Guild Wars 2

I’m seeing all these threads popping up everywhere on how “easy” or how “boring” some professions/specs are in competitive tournaments.

Perception is everything. What you see and what you hear depends a great deal on where you are standing. It also depends on what sort of person you are. I personally know top 1000 players who found pre-nerf Phantasm Mesmers, pre-nerf Spirit Rangers and post buff Necromancers hard to play… and did quite well at some of the supposedly “harder” classes.

All things are subject to interpretation. Whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth. No man has the right to dictate what other men should perceive, create or produce.

I for one quite enjoy playing the “simpler” specs. I’m not a terrible player… I can play the more “complex” professions with a certain level of finesse.

However… I don’t enjoy it.

For me… and gamer’s like myself… we tend to look at complexity as the enemy. Rather than seek complex, intricate systems that require a lot of patience and skill to master, I have opted for simpler, easier to pick up and play systems. After a hard day of work, I don’t enjoy dealing with the tedium of complex game mechanics.

Just because something is seemingly complex, doesn’t make it deep. On the other hand, just because something is seemingly simple to pick up and play does not make it shallow. Depth comes from the degree to which one can learn and master the systems at play.

Let’s not fool ourselves here… All classes in the game are simple to understand. There are only a limited number of rules one must need to know. There are hundreds of thousands of possible permutations of the mechanics and equally as many tactics to experiment with.

While anyone can play to moderate success, someone who is an expert of the game will easily defeat a novice or intermediate player.

Pressing 1 button 10 times isn’t necessarily easier than pressing 10 different buttons once. These incessant screams for changes because you don’t like the “simpler” specs is selfish and annoying.

Get over yourselves… you aren’t “Pro” because you are playing a class which plays differently.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EitZRLt2G3w
-

As an engineers main…..I do NOT approve of this post

Who found phantasm mesmers difficult? Lol

I do enjoy more complex mechanics as they introduce more interesting nuances to the class. And it makes the better player who is able to optimize those complex mechanics. So in a sense every class should be reasonably complex (at least imo).

However the hostility, like the undertone in Achilles’ post, I also believe is a problem. That elitist mentality based on class choices is really obnoxious because the only point in that sense is to remove any sense of legitimacy from that class.

If the easy to play class /combo is really strong people comment this is true of all MMOs.

Problem with this game is they keep making the game easier and easier by making the easy builds stronger.

Everything about this game is easy. It’s honestly one of the most simplistic games I’ve ever played. So when a build is easy, even in terms of this game, yet is one of if not the strongest available, obviously people aren’t going to like it.

Achilles.2197:

Who found phantasm mesmers difficult? Lol

Why does it matter? Why is it funny?

A lot of you guys suffer from expectation bias. You believe, certify and speak on things based on how you feel other players should “reasonably” adjust and grasp mechanics within the game.

You then disbelieve, discard, or downgrade the corresponding weightings for the data that appear to conflict with those expectations.

This phenomenon and the play of it on the human psyche is a recurring theme and one that leads to very inefficient and under performing programs, where people are left either defending poor results or seeking yet another magic answer to all their problems.

dreztina.4820:

Everything about this game is easy. It’s honestly one of the most simplistic games I’ve ever played. So when a build is easy, even in terms of this game, yet is one of if not the strongest available, obviously people aren’t going to like it.

“Easy” is a relative term.

Jasher, Phantasm mesmers were/are very easy to play.

Anytime AI does the majority of a classes work/damage its easy to play. Passives are in the same boat.

Expectation bias in this discussion? Never has the label pseudo intellectual been more fitting.

Jasher.6580:

dreztina.4820:

Everything about this game is easy. It’s honestly one of the most simplistic games I’ve ever played. So when a build is easy, even in terms of this game, yet is one of if not the strongest available, obviously people aren’t going to like it.

“Easy” is a relative term.

To be fair, you’re abusing the terms “relative” and “perspective.” There’s nothing wrong with enjoying a simple spec. That doesn’t mean that simple and complex are really the same, and it’s just a matter of opinion. Perception does not change reality (no matter how you look at it!)

There are certain problems with allowing simple builds to be the best, such as the fact that they don’t require any time to learn to play, so everyone plays them. Also, it creates bad balance problems for casual players, since often the counters to those builds are much harder to play, and no one is able to do it at those levels.

As an example, take a random solo queue match I was in recently. The opposite team was three staff necros and two stunlock/regen warriors. I was playing a 3-kit engineer. I did fine but my poor teammates got destroyed in seconds in every fight. The map chat wasn’t pretty.

Xom.9264:

Jasher, Phantasm mesmers were/are very easy to play.

Anytime AI does the majority of a classes work/damage its easy to play. Passives are in the same boat.

It is still on you to properly use the phantasms, and the other parts of the build to full effect. Same thing with the old way spirits were, it was still up to you to summon them, keep them summoned, and then use the rest of your skills to good effect. In general people find these builds really easy, but that doesn’t mean everyone finds them easy.

I think the better point to take from this thread is that simple isn’t bad. There should be viable specs in the game that aren’t super nuanced and hard to play. There should also be specs that are very difficult with high skill ceilings, and they should accordingly have the potential to make plays that a simple build can’t. Draw the parallel to LoL, where champions like Lee Sin can make very strong, very rewarding plays, yet this are still really simple, strong champions for others.

Both should be viable in the game, not just one, and there shouldn’t be an elitist mentality against simplicity.

Xom.9264:

Jasher, Phantasm mesmers were/are very easy to play.

Very easy to play by who’s standards? Yours? Your friends? The “Pro’s”? The forums?

Measuring performance and the level of effort it takes to accomplish something effectively isn’t something you can quantify that easily.

I’ve played against many many Phantasm Mesmer’s who I destroyed… and this was before the nerf when they were supposedly “op”… LoS and dodging the telegraphed and delayed responses from the Phantasms wasn’t a very difficult task… the auto-attack from the Mesmer was pitiful at best…

I digress.

If Phantasm Mesmer’s were so easy… why were so many that I faced so bad at it?

I think the problem is mostly about skill in < Power out.

If some thing is easy to do and can match or even out do harder plays then the problem is everyone runs the same easy method.

And people who play things that take more risk ore are more difficult to pull off feel cheated for the lack of reward.

True it’s perspective. Anything is essentially easy to play once you got it down. Some learn quicker than others ect. But I can understand the feelings of the people rather indignant about it.

It’s not that something can’t be countered it’s that a side has a clearer advantage for nothing.

(On a mobile device waiting in a line, getting consistent server errors excuse the lack of editing)

It’s like in sport. It’s easy kick ball, but some reason some people kick ball better than others.

I agree fully with the OP’s post. I really don’t understand the hate towards people who play a class that is perceived as “simple.” I main a ranger, but I didn’t get here from jumping onto the meta, I started playing this class on release.

Even with the builds, I’ve yet to see anyone who can play a spirit ranger to perfection. People still use spirit actives while their spirit is blinded. They still stack condis right before a cleanse is off cooldown. They still don’t cancel their pet f2 when it is apparent the skill will fail due to stab/range. They don’t combo though fields properly, evade dangerous skills, or all sorts of things that they should be doing to maximize their potential.

Aside from just your own class too, there is a lot of depth in your knowledge of other classes. How you handle a fight with another class is a real indicator of skill, not just the build that you run. If a player fights a mesmer, do they swap their weapons with the mesmer, watch animations, and time their burst to the mesmer’s defense? If the player fights an ele, do they watch the attunements, ready to dodge during fire and earth, and ready to burst immediately after water?

I have full respect for players who use the most effective build for their class. I wouldn’t handicap myself to help an enemy, and I wouldn’t expect my enemy to either.

Daishi.6027:

I think the problem is mostly about skill in < Power out.

If some thing is easy to do and can match or even out do harder plays then the problem is everyone runs the same easy method.

And people who play things that take more risk ore are more difficult to pull off feel cheated for the lack of reward.

True it’s perspective. Anything is essentially easy to play once you got it down. Some learn quicker than others ect. But I can understand the feelings of the people rather indignant about it.

