Guild Wars 2

I wanted to distill my other topic into this simple question:

What would be the problem with engineers having a second weapon set?

and

If there is a problem and it is due to kits, would said problem be mitigated by having the second weapon set become inoperable / greyed out when a kit is selected as a utility?

I know I am beating this dead horse DEEP into the ground, but so far I have not gotten a satisfactory answer. I would LOVE to have a Dev. weigh in.

So far the only issues I have heard are:

1. HgH builds would be out of control and engineers will be running around with high might stacks and too many condition clears.—- Well almost every class can do that in this Meta with strength runes as they are. Elementalists and Warriors are mobile might machines. As far as condition clears go I am not sure that someone concerned with conditions would take HgH over Automated Response for one thing.. and CLENSING IRE and BUNKER GUARDS for another. These “Problems” are already out there anyway so I doubt this change would be in any way game breaking.

and

2. If Engineers had a second weapon set they wouldn’t equip kits anymore because kits are subpar to “normal” weapons. Maybe, MAYBE there wouldn’t be any 1 kit engineers out there anymore. I doubt it though. EG TK BK Nades…. Subpar? I think not. Not to mention the fact that we only have access to what 3 weapons? Rifle Pistol Shield.

To put things in my perspective; I pretty much only play spvp now and I run a 3 turret bunker engineer. Now just because I don’t have a kit I lose access to Sigils of Battle, Doom, Energy, Geomancy, Hydromancy, Intelligence, Leeching and Renewal. I think that’s a huge hit. Some of those are the best in the game in my opinion. Sigil of energy is huge for almost any profession and any build.

Not to mention that I am twiddling my thumbs when everything is on cooldown…because I don’t have anything to swap to.

And again I would be ecstatic if a dev. could come on and give their 2 cents.

Epidemix Revenge.4862:

And again I would be ecstatic if a dev. could come on and give their 2 cents.

The dev’s answer has already been given when they designed the game and didn’t grant engineers a swappable weapon.

Or maybe they never designed and balanced this class properly, seeing as it was one of the last ones they did.
And having fixed penalties due to optional utilities – something we know for certain due to the december 2012 balance philosophies – should be proof enough of that.
And having kits balanced upon grandmaster trait should be further proof – no other utility or weapon is treated like that. And it isn’t like engineers’ traits and utilities are stronger by design compared to other classes.
So all that’s left is a class with average traits and utilities, but with a single weapon that’s weaker than the other classes’ ones by design.
And people see the engineer as an high skill floor class? No wonder about that: it is weaker by design, thus people need to be better players to overcome the handicap.

Lishtenbird.2814:

Epidemix Revenge.4862:

And again I would be ecstatic if a dev. could come on and give their 2 cents.

The dev’s answer has already been given when they designed the game and didn’t grant engineers a swappable weapon.

You are so right. I don’t know why I haven’t thought of this. I forgot there haven’t been any changes to any professions since beta… Thank you for clearing that up.

Manuhell.2759:

Or maybe they never designed and balanced this class properly, seeing as it was one of the last ones they did.
And having fixed penalties due to optional utilities – something we know for certain due to the december 2012 balance philosophies – should be proof enough of that.
And having kits balanced upon grandmaster trait should be further proof – no other utility or weapon is treated like that. And it isn’t like engineers’ traits and utilities are stronger by design compared to other classes.
So all that’s left is a class with average traits and utilities, but with a single weapon that’s weaker than the other classes’ ones by design.
And people see the engineer as an high skill floor class? No wonder about that: it is weaker by design, thus people need to be better players to overcome the handicap.

really, this again?

A more solid solution would simply be to put turrets, gadgets and alchemy on par with kits. That way your utilities equally counter the weakness of your weapon no matter which ones you take. As it is, the most logical decision in many cases is to simply take as many kits as possible (assuming you can handle that many buttons).

Lishtenbird.2814:

Epidemix Revenge.4862:

And again I would be ecstatic if a dev. could come on and give their 2 cents.

The dev’s answer has already been given when they designed the game and didn’t grant engineers a swappable weapon.

We also can’t have account bound dyes because dyes were designed to be character bound from the start.

oh wait..

Grimwolf.7163:

A more solid solution would simply be to put turrets, gadgets and alchemy on par with kits. That way your utilities equally counter the weakness of your weapon no matter which ones you take. As it is, the most logical decision in many cases is to simply take as many kits as possible (assuming you can handle that many buttons).

