It's time for new weapon types

Thematic and mechanical expansion of weapons & weapon skills is way overdue at this point. It is my opinion that new weapon types would be one of the best bang-for-buck ways of expanding options for players in a way that increases player investment. It would make far more sense than continuing to shoehorn existing weapon types for new professions with elite specs.

Some are obvious, like lances/spears for land, but they could get creative as well. I don't think simply using new skins for existing weapons that change the weapon type is appropriate. Hammer skills don't fit a greataxe, for example, nor do staff skills fit a spear/lance. It could also provide a means to finally single-wield one-handed weapons in a way that doesn't gimp you.

They don't need to have the same number of skins as the original weapon types, nor do they need to maintain the status quo of releasing a skin for every weapon type with each new BL release. If you want my honest opinion, that actually causes choice fatigue anyway and pushes players away from those skins. I actually think they'd generate more interest and revenue by having more unique BL skins instead of skin meshes they apply to all weapon types.

Balance is also a non-issue since both balance and expansion of gameplay options are separate iterative processes and it's a fallacy to block this sort of expansion over balance concerns.

Or they can just improve the usefulness of existing weapons rather add new ones which may just end up being mediocre or causing others to become (more) mediocre.

@"Ayrilana.1396" said:Or they can just improve the usefulness of existing weapons rather add news one that may just be mediocre or cause others to become (more) mediocre.

No, because that isn't the problem. All weapons in the game are usable and they'll never "fix" balance to the extent that everything can be meta in every situation. The problem is that we need expansion of available tools and we're lacking in a large number of iconic weapon types like polearms, greataxes, crossbows, etc - for no good reason, really.

Additionally, adding new weapon types would be about as exciting as getting new elite specs with far less work going into it, and would also help lay a foundation to improve the flexibility and scalability of the elite spec system.

It's literally a win, win, win. If MO thinks otherwise, I don't know what he's on about and I should be running the game instead. We'd have also gotten mounts a lot sooner than we did and dungeons never would have been abandoned.

@Einlanzer.1627 said:

@"Ayrilana.1396" said:Or they can just improve the usefulness of existing weapons rather add news one that may just be mediocre or cause others to become (more) mediocre.

There is no need for them other than you wanting them because other games have them.

I want MINIGUNS for warriors, rocket launchers for engineers and submachine guns for thiefs.

A "polearm" that only does wide swings and slashes literally is a reskinned Greatsword. A "greataxe" that only does overhead chops and wide smashes literally is a reskinned Hammer.

If you want these things added, you have to do way better than "no it isn't". How would these weapons introduce new gameplay archetypes? what differentiates them from existing weapons/archetypes besides appearance? what substantial differences makes them worth using and therefore worth the effort to introduce and subsequently balance? Try presenting an actual argument and not just "I want it!"

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Einlanzer.1627 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Or they can just improve the usefulness of existing weapons rather add news one that may just be mediocre or cause others to become (more) mediocre.

Who cares? Need vs want is subjective and not worth nitpicking (this sort of diversion is something you do when you have a bad argument), but MMOs need expansion of content and player tools. My rather common-sense opinion is this would be one of the best "bang for buck" types of expansion we could possibly have. There are a few things that could potentially take its place, but most of them (like new races) would probably be more work for less payoff.

If you disagree, that's fine, but you have a habit of showing up in these kinds of threads and just acting contrarian with no good argument at all, then for some reason acting like your "nay nay nay" carries more objective weight. Newsflash - it doesn't. I mean, do you even have alternate ideas for what they could expand on or develop instead?

@"Trise.2865" said:A "polearm" that only does wide swings and slashes literally is a reskinned Greatsword. A "greataxe" that only does overhead chops and wide smashes literally is a reskinned Hammer.

If you want these things added, you have to do way better than "no it isn't". How would these weapons introduce new gameplay archetypes? what differentiates them from existing weapons/archetypes besides appearance? what substantial differences makes them worth using and therefore worth the effort to introduce and subsequently balance? Try presenting an actual argument and not just "I want it!"

No, i actually don't have to do better than "no it isn't." I don't have to provide a dissertation on why a greataxe is not used the same way a large hammer is, because a.) it's common sense, and b.) it doesn't matter.

