell(CURRENT_CHANNELED_SPELL)` — if the bot isn't channeling at all, returns false immediately. If it is channeling but the spell isn't a Hurricane rank, also returns false. This check is necessary because `CURRENT_CHANNELED_SPELL` is a slot, not a specific spell — the same cancel action is reused for other channeled spells in the codebase, so the trigger must verify it's specifically Hurricane before acting. 2. Iterates through `HURRICANE_SPELL_IDS` (all five ranks: 16914, 17401, 17402, 27012, 48467) calling `bot->GetDynObject(spellId)` until a non-null result is found. Hurricane places a `DynamicObject` on the field that the server uses as the actual AoE cylinder — each damage tick queries which units are inside it. The DynamicObject is keyed by spell ID, so the trigger must try each rank to find whichever one the bot currently has learned and placed. 3. Reads `dynObj->GetRadius()` — the actual radius stored on the DynamicObject itself rather than a hardcoded constant. This matches exactly what the server uses to calculate damage, so the trigger's cancel condition is spatially identical to the server's hit detection. 4. Walks the `"attackers"` GuidVector and counts how many live attackers are within `dynObj->GetRadius()` of the DynamicObject's position using `unit->GetDistance(dynObj->GetPosition()) <= radius`. 5. Returns `count < minEnemies` (default 3). The trigger fires — cancelling the channel — when fewer than 3 attackers are physically inside the Hurricane AoE. Why `"attackers"` and not a full area scan: Hurricane only deals damage to units that are attacking the bot (or in its threat list). Scanning all nearby hostile units would cause premature cancellation if non-aggro'd enemies happened to be standing outside the AoE. Attackers is the right scope. Strategy wiring: The trigger is paired with `NextAction("cancel channel", 22.0f)` in the AoE strategy for both Balance and Resto druids. The cancel priority (22.0f) sits below the Hurricane cast priority (23.0f), so if the medium AoE trigger re-activates on the same tick the cancel fires — meaning enemies came back into range — the new cast wins over the cancel. --- ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. Most new triggers are simple aura or cooldown checks. The heavier ones are the group scans (for the blanketing HoTs and the healer mana check), but these are identical in cost to group scans already running throughout the project (all of the party member health checks). The Starfall safety check is the only genuinely new scan — it looks for nearby hostile NPCs before allowing a cast, using the same grid search the project already uses elsewhere. That being said, it's loaded on the end of the trigger/action pairing - so in the StarfallNoCDTrigger, the bot has to already have learned starfall, already be in combat, and have Starfall off of cooldown and ready to use. The Hurricane cancel check only runs while the bot is actively channeling, so it's tightly gated. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. Negligible for almost everything in this PR. The vast majority of new logic is aura/buff/debuff lookups and cooldown checks that cost nothing at scale. The group scans for blanketing and healer mana follow the same pattern as existing party scans that already run on every healer bot every tick. No new unbounded operations, no shared state between bots. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> All druids perform a bit better now - I'd say test the branch out with the druids y'all currently use. JUST REMEMBER TO DO reset botAI or talents spec "x" again, since there have been some strategies changed!! The big one being the blanketing strategy for resto druids. They heal so much better now. Also being able to control when they pre-hot is really great. ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) Tested before an after with the same performance logs. I tested it with a 25 man group of only druids versus my normal 25 man group on several raid bosses - no difference in pmon. - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) Druid bots currently have several bugs/issues with them. This doesn't exactly change the skills they were already using - just refines the scenarios in which they should be used. For example, a boomkin won't use starfall when there is a pack within range but not aggro'd. You can turn off feral charge for cat druids now, so they don't fly into a bosses aoe (locust swarm on anub, overload on iron council). Bear druids don't battle rez anymore. They just feel less clunky and heal/hold aggro better. - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) There are only 2 changes to files outside of the druid strategy, which is the healer low mana framework and the modification to autoattack not being used while in prowl. ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> AI was used heavily in the process to make this PR. First in the research necessary into how systems work, to the initial code implementation, to the testing results (explaining the outcome/why it sucks), to the fix, and then to the review of the code at the end. I will say that after I started researching how to use AI, use .md files for context, clearing sessions, I got a lot better results. I'll be the first to admit that it is 10 times easier to introduce a bug with AI than it is to solve one or implement something new. That is why every time it proposed a change, I asked it if the code was consistent with the project (Already present somewhere else) and if it wasn't, it was heavily scrutinized. It was written with Claude Code with Sonnet 4.6 (high), and peer reviewed by Github copilot. AI also made the description part of the PR, in which I modified myself. <!-- TRANSLATIONS: Anything new that the bots say in chat must be in a translatable format. This is done using GetBotTextOrDefault, which you can search for in the codebase to find examples. Your code needs to have English as the default fallback, while the full translations need to be in an SQL update file. The languages in the file are the nine language options supported by AzerothCore: English, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Taiwanese, Spanish, Spanish Mexico, and Russian. See data/sql/playerbots/updates/2025_12_27_ai_playerbot_fishing_text.sql as an example of a translation SQL update, whose content are called within the codebase at src/strategy/actions/FishingAction.cpp --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Any new bot dialogue lines are translated. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). Wiki commands @Dreathean While this PR does add strategies, they are all enabled by default: co +feral charge (feral druids, both cat and bear) - enabled by default, allows/prevents the use of feral charge co +tranquility (resto druids) - enabled by default, allows/prevents the use of tranquility co +blanketing (resto druids) - enabled by default, allows the druid to pre-hot with wild growth and rejuvenation But it would be worth a mention on the wiki - there are scenarios where having these strategies disabled would be beneficial. ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. --> @kadeshar @Celandriel @brighton-chi Thank you for taking the time to look this over. There is a lot of copied code, a bit of new code (which is explained in the code explanation part of it, but please still ask questions), and a lot of refactoring. Please remember to reset the bot strategies before/after you test this branch, due to the several changes (blanketing, feral charge strategies). Reset with reset botAI or "talents spec balance pve" for any testers out there that didn't know. If/When this PR goes to the master branch, it will need to be noted to the people this same thing about resetting strategies.	2026-05-23 11:42:08 -07:00
dillyns	6294199343	DKs should use weapon stones (#2407 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Death Knights were not using weapon stones. This PR lets them use and initialize with weapon stones. ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> Create an rndbot DK. They should be init with weaponstones and use them on their weapon. Or give a weapon stone to an altbot. They should use it on their weapon. ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> <!-- TRANSLATIONS: Anything new that the bots say in chat must be in a translatable format. This is done using GetBotTextOrDefault, which you can search for in the codebase to find examples. Your code needs to have English as the default fallback, while the full translations need to be in an SQL update file. The languages in the file are the nine language options supported by AzerothCore: English, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Taiwanese, Spanish, Spanish Mexico, and Russian. See data/sql/playerbots/updates/2025_12_27_ai_playerbot_fishing_text.sql as an example of a translation SQL update, whose content are called within the codebase at src/strategy/actions/FishingAction.cpp --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Any new bot dialogue lines are translated. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. -->	2026-05-22 21:57:20 -07:00
dillyns	1443668694	Make arcane barrage the alternate for arcane blast for level 60 mages (#2401 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Adds arcane barrage as the alternate for arcane blast so level 60 arcane mages who dont have arcane blast yet will use arcane barrage whenever available. For level 60 arcane mages, its actually better dps to alternate between arcane barrage and arcane missiles to fish for Missile Barrage procs. Before: <img width="576" height="403" alt="Screenshot_20260518_024601" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/567f198f-3655-4449-86e6-2cfffd19a529" /> After: <img width="579" height="381" alt="Screenshot_20260518_025040" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/803f5380-58d3-490a-a3b1-e2941e2f0048" /> ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> Have a level 60 arcane mage dps a dummy. To compare to the old "rotation" of just using arcane missiles you can "ss Arcane Barrage" ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> <!-- TRANSLATIONS: Anything new that the bots say in chat must be in a translatable format. This is done using GetBotTextOrDefault, which you can search for in the codebase to find examples. Your code needs to have English as the default fallback, while the full translations need to be in an SQL update file. The languages in the file are the nine language options supported by AzerothCore: English, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Taiwanese, Spanish, Spanish Mexico, and Russian. See data/sql/playerbots/updates/2025_12_27_ai_playerbot_fishing_text.sql as an example of a translation SQL update, whose content are called within the codebase at src/strategy/actions/FishingAction.cpp --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Any new bot dialogue lines are translated. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. --> Co-authored-by: Keleborn <22352763+Celandriel@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-05-22 21:47:38 -07:00
