Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[CLOSED] Can mace spec proc from spell attacks #8

Open
kelno opened this issue Jan 2, 2019 · 4 comments
Open

[CLOSED] Can mace spec proc from spell attacks #8

kelno opened this issue Jan 2, 2019 · 4 comments
Labels
invalid This doesn't seem right needs research

Comments

@kelno
Copy link
Member

kelno commented Jan 2, 2019

Issue by ccshiro
Friday Oct 24, 2014 at 20:06 GMT
Originally opened as ccshiro/cc-buglist#8


Can mace spec proc from non-white hits? This report is about gouge in particular.

@kelno kelno added this to the october22-test milestone Jan 2, 2019
@kelno kelno added invalid This doesn't seem right needs research labels Jan 2, 2019
@kelno
Copy link
Member Author

kelno commented Jan 2, 2019

Comment by eviloncc
Friday Oct 24, 2014 at 23:18 GMT


http://www.wowwiki.com/Procs_per_minute. Should be helpful explains procs and instant attacks.

http://wow.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=243&mid=1182073326288194540. Old threat where they talk about mace stun might be helpful

@kelno
Copy link
Member Author

kelno commented Jan 2, 2019

Comment by sasfog
Sunday Oct 26, 2014 at 23:36 GMT


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSH3HD1YjTk#t=23s (23 sec, there's a purple skill hit then the mace stun proc)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSH3HD1YjTk#t=13s (13 sec, after mortal strike lands, stormherald proc)

@kelno
Copy link
Member Author

kelno commented Jan 2, 2019

Comment by sasfog
Thursday Oct 30, 2014 at 12:03 GMT


Here are some possible examples for rogues, though with their fast attack speed, mace stun could have been from unshown auto attacks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pu7JSJiYl8#t=4m33s (4 min 33 sec)
http://www.warcraftmovies.com/movieview.php?id=29670 (possible occurance at 0:52, 1:40, 5:34, 6:46, 7:30, 9:09)

@kelno
Copy link
Member Author

kelno commented Jan 2, 2019

Comment by ccshiro
Thursday Oct 30, 2014 at 12:10 GMT


@sasfog Thanks for the videos. The accumulated evidence seems to confirm that it should work as it does currently. Thanks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
invalid This doesn't seem right needs research
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant