Guild Wars 2

When I look at the different professions (and I play 7 of 9) I’m really very happy with the spread of weapons. I think that when the classes were first created they got the mix of weapons just right. Each weapon we had really fit the character of the profession.

The introduction of an elite spec changed that by adding an additional weapon from the pool. In some cases I think that worked ok, in others, just not. And I mean that in the sense that the new weapon choice did or did not fit with the aesthetic of the profession.

Now as another expansion is in the offing we are all eagerly awaiting a second elite spec for the classes, it’s just the thought of them shoe-horning in another weapon class into the professions that is giving me pause.

Do I want a pistol or scepter weilding warrior? hmm….no.
Do I want a longbow or rifle weilding necromancer? hmm..no
Do I need to make more examples?

So as an alternative to this how about this for a suggestion : let us keep the same weapons we have now. Don’t add a new one. Just pick one of the iconic weapons of the class and give us 5 new skills to use.

I’d love to see 5 different skills for the warrior GS, the rangers longbow, the engineers rifle etc.

If we end up with multiple elites in the coming years some classes will end up being able to use every weapon in the game, and as a result we will water down the sense of diversity you get from professions. Why bother with alts when every profession can spec for every weapon and every skill?

It’s just an idea, and I figure it’s already way to late for the next expansion, it will already be set in stone, maybe somewhere down the line we could get somehing like this.

tl:dr – keep the same weapons for new elites, just give us 5 new skills for one of the weapons or a particular combo. ( sword and board )

How would this work though if you wanted to take the new Warrior elite spec for its traits, but keep the original warrior GS skills? This lowers choices that players have, and I’m not a fan of that

I’d much rather new weapons for new elite spec and I feel that it actually benefits all professions to have new playstyles with new weapons and new skills.

They’ve also made it so that future elite specialisations can double up on previous elite specialisation weapons, so like two mesmer elite specs can, in the future, use shields with different shield skills for each one, depending on the theme of the elite specs.

I don’t like the idea of doubling skills on core profession classes, because what if the new elite spec is awesome but it changes my favourite weapon and ends up with new skills that I absolutely hate?

Also, a warrior with a pistol sounds awesome to me!

The current path they’re on is fine in my opinion, no need to change it.

@ OriOri,

Well that is the problem with players wanting everything in order to max/min. Why shouldn’t there be limits to what is available in the choices you make. Some choices probably should exclude others. I don’t see that as being a negative, though I get that others might.

Now that I think about it, you could have it so the profession mechanic switches to the new skills, that would let you keep the original skills of the weapon and have 5 new ones, just like when a necro uses shroud.

Just an idea.

The problem is that this would mostly only work for Professions that have a lot of weapons already and most likely Warrior may be the first profession to obtain a new Elite Spec that changes the gameplay style of a core profession weapon.

Each profession has the potential to use all weapons in this game but in their own unique way.

Engineer, for example, has the potential to use weapons such as Staff for a Technomancer Elite Spec, Focus (Main/off hand) for a Psychic Elite Spec (Mental energy and using the law of Physics) by using the Focus as a conduit for Psychic Energy, and Scepter Elite Spec by modifying and adjust to be like a stun baton.

Also unbind current elite spec weapons and utilities from elite specs, so you can use them on vanilla professions (though you’d still require HoT to use them).

@ EdwinLi

I think it would work for any profession, regardless of how many weapons they already have.

Sure, I get that it’s possible to make up some junk about why any weapon could be used by any profession, afterall, they’ve already done it, my point is that maybe it’s not such a good idea to.
Do we really need to have every profession use every weapon? To me that just waters down the professions. The profession started with a pretty solid identity that was easy to understand. Long before people try out GW2 they know what most of the professions do. Anyone remotely familiar with a fanstasy concept knows what a warrior, a ranger or an elementalist is. The names themselves confirm an identity.
Each new Elite spec waters down that identity. More choice isn’t always better imo.

Ragnar Stormcaller.6253:

@ EdwinLi

I think it would work for any profession, regardless of how many weapons they already have.

Sure, I get that it’s possible to make up some junk about why any weapon could be used by any profession, afterall, they’ve already done it, my point is that maybe it’s not such a good idea to.
Do we really need to have every profession use every weapon? To me that just waters down the professions. The profession started with a pretty solid identity that was easy to understand. Long before people try out GW2 they know what most of the professions do. Anyone remotely familiar with a fanstasy concept knows what a warrior, a ranger or an elementalist is. The names themselves confirm an identity.
Each new Elite spec waters down that identity. More choice isn’t always better imo.

The concept of Elite Spec is not to water down the identity but to build on current identity or introduce a new identity to each profession.

Anet has introduced two types of Elite Specs being Extension and Unique.

Extension Elite Specs simply adds on to the core profession mechanic such as Scrapper, berserker, Chronomancer, and Tempest without changing the core function of the Profession’s mechanic while Unique Elite Spec gives it a new identity unique to that specific elite spec by changing the core profession mechanics and/or skills to a new one that function differently from the Core profession such as Dragonhunter, Reaper and Druid.

For example, Engineer can get a New Elite Spec that changes the function of their toolbelt into a skill that changes the Main Weapon skills thus turning the toolbelt into a "Ammo"belt. Yes they lose their toolbelt identity to use extra skills based on their Utility skills but in exchange they gain new set of skills per main weapon being pistols, rifles, shield, and the elite spec weapon.

A Guardian Virtue could be changed from buffs into attack skills (which Dragon hunter did) or Stances which affect the Guardian by certain benefits through offensive, defensive, or support means.

