New Core Revenant Weapon (suggestion)

I know it is another suggestion about revenant from me but rev is my main and i think some things could be done with the core rev. What i think the revenant lacs in core is a nice ranged weapon. i know we got the hammer but in terms of pvp if you got hammer and someone jumps on you, youre either good with sword/sword (or shield or axe whatever) or youre screwed, or its a pewpew ranger. the reason is simply because its so slow even the reaper greatsword without quickness is faster then that, but its the only possibility of ranged combat (as core rev no elite spec). So why not give the revenant a second ranged weapon, no matter if one handed or twohanded. Maybe A mainhand pistol, since the theme of the revenant weapons was " physical weapons amplified with the powers of the mist since they dont use scepters or focuses( foci ?), or rifle or rework a weapon ( like staff to toggle between ranged and melee combat. like the thiefs rifle can change between kneel and stand modes(pls dont change staff 5 anet for it) maybe remove the staff 2, move every melee staff skill to the left, set the number five to a flipp between ranged and melee and set staff 2 as ranged skill. same function only ranged ofc. What do you think ppl? Should staff get a flipp skill where they change between melee and ranged combat? should he get a new weapon? Or should nothing happen ?

@"Lucas.3718" said:So why not give the revenant a second ranged weapon, no matter if one handed or twohanded. ... What do you think ppl? Should staff get a flipp skill where they change between melee and ranged combat? should he get a new weapon? Or should nothing happen ?

I think it's a bigger headache and more trouble than it's ultimately worth. I think they opted for Elites over adding to core was because once you start adding to core you open yourself up to a constant headache of "why didn't you go with X weapon which is CLEARLY what this profession needs" and in the end would just cause more bickering for very little payoff. If you're pick your way through the various "Elite Weapons OMGZ!!!!" threads you'll notice that folks can't even agree on what an Elite weapon should bring to the table. Magnify that with a permanent core weapon and you can see why ArenaNet is loath to go down that road. With an Elite, you can justify the changes around a theme and those changes are optional mechanics. If they don't work for some folks well they still have a second Elite to play or the core to play. But if you start adding to the core profession then you are stuck in a never-ending loop of unsatisfied players who will never agree on which weapon would really make core work.

While you can never make everyone happy there are certainly ways to make changes that don't create a world of constant headaches and complaints and working changes through Elites is likely one of the better methods for making changes.

I think there is an argument to be made that revenant is a special case. The revenant still carries the legacy of having been originally designed as a profession without a weaponswap, and such professions naturally have fewer weapon options than other professions in their weight category (revenant has more options than elementalist and engineer, but elementalist is just one two-handed weapon short, and having more weapon options is part of the soldier category's flavour). Perhaps more significantly, from a design perspective, professions without weaponswaps only need to have one weaponset suitable for any given build, not two. ArenaNet's addition of the trident, as an example, was a de facto acknowledgement of this problem.

As things currently stand, core condition revenants (and heralds) lack a second condition-oriented set to swap to: whichever weapon they switch to, they're relying on Corruption traits to proc damaging conditions until they switch back (and sword is the only option they have that's really good for this: hammer is too slow to get good use out of Rampant Vex, and staff lacks a chill to trigger Abyssal Chill). On top of that, now that guardian staff has been un-boonsmited, revenant is the only core profession that lacks a second ranged weapon option. Adding a ranged condition weapon is an obvious solution to these problems.

Which, of course, they did with renegade. The problem is that if they handle it that way, they're going to face the same problem each time they create a new condition-oriented elite specialisation for the revenant. If they add a new core weapon, though, they won't need to keep solving the same problem with future elite specs.

@draxynnic.3719 said:I think there is an argument to be made that revenant is a special case. The revenant still carries the legacy of having been originally designed as a profession without a weaponswap, and such professions naturally have fewer weapon options than other professions in their weight category (revenant has more options than elementalist and engineer, but elementalist is just one two-handed weapon short, and having more weapon options is part of the soldier category's flavour). Perhaps more significantly, from a design perspective, professions without weaponswaps only need to have one weaponset suitable for any given build, not two. ArenaNet's addition of the trident, as an example, was a de facto acknowledgement of this problem.

As things currently stand, core condition revenants (and heralds) lack a second condition-oriented set to swap to: whichever weapon they switch to, they're relying on Corruption traits to proc damaging conditions until they switch back (and sword is the only option they have that's really good for this: hammer is too slow to get good use out of Rampant Vex, and staff lacks a chill to trigger Abyssal Chill). On top of that, now that guardian staff has been un-boonsmited, revenant is the only core profession that lacks a second ranged weapon option. Adding a ranged condition weapon is an obvious solution to these problems.

Which, of course, they did with renegade. The problem is that if they handle it that way, they're going to face the same problem each time they create a new condition-oriented elite specialisation for the revenant. If they add a new core weapon, though, they won't need to keep solving the same problem with future elite specs.

I wouldn't read too much into the addition of the trident. That just brought Revenant in line with the other weapon swap professions in terms of underwater combat. Outside of that Revenant isn't really a special case. It has weapon swap and the number of weapons it has places it in the middle of the pack having the same number as Theif. One could argue that if Revenant needs an additional weapon then Theif would need one too. There really isn't a NEEDS based argument that can be applied to the situation that wouldn't also work for other professions, especially Theif, Elementalist, and Engineer (your ranged combat argument could be applied to Elementalist or be flipped to apply to Engineer in regards to melee). I can promise you that Engineer players will not see Revenant as a special case nor will they buy the argument they only need one weapon for a build. While having an additional condi weapon to swap into would be nice is it being nice for Revenant players really going to be enough for them not to get the exact same request from Engineer players seeking an additional melee weapon to play with or an additional long range weapon that is really long range and not just a short range weapon with additional reach? Once that door is opened there is no going back and special case will not be reason enough for the other player bases to not be upset over the issue.

But even then, nothing you said nullifies or directly counters the argument I actually made. Even if you could convince folks that Revenant is a special case (and it's not) you will still get the headache and problems I outlined. Adding additional core weapons is really a lose/lose proposition for ArenaNet on multiple fronts and they opted to bypass that with Elites.

You seem to be assuming that because I'm in a revenant forum, supporting a request for an improvement for the revenant, that I'm more of a revenant player than an engineer player. This isn't the case. I wouldn't say that engineer is my main, but I'm definitely playing engineer a lot more than rev, especially since PoF.

The distinction with the engineer and elementalist is that because they don't have a weaponswap, they don't need more than one weaponset suitable for any given build. Engineer has a very clear separation: if you're power-oriented you take rifle, if you're condi-oriented you take pistol, unless some utility consideration is more important than keeping to the damage type. A core melee weapon would be nice, sure, but the core engineer works without one, especially since the rifle is largely designed as a close-range weapon with the option to poke at long range anyway. Elementalist has a set of weapons defined more by engagement distance, but they're all hybrids to some extent, although some elementalist weapon sets are certainly more suited to one side of the condition/power spectrum than the other.

Similarly, thieves also have enough options to fill out both weaponswaps regardless of whether they go condition or power. Dagger/dagger, pistol/dagger, and shortbow are all capable at dishing out conditions depending on which skills you choose to spend initiative on, while most sets also work well as power sets. (I'd also note that, while revenant technically has the same number of primary weapons as thieves, mesmers, and necromancers, soldier professions have a precedent of having more weapon choices, so they can have a wider range of melee-focused weapons while still having more than one choice of ranged weapon. Revenant has the melee focus of soldiers, but with the un-boonsmiting of guardian staff 1, is the only core profession that has only one ranged option.)

This principle spreads across other professions: with two exceptions, each profession with a weaponswap has at least two power-oriented weaponsets and two condition-oriented (or sufficiently hybridised that they can work as such) weaponsets. Warrior has sword/X and longbow. Ranger has shortbow and axe/dagger or torch. Mesmer and necromancer each has scepter/X and staff.

The exceptions are guardian and revenant.

Guardian is an exception due to how it is designed: to an extent, guardian was never really intended to be a condition damage dealer until Firebrand, and non-firebrand guardians are intended to mostly lean on Virtue of Justice (and utilities) for their burn sources. As a result, guardian weapons are largely designed to synergise well with Virtue of Justice passive procs in order to generate burning that way, with a number of weapons bearing skills focused on multiple small hits in order to generate lots of VoJ passive activations. In short, guardian is designed to not need dedicated condition weapons. Even firebrand axe is possibly more of a hybrid than a dedicated condition weapon.

Revenant, on the other hand, is an exception because of how it was originally designed as a non-weaponswap profession. Sword, hammer, and staff didn't need to be condition-friendly in their original design brief, because the assumption was that if you were going condi as a revenant you'd take mace/axe and that would be all you needed. Except now that's not all they need, because they're a weaponswap profession, and none of their other core sets are suitable for conditions. Generally, sword is taken because it's the least bad (lots of quick attacks and chill to proc traits, and the evade frames are useful, similar to condi mesmers using sword for defence and utility) or hammer just to have SOME ranged capability and it's the only core option to do that despite how poorly it interacts with Rampant Vex, but every other revenant set is designed purely with power builds in mind. Unlike guardian, this can't be brushed off as "well, revenants aren't supposed to do condition damage", because clearly they are.

There's always going to be some people complaining when they see another profession getting something when they see their profession as lacking something important, but I think the more rational side of the playerbase would understand if ArenaNet explained that it was a special one-off case to resolve a problem that arose due to the revenant's development history. If they don't fix this problem at the core level, it's just going to keep coming back to bite them every time they want to make a condi-oriented elite specialisation for revenant.

The alternative would be making one of the existing core weapons a more practical hybrid. My suggestion would be reducing the direct damage of Coalescence of Ruin in exchange for a hefty bleeding stack - this would kill two birds with one stone by also giving CoR spikes a bit more counterplay.

Staff should have been the melee dps/defensive weapon like in data mining pre alpha version, with traits that change it into a more supportive healing weapons unlike the Frankenstein mess that it is today....

If they not Willing to do that, I am willing sacrifice Hammer 4 skill to be a Flip skill between Ranged and Melee. I want a 2 hander Melee weapon.

The Revenant needs an off hand ranged weapon. A baseline Focus would be good.

But I had a better idea a while back. How about Core Dagger, that's ranged channel drain ability that suck life from it's enemies. Would like this main hand with off hand focus or torch for core. This gives us a baseline ranged 1 hander with a off hand that can be useful between both Dagger and mace for demon, or between Sword mainhand and Dagger for any other power.

i rather have them give every rev weapon the trident treatment, that way rev can have more weapon skills without adding more weapons to the core class.

also they could make hammer a better weapon.

You seem to be assuming that because I'm in a revenant forum, supporting a request for an improvement for the revenant, that I'm more of a revenant player than an engineer player. This isn't the case. I wouldn't say that engineer is my main, but I'm definitely playing engineer a lot more than rev, especially since PoF.

No such assumption was made. My argument does not rest on you being a Revenant player at all. My argument does not rest on you being an Engineer player. None of the points I make are based on what you decide to play. I honestly do not care what you consider your main or what you play often. It isn't important to my arguments. My argument is basically about the activities of other players who don't happen to invest time in playing Revenant.

The distinction with the engineer and elementalist is that because they don't have a weaponswap, they don't need more than one weaponset suitable for any given build. Engineer has a very clear separation: if you're power-oriented you take rifle, if you're condi-oriented you take pistol, unless some utility consideration is more important than keeping to the damage type. A core melee weapon would be nice, sure, but the core engineer works without one, especially since the rifle is largely designed as a close-range weapon with the option to poke at long range anyway. Elementalist has a set of weapons defined more by engagement distance, but they're all hybrids to some extent, although some elementalist weapon sets are certainly more suited to one side of the condition/power spectrum than the other.

You say this but at present, there is already an ongoing discussion among Engineer players on the necessity of needing an extra weapon. Especially in regards to how the current choice in weapons doesn't give them very much in the way of actual weapon build choice. They feel just as limited as the Revenant player base feels and at face value, their case is as solid as Revenants. To claim that one profession should be ok and another is a special case that needs a fix is a fairly arbitrary choice that tends to lead to player discontent. After all, why should your assessment of the needs of the Revenant profession be considered more viable than those that the Engineer players are currently expressing? This is what creates the problem. You rationalized why Engineer and Elementaltist are ok at present but clearly, your reasons for why they are ok don't matter over in the Engineer forum where it is currently being discussed. The discussion over in the Engineer forum completely disagrees with your assessment.

The entire idea that any given profession needs additional core weapons to fill a gap is a subjective position and no one profession has more right to it than any other. The moment ArenaNet decides that one profession is deserving of additional core weapons they have boxed themselves into a lose/lose situation in which they either give other professions additional weapons or have angry players accusing them of favoritism and bias.

There's always going to be some people complaining when they see another profession getting something when they see their profession as lacking something important, but I think the more rational side of the playerbase would understand if ArenaNet explained that it was a special one-off case to resolve a problem that arose due to the revenant's development history. If they don't fix this problem at the core level, it's just going to keep coming back to bite them every time they want to make a condi-oriented elite specialisation for revenant.

