Reduce Combined Forces out-of-combat timer

It tends to make small manning more annoying than it needs to be. Catering to one play style is not the way, but inhibiting it isn't very useful either.

You have a few ways to solve it, really:

1. Reduce the timer from the obnoxious 60 seconds to something more reasonable like 30 or even 20 seconds.
2. Tie it to death only. There are no shears here, so there's no other way to lose your buffs here short of dying. Make it so that the person cannot rebuff for 30 seconds after being rezzed. Hell, keep your 60 with this method. A penalty for dying should be considerable.
3. Increase the duration of buff potions and make them cost more.

In a lot of situations, particularly siege, you almost have to time your engagements around your ability to rebuff. Oh, your buffs are dropping in 40 seconds, but you just nuked a guy? Now you need to wait a full minute to refresh the timers. This is basically forcing you to overly micromanage your buff timers, and make sure you are sufficiently out of combat before popping them again. This can mean wasting 2 or 3 minutes of every single charge because you're trying to make sure they are always up at maximum efficiency.

Just a few ideas. I just think as it's currently implemented, it's excessive. You want to penalize death and you want to make it so that "buffs in a jar" are balanced, but there are more practical ways to do it for those that are solo or running in a buffless smallman.

Tue 9 Jul 2019 2:41 PM by Druth

I think most would gladly pay double for a 20 min duration combo pot.
I would pay 3 times the amount for a 20 min duration.

Tue 9 Jul 2019 2:46 PM by Laec

redoing endo every 10 minutes gets really annoying as well. feels like 50% of the time i end up without endo in the heat of battle because the timer is so bloody short. double the cost and give us double the timer seems like a great solution for all pots with a duration.

Tue 9 Jul 2019 3:18 PM by vxr

elninost0rm wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 2:36 PM
1. Reduce the timer from the obnoxious 60 seconds to something more reasonable like 30 or even 20 seconds.
2. Tie it to death only. There are no shears here, so there's no other way to lose your buffs here short of dying. Make it so that the person cannot rebuff for 30 seconds after being rezzed. Hell, keep your 60 with this method. A penalty for dying should be considerable.
3. Increase the duration of buff potions and make them cost more.

#2 makes a lot of sense for me. Like you said there is no shearing here so what's the point of having a rebuff time for combat? Makes sense on death. I would be happy if they increased the timer on death, but removed it for combat.

Tue 9 Jul 2019 3:21 PM by Sepplord

First time i actually see a proposal that seems to not come with any economical changes or similar...

LEtting people rebuff in combat, as long as they haven't died seems reasonable.
Maybe it could even check and only allow rebuffing in combat when the buffs are still up (to discourage people running around unbuffed and only buffing for engagement...although that would be dumb because of missing out on con-HP)

The problem with changing timer/costs is that it will either change the goldsink OR shift goldcosts from the skilled players onto the noobs. Probably both.

Tue 9 Jul 2019 3:33 PM by vxr

Druth wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 2:41 PM
I think most would gladly pay double for a 20 min duration combo pot.
I would pay 3 times the amount for a 20 min duration.

Agreed.
Ya, increasing the timer would help in more than one way. I often will pop my buffs when I have 3 minutes remaining. I do this very often because it is a huge pain to engage someone at around 3-2 minutes and then have to wait another minute for combat timer to expire. Also, by the time you get anywhere 3-5 minutes of the buffs are already gone. Increasing the timer would help with this. So even if I continue popping the buff 3 minutes early, at least I would have 17 minutes of buff time as opposed to 7 minutes.

Anyone one or a combination of the following would be greatly appreciated:
- Let us stack buff timers. Instead of replacing buffs add the time remaining to the new buffs (preference)
- Remove buff timer for combat and only keep it for death (2nd preference)
- Combat buff timer reduced
- Maybe buff duration can be increased when used at frontier villages?
- Longer duration buffs. Fine with them costing more.

Ultimate solution (biased opinion):
Stack buff timers, increase buff timers by 2 minutes, remove combat timer and only have buff timer on death.