I can see how it looks like new identity.
Lets take the Guardian, they got Dragon Hunter, a trap dropping longbow specialist. But wait, we already have one of them, it’s called a Ranger.
I dont see it as new identity, I see it as an identity swap. A mix and match between professions that is in danger of continuing until every profession does exactly the same as every other profession, just with different names for it.
It would certainly sort out the balance problems though :P

Ragnar Stormcaller.6253:

@ EdwinLi

I think it would work for any profession, regardless of how many weapons they already have.

Sure, I get that it’s possible to make up some junk about why any weapon could be used by any profession, afterall, they’ve already done it, my point is that maybe it’s not such a good idea to.
Do we really need to have every profession use every weapon? To me that just waters down the professions. The profession started with a pretty solid identity that was easy to understand. Long before people try out GW2 they know what most of the professions do. Anyone remotely familiar with a fanstasy concept knows what a warrior, a ranger or an elementalist is. The names themselves confirm an identity.
Each new Elite spec waters down that identity. More choice isn’t always better imo.

“Make up some junk”, you mean lore? Story?

And I think the class identities would be solid regardless of what weapons would be used, because not every profession would use the same weapon the same way. Thieves and Revenants use staves and melee weapons, Mesmers use greatswords as a power based staff instead of a condi based staff, Revenants use hammers as a ranged weapon instead of a melee weapon, necromancers use axes and warhorns as magical implements, engineers use shields as another modified tool, elementalists use daggers as magical implements also. The mold’s been broken already about what weapons define certain professions and elite specs are a chance to take classes further into directions that they couldn’t do before, and new weapons with elite specs are absolutely the best (and honestly, the only) method of providing new ways to play and show these new skills each profession acquires. Why should Guild Wars 2 conform to what other fantasy worlds do when this game has it’s own space to explore the full extent of these professions in ways no other game does? The mold was even broken back in the original Guild Wars, with the healing profession being called a Monk that was a pure spellcaster instead of the fantasy monk that exists in essentially every other fantasy world. So I absolutely support breaking the mold even further. The professions don’t dilute their fantasy by using new weapons that they normally wouldn’t have access to, they can actually further improve the current fantasy of those classes (elementalists with swords anyone?).

All in all though, opinion is subjective, and ArenaNet can’t satisfy everyone with what they do.

Ragnar Stormcaller.6253:

I can see how it looks like new identity.
Lets take the Guardian, they got Dragon Hunter, a trap dropping longbow specialist. But wait, we already have one of them, it’s called a Ranger.
I dont see it as new identity, I see it as an identity swap. A mix and match between professions that is in danger of continuing until every profession does exactly the same as every other profession, just with different names for it.
It would certainly sort out the balance problems though :P

But wait, rangers are also trap dropping shortbow specialists. Core Thieves have both traps and shortbows.

Is there an identity swap there too?

What about warhorns and shouts? Warriors, rangers, necromancers and elementalists.

sword and physical? thieves and warriors.

staff and glyphs? rangers and elementalists.

There’s no ‘identity swap’ happening here, because the themes are separate, despite similarly based weapons and skill types. The theme of a ranger is ‘naturalist combatant with a pet’, that doesn’t change with the ranger having a staff and using more nature magic than they already did, and that won’t change if they get access to rifles, scepters or hammers. Thieves are ‘stealthy combatants with some shadowy magic capability’ and they can absolutely find a way to use a greatsword or hammer. Guardians don’t stop being ‘light wielding strategic combatants’ just because they use longbows and traps and it actually fits them thematically, because you can better reach a flying combatant with a longbow than you can with a sword, and traps are an extremely useful strategic tool.

There’s no identity swap because the theme stands strong.

castlemanic.3198:

But wait, rangers are also trap dropping shortbow specialists. Core Thieves have both traps and shortbows.

Is there an identity swap there too?

What about warhorns and shouts? Warriors, rangers, necromancers and elementalists.

sword and physical? thieves and warriors.

staff and glyphs? rangers and elementalists.

There’s no ‘identity swap’ happening here, because the themes are separate, despite similarly based weapons and skill types. The theme of a ranger is ‘naturalist combatant with a pet’, that doesn’t change with the ranger having a staff and using more nature magic than they already did, and that won’t change if they get access to rifles, scepters or hammers. Thieves are ‘stealthy combatants with some shadowy magic capability’ and they can absolutely find a way to use a greatsword or hammer. Guardians don’t stop being ‘light wielding strategic combatants’ just because they use longbows and traps and it actually fits them thematically, because you can better reach a flying combatant with a longbow than you can with a sword, and traps are an extremely useful strategic tool.

There’s no identity swap because the theme stands strong.

Yep the main focus of Elite Specs is not the Utility skills as those are just additions mostly to provide a new set of utility people may find interests in.

The main focus of the Elite Specs is adding and adjusting the Profession’s core system such as how Dragonhunter’s Virtue was adjust from buffs into offensive/defensive active skills and Reaper changed the Necros Death Shroud into a more melee DPS focus Reaper Shroud.

Professions such as Warrior, Mesmer, Engineer, and Elementalist got extensions to their core profession system without changing the system’s functions such as Engineer got F button for Auto res and finisher which adds a additional tool to their tools, Mesmer got a additional Illusion shatter system, Elementalist got to overload their current Elements for powerful attacks, and Warrior has a stronger Rage Mode called Berserk Mode when they max their rage.

Weapons are also additions made to provide additional weapon option and a unique experience that is unique to the Profession such as how Thief use Staff as a Melee weapon or maybe one day a Short-bow Elite Spec is introduced using Power Build set up. Maybe even go the extra mile and introduce a melee Secpter or maybe a Melee Focus main hand weapon unique to that specific Profession due to the Elite Spec.

The main focus of the Elite specs was power creep, pure and simple. And we are now in the situation where core builds are severely lacking. Try getting a mesmer who isnt a chrono into a raid, or a ranger who isnt a druid. The power creep designed into the Elite specs made the core professions obsolete, forever changing their identity by saying that if you don’t go Elite you can’t compete.

