Where do I find an in game equivalent?
1 Like
well the description does not helpâŠ
but honestly i think there are more important things to complaint about than just a rope that now breaks,
they made it so as the regular chain bindings.
i cant see why this is so relevant⊠it breaks? make another one.
or farm obulus and get a 20k one, or just go make binding of the dead, which is easy to make .
1 Like
Itâs not that serious but everyone likes to argue lol. Just pointing out how ridiculous it is to add it and then remove it. It wouldnât kill anything to have left it alone. Of course I use chains but ty. 
1 Like
its not the first time that they have added soemthing that required fixing later,
or things that got nerfed, funcom loves nerfing as their way of looking for balance.
1 Like
It took more than a year to remove the witch doctor recipe from Siptah loot table.
You were loosing 5 schematic fragments for it 
.
So patience my friend, 
.
Itâs âpay to winâ the reason players complaining and they are correct. I do find some complaints silly too, but this doesnât mean i am correct as well. The good part here is that Funcom steps back and correct the situations, as they did with whip bindings. So, again my friend PriestessAthena i have no reason to complain about this change, yet i donât disagree that these changes disappointing a group of players
1 Like
google ne peux pas savoirâŠ
La notion de lâinfinie et propre Ă lâhumain
Une spĂ©cificitĂ© quâil exploite et le rend talentueux surtout dans lâexpression de son art prĂ©fĂ©rĂ©, la stupiditĂ©âŠ
This one still routinely gets the potion to go to the midnight grove on Siptah in a drop.
If you attempt to drink it, an error notes it can only be used in the realms of the Giant Kingâs.
So yes, when it comes to fixing thingsâŠ
It happens when it happensâŠ
If it happensâŠ
And also, the flavor text is often hilariously wrong.
There is a legendary sword, explicitly described as a curved blade.
Guess what it looks likeâŠ
3 Likes
Letâs take a look at this argument from a logical standpoint here. There are some points that have been made, some of which have some validity to them but are also being taken out of context to invalidate the issue at hand. First we have to look at the list of bindings that are in the game, I excluded the two legendary binding because you cannot craft that one so it is not relevant to this discussion. Then you have to look at when the whip binding was introduce and when it was altered. I honestly do not know when they were altered but this item was introduced back in chapter 2 of the Age of War, so it has been around for quite some time.
Now, let is look at the arguments presented thus far.
Can you quote any sources to determine that they now have the correct durability? I am genuinely curious where you could have possibly come to this conclusion from since the cost to craft this item compared to the other binding of the exact same weight and durability are so vastly different.
The crafting cost is very close to Bindings of the Dead, though not as expensive. Still if is FAR closer to that item than the Chain Bindings and yet you suggest that the new durability value is the âright durabilityâ, which is why I question where you have come to this conclusion.
It is basically a free item, so long as you PAID $15 FIRST. ThatâsâŠnot free⊠That is merely the illusion of free, which is vastly different.
This is correct. The devs have said this. And yet history has shown, REPEATEDLY that what they have said, and what they have PRESENTED are two vastly different things. They have added items in pretty much every single Battle Pass that has been, essentially, pay to win. And this goes back to the very first Battle Pass. And though they also have a history of going back and âcorrectingâ these items they also do not do so until AFTER said Battle Pass is no longer current. This is the same for the BLB, they put items in the BLB that are P2W and they do not correct said items until they are no longer in rotation. So what the Devs practice and what they preach do not go hand and hand and as such you can not use their words to justify their actions. They have a proven history of making over powered items (inventory items that hold vastly more than anything else comparable, pets skins that make them massively over powered, weapons that are massively imbalanced). From their actions over the last 7 chapters the pattern has been has been set and cannot be denied. Regardless of their attempted excuses, which frankly are weak at best, they intentionally put out items with increased stats to boost sales and once said sales are no longer feasible they âadjustâ said items, though said adjustments are of typical Funcom standards. That is to say, halfarsed at best.