All I have to do is voice my opinion on why new weapons would be good for the game - the opportunity for new weapon skills and fun new skins that actually have skills, animations, and soundsets that are thematically complementary. It's something that can bring a lot of freshness to the game for a lot less work than something like new races or classes.

@"Tails.9372" said:I want MINIGUNS for warriors, rocket launchers for engineers and submachine guns for thiefs.

For crying out loud, Engineers already have https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Homing_Torpedo , what more do you want?!

I wouldn't be opposed to throwing in cross bows, land spears, great axes and maybe even wands or something like that

@"Einlanzer.1627" said:The problem is that we need an update to what's available

Justify. Why do we need that? And who is this "we" that needs it? If it's merely a speculative assertion that it would be good for the game, you'll have to explain why it would be good for it.

@Turkeyspit.3965 said:

@"Tails.9372" said:I want MINIGUNS for warriors, rocket launchers for engineers and submachine guns for thiefs.

A rocket launcher.

If they put in new weapons there are some considerations.1) the new weapon is unlikely to have a Legendary or be included in Black Lion Weapon Sets or be added to old sources of skins such as hearts.2) they’ll have to make a new weapon section for the skin(s) and it’s going to be pretty meager. There will probably be at best a handful of skins and there may only be one skin.3) if they keep adding new weapons then there will be more weapon sections with only one or a few skins, which won’t look good when compared to all the skins that the old weapons have.

Will people be happy to have a new weapon but no Legendary or very little choice in skins? I suspect they won’t.

@"Einlanzer.1627" said:In other words, concern about skins is not a reason to not get new weapon types. Of course the cost of implementing skins is a reason to avoid adding new weapon types.

Your central argument literally makes that point, "We need better variety for both cosmetics and skills when it comes to weapons" — if cosmetics are part of the reason, then there's no value in adding e.g. polearms unless they plan to add a lot of polearm skins to the game.

@Just a flesh wound.3589 has outlined just some of the issues. Others include needing multiple animations for use of such weapons for each profession and each elite, testing existing animations that are weapon-agnostic (e.g. gliding, mount travel, etc), and more.

There are good reasons for wanting new weapon types in the games, good reasons for adding them. However, it undermines the cause to assume that the costs will be anything less than substantial, in both the short term and long term.

I wish they'd add flails and just make it the weapon for the next set of elite specs on all classes

@Steve The Cynic.3217 said:

@"Einlanzer.1627" said:The problem is that we need an update to what's available

Because the game is old, getting stale, and a new Elite spec every 2 -4 years isn't enough.

There are still many weapon options available to each profession like MH focus for Necro (>_<), MH war horn for Warrior, rifle or pistol for many professions (rifle Ele?), etc.

Also, like greatsword for Mesmer, weapons do not need to have the animations or function expected. Thief got a melee staff, which was a lot more like the land-spear ideas from before HoT and showed way more staff movement than core professions used.

More concerning than weapon types is potential for specializations becoming redundant even within a profession. What happens when a profession can fill almost any role with the specializations it already has? The performance gaps built into each profession are being filled by specializations. Why swap to another profession when rebuilding a favotite is good enough?

The next set of elite specializations had better add entirely new capabilities like gliders and mounts did. For example,

• Mesmer opening a temporary way point,
• Engineer being able to add armor to AI pets,
• Ranger buffing mounts,
• Guardian detecting enemies stealthed at close range or not in stealth at long range,
• Thief getting loot bonuses,
• Mesmer cloning an entire group at a fake location that shows on the mini map,
• Revenant creating a 1-person portal directly through a wall,
• Warrior using adrenaline to buff a utility skill like a shout,
• Elementalist using elements to power devices or put wind in a ship's sails, etc.

Because the game is old, getting stale, and a new Elite spec every 2 -4 years isn't enough.If 9 new elites isn't enough every 2-3 years (it hasn't been even 2 years since PoF launched), then how would adding a single weapon help, especially if it was done without many skins or without revamping at least one trait line per prof?

And if ANet were to do all that work, how would that help speed the pace of changes, rather than slow things down? Or if ANet changed priorities so it could do all the above within a shorter period of time, why pick "new weapons" instead of new prof or new race or any of a number of other things that people also want from older games?

what we need is equalizing the weapons so one prof doesn't have more choices than the other, engineers are lacking weapons like mad while warriors have so many they will hit a wall really fast.

