Talk:Energy potion

Addition of potions

So, is this it? No more energy management, just load up on potions and suck them down as often as you can? I thought they wanted to stay away from this kind of item-centric gameplay... Arshay Duskbrow 23:13, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Honestly it is hard to say at this point. This is just going off the demo footage. We really need a lot more information before we can draw an absolute conclusion. ShadowRunner 23:16, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like shit to me, sorry to say this but if this will be in the real game that's just another thing they will have fucked up, I've seen some videos from the demos and looks pretty good but to me it has some very much sucky elements. the rezzing has no recharge time I've seen a charr rezz like 5 people in 30 seconds I mean wtf is up with that :s also the event thingys look kinda fckd up, Anet has alot of work to do... And I hope that in the future this page will be candidate for deletion. Prince Grazel 23:30, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

The charr resurrecting everyone was in "dev mode" according to comments I've seen on the video; would also explain why none of the enemies noticed it.--Kyoshi (Talk) 23:53, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Plus, you forget the new "Downed" feature. It's entirely possible that none of those Charr being ressed were dead, just downed, and they weren't actually being resurrected, just revived/"rallied". 72.174.198.212 20:06, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Problem with that theory is, downed characters aren't simply ignored by enemies. From what they've told us, being downed you get one skill that can make you invulnerable to damage, but it doesn't lose aggro or anything. I'm more inclined to believe it was just a dev trying to help the demo players and show off a bit.

Concerning the potion itself, they'll have recharges, and these are the only potions there will be. There was also apparently some hinting about a different energy mechanic being used in PvP, since the only reason energy potions are around is because of decreased energy regeneration. Or something like that. --Kyoshi (Talk) 20:47, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Decreased energy regeneration? Increase it. I don't like the idea of having to spam a potion if I run out of energy. Energy management added a nice layer of strategy, you had to know what you were doing, or you'd be out. This just turns it all into button mashing and skill spamming. I *really* hope this will be one of those "features" that they'll end up removing, like the skill gems back before GW1's release. 76.115.162.93 02:49, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

I hate games that force you to buy potions before you can actually have any fun. Consumables okay in original Guild Wars because they're optional. I thought they wanted to create a game in which you don't have to spend time perparing to have fun. Collecting potions is not having fun. Ramei Arashi 04:17, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

You can't spam these potions because they have a recharge. They will be cheap so that it's hardly even a nuisance, much less a time consuming venture; just buy a few when you stop to merch your loot, like picks or ID kits. And for any worries concerning PvP, they've hinted at different mechanics for energy in PvP. --Kyoshi (Talk) 00:46, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

"They will be cheap so that it's hardly even a nuisance": that is extremely unlikely. As Regina's post on GW2G states, the reason they have added energy potions is to give players a long term resource to manage. If said resource did not need management at all (in other words, if potions were so cheap to the point of becoming irrelevant), then ArenaNet's reason for adding potions would be moot. Erasculio 00:54, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Time is also a resource. The potions have a recharge. --Kyoshi (Talk) 01:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I think that the recharge doesn't refill a potion, it allows you to use another one. This feature seriously irks me, and I agree with Ramei. It seems like an obnoxious thing which should be left behind to the old MMOs, along with the rest of the things GW2 improves upon. This, the 720 second recharge skills, paying for map travel, and the use of the 'classic' (obselete) attribute system (charisma/intelligence/dexterity etc) are worrying me. I hope they aren't trying to appeal too much to the people used to playing WoW :\ NALANA 23:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Addendum: Guild wars 2 seems to be more long-term oriented in general, and the cases presented for potions make sense. Rather than running from one small mob to another, players will be running from one general area to another, and facing larger, dynamic events. So, potions make sense as long-term investments. Imo, though, potions and map-travel fees will still be 'necessary evils' of sorts to achieve the desired gameplay mechanics, but 'don't bash it till you try it,' i suppose :P NALANA 00:22, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) A lot of people don't realise this, but gold sinks are essential to combating inflation. Having to pay a small amount for commonplace things like map travel and potions will actually make rare items (a lot) cheaper. Even GW1 made you pay for identification and salvage kits, and it's still hyperinflated to all hell. Skilled players will actually benefit more from potions being in the game, because they'll spend less money on potions than unskilled players (thereby making more profit), but still benefit from the anti-inflationary effects._╺┛prʘcess.executıʘn_┗╸07:11, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

if you dont like energy potions, dont buy them Getefix 22:32, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

So I guess we should all play warriors, then? The major gripe I have is the fact it becomes a limiting factor on how much time you can spend out in the wild, or else you have to gimp your carrying capacity. I have to choose between going on a short trips and have to return to town every 10 minutes, or fill half my inventory with them and not be able to pick up all the loot. Either way, I'm not having as much fun as I should be.

