Talk:Energy Storage

Bug?
Hi there, I think there is a bug in calculation of the amount of Energy after getting a Death Penalty. (If I am right, this bug exists since the very first version of the game)

In-game description:

"For each rank of Energy Storage, your maximum energy increases by 3. Several skills, related to gaining Health or Energy, become more effective with a higher Energy Storage."

most players do have Energy Storage at level 13: 39 Energy

bonus from Elementalist armor: 10 Energy

basic Energy on all Characters is: 20 Energy

total energy: 39 + 10 + 20 = 69

Now for simplicity, no weapon or focus is used which could add more energy. Here is what you expect in-game:

What happens:

The basic Energy and the Energy gained from the attribute Energy Storage are affected by Death Penalty.

Why i think it is a bug:

If you die, you don't remove attribute points from Energy Storage, or do you?

Remember the description of Energy Storage?

You have Energy Storage on 13...

and your bonus from the armor: 10 Energy...

3 * 13 = 39

39 + 10 = 49

That is 49 Energy from your Armor and Energy Storage

with a dp of -60% you have 34 energy...

To calculate the basic Energy:

34 - 49 = -15

that means, you have a basic energy of -15 !? o.O

On the other hand Morale Boosts also affect both, the basic Energy and the Energy from Energy Storage, but there is no relation...

Compare a maximum gain of 6 Energy to a maximum loss of 23 Energy!

Try it!

Remove all attribute points from Energy Storage, go somewhere and die until you have a Death Penalty of -60% and then add points to Energy Storage.

(Use Blood is Power on a Hero at Isle of the Nameless, or a similar skill)

Conclusion:

Either the calculation is wrong or the In-game description of Energy Storage.

But if you think it is just the description which is wrong, why should the Elementalist be the character that suffers most from Death Penalty?

So imo it is a bug in calculation. ranma 17:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Wow - if nothing else, this is the most impressive discussion page I've seen in a long time - good job! Now we wait for an admin to come along and tell us why it shouldn't be done like this ^^  Snog  rat [[Image:User Snograt signature.png]] 21:57, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


 * It's not a bug - you gain death penalty after you increase your attribute, so the calculation comes after that. Besides, the extra energy should just be a bonus - it's no excuse for not bringing energy management. -- Armond Warblade[[Image:User Armond sig image.png]] 19:33, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Errrr... but what other primary attribute is effected by ones DP? Energy storage should be considered the same as energy gained from a focus item/staff and not be effected by the DP. If one puts the attributes into it, you should still be getting the use out of them regardless of how many times you die as no other attribute line becomes penalised after dp. just my oppinion though -- Salome 13:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Trying for the slowest debate ever? To the point: all inherrent effects are affected by whatever affects that sort of effect. Backsword 14:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * LOL i was bored and the topic interested me. Anyhoo Backsword, haven't you just described the current game mechanic, you've not actually gave a reason for it operating in that manner other than that is the way the current game mechanic operates. I'm just a tad confused as to why they've decided to make energy storage work in that manner when no other attribute line is affected by DP. Although admittedly,energy storage is also the only attribute i can think of which actually effects base charecter statistics by giving a direct solid extra energy pool, rather than just decreasing the costs of the skills used (Expertise) or allowing the gaining of energy through other mechanics to offset the cost of the skill itself (Mysticism, Leadership, Soul Reaping). -- Salome [[Image:User_salome_sig.png|19px]] 01:30, 1 March 2008 (UTC)


 * To me, even if it's a who cares kind of thing, energy storage shouldn't be affected by dp...I mean if focuses are uneffected and the description is very clear (3 per level) why should it be affect. Barkingllama 19:47, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

On a disrelated note, I think that ANet should add one Energy Storage skill (call it whatever you like). Description: [Elite] Deal 25...54...63 Chaos damage to target (not armor-ignoring). Cast time - 3/4 or 1 second. Energy cost - 1 or 5 {If energy cost of 5, gain 3 energy after casting}. Recharge time - 1...3 seconds.

I have made this suggestion for a deliberate reason: Elementalist attributes Air, Earth, and Water have no standard attack spell (spell which may be spammed, such as Flare) to rely upon which is non-projectile (each attribute has non-projetile spells, but none of which may be relied upon as a standard attack spell). This greatly reduces the effectiveness of the Elementalist in battle. Fire Magic has Mind Blast, which may kill from around corners and through walls, as well as replenish energy, while recharging fast enough to replace Flare as the standard attack. Were ANet to implement this spell in-game, they could remove Mind Blast all-together and give all Elementalist attributes the option to utilize this spell for around-corner kills and through-wall kills. The Elementalist becomes much more efficient, yet is still not "godly", as armor still reduces damage.

Now, most elementalist skills have cons (take-backs which limit the skills). The cons of this spell are simple: As it is under the Energy Storage attribute, attunement spells do not reduce the energy cost of the spell; because it is an elite skill, the player may not utilize skills such as Sandstorm, Savannah Heat, Shatterstone, Invoke Lightning, or Master of Magic; as the Chaos damage dealt by the spell in not armor-ignoring, it is subject to the same rules of armor-damage-reduction as every other elementalist spell, with some exceptions.

Players: If you do not approve of this suggestion please do not flame me, simply don't reply. If you approve, please reply on this page so that ANet knows how we Guild Wars players feel.

Thank you for your time. Ara 04:29, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * lol? - Auron 04:31, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Er, reasonable skill idea I suppose, but I really dont think it would see good use outside of pvp... where it would probably be exploited to the fullest like any other skill. Also, Mesmer is the only profession to deal chaos damage specifically, so I don't think that it would be a likely damage type even though Energy Storage is considered under Lyssa's domain.
 * I see your point on the damage type and the PvP-exploitation. But, honestly, I wouldn't care what sort of damage it would deal.  Just so long as I woudln't have to use skills like Lightning javelin, Flare, or Ice Spear.  Just the thought of those skills make me shudder.  I'd really like to see something like this in the game, even if it had to go through all of the skill-nerfing lines before being put in.  Meh, just hopeful thinking I suppose; once GW2 is released we probably wont see many more skill updates to GW, anyway.  Still...Ara 20:55, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Skills That Scale With ES
Elemental Lord scales to. I don't know how add it or if it should be added. Any else want to do it? :D Toast 06:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

3 or 4 Self Heals?
Questioning a recent revert. Aura of Restoration, Ether Renewal, and Glyph of Renewal all heal a specified amount directly, but Energy Boon grants Health regeneration--and I see Troll Unguent listed in the Self heal page (which includes neither Ether Renewal nor Energy Boon, but an Elementalist Alliance rank self heal in Elemental Lord). Feedback on consistency between these two pages?

If regen counts as self healing, and Alliance rank skills count as self healing, Ether renewal and Energy Boon should be added to the self heal page and the Energy Storage page should reflect that four of the five Elementalist self heals are linked to it, no?

I'm rather inexperienced in the more official among wikis so I'm asking over personally doing to not needlessly step on toes. -CS 173.75.142.215 22:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)