But I’m going off topic here. My point was and still is we could have an elite spec that also uses our existing weapons, leaving our core profession identity unchanged, by simply using the core weapons as Elites.

I’d rather have that than face the prospect of my ranger weilding a scepter, or my necromancer with a rifle or shield. etc

I’m completely against this suggestion. I desperately want a hammer ranger, rifle thief, and greatsword revenant.

Ragnar Stormcaller.6253:

The main focus of the Elite specs was power creep, pure and simple. And we are now in the situation where core builds are severely lacking. Try getting a mesmer who isnt a chrono into a raid, or a ranger who isnt a druid. The power creep designed into the Elite specs made the core professions obsolete, forever changing their identity by saying that if you don’t go Elite you can’t compete.

I definitely do not believe that the entire point was power creep. It ended up power creep, no doubt, but I don’t believe for a second that the designers intentionally set out to create power creep. They were marketed as an alternative playstyle from what I remember, and future elite specs should be the same power level as current elite specs, making elite specs a choice once more (though between elite specs).

But I’m going off topic here. My point was and still is we could have an elite spec that also uses our existing weapons, leaving our core profession identity unchanged, by simply using the core weapons as Elites.

I’d rather have that than face the prospect of my ranger weilding a scepter, or my necromancer with a rifle or shield. etc

And my point was and still is the core identity remains solid no matter what weapon is added to their kitten nal, because the identity is the profession itself, not the weapons they wield.

I’d love a scepter on my ranger and a rifle or shield on my necromancer.

Restating your point doesn’t remove the previous conversation, nor does it improve your stance. And it’s okay for people to not agree with your idea. It happens with any opinion/idea.

Ragnar Stormcaller.6253:

When I look at the different professions (and I play 7 of 9) I’m really very happy with the spread of weapons. I think that when the classes were first created they got the mix of weapons just right. Each weapon we had really fit the character of the profession.

The introduction of an elite spec changed that by adding an additional weapon from the pool. In some cases I think that worked ok, in others, just not. And I mean that in the sense that the new weapon choice did or did not fit with the aesthetic of the profession.

Now as another expansion is in the offing we are all eagerly awaiting a second elite spec for the classes, it’s just the thought of them shoe-horning in another weapon class into the professions that is giving me pause.

Do I want a pistol or scepter weilding warrior? hmm….no.
Do I want a longbow or rifle weilding necromancer? hmm..no
Do I need to make more examples?

So as an alternative to this how about this for a suggestion : let us keep the same weapons we have now. Don’t add a new one. Just pick one of the iconic weapons of the class and give us 5 new skills to use.

I’d love to see 5 different skills for the warrior GS, the rangers longbow, the engineers rifle etc.

If we end up with multiple elites in the coming years some classes will end up being able to use every weapon in the game, and as a result we will water down the sense of diversity you get from professions. Why bother with alts when every profession can spec for every weapon and every skill?

It’s just an idea, and I figure it’s already way to late for the next expansion, it will already be set in stone, maybe somewhere down the line we could get somehing like this.

tl:dr – keep the same weapons for new elites, just give us 5 new skills for one of the weapons or a particular combo. ( sword and board )

No thanks.

They can add variant skills to weapons after they release all or most weapons for each profession.

I don’t really get the suggestion … we are not even close to elite specs ‘diluting’ the class because of non-unique weapon choices. I don’t get that argument … the weapon skills on each class are already unique, so it’s irrelevant how many classes share a particular weapon. And I also disagree that most classes have a good weapon selection to being with. I think quite a few suffer from a small choice.

I’m not saying Anet NEEDS to have a new weapon for each elite spec, but frankly, I can’t see why they wouldn’t or why it would be bad for the game. Classes already share from a core group of weapons … but somehow adding more elite specs with new weapon choices makes sharing from the core a bad thing? I don’t see it.

I would love to see alternate skills for existing weapons (melee axe main hand for Ranger please).

I would also love to see weapons added to existing professions (dagger main for ranger).

Why not both?

Ragnar Stormcaller.6253:

@ OriOri,

Well that is the problem with players wanting everything in order to max/min. Why shouldn’t there be limits to what is available in the choices you make. Some choices probably should exclude others. I don’t see that as being a negative, though I get that others might.

Because its a game and games have competition and every game from WoW to lowest of the low there is one steadfast truth in order to bleed out a playerbase. That being pruning and places limits on the classes in general the old elites didn’t have those restrictions so unless Anet wants to lower its player-base further then it makes no sense to restrict even in the slightest the capabilities of the new ones.

People have complaints about all sorts of things in other games but messing with a players class is still number 1 and it doesn’t matter if they restrict by alot or a little. Heck with all the issues of GW2 the most anger I’ve ever seen in this game was during the pre HoT class pruning.

Ragnar Stormcaller.6253:

Try getting a mesmer who isnt a chrono into a raid, or a ranger who isnt a druid. The power creep designed into the Elite specs made the core professions obsolete, forever changing their identity by saying that if you don’t go Elite you can’t compete.

Though I 100% agree with you for classes like elementalist->tempest, warrior->berserker, or the worst offender – revenant->herald, there are definitely some situations where you see base classes, in raids, being more effective and/or fulfilling a different role entirely from their elite specialization.

For example, base condi mesmers are disgustingly effective dps against Matthias, and back in the day when necro/reaper used to be more of a raid staple, I’d see people swapping out of reaper and going base necro for things like Slothasor. Also also, main reason I’m writing this – base, no elite-spec condi ranger is right up at the top of the dps charts at the moment, second only to expert-pianist base condi engies. So, it’s extremely easy to get a ranger who isn’t a druid into raids, because they’re everywhere atm. :O

tl;dr: Depending on the situation and what class we’re talking about, the base class can be more of a benefit than the elite-spec.