It’s not that something can’t be countered it’s that a side has a clearer advantage for nothing.

(On a mobile device waiting in a line, getting consistent server errors excuse the lack of editing)

I would summarize it as risk vs reward. A well designed game will have setups that span the spectrum of how risky it is, vs how rewarding it is to succeed. There should be viable low-risk low-reward builds, these should be builds that are not only easier to play, but have very consistent output; you can always rely on them to do their job. Then on the other end are high-risk high-reward builds; builds that cannot be expected to function perfectly every time, even in the hands of a skilled player, but when a player does play a really great game, they are rewarded for it.

By nature higher risk builds should be stronger when played perfectly, and then the balance comes from the inability to play them perfectly against a smart team, while lower risk builds should be slightly weaker in ideal situations, but have very consistent performance. The game isn’t quite there yet.

There would be no problem for both spec, simplicity and complexity, co-exist in the game IF AND ONLY IF, people play simple spec will NEVER EVER can win another people play in complex spec. Right now, as I see it, people play simple spec can easily out-do people play with complex spec which is stupid.

Stealth.9324:

There would be no problem for both spec, simplicity and complexity, co-exist in the game IF AND ONLY IF, people play simple spec will NEVER EVER can win another people play in complex spec. Right now, as I see it, people play simple spec can easily out-do people play with complex spec which is stupid.

That doesn’t make sense. If I enter a game with a complex spec, I shouldn’t instantly win because of my build loadout. I should win, however, if I take an incredibly complex spec that is very difficult to play perfectly, and then play it perfectly against a very simple spec. That is the point of risk-reward, higher risk gives higher reward only if you are successful.

Jasher.6580:

Xom.9264:

Jasher, Phantasm mesmers were/are very easy to play.

Very easy to play by who’s standards? Yours? Your friends? The “Pro’s”? The forums?

Defining “easy” and “difficult” is not too hard. Skill is composed primarily of the rate of actions and decisions a player must take, combined with a third factor—the “forgiving” factor, i.e. how many bad actions or decisions can you make before you lose.

Let’s take the build/scenario you describe. Phantasm mesmer: rate of action=lower than average (i.e. a lot of time spent just kiting, autoattacking, etc). Rate of decision making=about average: there are a number of factors that you mention, such as LoS, dodging, etc. Number of bad actions/decisions allowed=higher than average. Zero high-CD/risky skills to land, multiple escape options.

So using a reasonable definition, we can conclude that phantasm mesmer is fairly easy to play.

Bhawb.7408:

Stealth.9324:

There would be no problem for both spec, simplicity and complexity, co-exist in the game IF AND ONLY IF, people play simple spec will NEVER EVER can win another people play in complex spec. Right now, as I see it, people play simple spec can easily out-do people play with complex spec which is stupid.

That doesn’t make sense. If I enter a game with a complex spec, I shouldn’t instantly win because of my build loadout. I should win, however, if I take an incredibly complex spec that is very difficult to play perfectly, and then play it perfectly against a very simple spec. That is the point of risk-reward, higher risk gives higher reward only if you are successful.

That is what I am trying to say. Thank you for clearance. On a side not, what I also means is by playing a simple spec mode, the player should not win against a complex spec. Lazy persons should not get the same rewards,if not higher, than working-hard person.

If you really want to be elite, you can play the “twitchiest” class there is, with a slow computer and a gimpy mouse and keyboard.

Bhawb.7408:

Stealth.9324:

There would be no problem for both spec, simplicity and complexity, co-exist in the game IF AND ONLY IF, people play simple spec will NEVER EVER can win another people play in complex spec. Right now, as I see it, people play simple spec can easily out-do people play with complex spec which is stupid.

That doesn’t make sense. If I enter a game with a complex spec, I shouldn’t instantly win because of my build loadout. I should win, however, if I take an incredibly complex spec that is very difficult to play perfectly, and then play it perfectly against a very simple spec. That is the point of risk-reward, higher risk gives higher reward only if you are successful.

This guy hits the hail on the head, and I already see it in action. Who can beat Teldo when he is playing his Engineer? Seriously… who?

