Trinitycore: [3.3.5] Core/Spells: High chance to resist spell

[Dalgurakk]

Description: It is common to see numerous resisted spells after recent commits. I'm not saying that the chance to resist is 100% wrong, that is why we need the criteria of the community to enrich this theme.
Some examples to analyze are:

1. Mage: Frostbolt casted by Mirror Images, the copies must inherit the attributes of the mage.
2. Warlock: Succubus Seduction (inherit attributes too?), Curse of the Elements.
3. Life Steal from [Bryntroll, the Bone Arbiter].
4. Rogue poisons
5. Some Bosses.

Current behaviour: High chance to resist spell

Expected behaviour: Spells must have a lower chance to be resisted.

Steps to reproduce the problem:

1. Try some cases in the Description.

Branch(es): 3.3.5

TC rev. hash/commit: c63f378

TDB version: 62

Operating system: W10

[Noryad]

@ariel- @xinef1
Maybe related with 93746e8

[xinef1]

Probably placebo, binaries were never resisted and now when they are, it seems like its too often.
Perform some tests and see for yourself.

[ariel-]

So, valid?

[Killyana]

I got the same feedback from many players, we where using another system for binaries, but after switching to the actual TC system the chance to resist to a binary has become very high.
I'm not sure if it's correct or not, we don't have any reference to compare.

[ariel-]

Another thing to note is that boss innate resistance (15 vs lvl 83 bosses with a lvl 80 spellcaster) wasn't implemented before. This resistance can't be overcome with spell penetration.

[xinef1]

It would be best to do some tests

[Moorgoth]

I'm not very knowledgeable about the subject but in several guides of disc priest does not recommend spell penetration, actually is common to resist Psychic Scream (vs mage and druids). Then I had to reach 130 spell penetration.

[Demonid]

@Moorgoth That is because most of the guides are made from private servers which don't have Binary Resistances working. in Retail / Arena Tournament, between 75 and 85 Spell Pen was mandatory for PvP, some guys were even taking 130+.

[Keader]

I saw it too.
Alot of players here, complaning about Resist in spells like Fear.
Lock with 135 Spell Pene + Curse of Elements vs Shadow Priest, 4 fears, 4 resist.

@xinef1 any news on this?

[ccrs]

I think spells like Fear, that leave a negative aura and are binary might be wrongly calculated

````c++
if (hasAura)
{
tmp += victim->GetMaxPositiveAuraModifierByMiscValue(SPELL_AURA_MOD_DEBUFF_RESISTANCE, static_cast(spellInfo->Dispel)) * 100;
tmp += victim->GetMaxNegativeAuraModifierByMiscValue(SPELL_AURA_MOD_DEBUFF_RESISTANCE, static_cast(spellInfo->Dispel)) * 100;
}

    // resistance for binary spells
    if (spellInfo->HasAttribute(SPELL_ATTR0_CU_BINARY_SPELL) && (spellInfo->GetSchoolMask() & SPELL_SCHOOL_MASK_NORMAL) == 0)
        if ((spellInfo->GetSchoolMask() & SPELL_SCHOOL_MASK_HOLY) == 0 || victim->GetTypeId() == TYPEID_UNIT)
            tmp += int32(Unit::GetEffectiveResistChance(this, spellInfo->GetSchoolMask(), victim, spellInfo) * 10000.0f); // 100 for spell calculations, and 100 for return value percentage

````

both checks apply

[ariel-]

Both are correct. First one applies bonus from SPELL_AURA_MOD_DEBUFF_RESISTANCE (only spell is Sacred Cleansing, whic adds +30% chance to resist)

Second one calculates resist chance for binary spells, this is correct, but I'll push some cleanup commit

[ariel-]

Cleanup done in e565b34f6d24411e210151d0d03e524f94cdff85. it won't change things too much though, so closing this as 'blizzlike' unless someone can describe with actual calculations that anything is wrong