Ragnar Stormcaller.6253:

Do I want a pistol or scepter weilding warrior? hmm….no.

Speak for yourself. Pistol – the weapon of choice of Commissioned Officers of all stations – would be amazing on Warrior, and play very well with their offhand weapons as well, while giving them a one-hand ranged option. Warriors are NOT a ‘melee only’ class, and should not be lacking in ranged options more than any other class.

I’ll admit scepter’s harder to put on warrior, but it could be done for a Battlemage/Spellsword elite specialization.

Do I want a longbow or rifle weilding necromancer? hmm..no

Speak for yourself. Death flies through the air on small feathered wings, seeking out life and destroying all things.

Do I need to make more examples?

Will they be just as terrible?

I will tear every weapon you say ’can’t fit with this class’ apart because yes, they can fit.

Bows on Engineer? Trick arrows are all the rage. You can put flares, explosives, tethers, and all sorts of things on an arrow. Sword on Engineer? Canach disapproves of your narrow mind. We already throw swords. Just let us blow them up when they get stuck in our foes. Demolitionist, bam.

no thank you very much i like my chances of mesmer getting axe or shortbow

I do agree here with the point, that Warriors should not wield pistols.
Its already a huge streth, that they even wield longbows and rifles, weapons that absolutely don’t fit to a Warriro by design and are in this game just only part of this class, due to Anet wanting, that all classes should be able to fight in melee as like ranged combat distance, so that no class has by design a disadvantage against a ranged fighting class in combat, what would end only in boring kiting battles, if you have no ranged weapon in your weapon kitten nal against such a class that can keep you on distance eventually too with the weapon skills to shoot you down, before you can even reach your enemy. Thats the freakign only reason, why Warriors have Longbows and Rifles.

Would it go after me, then I would have given them other weapons that fit much more to the design of the Warrior while alllowing them to have ranged combat as well by giving them:

- Spears designed as midranged Throwing Weapon (basically Paragon as the paragon was basically nothign else than a midrange Warrior with Shouts)
- Redesing their Axe Skills as ranged Set (Tomahawks) and redesign the Axe Skills of the Ranger instead into Melee Skills.

Warriors are no class, that should have longrange skills, thats the freakign reason why they wear HEAVY ARMOR to be able to survive better and longer in melee to midrange combat, not for the reason so they can fight from the backline with a longrange weapon …

To Warriors belong conventional and traditional melee to midrange weapons.
Due to Anets decision to give them already from begin on access to nearly all weapons makes it now for Elite Specs very difficult for this class to give them somethign new.
So it wasn’t surprising for me, that Net gave the Berserker somethign totally unfitting as like the Torch – because it was one of the very few not by the Warrior useable weapons in the game, that theoreticalyl make sense – because lets face it, a Torch should be useable basically by absolutely all classes, theres no special training, knowledge, skill or anything needed to be able to wield a torch!!)

Wouldn’t Warriors be already able from begin on to wield Greatswords, then this would have been by design the weapon, that an Elite Spec like a Berserker should wieldand should have added to the Warrior.
However, they do, but there would have been a much better alternative, than the Torch – the Greataxe!! But that would have meant, that Anet for once wouldn’t have to go for the lazy solution and instead woudl have gone the way that requires more effort.

However, I can also understand, that ANet wanted to make sure with the first set of Elite Specs, that the worl load of the first set that introduces them as feature for HoT the workload to do wouldn’t bee too big.
So it was easier and safer to gofor Anet for the first set of Specs after only already existing weapons, because then they wouldn’t need to create new weapon animations or retroactively weapon skins for all the already existing skin sets (even if they don’t need to do that instantly and can do this slowly over time, nobody would complain about it, when a new added weapon type begins naturally first with a significantly lesser amount of skins, than weapons,. that already are over 4 years in the game since release day! That is just logical and nobody can expect from anet to add new weapons type instantly with all the weapon skins retroactively from over 4 years, that would be simply unfair and asked too much from them to do)

For further E-Specs should Warriors receive new weapons like Greataxes, Spears, Staff, Dagger and Tower Shields (Paragons in GW1 had them for) for a bigger Shield that is offensively used in the main hand, instead of the smaller defensivelsy used Shields (Bucklers)

zealex.9410:

no thank you very much i like my chances of mesmer getting axe or shortbow

Not to mention, if Warrior runs out of spare weapons, they’ll have to make a new weapon class.

[insert wild forum dreams of “land spears” or fist weapons~]

Orpheal.8263:

I do agree here with the point, that Warriors should not wield pistols.
Its already a huge streth, that they even wield longbows and rifles, weapons that absolutely don’t fit to a Warriro by design and are in this game just only part of this class, due to Anet wanting, that all classes should be able to fight in melee as like ranged combat distance, so that no class has by design a disadvantage against a ranged fighting class in combat, what would end only in boring kiting battles, if you have no ranged weapon in your weapon kitten nal against such a class that can keep you on distance eventually too with the weapon skills to shoot you down, before you can even reach your enemy. Thats the freakign only reason, why Warriors have Longbows and Rifles.

Your insult to warriors is noted, and dismissed.

Warriors have Longbow and Rifles because those are weapons of warriors throughout history and mythology. And if you say warriors shouldn’t have ranged weapons because they’re “Tanks” – A proper tank is equipped with a 120 mm cannon and machine gun while still clad in the best armor.

It’s simply not true that core weapons are obsolete now. I regularly swap between GS and Axe on my Necro depending on situation for example when there is fire aoe around boss i use Axe or when party wants more vulnerability stacks.

Although elite specs might be mandatory right now core weapons are by no means obsolete and they are fulfilling their purpose quite well as supplementation of elite weapon.

Sartharina.3542:

Your insult to warriors is noted, and dismissed.

