Class Complexity Rating

[Jokuc.3478]

With the new update, ANet has added "Complexity" ratings for each class. How do you feel about this?

 

I get the idea, but I think it might do more bad than good cause things change a lot depending on what Elite Spec and what build you play. For example, Condi Chaos Virtuoso is very easy but Axe Mirage is very hard. Power Mech is extremely easy but Sword Holosmith has a little bit more of a learning curve. So the ratings can be misleading.

[Farohna.6247]

I feel like it's about the same as reading a forum or watching a YouTube video about what to play.  It's an overview about the professions, and then hopefully the player looks up builds from there to see what would suit their needs on metabattle, snowcrows, etc.

[Devas.8104]

I thought they wanted to make all of them straigthforward and easy?

[Alcatraznc.3869]

Where is that complexity thing ? Is it when you create your character ? Because I didnt see any of these to be fair

[oscuro.9720]

Idk where this is, but it’ll be interesting to see what they use as their measure of complexity, since there’s different ways to view what comprises a “complex” class/specialization.

[RadiantWolf.2058]

2 hours ago, Alcatraznc.3869 said:

Where is that complexity thing ? Is it when you create your character ? Because I didnt see any of these to be fair

It's when you create a new character.

 

3 stars being complex, 1 being not so complex, they're listed thus:

Guardian: *

Warrior: *

Revenant: **

 

Engineer: ***

Thief: **

Ranger: *

 

Mesmer: **

Necromancer: *

Elementalist: ***

 

I agree with OP that elite spec is a factor here. I wouldn't place Mechanist and Weaver at the same level of complexity.

Edited August 24, 2022 by RadiantWolf.2058

[Noodle Ant.1605]

i dont think this takes elite specialisations into account, probably just measures the “complexity” of the core profession mechanic + innate armor/health (facetank survivability?) maybe

[ASP.8093]

47 minutes ago, RadiantWolf.2058 said:

3 stars being complex, 1 being not so complex, they're listed thus:

Guardian: *

Warrior: *

Revenant: **

 

Engineer: ***

Thief: **

Ranger: *

 

Mesmer: **

Necromancer: *

Elementalist: ***

Seems pretty sensible to me, overall. All the 1-star classes require you to master the game's core concepts but don't add a lot of extra cognitive load on top of that. All the 2-star classes have some kind of weird class-specific resource management (Rev energy, Thief initiative, Mesmer clones/blades), all the 3-star classes can have very complex rotations when played optimally. Arguably Mechanist is kind of a weird exception (since it removes the extra toolbelt skills and also has viable builds that don't make heavy use of kits), but you have to play through a ton of the game to unlock Mechanist anyway.

N.B. I'm not saying Thief is harder to play than Warrior or whatever. Just that you have to learn extra weird things on top of the normal game stuff to play it.

[Karagee.6830]

Mechanist is 0 rating, right? Right???

[Alcatraznc.3869]

6 hours ago, RadiantWolf.2058 said:

It's when you create a new character.

 

3 stars being complex, 1 being not so complex, they're listed thus:

Guardian: *

Warrior: *

Revenant: **

 

Engineer: ***

Thief: **

Ranger: *

 

Mesmer: **

Necromancer: *

Elementalist: ***

 

I agree with OP that elite spec is a factor here. I wouldn't place Mechanist and Weaver at the same level of complexity.

 

Thanks for sharing this.

 

I will definitely assume Anet made this complexity star based on core spec. While I do agree Engineer and Elementalist are among the hardest to play, Mechanist for Engineer would put it at 1* and Holosmith-Scrapper would put it at 2*. 

 

Again, core spec wise I think Anet isnt wrong when it comes to complexity but if it is meant to include elite spec, this is definitely a more tricky situation.

[pierwola.9602]

Guild Wars 2 *

[Zaret.1450]

18 hours ago, Jokuc.3478 said:

With the new update, ANet has added "Complexity" ratings for each class. How do you feel about this?

 

I get the idea, but I think it might do more bad than good cause things change a lot depending on what Elite Spec and what build you play. For example, Condi Chaos Virtuoso is very easy but Axe Mirage is very hard. Power Mech is extremely easy but Sword Holosmith has a little bit more of a learning curve. So the ratings can be misleading.

think that even then you see clear diferences, if mirage is difficult and virtu easyer you can just increase mirage traits and weapons or decrease virtu traits and weapons on need.

The same goes for almost every elite, rev for example is the exact oposite, they have been nerfing deva, a power trait line, while triing to nerf the condi builds, that only made power builds become incredibly weak and unnerving, now to buff power builds they have herald on one hand and vindi on the other, in my opinion vindi is more difficult, 2 weapons, energy management, evade management and archie having no upkeep makes making mistakes easy and punishing, while herald is more of activate upkeeps to get dmg buff and then hit with the swords, an easy way to balance would be buffing gs, as they already did, although it still needs a bit more i think, buffing a couple of archie skills, or a vindi trait or two, other more difficult biffs could be changing energy mecanic or rocket jump mecanic so its easyer to play with it.

what i mean is, targeting one elite or build isnt difficult if you think about what youre doing, the problem is that anet usually just nerfed and buffed without even looking at the builds nor the class itsef, and thus nerfing power traits to balance condi builds, putting traits in a traitline that doesnt make sense, having core mecanics that end up being a hidrance on gameplay or that could be simplified and polished without loosing identity nor getting broken, i hope this little changes, that truly are well directed at least, means anet is finaly getting serious at balancing and there are big changes aproaching.