With just that, there’s still the ‘Every Engineer is treated like they have a Kit’ aspect of the no-swap design decision, on top of the relatively difficult, and time-consuming, rebalancing required to make single skills + Toolbelts on par with weapon set swaps.

Heh, finaly someone pointed out the biggest design flaw in this profession.

What an argument about Engineers not haveing weapon swap cus of kits have to do with an Engineer that dont have any kit sloted?

Absolutly NOTHING!!!

I mean, its so OBVIOUS that EVERY Engineer have at least 1 kit in utility slot, right?….NO!

Honestly, its like this profession was made so that we are forced to take a kit or we will lose 5 weapon skills and have the lowest number of weapon skills in game, also 5 skills more or less avaliable in a fight is a big difference, especialy in spvp!

BTW Elementalist have 4 atunments no matter what they put in utility slot so they cant lose these aditional weapon skills no matter what!!

I do not agree with the OP odd weapon swap substitute idea, but I do feel there is a need to re balance some of the skills in some way that a kit less engineer has equivalent value as one running a kit.

So… started another thread on the same subject to try to get a dev’s attention?

Wars (and other classes) are able to might stack due to runes of strength… which are in need of an obvious nerf.

As I mentioned in the other thread, CI isn’t really the problem with wars, it’s zerk stance being so long which also grants them adrenaline to further use CI. 409 doesn’t require you to hit your opponent unlike CI. Comparing the two is very apples and oranges.

You’re basically asking why not just add eng to the list of problems in these areas instead of fixing those problems.

Aberrant.6749:

So… started another thread on the same subject to try to get a dev’s attention?

Wars (and other classes) are able to might stack due to runes of strength… which are in need of an obvious nerf.

As I mentioned in the other thread, CI isn’t really the problem with wars, it’s zerk stance being so long which also grants them adrenaline to further use CI. 409 doesn’t require you to hit your opponent unlike CI. Comparing the two is very apples and oranges.

You’re basically asking why not just add eng to the list of problems in these areas instead of fixing those problems.

Because is bigger problem than just some trait/rune issue?
Its about a design flaw here that take away 5 skills from profession if they dont use a kit, which is also protected by a flawed argument that only holds true IF Engineer use a kit.

And also, why the hell you jump out with warrior and might stacking/CI issue if its about Engineer and weapon swap?
OP used CI as an example inorder to show that this change, to Engineer profession, wouldn’t affect game balance more then any other issues that are out ther at the moment.

It’s not a design flaw. It’s a tradeoff. Zero cooldown on kit swaps is huge. Non-kits have unique utilities not found on kits that can make them worth those 5 skills.

Without the tradeoff it would be too strong (why the CI/might issue was brought up). The game is not balanced for HgH + 409 + rifle + pistol/X. Sorry if this was confusing to you.

This just isn’t something that’s going to happen based on what the dev’s have said in the past about eng balance. It’s somewhat like asking why don’t necro’s get a cleave like the other classes…

A tradeoff would imply you always get something in return for the lack of a second weapon and a weakened main one.
The problem is that this doesn’t happen – the penalties are fixed, but kits are optional.
It is a design flaw, and one that makes non-kit engineers the weakest class of the game by design. It can’t be otherwise – the utilities and traits aren’t supposed to be stronger than the other classes’ ones, and it is the same for the class mechanic (especially since toolbelts are already balanced with the respective utilities).

And even in the example you mention, i can’t see where it would be imbalanced. One is a power weapon, the other is mostly a condition one, and almost half of the trait points are spent in a defensive tree to take hgh anyway. So any specialization hampers the offensive capabilities of one of them. Also, the weapons are already weakened by design.

If you’re saying that two weapons that are weakened by design would be overpowered with 25 might (let alone that you basically have to spam all the utilities to get those), then any other class is even more overpowered – engineers aren’t the only ones able to stack might effectively, and any good group can get 25 might anyway, but the other classes’ weapons aren’t weakened by design like the engineer’s ones.

Celesital + might works well for both p/x and rifle. I don’t see that as a weakness/problem.

The old HgH build didn’t have problems dealing damage despite investing in that trait line because of the added damage from HgH. It lost a bit of utility, but you would regain that with rifle + another open slot for another elixir with quite a bit to spare. The only change would be that you now need 20 in power instead of 10 for IP which wouldn’t be a big deal.

Yes runes of str are op if that’s what you’re talking about with group might. If you stack 5 people on one point in PvP you’re going to lose the game.

Idc about PvE if that’s what you’re referring to as far as a group stacking might. PvE is very easy as is and if this was a PvE only change, then fine, no problems.

I don’t feel that I need to write anything more after this as it won’t happen. Same thing with eles getting a weapon swap. It’s part of the core class balance & flavor.

I think for the Engi, the default weapons work ok-ish compared to the Elementalist.

That is to say, one weapon-set is condition-heavy, one is power-heavy. But, both are range-agnostic, they function ok from range but also well from melee.

That is how it should be.
The specific issue Elementalists have is that their range is locked by weapon-choice. Not overly (their melee weapon is 600 range), but still enough to matter.

Other than that I don’t see the problem. Engineers get 2x utility/healing and Elementalists get 4x weapon skills to make up for it. Lack of sigil… yeah… but honestly, nerf sigils? Sigils and Runes are too much of a total build ,they shouldn’t be. Once nerfed, the issue disappears entirely, and the nerf would be good for the game outside of Engi/Ele, anyhow.

Thinking it over, the toolbelt may be an effective way to solve the over-reliance on kits to counter the single weapon.
When using something like a Gadget or Alchemy skill, the toolbelt skill given could have a low recharge, built to be used more like an additional weapon skill rather than an additional utility. A lot of them have this sort of function in the first place; Launch PBR, Rocket Kick, Analyze, etc. The problem is just with the numbers they’re tuned with.
Place a non-kit/turret in every slot, and you’ve effectively got a second weapon that requires no swapping whatsoever.
At the very least, Kits shouldn’t have as strong of toolbelt skills as the others.

Aberrant.6749:

It’s not a design flaw. It’s a tradeoff. Zero cooldown on kit swaps is huge. Non-kits have unique utilities not found on kits that can make them worth those 5 skills.

Without the tradeoff it would be too strong (why the CI/might issue was brought up). The game is not balanced for HgH + 409 + rifle + pistol/X. Sorry if this was confusing to you.

This just isn’t something that’s going to happen based on what the dev’s have said in the past about eng balance. It’s somewhat like asking why don’t necro’s get a cleave like the other classes…

……Honestly… it seems that you dont know what tradeoff is, on one side you have 5 weapon skills if you chose to use a kit(weapon swap), on the other side you have only 1 utility slot if you wont opt to use a kit(no weapon swap).

If you use a kit then you are on the same page as other professions since you can swap from weapon to kit(secondary weapon) and have aditional 5 skills and the cost is only 1 utility slot, but if you wont use a kit then you lose ability to swap and you also lose 5 weapon skills in return you only gain one utility slot.

use a kit:
pros

• swap from weapon to kit, working sigils on swap
• aditional 5 weapon skills
• same numbers of weapon skills avaliable as other profession, more if using 2 or more kits

cons

• lose only 1 utility slot

dont use a kit:
pros

• gain only 1 utility slot

cons

• no swaping from weapon to a kit, sigils on swap dont work
• lose 5 aditional weapon skills
• lowest number of weapon skills among all professions

^^^^^WHER DO YOU SEE A FAIR TRADEOFF HERE?^^^^^

I dont know what game are you playing but 1 utility skill will never be equal to aditional 5 weapon skills in gw2.
I didnt meantion toolbelt slot as its based on utility slot(on kit also) and cant be chosen separetly.

and btw, before someone say then why not just use that kitten kit? i will ask what build diversity is it then?
Use a kit and you are equal with other professions, dont do it and you are below them, ther are players that dont use kits in their build and just because of that one utility slot free they sufer more than any other profession.

No matter how utility slot is used by, Elemantalis, Warrior, Guardian, Ranger, Thief, Necromancer or Mesmer, they dont lose 5 weapon skills. One could argue about conjure weapons or banners on Elementalist or Warrior but they already have weapon swap avaliable to them no matter the utility chosen (Elementalist have 4 Atunmens that work like weapon swap).

THIS IS A DESIGN FLAW!

Grimwolf.7163:

Thinking it over, the toolbelt may be an effective way to solve the over-reliance on kits to counter the single weapon.
When using something like a Gadget or Alchemy skill, the toolbelt skill given could have a low recharge, built to be used more like an additional weapon skill rather than an additional utility. A lot of them have this sort of function in the first place; Launch PBR, Rocket Kick, Analyze, etc. The problem is just with the numbers they’re tuned with.
Place a non-kit/turret in every slot, and you’ve effectively got a second weapon that requires no swapping whatsoever.
At the very least, Kits shouldn’t have as strong of toolbelt skills as the others.

Thats a very sounding solution but ther are few issue that complicates it:

• one is what you meantioned CD, is too long, on some skills its even 50-60 seconds
• if you reduce CD on them then what about engineers that still will be using kits, they will get another weapon and toolbelt skills on short CD
• also Toolbelt is and Engineer unique mechanics and its affected by utility slot, other professions secondary weapon is not dictated by their utility choice and their weapon is not restriced by their unique mehcnaics(1F-4F), exept Elementalist, for the rest its vice versa, its the weapon that restrict 1F-4F skills

Altho it would require more balancing, i think it would be better if the toolbelt skills could be selected separetly to the utility slot, of course ther would be rational restriction in place, like:

• toolbelt skills would be split on groups like healing, utility and elite skills(or traits) so that you cant slot 2 or more healing skills, evey F slot would be a separate group that have only few skills avaliable to chose from i.e
  1F- skills A, B, C
  2F- skills D, E, F
  3F- skills G, H, I
  4F- skills J, K, L
• Every kit sloted would reduce numbers of avaliable toolbelt skills from every F group by 1, or would completly remove the option to chose them, as a counter balance for Engineers that will use kit.

Well, as i said, it would require serious balancing.

You always choose one of those utilities over another kit. You say it would be unbalanced to get an extra weapon-esque skill with a kit, but the alternative would be yet another kit on top of the one you have.

I don’t see how it matters at all that toolbelt skills are class-specific. Also, the suggestion of making toolbelt skills independent is very convoluted. It would simply be far too much work to ever happen, without even considering whether it would effectively solve any issues.

In its simplest form, the issue here is merely that other utilities do not compensate the loss of a second weapon the way kits or possibly even turrets do.
Its just a matter of finding some way to tune the other utilities to match them.
Far as I know, every meta Engineer build either takes MULTIPLE kits, or abuse the mechanics of a large number of turrets (which also usually have at least one kit).
Even a gimicky gadgeteer build heavily utilizing gadget traits like static discharge still takes a kit. They’re simply too powerful to avoid.

Grimwolf.7163:

You always choose one of those utilities over another kit. You say it would be unbalanced to get an extra weapon-esque skill with a kit, but the alternative would be yet another kit on top of the one you have.

No no, what i meant is that ther should be a tradeoff, if you can get a kit and still have toolbelts skill on pare with weapon skills then what will get the player that wont take a kit? they will only get some good toolbelt skills and still lose 5 or more skills, ther must be some restriction on that.

I don’t see how it matters at all that toolbelt skills are class-specific. Also, the suggestion of making toolbelt skills independent is very convoluted. It would simply be far too much work to ever happen, without even considering whether it would effectively solve any issues.

I agree that it would be a bit complex to make but in use that wouldnt be more complex than traits selection.
Also what i meant is that our profession mechanics is restriced by utility slot and our skills on toolbelt would be dictated by utility which in return would reduce our choice in that aditional 5 “weapon skills”, other professions unique mechanics are not limited by utility slots, all i meant is that if our toolbelt skills suposed to be our secondary weapon skills we should be more free while chosing what we get.

In its simplest form, the issue here is merely that other utilities do not compensate the loss of a second weapon the way kits or possibly even turrets do.
Its just a matter of finding some way to tune the other utilities to match them.
Far as I know, every meta Engineer build either takes MULTIPLE kits, or abuse the mechanics of a large number of turrets (which also usually have at least one kit).
Even a gimicky gadgeteer build heavily utilizing gadget traits like static discharge still takes a kit. They’re simply too powerful to avoid.

Im not saying that your idea is bad, its just that i dont really see how one utility slot can be made to be equal 5 weapon skills that kit offer.
Also, while i agree that kits are too good to ignore they are still optional and not everyone will use them, not everyone follows meta or go with copy&paste builds, in fact Engineer profession allows for many obscure builds to be “viable” without kits, tho they still miss aditional skills.

I only play spvp. Pretty much solo q only. I ain’t nothing special and don’t claim otherwise.

I play with rocket, thumper and flame turrets. Celestial amulet. Pirate rune at the moment because dat kitten bird yayuh. I like the 2 0 6 6 0 spread with ACP and the RBT & Experimental Turret gm traits. I rock the rifle.

Now with this setup I want sigils of energy all of the time and battle/leeching some of the time depending on what flavor I feel like playing. So why can’t I use them? This is the only profession that limits itself this way based on utility choices. I don’t want to change my build and shouldn’t have to.

Someone keeps bringing up one possible exploit that isn’t even all that heinous compared to what’s already out there. And I mentioned cleansing ire because Longbow burst does not have to hit, or never misses because its ground targeted aoe in any case. Which is why EVERY warrior build has CI and is x/x +Longbow…

tl;dr I want to use swap sigils. Why should I have to change my build to be able to. No other profession has to. Still no satisfactory answers imo

Epidemix Revenge.4862:

Still no satisfactory answers imo

Ok, then here’s the simplest one:
Classes are not supposed to be equal. Nothing more or less than that.

I mean yes, I get that you perceive it as an imbalance (and so do I, but in a different way, I think Sigils and Runes need a very heavy across-the-board nerf), but the point is quite debatable. Maybe it’s intended that Engineers (and Elementalists) cannot utilize sigils as well as other classes.

Carighan.6758:

Epidemix Revenge.4862:

Still no satisfactory answers imo

Ok, then here’s the simplest one:
Classes are not supposed to be equal. Nothing more or less than that.

I mean yes, I get that you perceive it as an imbalance (and so do I, but in a different way, I think Sigils and Runes need a very heavy across-the-board nerf), but the point is quite debatable. Maybe it’s intended that Engineers (and Elementalists) cannot utilize sigils as well as other classes.

I see where you’re coming from but I am not asking for equal classes

I am asking for an equal playing field …though that may be the wrong analogy…. hmm Well in keeping on with the sports terms; I am asking for equal access to equipment

Yes but equipment is a fundamental component of classes in RPGs.
To compare with the sports stuff, in a football match all players are of the same class. However, they provide a different role by virtue of their position and intended behaviour alone (and sometimes the equivalent of muscle memory ingame if you do the same stuff often enough, in their case physical adaptation).

None of them has a rocket launcher.

Or a full riot suit.

None of them is an alien.

Or a crocodile.

The comparison just doesn’t work out well.
Asking for a level playing field is pointless in RPGs, IMO. We’re not supposed to be on the same playing field, by virtue of not fitting into one. An ideal RPG has imbalanced classes to the degree that they are incomparable but also dependent on each other.

But specifically to the sigil thing, the issue is external. Sigils and Runes are so important and powerful that in many regards they completely eclipse class abilities and traits. And that… really ought not to be.

I agree sigils and runes have too much impact for basic components. But what I’m trying to get across is that they are a component of EVERY build for every profession. Every single one. So using the football analogy they are like the shoes or the helmets or the shoulder pads. This being the case then all access to this equipment should be equal

A couple of things come to mind:

First, I am for allowing the kitless engineer to have access to a second weapon set. It is less for the skills and more for the sigils.

Before we go too far:

It only takes ONE utility slot to “make up” for not having a second weapon with skills.
But you CAN’T make up for the lack of sigils (at least not “in kind”),

Several classes lack mobility and their primary means is tying up a utility slot with a movement ability. So several classes wind up only having 2 offensive or defensive utilities.

Our kits arguably are far better than the typical weapon and they are very synergistic with skills/traits. For example, the bomb kit is an amazing kit in the melee range with very high damage (if power build) and very strong conditions. Grenades. . . well. . . enough said if you spec that line they are better than a typical weapon.

So, for the purpose of having “abilities” to use, it only takes ONE kit. Build diversity is just fine even if you want a couple of turrets or gadgets.

But. . . .

You still have fewer sigils. There is the real issue.

Bombsaway.7198:

Our kits arguably are far better than the typical weapon and they are very synergistic with skills/traits. For example, the bomb kit is an amazing kit in the melee range with very high damage (if power build) and very strong conditions. Grenades. . . well. . . enough said if you spec that line they are better than a typical weapon.

I have to disagree. First of all, more than synergy, we should talk about an extreme dependance on traits; some are so much dependant on those that they’re directly balanced over the traited version (grenades are the most blatant example). It is also common for effects related to single kits to be fragmented over many different traits, often ending up with multiple traits giving each a single effect to a kit (compared to the multiple effects given to weapons that other classes usually get)
Also, what people often forget is that we’re balanced over sustained damage. What that means is that we mostly lack bursts and we’re supposed to damage over time. For tha purpose, our kits are mostly hybrid weapons . The bomb kit is a perfect example of this. The “very high damage (if power build)” you reference isn’t anything other than the autoattack, and aside from the toolbelt, the only sensible source of direct damage of the whole kit. The other skills are conditions-based.
And almost any kit follow this pattern (sometimes reversed: elixir gun’s autoattack is mostly about bleeding, but the other damaging attacks are power based).
What this basically means is that kits have nice effects because we aren’t supposed to use them at their full potential, as they were made hybrid on purpose. There is no specialized power-based weapon or condition-based weapon, unlike other classes’ weapons.
I would also add that the variety of effects given to kit skills is purposely reduced, and for good reasons. Having many control skills, blocks, evades, burst damage, mobility skills or healing skills in kits would cause serious balance problems , due of the possibility of having a full kit build (and thus being able to spam and cycle between them). Due to that, the variety of the skills on kit is limited – for example, bombs and grenades are literally about some damage+a condition, all dealt in the same manner. This isn’t necessarily bad, but makes them very predictable. And many of the skill types mentioned above, when they are present, are purposefully limited in number to avoid balance problems.
“Real” weapons haven’t got such limitations (by virtue of their fixed number of two weapon sets) and thus can offer more variety.
Beside that, unlike “real” weapons, engineer skills are more limited even in their “complexity”, often having a single effect (be it dealing a condition, knocking back or something around that).

So, in the end, i can’t agree with you when you say that they’re better than normal weapons. They aren’t supposed to be better than those, and it would be a serious balance concern if they were so.

Bombsaway.7198:

It only takes ONE utility slot to “make up” for not having a second weapon with skills.
But you CAN’T make up for the lack of sigils (at least not “in kind”)

You… You realize you can just take non-swap sigils, right?

Grimwolf.7163:

Bombsaway.7198:

It only takes ONE utility slot to “make up” for not having a second weapon with skills.
But you CAN’T make up for the lack of sigils (at least not “in kind”)

You… You realize you can just take non-swap sigils, right?

Yes. I want the non swap energy sigil please.

On a more serious note.

How about stacking sigils? Other profs other than ele can have 4 sigils on 2 weapon sets which means they will always be able to have a stacking only set and a dps set.

Ex. Maybe I want to run 3 turrets and double rifle for both my weapon sets so I can have Bloodlust and energy + Air and Fire. This way I have a stacking/emergency energy weapon and a primary dps weapon JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER PROF can other than eles. Right engies and eles are the only profs with this handicap.

As it stands if we bring a stacking sigil we are stuck with that sigil no matter if we have kits to swap with or not.

Props to JJBigs on the stacking topic
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/Sigils-unfair-to-ele-engi/first#post4140980

Please provide link to kitless build that is popular to play and effective.

If all you’re going to do is talk about hypothetical builds that may choose to not run kits/elixirs then your argument is pointless and meaningless. One should not have to consider hypothetical situations that don’t exist and if they did, are not effective or even enjoyable.

Start off your argument with fact, not dreamy hypothetical rhetoric that vaguely kinda outlines what your trying to prove, but doesn’t really do a good job of doing so.

Maybe there is a enjoyable and effective warrior build that only use axe/shield and has no secondary weapon swap at all. Perhaps we should consider a ele build that never uses one of it attunements or a necro that has a dagger in one hand and a axe on the other main hand and no secondary weapons..maybe there is builds out like that that we need to think about also.

See where I’m going with this?..hypothetical situations means nothing. Next lets discuss rangers who don’t want a pet.

If you were to have read this discussion, listed the build I like to play in this very topic. In detail. Its efficacy is up for debate and is rather subjective. What works well at the bottom of the ladder might not work well at the top of the ladder and vice versa. I have been playing a 3 turret build which I have listed in an above post. It is fun to me and my win rate with it far exceeds my win rate without it. My win rate on my engy is around 65%. And i was 3Losses and 9wins deep before i began running this build.

If that warrior wants to use just axe and shield he can equip that setup twice to get the full value of his sigils. I believe for a while the pve warrior meta was gs/gs. I don’t pve so this was what I gathered from reading on the forum. Your necro example was just silly and I see no need to respond.

CntrlAltDefeat.1465:

Please provide link to kitless build that is popular to play and effective.

If all you’re going to do is talk about hypothetical builds that may choose to not run kits/elixirs then your argument is pointless and meaningless. One should not have to consider hypothetical situations that don’t exist and if they did, are not effective or even enjoyable.

Start off your argument with fact, not dreamy hypothetical rhetoric that vaguely kinda outlines what your trying to prove, but doesn’t really do a good job of doing so.

Maybe there is a enjoyable and effective warrior build that only use axe/shield and has no secondary weapon swap at all. Perhaps we should consider a ele build that never uses one of it attunements or a necro that has a dagger in one hand and a axe on the other main hand and no secondary weapons..maybe there is builds out like that that we need to think about also.

See where I’m going with this?..hypothetical situations means nothing. Next lets discuss rangers who don’t want a pet.

The fact that you consider kitless builds as merely hypothetical just further reinforces the point that kitless engineers, at least, should have a second weapon.
Cause as you said yourself, they aren’t considered effective at all for the most part. Unless they use some sort of gimmick – sd builds – they lack offensive power. And they lack it because most of the time is spent autoattacking with pistol or rifle, due of the lack of weapon skills. Pistol/Shield is even more lackluster in that regard, obviously.

Also, the examples you made are merely nonsensical. The classes you listed don’t have to give up anything to get the things you mentioned. Any warrior have a second weapon set to use, any elementalist has four attunements by default, any necro can use a primary and secondary weapon by default.
Without giving up anything – the elementalist is the only exception, albeit having 4 sets of weapon skills (albeit specialized and differently balanced) in exchange for not having a second weapon set. But even then, it isn’t a choice – it is his main class mechanic.

Whereas engineers not only have a single weapon set by default – making them also the class with less skills unless they use kits – but their main weapon is also weakened by design, and on top of that, if they want to use a kit, they must give up an utility slot.
No other class has fixed penalties due to optional utilities. You don’t see warriors having lower stats than anyone else just because they can use banners to raise them, for example.
So where is the logic in engineers having those penalties?
There is no logic, that’s the problem.

P.S. and imho, it wouldn’t be an issue even if the class had a second main weapon, indipendently of kits. The class is all about sustained damage anyway, and the main weapons aren’t exactly noted for their damage. A power build is already using the rifle, but one would rather use the bomb autoattack than some weapon skill, if the point is dealing direct damage. There wouldn’t be much gain in that case even if he had the possibility of using a pistol/pistol or pistol/shield – it would lack the stats to do damage with conditions.
And a condition build is likely to already use pistols, thus it wouldn’t gain in damage with a rifle.
A celestial build could have some advantage in that regard, being able to use all the weapons properly.
For the most part, though, the second weapon would be useful for the skills effects, rather for their damage.

But even if there were issues, in the end, the solution should be to properly balance kits, and not to eliminate the main weapon from the equation.

Look, we can all say that the engineer is in a “fine place” and I would have generally little reason to disagree noting that all classes have this or that which could be improved upon. Same for ele.

But it is quite hard to actually say that ANET was not besieged by the issue of sigil parity when it moved from having 2 handed weapons only have 1 sigil to 2 sigils because people thought the one handers were “more powerful”. If you are going to cave to that type of parity, why not extend it to all classes? In short, you provided parity to all classes save 2 around the use of sigils.

I am well aware that I can take non-swapping sigils, but if I don’t take a kit as an engineer, I can’t take a swapping sigil so there is a bit of a parity problem.

Frankly, the OLD system of providing a benefit from taking 2 1 handed weapons versus 1 2 handed weapon was MUCH better. Think of the builds that are the most annoying in PvP and WvW. Too often they involve the AE and cleave of the 2 hander. I always thought there was supposed to be a penalty for taking the 2 hander in the customization of the weapon. But they caved. As such, it is now time to finish the job by allowing engineers and eles the same sigil access too.

You DO NOT need to provide them more than the same sigil access (e.g. more weapon skills). The 2cd set could be nothing more than a way to hold sigils and not actually usable or swappable.