I do agree with sepplord about the timer/cost issue..

Tue 9 Jul 2019 3:37 PM by DasBier

There have Been so many positiv changes of buff potions and you still dont have enough? Wow no words for this topic.

Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:15 PM by elninost0rm

DasBier wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 3:37 PM
There have Been so many positiv changes of buff potions and you still dont have enough? Wow no words for this topic.

Provide feedback on why you truly believe that there is a glaring issue with any of the proposals, namely #2, in order to make the mechanic make more sense.

None of the proposals here, in any way, actually change the effect of the buff pots or make them better. It just makes them slightly less annoying when you are running in a smallman that does not have a buffing class.

I don't really think I'm asking for the world here. No need to be so dismissive without providing constructive feedback.

Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:30 PM by Tigerforce

elninost0rm wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:15 PM
DasBier wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 3:37 PM
There have Been so many positiv changes of buff potions and you still dont have enough? Wow no words for this topic.

Provide feedback on why you truly believe that there is a glaring issue with any of the proposals, namely #2, in order to make the mechanic make more sense.

None of the proposals here, in any way, actually change the effect of the buff pots or make them better. It just makes them slightly less annoying when you are running in a smallman that does not have a buffing class.

I don't really think I'm asking for the world here. No need to be so dismissive without providing constructive feedback.

His kind are so annoying. Thinking they are these Ultra Phx Dev supporters or something and not realizing these are FORUMS for ppls ideas and suggestions to help improve game play.

Its a good idea, most ppl are and do get annoyed by the 10min buff timer. It is crazy and makes no real sense. Longer buffs being 15-20 (20min being the same as self buffs practically which no reason not to match) will not decrease sales in housing or whatever. People burn through pots with their death rate and use, and quite frankly if that is the case, then simply extending the buff time and shortening the reuse would fix that.

Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:30 PM by Kaseylol

Combat timer on a buff pot, implying using the buff pots in a rvr fight is inherently bad, yet they exist at all?

If buff pots for rvr are bad then why have them? If they are acceptable, why is there a timer? If you think a newly rezzed person should be buffless because that's how buff classes work, why even give them buffs in the first place?

There's some dev who thinks it's unfair to buff right after a rez or during combat because you should be forced to be buffed by a buff class while in combat, but fair to have buffs without a buff class in every other situation. No real rhyme or reason to some decisions here.

Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:33 PM by gotwqqd

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 3:21 PM
First time i actually see a proposal that seems to not come with any economical changes or similar...

LEtting people rebuff in combat, as long as they haven't died seems reasonable.
Maybe it could even check and only allow rebuffing in combat when the buffs are still up (to discourage people running around unbuffed and only buffing for engagement...although that would be dumb because of missing out on con-HP)

The problem with changing timer/costs is that it will either change the goldsink OR shift goldcosts from the skilled players onto the noobs. Probably both.

You double or triple the cost and timer the gold sink will INCREASE

I believe if you double the cost and triple the time it would still likely increase gold sink

Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:39 PM by elninost0rm

Tigerforce wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:30 PM
elninost0rm wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:15 PM
DasBier wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 3:37 PM
There have Been so many positiv changes of buff potions and you still dont have enough? Wow no words for this topic.

Provide feedback on why you truly believe that there is a glaring issue with any of the proposals, namely #2, in order to make the mechanic make more sense.

None of the proposals here, in any way, actually change the effect of the buff pots or make them better. It just makes them slightly less annoying when you are running in a smallman that does not have a buffing class.

I don't really think I'm asking for the world here. No need to be so dismissive without providing constructive feedback.

His kind are so annoying. Thinking they are these Ultra Phx Dev supporters or something and not realizing these are FORUMS for ppls ideas and suggestions to help improve game play.

Its a good idea, most ppl are and do get annoyed by the 10min buff timer. It is crazy and makes no real sense. Longer buffs being 15-20 (20min being the same as self buffs practically which no reason not to match) will not decrease sales in housing or whatever. People burn through pots with their death rate and use, and quite frankly if that is the case, then simply extending the buff time and shortening the reuse would fix that.

