Talk:Power Return

Psychic Distraction
Note! the fastest recharge any skill interrupt spell is Psychic Distraction with 2 seconds of recharge time, with the plus of distraction and the draw back of disabling all other skills; which is an elite.

Power Return is a non-elite 7 seconds recharge any skill interrupt spell with the draw back of giving energy to the target. ^ ^

Former discussion
The notes at this point are useless. We are all speculating. Wait till you see the skill description in game as well as the cost and recharge, then speculate. --Karlos 07:28, 14 March 2006 (CST)


 * Useless? I think that's a bit of a stretch.  If Factions comes out and all we need to do is enter the green numbers, the notes are still relevant and we just need to change tense.  If the skill is completely different, scratch the whole thing and start anew.  Of course it's not set in stone yet, but that's the reason for the disclaimer at the top :/ --Qian Khan 09:13, 14 March 2006 (CST)


 * So, ANet made a skill that I can use to give my enemy energy JUST so that I can keep Malaise on him (which I put originally to drain his energy) and -2 degen on my own health. Yaaaay! I mean some of these speculations are wild. --Karlos 09:40, 14 March 2006 (CST)


 * Do you plan to be an asshole when you get out of bed, or is it just at a whim? Do you think that this is an information source or not?  Do you really want to start debating what is common sense enough to be added to this Wiki?  --Qian Khan 09:44, 14 March 2006 (CST)


 * Yes, I think adding usage notes when the most basic information about the skill is not known is useless, yes. I criticize the usefulness of highly speculative opinions based on greatly missing information. Your stand is the one that does not seem like common sense to me. Are personal insults all you have to say in response? In fact, if you don't make a case for why this ridiculous statement "giving my enemy energy to keep Malaise on, so I can drain him from energy, just so that I can then give him energy and keep Malaise on" is in there, I will remove it. Better type fast.--Karlos 09:57, 14 March 2006 (CST)


 * Umm how about because you have a tight skill build and malaise is doubling as a cover hex? Or because you have a weapon +15% versus hexed foes. There are skills and tactics that only work on hexed foes, you know.  Your original point was that we were speculating.  Now your point is that Malaise is a lame hex to prolong.  Come on. --136.186.1.118 10:36, 14 March 2006 (CST)


 * Now you're defending the highly speculative with the highly improbable. Why not use a hex that doesn't cause me health degen and does not require me to case another skill to keep it up in addition to casting it? So, I am going to dedicate 3 skills on my skill bar just to keep a hex on a foe so that I do more damage vs hexed? All that when I can just replace that with one very long lasting hex like Spinal Shivers or one that's very cheap and fast recharging like Parasitic Bond? --Karlos 11:06, 14 March 2006 (CST)


 * Umm... this is a Mesmer skill not a Necro skill. You ever heard of a Mesmer that wasn't Me/N or N/Me?  And my point of having a tight skill build remains valid.  Not that it matters: this information is potentially useful but if you want to delete it so your pride feels bolstered we all know that as a mod you're well within your rights.  A phrase that might come in handy in the future: "I see your point and now it's clear that I spoke rashly."  It's not that hard.  --Qian Khan 12:15, 14 March 2006 (CST)


 * Hey, I'm not the one who brought up necro, the example did. And yes, I feel very happy now. And no, it's not my right to remove valid data from this wiki, not as a user, nor as an admin. --Karlos 12:23, 14 March 2006 (CST)


 * Too much speculation is, well, overly speculative. The previous version of the page was basically "Here is every way you could possible try to profit from something that gives your enemies energy," which is an example of the "shotgun method": tangential or trivial information does not make something more encyclopedic. --130.58 12:34, 14 March 2006 (CST)


 * Just for those reading this discussion in the future, by the way: giving the target energy just to keep Malaise up is tres dumb. The only purpose of the hex is to deny energy. If you keep giving the target energy, why waste your health anyway? A much better use of this skill is against targets who you know already have more energy than they can use. So, for example, you might want to use it against a minon master in a competitive mission (since he has tons of energy anyway) or against anyone who's about to get spiked really hard (since he won't be able to use the energy before he dies anyway, and he doesn't get to keep it afterward). If you actually make this skill part of an "energy denial" strategy, though, you're just kind of spinning your wheels and doing very little to actually help your team. &mdash; 130.58 (talk) ( 19:11, 11 July 2006 (CDT) )

The "blanking"
First of all, I wouldln't call the removal of a single bullet point blanking, but that's not the main point. I agree with the removal of the bullet. It conveys no useful information whatsoever. It is self-evident that not everything about the skill is know. It is self-evident that enemy gaining energy is in general undesirable. I think calling the degree of undesirability "prohibitive" is already speculation, opinionated, and exaggerating. I might as well right "at first glance the Jedi profession is overpowered, so Anet will nerf it to keep it balanced with all the other professions". I'll re-delete the bullet point unless someone defends it in 12 hours. -PanSola 14:41, 17 March 2006 (CST)
 * I also support removing that bullet. --130.58 14:44, 17 March 2006 (CST)
 * Ditto, some of the speculation about skills is nice, but it should be kept to the talk page, if someone removes it then boohoo, it's just a guess 19:07, 17 March 2006 (CST)

And now, one anonymous user has reverted another anonymous user's edits to the comments. I think the revert should be undone since the edited comments are definitely better than the old ones. --68.142.14.9 09:18, 21 May 2006 (CDT)


 * For the first note, I think I can objectively say the original version was definitely better. As for the second note, I biasely think the old version is arguably better. - 11:47, 21 May 2006 (CDT)


 * The opposite of "power drain" as in "you gain energy" is "you lose energy." I think a comment that states something is the opposite of two different skills is, well, stupid.  At least, confusing.  --68.142.14.9 18:43, 21 May 2006 (CDT)
 * The opposite of "power drain" as in "you gain energy" can also be "foe gain energy". The opposite of "power return" as in "foe gain energy" can be either "foe loses energy" or "you gain energy". If you are confused despite the parenthesis explaining things, then I think you are, well, ... - 23:54, 21 May 2006 (CDT)


 * The opposite of "I'm cold" is "I'm hot," not "you're cold." That makes no sense.  My energy and your energy are not some sort of zero-sum system.  --68.142.14.9 00:46, 22 May 2006 (CDT)
 * "Instead of I killing you, the opposited happend". Now, does that mean I kept you alive or that you killed me?  I think both interpretation works. There is a 1-on-1 opposition context that your example left out.  It's not necessarily zero-sum, but they are opposites. - 00:54, 22 May 2006 (CDT)

To point out the skill's description is, again, meaningless. And to say that this skill is opposite to A AND B is also not very meaningful. "Power series" is an expression that maybe of interest to PanSola, but is not really an expression of meaning (with respect to Mesmer skills) nor of renown among players. --Karlos 03:25, 22 May 2006 (CDT)
 * I'm fine with nuking thta comment completely. - 03:46, 22 May 2006 (CDT)

What
"Note, though, that there are other mesmer interrupts with faster recharge (at the cost of more energy) or no energy requirement (at the cost of much longer recharge). "

This comment is useless! There are no mesmer interrupts with faster recharge that I can see. There is only one - Psychic Distraction. So mention it. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Loomy (talk &bull; contribs)  22:46, 2 August 2006 (CDT).
 * good catch, thanks for fixing that. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 22:49, 2 August 2006 (CDT)