Maintained Enchantments

[nudge]

If memory serves, and these days it oft does not, there is a section in "The Wizard of Earthsea" where one of the characters describes that he does not live wrapped in protected spells, like an old lady wrapped in scarves against the cold. Seem to remember something about him being shot with an arrow immediately before hand, so it may not of have been such a good life choice ...

In GW1 there are many enchantments, but only a handful are maintained enchantments. What do people think if more enchantments where maintained? Thinking more of the "attunement" and "aura of the" type enchantments, rather than "flame djinns haste".

[raspberry jam]

Whether an enchantment is maintained or not is a question of energy consumption vs. risk/reward balance. It all depends on exactly what kinds of enchantments they are going to put in the game.

IMO one point about attunements is that they have quite a long recharge time, and are therefore nice, rewarding targets for enchantment removal or interrupts. So personally I think they should stay non-maintained.

[Alaris]

I like the idea of having some choice in your buffs.

You could have basically the same buff in different versions. Take elemental attunement for example.

You could have an enchantment that needs to be re-cast, and can be removed as well.

You could have a maintained version, which once cast stays unless removed. Easier to maintain, but perhaps the %energy saved is a bit less.

Then you could have a permanent, unremovable buff (like a passive skill) that does not need casting. The drawback for that would be that there would be counters to passives, like skills that disable passives or does more damage if you have passive skills on your bar.

Each has pro's and con's to fit different play styles.

[Zsig]

Given the nature of the maintained enchantments we got, I have to say that increasing the number of them too much would be a problem, specially in PvP.

Ok, there's a limit to the number you can maintain at any given time, but this sort of thing encourages you to play in a passive way. "cast and forget" giving you or your party members some neat passive bonuses.

Given that, I do understand that some of the maintained enchants do require skill to use (like [[holy veil]) and it would be nice to have more of those.

Also, why limit ourselves only to enchantments? Bring us some maintained Hexes, maintained Summonings, etc.

[Aiiane]

Maintained enchantments with weak passive effects and more interesting "on remove" effects are okay.

Maintained enchantments with powerful passive effects promote passive play, and are thus undesirable.

[raspberry jam]

Maintained enchantments with powerful passive effects promote passive play, and are thus undesirable.Do you mean powerful passive effects like [[life barrier|halved damage] and [[balthazar's spirit|tons of energy if it's used right]?

Both these skills are actually very desirable in PvE (and mostly useless in PvP, so they don't matter there) because of their nature and because of the [[life bond|synergy] they give with [[blessed signet|other skills].

[Alaris]

Maintained enchantments with powerful passive effects promote passive play, and are thus undesirable.

Pffft.

I've heard that argument tons of times, and I still don't get it. Its not like somebody will have 8 passive skills and be able to beat up the monsters in solo HM or be able to PvP effectively.

It's not like having to re-cast enchantments is much more active either. Instead of cast & forget, it's cast and check the timers. Not my idea of fun.

Nothing wrong with a few passive skills, as long as you also need some active skills to be effective. For example, passive defenses & energy managements are great, but you still need active skills to deal damage.

Also, the price you pay for the ease of use of passive skills is slightly less effective skills. Active skills should be slightly better to encourage active play.

[KyppDuron]

Active skills should be slightly better to encourage active play.

and that means there is no point in using the passive skill because it is less effective.
-edit-
and as long as that is the case, then i'm all for lots of maintained enchants.

btw, maintained minions would work really well for a golemancer.

[Aiiane]

Do you mean powerful passive effects like [[life barrier|halved damage] and [[balthazar's spirit|tons of energy if it's used right]?

Both these skills are actually very desirable in PvE (and mostly useless in PvP, so they don't matter there) because of their nature and because of the [[life bond|synergy] they give with [[blessed signet|other skills].

You misunderstood my statement. They are "undesirable" in the sense that they're not good for game balance; they're not something I would desire to be in-game.

Of course powerful effects are "desired" for playing PvE, they're powerful. That doesn't mean they're good game design.


I've heard that argument tons of times, and I still don't get it. Its not like somebody will have 8 passive skills and be able to beat up the monsters in solo HM or be able to PvP effectively.

Why are we concerned with soloing here? Guild Wars is a team game. I'm sure you're familiar with the concept of a bond monk, yes? Probably one of the most boring roles to play in a team - so why should a game include skills that promote that kind of play?

Maintained enchantments by their very nature make you less able to do active things while you maintain the passive enchant, due to their energy degeneration. Thus, maintained enchantments that encourage you to leave them up indefinitely are a hindrance to active play, and thus should be treated with caution.


