Guild Wars 2

Hello, ive been seeing many threads about OP this OP that, pertaining to rangers and previously theives and hambow wars etc.

I get a feeling that many players may not know what over powered means because the term is used so often, and in many cases where the person using the term is wrong about their accusations, this could be because this game has three main “game modes”:
Pve
Pvp
Wvw

Being extremely strong in ONE situation against ONE build does not make a class or build op.

Example:

Burst ele vs terror-mancer. Most burst eles have very little condi remove. This does not mean terror-mancers are op. It simply means that the terror-mancer counters the ele.

Now pit that same terror-mancer to a stability warrior. Obviously the outcome will be different given the skill level of each player is the same. Since the necro spent many of his traits in to damage on fear or even duration runes, much of his power is negated by the stability.

A more recent example and a hot topic: rangers
LB ranger vs d/p thief

*Note that these examples are under the assumption that each player is at the same skill lvl.

So the LB excels at ranged damage. And very high burst. A d/p thief is amazing at sticking to their target. The thief can apply many blinds to the ranger and use shadow shot to stick right on the enemy. The outcome could go either way, but the thief should win if they dodge properly and use black powder to its fullest.

So these are some examples of non op-ness. So lets look at op now.

The old hambow war:
This build was incredibly powerful.
Hambows use the hammer traits to dominate their oppenent.
In wvw:
They were unstoppable with -%40 condi duration. Now they do not have great movespeed, but if you get in range of the hambow war you will get cc chained.

1v1 duels?
The majority of the other classes and builds have a very tough time handling one hambow war, and i bet. That if you put in the ring a hambow war with the same skill lvl as his opponent, he will win.

Pvp:
Not only were the hambow warriors hard hitting. They can take a beating. Most of them ran sigs which made them tougher and passively regen hp. They can easily take opponents on points.

Overpowered is a term to be used when a build or class dominates in multiple aspects of the game and the majority of the time. This is a rare occurrence and usually happens as the games are being released, and it eventually gets balanced.

This thread is not to say anyone is OP, but it is to say you need to give valid points on why you think a particular build is op.

Feel free to add

Everyone who posts an X is OP thread got beat in PvP or WvW and assumes they are the best player on earth when they most likely suck – How can I lose!?

You want people to stop exaggerating and calling everything OP right? Me too

But will it happen? Coming Soon™

Overpowered:
A mechanic, skill, trait, character, build, or profession that was able to beat me in combat because it gave an largely unbalanced advantage to my opponent. It is clearly not due to the skill difference between my opponent or me or the whole situation, instead it’s clearly a balance issue where the thing that the opponent was using is overpowered.

^Definition for most QQ threads.

I think some people need to find the line between things being Overpeforming rather than Overpowered …

Overpeforming are most builds within the meta, or they would not be meta builds…

Overpowering means they are dominating, canceling out multiple roles within all aspects of the game – and this is reserved to no class at this moment…

Overpowered means that the class has simply too much of everything without much sacrifice. The current D/D celestial ele is a good example ,, they can hold a point , 1v1, support team fights , backcap with incredible mobility, great condi and power damage , great condi clear and overall survivability.

Literally everything in one build , at least the old hambows couldn’t chase you. Its OK to have an OP build in the game if it has mediocre mobility because it makes thief/mesmer combo more usefull but then you have OP bunker builds with incredible mobility like celestial engineer and ele that makes mobile classes completely useless.

Zero Day.2594:

Overpowered:
A mechanic, skill, trait, character, build, or profession that was able to beat me in combat because it gave an largely unbalanced advantage to my opponent. It is clearly not due to the skill difference between my opponent or me or the whole situation, instead it’s clearly a balance issue where the thing that the opponent was using is overpowered.

^Definition for most QQ threads.

This basically.

Good example would be frost bow on zerker ele; get caught with the stun= dead.
That may be an example of broken more than op though.

The definition of over-powered as used most often on these forums?

“Such and such build killed me. There are counters for it, but I don’t feel I should have to use them.”

My definition of over-powered?

“A particular build is consistently generating successful results, and there is no counter-play available to a majority of the possible opposition.”

