It seems that when there is a sticky step that QO steps do not want to advance themselves off the list. They check themselves off, but don't clear off. I was not in combat either. I noticed this when I put a sticky step in for "The Leaders at Jin'Alai" above the QO steps for "Breaking Through Jin'Alai".

Grumble. This one is trickier to fix than I thought.

Yea, apparently not a lot of things like it when there is a sticky step.

Hey guys, I've created a test levelling guide that use dailies in order to reproduce the problem. I thought that might be helpful since it can be repeated unlike normal levelling guides. (Of course, Molten Front needs to be unlocked and the proper dailies needs to be available.) Sometime, a good test to repeat the bug can be very useful to fix it.

I didn't see any place where I could attach a file here so I've uploaded it to Google Docs

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B2l1zdRmNYwcNTM1Y2JhN2YtYTFiYy00NDc1LWI4YmYtMjFiNWVjY2UzNzJi&hl=en_GB

On a side note, I've been hacking away at WoWPro for a while. You can find my own fork here on GitHub. It's probably not the fix you are looking for but my fork use states instead of message for quest, objective and loot completion. The side effect is that my fork doesn't appear to have this issue with sickies.

I hope that this is helpful to you guys.

I re-uploaded the test with some corrections I've made : https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B2l1zdRmNYwcYjBhYjU2YzEtYmE1ZC00YjBkLTg1YmQtNzQ5NjhiN2Y2MzJi&hl=en_GB

If you could try the following experiment for me:

In WoWPro_Broker.lua in function WoWPro.CompleteStep(), add:

WoWPro:Print("WoWPro.CompleteStep("..step..")")

And see if the numbers "jump down".
I am suspecting some of the callers are confusing absolute step numbers and displayed step index numbers.

--Luis

On Oct 5, 2011, at 5:56 PM, Laotseu wrote:

I re-uploaded the test with some corrections I've made : https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B2l1zdRmNYwcYjBhYjU2YzEtYmE1ZC00YjBkLTg1YmQtNzQ5NjhiN2Y2MzJi&hl=en_GB

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#347 (comment)

@Laotseu You have an interesting fork you have been maintaining and keeping up to date.
Are you at all interested in me pulling some of it into the master repo?