[Zyreva.1078]

I'm sure all the new engis who pick the class because they enjoy complex gameplay, will be very happy when they reach endgame and everyone wants them to play mech ...

Pretty useless and potentially misleading addition.

[Zaret.1450]

4 minutes ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

I'm sure all the new engis who pick the class because they enjoy complex gameplay, will be very happy when they reach endgame and everyone wants them to play mech ...

Pretty useless and potentially misleading addition.

well i dont think its a bad elite, design wise, it brings engi an easy elite and also serves for those that like robots and pets but dont realy like necro nor ranger, its problem was how broken it was, also the mech might be usefull for anet to see how weak pets are overall and maybe get them some good reworks, the cc for example was pretty good

[itspomf.9523]

14 hours ago, RadiantWolf.2058 said:

It's when you create a new character.

 

3 stars being complex, 1 being not so complex, they're listed thus:

Guardian: *

Warrior: *

Revenant: **

 

Engineer: ***

Thief: **

Ranger: *

 

Mesmer: **

Necromancer: *

Elementalist: ***

 

I agree with OP that elite spec is a factor here. I wouldn't place Mechanist and Weaver at the same level of complexity.

Going off what you've posted and the various class mechanics -- such as elementalist having attunement shifts and radically different play-styles per element, engineer having all of its kits which change your weapon loadout, vs. "press 2 to bonk" for warrior or guardian -- yeah, it rather makes sense.  Even thief, revenant, or mesmer being mid-level complexity, due to resource management (initiative, energy, and clones, respectively) which can enable or empower skills makes sense.

And keep in mind, while elite specs may ease (or substantially alter) gameplay, these ratings likely are based off of core profession mechanics ... you know, the parts that new players are going to be exposed to before "mastering" their profession.

I will disagree with Anet that ranger and necromancer are "easy," however, on the basis that the latter has resource management as well and the shroud transformation, whereas commanding pets isn't always the most intuitive thing on ranger (nevermind each family of pets having potentially radically different styles).

[Voyant.1327]

I think everyone who sees Engineer difficulty rating immediately thought of "Mechanists press 1 button how difficult is that."

[Kuma.1503]

Imo Anet should split things into skill floor and skill cap since some classes are easy to play or have a few very easy builds, but are difficult to mater, and others are very off putting to new players, but not too challenging once you get a hang on them. If it were up to me I'd rate things like this.

(In the spirit of the Aug 23 patch. Ratings are based on PvE only) 

 

Warrior

Floor: *

Ceiling: *

(Note: Warrior isn't braindead, but someone has to be 1 star and warrior is both beginner friendly and has the lowest cap since it's all DPS with few tricks up its sleeve.)

 

Guardian

Floor: *

Ceiling: **

 

Revenant

Floor: ***

Ceiling: **

 

Ranger

Floor: *

Ceiling: ***

 

Thief

Floor: **

Ceiling: **

 

Engineer

Floor: 

Ceiling: ***

 

Necromancer

Floor: *

Ceiling: **

 

Elemantalist

Floor: **

Ceiling: ***

 

Mesmer

Floor: **

Ceiling: *** 

 

 

Edited August 24, 2022 by Kuma.1503

[Zekent.3652]

48 minutes ago, Kuma.1503 said:

Warrior

Floor: *

Ceiling: *

(Note: Warrior isn't braindead, but someone has to be 1 star and warrior is both beginner friendly and has the lowest cap since it's all DPS with few tricks up its sleeve.)

No, warrior has one of the highest ceilings in the game, specially for pvp.

it's clearly the easiest to get into, but one of the hardest to master, depends on just good timings for pve (specially as bladesworn), and for pvp (except for bladesworn, it's just busted honestly)

[Kuma.1503]

41 minutes ago, Zizekent.2398 said:

No, warrior has one of the highest ceilings in the game, specially for pvp

it's clearly the easiest to get into, but one of the hardest to master, depends on just good timings for pve (specially as bladesworn), and for pvp (except for bladesworn, it's just busted honestly)

 

Quote

(In the spirit of the Aug 23 patch. Ratings are based on PvE only) 

List does not take PvP into account

Warrior's simplicity adds to its difficulty in PvP since the player has no gimmicks to carry them and the player must make up for that with smart play and by maximizing what tools they have available. Warrior also has multiple mechanics that actively punish sloppy skill use. Whiff your F skill into a blind/evade/dodge/juke? No adrenaline. No trait procs. Get rekt. Mistime your full counter? Get rekt.  Stun someone and cast hundred blades without counting the enemy's stunbreaks? Lol stand nice job attacking the air noob. Enjoy your self root. 

All this and you have to deal with other classes like Harbinger getting every boon in the game at the press of a button and vommiting as much damage as a ranger's rapid fire on their auto attack. (check the coefficient and cast time. If not for tempest's rediculous amount of projectile hate, harb would still dominate PvP)

Even bladesworn, easy as it is, has a lot of room for mastery. If this were a PvP list, Warrior would be 3 stars easily. 

 

In PvE its simplicity limits the ceiling of what it is capable of even in very skilled hands. That's why I gave it one star.  I would not say Warrior has the highest skill cap in PvE by a long shot. It takes a lot of skill to hit the benchmark on Warrior, like it does on most builds, but that's not unique to warrior, most players can't get near the benchmark on their build (Rifle Mech notwithstanding... there's a reason why I didn't even give Engineer a star for their skill floor)

You don't have to memorize boss patterns to time your confusion spikes like on condi mirage. You don't to mange legend swaps + stance swap within you legend swap + energy + weapon swap + your situational utility skills + your rotation + Play without a dodge since you use them for DPS like you do on Vindicator, and Warrior lacks Rev's wide swath of situational supportive/ utility skills that good players can use to significantly increase their groups win rate if utilized properly. 

You don't have the sadistic level of APM and skill timing that is required on Untamed. 

It's a middle of the road DPS in terms of difficulty with very limited situational utility and very straight forward skills. Very minimal support. Very minimal utility. 

So I gave it one star in PvE. Not because it's easy, but because it's the most limited class in terms of what it does, how straightforward it is, and what it's capable of. In PvE. 

Having ratings that scale from 1 to 3 doesn't work if no one is a 1, and Warrior fits that bill the best. If you have another class that should be a 1 instead, I'd like to hear it.

Edited August 24, 2022 by Kuma.1503

[Mell.4873]

10 hours ago, pierwola.9602 said:

Guild Wars 2 *

Guild Wars 2 Forum ***

[ASP.8093]

You all are complicating the heck out of this for no value. It's clearly just a "if this is your first toon, how much are you gonna have to learn super fast to avoid falling behind while leveling" kind of thing. 90% of this design is just to prevent people from going, "aha! a mage! elementalist!" before they even understand what a boon is.

[Noah Salazar.5430]

21 hours ago, RadiantWolf.2058 said:

Engineer: ***

what, engi have 3 stars 😮

maybe it's mean easy to play hard to master but idk

Edited August 25, 2022 by Noah Salazar.5430

[RadiantWolf.2058]

1 hour ago, Noah Salazar.5430 said:

what, engi have 3 stars 😮

maybe it's mean easy to play hard to master but idk

Engineer core is absolutely one of the more complex classes in the game. It's not very straightforward with the kits, limited weapon choices, etc.

 

The elite specs do simplify things a bit but I think core engineer with 3 stars for complexity makes sense.

 

Keeping in mind that complexity and challenge are not necessarily the same thing.

[Lily.1935]

On 8/24/2022 at 12:29 AM, ASP.8093 said:

Seems pretty sensible to me, overall. All the 1-star classes require you to master the game's core concepts but don't add a lot of extra cognitive load on top of that. All the 2-star classes have some kind of weird class-specific resource management (Rev energy, Thief initiative, Mesmer clones/blades), all the 3-star classes can have very complex rotations when played optimally. Arguably Mechanist is kind of a weird exception (since it removes the extra toolbelt skills and also has viable builds that don't make heavy use of kits), but you have to play through a ton of the game to unlock Mechanist anyway.

N.B. I'm not saying Thief is harder to play than Warrior or whatever. Just that you have to learn extra weird things on top of the normal game stuff to play it.

I don't think they're all that accurate. Engineer isn't nearly as hard as it looks and Necromancer is much harder than first impressions. For leveling maybe, but you get into their elite specs Holosmith is 3, Scrapper is 2 MAYBE, Mechanist is 1. For Necromancer Scourge is 2, Reaper is 2 and harbinger I'd say is 3. There's a lot of specific interactions you have to consider to really play these "Easy" classes effectively or even just good enough.

Played Necromancer for almost 10 years now and If I'm having a bad day, reaper is 19k bench. I go and pick up a guardian and without knowing the rotation its 26k. On a good day I can get up to about 29k on reaper. That's a BIG difference in performance and reaper is considered the easiest of necromancer's elite specs to run.

Necromancer is all about time management and resource management which trips up a lot of new players. I've run All of the Necromancer elite specs in raids, and honestly, Harbinger is one of the most difficult builds I've run. Right up there with condi kits holosmith if not a bit harder.

[Gibson.4036]

Core guardian is deceptive to new players because it’s really easy at first (there’s a reason it’s recommended for key running) but at some point they hit “what do you mean my plate-wearing paladin doesn’t just facetank?”