It’s funny how you say the terror necro is countered by a stability warrior.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Corrupt_Boon

This is the most painful, but necro’s have more boon removal then any other class, except maybe mesmers. Also note what the stability turns into.

what’s wrong with Corrupt Boon?

it’s a so-so skill

It really depends upon what you are applying the term to. To be general, I am going to apply the term to professions since that is the broadest factor in GW2 combat.

And I don’t have a definition more so a set of guidelines so here we go:

• A player of average skill becomes overall more effective on a different profession using the same skill and effort as on the previous profession.

• The profession lacks weaknesses or provides too many strengths in proportion to other professions.

• The profession is much more versatile; build, trait and skill-wise; in comparison to the other professions.

• The profession sacrifices or changes very little in their build to maintain combat effectiveness in multiple combat roles compared to other professions.

• Access to multiple parts of combat (support, control, damage, etc.) is broad compared to other professions.

Basically…. the more something has compared to other professions, the more overpowered it is. These guidelines also help me in terms of severity of being Overpowered. For example, if a profession at DPS uses 10 trait points to max damage and the best only needs to use 4 to achieve the same amount and no other profession can challenge the second profession, then that would be very overpowered in my eyes.

The QQ on most specs is there with a reason.

They call something OP while it should actually be called: Balance Epic Fail Implemented Cheese

Its not that Rapid Fire is OP, but it is the worst change in my opinion. Turret Engi’s aren’t OP against all classes. So should we assume that they should exist? Because really, what OP means in almost each and every QQ thread = No risk, High reward

Defining “OP” is actually very difficult. Because unlike in some more simple games, MMORPGs like GW2 have an absolutely humongous amount of complexity to their… well, everything.

This means that there’s very few if any reliable situations which can be used to even judge whether something could be overpowered, underpowered or balanced.

Now, the common reply to that is: “Yes, but we can just make two players of equal skill duel and see what the outcome is. Repeat it often enough and voilà, balance input!”.

Yes, we could. If we ignore the complexity of the game around it:

• How do you know two players are of equal skill? If you don’t know, how do you guarantee (and proof) that their skill difference had no substantial effect on the outcome?
• Not all abilities and effects are meant to shine in 1v1 situations. How do you rate these, respectively how do you contextualise the skills you want to test when you cannot try all contexts?
• The game does not actually support or even acknowledge 1v1 exists. What meaning has such a test, if it is completely disconnected from the game’s design and function?
• Classes are probably not meant to be balanced, as evident by the lack of 1v1 support or design. At least, they’re not meant to be balanced on a microscopic level.

We could now raise the magnifying glass, and look at a macroscopic level. Compare metrics. What percentage of players with what class loses how often in what team composition versus what other team composition? How do they fare in what degrees of uneven combat in WvW?
Then start to eliminate all data which seems to not change the overall percentages. If you end up eliminating everything, your classes are – macrolevel – balanced. That is to say, independent of individual context when looking at all contexts and all fights fought, each class performs good or bad to the same degree.

That still ignores another type of potential imbalance, social. Even if two classes were perfectly balanced (which is utopian) then players would usually have a preference. It starts with something as simple as Warrior vs Ranged Caster, one class is inherently more popular, in all fantasy games. You tell me why.
Problem is, does this mean the classes are actually imbalanced? After all, players feel socially left out, being told that Warriors are “better for the group” (this happens a lot in all MMOs, btw), which makes sense because simple overexposure optimized player tactics for maximizing warrior presence but they lack experience for doing the same with more varied parties.

Do you do something based on that? Is that “acceptable” imbalance? Is that not actually overpowered, but do you still do something against it, in fact destroying the perfect balance we assumed, to equalize perceived balance?

“Overpowered” is a terrible concept. As is “balance” in the context of MMO.
It cannot exist, owing due to the complexity of the game. It’s best to think in terms of relative popularity and absolute attainability instead, as those can be more readily evaluated:

• Is class X readily taken for content A but never for content B, independent of spec, weapon, gear or whatnot? Help them, or if they’re being blocked by another class, nerf that one to make room.
• Can class X not do macroscopic activity N, no matter what they try (say, a class is entirely incapable of acting in WvW, not bad, not well, independent of spec, they’re always free cannon fodder to a degree where the best player in the game would easily lose to the worst player in the game)? If yes, something is broken in design, the class should have a complete toolkit.