Crow	3a7e3e2719	Fix Mages' Armor Strategies & Light Refactor (#2390 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Mages have a "bdps" strategy to use Molten Armor (default for Fire and Arcane) and "bmana" strategy to use Mage Armor (default for Frost). The existing code uses a series of alternatives for armor (Molten->Mage->Ice->Frost), which is needed for Mages that have not learned Molten or Mage. However, I was noticing that sometimes my Fire and Arcane Mages would end up with Mage Armor, presumably because there could be a situation in which the casting of Molten Armor failed and the fallback to Mage Armor kicked in (for example, due to there being not enough mana to cast Molten Armor). This PR makes bdps always mean Molten Armor, if it is learned, and bmana always mean Mage Armor, if it is learned, by gating through triggers. Other changes: - Added bdps and bmana to default Mage combat strategies (still bdps for Fire and Arcane and bmana for Frost) so that Mages will reapply armor if it expires in combat. - Deleted Arcane Explosion strategy--it was not fully implemented because there was no associated action (such as through a CastArcaneExplosionAction class). I debated implementing it, but there isn't a suitable targeting mechanism that exists in the code from what I can tell. Arcane Mages generally just use Blizzard for AoE (and Flamestrike with PoM); Arcane Explosion is useful to use if (1) a player is moving or (2) mobs are almost dead in an AoE situation. Scenario (1) is irrelevant for bots since they cannot cast while moving. With respect to scenario (2), the existing AoE triggers in fact look for highest HP mobs so to implement Arcane Explosion in a useful manner would probably require a new Value, and that is not worth it for what would be miniscule benefit anyway. - General cleanups of Mage code (e.g., deleted empty ActionNodes). These were based on a quick review; I did not do any sort of detailed or comprehensive review and have no desire to with this PR. Note: I know that FrostMageStrategy.cpp had a Fireball alternative for Frostfire Bolt, but I deleted it anyway because the same ActionNode is already in GenericMageStrategy.cpp. - General cleanups of AiFactory default combat/noncombat strategies (e.g., removal of deprecated bdps and bmana strategies for Shamans). ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. Added getAlternatives for the armor strategies; this approach already exists for Druids. Added one new trigger for Molten Armor that is throttled by 10s like the existing Mage Armor trigger. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> Give a Mage the "bdps" strategy. They should cast Molten Armor. Make them cast a different armor. After the trigger throttle period (10s), they should reapply Molten Armor. Same goes for bmana and Mage Armor. Try this in combat, and it should work too. ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) The point of this PR is to fix the default Mage armor buffing behavior. - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> I had GPT-5.4 present a couple of possibilities to fix the issue of Mage Armor being cast with bdps, and from there I settled on the getAlternatives approach. I did everything else. <!-- TRANSLATIONS: Anything new that the bots say in chat must be in a translatable format. This is done using GetBotTextOrDefault, which you can search for in the codebase to find examples. Your code needs to have English as the default fallback, while the full translations need to be in an SQL update file. The languages in the file are the nine language options supported by AzerothCore: English, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Taiwanese, Spanish, Spanish Mexico, and Russian. See data/sql/playerbots/updates/2025_12_27_ai_playerbot_fishing_text.sql as an example of a translation SQL update, whose content are called within the codebase at src/strategy/actions/FishingAction.cpp --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Any new bot dialogue lines are translated. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. --> @Dreathean Perhaps the wiki can be updated to document the bdps and bmana strategies for Mages?	2026-05-22 19:25:48 -07:00
Crow	cd2fe2f9a1	Use Stones for Prot Paladins & Reduce Oils (#2405 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Back when I did the Stones/Oils PR, I gave Wizard Oil to Prot Paladins. I was operating based on their mechanics in TBC and have since realized that their damage is much more physical-based in WotLK as opposed to spell-based in TBC. So I've changed them to now get stones upon maintenance and apply stones. I also reduced weapon oils given during maintenance from 4 to 2 stacks. I did 4 originally because oils stack to 5 so it would align with the amount given of stones and poisons (which stack to 20). But 4 inventory slots taken up by oils is excessive, and 2 still last far longer than buffing reagents in a raid context. So this is just to reduce inventory clutter. Other stuff is just little code stuff like reformatting or reordering things to be more efficient. ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. There's nothing new--essentially with respect to consumables, prot paladins now are lumped with ret. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> Create a prot paladin, turn on selfbot. Use maintenance and the paladin should be given stones and no oils. The paladin should then apply the stone to its weapon (if it is equipping a level-eligible weapon). Create a caster, turn on selfbot. Use maintenance and they should be given 2 stacks of oils. ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) Prot paladins will now use stones in their inventory and will not use oils in their inventories. This is better for their mechanics. - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> <!-- TRANSLATIONS: Anything new that the bots say in chat must be in a translatable format. This is done using GetBotTextOrDefault, which you can search for in the codebase to find examples. Your code needs to have English as the default fallback, while the full translations need to be in an SQL update file. The languages in the file are the nine language options supported by AzerothCore: English, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Taiwanese, Spanish, Spanish Mexico, and Russian. See data/sql/playerbots/updates/2025_12_27_ai_playerbot_fishing_text.sql as an example of a translation SQL update, whose content are called within the codebase at src/strategy/actions/FishingAction.cpp --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Any new bot dialogue lines are translated. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. -->	2026-05-22 19:25:07 -07:00
Crow	92081c9f1a	Expand PWS Usage by Disc Priests (#2403 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Disc Priests currently do not use Power Word: Shield until a party member is at "medium health" (configurable, default 65%). That is the second-level healing threshold; at the highest level, "almost full health" (configurable, default 85%), Disc Priests will use only Prayer of Mending and Renew. This PR adds PWS as the highest priority healing action starting at "almost full health." ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. Added new action "power word: shield on party" to "party member almost full health" trigger in HealPriestStrategy.cpp (the "heal" strategy, which is the default strategy for Disc Priests, as Holy Priests use the "holy heal" strategy). ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> Group up with a Disc Priest and take damage; confirm that PWS is cast when you drop below your configured almost full health threshold. ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) PWS is the signature ability of Disc. Priests, and delaying it to 65% is significantly limiting their effectiveness in group content, particularly with raid bosses that deal raidwide damage and in heroic dungeons, where waiting until the tank hits 65% is a death wish. This single change makes an enormous difference in their effectiveness. See below for before/after change for Eredar Twins (focus on the activity). Before: <img width="693" height="397" alt="Screenshot 2026-05-18 201949" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/18ad84c7-9ad8-4c39-94e7-650c9bb5f36e" /> After: <img width="746" height="409" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6240f118-e12f-44c7-a1af-373e94985957" /> - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> <!-- TRANSLATIONS: Anything new that the bots say in chat must be in a translatable format. This is done using GetBotTextOrDefault, which you can search for in the codebase to find examples. Your code needs to have English as the default fallback, while the full translations need to be in an SQL update file. The languages in the file are the nine language options supported by AzerothCore: English, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Taiwanese, Spanish, Spanish Mexico, and Russian. See data/sql/playerbots/updates/2025_12_27_ai_playerbot_fishing_text.sql as an example of a translation SQL update, whose content are called within the codebase at src/strategy/actions/FishingAction.cpp --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Any new bot dialogue lines are translated. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. -->	2026-05-22 19:24:47 -07:00
kadeshar	f1a2736a31	Polymorph spam fix (#2373 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Fix for polymorph spam in combat ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> 1. Invite mage bot which have polymorph (check `spells polymorph`) 2. Enter combat and mage should not spam polymorph 3. Enter another combat best with multiple mobs and one of this mobs mark moon 4. Mage should cast polymorph on marked mob ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> <!-- TRANSLATIONS: Anything new that the bots say in chat must be in a translatable format. This is done using GetBotTextOrDefault, which you can search for in the codebase to find examples. Your code needs to have English as the default fallback, while the full translations need to be in an SQL update file. The languages in the file are the nine language options supported by AzerothCore: English, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Taiwanese, Spanish, Spanish Mexico, and Russian. See data/sql/playerbots/updates/2025_12_27_ai_playerbot_fishing_text.sql as an example of a translation SQL update, whose content are called within the codebase at src/strategy/actions/FishingAction.cpp --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Any new bot dialogue lines are translated. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. -->	2026-05-15 23:26:03 -07:00
kadeshar	cc6f6c2c3a	Thorns reapply fix (#2338 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Allowed druid cast Thorns on target which already have Thorns on him to extend duration. Related with: #2290 ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> 1. Invite 2 bot (one of them must be druid which can cast thorns) 2. Select second bot and use commad `cast thorns` 3. Wait until buff timer decrease 4. Use again same command 5. Druid should cast spell ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> To understand reason. <!-- TRANSLATIONS: Anything new that the bots say in chat must be in a translatable format. This is done using GetBotTextOrDefault, which you can search for in the codebase to find examples. Your code needs to have English as the default fallback, while the full translations need to be in an SQL update file. The languages in the file are the nine language options supported by AzerothCore: English, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Taiwanese, Spanish, Spanish Mexico, and Russian. See data/sql/playerbots/updates/2025_12_27_ai_playerbot_fishing_text.sql as an example of a translation SQL update, whose content are called within the codebase at src/strategy/actions/FishingAction.cpp --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Any new bot dialogue lines are translated. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. -->	2026-05-02 12:19:37 -07:00
Keleborn	866a73dfbf	Clean up unused variables (#2268 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Clean up a bunch of additional unused variable warnings. ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> - Does this change add bot messages to translate? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> - Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> Claude reviewed the warnings log from a build and suggested a series of changes. I focused just on these warnings for now. Every line was reviewed. Some sections need to be reviewed by author for intent. ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. -->	2026-04-24 23:03:36 +02:00
kadeshar	19249e90a0	Pull strategy migration (#2310 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Pull strategy migration from cmangos for tank specializations ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> 1. Invite bot tank 2. Use `reset boAI` or `nc +pull,+pull back` + `co +pull,+pull back` 3. Order bot to pull using command `pull my target` or `pull rti target` 4. Bot should run to mob, use ranged skill and back to point where he started pull Without `pull back` strategy bot run to mob, use ranged skill and wait on mob until he come to bot ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> Help with migration and solving some problems <!-- TRANSLATIONS: Anything new that the bots say in chat must be in a translatable format. This is done using GetBotTextOrDefault, which you can search for in the codebase to find examples. Your code needs to have English as the default fallback, while the full translations need to be in an SQL update file. The languages in the file are the nine language options supported by AzerothCore: English, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Taiwanese, Spanish, Spanish Mexico, and Russian. See data/sql/playerbots/updates/2025_12_27_ai_playerbot_fishing_text.sql as an example of a translation SQL update, whose content are called within the codebase at src/strategy/actions/FishingAction.cpp --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Any new bot dialogue lines are translated. - - [ ] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. --> Stability test after randomize new bots <img width="465" height="172" alt="obraz" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6e39a8c0-f23b-47cc-852a-71fa98044a31" /> --------- Co-authored-by: Keleborn <22352763+Celandriel@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-04-17 14:07:47 -07:00
kadeshar	5d7fb9e97d	Druid - lifebloom (#2292 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Restoration Druid now use lifebloom when get Clearcasting proc. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> 1. Invite to group restoration druid and tank 2. Attack target (for example dummy) 3. When druid heals and get clearcasting should cast lifebloom on tank ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) Restoration druid by default use lifebloom on tank when got clearcasting proc. - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> Copilot CLI to review. <!-- TRANSLATIONS: Anything new that the bots say in chat must be in a translatable format. This is done using GetBotTextOrDefault, which you can search for in the codebase to find examples. Your code needs to have English as the default fallback, while the full translations need to be in an SQL update file. The languages in the file are the nine language options supported by AzerothCore: English, Korean, French, German, Chinese, Taiwanese, Spanish, Spanish Mexico, and Russian. See data/sql/playerbots/updates/2025_12_27_ai_playerbot_fishing_text.sql as an example of a translation SQL update, whose content are called within the codebase at src/strategy/actions/FishingAction.cpp --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Any new bot dialogue lines are translated. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. --> <img width="728" height="268" alt="obraz" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/25bf2b22-d8e5-4755-9f44-d24246cceae2" /> <img width="506" height="196" alt="obraz" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f4e4897c-496a-412f-bde7-a88f15d9099c" />	2026-04-10 22:24:38 -07:00
Keleborn	5e2f2823ec	fix(Core/Paladin): Remove duplicate trigger registrations (#2301 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> The "lay on hands", "lay on hands on party", "blessing of protection on party", and "divine plea" triggers were registered twice with conflicting priorities, causing double-firing. Removes the old block while preserving the new "hand of freedom on party" trigger. @kadeshar Can you confirm this matches your intent? ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [X] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [X] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [X] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> - Does this change add bot messages to translate? - - [X] No - - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> - Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [X] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> Claude spotted the error on review and ran ahead with a fix, but I confirmed that it is infact duplicate. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> ## Final Checklist - - [X] Stability is not compromised. - - [X] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [X] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [X] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. --> Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-04-10 15:17:03 -07:00
kadeshar	4c9b0adb72	Fire mage cc (#2281 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Added support for fire mage cc spells like: Dragon's Breath (disorient) and Blast Wave (knockback) ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> 1. Invite fire mage to party 2. Add strategy `nc +duel` 3. Start duel and go near bot 4. Bot should use frost nova/dragon's breath/blast wave depends of cooldowns ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) Mages cc by default - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> - Does this change add bot messages to translate? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> - Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> OpenCode, for research differences between CcStrategy implementation between cmangos and ac playerbots ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. -->	2026-04-04 13:00:51 +02:00
dillyns	4ba05962c9	Add fireball fallback for frostfire bolt for frost mage (#2271 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Low level frost mages who do not yet have Frostfire Bolt never use Brain Freeze procs, since it is trying to use Frostfire Bolt. This adds Fireball as the fallback for Frostfire Bolt, so frost mages without frostfire bolt will still use Fireball when they get Brain Freeze ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> Get a frost mage without Frostfire Bolt who has the Brain Freeze talent. A level 60 frost mage works for example. Have them attack something until Brain Freeze procs. They should now use Fireball instead of ignoring it. ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> - Does this change add bot messages to translate? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> - Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. -->	2026-04-04 13:00:26 +02:00
Crow	f5363c9465	Fix Warrior Battle Shout Spam (#2259 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> There is a known problem that Warriors will repeatedly spam Battle Shout (BS) if there is a stronger Blessing of Might (BoM) present that they cannot override. It has been long known that the issue arises from the lack of a BS trigger. It was not a problem in the past because BS and BoM used to (erroneously) stack, and that was eliminated when AC ported TC's stacking rules. This PR adds a trigger for BS that prevents the bot from attempting to cast it if a stronger BoM (or Greater BoM) is present. To do this, it compares the AP bonus of any BoM/GBoM applied to the Warrior bot, and then will attempt BS only if the Warrior has a stronger one. I also did some minor reformatting of the other Warrior triggers, mostly just deleting comments and extra braces. ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. The trigger is fairly complicated because it uses an AP comparison and takes into account spell ranks and the talent Commanding Presence (which increases the strength of BS). The bug could be solved by a very simple aura check for BoM/GBoM. That's suboptimal though because BS will be stronger if the Paladin has a lower rank of BoM or the Warrior has Commanding Presence and the Paladin does not have Improved BoM. At the end of the day, this is a new trigger that runs every tick, but it's not really more expensive than generic BuffTriggers, which all do this. And it is needed to solve a very annoying bug that essentially renders Warriors useless in any optimized raid unless BS is disabled. I don't believe this more robust trigger (as opposed to just calling BuffTrigger and additionally checking for any BoM/GBoM aura) has any further impact on performance--any added logic is practically free AFAIK (e.g., checking if the bot has a particular talent is just an integer lookup). ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> Form a group with a Warrior and Paladin bot, with the Warrior bot having a weaker BS than the Paladin's BoM (this is naturally the case at max level, unless the Warrior has Commanding Presence and the Paladin does not have Improved BoM). Have the Paladin cast BoM on the Warrior if it has not done so automatically. Enter combat and see if the Warrior uses BS. Try again with the Warrior having a stronger BS. ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [ ] No, not at all - - [x] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) As noted above, this is a new BuffTrigger that runs every tick. - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) Default behavior was broken. - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) This is, with respect to the code, a pretty complex trigger. But that should not impact other logic, and if need be, there is a very simple version that could be implemented that would at least fix the bug, as noted above. ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> - Does this change add bot messages to translate? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> - Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> I used Claude Sonnet 4.6. This is essentially the first PR that I entirely vibe coded. I knew what the problem was and how to fix it, including the conditions I wanted in the trigger, and the LLM did the rest. I can tell you what each block does and why that's needed, but I can't tell you how they all work technically. I tested this ingame in scenarios where the available BS was stronger and not as strong, and in each case, the correct behavior was observed. I've since run several raids without BS disabled on my Warriors, and they are correctly not using it (as my Ret Paladin is applying a stronger BoM). The trigger does not show up as an expensive one with pmon (unlike, say, VIgilance, which is probably the most expensive class trigger in the mod (excluding any DK triggers just because I've never used one so I have no idea)). ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Keleborn <22352763+Celandriel@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: bash <hermensb@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Revision <tkn963@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: kadeshar <kadeshar@gmail.com>	2026-04-04 12:59:45 +02:00