It's not like having to re-cast enchantments is much more active either. Instead of cast & forget, it's cast and check the timers. Not my idea of fun.

You've probably not played much with enchantments in PvP then, since in PvP you have to worry about intelligent, targeted enchantment removal, especially on enchantments with significant recharge times.


Nothing wrong with a few passive skills, as long as you also need some active skills to be effective. For example, passive defenses & energy managements are great, but you still need active skills to deal damage.

Again, I point you to the example of the bond monk - why should the game encourage a model of sitting 50 feet behind your team and using a single signet every 8 seconds? That type of play shouldn't be encouraged.


Also, the price you pay for the ease of use of passive skills is slightly less effective skills. Active skills should be slightly better to encourage active play.
Which is essentially what I was already stating, although if you just want to add some sub-par skills to the game and make them maintained enchantments, I'd say that's just a waste of skills.

[Alaris]

I'm sure you're familiar with the concept of a bond monk, yes?

You've probably not played much with enchantments in PvP then, since in PvP you have to worry about intelligent, targeted enchantment removal, especially on enchantments with significant recharge times.

Which is essentially what I was already stating, although if you just want to add some sub-par skills to the game and make them maintained enchantments, I'd say that's just a waste of skills.

About the removal & PvP... I've played enough PvP for that to be an issue. Again, it's mostly an issue of noticing which enchants are off, and re-casting them (being careful to not be interrupted etc).

You make a good point with the bonding monk. I've used that on heroes, but surely a human player would be bored to tears if forced to play this style... I was referring to self-enchants though, so that issue doesn't really apply. Things like elemental enchantment could have a maintained / passive version, which would leave you to concentrate on active skills instead.

And I didn't say "sub-par", I meant balanced. Pro's and con's. Active skills require more work but are slightly better. Passive / maintained skills require less work, thus are slightly worse. But both would be useful skills for slightly different reasons. For example, you might prefer the passive version in enchant-removal-heavy areas or in areas where energy-denial is heavy (hence you might not be able to re-apply it). You might prefer active enchantment if it synergizes with some Dervish / Monk skills (that give bonuses for each enchantment on you).

Or you just might prefer the easier-to-use skills even if they are slightly sub-par because you're a new player and you need to concentrate on other things than those timers.

[raspberry jam]

You misunderstood my statement. They are "undesirable" in the sense that they're not good for game balance; they're not something I would desire to be in-game.

Of course powerful effects are "desired" for playing PvE, they're powerful. That doesn't mean they're good game design.No, it actually is good game design. Those skills are extremely important building blocks for players who want to build around problems in PvE. A lot of what makes PvE (well, PvP too, but there you can't build for a fixed problem) exciting is the beautiful synergies you can get between skills. If that means that these skills are passive then so be it. Expecting people to correctly renew dual bonds on the entire team is too much to ask.

Again, I point you to the example of the bond monk - why should the game encourage a model of sitting 50 feet behind your team and using a single signet every 8 seconds? That type of play shouldn't be encouraged.If you play bonder in Sorrow's Furnace, FoW, and other places, enemy necros and mesmers certainly discourage simply hanging back and spamming your signet.

[Aiiane]

No, it actually is good game design. Those skills are extremely important building blocks for players who want to build around problems in PvE. A lot of what makes PvE (well, PvP too, but there you can't build for a fixed problem) exciting is the beautiful synergies you can get between skills. If that means that these skills are passive then so be it. Expecting people to correctly renew dual bonds on the entire team is too much to ask.


If you see playing a bonder as exciting, then I'm afraid we disagree on a base level that no amount of explanation is going to rectify.


If you play bonder in Sorrow's Furnace, FoW, and other places, enemy necros and mesmers certainly discourage simply hanging back and spamming your signet.
There's a reason the other monk typically has cover enchantments.

[Wethospu]

- - And I didn't say "sub-par", I meant balanced. Pro's and con's. Active skills require more work but are slightly better. Passive / maintained skills require less work, thus are slightly worse. But both would be useful skills for slightly different reasons. For example, you might prefer the passive version in enchant-removal-heavy areas or in areas where energy-denial is heavy (hence you might not be able to re-apply it). You might prefer active enchantment if it synergizes with some Dervish / Monk skills (that give bonuses for each enchantment on you).

Or you just might prefer the easier-to-use skills even if they are slightly sub-par because you're a new player and you need to concentrate on other things than those timers.