These two things can be reliably measured. They’re also fairly absolute to identify, leading to a clearcut case of what has to be done.

They don’t have anything to do with overpowered/underpowered, mind you. But then, you shouldn’t really think in those terms. They’re terrible, a result of players wanting to shift blame for losses.

I agree there is way too much This is op, that is op, etc. in the forums.

But… I just have to… HamBow OP in WvW? It was decently good in 1v1 and kinda good in small scale but thats it. In WvW it didn’t really oppose much danger as most people could just backpedal and be safe. I killed hambows with tanky GS/Hammer warrior build, and only because I had greater mobility meaning I could bait out defenses and buzz off to wait them to wear off and give pressure afterwards, where as they couldn’t do the same to me.

But, I do agree with you there is too much OP accusations

I still think that they should use monkeys when they balance classes. Ranger is op because monkey who play ranger would beat other monkeys.

Junkpile.7439:

I still think that they should use monkeys when they balance classes. Ranger is op because monkey who play ranger would beat other monkeys.

Monkeys would probally smack their hands, face, whatever on the keyboard trying to acquire banana. It would end up in a balance where warriors and kit engineers would get nerfed. I don’t think that would be fai….

…

I vote for monkey testers, yes!

Paavotar.3971:

Junkpile.7439:

I still think that they should use monkeys when they balance classes. Ranger is op because monkey who play ranger would beat other monkeys.

Monkeys would probally smack their hands, face, whatever on the keyboard trying to acquire banana. It would end up in a balance where warriors and kit engineers would get nerfed. I don’t think that would be fai….

…

I vote for monkey testers, yes!

The monkeytester should play against normal players tough. If monkey wins -> either human player IQ is lower, or nerf monkey build.

There goes turret engi (or gw2 test team)

Judging by the ranger threads I’m pretty sure OP means if I’m fighting someone else, I’m below 50% health, I have blown all my blocks, evades and dodges, and at that point a fully glass player uses a burst skill to finish me off, the glass player is OP.

Please see below for OP definition.

Overpowered (OP) is the overwhelming of an opponent or opponents ability/abilities to overcome the situation no matter what skills/reaction time the target has (out of target’s control). It can also be a series of abilities/skills used in conjunction (and typically in a very short sequence or instant) that overwhelms the opponent before proper skilled reaction can occur. The target does not have to lose the battle for any single or series of abilities from the attacker but it must be at a great disadvantage (withdraw from battle to survive).

OP is typically confused on a targets perceptual-basis by overwhelming odds against the target (i.e. target being attacked simultaneously by many players even if unaware).

In MMO forums, OP typical responses are countered by /troll or L2P posts or by counters used for all battles, like evasion or withdrawal/LoS repositioning, (as opposed to acceptance of an unbalance) from the perspective of the OP user.

Someone just nailed it

The definition of overpowered is a build someone comes across which their current build cannot counter. Forget having to alter their own build, that’s just crazy talk.

Please anyone, is there a class and build in this game that is pretty much good or excels in all situations? Please tell me as I’m lazy and I do not want to change my class or build at all.

Find me that class/build, I’ll play it and we’ll call it OP.

Mystogan.4157:

Example:

Burst ele vs terror-mancer. Most burst eles have very little condi remove. This does not mean terror-mancers are op. It simply means that the terror-mancer counters the ele.

Now pit that same terror-mancer to a stability warrior. Obviously the outcome will be different given the skill level of each player is the same. Since the necro spent many of his traits in to damage on fear or even duration runes, much of his power is negated by the stability.

1v1 duels?
The majority of the other classes and builds have a very tough time handling one hambow war, and i bet. That if you put in the ring a hambow war with the same skill lvl as his opponent, he will win.

Sorry, but these two statements show that you don’t know jack kitten. Stability is horrible against terrormancers because corrupt boon makes it into fear, the exact thing that the warrior is trying to avoid. I did that myself countless times, it still puts a smile on my face when a warrior pops stability.

Second: Hambow will win 1v1 every time? Have you ever seen a duel on a 1v1 server, save even played a duel yourself? Even before the last balance patch hambows were terrible in duels. Their playstyle is predictable, their moves can be anticipated easily and their animations are obvious and easy to dodge.