kadeshar	a87999bef5	Berserker Rage support (#2261 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Added Berserker Rage usage (in combat and outside combat) for Warrior (all specs) Related with: #1755 ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> - invite warrior to party - [optional] start combat (for example with dummy) - use command `.aura 6215` - bot should cast Berserker Rage ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) Warriors use Berserker Rage when they got fear, sleep or sap - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> - Does this change add bot messages to translate? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> - Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> Copilot CLI to review ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. --> <img width="324" height="125" alt="obraz" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e502f1c1-88f4-42a1-b07b-fc9ef3fd318b" /> [Berserker Rage performance test.txt](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/26333365/Berserker.Rage.performance.test.txt)	2026-04-03 22:32:32 -07:00
kadeshar	30c142aaca	Challenging Roar support (#2238 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Added Challenging Roar support to druid taunt spell Related with: #2002 ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> - run dungeon with druid tank and monitor spell usage ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) Druid also use Challenging Roar as taunt spell - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> - Does this change add bot messages to translate? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> - Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. -->	2026-04-03 22:31:42 -07:00
kadeshar	d07ddb14d0	Paladin use bubble heal strategy (#2244 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Added support for bubble heal strategy. Adjusted emergency action order ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> - invite paladin bot to party - check that bot dont have `healer dps` strategy - start combat (with for example dummy) - use `.damage 20000` where 20000 is near max health of bot - use `.unaura 25771` until bot use Divine Shield - bot should heal himself ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) Paladin bot heal himself without `healer dps` while Divine Shield - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> - Does this change add bot messages to translate? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> - Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. --> <img width="297" height="142" alt="obraz" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5e35341b-2b23-4d34-b0c6-dc228823850f" />	2026-04-03 22:31:17 -07:00
Crow	15bf0ab427	Fix Shaman Weapon Enchants & Cure Toxins/Cleanse Spirit (#2234 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> 1. I've been having persistent issues with Enhancement Shamans sometimes applying Rockbiter to both weapons instead of MH Windfury and OH Flametongue. Rockbiter is the alternative for Flametongue and, through Flametongue, the alternative for Windfury. But there seemed to be no obvious reason why a Shaman that had all three abilities would ever use Rockbiter, which costs more mana than Windfury and Flametongue. Claude's take on it is that there is instability from ItemForSpellValue related to its poor way of distinguishing handedness, in addition to it having a 1-second cache, which can cause in some scenarios stale caches for the action running on each hand back-to-back. I still can't say I fully understand why the issue exists, but the most straightforward fix that should prevent this from happening is to just have separate mainhand and offhand actions for each enchant. So that's what this PR does. The relevant ActionNodes are now: - The MH-specific chain for Enhancement is WF -> FT -> RB. In practice, Enhancement should never apply RB because all Shamans under level 10 (when FT is learned) are considered Elemental. The FT -> RB node is just for Elemental. - The MH-specific Resto chain (not that Resto can dual-wield) is EL -> FT -> RB. Againt, FT -> RB is just for Elemental. - OH for Enhancement is only FT. You cannot be Enhancement before level 10, nor can Enhancement dual-wield before level 40, so no alternative is needed. 3. I commented out Frostbrand Weapon actions/triggers because the ability is not included in any strategy. I didn't delete the code because in the future somebody might want to implement it as I understand it can be useful for Enhancement Shamans in PvP. 4. Shamans are coded to use "cure poison" and "cure disease", which do not exist in WotLK, having been combined into Cure Toxins. Wishmaster has PR #1844 that has been open on this for a long time, but I decided to correct the abilities here anyway as he was going for a more limited approach, and I decided to rename all the actions and redo the structure to rely on ActionNode alternatives, which is pretty much the exact framework that should be used for this type of situation w/r/t bots. Now, Shamans prefer Cleanse Spirit (Resto talent, which costs the same as Cure Toxins and also dispels curses), with an alternative of Cure Toxins (for poisons and disease only). I tested this and it seems to work well. 5. I deleted empty ActionNodes. 6. I did some cleanup of formatting and such, but this is not intended to be a comprehensive refactor. ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. I've followed the general intended structure of class strategies with triggers and actions. The same triggers exist, just different actions are called based on the trigger that fires, so I don't think there should be any impact on performance. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> The best way to get a grasp on if things work is probably to just do group play for a while with Shamans and make sure they apply the right enchants and properly cast Cleanse Spirit and Cure Toxins. ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) Shamans previously did not cure poisons or disease at all, and now they do with the default "cure" strategy applied. - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) One might say having separate actions per hand for enchants is somewhat more complex, but ultimately I think it is less confusing to keep those paths separate. ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> Does this change add bot messages to translate? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> I had Claude try to diagnose the weapon enchant issue. It proposed and provided the separate MH/OH WF/FT actions. The other things were easy enough for me to do. ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Keleborn <22352763+Celandriel@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: bash <hermensb@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Revision <tkn963@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: kadeshar <kadeshar@gmail.com>	2026-04-03 13:25:40 -07:00
kadeshar	76dd91c4fa	Hand of Freedom support (#2233 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description Added Hand of Freedom action for paladin. Related with: #2002 ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> - invite paladin bot to party - start fight (can use dummy target) - apply some snare effect to bot or yourself (for example `.aura 1715`) - bot should use hand of freedom ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) Yes, paladin bots start using Hand of Freedom - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> - Does this change add bot messages to translate? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> - Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> OpenCode, as helper to create and review code ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. --> <img width="424" height="93" alt="obraz" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/3cac4454-35af-474d-8ea0-67c462973c79" />	2026-04-03 13:25:29 -07:00
dillyns	496d6c9e4c	Blood dk rotation update (#2227 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Improve the blood DK rotation, add hysteria use, improve blood pact use. Basic Blood priority should be: 1. Keep diseases up 2. Use rune strike whenever possible 3. Use frost and death runes on Icy Touch (highest threat ability) 4. Use unholy runes on death strike to trigger more death runes 5. use blood runes on heart/blood strike Hysteria should be used on a physical dps, or a tank if no physical dps is available. Never a caster or healer. Summon ghoul should be saved for death pact usage. They are honestly a liability that aggros everything in range without the unholy talent that turns them into a pet anyways. ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. Removed plague strike from the general rotation. It should only be used for disease application. Added death strike on "high unholy rune" trigger instead. Remove raise dead from generic dk. Only cast it right before death pact. Add hysteria to bloods default actions. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. Minimal change ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> To test rotation changes: Use a combat parsing addon such as Details! or watch the combat log of a Blood DK bot. They should now use death strike instead of using unholy runes on plague strike. To test hysteria: Ungrouped blood dk bots can be observed using it on themselves. Create a group with the blood dk + casters/healers only. Observe that they never use hysteria on the casters. Create a group with blood dk + physical dps. Observe that they use hysteria on a dps and not themselves. To test blood pact: I used GM command .damage to get my Blood DK bot into "critical health" trigger. They will use raise dead then blood pact. ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> Does this change add bot messages to translate? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> Used for brainstorming and exploring the codebase to find similar patterns. ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. -->	2026-04-03 13:24:55 -07:00
Crow	79562be2e5	Fix Hunter Aspect Switching + Trigger Cleanups (#2203 ) # Pull Request Note: When I reference Aspect of the Hawk below, it also means Aspect of the Dragonhawk (the code will use Dragonhawk if the Hunter has it, Hawk if not, they share actions, triggers, and strategies). Hunter Aspects are currently bugged. All Hunters, regardless of spec or strategy, are hardcoded to use Aspect of the Hawk when mana is at 70%+ and Aspect of the Viper when mana drops to "lowMana" from the config (default is 15%), divided by 2. This means the following: - Hawk (bdps) and Viper (bmana) strategies are useless - Pack (bspeed) and Wild (rnature) strategies are applied, but bots will rapidly switch back and forth between Pack/Wild and Hawk/Viper, depending on strategy and mana level. This PR addresses the issues by doing the following: - Global Hawk strategy is removed. Now you need to set bdps for Hunters to use Hawk, but bdps remains the default Aspect strategy for all Hunters. - Dedicated Viper strategy is removed, leaving the global strategy. However, Viper will be used (when lowMana/2) ONLY if the bot is set to bdps. If the bot has the Wild or Pack strategy, they will not switch to Viper at all. I did this because I am assuming if you are using Wild or Pack, you need them for reasons other than to pump DPS. - The threshold to switch back to Hawk is lowered from 70% to 60%. The gap between lowMana/2 and 60% is now filled--if bdps is on, Hunters will switch to Hawk whenever above the Viper threshold, _except_ for when they have the Viper aura, in which case they will not switch to Hawk until 60% mana. This lets the Hunter build back mana before swapping back to Hawk (more like general player behavior) while still letting them swap from other Aspects to Hawk without needing to be all the way at 60% mana. - Gets rid of a weird condition in the Hawk trigger that would make it so that Hunters would switch to Hawk when at exactly 0 mana. I'm not sure what the point of that is. Also, I refactored the triggers a bit because I noticed there was some dead code in there. I didn't do a comprehensive refactor, but there was a lot of stuff that clearly didn't make sense even to my eyes, like back-to-back returns. I think there's more unnecessary code even just in the triggers, but I didn't want to get too into the weeds with this PR. --- ## Design Philosophy We prioritize stability, performance, and predictability over behavioral realism. Complex player-mimicking logic is intentionally limited due to its negative impact on scalability, maintainability, and long-term robustness. Excessive processing overhead can lead to server hiccups, increased CPU usage, and degraded performance for all participants. Because every action and decision tree is executed per bot and per trigger, even small increases in logic complexity can scale poorly and negatively affect both players and world (random) bots. Bots are not expected to behave perfectly, and perfect simulation of human decision-making is not a project goal. Increased behavioral realism often introduces disproportionate cost, reduced predictability, and significantly higher maintenance overhead. Every additional branch of logic increases long-term responsibility. All decision paths must be tested, validated, and maintained continuously as the system evolves. If advanced or AI-intensive behavior is introduced, the default configuration must remain the lightweight decision model. More complex behavior should only be available as an explicit opt-in option, clearly documented as having a measurable performance cost. Principles: - Stability before intelligence A stable system is always preferred over a smarter one. - Performance is a shared resource Any increase in bot cost affects all players and all bots. - Simple logic scales better than smart logic Predictable behavior under load is more valuable than perfect decisions. - Complexity must justify itself If a feature cannot clearly explain its cost, it should not exist. - Defaults must be cheap Expensive behavior must always be optional and clearly communicated. - Bots should look reasonable, not perfect The goal is believable behavior, not human simulation. Before submitting, confirm that this change aligns with those principles. --- ## Feature Evaluation Please answer the following: - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior? - Describe the cheapest implementation that produces an acceptable result? - Describe the runtime cost when this logic executes across many bots? I don't expect there to be any impact on costs, and if anything this PR removes some unneeded checks from triggers. --- ## How to Test the Changes - Step-by-step instructions to test the change - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, bots, specific configuration) - Expected behavior and how to verify it The easiest way is to go shoot a dummy with Volley until low on mana and then toggle on selfbot. You can do this with various Aspects active to test. ## Complexity & Impact Does this change add new decision branches? - - [X] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) Does this change increase per-bot or per-tick processing? - - [X] No - - [ ] Yes (describe and justify impact) Could this logic scale poorly under load? - - [X] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) --- ## Defaults & Configuration Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [X] Yes (explain why) Described above. Default behavior is broken. If this introduces more advanced or AI-heavy logic: - - [X] Lightweight mode remains the default - - [ ] More complex behavior is optional and thereby configurable --- ## AI Assistance Was AI assistance (e.g. ChatGPT or similar tools) used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [X] Yes (explain below) I asked Claude some questions about the triggers to make sure I didn't screw anything up. If yes, please specify: - AI tool or model used (e.g. ChatGPT, GPT-4, Claude, etc.) - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation) - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated - Whether the result was manually reviewed and adapted AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. Any AI-influenced changes must be verified against existing CORE and PB logic. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --- ## Final Checklist - - [X] Stability is not compromised - - [X] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable - - [X] Added logic complexity is justified and explained - - [X] Documentation updated if needed --- ## Notes for Reviewers Anything that significantly improves realism at the cost of stability or performance should be carefully discussed before merging. --------- Co-authored-by: Keleborn <22352763+Celandriel@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: bash <hermensb@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Revision <tkn963@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: kadeshar <kadeshar@gmail.com>	2026-04-03 13:24:37 -07:00
kadeshar	6db44b5296	Will of the forsaken (#2231 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Added Will of the Forsaken support. Made structure fix for affected files. Partially resolves: #2002 ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> - create/invite undead bot - start fight (you can use dummy target) - use `.aura 6215` to fear bot - bot should use "Will of the Forsaken" to remove debuff ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - - [x] No, not at all - - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) Undead bot use now "Will of the Forsaken" to remove charm, fear or sleep. - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> - Does this change add bot messages to translate? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> - Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> OpenCode to review changes ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised. - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. --> <img width="325" height="77" alt="obraz" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/729cfdf8-3742-457c-9278-7fcce824e6d0" /> --------- Co-authored-by: Keleborn <22352763+Celandriel@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-03-27 11:53:53 -07:00
FutterSillo	45aa6f2f8e	Update valid targets for Hunter Talent: "Improved Tracking" (#2218 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Updates the list of valid targets in NoTrackTrigger::IsActive() for the hunter talent "Improved Tracking". Including: "track beasts", "track demons", "track dragonkin", "track elementals", "track giants", "track humanoids", "track undead", // "track hidden", // "find herbs", // "find minerals", // "find fish", // "find treasure", This change ensures standard combat tracking is correctly recognized while providing commented-out utility options (Hidden, Herbs, Minerals, Fish, Treasure). This is specifically useful for "Selfbot" users who want to maintain a specific utility tracking without the bot logic automatically overriding it and switching back to "Track Humanoids". ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> - Track valid Targets for "Improved Tracking" with a Hunter in selfbot. Its stay the same. - Track any other Targets for "Improved Tracking" with a Hunter in selfbot. Its switch back to "Track Humanoids". ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - [x] No, not at all - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain why) - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> Does this change add bot messages to translate? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> ## Final Checklist - [x] Stability is not compromised. - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Keleborn <22352763+Celandriel@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: bash <hermensb@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Revision <tkn963@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: kadeshar <kadeshar@gmail.com>	2026-03-27 10:38:54 -07:00
dillyns	b172e88010	Resto druids should always be in tree form (#2192 ) # Pull Request Resto druids would not go into tree of life form when in combat until certain triggers were hit. They should be in tree of life form all the time. Move tree form actions from the various triggers to default actions instead, with highest priority ## Feature Evaluation Please answer the following: - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior?\| When healer druids enter combat their first priority should be entering tree form. - Describe the cheapest implementation that produces an acceptable result? Add tree form action to default healer druid actions instead of triggers. - Describe the runtime cost when this logic executes across many bots? nil --- ## How to Test the Changes - Have a resto druid bot with tree of life form talented. - Enter combat - The druid should immediately enter tree of life form ## Complexity & Impact Does this change add new decision branches? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) Does this change increase per-bot or per-tick processing? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (describe and justify impact) Could this logic scale poorly under load? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) --- ## Defaults & Configuration Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) If this introduces more advanced or AI-heavy logic: - - [x] Lightweight mode remains the default - - [ ] More complex behavior is optional and thereby configurable --- ## AI Assistance Was AI assistance (e.g. ChatGPT or similar tools) used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) If yes, please specify: - AI tool or model used (e.g. ChatGPT, GPT-4, Claude, etc.) - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation) - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated - Whether the result was manually reviewed and adapted AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. Any AI-influenced changes must be verified against existing CORE and PB logic. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --- ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained - - [x] Documentation updated if needed --- ## Notes for Reviewers Anything that significantly improves realism at the cost of stability or performance should be carefully discussed before merging.	2026-03-27 10:38:39 -07:00