Warriors have Longbow and Rifles because those are weapons of warriors throughout history and mythology. And if you say warriors shouldn’t have ranged weapons because they’re “Tanks” – A proper tank is equipped with a 120 mm cannon and machine gun while still clad in the best armor.

Where you see in my post any kind of “insult” I dont know.. if you mean that “kitten”, then be assured, that it is just simple a normal word, that the ridiculous filter of this forum mistakes as a bad word and its just a common used synonym word for equipment that sadly sounds and is written with its first four letters like a persons butt what this dumb filter can’t differentiate here.

But maybe you just want to see only in my posting an insult, just because I don’t agree with your “picture” of what a Warrior has to be …>.>

I don’t say Warriors shouldn’t have ranged weapons… I said they should have gotten ranged weapons that fit better their design of being a m mainly melee focused Class, as thats what SOLDIERS back in history were mostly before firearms like Rifles were invented around 1500 and replaced more and more Bows, first in Europe, then later in the rest of the world.

Warriors used heavy armors to survive better in melee confrontations, not to hide themself like turtles in the backline while watching others doing the work for them at the frontline.
Back in history there existed specificly trained and skilled ARCHERS for this job at ranged combat, which wore all no heavy armors, simply because they didn’t need them and if they would have used them, they would have disturbed them only while using their bows because of making them less mobile and easier targets for faster moving enemy units with melee weapons, because as like you can think about – in a real battle is a bow not very efficient in a melee combat, as like a sword in comparison.
It weren’t heavy armored people in plate armors that stood on fortress walls or at the backline to shoot with their longbows at enemies neither, no again it were specific for this task trained and skilled archers that all wore mostly less weighting hard leather armors, stuff that is comparable of what Rangers in GW2 use.

The only real historic “warriors” if you want to call them that, which existed were chariots in the ancient Rome and such at Julius Caesars timeage that used all bows only from HORSEBACK mainly or as unmounted military archer troops.

Its a simple fact that Warriors in GW2 just have Longbows and Rifles, so that they can fight back against Rangers, Elementalists and the like that have 1200er range skills, so that you are with a Warrior not in a permanent disadvantage of being kited around to death. And its very difficult to near impossible to design for a Warrior belieavable longrange skilsl that are based on weapons liek Swords, Axes ect. without making usage of any weird magic effects as reasons for why this skill works liek designed and Warriors are no “magical profession” – so that is out of question, which means automatically the only solution for ranged combat for Anet was to give them Longbows and Rifles, where I just say, a better fitting solution would have been Spears and Axe (Tomahawk Style) as mid ranged Weapons, due to these Weapon fitting better to the Warrior & Hunter Theme that is melee to midrange based.

@Orpheal Samurai (and essentially every archer and ranged combatant in existence, modern day or historical) would disagree with you about what consists as a ‘warrior’. In fact, I specifically point out samurai because despite there being a titanic amount of pop culture depicting samurai as melee combatants, in truth, samurai of the past were hardcore archers, to the point that they would downplay their swordplay capabilities to not look bad in the eye of other samurai. The reason? You’re less likely to get killed if you’re farther away from an enemy. Anyone can swing a sword, not everyone can aim with a bow and arrow.

Another point, how useful is a melee only warrior when defending a keep in a siege? Most defenders would be atop ramparts and walls, looking down on their enemies, and the best way to take out an enemy that’s at the bottom of the wall when you’re at the top? Ranged weaponry like a rifle or a bow and arrow.

What about modern combatants? As anyone following some of the threads I post on know, comparisons between modern day situations and fantasy situations fall flat because the two situations are different, but this is probably the only case where the comparison is apt. Would you deny calling a modern day soldier a warrior? They train like hell to keep their bodies as muscle toned as possible and learn a variety of martial arts to defend themselves in case they ever get into a situation where they don’t have a gun. But they still use guns because it’s more tactically sound to use a ranged weapon than heading into melee combat where you can more easily be killed (whether by being closer to an enemy firing a ranged weapon at you or simply an enemy who can use physical force to kill you).

So, now that your point about ‘real warriors don’t use ranged weapons’ is ruined, we can move on to a couple of other points that you make.

‘Warriors use heavy armour for a reason’. Did you know that during the early stages of the development of gun powder weaponry, they would create breastplates on most infantry units that could take a hit from a bullet (in fact, quality assurance was firing a bullet into every breastplate made to make sure it could withstand the force), meaning that heavy armour was made to defend from ranged attacks as well as melee attacks. So yes, this argument doesn’t make sense either, and arguably in a world of friggin magic, heavy armour being used only for melee combat makes even less sense (especially when even warriors use magic now).

(part 1 of 2)

‘Warriors only have longbows and rifles because Anet decided that every class needs a long ranged weapon’. Warriors had access to both rifles and longbows, both at 1200 units range. Every profession, even before heart of thorns, had access to 1200 ranged weaponry. Except not really. Rangers had access to 1500 range on longbows, which, fine, that still means every profession had access to long ranged weapons. Well, feat your eyes on this wiki page. Meet the Guardian who didn’t have access to 1200 range in vanilla GW2, had access to a 900 range scepter and a 600 range staff. Arguably, those both count as ‘mid range weapons’ by the community at large. So why didn’t the guardian get a 1200 range weapon in vanilla GW2 if Anets design intention was to ‘give every profession a long ranged weapon’? Unless you’re talking about anything farther than melee, in which case the elementalist doesn’t have any melee options, the shortest range is 300 on a dagger, over double the range of melee distance which is 130. So objectively, you’re wrong about Anet wanting every class to have both melee and ranged options in either way you want to look at it.

‘Anet only gave warriors torch instead of greataxe because they’re lazy’. First, there’s a difference between ‘cost efficiency’ and ‘laziness’. This is a cost efficiency issue (look at how many greataxes they’d have to make, one for each weapon set and there’s maybe close to 50 of them at this moment in time, plus any standalone greataxes they may wish to create as well), not a laziness one and until you can grasp the reality of that, you won’t understand what it truly takes to be a game designer. Secondly, creating something like the berserker with a torch takes a lot of time. In fact, I’d argue that giving the berserker a greataxe would be lazier than giving them a torch, because there’d be much less to design around. It shows ArenaNets creativity that they came up with a berserker that explodes into a literal fiery rage, gave warriors the berserk mode that upgrades their adrenaline bursts into more fiery versions and all those creative rage utility skills too (I can’t even IMAGINE the coding nightmare it must have been to turn an enemy into a projectile that knocks back other enemies for Wild Blow). So kudos to the devs for actually coming up with a great design using the limits of what’s available to them. This doesn’t mean that there isn’t space for new weapons like greataxes in the future, but it’s objectively wrong calling ArenaNet lazy for coming up with a creative design using weapon choices already in the game, which undoubtedly took more work than simply slapping on a greataxe to the berserker because ‘it makes more sense’. ArenaNet have also taken the stance that if they introduce a new weapon, they’d only do it if at least two classes have access to that weapon, and I don’t see another elite spec that could use a greataxe at all. Retroactively adding new weapons to core professions is an option, but an unlikely one from a marketing point. Also, I can’t wait to see how ArenaNet gives warriors and every profession new weapons to use and the creativity going into them. Just because you disagree with design decisions doesn’t make them bad decisions (or lazy ones)

(part 2 of 2)

Selectable 2-5 weapon skills have been obvious for this game for a long time. I was surprised when they decided to go the elite spec route instead of just giving the game new 2-5 weapon skills. It just seemed like an obvious route to go.

@castle: thats the reason why I focused my comment on european warriors, because I knew, someone would come up wioth the “Samurai” comparison >.>

GW2’s warrior is designed after the classic european warrior, not after asian katana swinging, bow wielding Samurais. Not to mention that we have no Samurais in GW2, nor surely will we ever get to see them in GW2 – not until eventually in XX years we might see perhaps the return of Cantha at which time it will most likely be already time for either GW3 or hopefully a completely new and better game franchise of Anet that surpasses GW2.
You forget the STAFF on Guardian, which was from befin on in the game and is also for guardian a 1200 range weapon – sorry, please get your facts straight!

With Orb of Light, 1200 range, yes its not its Auto Attack, but it had from begin on that range.

And no, its laziness, because what you expect them to do with adding new weapon types is just pure greed and unfair towards the devs to expect from them, that they should implement instantly all skins from 4 years of development time the very moment they would add a new weapon type!!
That this is some kind of childish super unrealistic wishthinking do you realize, or??? Thats something that has time, its more important that they just improve the game with interestign new weapon types, the skin diversity ins by far not THAT important at first, it naturally will come over time after the new weapon type has ben implemented first and this may include also retroactive skins of already existing skin sets to make them complete again.

I did say not only that heavy armors are used for a reason to increase the chances of survival, which is just a fact, but it has also in relativity to the game mechanics its reason. Heavy armors have by design the highes defense values naturally, they are only worn by soldiers, which are all by design focused around melee Combat, be it the Warriro with his Sword, Axe, Hammer, Mace or Greastword, which are all conventional traditional melee weapons and in fact also for the Warrior in the game designed as melee weapons, the only ranged combat has the Warriro from Longbow and Rifle, because there excists basically no alternative to these weapon types to give the Warrior trustworthy ranged weapon skills without involving “magic” as reason to explain why the skill works as it works and for that is already the greatsword skill Bladetrail a a stretch, while all other skills are normal compared to this single one and look like normal physical combat arts that don’t defy physics like Bladetrail does. But thats a different topic now

Guardians have their Sword, Mace and Hammer for Melee Combat while Scepter/Focus and Staff and now with Dh Longbow for Mid to Longrange Combat.

Revs have their Swords, Axe, Mace, Shield and Staff for Melee combat, in this case again most of all their useable weapons by design are melee weapons, just like its the case for Warrior and more or less also the Guardian which is from all of the 3 the more magical based and balanced soldier class in regard of melee and ranged combat now due to DH, but before DH the favor was also here more towards melee combat with either Sword, Mace or Hammer, while the rest is midrange with only 1 single long range skill.

Greataxes are easily useable by multiple possible classes. The bare minimum of two is simply reached with just the Warrior (Berserker, redesign that Torch thing to somethign else and merge what is possible) and the Necromancer (Executioner)
Job done! Possible would be as well the Rev and the Guardian for sure.

However, you can count up a plethora of more arguments now, you won’t convince me here now that longbows and rifles belong to the Warrior. that has also somethign to do with “honor”
A rifle as like a longbow is a honorless weapon for a true Warrior. Warriros with honor fight and die in melee combat from eye to eye with their enemies, weapons crossed, thats the way of the warrior.
Shooting enemies dead from safe range is just the way of modern tactical warfare that came with the modernization of weapons and the invention of firearms, cannons ect.

I laugh at warrior players who fight me only with ranged weapons and never get over to melee combat for what their class is mainly designed for, when you just look at their weapons and their skills.

Sure, everything we say here changes nothing on the point, that we still talk about a fantasy game with magic and high tech stuff and all that supernatural things that look far more advanced than just gun power guns, while shooting still only silly bullets, when you’d expect something like laser beams and the like of them (Asurans eh) that you find in them naturally to explain all kinds of weird unreal things.
But that hasn’t to mean that we must have to agree with just everything, only because we play the game.

Orpheal.8263:

I laugh at warrior players who fight me only with ranged weapons and never get over to melee combat for what their class is mainly designed for, when you just look at their weapons and their skills.