A thief at equal skill level would possibly beat teldo.

Derps.7421:

A thief at equal skill level would possibly beat teldo.

Serious question. Are you trolling me?

Ok, let me make another example for you. Look at Phantarm, he plays Eles and he is one of the best Eles, don’t you agree? Now I could say that “When Phantarm is playing his Eles, he is unbeatable. Seriously,who?” But it is far from the truth as we all know.

OP, I agree with you. A good game should be simple, not complex. Look at chess, is very simple to play, yet very deep. I don’t think the number of buttons available determine the “skill of the class”, sometimes, with less options to choose from, you have a harder time against your opponents, and you have to use your creativity to overcome those obstacles. Thats why I like simple classes, because the complexity of the game to me, is offered by terrain, enemies, resource managing, etc. If I wanted to play a piano, I have one downstairs.

Because playing to your full ability, and using every combo in the book, and predicting the opponent’s attacks and actions is pointless when they just go 1,2,3,4,5 + fear and win.

Simple builds are alright, but they should not become more powerful than a complex build that is played correctly.

Baltzenger.2467:

OP, I agree with you. A good game should be simple, not complex. Look at chess, is very simple to play, yet very deep. I don’t think the number of buttons available determine the “skill of the class”, sometimes, with less options to choose from, you have a harder time against your opponents, and you have to use your creativity to overcome those obstacles. Thats why I like simple classes, because the complexity of the game to me, is offered by terrain, enemies, resource managing, etc. If I wanted to play a piano, I have one downstairs.

I laughed at the piano comment. lol. Yes, some people enjoy the “John kittening Madden” playstyles which is fine… but begging to nerf and over-complicate the simpler specs is selfish and stupid.

I remember how people in WoW loved playing Cat DPS… I loved the concept of the class but I hated the rotation…

Jasher.6580:

kitten s.7421:

A thief at equal skill level would possibly beat teldo.

Serious question. Are you trolling me?

Ever fight a good pistol dagger thief or a really good dagger pistol thief? If this said thief player is on the same skill level as teldo then the thief would win.

Baltzenger.2467:

A good game should be simple, not complex. Look at chess, is very simple to play, yet very deep.

Chess is simple? I guess it can be once you understand the basics, however, as a player you are visually reacting to your opponents moves which isn’t the best of metaphors for this game at the moment what with all the little toads hopping around waving their hands.

Dear OP
Yes, the other team is your opponent, or enemy if you prefer. Playing a simple class allows you to focus more on them and less on executing your abilities with the maximum efficiency. The easier it is to execute your maximum potential, the less diversity and skill is involved; it becomes more given, what the outcome of the match is.

In other words: There should be a balance. Imagine playing a profession with 2 skills and no utilities vs another with the same amount. In other words, extrapolate the consequence, if it (simplicity) was applicable to all classes. Would the game be fun?

I have zero problems with some specs being easier to play then others outside of specs that are very reliant on AI/pets which in my opinion are pure cheese. That being said these sorts of specs need to be weaker then harder ones that are played correctly. That is what we call balance. And its not always the case.

Kwll.1468:

I have zero problems with some specs being easier to play then others outside of specs that are very reliant on AI/pets which in my opinion are pure cheese. That being said these sorts of specs need to be weaker then harder ones that are played correctly. That is what we call balance. And its not always the case.

I tend to agree with this, but it does however become an issue, when whole classes are more or less stuck in so-called simple builds. Should the entire class suffer from that? So yeah .. “tend to agree” is perhaps what covers my opinion.

nerf spirit rangers moar and stun warriors

This isn’t DOTA. This is an MMO. There should be more than 5 buttons to push. There should be combos to wield. There should be multiple ways to play each class. This game has failed on A LOT of what makes this game an MMO.

I have multiple classes, but the Warrior and the Ranger are the least fun for me because of how straight forward they are. The Ranger in particular is nothing but an auto-attack class. While it’s fun to pretend I spend so much time auto-attacking because a lot of my skills are reactive, the fact that I spend so much time auto-attacking is because the oppurtunities to use those skills are few and far between.