dillyns	32af1b95de	Paladin Seal of wisdom fallback fix for Ret/Prot Paladins (#2147 ) # Pull Request This PR removes the fallback for Seal of Wisdom action from generic Paladin strategy and moves it to Holy Paladin only. This is necessary because a paladin who does not have Seal of Wisdom yet who goes low mana and triggers the seal of wisdom action will end up falling back to Seal of Righteousness, even though a better seal may be available, such as Seal of Command. The fallback is added to Holy Paladin so that low level holy paladins still use Righteousness until they get Wisdom --- ## Feature Evaluation Please answer the following: - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior? Ret paladin without Seal of Wisdom shouldn't change seals on low mana. - Describe the cheapest implementation that produces an acceptable result? Cheapest implementation is to remove seal of wisdom fallback for non-holy paladins. - Describe the runtime cost when this logic executes across many bots? No difference in cost compared to existing logic. --- ## How to Test the Changes Use a ret paladin bot who has Seal of Command but who does not have Seal of Wisdom. A paladin under level 38 will do. Order them to attack something, like a test dummy, until they eventually run low on mana. Before this change: The paladin will switch to Seal of Righteousness when they get low mana. After this change: The paladin leaves Seal of Command on when they get low mana. ## Complexity & Impact Does this change add new decision branches? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) Does this change increase per-bot or per-tick processing? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (describe and justify impact) Could this logic scale poorly under load? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) --- ## Defaults & Configuration Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) If this introduces more advanced or AI-heavy logic: - - [x] Lightweight mode remains the default - - [ ] More complex behavior is optional and thereby configurable --- ## AI Assistance Was AI assistance (e.g. ChatGPT or similar tools) used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) If yes, please specify: - AI tool or model used (e.g. ChatGPT, GPT-4, Claude, etc.) - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation) - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated - Whether the result was manually reviewed and adapted AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. Any AI-influenced changes must be verified against existing CORE and PB logic. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --- ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained - - [x] Documentation updated if needed --- ## Notes for Reviewers Anything that significantly improves realism at the cost of stability or performance should be carefully discussed before merging.	2026-03-21 15:19:22 -07:00
kadeshar	98395a1090	Added cancellation druid form actions (#2194 ) # Pull Request Added new (for now manual) actions to cancel druid forms. Resolve: https://github.com/mod-playerbots/mod-playerbots/issues/1788 --- ## Feature Evaluation Please answer the following: - order bot enter some form like `do travel form` - order bot cancel form like `do cancel travel form` --- ## How to Test the Changes - order bot enter some form like `do travel form` - order bot cancel form like `do cancel travel form` ## Complexity & Impact Does this change add new decision branches? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) Does this change increase per-bot or per-tick processing? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (describe and justify impact) Could this logic scale poorly under load? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) --- ## Defaults & Configuration Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) - --- ## AI Assistance Was AI assistance (e.g. ChatGPT or similar tools) used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) --- ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained - - [x] Documentation updated if needed ---	2026-03-20 20:42:22 +01:00
Crow	cba6af27ad	Fix Assassination Rogue Finishers and add Cold Blood (#2215 ) <!-- Thank you for contributing to mod-playerbots, please make sure that you... 1. Submit your PR to the test-staging branch, not master. 2. Read the guidelines below before submitting. 3. Don't delete parts of this template. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: We prioritize STABILITY, PERFORMANCE, AND PREDICTABILITY over behavioral realism. Every action and decision executes PER BOT AND PER TRIGGER. Small increases in logic complexity scale poorly across thousands of bots and negatively affect all. We prioritize a stable system over a smarter one. Bots don't need to behave perfectly; believable behavior is the goal, not human simulation. Default behavior must be cheap in processing; expensive behavior must be opt-in. Before submitting, make sure your changes aligns with these principles. --> ## Pull Request Description <!-- Describe what this change does and why it is needed --> Note for reviewers: The Rogue files are very confusing, so for background, there is DpsRogueStrategy, which is for all Rogues and represented by the “dps” strategy in game, and there is also AssassinationRogueStrategy, which is for Assassination and Subtlety specs and represented by the “melee” strategy in game. So Combat has only the dps strategy, while Assassination and Subtlety have the dps and melee strategies. - The main focus of this PR is to fix an issue with Assassination Rogues that caused them to use Eviscerate instead of Envenom about 1/3 of the time they should have been using Envenom, which was significantly reducing their DPS. See the bottom of this post for an explanation for why this was happening and why the fix works. Well, LMK if you think it's wrong, but this is how I am understanding things, and my back-of-the-envelope math (also below) supports it. - After this PR, Assassination Rogues will use Eviscerate only if they are unable to use Envenom (don't have the ability learned or no Deadly Poison on the target) or if they don’t have Rank 3 in Master Poisoner. - Additionally, Assassination Rogues previously would use Envenom/Eviscerate at 3 or more combo points. This is suboptimal so I created a new “combo points 4 available” trigger that will fire at 4 or 5 combo points only. They will still use the finisher at 3 combo points if the mob is almost dead (via the existing “target with combo points almost dead” trigger). - I then added Cold Blood, which Rogues previously would not use at all. Now there is a ColdBloodAction(), and Cold Blood is used when a Rogue has at least 4 combo points, right before using Envenom (or Eviscerate). I implemented it as a standard BuffTrigger so they’ll just use the ability off cooldown. - While looking at the combo point triggers, I thought it was confusing that the “combo points available” trigger actually meant 5 combo points (presumably because the default parameter for combo points in ComboPointsAvailableTrigger() is 5). I changed the string to “combo points 5 available” so it’s less confusing going forward. This necessitated some changes in the Druid files too. - Next, I cleaned up DpsRogueStrategy a bit. Not a lot to say, just some duplicative or useless logic was removed. There shouldn’t be any impact on gameplay from the changes. - In the process of making the edits in the Druid files, I noticed that the trigger for Tiger’s Fury in OffhealDruidCatStrategy was “low energy,” which does not exist (there is a “light energy available,” but the EnergyAvailable triggers are for when energy is AT LEAST the designated level, not AT MOST the designated level). So I replaced the trigger with the already-existing “tiger’s fury” trigger, which I think is just a generic BuffTrigger so I don’t actually know why it exists (i.e., Druid will use the spell off cooldown). But this particular change is just a quick fix and not intended to be thoughtful (that would be outside the scope of this PR). ## Feature Evaluation <!-- If your PR is very minimal (comment typo, wrong ID reference, etc), and it is very obvious it will not have any impact on performance, you may skip these question. If necessary, a maintainer may ask you for them later. --> <!-- Please answer the following: --> - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior. - Describe the processing cost when this logic executes across many bots. There should be no relevant impact on performance. This PR adds one new action triggered by the standard BuffTrigger. Otherwise, these are just fixes to existing logic. ## How to Test the Changes <!-- - Step-by-step instructions to test the change. - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, number of bots, specific configuration). - Expected behavior and how to verify it. --> The easiest way to test is to fight a boss that doesn't tend to result in downtime (since downtime can lead to the loss of deadly poison stacks, in which case Eviscerate will (and should be) used by Assassination Rogues). You can use a damage meter such as Skada to track ability use. You should see: - Assassination Rogues don't use Eviscerate at all, or very few times. - Assassination Rogues use Cold Blood. - Offheal Cat Druids use Tiger's Fury. - Otherwise, Rogue and Cat Druid behavior should remain the same. ## Impact Assessment <!-- As a generic test, before and after measure of pmon (playerbot pmon tick) can help you here. --> - Does this change increase per-bot/per-tick processing or risk scaling poorly with thousands of bots? - [x] No, not at all - [ ] Minimal impact (explain below) - [ ] Moderate impact (explain below) - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - [ ] No - [x] Yes (explain why) Default behavior for Assassination Rogues was broken, as explained above. - Does this change add new decision branches or increase maintenance complexity? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain below) ## Messages to Translate <!-- Bot messages have to be translatable, but you don't need to do the translations here. You only need to make sure the message is in a translatable format, and list in the table the message_key and the default English message. Search for GetBotTextOrDefault in the codebase for examples. --> Does this change add bot messages to translate? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (list messages in the table) \| Message key \| Default message \| \| --------------- \| ------------------ \| \| \| \| \| \| \| ## AI Assistance <!-- AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --> Was AI assistance used while working on this change? - [ ] No - [x] Yes (explain below) <!-- If yes, please specify: - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation). - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated, and whether it was thoroughly reviewed. --> I had Claude help me diagnose the initial issue and help me understand the queue system. And I had it implement the changes that were just busywork (like combo point triggers). ## Final Checklist - [x] Stability is not compromised. - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable. - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained. - [x] Documentation updated if needed (Conf comments, WiKi commands). ## Notes for Reviewers <!