That's not really where I was going with it. The insta-cast evac AAs have a longish recast time. That can be reduced with AAs, but there's still a recast time. If you allow Teleport to Bind to be insta-cast, you now have two spells that can instantly save the group. Now add in any port spell. Wizards and druids would have unlimited insta-cast port spells. I don't see that happening.
This..!!!! Some are insulted or have their ego bruised, most are completely out of the focus. Either Dreamweaver says, that both (port and evac) fail or dreamweaver missed the "port-fail-too-part". Fascinating... So I would like to ask Dreamweaver: are normal ports (no evacs or succor or exodus) failing and if, how often compared to evac, succor, exodus (with max level and AA)?
My understanding (having read the post more than once) is that the player believes there to be a bug in the way this is functioning. I was told there was not. But I wanted to make sure that you could all continue to discuss the issue, reading through the posts I still don't see any verifiably reported bug. I can always move it back but for now it stays here. Also. Not really a bug forum discussion "So please please please get rid - at least at a certain "professional" level - get rid of fumbles of stupid lowest lowest lowest level spells which are by any means normally not fumblable with full maximum AA (!!!!) at level 115 (which makes me think about the usefulness of such unfumble-AAs)."
It's great to have AA to be able to 100% cast a spell with a fixed 20% failure chance. Ya that's great. Can we have more AA to improve our chance of experiencing that fixed failure rate? Also please make that AA cost a TON. Wonderful. You all get the sarcasm. Even Better.
That means....? Evacs and normal Ports have a failure rate? Some claim that Ports don't fail, some claim they do fail. This is the question. It is not clear for me in the last post. (note: I don't have english in my mother tongue, but do I understand that right?)
It depends on the definition of fail in this case. Any port can fail, as in the gate collapses and you have to recast. But if fail means "left some people behind," then only evacs and succors have that possibility.
Sorry, yes, my bad and not precise from my side. I meant: "is there a chance that ports leave people behind" from devs side? Perhaps that is the reason of understanding why this threads seems a bit weird, at least for me...
No. It's only weird because people confuse ports and succors. "My port left someone behind!" "That's because you used Succor spell and not port spell." "Oh."
So now let me ask a stupid question. I thought evacs cleared agro because you zone when they go off. At least it seems like you do that when my wizard buddy (they still exist) gets cold feet when I have an interesting pull. I never remember them not clearing agro, but I haven't played a druid in 18 years.
When first implemented (a very long time ago), they did not reload the zone, and did not always clear agro, even though they were supposed to. Hence, the change to make them reload the zone.
Right and this was broken a couple of years ago to appease DoT parsers who were dying during raid battles. There are other bug reports about this on the forum.
They do zone you and they do clear agro. However if you still have a dot on the mob the next time he takes damage you regain agro.
Normal gate spells can collapse(even clicky-gates like the guildhall-anchor), don't remember if it ever happened to a port though. Evacs are unreliable but they rarely fail in my experience.