Based on current conversations over in the Engineer forum, I do not believe that the other players would understand Revenant being a special one-off case. As for the rational side, at present, the Elementalist forum has posts about how bad their profession is now because they are no longer as powerful as they used to be. Over in the Necromancer forums, several discussions going on about how ArenaNet must hate their profession due to its balance issues. So I also have doubts that rationality would win out considering the nature of several ongoing conversations in various subforums.

Your argument for Revenant can also be applied to Engineer as the lack of additional weapons will bite them every time they opt to do a one-handed weapon, whether it be main-hand (their only choice being pistol or shield) or giving them an off-hand weapon (their ONLY choice being pistol). Anytime Engineer gets a non-two-handed weapon this problem will come up. Thus a one-handed weapon would either have to design around the use of pretty much just one other weapon or it creates a mix match that Engineer players currently highlight in regards to the sword situation from Holosmith and why they feel the sword isn't a good weapon given the off-hand choices they have. The fact that you attempted to justify why Engineer should be ok with what they have based on their current design while there is an ongoing conversation about this very subject only serves to support the points I was making about how everyone feels they should have more core weapons. Your Revenant argument easily works for the Engineer case and the ongoing conversations makes it clear that the other player bases do not view Revenant as a special case.

The evidence, at present, does not support the idea that other players would be ok with just Revenant getting additional weapons. Quiet the contary, current evidence supports the idea that other people feel they need one just as much, if not more, than Revenant. Nevermind the non-weapon related headache it creates (such as Necromancer players asking why Revenant gets more core weapons but Necromancer still underperforms). The payoff for such a move does not outweigh the discontent it would create.

I've seen the engineer discussion you reference. Have some sympathy for it, in fact.

However, I think there is a fundamental distinction:

Core engineers have always been intended to work the way they do - or at least, they have since they were publicly announced. The base weaponsets are designed to be versatile from an engagement distance perspective: you can poke from long range with them if you want to, but each can reward getting in closer if it's practical to do so. Engineers also have kits with which they can use to cover any shortfalls that the base weaponsets might have... or even to take their place as the primary weapon of the build. While the element of choice might be lacking, both power and condi builds are well covered: you take rifle for power, pistol/x for condi, and while additional choices might be nice, you're never put in a situation where you're playing condi and forced to take a power-oriented weapon because there isn't a condi-oriented weapon to fill that slot (or vice versa). While limited in choice, the weapons work for what the engineer needs to do, and every engineer build can choose a weaponset that suits it. Yes, it would be nice if you could have a melee weapon in your base weaponset when you're using ranged-oriented kits, but rifle or pistol will do the job (issues of undertuned numbers notwithstanding).

Revenant design, on the other hand, has been a bit of a clusterkitten.

It was originally intended to be a no-weaponswap profession, but the weapons simply weren't properly designed with that in mind.

We've just discussed how the engineer's base weaponsets are designed to be versatile: able to deal at least some damage at any range while rewarding close-in fighting. Elementalist weapons, while somewhat more specialised in this respect, work in a similar way: daggers maintain some standoff capabilities through Vapor Blade, and staff and scepter both have combos that are most effective at closer ranges. While less convenient than engineer kits, elementalists also have weapon conjures to compensate for shortfalls in their primary weapons if needed.

Revenant weapons, on the other hand, were not designed with this versatility in mind. Staff and sword are basically melee weapons: they HAVE ranged skills, but on a similar level to Throw Axe or Zealot's Defence. Mace could arguably skirmish with Searing Fissure and Echoing Eruption, but is still held back by the lack of a ranged autoattack. Hammer, by contrast, has similar "most effective at long range" skill behaviour to mesmer greatsword and ranger longbow, but lacks the ability of those two weapons to knock enemies back or pull off close-ranged spikes regardless: a hammer revenant was pretty much helpless in close range during the testing weekends. On top of that, revenants didn't have access to additional weapons through utility slots that provide a safety valve for engineers and elementalists.

Resolving this required rebuilding the weaponsets from the ground up (which they didn't really have time for) or making the revenant into a weaponswap profession.

Problem is, as discussed above, the weaponsets weren't designed for being a conventional weaponswapping profession either. The complete lack of an underwater weaponswap was an obvious shortfall, but the other shortfall is that mace/axe is the only weaponset that was made with condition damage in mind, because the other weaponsets were made on the assumption that a condi build would use mace/axe and wouldn't need another set to swap to.

Revenant lacking a second condition-oriented, or at least hybrid-oriented, weapon isn't just a matter of "it would be nice to have more choice" like it is for engineer. It's a matter of every single condition-oriented revenant that doesn't get an additional condition weapon out of an elite specialisation being forced to take a weapon that's not suitable for their build (or to take mace/X as both weaponsets). Because - unlike engineer, and every other profession in the game for that matter - the weapons were designed around an assumption that did not reflect the final behaviour of the profession.

Resolving this could be in the form of a new (core) weapon, or in adjusting one of the existing weapons, ideally hammer, so that it at least makes a suitable hybrid. But in the long run, it needs to be done. And the longer it isn't done, the more balance issues are going to persist due to plastering bandaid solutions over a fundamentally flawed design.

And I think that if ArenaNet was straight about the problems that have arisen with revenant due to its rushed design process, and that the addition of a weapon was intended to resolve this and that the playerbase shouldn't expect it to be a precedent, I think the majority of the playerbase would accept that.

Now, there are always going to be people who complain when some other profession gets improvements while their own favoured professions are perceived by them as being neglected. And they probably are disproportionately loud on the forums and other discussion venues. But I don't think improvements should be held hostage to the "why did Some Other Profession get a buff and my profession didn't?" crowd.

However, I think there is a fundamental distinction:

No, no not really. Any such distinction you may claim isn't really a distinction but just you advocating your personal preference on who you think needs mechanical help. I'll be honest, I'm just skimming your post(s) as I'm not making an argument that is based on game mechanics. I'm not really trying to argue that based on the mechanical shortcomings of Revenant that should be allowed to have an extra weapon. Honestly, any argument you could possibly make really applies to Engineer. Engineer's weapon issue isn't really a desire based issue but an actual mechanical problem. If it's a mechanical problem for Revenant, then it would be a problem for Engineer. The whole weapon swap thing isn't really all that big of an issue because if you really want to push the weapon swap then the solution is simple, play Renegade. Renegade allows you to run a melee set of condi weapons and a condi ranged weapon. Elite specs are really meant to solve this issue.

My argument is social in nature. It has always been social in nature. I'm really not interested in the mechanical justification because if you go over to the Engineer forum you can see that they have a mechanical issue. You dismiss said point by claiming it's a desire and something nice to have but honestly that applies to Revenant too. Whose mechanical argument is valid is really a subjective and arbitrary decision.

Revenant lacking a second condition-oriented, or at least hybrid-oriented, weapon isn't just a matter of "it would be nice to have more choice" like it is for engineer.

Except it is. The Engineer argument is just as strong as the argument you are making. Which one is correct really boils down to arbitrary subjective choices on who merits additional weapons. If Engineer having an additional weapon so that when they run a one-handed or off hand build it is not restricted to being a condi build is a "nice to have" then Revenant needing a second condition oriented weapon is a "nice to have" thing too. Keep in mind, you're not talking about having a condi weapon. You are talking about having additional condi weapons. Meanwhile, Engineer players are talking about having an actual power weapon. They actually do lack a one-handed power option and if Revenant is worthy of getting a second condi option then Engineer is more than justified in arguing that they should get at least one power option. They aren't asking for a second condi, they want a one-handed power option. Lack of weapon swap doesn't change a lack in power weapons. The arguments you have been making thus far reinforce the points I am making about why it would be lose/lose for ArenaNet.

Again, I'm not making a mechanics based argument. Just about everyone can come up with a mechanical justification for an additional weapon. I'm making an argument based on the social behaviors of ArenaNet's customer base.

And I think that if ArenaNet was straight about the problems that have arisen with revenant due to its rushed design process, and that the addition of a weapon was intended to resolve this and that the playerbase shouldn't expect it to be a precedent, I think the majority of the playerbase would accept that.

The various threads that continually crop up about unresolved balance issues indicate you are wrong about this.

Now, there are always going to be people who complain when some other profession gets improvements while their own favoured professions are perceived by them as being neglected. And they probably are disproportionately loud on the forums and other discussion venues. But I don't think improvements should be held hostage to the "why did Some Other Profession get a buff and my profession didn't?" crowd.