-- Anything else that's helpful to review or test your pull request. --> The reason for why Assassination Rogues were using Eviscerate so frequently is due to the fact that Envenom and Eviscerate were part of the same TriggerNode. When actions are part of the same TriggerNode, they're processed together, and the actions are queued by priority. When the higher-priority action is executed, the lower-priority action is not cleared--it remains in the queue for expireActionTime from the config, which is 5 seconds by default. Then, as soon as the lower-priority action can be executed (without regard for triggers because it is already triggered, just sitting in the queue), it will execute. This pattern of code works fine ingame if (1) you are actually trying to queue actions, like what I did with Cold Blood -> Envenom, (2) there are other guards like IsUseful() and IsPossible() that keep unwanted actions from executing, or (3) the trigger is just constantly firing so the higher-priority action is always evaluated. But TriggerNode isn't really the right way to implement action priority--that's through ActionNode. AssassinationRogueStrategy had Envenom and Eviscerate in the same TriggerNode, and then the corresponding ActionNode had Rupture as a fallback. Now, I changed it so Eviscerate is instead a fallback in the Envenom ActionNode (and Rupture is removed entirely because Assassination Rogues just shouldn't be using it, except maybe on very high-armor targets that are immune to poison, but that is very niche). ~ I did some back-of-the-envelope math to check this pattern. Say we're in a situation where Deadly Poison is up so ideally the Rogue should use Envenom 100% of the time. Through the old system, what would happen when the trigger fired? - Rogue uses Envenom since it's the higher-priority action. - Due to the Ruthlessness talent, Rogue has a 60% chance of having 1 combo point after the finisher, 40% chance of 0 combo points. If it has 1 combo point, it uses Eviscerate immediately. - If it has 0 combo points, it uses Mutilate. Mutilate grants 2 combo points, unless it crits, in which case it grants 3 due to Seal Fate. If Mutilate doesn't crit, the Rogue has 2 combo points, and it uses Eviscerate. If Mutilate does crit, the Rogue has 3 combo points, and it uses Envenom. - So let's assume Mutilate has a 55% crit chance (very reasonable for a Rogue in entry-level raid gear with raid buffs due to Opportunity giving +20% crit chance to Mutilate). Mutilate hits twice, and if either hit crits, Seal Fate Procs. The chance of at least one crit with two hits at a 55% crit chance is ~80%. That means if Ruthlessness doesn't give a combo point, there is an 80% chance that Envenom will be used and a 20% chance that Eviscerate will be used. - Combine the above, and the result of one trigger firing is you get 1 guaranteed Envenom + 0.6 Eviscerates (Ruthlessness proc path) + 0.32 Envenoms (No Ruthlessness proc but Seal Fate proc path) + 0.08 Eviscerates (No Ruthlessness proc and no Seal Fate proc path) = 1.32 Envenoms to each 0.68 Eviscerates, or a 1.94:1 ratio of Envenoms to Eviscerates. That is basically identical to what I saw in practice of roughly a 2:1 ratio of Envenoms to Eviscerates. - I understand the above is simplistic and it assumes that the Rogue gets a combo point within 5 seconds following using Envenom (very likely) and that there are not two opportunities to use Envenom or Eviscerate in the 5-second queue period after using Envenom (it can happen but is uncommon). That's all at the margins and isn't going to impact the math very much. --------- Co-authored-by: Keleborn <22352763+Celandriel@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: bash <hermensb@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Revision <tkn963@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: kadeshar <kadeshar@gmail.com>	2026-03-20 20:40:59 +01:00
Crow	35a0282ca6	Add Sense Undead for Paladins (#2200 ) # Pull Request This PR adds the sense undead ability for Paladins, which they will keep active at all times. This is mildly useful because the associated minor glyph provides a 1% damage increase against undead while the ability is active. Sense undead is also added to InitClassSpells(). I understand that it is a trainer spell so would normally be covered by InitAvailableSpells(), but those playing with mod-individual-progression will not receive the spell through InitAvailableSpells() because it is removed from trainers by the mod (in TBC, a quest was required to obtain the spell). Finally, the minor glyph of sense undead is now added to the config as a default glyph for all PvE specs. It is not added for PvP specs because Forsaken do not count as undead so the glyph is useless in PvP. I also made some other tweaks to Paladin default minor glyphs that are not worth spending any time talking about. Edit: I also did some minor reformatting of code and replaced some numbers with existing constants. --- ## Design Philosophy We prioritize stability, performance, and predictability over behavioral realism. Complex player-mimicking logic is intentionally limited due to its negative impact on scalability, maintainability, and long-term robustness. Excessive processing overhead can lead to server hiccups, increased CPU usage, and degraded performance for all participants. Because every action and decision tree is executed per bot and per trigger, even small increases in logic complexity can scale poorly and negatively affect both players and world (random) bots. Bots are not expected to behave perfectly, and perfect simulation of human decision-making is not a project goal. Increased behavioral realism often introduces disproportionate cost, reduced predictability, and significantly higher maintenance overhead. Every additional branch of logic increases long-term responsibility. All decision paths must be tested, validated, and maintained continuously as the system evolves. If advanced or AI-intensive behavior is introduced, the default configuration must remain the lightweight decision model. More complex behavior should only be available as an explicit opt-in option, clearly documented as having a measurable performance cost. Principles: - Stability before intelligence A stable system is always preferred over a smarter one. - Performance is a shared resource Any increase in bot cost affects all players and all bots. - Simple logic scales better than smart logic Predictable behavior under load is more valuable than perfect decisions. - Complexity must justify itself If a feature cannot clearly explain its cost, it should not exist. - Defaults must be cheap Expensive behavior must always be optional and clearly communicated. - Bots should look reasonable, not perfect The goal is believable behavior, not human simulation. Before submitting, confirm that this change aligns with those principles. --- ## Feature Evaluation Please answer the following: - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior? - Describe the cheapest implementation that produces an acceptable result? - Describe the runtime cost when this logic executes across many bots? The implementation just checks if a Paladin has the sense undead aura, and if not, the Paladin will activate sense undead. It is simple and cheap. --- ## How to Test the Changes - Step-by-step instructions to test the change - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, bots, specific configuration) - Expected behavior and how to verify it ## Complexity & Impact Does this change add new decision branches? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) Does this change increase per-bot or per-tick processing? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (describe and justify impact) Infinitesimally Could this logic scale poorly under load? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) ## Defaults & Configuration Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [ ] No - - [x] Yes (explain why) Paladin bots will by default have sense undead enabled. There is no disadvantage to this. If this introduces more advanced or AI-heavy logic: - - [x] Lightweight mode remains the default - - [ ] More complex behavior is optional and thereby configurable --- ## AI Assistance Was AI assistance (e.g. ChatGPT or similar tools) used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) If yes, please specify: - AI tool or model used (e.g. ChatGPT, GPT-4, Claude, etc.) - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation) - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated - Whether the result was manually reviewed and adapted AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. Any AI-influenced changes must be verified against existing CORE and PB logic. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --- ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained - - [x] Documentation updated if needed --- ## Notes for Reviewers Anything that significantly improves realism at the cost of stability or performance should be carefully discussed before merging. --------- Co-authored-by: Keleborn <22352763+Celandriel@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: bash <hermensb@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Revision <tkn963@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: kadeshar <kadeshar@gmail.com>	2026-03-20 20:38:06 +01:00
Keleborn	439293e100	Warnings PR 2 clean unused variables (#2107 ) # Pull Request Removed unused variables and fixed styling issues. ## How to Test the Changes - Step-by-step instructions to test the change - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, bots, specific configuration) - Expected behavior and how to verify it ## Complexity & Impact - Does this change add new decision branches? - [x] No - [] Yes (explain below) - Does this change increase per-bot or per-tick processing? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (describe and justify impact) - Could this logic scale poorly under load? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain why) --- ## Defaults & Configuration - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain why) If this introduces more advanced or AI-heavy logic: - [ ] Lightweight mode remains the default - [ ] More complex behavior is optional and thereby configurable --- ## AI Assistance - Was AI assistance (e.g. ChatGPT or similar tools) used while working on this change? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain below) --- ## Final Checklist - [x] Stability is not compromised - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained - [x] Documentation updated if needed --- ## Notes for Reviewers This was filtered from the code provided by SmashingQuasar. Eliminated variables were confirmed to be not used, but unclear at times if that is due to mistakes in writing. --------- Co-authored-by: bashermens <31279994+hermensbas@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-02-27 16:04:33 -08:00