Whatever will let me punch things. Let's do it.

I see no need for this. Elites get new weapons every time one is released. Adding weapons to reduce 'staleness' is a fallacy ... there have been more significant introductions of things to address 'staleness' and if they don't do it for you, a new weapon most certainly won't.

Honestly, adding more weapons is such a low value proposition to me as a player, especially on classes that have lots of weapons already. MAYBE adding a weapon to Rev or Ele could be interesting, but that's about it ... everything else pretty much has it covered. It's even LESS value to you if you are a player concerned about performance ... because the likelihood that the weapon they add is optimal on a specific class for whatever game mode you want is almost zero.

@Tails.9372 said:I want MINIGUNS for warriors, rocket launchers for engineers and submachine guns for thiefs.

As long as my ranger gets an assault rifle, I'm happy.

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Einlanzer.1627 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Or they can just improve the usefulness of existing weapons rather add news one that may just be mediocre or cause others to become (more) mediocre.

Was no need for mounts but people wanted them, now look at how appreciated they are? This bullshit context you people love to use (Yes YOU people) When someone wants something new for a game they love is astoundingly ignorant. New races, proffessions, and weapon types > More of the same, which in reality is all the expansions have offered. More of the same, more of the same taking a weapon changing it slightly with different use and interactions but basically cutting as many corners as possible. Which in my opinion is lazy, it is. The only reason I feel it has been this way for so long is because they had the majority of seasoned guild wars staff on other projects; Which meant we had people who were not as experienced with the IP working on it.

That and the budget was kind of limited, they couldn't go ham on guild wars as it was NOT their focus where as now it is and will probably be for the foreseeable future. It will happen in time and no arguing or bitching semantics will change it; New races and classes sell expansions, new weapons will also keep existing and reoccurring players invested. Id rather new things over old things; Example for comparison.Warriors have almost every weapon unlocked that fits them, properly at least. A spear, flail, great-ax or something else would fit far better than a scepter or staff made into this weapon type. They need new weapons and could be one of the forerunners into knew weapon-types going forward as they have the most accessible right now. This keeps warrior from growing stale because all they get is hand-me-downs. (melee staff is already done, why re-do it on the warrior for example.)

Revenant on the other hand is EXCEEDINGLY limited in weapon variation so they can afford to have old weapons added in unique ways, I.E The hammer and how it function. since it's so limited and it has already set the precedent that it can take older weapons and make them weird, but accesible and fun then sure why not; Other classes also can go with this trend. But the warrior can't afford to mimic a melee staff because rev and thief already do it and cover both methods of function. (Cc/heal and CC/damage.) Not much more a warrior can do with that; Same with how Scepter/focus or heck even short bow would feel as it would just be something we have already seen and is not that new. So warriors feel like they get the shaft because next expansion their weapons are pretty much done.

They could bring spears on-land along with tridents, why not we have two legendaries in the game and they are not used often at all with all things considered so that spares the team of worrying on that front. We could also perhaps have other new and inventive weapon types; I wouldn't mind seeing maybe some hand to hand type weapons such as claws or fists. Maybe A great-ax or a lance, maybe something else that could be super cool like a scythe or a scimitar the list is quite endless and A-net is stifling their creativity by saying "Weapons we already have only" for elite specs designed to change your class. (This also helps the Spec feel stand-alone on its class, as it makes it so perhaps for a time its the ONLY one able to use this weapon.) And then trickle it down to the other characters and use it, which basically opens endless doors of possibility.

@sorudo.9054 said:what we need is equalizing the weapons so one prof doesn't have more choices than the other, engineers are lacking weapons like mad while warriors have so many they will hit a wall really fast.

That miiiiiiiiight have something to do with engineers using kits as their unique entirely different weapon types.

@Thornwolf.9721 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

@Einlanzer.1627 said:

@Ayrilana.1396 said:Or they can just improve the usefulness of existing weapons rather add news one that may just be mediocre or cause others to become (more) mediocre.

There is lots of things Anet could do to keep the game from being stale so I don't think it's a good argument for introducing new weapons to classes in the first place. The relevant questions are what value it gives and how much work it takes.