I'm crippling my gameplay for a silly mechanic that really doesn't add any depth to the game. GW1 forced you to manage your energy carefully to make sure you don't run out at the wrong time. Energy management was linked to combat and the fight I'm in right now. In GW2, potions throw that out the window. Surviving a battle is no longer dictated by the players skill and decisions in that battle. It can now be determined by the fact he walked into a trap 5 minutes ago and downed most of his potions trying to survive it. He's fought much more than he was expecting and used his resources to survive. The player now needs to turn around and head all the way back to town (praying they don't run into trouble along the way), or die because he doesn't have the resources to continue (and ultimately having to head back to town anyway).

I know someone will chime in and say that being prepared is a form of player skill. This is true. But is it a fun form of player skill? When the battle is decided before it's started, most players are going to answer with a no.--70.119.84.20 05:45, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

In demo footage it was fairly rare for a player to run out of energy unless they were fighting multiple enemies for an extended period. I'd expect you'd be even better with energy once you got familiar with the skills rather than just being dumped in there at level 25 or 45. All professions seem to run out of energy at about the same rate and there isn't any way for a player to boost their energy pool using stats any more. And the "all the way back to town" thing? GW2 has map travel if you find you've used your potions map back to a town - then run back out to where you were. Most places in the world seem to be about 5 minutes from a waypoint. I don't think it is as dire as you make out. :) -- aspectacle  06:43, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Aspectacle covered pretty much everything, but when you said "fill half my inventory with them and not be able to pick up all the loot." that is untrue. Energy potions have their own separate slot. Also enemies will drop energy potions so you will not have to map back to town all the time. - Giant Nuker 14:48, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Reading a few people's comments from when they played the demo, it seems as though energy potions bridge the gamer skill gap between players. Good players wont need to use as much, and everyone else will suffer a gold-sink to compensate. --Xu Davella 15:17, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Various Subjective Terms

Why are there "Large", "Heavy" and "Major" energy potions? Thats using height, weight and state in the labels. We could have medium, small, tiny, Massive, light, minor, etc... Just seems excessive IMO Aquadrizzt (talk)(contribs) 00:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Or, we could just scrap them all together and do the world a favour? :D --Naut 00:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Best guess is they're following the Starbucks model. 06:16, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Hm... That is very strange. I thought ANet wanted game to be more(or extremely) simple for ordinary(or noob) players, while providing some (if any) strategy challenge for us - old GW1 players. A balance. After everything they have said that's final blow. It seems that old GW1 players can be found only in GW2 PvP. Structured PvP.--Sergiy 11:35, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I couldn't understand a word you said Sergiy. Back to the topic, if they were going to use different means of labeling the same potion, would that mean that players can make their own potions according to size, weight and concentration? I suppose that idea is a moot point, since the size of the potion would directly affect its weight. (Xu Davella 07:15, 17 October 2010 (UTC))

Not if the larger potion was less dense. 08:19, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

ANet!!! Consistency is awesome! Please change the names of these; they make no sense! (Minor, Major, and Superior descriptions say HELLO!) NALANA 00:24, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Some notes

Just a few things which aren't recorded on the page. Small energy potions are either 20 or 30 bronze/copper pieces (I can't quite make out which in the video). The merchant seemed like a general goods merchant who accepted coin only in Queensdale. -- aspectacle  11:42, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Health Potions

Since 'potion' redirects to this page, do we know there will be no health potions? - Michiel412 08:45, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

No, there won't be health potions. 82.131.227.251 09:02, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, we know* there won't be health potions. - Infinite - talk 09:28, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Anet, I hate potionspamming for health - Michiel412 09:07, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

So does A-net ;) --The Holy Dragons 09:31, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, many, myself included, hate potion spamming--or even occasional use--for energy. It's one of my main gripes about the Diablo series. GW1 is already too con-heavy (possibly for different reasons), and GW2 would be better off without these. --Seventh 12:01, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

You can play all of GW1 (on both Normal and Hard Modes) without the use of cons, though. - Infinite - talk 12:04, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

cut out inventory icons

Someone has gone to the effort of slicing the inventory icons of the energy potions taken from the icon sheet out of their black backgrounds. I don't agree with this move.

