Please return bind wound to its state about a week ago.

H

hassan

Dalayan Beginner
With a recent patch it changed (unlisted) that you can't bind wound anyone that has hate so basically you can't bind wound anyone thats fighting a mob whether or not they are attacking. This destroyed one of the more important tools for leveling as casters. Before the patch, caster's wound bind wound on a high resist mob or when they are OOM helping the group survive. With the patch they are helpless.

Another concern with this is for adept's and other raiding mobs. Bind wound is essential for many adepts for the fact spell's won't land for the first half of the battle until a lucky malise lands. The role of the caster's are usually to spam bind until this happens, because of the recent change caster's have lost general power in raids/adepts.

Suggest change: I understand the concern with changing it back due to many (including myself) would heal my toon that was boxed with bind wound while leveling. My proposal is to make it so you can bind wound ONLY people in your grp/raid to help restore some utility to the bind wound skill. Thanks for reading this.
 
It's not a bad idea, it solves the problem of higher level characters bind wounding their alts or healing on adepts.
 
For the adept part of the post, I think BW is not the solution. Maybe they're intended to be that hard, or maybe they should have their resists lowered a bit (or maybe you should get higher level people, can't tell ;)).

But binding a warrior's wounds while there's a dragon biting him doesn't look like something right :).
 
imho, casters that are oom are better off sitting on their bum... medding!
so that they can nuke a bit more before the fight is over, then they are far more usefull then when they try to BW the tank.
 
BeittilBonker said:
imho, casters that are oom are better off sitting on their bum... medding!
so that they can nuke a bit more before the fight is over, then they are far more usefull then when they try to BW the tank.
Click to expand...

I completely disagree with this statement! I can't count the amount of times (at lower levels) that I saved my groups arse by bind wounding during fights. Its not a HUGE HP increase, but it was enough to do SOMETHING while I was OOM as were the healers. IMHO if it's about not PLing with BW (lol is that even possible???), what prevents a higher level from buffing and DSing a lower level, turning off its attack just long enough to get a quick bandage on, and then turning attack back on?

PS: My intention is not to debate something that has been added in recently via a patch. If Wiz's mind is made up on the subject, there is no debating him into changing it back. He usually has reasoning that is well beyond our understanding (hence his role on the server vs. ours :p)
 
Bind Wound is too powerful here to be allowed to be used in combat. I'd rather keep it a powerful downtime measure.
 
BW at its original state made it unbalanced in my opinion. In most cases with my low level cleric I'd be asked to nuke while someone had their alt BW the tank. :sadf:

Plus I agree that from a logistics standpoint that it makes no sense to BW someone in combat. It should definately be an out of combat ability.
 
Would it be possible (or feasible) to implement a hate timer for FD classes? Similar to the one done for live where after a certain length of time where no attacking was taking place the mob 'forgot' about the pc. I think that this would accomplish the goal of not allowing BW during combat but also eliminate having to jump up and down for 10 or more minutes trying 'release' the pc from the mob's hate list.

BTW, thanks Wiz and Co. for all of your time and effort!
 
The other night we were in Mielech B killing frogs, and someone made a wrong turn which brought us a few extra visitors. So long story short, we get all dead but one and both druids are OOM. Luckily the necro has enough to barely get a mes off and the tank is at about 13% health. So I am thinking hey I can BW up since I am not in combat. *BZZZZZT* Wrong answer. Define in combat? I mean a mob standing there mesmerized is not engaging in combat is it? I am not attacking nor being attacked and it is a form of downtime, why can't I BW under this scenario from an RP or gameplay perspective?
 
Tempus said:
The other night we were in Mielech B killing frogs, and someone made a wrong turn which brought us a few extra visitors. So long story short, we get all dead but one and both druids are OOM. Luckily the necro has enough to barely get a mes off and the tank is at about 13% health. So I am thinking hey I can BW up since I am not in combat. *BZZZZZT* Wrong answer. Define in combat? I mean a mob standing there mesmerized is not engaging in combat is it? I am not attacking nor being attacked and it is a form of downtime, why can't I BW under this scenario from an RP or gameplay perspective?
Click to expand...

Interesting situation, but keep in mind that *if* mez or any other forms of non-combat stopages are excluded from this new BW format, it could make Enchanter/Necro soloing much easier. Don't take that statement as anti-soloing, just stating that allowing certain aspects of that could in turn look as if there is some class favoritism. My question is, *if* anything with BW was changed from this point on, how would it affect the individual class balances?
 
If the chanter is tanking the mob when solo'ing he has bigger issues then being able to BW while a mob is mez'd, Like wise a necro would just Lifetap to regain HP.
 
Tempus said:
If the chanter is tanking the mob when solo'ing he has bigger issues then being able to BW while a mob is mez'd, Like wise a necro would just Lifetap to regain HP.
Click to expand...

You never know ... there have been crazier loopholes found before... was just trying to state that the whole scenario should be thought through so exploits/loopholes aren't created.
 
Was bind wounding with a rooted mob the "too powerful" thing, or bind wounding lower level players? If it's the lower-level player thing, you could just make it so you had to be a certain level to get full benifit from BW. Say, if you're level 10 or less, bind wound of 51+ does the same as bind wound 50 on you.
 
The "in-combat" thing disrupted one of my favorite monk solo techniques. I can no longer hope for a root proc to then stand back and bind wounds twice for any worthwhile benefit. Now the only recourse for a fight that starts going badly is to feign death and try again, which isn't nearly as much fun. This method won't let you take on much more powerful mobs (unless you got REALLY lucky with procs). It just allowed an in-combat option for when the light-blue starts kicking your butt.

I had been meaning to mention it for awhile but I didn't want to start a new thread for it. I wish it could go back to the way it was, but I'm not about to throw a tantrum if it doesn't.
 
I have had trouble with this as well, but I must agree with the concept that BW while in battle is a little off. I do wish, however, that it would work while mobs are mesmerized.

I did notice that before the nerf was a period where in combat BW did half normal BW damage. Would it be possible to reimplement something like it? like 1/4 normal BW damage or something? where it works but it's not at all huge.
 
Concievably you could have BW be interrupted by being hit or cast on instead of by aggro. That way roots and stuff would still work, but BWing alts wouldn't.
 
Just experienced a bit of frustration from this.
My monk has a flitterdust pouch and solos a lot. I usually mez the mob im on for 1 minute and get off 2 or 3 binds. Can't do that now, so I'm a bit screwed in a few fights.

This is also the case of my bard, although i use it less frequently.
 
If the only issue with that was the necro / enchanter / bard / whatever being able to bind while the mob was mezzed, perhaps simply making it so the person who cast the mez / stun / whatever cannot bind, but nothers can, would solve the problem? I mean, anyone else could just relog, come back and bind woulds while the enchanter / necro kept the mob mezzed, then re-engage at an appropriate time anyway. This would just remove the hassle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom