Guild Wars 2

feight.2704:

nGumball.1283:

Kal Spiro.9745:

Knighthonor.4061:

Kal Spiro.9745:

Knighthonor.4061:

Valandras.2093:

silvermember.8941:

Trock Bronze.9625:

its not some random reddit post that has confirmed no spears or new weapons it was actual interviews that have said so.

It seems op already knows that. It seems more like the OP wants new weapons because new weapons types are always better, which they could be.

OP simply isn’t accepting the fact that Arenanet’s priorities are no in line with his.

I can refuse to accept the laws of gravity, doesn’t mean I’m any less bound by them.

But nobody knows how Gravity works which is why it’s still just a THEORY of gravity …..

You don’t know what theory means.

Actually I do

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory

Theory is an idea, of how something works.
Example is the “Moon causes the waves in the ocean”. That’s a theory not a fact.

Sorry, let me rephrase, you don’t understand what a theory is. Something can be a theory and still be a fact. You don’t understand how science works well enough to actually be in this argument.

^
There is a difference. A ’’Thoery’’ in science means something that has, indeed, be proven and will remain a fact until it gets falsified. The ‘’Gravity theory’’ is a theory because it is a proven a fact.

Hypothesis in science is the synonym for the everyday use of the word theory.

You are wrong, theories that are proven true become Laws. we will talk of the Law of Gravity when inferring about the proven THeory of Gravity. theories stay theories forever.

That’s not really how it works. Read above. Laws and theories are distinct from one another. A law typically refers to something specific that is mathematically demonstrable. A theory is a scientific explanation – a collection of facts, hypotheses and laws that, together, holds predictive power and has not been falsified.

Most theories never become laws because theories are more comprehensive in scope. The Law of Gravity and the Theory of Gravity actually reference different things, for exmple.

Einlanzer.1627:

feight.2704:

nGumball.1283:

Kal Spiro.9745:

Knighthonor.4061:

Kal Spiro.9745:

Knighthonor.4061:

Valandras.2093:

silvermember.8941:

Trock Bronze.9625:

its not some random reddit post that has confirmed no spears or new weapons it was actual interviews that have said so.

It seems op already knows that. It seems more like the OP wants new weapons because new weapons types are always better, which they could be.

OP simply isn’t accepting the fact that Arenanet’s priorities are no in line with his.

I can refuse to accept the laws of gravity, doesn’t mean I’m any less bound by them.

But nobody knows how Gravity works which is why it’s still just a THEORY of gravity …..

You don’t know what theory means.

Actually I do

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory

Theory is an idea, of how something works.
Example is the “Moon causes the waves in the ocean”. That’s a theory not a fact.

Sorry, let me rephrase, you don’t understand what a theory is. Something can be a theory and still be a fact. You don’t understand how science works well enough to actually be in this argument.

^
There is a difference. A ’’Thoery’’ in science means something that has, indeed, be proven and will remain a fact until it gets falsified. The ‘’Gravity theory’’ is a theory because it is a proven a fact.

Hypothesis in science is the synonym for the everyday use of the word theory.

You are wrong, theories that are proven true become Laws. we will talk of the Law of Gravity when inferring about the proven THeory of Gravity. theories stay theories forever.

That’s not really how it works. Read above. Laws and theories are distinct from one another. A law typically refers something that is mathematically demonstrable. A theory is a scientific collection of facts, hypotheses and laws that holds predictive power and has not been falsified. Most theories never become laws because theories are more comprehensive in scope.

Like Relativity, Evolution, and the Even/Odd Theory of Star Trek

Your are wrong again, VERBATIM from wbmaster:
a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena. there are many semantic usage of Theories, but the one attached to the scientific method is that yes its a body of facts that present themselves as the BEST WAY to explain a phenomena, why the best? because not Yet falsified. BUt never proven true. LAWS, are proven true, mathematically or otherwise.

feight.2704:

Your are wrong again, VERBATIM from wbmaster:
a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena. there are many semantic usage of Theories, but the one attached to the scientific method is that yes its a body of facts that present themselves as the BEST WAY to explain a phenomena, why the best? because not Yet falsified. BUt never proven true. LAWS, are proven true, mathematically or otherwise.

That’s pretty much saying exactly what I said. Most concepts in science cannot be proven true with 100% certainty. The only concepts that make it to Law status are those that are very narrow in scope and can be illustrated through relatively simple mathematical statements (such as Newton’s laws of motion).

This does not include the overwhelming majority of what we refer to as theories, which have no capacity to ever become laws because they are comprehensive explanations of complex phenomena. Regardless of that, we know that we can safely consider Evolution a fact. It can be a fact without being a Law.

Einlanzer.1627:

feight.2704:

Your are wrong again, VERBATIM from wbmaster:
a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena. there are many semantic usage of Theories, but the one attached to the scientific method is that yes its a body of facts that present themselves as the BEST WAY to explain a phenomena, why the best? because not Yet falsified. BUt never proven true. LAWS, are proven true, mathematically or otherwise.

That’s pretty much saying exactly what I said. Most concepts in science cannot be proven true with 100% certainty. The only concepts that make it to Law status are those that are very narrow scope and can be illustrated through relatively simple mathematical statements (such as Newton’s laws of motion).

This does not include the overwhelming majority of what we refer to as theories, which have no capacity to ever become laws because they are comprehensive explanations of complex phenomena.

lol sorry
im still waiiting on that quote on the water weapons.
confused for the time being

I don’t keep an organized list of locations and links for every piece of information I acquire. It’s not my responsibility to keep the community informed, it’s the communities responsibility to keep itself informed.

If that means you will continue clinging to a chance that doesn’t exist because you have faith, well that’s too bad for you. But when it comes together, don’t come back crying about it, because you were informed long before.

Kal Spiro.9745:

I don’t keep an organized list of locations and links for every piece of information I acquire. It’s not my responsibility to keep the community informed, it’s the communities responsibility to keep itself informed.

If that means you will continue clinging to a chance that doesn’t exist because you have faith, well that’s too bad for you. But when it comes together, don’t come back crying about it, because you were informed long before.

well, sorry i cant keep myself 100% inform like you do, i try to sleep at night too.
But if you State something , Back it UP . SImple ,THere havent been Millions interviews since the Announcement , if they said : we will not convert water weapon to land ever, You can say it . IF they havent, you cannot, Informed or not,

Gonna post this here!

“We talked polearms. No polearms in this expansion. Colin said “We warned the art team what the community would think when they saw the trailer, but they chose to make things the way they did.” It looks like a polearm but it is not. No word if they ever will be."

https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/2tsiox/pax_afterparty_lessons_learned/

Sorry, no polearms/land spears in HoT.

This is why I don’t bother, because I know someone will get around to it for me eventually.

that one way of seeing things< i just rather backing what i say myself, makes it easier on the dialogue.
its still a missed opportunity to make something surprising… been a while i havent been surprised by GW.

Odd, I think we are getting new weapons, but I think it depends on what you mean by “new weapons.”

Are we getting new skills and playstyles for each profession? Yes, we are. A greatsword held by a Warrior is nothing like a greatsword equipped by a mesmer. They feel like totally different weapons. Can a necromancer currently equip a greatsword? No. So, in a sense, it will be a new weapon.

But wait. Maybe you meant a different physical item — not something you can already craft and hand out to another class already. Okay, so are we getting some of those? Yes, there will be new precursors and legendaries. We’ll even be able to get them in different ways — by completing collections.

But wait. Maybe you want weapons that look different. Will we get different looks for our weapons? Yes, I consider it extremely likely that there will be new skins. In fact, at least one of them looks like a polearm enough to confuse people watching the video. (Caveat: Said weapon might only exist in the artist’s imagination and might not actually be released as a weapon skin. I cannot know for sure.)

So, to sum up, we will be able to obtain new weapons we were not able to obtain before with new stats and new skills and new looks.

The only thing we don’t have is a new weapon class, which largely doesn’t add anything new above and beyond the new skills, new way of getting precursors, and new skins that we are already getting.

PS There is nothing stopping the team from adding polearms and allowing them to be used as another specialization in the future, but it would have to be in an expansion after this one. I don’t know if it’s ever going to happen, though.

lordkrall.7241:

Crash.5362:

New skills, possibilities. combos, are NOT an addition gameplay-wise !?

And EVEN if they werent, who said that an expansion must only bring new game-play, and not also new skins, and things that just look cool too ? They do this all the time bringing in those new skin packs and whatnot. As you said, “Adding stuff just for the saeke of being added”

I dont know how much of a fan you are of this game. I can tell you that you can trust that I’m the HUGEST fan of gw2 out there. But that doesnt make me blind, there is a HOLE that is the lack of those weapons in the game. Or at least one of them.

But what niche would it will? What would it add to a Warrior that he/she/it can’t do right now? If it doesn’t add something to that there is basically no point to spend the time and resources to add a new weapon.

I am not saying it must only bring new game-play, I am just questioning if adding something that is in no way needed or will not increase the playability of the game is really needed. Especially in a situation when said addition will require massive amounts of time and resources to get done, for very little gain.

Adding new skins does not require any balancing, it does not require any new programming and so on. It basically requires an artist.

I have to respond to this, especially the warrior bit. Warriors already fill every niche available banner/shout support, damage, they can stun lock like no other, I guess they can’t stealth or blind; but back to the topic, in that regard what role could a warrior specialization bring? And now that I think about, they’re getting another weapon too. I’m stumped.

EDIT: Also i agree with what ekarat said.

In regard to weapons, what worries me most is the warrior. If we analyze the situation, the weapons that are available, just do not fit with the profession. For example:

• Warrior with daggers: boring
• Warrior with torch: to burn things in the jungle?…meh
• Warrior with staff, scepter or focus: wtf?
• Warrior with short bow: we have long bow.
• Warrior with trident: well…if there is no alternative…

Lukhas.1962:

In regard to weapons, what worries me most is the warrior. If we analyze the situation, the weapons that are available, just do not fit with the profession. For example:

• Warrior with daggers: boring
• Warrior with torch: to burn things in the jungle?…meh
• Warrior with staff, scepter or focus: wtf?
• Warrior with short bow: we have long bow.
• Warrior with trident: well…if there is no alternative…

OH pistol, Rytlock FTW!!!

Sagat.3285:

Lukhas.1962:

In regard to weapons, what worries me most is the warrior. If we analyze the situation, the weapons that are available, just do not fit with the profession. For example:

• Warrior with daggers: boring
• Warrior with torch: to burn things in the jungle?…meh
• Warrior with staff, scepter or focus: wtf?
• Warrior with short bow: we have long bow.
• Warrior with trident: well…if there is no alternative…

OH pistol, Rytlock FTW!!!

Boring,, don’t want.

I want something that’s unique from Warriors as the specialization. Like maybe a scepter for a void knight Mage Tank or something.
Or staff for Monkey King type Melee support action.
Torch is ok if it’s Melee off hand. Don’t want it too similar to Ranger’s torch.

what bothers me about warriors using pistols is, why? and what does it do? The warrior is this non magic heavily armored fighter with weapons centered around the theme of power/strength. The pistol just doesn’t quite fit in, which also leads me to wonder completely, what kind of specialization is warrior going to have.
I actually don’t think torch is a bad option, considering many barbarians in fantasy novels, which is still just stab with it, and throw it.

A Massive Headache.1879:

what bothers me about warriors using pistols is, why? and what does it do? The warrior is this non magic heavily armored fighter with weapons centered around the theme of power/strength. The pistol just doesn’t quite fit in, which also leads me to wonder completely, what kind of specialization is warrior going to have.
I actually don’t think torch is a bad option, considering many barbarians in fantasy novels, which is still just stab with it, and throw it.

Well they do use rifles which is pretty much a larger pistol in GW2 universe.

But I still don’t want that for specialization. I want something that makes the class feel unique from Warriors. Like Rangers and Druids are unique to each other.

I don’t want to be a Rytlock warrior. I don’t.
I want to be a unique heavy fighter. Warriors are already physical defensive fighters. Why not a magical defensive fighter?

Knighthonor.4061:

A Massive Headache.1879:

what bothers me about warriors using pistols is, why? and what does it do? The warrior is this non magic heavily armored fighter with weapons centered around the theme of power/strength. The pistol just doesn’t quite fit in, which also leads me to wonder completely, what kind of specialization is warrior going to have.
I actually don’t think torch is a bad option, considering many barbarians in fantasy novels, which is still just stab with it, and throw it.

Well they do use rifles which is pretty much a larger pistol in GW2 universe.

But I still don’t want that for specialization. I want something that makes the class feel unique from Warriors. Like Rangers and Druids are unique to each other.

I don’t want to be a Rytlock warrior. I don’t.
I want to be a unique heavy fighter. Warriors are already physical defensive fighters. Why not a magical defensive fighter?

Guardian and Revenant fill those roles, pistol is strenght based aka fire power you forgot we have fire blasting LB,rifle? Ranger Nature Magic,spirits… can easily relate to druid even Entangle,Muddy Terrain… if it’s CC based. OH pistol is the most likely weapon so far.

@Knighthonor, The rifle kind of seems like it still requires a lot of strength, like there would be a lot of recoil if they weren’t strong enough, such as the engineer rifle skill 4.
To me at, the warrior already not being magical at all mostly, doesn’t let me believe it’s specialization would either, I could be wrong though. I do have to mention, with the monkey king tonic and mini, that would be pretty sweet if warriors had that.

Sagat.3285:

Knighthonor.4061:

A Massive Headache.1879:

what bothers me about warriors using pistols is, why? and what does it do? The warrior is this non magic heavily armored fighter with weapons centered around the theme of power/strength. The pistol just doesn’t quite fit in, which also leads me to wonder completely, what kind of specialization is warrior going to have.
I actually don’t think torch is a bad option, considering many barbarians in fantasy novels, which is still just stab with it, and throw it.

Well they do use rifles which is pretty much a larger pistol in GW2 universe.

But I still don’t want that for specialization. I want something that makes the class feel unique from Warriors. Like Rangers and Druids are unique to each other.

I don’t want to be a Rytlock warrior. I don’t.
I want to be a unique heavy fighter. Warriors are already physical defensive fighters. Why not a magical defensive fighter?

Guardian and Revenant fill those roles, pistol is strenght based aka fire power you forgot we have fire blasting LB,rifle? Ranger Nature Magic,spirits… can easily relate to druid even Entangle,Muddy Terrain… if it’s CC based. OH pistol is the most likely weapon so far.

explosive arrow, needing strength to pull the bowstring back far enough to where it deals the kind of damage it does.
I mean i guess they could have hand cannons or something.

A Massive Headache.1879:

what bothers me about warriors using pistols is, why? and what does it do? The warrior is this non magic heavily armored fighter with weapons centered around the theme of power/strength. The pistol just doesn’t quite fit in, which also leads me to wonder completely, what kind of specialization is warrior going to have.
I actually don’t think torch is a bad option, considering many barbarians in fantasy novels, which is still just stab with it, and throw it.

Pistol, could fit in very well with swords. Swords isn’t about power, it’s fineness, since it’s primary point is conditions.

Kal Spiro.9745:

A Massive Headache.1879:

what bothers me about warriors using pistols is, why? and what does it do? The warrior is this non magic heavily armored fighter with weapons centered around the theme of power/strength. The pistol just doesn’t quite fit in, which also leads me to wonder completely, what kind of specialization is warrior going to have.
I actually don’t think torch is a bad option, considering many barbarians in fantasy novels, which is still just stab with it, and throw it.

Pistol, could fit in very well with swords. Swords isn’t about power, it’s fineness, since it’s primary point is conditions.

That is a very good point actually, I can’t think of a single counter-argument. I just still can’t imagine what kind of skills a warrior with a pistol would be.