I’m fine with the Ranger being a pet class, but ANet designed the pet in this game to be nothing more than a DOT, they refuse to make it live up to its potential, and the class as a whole is held down because of a class mechanic that is more of a hindrance than a benefit to the class as a whole. And if you want to play a power ranger as opposed to a bunker/condi spec? Fuggetaboutit.

Warrior isn’t in much better of a spot. While the class has combos, they’re nothing more then 1 >> 2 >> 3 combos. If you ever break the 1, 2, 3 chain you don’t throw in a 4 or 5… you wait for 1 to reset and go back to 1, 2, 3.

This is what people complain about. And it’s legitimate to complain about these things. If you want a game that has no depth and very simplistic combat you play games like DOTA. You don’t go to an MMO for simplicity.

In an MMO, “Easy” vs. “Hard” isn’t about how many buttons you have to press to obtain a desired result. It’s about the risks you have to take when you play a certain build, and the rewards you get out of it. In other words, it is about how many tactical mistakes you can make in a fight compared to your enemy and still win. Theoretically speaking, if two players fight each other, and Player A makes 10 major mistakes while Player B only makes 2, you would expect Player B to win. The game feels unbalanced when Player A’s build allows him to win despite having made more mistakes.

The “simple” to play builds, phantasm, CC warrior, spirit ranger, engender a lot of hate because they allow you to beat another player even when outplayed. In the case of mesmers and rangers, the AI handles the damage attacks for you. Thus, there’s less room for error. For example, you don’t have to worry about your phantasm summon missing because your opponent dodged. (Yes, they can dodge the phantasm’s attacks, but a dodge won’t prevent the summon). Moreover, if you miss your main damage-attacks (because you were outplayed), it’s a short cooldown before you can attempt the burst again. Thus, any errors you do make don’t hurt you much. (Compare summoning a phantasm to landing a firegrab, and compare the cooldowns).

On the flip side, these easy classes tend to be more forgiving on the defensive side, too. If you fail to dodge a stun as a mesmer, you have plenty of blinks/stunbreaks. If you position yourself poorly, you have stealth. Many other classes, if specced glassy, will simply die in these situations.

Edit: I should add that the above example w/ mesmers holds true only in a power-centric meta. In the condi-meta, the traditional phantasm/shatter mesmer is pretty risky to play due to the lack of condi removals. Hence the lack of complaints about mesmers in the condi-meta.

Jasher.6580:

dreztina.4820:

Everything about this game is easy. It’s honestly one of the most simplistic games I’ve ever played. So when a build is easy, even in terms of this game, yet is one of if not the strongest available, obviously people aren’t going to like it.

“Easy” is a relative term.

People claim something is “Easy” when it is popular. S/D thief? Popular therefore it is easy. Shatter Mesmer? Popular therefore easy. Stun Warrior? Popular therefore easy.

Those two things are not mutually exclusive but as long as they’re getting killed by something you don’t quite understand how to counter, and it is being adopted by a majority of the populace, it is officially easy.

Dirame.8521:

Jasher.6580:

dreztina.4820:

Everything about this game is easy. It’s honestly one of the most simplistic games I’ve ever played. So when a build is easy, even in terms of this game, yet is one of if not the strongest available, obviously people aren’t going to like it.

“Easy” is a relative term.

People claim something is “Easy” when it is popular. S/D thief? Popular therefore it is easy. Shatter Mesmer? Popular therefore easy. Stun Warrior? Popular therefore easy.

Those two things are not mutually exclusive but as long as they’re getting killed by something you don’t quite understand how to counter, and it is being adopted by a majority of the populace, it is officially easy.

Or, sometimes, some things are popular because they are easy to play. And again, by “easy” I again mean low-risk, high-reward.

I updated the OP with a very interesting video.

I think the video gives a good explanation around the 4m mark. And I’m sure A.net is aware of this basic concept, and the difficulty maybe is in implementing it well.