Upper statement starts sounding like "I have my 1337 favorite build, please Anet make it work in every area!". If you make a skill with copies that works in every area then what's the point? I think different areas should force you to play different builds.

With same idea:
Dragon Slash: Deals +10...34 damage. You gain 1...4 strikes of adrenaline if it hits.
Dragon Slash: Deals +7...28 damage. You gain 1...3 strikes of adrenaline if it hits. This skill recharges instantly in all cases.

The lower one would work in Nightfallen Jahai where your skills gets additional 3 seconds recharge. The lower one would be a bit weaker than the upper one though.


And the lower statement. I think it's better if new players learn to play this game effectively. I fear that then some players would stick to the weaker skills just because they aren't forced to use better ones.

[raspberry jam]

If you see playing a bonder as exciting, then I'm afraid we disagree on a base level that no amount of explanation is going to rectify.Well, I also like playing orders necro, which actually is played by mostly hanging back and spamming the same skill over and over. Though that skill isn't a maintained enchantment. It's the beauty of the skill synergies within the team that appeals to me.

In fact being maintained or not has nothing to do with active or passive play.

[Wethospu]

True, but maintaining skills has something to do with passive play.

Usually you maintain maintainable enchantments but it also applies to spammable skills.

[nudge]

Also, why limit ourselves only to enchantments? Bring us some maintained Hexes, maintained Summonings, etc.

Nice idea. Each golem requires a maintained enchant to control. Drop to 0 energy and control is lost. Makes the mesmer a more dangerous foe.

Aiiane, I was not really thinking of bond monks so much, as more attunments. Have always found it rather annoying to reapply them. But maybe that's just me.

And even if you are a bond monk, or a OotV spammer, why does that have to be dull? If you helping out your friends, playing your part in the team, and enjoying what you are doing what's the problem?

[Wethospu]

If you enjoy it, fine.

But I don't want people ask me to run a build which requires pressing one button frequently.

For me playing is something else than that. And as I'm selfish I don't want GW to be turned a game which I would like less.

[nudge]

But I don't want people ask me to run a build which requires pressing one button frequently.

Strangely I don't have a have a recollection of ever having asked you to run a build which required you to press one button.

[Akirai Annuvil]

In fact being maintained or not has nothing to do with active or passive play.
It has a lot to do with active or passive play. Maintaining skills is inherently more passive than activating them. After all, you're simply using them less.

Maintained enchantments which only pay off by being continuously maintained (think [[strength of honor@12], [[life barrier@14]) are especially passive by nature as the only thing you want to accomplish is keeping them up, which means even if they drop (which they principally speaking don't do), re-activate. That's the entire roll of the skills; no personal judgement required, just keeping them up for as long as possible, same as [[never surrender!@9] for example. A skill which likewise should be less effective than its more active cousins.

Maintained enchantments which only pay off when removed at the right time ([[holy veil] being the prime example) require judgement from the player, whether to remove or to maintain. Skills requiring good team coordination and personal judgement of the situation are active and should be more effective than their passive cousins.
And even if you are a bond monk, or a OotV spammer, why does that have to be dull?
Because you're just spamming your buttons on recharge. As a role in a game it requires less skill from the player and doesn't reward skill nearly as much as an active role does. In a skill-based game (aka GW1/2) that makes it undesirable.

[Wethospu]

Strangely I don't have a have a recollection of ever having asked you to run a build which required you to press one button.

True, Ursan requires 3 or even 4.

[raspberry jam]

It has a lot to do with active or passive play. Maintaining skills is inherently more passive than activating them. After all, you're simply using them less.It requires more clicking, but not more thought. I agree completely with the rest of what you are saying, but I still like such skills. As I said, they are great for the kind of player who wishes to build a problem away. In PvP, such skills (the maintained ones anyway) are mostly pointless to bring anyway.

About maintained hexes: The problem is that you suddenly get much more information. Imagine a necromancer putting [[life siphon] on the entire enemy team (not a very effective tactic, but just assume. For other hexes, the information transfer is even greater). Normally, if one of his hexes ran out or was removed, he wouldn't know which one - he'd just see that his regen dropped. If these hexes were maintained, he'd know right away who lost it and where he must cast it again.

[Alaris]

Upper statement starts sounding like "I have my 1337 favorite build, please Anet make it work in every area!". If you make a skill with copies that works in every area then what's the point? I think different areas should force you to play different builds.