If a class is overpowered or not depends on the player’s perspective. Bad players will consider hambow to be overpowered since they are unable to play smart and to dodge properly. Once you learn that hambow can’t do anything against you. Still talking about 1v1, but since none of the typical tPvP builds seems to be overpowered to the community it HAS to be 1v1 which determines which builds are seen as overpowered. Or did you ever see a bunch of whinethreads about the super important altruistic healing bunker guardians? I think not. Whinethreads are currently about LB rangers (and Engineers of course).

So what is overpowered? It can’t be determined by an impartial view IMO. Bad players will always consider “chesse builds” with low skill floor to be overpowered (such as hambow, LB ranger) while good players usually see builds with a high skill ceiling as the strong ones. Take for example a shatter mesmer, they are quite popular in duels (other than hambow) but they are just very hard to play. In the end, the better player actually wins quite often, at least in duels.

And THIS means that all the “lololol class x with build y is so overpowered” is a learn to play issues in most cases. Sure, there are super easy faceroll win builds like PU mesmer, or P/D thief (though my personal opinion is that P/D thief is not THAT strong) but at least these builds are terrible in tPvP and can be ran away from easily.

I think this describes it best: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EitZRLt2G3w

Stebene.9275:

Take for example a shatter mesmer, they are quite popular in duels-

I’m gonna have to stop you right here-

Sure, there are super easy faceroll win builds like PU mesmer, or P/D thief (though my personal opinion is that P/D thief is not THAT strong) but at least these builds are terrible in tPvP-

annnnnd here.

In the past couple weeks I’ve seen threads saying that Engis, Eles, Thieves, Rangers, Warriors, and Necros are ALL OP. And these are just the threads I’ve noticed.

This is a good sign. If everybody is OP, then nobody is OP.

Sounds like we’ve got ourselves a good game of Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock :P

Tryxtr.6295:

In the past couple weeks I’ve seen threads saying that Engis, Eles, Thieves, Rangers, Warriors, and Necros are ALL OP. And these are just the threads I’ve noticed.

This is a good sign. If everybody is OP, then nobody is OP.

Sounds like we’ve got ourselves a good game of Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock :P

Point out one thread within two weeks where “Warrior is OP” is the topic, where it doesn’t involve how fast they can run away. Because admitting defeat is not a power.

Meanwhile Guardians, who outspec warr for PVE and PVP, go unmentioned.

Tryxtr.6295:

In the past couple weeks I’ve seen threads saying that Engis, Eles, Thieves, Rangers, Warriors, and Necros are ALL OP. And these are just the threads I’ve noticed.

This is a good sign. If everybody is OP, then nobody is OP.

Sounds like we’ve got ourselves a good game of Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock :P

No Guardian and no Mesmer mentioned /weep

I think the defining line of Overpowered comes from a few factors. But I think a clear cut way to describe over powered would be if mechanically 2 builds face of one vs one, both players do everything they need to do to win, but one side will always be victorious. Situations like these should virtually always stalemate until someone makes a mistake.

Now the problem we then get is “it’s not balanced around 1v1” ok well then how do you mechanically balance around 5v5? Well I would presume we use cap points and the game type to distinguish.

My perspective of this matter is that it always comes down to “what will die/down and what will not?”.

So then I think what defines the common conception of overpowered is anything that can outlast massive amounts of damage but still being able to dish out enough to melt any damage based builds. This concept is even WORSE when you add in AoE because then you can carry via holding points, and deal with the heavy damage dealers. Then in the long term due to no restrictions we get ppl running 3-4 per comp and we call that the “Meta” thus making the justification something is fair and promoting powercreep.

Now the QQ/l2p kind of OP comes from certain class comparing concepts. For example the recent ranger buffs get hated on and compared to warrior 100b but at long range. These kinds of things I feel are just people not willing to deal with context, by overlooking the weaknesses of the build that “ANY” build can exploit. Which is to say as opposed to a hard counter which I personally do not think is healthy for a game that is supposed to be “Skill based.”

Just as a final thought on competative “balance” We should never strive for Rock/Paper/Scissors. But for Protoss/Terran/Zerg. (well at least SC1)

Non competitive I find “Overpowered” to be a non factor as long as no one is getting an unfair advantage at earning rwards.