For those too lazy to watch the video, at the 4m mark it talks about “foo” strategies — strategies that are easy to execute and cause you to win over other beginners. But there are other, more powerful strategies that require more skill to execute well. The idea is that the developer should lay out an evenly-spaced crumb trail of higher risk, higher reward strategies. The new player starts with the foo strategy first, then realizes there’s a better (but more difficult) strategy he can do, and starts doing that. Then he realizes there’s an even better, but even more difficult strategy, and he starts doing that.

We don’t have this in GW2. Many of the “foo” builds in GW2 are NOT outclassed by higher risk, more difficult builds. For example, a phantasm mesmer will dominate an interrupt mesmer 9 times out of 10, even though the interrupt mesmer is way harder to play.

In other words, the current availability of low-risk, high-reward builds makes it so people have no incentive to improve. If you’re already achieving the max result with the current build, why change things up? For example, playing an interrupt mesmer is probably far riskier, takes more strategy, and takes better timing to pull off than a phantasm mesmer. But even if you play it perfectly, you’ll still do worse than a phantasm mesmer. So why bother?

Also, I want to clarify one thing. I don’t think playing an “easy” build means that you’re bad, or that you’re dumb, or that you have slow reflexes. I don’t even think “easy” builds are necessarily “braindead” to play. For example, I consider shatter mesmer to be mechanically easy, but I think it has a fair amount of strategic depth. Especially if you’re also taking portal. An “easy” build to me just means one where you can afford to make many more mistakes than your opponent and still win.

ResJudicator.7916:

-snip-

Also remember some of these “Foo” strategies are used for beginners to sometimes win against pro’s on occasion as well.

Jasher.6580:

Xom.9264:

Jasher, Phantasm mesmers were/are very easy to play.

Very easy to play by who’s standards? Yours? Your friends? The “Pro’s”? The forums?

Measuring performance and the level of effort it takes to accomplish something effectively isn’t something you can quantify that easily.

I’ve played against many many Phantasm Mesmer’s who I destroyed… and this was before the nerf when they were supposedly “op”… LoS and dodging the telegraphed and delayed responses from the Phantasms wasn’t a very difficult task… the auto-attack from the Mesmer was pitiful at best…

I digress.

If Phantasm Mesmer’s were so easy… why were so many that I faced so bad at it?

Cut it out, they were easy in the absolute sense of the term.
4, switch, 4, play hide and seek, repeat.
Empirically 90 players out of 100 could do that, highest percentage of simplicity amongst all professions.

Lachanche.6859:

Empirically 90 players out of 100 could do that, highest percentage of simplicity amongst all professions.

Feel free to look at the finger while i’m pointing at the moon.

Lachanche.6859:

Feel free to look at the finger while i’m pointing at the moon.

Classy.

ResJudicator.7916:

For example, playing an interrupt mesmer is probably far riskier, takes more strategy, and takes better timing to pull off than a phantasm mesmer.

I think a “viable” interrupt build would be very overpowered though.

So in your mind, spirit ranger takes the same amount of skill as an engineer? This post makes no sense…

nerf spirit rangers? nerf warriors? nerf thieves? nerf necros?

the game revolves around running around and capturing 3 points and you wanna nerf viable builds? that will make the game simpler dont you think?

In the ideal world a class should be easy to play, hard to master. The problem with GW2 and many builds is that it is easy to play, easy to master. That shouldn’t be the case.

Interesting post. To add to perception, I think, in general, losing to a ranger feels cheap due to the existance of the pet. It feels like when you lose to a perma strealth thief. Add in the so called common knowledge that spirits are too simple and perhaps too strong, you get the perception of imbalance as a result.

Many times, when a ranger gives a boon it is perceived to be worth less. “Ranger’s healing spring is worse than elementalist healing rain”, “ranger fury or vigor isn’t special”, and so on. But as soon as ranger does something that seems to help “is this OP? Should we nerf it?”.

Contrast that with the typical review of guardians: “While not OP, guardian does everything and the kitchen sink”. Everything is always qualified with guardian like it’s a sacred profession.

That’s all, honestly, a bunch of bull but look around and see who believes it. Look at the common professions you see running around the game. That’s the hivemind meta. And many of those players won’t know how to even blast a field.