I agree that different areas should force you to use different builds, but that's not a counter-argument to what I said. If foes in an area do damage that bypass protection skills, then it doesn't matter if your protections are passive, active, enchants, or whatnot. Either way you're better off adopting a different strategy.

Moreover, maintained enchantments are usually more costly than equivalent active enchantments, so against enchantment-removal foes, you're better off with active enchantments.

I think it's better if new players learn to play this game effectively. I fear that then some players would stick to the weaker skills just because they aren't forced to use better ones.

You can't force people to learn. The best you can do is provide information (tutorials, wikis, etc), and pro's and con's to using different skills, and hope they learn from it.

Making every skills active and requiring deep thought and strategy to use well will just aleniate noobies. That's the main reason why mesmers and assassins are not popular in PvE. They need to be played well to be efficient.

Easier-to-use skills act as a way to make the learning curve not-too-steep. Experienced players will naturally gravitate towards more efficient skills when they are ready to use them.

Also keep in mind that there may be build-specific reasons to use maintained enchantments or passive skills. As an interrupter, for example, casting a 1-3s spell can make the difference between being ready or not to interrupt a critical spell. Also, maintained enchantments can be pre-applied, and energy can be allowed to refill before combat. Casting them during combat puts a strain on your energy and time.

I didn't really enjoy playing the Dervish, because this class was too dependent on re-applying self-enchantments. Although re-applying them was "active", it was very much a robotic action.

[raspberry jam]

I didn't really enjoy playing the Dervish, because this class was too dependent on re-applying self-enchantments. Although re-applying them was "active", it was very much a robotic action.Reapplying enchantments on recharge isn't active.

[Akirai Annuvil]

Reapplying enchantments on recharge isn't active.
Neither maintaining nor reapplying on recharge is really active; the latter is less passive though.

Anyway, if you want to see a playstyle while understanding why it shouldn't be as powerful as it's contemporaries I can't really mind. As for me I don't mind if they add skills such as [[life barrier@14] - it adds a playstyle which some people seem to like which ups sales and is a good enough reason for me. As long as they don't become as powerful as their active counterparts ([[protective spirit@11] for example).

[raspberry jam]

Hahaha. Well, I completely agree with that, of course.

[Wethospu]

I agree that different areas should force you to use different builds, but that's not a counter-argument to what I said. - -

As far as I understood you suggested two copies of same skill which are slightly different (so you can use them in different areas like my Dragon Slash example). I'm not really trying to counter anything because I realize that people like different things. I just don't want game become something which I would like less.
However I find it stupid if you could use one build all the time with some minor changes (and now I mean changing one skill to sub-par one which is better in that area).
Let's take an example how I would like it:
You use Fire Attunement. In heavy enchant removal areas it would be pretty useless. Instead of bringing whatever sub-par copy you should bring Power Drain, Glyph of Lesser Energy, etc..


- -You can't force people to learn. The best you can do is provide information (tutorials, wikis, etc), and pro's and con's to using different skills, and hope they learn from it.

Making every skills active and requiring deep thought and strategy to use well will just aleniate noobies. That's the main reason why mesmers and assassins are not popular in PvE. They need to be played well to be efficient.

Easier-to-use skills act as a way to make the learning curve not-too-steep. Experienced players will naturally gravitate towards more efficient skills when they are ready to use them.
- -

You can force them learn, or quit. If there is heavy enchant removal area and guy X keeps bringing his attunement all the time he surely will realize that it won't work, especially if he fails on that quest/mission. Also if it wasn't only H/H someone could explain him -> Guy X Skill Boost ++!
Also game could remind on those tool tips that your enchantment is getting removed a lot in this area. So if guy X can read he would learn.

I don't really think Assassin and Mesmer are hard to play. The point is that they just don't fit to PvE. In PvE you kill many many things. Mesmer is good with disabling, not killing. Assassin is good with spiking single target. (These are just general ideas, exceptions exist) What about Monks then? I think they require more skills than Assassin or Mesmer. Are they unpopular too?

More examples :P
My friend started playing this game like a year ago and guess what his first character was? Mesmer. What about second? Assassin.
He first put stuff like Distracting Shot on his Mesmer but later he realized that stuff like Backfire is very useful in PvE against Monks.
I think this game should require skill in PvE and not be like "Press x button and you win!" (my friend did fine with his Distracting Shot).

And that last part:
I think game itself should be teaching. Make areas in starting island very different and explain new players what is special there. If game is easy and offers weaker but easier to use skills what's point of better skills? (Or skills which are easy to use and powerful like Ursan :P)