all demigods require a low amount of skill imo.

Clicking to join a game and pick a demigod requires low amount of skill.

Doing anything significant after that point, probably not quite so.

P.S. I'm sure if you work on your skill you will greatly improve your stats

Short version: Learn to play newb.

Long version: Unclean Beast can be either a very high damage melee fighter or a very good hit and run antagonizer. It's not a very hardy fighter though and can't easily outlast a tough enemy. Unclean Beast also has limited ranged options and can be whittled down at a distance.

The player's build makes all the difference. Ooze specialized builds are useless against ranged attacks but can stand up to melee damage much better. That might help against demigods out in the open but it generally makes it harder to push through towers. If you don't max out Spit you'll be much weaker against buildings in the long run. Gods like Regulus and Torchbearer can hassle you effectively.

Spit specialized builds on the other hand should be great at hit and run, less limited against ranged attacks, and decent against buildings. But now you're vulnerable against a solid melee fighter with army support. Oak, Sedna, and Erebus can combat you effectively. Creeps may also become problematic in the long run.

The bottom line is that if you think it's all the same then you have no freaking clue about what you are talking about. LTPN.

oh and btw,

sludge slinger throws poo at dps demigods for 7 seconds.

Well I've made the reward-player-skill argument many times in several different games so I do have some sympathy for the OP. Basically how the argument goes is that while there are no arbitrary rules of honor or minimum-required-skill for the players, an ideal game should be balanced in a way that in general, simple strategies have a lower maximum potential than complicated ones. But achieving that is totally the responsibility of the game designers. 

However, I personally don't think of Beast as much simpler than any other DG. The simple fact is that most effective builds play as 1234 spammers or right-click-whores. Its just the nature of the game. Most of the "skill" in this game is displayed in how you position yourself, how you coordinate with your teammates, etc, and every DG is capable of that.  

The one thing that I do find possibly OP about Beast is that he is so strong early and late. He is one of (if not the) best end-game AA hero, so you'd think a good strategy would be to dominate him early to prevent him from getting to that point. But his natural stats and powerful early spells make him almost unstoppable in the early game as well. There are just very few builds that can match the beginning-to-end power that Beast has.  

@ Milskidasith

Actually no, if everybody tries to use the more complicated strategy then lesser players will fail to execute it properly, allowing the more talented players to distinguish themselves, which is the whole point of competitive gaming. I really don't intend to argue that reward-player-skill should apply to DG as 1) its not a major cybersport and 2) the game mechanics of DG generally don't lend themselves to R-P-S the way other games do. I was just mentioning it to point out that the OP might have some traction if DG were different than it is.

Also, I just finished last week with a very long and draining argument regarding R-P-S with some fellows on the guildwarsguru forum, so I would really, really appreciate not having to go through any of that again so soon. So please, please, let it drop. 

Using execution barriers as a substitute for an actually deep game is a sign of bad game design in almost all cases, and necessity in the few that aren't.

The whole point of competitive gaming is to show who's best at the game, not who is best and doing arbitrarily complicated tasks in order to play the game. To use an example from a game designer (David Sirlin, author of Playing to Win) imagine if you had to juggle while playing chess, to make it more complicated. It is no longer about chess, but about who is a better juggler.

There is a big difference between rewarding player skill and rewarding a player's ability to execute complicated tasks. The game already rewards the first one; rewarding the second is not a good idea. Also, it doesn't have to be a major cybersport to be well balanced; in fact, the opposite is true. Things only become major cybersports BECAUSE they are well balanced and designed.

If demigod had arbitrary execution barriers it would be a different and much worse game.

Yeah, they don't lend themselves to R-P-S. That's kind of a good thing, though; if one demigod hard countered the other, it would be bad. Since your choices in the game are set in stone after you make them (you can't readjust skill points) having hard counters with R-P-S would be very hard to implement well in a game like Demigod; it would require a complete reworking of the skill system or else people would have to accept that if they picked P early game, they would lose if their opponent picked S no matter what.

R-P-S is unfortunately the acronym for both Reward Player Skill and Rock Paper Scissors. Ironically, those concepts are often conflict with one another. I usually mean Reward-Player-Skill.

Malskidasith: I never said anything about execution barriers. I think we would both agree that requiring people to juggle batons while pressing buttons with their toes is stupid. As you said, the game should show who is better at playing the game. I agree, and suggest that the game should include (mentally) challenging strategies requiring judgements about how and when and where to use abilities, and favor these strategies slightly above ones that simply consist of pressing a button every time it is recharged. If the best strategy in the game was allowed to be so simple, everyone would be forced to use it, and everyone would be almost equally effective at it because of its simplicity. This makes for the most shallow and undesirable type of game.

But as I said, R-P-S was not the important part of my first post in this thread, and I don't plan to argue about it, so please forget that I brought it up. If you still have questions, you can pm me, as I feel we've already dragged things off topic enough. 

Symbol of purity and/or competent play resolve this situation.

i'd even go so far as to argue that DG's that on their face appear to have more simplistic gameplay mechanics are not easier to play. it requires you to think more about how to apply your limited scope abilities. a good UB player is far more concerned with map position and getting an accurate read on his opponent's defensive abilities than he with trying to figure out how/when/where to spit.

i mean, we can keep going with examples from DG or even examples from other games. here's one.

Starcraft is relatively simple from a strategic perspective. units tend to have hard counters in a very RPS matrix sort of way. the most relevant things are scouting (so you known which counter to build) and macro-economy (build more stuff = win). the strategy is simple enough to the point that top level gameplay isn't distinguished by it at all but is instead entirely dependent on manual dexterity. the best Starcraft pros in South Korea are the ones who have the fastest reaction time and are the best at pushing buttons on their keyboard. its very much the equivalent of playing chess while juggling.

and i hate that about high level Starcraft. i don't want to play chess while juggling. i just want to play chess. i want a game with strategic depth not a game about twitch factor, reaction time, multi-tasking, etc.

another example in competitive gaming. SF4 is a better competitive game than MvC2 explicitly because it is slower and simpler. this leads to more contemplation of strategy and matchups and less concentration on twitch, infinite combo, and exploits (which is what high level MvC2 is all about).

so ya, complexity in its own right is not desirable. simplicity is better by default. strategic depth can be achieved even in simple systems. this is the model of elegance and makes for good gameplay.

I play UB all the time, and he isnt the ultimate melee fighter, even at the start and end of the game. I am continually outlasted by sedna and oak, but usually I heavily invest in speed so I can get away. Regulus and TB tend to be fairly easy kills at the beginning so rock paper scissors seems to be working ok. A well played erebus usually gets the better of me.

At late game I usually find myself much weaker than oak, and sedna can still be a major problem. As usual a well played erebus is nigh impossible to kill.

As a last comment for all these people who continually regurgitate this nerf UB stuff, if you think he's so wonderful why dont you play him. Then if you think he's still OP come back and post and you will have a little more credibility. I dont want to see this game go the way many other mmo's have gone with everything getting nerfed at the request of the players, and being left with a load of bland skills, and various characters taking turns in being flavor of the month as skills are forever "adjusted"

From my experience a health stacked UB can be out-lasted by Oak and Sedna and maybe Erebus as well.  Ooze UB struggles against tower rook and the ranged heroes early game without early speed items but if you have those then you're not really health stacking.  I've also found that players making use of slowing skills/abilities/items can often cause problems for a health stacking ooze build.

Dammit, should have Shoryuken'd....