Question about elite-specs / weaponswap

Question about elite-specs / weaponswap

in Engineer

Posted by: Arantheal.7396

Arantheal.7396

Q:

I’m out of the loop for most classes, since I just came back to the game a month ago after a 2 year hiatus (feeling up-to-date on engi / warri so far), so I want to ask you about your thoughts on these questions:

1.) IF – note the big “IF” at the beginning – elite-specializations in general would be changed to allow every class to have access to their new weapons, regardless if the accompanying elite-traitlines would be picked or not, would there be classes where it breaks their balancing completely / or makes their new weapons useless outside of their traitlines?

2.) Given that such a change would be implemented, and therefore sword and hammer become readily available to be picked, would you favor or disfavor engineer getting a weapon-swap mechanic?
Do you think this would be a beneficial / reasonable change for our class?

3.) IF such a change would be implemented, what are your thoughts on the prospect of new elite-specializations not being forced to add new weapons, but could focus on existing weapons instead and add to – or change their playstyle?
Would this make elite-specs more interesting, by maybe improving already existing class-mechanics / strengths, or do you rather want to see new roles being added to a class with every elite-spec release?

I’d love to read detailed answers to all 3 points from you.
Maybe the devs will see your answers, too

Engineer is love, Engineer is life.

Question about elite-specs / weaponswap

in Engineer

Posted by: Ardid.7203

Ardid.7203

1) I would love to see base professions using new weapons. However, the fact those weapons would ALSO be usable by the Elite Specs means the interacting factors multiply exponentially, making it a nightmare to properly balance not just the profession itself, but the whole game.
IMO: It is ok the elite spec weapons are contained into the spec. However, Anet should also add a couple extra weapons ONLY for the base profession, especially in cases were the options are strongly limited, like Engie’s.

2) No matter the change, I would NEVER support adding weapon swap to engie. It not only would introduce new problems to balance, but it goes strongly against what I think defines Engie. Any new change must add diversity while highlighting Engie’s unique quirks and gameplay; making Engie similar to other professions is not the way.

3) Elite specs purpose IS to change the way the profession is played. If this objective is met by adding new weapons or by changing current ones is not problem, IMO, both options are valid. However, there are 3 caveats:

a) People get accostumed to a weapon playing in a certain way. Changing too much this basic, expected gameplay, would undoublty be unpopular.

b) People also expect new Elite Specs to add new weapons. Its one of their most obvious selling points. Not doing so would, again, be unpopular.

c) IMO “Improving already existing class mechanics” sounds too close to “fixing current core profession problems” to me. This is NOT the purpose of elite specs. Base professions must be adressed and fixed prior to adding gamechanging innovations, and those game-changes should always be fresh and noticeable. Creating an Elite Spec only to make what we already do in a better (or merely patched) way is not, IMO, what Anet has to do.

In short form:
Fix the base first —→ Add gameplay diversity second.

“Only problem with the Engineer is
that it makes every other class in the game boring to play.”
Hawks