I laugh at warriors who use sword #2 and greatsword #3 and #5 to run away. Seems all too common for this brave honourable profession.

castlemanic.3198:

They’ve also made it so that future elite specialisations can double up on previous elite specialisation weapons, so like two mesmer elite specs can, in the future, use shields with different shield skills for each one, depending on the theme of the elite specs.

Have they changed this? Last i looked the system was entirely designed to make this impossible. Thats the reason the elite spec can only be placed in to the bottom trait line. The elite spec overides many classes core systems so not doing this would be even more then power creep it would be just plain impossible to do anything without breaking the core instruments the elite specs added.

@Orpheal

I am not trying to be rude but I feel I must state this….

The way you describe Warrior of a Profession about Honor is what is called a Romanticize veiw.

Warriors of GW2 are not the warriors of stories where they would fight people honorably but are Combat and Weapon Masters.

In GW1 the world was at a age where Warriors focused more on the melee combat with their skills focused on always being in close range of their target while equipped with heavy armor to handle arrows and close range combat but technology back then had not developed far enough to create weapons that can easily pierce through Heavy Armor. However, the centuries has changed the world greatly and the Warriors needed to adjust to this changing world as technology advances thus the Warriors had to take up mastering new forms of combat to keep up with advancement of technology.

The introduction of Guns changed the field of battle greatly and development of weapons that can easily pierce through Heavy Armor at long range made things difficult to depend only on old style melee weapons. Warrior profession had to adjust to these changes and take up learning range weapons such as bows and rifles.

GW2 world is at that crossroad in a developing civilization life where the old style of fighting and new style of fighting are clashing with each other because the advancement of new weapons such as rifles are still within the new but is starting to out perform old style weapons as technology advance thus why we see more NPC Warriors using rifles in Krytan forces and the Charr forces.

The motto of the Warrior isn’t “FIGHT ME IN HONORABLE COMBAT!” – it’s “Victory at Any Cost!”

They’re here to wage war, not engage in poncy duels. Their presence on the battlefield is just as heralded by the thunderous rapport of their guns as well as the clash of steel in melee. They aren’t backline fighters, either, even with their ranged weapons. They’re either mid, or pushing forward, using their weapons to apply extra-long reach.

The Pistol is very much suitable for an Officer/Tactician-themed Warrior elite specialization, allowing them to stand somewhat back from the battlefield while still fighting, taking out targets with a trusty pistol sidearm while holding a line with a shield, bolstering allies with a warhorn, or cleaving through those that get too close with an axe in the offhand as they put pressure on their enemies at range. (Or clobbering people with a mace, or looking fancy with a sword)

Nickzor.2453:

castlemanic.3198:

They’ve also made it so that future elite specialisations can double up on previous elite specialisation weapons, so like two mesmer elite specs can, in the future, use shields with different shield skills for each one, depending on the theme of the elite specs.

Have they changed this? Last i looked the system was entirely designed to make this impossible. Thats the reason the elite spec can only be placed in to the bottom trait line. The elite spec overides many classes core systems so not doing this would be even more then power creep it would be just plain impossible to do anything without breaking the core instruments the elite specs added.

Yes, the elite specs are mutually exclusive. That’s what allows them to have two elite specs recycle a weapon.

Ragnar Stormcaller.6253:

the new weapon choice did or did not fit with the aesthetic of the profession.

….
Do I want a pistol or scepter weilding warrior? hmm….no.
Do I want a longbow or rifle weilding necromancer? hmm..no
Do I need to make more examples?

I can’t agree with your definition of the aesthetic of the professions — those are your preferences, not something that necessarily fits the game. Normally, I wouldn’t imagine a psy-class such as mesmer using sword, greatsword, and certainly not pistol. However, those work well in this game.

Similarly, I wouldn’t have chosen greatsword to match the necro, but the way it’s done also seems to suit the class (even if I don’t love the skills it offers).

Do I want a pistol-wielding guardian? No. Do I really care as long as it works for this game and provides for more interesting and fun gameplay possibilities? I do not.

tl;dr I can’t agree with the premise that specific classes can’t be matched with specific weapons

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Ragnar Stormcaller.6253:

the new weapon choice did or did not fit with the aesthetic of the profession.

….
Do I want a pistol or scepter weilding warrior? hmm….no.
Do I want a longbow or rifle weilding necromancer? hmm..no
Do I need to make more examples?

I can’t agree with your definition of the aesthetic of the professions — those are your preferences, not something that necessarily fits the game. Normally, I wouldn’t imagine a psy-class such as mesmer using sword, greatsword, and certainly not pistol. However, those work well in this game.

Similarly, I wouldn’t have chosen greatsword to match the necro, but the way it’s done also seems to suit the class (even if I don’t love the skills it offers).

Do I want a pistol-wielding guardian? No. Do I really care as long as it works for this game and provides for more interesting and fun gameplay possibilities? I do not.

tl;dr I can’t agree with the premise that specific classes can’t be matched with specific weapons

Pistol-wielding Guardian? Inquisitors are too kitten fun to say no to that concept.

@Orpheal So you want to avoid talking about samurai because it would defeat your argument about warriors not using ranged weapons… It’s still a legitimate argument. And you haven’t countered warriors on top of ramparts/walls, which is a very legitimate time to start using a ranged weapon like a bow and arrow.

Get my facts straight. Okay. Here’s some facts. The warrior has 9 1200 ranged skills on longbow and rifle, guardian has 3 1200 ranged skills on. So okay, my bad on the guardian. Except now that I’ve done a little more looking, thieves don’t have any weapon skills that reach 1200 range. The longest range is 900 on both shortbow and pistols. Sure, steal is 1200, but we’re talking about weapons at the moment so steal doesn’t count. In fact, daredevil added another melee weapon to the thief’s kitten nal, so your argument is again disproven by facts. You also have the issue of the elementalist objectively not having melee ranged weapon skills that you conveniently ignored too, so is that another argument that you don’t want to talk about because it disproves your point?

