You got one part right here. It's not good to assume that axe got buffed strictly for PvP, I'll give you that. Then comes the question... why was it buffed? I'm sure as hell it wasn't for OW PvE. Anything works there. Wait... here it comes... maybe it was underperforming! But what is that nonsense I bolded in your comment: "A weapon getting buffed does not immediately imply it was for reasons of performance"? Wow... just wow. So why did they buff it then if it wasn't for performance? I'm pretty sure it was for performance. It's pretty much stated in the patch notes. I had to dig up the patch notes that improved axe. I started here https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/info/updates/Game-Update-Notes-October-18-2016. Anet pretty much states here " In addition to a couple of minor bug fixes, we wanted to improve the viability of necromancer power builds, which have been somewhat lacking in presence." Many changes are conceptual and good performance is just a bonus? Are you positive about this? I'm looking at patch notes. Most of them are geared towards resolving performance issues. When you say conceptual are you talking about thematics? Like if the skills, traits, weapons match the theme of the class? Doesn't seem like it to me. They do mind the theme and concept of the character but the end-goal seems to be performance. I don't have a choice for a fast, consistent, but less burst melee weapon. Dagger should have been that but it isn't consistent. Nothing fits the criteria so i have nothing to choose from, hence, no choice except to change playstyle and either go with utility of staff, or cleave and slow burst of GS. Do you understand what build diversity is? I think that's what Anet is currently campaigning for with the current PvP/WvW splits.