Keleborn	d1cac8d027	Bug fix. Equip Action triggered action (#2142 ) # Pull Request Brighton caught a mistake I made changeing the action registry, so the correct action was no longer triggering. I cleaned that up, and renamed the action. ## How to Test the Changes - This was tested by adding logging to both equip actions. But to test this without that, the best way to verify the fix is to stop alts from auto upgrading via config. Then they should correctly follow the configured behavior. ## Complexity & Impact Does this change add new decision branches? - - [x ] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) Does this change increase per-bot or per-tick processing? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (describe and justify impact) Could this logic scale poorly under load? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) --- ## Defaults & Configuration Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) If this introduces more advanced or AI-heavy logic: - - [x] Lightweight mode remains the default - - [ ] More complex behavior is optional and thereby configurable --- ## AI Assistance Was AI assistance (e.g. ChatGPT or similar tools) used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) If yes, please specify: - AI tool or model used (e.g. ChatGPT, GPT-4, Claude, etc.) - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation) - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated - Whether the result was manually reviewed and adapted AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. Any AI-influenced changes must be verified against existing CORE and PB logic. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --- ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained - - [x] Documentation updated if needed --- ## Notes for Reviewers Anything that significantly improves realism at the cost of stability or performance should be carefully discussed before merging.	2026-02-15 16:29:20 -08:00
Keleborn	441f9f7552	Warnings PR 1: Event warnings and headers (#2106 ) # Pull Request This is the first in a series of PRs intended to eliminate warnings in the module. The design intent is to eliminate the calling event when not needed in the body of the function. Based off of SmashingQuasars work. --- ## How to Test the Changes - Step-by-step instructions to test the change - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, bots, specific configuration) - Expected behavior and how to verify it ## Complexity & Impact - Does this change add new decision branches? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain below) - Does this change increase per-bot or per-tick processing? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (describe and justify impact) - Could this logic scale poorly under load? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain why) --- ## Defaults & Configuration - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain why) If this introduces more advanced or AI-heavy logic: - [ ] Lightweight mode remains the default - [ ] More complex behavior is optional and thereby configurable --- ## AI Assistance - Was AI assistance (e.g. ChatGPT or similar tools) used while working on this change? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain below) --- ## Final Checklist - [x] Stability is not compromised - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained - [x] Documentation updated if needed --- ## Notes for Reviewers Anything that significantly improves realism at the cost of stability or performance should be carefully discussed before merging. --------- Co-authored-by: bashermens <31279994+hermensbas@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-02-14 20:55:10 +01:00
privatecore	a0a50204ec	Fix action validation checks: isUseful -> isPossible + codestyle fixes and corrections (#2125 ) # Pull Request Fix the incorrect logic flaw when processing actions from different sources. It should be: `isUseful` -> `isPossible`. The original logic is based on the Mangosbot code and the impl presented inside `Engine::DoNextAction`. This should fix all wrong validation orders for triggers and direct/specific actions. Code style is based on the AzerothCore style guide + clang-format. --- ## Design Philosophy We prioritize stability, performance, and predictability over behavioral realism. Complex player-mimicking logic is intentionally limited due to its negative impact on scalability, maintainability, and long-term robustness. Excessive processing overhead can lead to server hiccups, increased CPU usage, and degraded performance for all participants. Because every action and decision tree is executed per bot and per trigger, even small increases in logic complexity can scale poorly and negatively affect both players and world (random) bots. Bots are not expected to behave perfectly, and perfect simulation of human decision-making is not a project goal. Increased behavioral realism often introduces disproportionate cost, reduced predictability, and significantly higher maintenance overhead. Every additional branch of logic increases long-term responsibility. All decision paths must be tested, validated, and maintained continuously as the system evolves. If advanced or AI-intensive behavior is introduced, the default configuration must remain the lightweight decision model. More complex behavior should only be available as an explicit opt-in option, clearly documented as having a measurable performance cost. Principles: - Stability before intelligence A stable system is always preferred over a smarter one. - Performance is a shared resource Any increase in bot cost affects all players and all bots. - Simple logic scales better than smart logic Predictable behavior under load is more valuable than perfect decisions. - Complexity must justify itself If a feature cannot clearly explain its cost, it should not exist. - Defaults must be cheap Expensive behavior must always be optional and clearly communicated. - Bots should look reasonable, not perfect The goal is believable behavior, not human simulation. Before submitting, confirm that this change aligns with those principles. --- ## Feature Evaluation Please answer the following: - Describe the minimum logic required to achieve the intended behavior? - Describe the cheapest implementation that produces an acceptable result? - Describe the runtime cost when this logic executes across many bots? --- ## How to Test the Changes - Step-by-step instructions to test the change - Any required setup (e.g. multiple players, bots, specific configuration) - Expected behavior and how to verify it ## Complexity & Impact Does this change add new decision branches? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) Does this change increase per-bot or per-tick processing? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (describe and justify impact) Could this logic scale poorly under load? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) --- ## Defaults & Configuration Does this change modify default bot behavior? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain why) If this introduces more advanced or AI-heavy logic: - - [ ] Lightweight mode remains the default - - [ ] More complex behavior is optional and thereby configurable --- ## AI Assistance Was AI assistance (e.g. ChatGPT or similar tools) used while working on this change? - - [x] No - - [ ] Yes (explain below) If yes, please specify: - AI tool or model used (e.g. ChatGPT, GPT-4, Claude, etc.) - Purpose of usage (e.g. brainstorming, refactoring, documentation, code generation) - Which parts of the change were influenced or generated - Whether the result was manually reviewed and adapted AI assistance is allowed, but all submitted code must be fully understood, reviewed, and owned by the contributor. Any AI-influenced changes must be verified against existing CORE and PB logic. We expect contributors to be honest about what they do and do not understand. --- ## Final Checklist - - [x] Stability is not compromised - - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable - - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained - - [x] Documentation updated if needed --- ## Notes for Reviewers Anything that significantly improves realism at the cost of stability or performance should be carefully discussed before merging.	2026-02-13 09:24:11 -08:00
dillyns	c9c936d5c1	Add Unending Breath to Warlock NonCombat Strat (#2074 ) # Pull Request Adds actions and triggers for Warlock class to cast Unending Breath when swimming, following the existing implementation for Shaman Water Breathing. --- ## Feature Evaluation Add triggers for Warlock noncombat strategy for Unending Breath on self and party. Triggers should only be active while swimming. Minimal runtime cost on Warlock bots trigger processing. --- ## How to Test the Changes - Bring a Warlock bot into water - It should cast Unending Breath on itself and anyone in the party ## Complexity & Impact - Does this change add new decision branches? - [ ] No - [x] Yes (explain below) It adds triggers to Warlock to decide when to cast Unending Breath on self or party members. - Does this change increase per-bot or per-tick processing? - [ ] No - [x] Yes (describe and justify impact) Minimal additional processing for Warlock triggers, same as already existing triggers for Shaman. - Could this logic scale poorly under load? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain why) --- ## Defaults & Configuration - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain why) If this introduces more advanced or AI-heavy logic: - [ ] Lightweight mode remains the default - [ ] More complex behavior is optional and thereby configurable --- ## AI Assistance - Was AI assistance (e.g. ChatGPT or similar tools) used while working on this change? - [ ] No - [x] Yes (explain below) Claude was used to explore the codebase to find similar implementations that already existed. --- ## Final Checklist - [x] Stability is not compromised - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained - [x] Documentation updated if needed --- ## Notes for Reviewers Anything that significantly improves realism at the cost of stability or performance should be carefully discussed before merging. Co-authored-by: bashermens <31279994+hermensbas@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-02-08 09:36:27 -08:00
bashermens	13fff46fa0	Improper singletons migration to clean Meyer's singletons (cherry-pick) (#2082 ) # Pull Request - Applies the clean and corrected singletons, Meyer pattern. (cherry picked from @SmashingQuasar ) Testing by just playing the game in various ways. Been tested by myself @Celandriel and @SmashingQuasar --- ## Complexity & Impact - Does this change add new decision branches? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain below) - Does this change increase per-bot or per-tick processing? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (describe and justify impact) - Could this logic scale poorly under load? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain why) --- ## Defaults & Configuration - Does this change modify default bot behavior? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain why) --- ## AI Assistance - Was AI assistance (e.g. ChatGPT or similar tools) used while working on this change? - [x] No - [ ] Yes (explain below) --- ## Final Checklist - [x] Stability is not compromised - [x] Performance impact is understood, tested, and acceptable - [x] Added logic complexity is justified and explained - [x] Documentation updated if needed --- ## Notes for Reviewers Anything that significantly improves realism at the cost of stability or performance should be carefully discussed before merging. --------- Co-authored-by: Nicolas Lebacq <nicolas.cordier@outlook.com> Co-authored-by: Keleborn <22352763+Celandriel@users.noreply.github.com>	2026-01-30 21:49:37 +01:00
Keleborn	bf456ee07f	Bear Alternative form for low level cat strat (#2041 ) This adds the bear form as an alternative form for druids with the cat strategies. This applies to low level (<20) druids that have the cat strategy applied. Reset botAI would not normally give them the strat, because they dont have cat form, but if set, this allows more dps.	2026-01-23 12:26:38 +01:00
bashermens	41c53365ae	[HOT FIX] MS build issues regarding folder / command lenght usage or rc.exe (#2038 )	2026-01-19 22:45:28 +01:00

42 Commits