Orpheal.8263:

And no, its laziness, because what you expect them to do with adding new weapon types is just pure greed and unfair towards the devs to expect from them, that they should implement instantly all skins from 4 years of development time the very moment they would add a new weapon type!!
That this is some kind of childish super unrealistic wishthinking do you realize, or??? Thats something that has time, its more important that they just improve the game with interestign new weapon types, the skin diversity ins by far not THAT important at first, it naturally will come over time after the new weapon type has ben implemented first and this may include also retroactive skins of already existing skin sets to make them complete again.

You’re the one who unrealistically wants ArenaNet to have added greataxes to warriors and called them lazy for it. I simply showed you how much work your request would take. In a game that’s dubbed “fashion wars 2”, skins are absolutely the bread and butter of this game, that’s exactly how arenanet makes their money on the gem store, not all their money because there are convenience items in the gem store too, but they still designed most of their gem store around cosmetic items. To ignore the facts that Anet would need to implement a greataxe skin for every weapon set is in and of itself wishful thinking. This is the true scope of what you’re asking Anet, anything less is Anet not doing their job properly.

The biggest flaw in your argument is your wording. “Melee focused” does not mean “melee exclusive”, and with that design, all three soldier classes fit. The devs made the best choices with regards to what warriors could wield at long range. Just because you don’t personally enjoy those choices doesn’t make those choices objectively wrong. Warriors are still warriors no matter what weapon they wield. And your argument about warriors not using magic? Well, there’s the berserker now that definitely uses magic, so it’s canon now, warriors can use magic. Just like guardians and revenants do. So again your argument falls flat.

It’s not as simple as slapping on a weapon to an elite spec, which was a point I was trying to make previously, you have to design the whole elite spec to work with the weapon and give it a theme, matching utility skills, the whole trait line and a new profession mechanic. Game design is absolutely more difficult than you could ever imagine it to be, so saying “Necromancer greataxe executioner done!” is, in fact, wishful thinking at best.

If there’s nothing I can do to convince you, then there’s no point in this argument. Objectively speaking, warriors have used ranged weapons historically, even European warriors. You ignoring that fact just shows that you have an idea in your head that clashes with reality and as such you wish not to see it. There’s been a precedence in Guild Wars 2 to break fantasy norms by providing weapons not normally useable by those professions, even warriors (especially berserkers). If you don’t like that, then I’m sorry but GW2 will continuously break your heart, especially if the spellbreaker leak is true. I for one love the warrior in it’s current implementation. It objectively makes sense, not just subjectively. Your denial of reality is telling, so I see no need to respond to you anymore.

hmm leaks suggest stuff….

Yep, they do… Well at least rumors etc.

I’m 100% in support of new mesmer pistol main hand. Though i do like the idea of reworking old weapons to fit new specs so you could choose between the two options. (Maybe do this for water weapons)

@ castle:

The eastern version of a “Warrior”, per se a Samurai which were mounted units fighting with bows from horseback either or with Katanas or Naginatas on foot, until firearms completely took over everything slowly can’t be compared to a western version of Warrior which is more comparable to either vikings or knights that favorized brutal and direct melee combat, because that was their form of having a “honorable battle”

Europe is known for its civil wars much more in its early history, than for its military wars that were done by dictators like Caesar and his Roman Empire at which time people saw bows already not anymore as just a poor mans hunting tool, but where that time people have become under the lead of the roman empire become militarized over the centuries, where before there was just civil wars held by farmers which eventualy used bows, or most likely simple knives, clubs, scythes, pitchforks and the like, stuff that was just affordable by the simple poor peopel at that time.

Europeans at that time saw into Knights of their Kingdoms their “Warriors”, because they were it which fought for their folks and defended it from harm and they fought all with sword and shield mostly, not with bows or rifles, which didn’t even existed at these times.
Thats the reason, why I differentiate between european “Warriors” and Samurais.
The cultures and the history between both forms are just too different to compare them or even go so far to put them on an equal level by saying that they are the same, only because one side of them did use in history for a much longer and earlier time bows already in warfare, than the other side, which saw for a long time in bows nothign else, than a tool to hunt food just used by hunters.

Fact is, Guild Wars (2) is a western stylized game. Tyria’s continent is based on a european setting, not an asian one like Cantha. This includes its profession design and why we have for example now Thieves and not Assassins from begin on.
“Warrior” is a very broad and generic term into which you can interprete alot into if you want.
If this wouldn’t be true, then we wouldn’t have this discussion here now, if everybody would have the same interpretation of what a Warrior is/should be for them.

Orpheal.8263:

Fact is, Guild Wars (2) is a western stylized game. Tyria’s continent is based on a european setting, not an asian one like Cantha. This includes its profession design and why we have for example now Thieves and not Assassins from begin on.
“Warrior” is a very broad and generic term into which you can interprete alot into if you want.

“Thief” is a broad term. “Assassin” used to be Arabic, but now is just as broad. “Mesmer” doesn’t exist as a trope, so could be anything.

But even if it did, what difference does any of that make? GW2 includes an actual video-game-inside-a-box, computers, lasers, and robots. (The Eastern European ‘golem’ is made from clay and imbued with living force — it’s more like a necromancer minion than what we have in GW2.)

In other words, GW2 borrows from all sorts of styles. The only thing that matters, ultimately, is whether people have fun with the design choices made by the developers (which only partly depends on whether players ‘believe’ that those choices fit the game).

Let’s try not to impose our preferences for what we would like to see on the developers. Instead, let’s wait to see what they end up delivering and how well it integrates into the existing game.