I think the inventory icons in GW2 will include and are drawn to look best with their black backgrounds, rather than being icons which are simply placed over a black background as they are in GW1. For example, the icons from the Ghastly set include a 'glow' similarly the [[Branded Cragstone]]. If you look at the sheet I linked a few have something of a coloured background. These examples will not be easy to cut out and likely end up with even more jaggies than the apparently simple images displayed on this page. These icons, and those which depict only a part of their item, will not take kindly to the addition of a post cut drop shadow either.

I'd like to revert back to the black background icons and suggest we maintain the black backgrounds for the inventory icons which are uploaded. Not just because of the appearance of the icons, but also I think, at least initially it is much easier and considerably less work to maintain the black backed icons. Hopefully this would mean we could have a somewhat more consistent set of images until someone is able to undertake the task of cutting all of them out ... if that is something we actually want to do. -- aspectacle  11:45, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

For comparison we're talking vs File:Major_Energy_Potion.jpg Venom20 12:06, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that the black background works with the current table, the black square against the white background is horribly rigid. Other than that, I do prefer the icon on the black background, seems to uphold a shading effect. Venom20 12:06, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

The background through the bottle is still black which makes for an odd effect with a white background. I agree with leaving the background black, and I'm sure the table format can be adjusted. --ஸ Kyoshi 14:04, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I couldn't put my finger on why the cutout one ended up looking cartoony ... it is probably because of the black you mention Kyoshi. Would reducing the padding on the first column help the table's appearance with the black icons? Maybe cell borders? -- aspectacle  21:58, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Contrary to GW, icons in GW2 are not renders and thus we should stick to the full icons, not some weird cut-outs. - Infinite - talk 22:31, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I will revert the page back to the original icons. -- aspectacle  23:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

?

source of it not being in the game?--Angelkiss 01:30, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

[1] under the header 'Energy'. Skills don't cost energy any more either. -- aspectacle  01:33, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Why not keep it for unimplemented content? We can have it parallel to GW1W. - Giant Nuker 01:40, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

how can skills not cost energy O.o --Angelkiss 01:44, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) The difference with gww is that the vast majority of removed stuff documented there was actually in the released game at one time - and still the list of stuff removed is huge. If we keep everything which was iterated through by ArenaNet before it saw the light of day the wiki will be holding on to a lot of stuff which no-one ever really played with. I think it is worth a trivia note on the energy page no more. Start keeping these when the game goes live. -- aspectacle  01:46, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

But energy was implemented in demos. Also, to reference gw1:Unimplemented content: "...feature that has never been included in the game". Unimplemented content is different from removed content. Removed content is something that existed in teh final release; whereas, unimplemented content is just that: content that was created but not implemented for final product. I disagree with deletion, and favour listing as unimplemented content. Venom20 01:56, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

It is pretty crufty and I'd rather not kept it - however in comparison to gww it is more interesting than most of the pages in that gww category. If you want to tidy up the page for long term storage go ahead but the redirects to it and images should be deleted. -- aspectacle  02:13, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

The article indeed can be tidied up a little bit, and the redirects to energy and energy potions should be removed, unless they are drawing reference to the unimplemented content; however, I disagree with removing the images. The images hurt no one and some artists worked hard creating them. Just because they aren't currently in the game, does not mean we should remove every reference to them. I feel the images should stay, in a similar fashion to the article. Venom20 03:20, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Keep one image as an illustration. I have a whole sheet of icons from last gamescom, several of them clearly energy potions of some sort, which some artist at ArenaNet slaved over - I imagine many of these will never be seen in the game. If you feel this way about storing every single bit of gw2 icon art used or not are we going to upload all of these too? Because I don't really see the point? -- aspectacle  03:43, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

So if Anet decides this no energy sytem doesn't work and they decide to bring the energy sytem back this page has te be recreated? Elonwolf 11:17, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I say keep the page for now just as "historical" information and in the event they bring the system back...personally I'd like to see the system stay in the game because energy is a key mechanic of the GW game and this is GW2, so it should feel alot like GW1...just better, newer, and 250yrs in the future. (Usaf1a8xx 14:53, 16 August 2011 (UTC))

Historical content tag is fitting as this has been covered by many developers in interviews in the past and has been included in several demos. Same for Energy in general. - Infinite - talk 16:58, 16 August 2011 (UTC)