Incorrect. You had to PAY for the Battle Pass. There was always an initial fee whether it was at AoS Chapter 1 or AoW Chapter 2 you still had to PAY at some point in time. Thus it was not âfreeâ.
As I have shown above, it was intentionally made to be better, with the intention to be nerfed after that Battle Pass was phased out. So yeah, it was intended to be that good, but it was also intended to be NOT that good at the same time. 
See the pattern established above, there is no point is stating the same thing that Jimbo already stated. There is also no point in showing a video where the devs flat out lie about their intentions when their history of every update since then has proven their claims to be false.
When it comes to items not functioning, that can be chalked up to ineffective Q&A. When it comes to item stats being OP, that is an established pattern made to increase sales because it has been shown that every time the items do not get âcorrectedâ until after the Battle Pass is changed over for a new chapter, or the item is no longer in rotation in the BLB, or months after the item is no longer available on a twitch stream (if even then). No, these types of âerrorsâ are not due to a lack in Q&A, they are a tactic used to increase sales. And they are clearly effective.
Well, I do happen to agree with you. I am only commenting on the patterns that I have clearly seen. But since @Taemien is already making baseless claims in this thread about things he DOES NOT KNOW and can only speculate upon (unless he literally works for Funcom he had absolutely no way to know the claim he made way up at the beginning of this thread), then what the hell, why not? 
I would have ended the sentence there. 
Now on for the FACTS about the bindings:
These are the material costs and the durability and weight costs of each of the bindings which can be crafted in the game. Now, if the claim is to be made that the Whip Bindings are now at the âcorrect durabilityâ, how can you make such a claim when they are at a material cost of 10 LAYERED SILK AND 40 ALCHEMICAL BASE MORE THAN THE CHAIN BINDINGS? To make such a claim is, frankly, absurd! Conversely, it is correct that they should not be better than the bindings of the dead. The bindings of the dead cost 3 Fragments of Power, instead of 3 Steel Bars, as well as a Heart of a Hero more than the Whip Bindings. Therefore, the only logical conclusion is that the Whip Bindings should have a durability rating somewhere in between the two of them.
It is clear that the item never should have been released without any durability loss at all. However, they needed a reason to encourage people who had not already purchased the Battle Pass to do so, thus they offer an item that is OP. Well, then again this was also the Battle Pass that had the OP snake in it.
Good question Kiki. Where do you find an in game item which cost the same in materials? 
You donât. So with no item in game with the same material cost why would you expect an item in game with the same durability cost? 
You cannot have equivalent results without equivalent expenditures.
2 Likes
Now this is an interesting claim. Especially after asking for sources of information. You basically have now said that you will accept no sources or proof because you believe they are all lies from the very source of the game itself.
But that gets even worse because if you believe the developers (and the devs themselves, not just the company in question) are liars, deceptive, and cannot be trusted. Why are you even here? Why do you have a piece of software on your PC or Console from an untrusted source?
Oduda have you uninstalled this game already, or do you routinely use software from bad sources?
1 Like
Ooh!
Thereâs one other little factor for the âWhip Bindingâ.
It doesnât require a Thrall to craft.
Chain Bindings cannot be crafted unless there is a craft thrall, specifically a Taskmaster of Tier 3 or higher. While this might seem an almost trivial thing, in the upcoming Age of HoA, the requirement to have a thrall becomes much more onerous.
These must have thrall requirements for crafting certain items may be artifacts of previous systems (wherein specific thralls were need for specific armours, ect) but it is very much still an issue.
But regardlessâŠ
How does one balance the requirement of slave labour against the material cost of the craftable?
How many layered silk is a Tier 3+ Taskmaster work? At what rate of exchange in alchemical base does this type of property person transact?
Also, why is there no Leather in this whip?
What the cluck type of whip is made of silk, âsecret sauceâ, and steel?