I bolded the word perceived in your response here. This is important because you are arguing your position as a NEED and claiming that others desire for the same thing is a perception. However, the idea that Revenant should get an additional weapon is just a perception that is no more valid than the Engineer one. I'm not talking about improvements being held, hostage. I'm talking about how one can fairly make choices on improvements that do not come off as having a bias towards a particular profession. Improvements are made, all the time I might add. Elite specs are designed to do what you are talking about in a manner that allows everyone to feel like some of their "perceived" neglected issues are being addressed. But there honestly isn't a strong reason why Revenant is more deserving. There isn't a mechanics based argument that you can make that will indicate that Revenant is a special case. If you really want to talk about a profession that needs to get improvements to the core profession then you should look at Necromancer. If anyone is deserving of an additional weapon or changes to the core of the profession it's Necromancer. And it would likely be Necromancer that would be the loudest group that would reject the idea that Revenant is more deserving. Let's keep in mind, Necromancer has been at the bottom for the life of the game. The issues that affect Necromancer limit its playability. Necromancer players frequently talk about how they get kicked from end game content because of the neglected issues with their professions. This isn't a subjective perception, like the case for Revenant. There is a very real outcome that Revenant does not suffer from. If Revenant doesn't get an additional weapon it's not like they get auto kicked from PUGs doing end game content.

This is why such changes are restricted to Elites. If you start making core changes to Revenant then ArenaNet is obligated to make changes to the core of other professions too. Being as how there are older professions who have been suffering from far worse problems than Revenant lacking an additional condi weapon (when they can simply play Renegade) it will be a hard sell on the part of ArenaNet that somehow Revenant is more deserving of such changes but Necromancer is still stuck being in last place and kicked from PUGs.

Given that you've pretty much admitted that you're only skimming, a typical sign of not being open to truly consider the other side's points, I'm just going to go over my core points:

First, there is a big difference between "another option" and "having to fill a slot with something that doesn't fit your stats", which is the case for condi core revenant at the moment. An engineer built for power can always pick rifle, and that fills out their one base weaponset slot. An engineer specced for conditions can take a pistol with the offhand of their choice. Sure, additional options would allow for greater customisation and optimisation, but neither is a bad choice for their build.

Okay, maybe pistol, but that's a numbers thing - it's supposed to be good at dishing out conditions, it's just undertuned. That's a problem to be fixed by improving pistol.

Similar comments apply to necromancer, and necromancer has one of the core distinctions between the rev and engineer: revenant has a weaponswap, and thus needs twice as many sets to complete a build. A condi-oriented necromancer can run scepter/X in one set and staff in the other, and have a decent condition output regardless of which set they are currently using, and without doubling up on sets. A power-oriented necromancer, on the other hand, can run dagger, axe, and arguably staff still has decent enough power coefficients to do the job if you can hit multiple targets.

Necromancer does have plenty of issues, mind you, but they're in the territory of getting the numbers right, and not having the active defences needed to survive an increasingly glassy meta. I don't think I've seen anyone saying that the solution is an extra weapon.

Revenant, now... if you go condi revenant, mace/axe is your obvious first choice of weaponset, and Mallyx is an obvious choice of legend. The other core legends aren't condition-oriented, but at least have useful utility for a condition build. And then you go to your second weaponset, and you have... three options that are all designed for power.

Therein lies the problem. Engineer can always choose a weapon that works for a power build or for a condi build. So can elementalist. Because they don't have a weaponswap, that's all they need. Thief, ranger, warrior, mesmer, and necromancer (guardian is special, go back to my previous posts for why) all need two weaponsets each for condi and for power because they have a weaponswap, and because their weapons were designed with being a weaponswapping profession in mind, they have those weaponsets. Revenant does not. Because its weapons were designed without weaponswap in mind (and the reason we have weaponswap now is that, at the bottom line, they were designed poorly for non-weaponswap weapons as well).

Second... I can really only repeat what I said before regarding the social argument: There are always going to be people who complain when someone else gets something and they don't. While no profession should be neglected, the game shouldn't be held hostage to the possibility (a near certainty, really, even for the most obviously needed improvements) that people will complain that attention is being given to another profession.

On that note, too, I had a look at the most recent thread related to the 'more weapons' topic in the engineer forum, and what I found was a couple of people stating that the revenant also needed another core weapon - this being out of the people whom you could probably most expect to be partisan about the issue. So I think that's actually evidence that the more rational part of the playerbase (because again, there will always be people who complain when someone else gets something) would understand the revenant's position.