Right, and if you go the duration route, just increase the cost proportionally so there is no hit to the alchemy economy. Nobody loses.

Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:43 PM by Jeninii

I agree with this,. Its a pain to have to pop pot after pot before u get anywhere. More of a pain like several of you guys stated when your in a fight and lose your buffs SUCKS..

Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:43 PM by elninost0rm

Kaseylol wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:30 PM
Combat timer on a buff pot, implying using the buff pots in a rvr fight is inherently bad, yet they exist at all?

If buff pots for rvr are bad then why have them? If they are acceptable, why is there a timer? If you think a newly rezzed person should be buffless because that's how buff classes work, why even give them buffs in the first place?

There's some dev who thinks it's unfair to buff right after a rez or during combat because you should be forced to be buffed by a buff class while in combat, but fair to have buffs without a buff class in every other situation. No real rhyme or reason to some decisions here.

I agree with most of this, but despite my OP, I do think that a timer upon death should trigger. With a buffing class, you not only have to communicate that you need the rebuff, but they need to be both freecasting AND sacrifice time and/or ability to heal someone else while buffing you. That's a pretty steep requirement there, so you'd essentially be making it too easy for a pot buffer to get back into the fight. I'm totally okay with a 60 second timer after a rez. The current combat implementation, however, doesn't really make much sense.

Tue 9 Jul 2019 7:32 PM by Sepplord

gotwqqd wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:33 PM
Sepplord wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 3:21 PM
First time i actually see a proposal that seems to not come with any economical changes or similar...

LEtting people rebuff in combat, as long as they haven't died seems reasonable.
Maybe it could even check and only allow rebuffing in combat when the buffs are still up (to discourage people running around unbuffed and only buffing for engagement...although that would be dumb because of missing out on con-HP)

The problem with changing timer/costs is that it will either change the goldsink OR shift goldcosts from the skilled players onto the noobs. Probably both.
You double or triple the cost and timer the gold sink will INCREASE

I believe if you double the cost and triple the time it would still likely increase gold sink

do we want a bigger goldsink though?
i personally don't want one

and as i said, it would also shift costs from the pro-players onto the noobs
for people that usually die within 10minutes of RvR it would simply double the cost of participation, no matter how long the pots are

The 0-2death per evenening players would benefit from it the most, do we need to make it easy on those players while making it harder for the noobs?

I am convinced that would be a bad idea for the serverhealth

elninost0rm wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:39 PM
Right, and if you go the duration route, just increase the cost proportionally so there is no hit to the alchemy economy. Nobody loses.

Nobody...besides the casual masses that regularly die within 10minutes of running

but who cares about those scrubs, right?

Tue 9 Jul 2019 8:40 PM by lurker

The reason the timer needs to be there for combat - not characters death is:

If you focus down a shaman/cleric/druid who isn't positioned well / or purposefully in order to remove buffs on the rest of the group - the rest of the group just instantly put 70% of that buffs back up again with the click of one button. This is a big change that shouldn't be ignored.

increasing the timers/double the cost or whatever there may be an argument for, but the in-combat timer is actually quite important IMO.

Tue 9 Jul 2019 10:31 PM by elninost0rm

lurker wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 8:40 PM
The reason the timer needs to be there for combat - not characters death is:

If you focus down a shaman/cleric/druid who isn't positioned well / or purposefully in order to remove buffs on the rest of the group - the rest of the group just instantly put 70% of that buffs back up again with the click of one button. This is a big change that shouldn't be ignored.

increasing the timers/double the cost or whatever there may be an argument for, but the in-combat timer is actually quite important IMO.

If we're going to say that this is the main reason, then adjust the timer. 60 seconds is obviously overkill in any sort of XvX fight and you won't be able to meaningfully get back into the fight anyway, so there's no need to worry about people replacing their buffs instantly. If you make it even 20 or 30 seconds, it makes a meaningful difference for the people I described in the OP, while still completely crippling the group members that just lost their buffs in your scenario. That's probably about how long it would take for the support class to get rezzed (assuming your group hasn't lost the fight already at this point) and start to dish out buffs.

Otherwise, play with the duration and cost. Make it cost 3 times as much and last twice as long. Whatever you need to do. I like what someone suggested earlier: make the timer stack. You want to gamble and use 3 or 4 charges at once, risking the fact that you might die in the next 30 seconds? Sure, go ahead. 30 minute timer if you stay alive. Balanced and has NO impact on the economy or the situation you described. The only people affected would be the ones that want to risk blowing a few charges at once to stack their timer. It's their loss and a calculated risk.

There are obviously many options you could tweak, some in tandem, to achieve a sensible goal. In its current implementation, smallman and solo are hurt the most.

Tue 9 Jul 2019 10:43 PM by elninost0rm

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 7:32 PM
gotwqqd wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:33 PM
Sepplord wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 3:21 PM
First time i actually see a proposal that seems to not come with any economical changes or similar...

LEtting people rebuff in combat, as long as they haven't died seems reasonable.
Maybe it could even check and only allow rebuffing in combat when the buffs are still up (to discourage people running around unbuffed and only buffing for engagement...although that would be dumb because of missing out on con-HP)

The problem with changing timer/costs is that it will either change the goldsink OR shift goldcosts from the skilled players onto the noobs. Probably both.
You double or triple the cost and timer the gold sink will INCREASE

I believe if you double the cost and triple the time it would still likely increase gold sink

do we want a bigger goldsink though?
i personally don't want one

and as i said, it would also shift costs from the pro-players onto the noobs
for people that usually die within 10minutes of RvR it would simply double the cost of participation, no matter how long the pots are

The 0-2death per evenening players would benefit from it the most, do we need to make it easy on those players while making it harder for the noobs?

I am convinced that would be a bad idea for the serverhealth

elninost0rm wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:39 PM
Right, and if you go the duration route, just increase the cost proportionally so there is no hit to the alchemy economy. Nobody loses.

Nobody...besides the casual masses that regularly die within 10minutes of running

but who cares about those scrubs, right?

This is kind of a strawman, but I'll address it anyway.

If that's your position, then make it so that the timer stacks. You don't HAVE to do it. Cost stays the same, but the option is there if you want to build up a bit of duration for a situation (like siege, perhaps) in which you might be relatively safe and don't want to micromanage it. If you die, oh well. It happens to us all, but you can just as easily use one charge at a time like you always have.

Wed 10 Jul 2019 6:05 AM by Sepplord

elninost0rm wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 10:43 PM
Sepplord wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 7:32 PM
gotwqqd wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:33 PM
You double or triple the cost and timer the gold sink will INCREASE

I believe if you double the cost and triple the time it would still likely increase gold sink

do we want a bigger goldsink though?
i personally don't want one

and as i said, it would also shift costs from the pro-players onto the noobs
for people that usually die within 10minutes of RvR it would simply double the cost of participation, no matter how long the pots are

The 0-2death per evenening players would benefit from it the most, do we need to make it easy on those players while making it harder for the noobs?

I am convinced that would be a bad idea for the serverhealth

elninost0rm wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 4:39 PM
Right, and if you go the duration route, just increase the cost proportionally so there is no hit to the alchemy economy. Nobody loses.

Nobody...besides the casual masses that regularly die within 10minutes of running

but who cares about those scrubs, right?

This is kind of a strawman, but I'll address it anyway.

If that's your position, then make it so that the timer stacks. You don't HAVE to do it. Cost stays the same, but the option is there if you want to build up a bit of duration for a situation (like siege, perhaps) in which you might be relatively safe and don't want to micromanage it. If you die, oh well. It happens to us all, but you can just as easily use one charge at a time like you always have.

How is it a strawman?
i am all for changes that don't have huge downsides...criticizing downsides of a suggestion and then changing the suggestion into something else until the downsides outweigh the benefits is imo how you reach a good solution

letting timers stack, or letting people rebuff in combat if they already have a buffpot up for example are scenarios that i currently don't see a huge problem with for example.

Wed 10 Jul 2019 6:35 AM by inoeth

Laec wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 2:46 PM
redoing endo every 10 minutes gets really annoying as well. feels like 50% of the time i end up without endo in the heat of battle because the timer is so bloody short. double the cost and give us double the timer seems like a great solution for all pots with a duration.

endu is doable in fight so i dont get what you want to say here...
this is about combined forces and not endu anway

Wed 10 Jul 2019 12:42 PM by elninost0rm

Sepplord wrote: ↑
Wed 10 Jul 2019 6:05 AM
elninost0rm wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 10:43 PM
Sepplord wrote: ↑
Tue 9 Jul 2019 7:32 PM
do we want a bigger goldsink though?
i personally don't want one

and as i said, it would also shift costs from the pro-players onto the noobs
for people that usually die within 10minutes of RvR it would simply double the cost of participation, no matter how long the pots are

The 0-2death per evenening players would benefit from it the most, do we need to make it easy on those players while making it harder for the noobs?

I am convinced that would be a bad idea for the serverhealth

Nobody...besides the casual masses that regularly die within 10minutes of running

but who cares about those scrubs, right?

This is kind of a strawman, but I'll address it anyway.

If that's your position, then make it so that the timer stacks. You don't HAVE to do it. Cost stays the same, but the option is there if you want to build up a bit of duration for a situation (like siege, perhaps) in which you might be relatively safe and don't want to micromanage it. If you die, oh well. It happens to us all, but you can just as easily use one charge at a time like you always have.

How is it a strawman?
i am all for changes that don't have huge downsides...criticizing downsides of a suggestion and then changing the suggestion into something else until the downsides outweigh the benefits is imo how you reach a good solution

letting timers stack, or letting people rebuff in combat if they already have a buffpot up for example are scenarios that i currently don't see a huge problem with for example.

A happy medium is probably removing the combat requirement if the buff already exists. This way it still penalizes people for having their druid/cleric/shaman die or being killed themselves, but it doesn't punish anyone that been even remotely watching their buff bar.

Thu 11 Jul 2019 9:48 PM by

gruenesschaf

TLDR: next update will include duration stacking up to 2x for potion buffs

Next update will change what happens when a duration stat buff is reapplied with the same value and the duration would normally just be refreshed, as would be the case for buff potions: instead of just resetting the duration, the duration is added to the existing effect. This never applies to pulse spells or realm abilities and is further restricted to effects that have a base duration between 5 and 15 minutes.

Note that trying to reapply the buffs, e.g. taking another potion, while the effect is above the duration of what would be applied (in case of potions if the current effect still has more than 10 minutes) will cause the buff application to fail. This means you can only extend the duration up to a maximum of 2x.

Fri 12 Jul 2019 12:17 AM by vxr

This will help a lot. Thank you.

Fri 12 Jul 2019 1:16 AM by gotwqqd

gruenesschaf wrote: ↑
Thu 11 Jul 2019 9:48 PM
TLDR: next update will include duration stacking up to 2x for potion buffs

Next update will change what happens when a duration stat buff is reapplied with the same value and the duration would normally just be refreshed, as would be the case for buff potions: instead of just resetting the duration, the duration is added to the existing effect. This never applies to pulse spells or realm abilities and is further restricted to effects that have a base duration between 5 and 15 minutes.

Note that trying to reapply the buffs, e.g. taking another potion, while the effect is above the duration of what would be applied (in case of potions if the current effect still has more than 10 minutes) will cause the buff application to fail. This means you can only extend the duration up to a maximum of 2x.

Sounds great

Sat 13 Jul 2019 12:35 AM by elninost0rm

Thanks for reading and implementing a happy compromise. Makes a huge difference.

Sat 13 Jul 2019 1:30 AM by gotwqqd

I think it’s a perfect solution...gold sink increase, and possibly in future they can bump it to 3x or higher.

I see no reason why it can’t be upped. It’s a big resource risk for players