Of course, the kind of whip that isnât a whip but is instead an exercise in whimsyâŠ
2 Likes
I asked for a source for the claim YOU made that the new durability rating was âthe right durabilityâ. Do you have any source where anyone from Funcom has made this claim? If so please cite it. If you do not, kindly keep your BS to yourself as you are asserting something which you cannot prove as though it were true.
No, I very clearly asked you to provide some. You so far have only provided an evasion.
Can you prove that their claims thus far have been anything other than? You yourself have provided the video where they made the claim that they will only add COSMETIC AND NOT POWER to the game. I have provided ample examples of where they have in fact added power to the game, and how they have in fact waited until the sources of said power are no longer available to adjust said item. Given their track record, can you provide any actual proof to counter this stance? If so please do so? The evidence has thus been presented, even by @CodeMage even if he had not presented a conclusion to said evidence. So please, present to your counter evidence and provide actual proof to your claims. I will be waiting.
That is not relevant to this discussion nor is it any business of yours.
Not at all. And I fully intend to play the testlive version of the next Age in hope to see how they do with the new update. So I still have the Live version and the Testlive version installed. Oh and Age of Conan as well.
Look, if you are unable to see the established pattern of behaviour from Funcom, or are simply unwilling to admit to it, well that is a you thing. I truly do not care to be honest. I have noticed it and I will point it out because it would be intellectually dishonest not to do so. Does that mean I do not have a long standing love of this game? Not at all or I would not have been playing it since early access. That does not mean that there has been a major shift in the company and that, as of recent, there has been a clear and obvious set of patterns that cannot be denied.
Good catch there @LostBrythunian. As that was not listed in the materials on the wiki I completely forgot about that. Well that and I have never actually made the whip bindings myself so I wasnât sure if you needed a thrall to create them or not. But it is good to note that as an added value to cost. 
And when you install software from untrustworthy sources. Thatâs a you thing. Which you have thus admitted to doing.
Youâve set up a weird fallacy of asking for a source, but then claim the actual source is a lie. Letâs play this game, what would be a source of information you would actually trust? An actual entity you would trust? Can you name one? Or does none exist? Letâs get that on record if youâve got the gall for it.
Incorrect and you bloody well know that if you actually read anything I said.
Did you just conveniently chose to ignore this part here? Funny that.
Look, either provide your evidence or stop wasting everyoneâs time by evading and making up more BS here. Show it or shut it, it is as simple as that.
I posted a video citing a source directly from the developers of the game. You called them liars and are not willing to accept any source the disagrees with your agenda.
So you have literally no proof that
this is the âright durabilityâ as you have stated. Thank you for clarifying.
OK, and in what part of this video, posted WELL OVER A YEAR before the Whip Bindings were created, does this provide any proof that the current durability rating of the Whip Bindings are âthe right durabilityâ? Do you not comprehend what my question was? Or do you not comprehend what proof is? Or are you truly just that much of a troll?
Provide proof FOR THE CURRENT DURABILITY RATING OF THE WHIP BINDINGS!
Several of us had already discussed this in this thread. Particularly those comments by Jimbo, Codemage, Pugilist, stelagel, and myself. Or are we all in cohoots with or fooled by Funcom?
You can watch the video and read the thread. If you want me to do that for you, I will need compensation. I will do legwork for someone I consider a friend, I do not consider you a friend.
Yeah, as predicted. More evasion. More lack of proof. More lack of evidence to support your baseless accusation.
And it is funny that you mention @codemage, because you clearly did not bother to actually read, and or comprehend a damned thing he wrote either. SHOCKING!
Perhaps you might want to re-read that again and actually let that sink in for a moment.
Not that it will do much good with someone as intellectually dishonest as yourself mind you. But for anyone else reading along they will see the point.
So yeah, you still have yet to answer my very simple question to provide any any single piece of evidence where Funcome has claimed that this specific current durability rating for the whip binding is the âright oneâ. You have merely made a baseless accusation which you pulled out of your arse and asserted to be fact and rather than own up to it you would rather evade that very simple request and spin yet more lies and make more false accusation while attempting to disparage me as well. Good on you!
On that we can both agree.