3 Simple questions about gunsaber

[Zekent.3652]

1: Why can't we stow it?
2: Why is it so poorly designed?
3: Why do we hold it like it's a greatsword and not a katana?

[Geoff Fey.1035]

1: Weapon was designed as a kit, therefore not stowable. Animation for Rama is NPC only

2: Depends on what you mean:

• Damage - Overcompensating cooldowns due to ammo design. Overfocus on Dragon Slash over Gunsaber with regards to damage.
• Utility - Unknown; assumed to be a lack of developers' understanding of Warrior, whereby Warrior weapons provide damage & utility and utility skills provide sustainability & "stat bonuses", unlike most other professions where weapons are damage, Utility are utility & sustainability, and Traits are stat bonuses.
• Mechanically - Attempted to make it a "weapon" but it is effectively a weapon kit. Does not allow interaction with current "weapon" coding of GW2. F1 co-opted to get around this to provide a "kit instead of burst" instead of simply providing weapon kit.

3: Easiest copy/paste. No additional coding, animation, or processes required. Similar to many re-used animations for all EoD Elite Specs.

Edited July 23, 2022 by Geoff Fey.1035

[Fueki.4753]

21 hours ago, Zizekent.2398 said:

1: Why can't we stow it?
2: Why is it so poorly designed?
3: Why do we hold it like it's a greatsword and not a katana?

1. Because Arenanet doesn't want us to be able to stow it.

2. Because it's not a mechanic for one of their favourite professions, but a mechanic for Warrior.

3. Because they didn't want to spend too many resources on creating a new posture or new animations for Warrior. And technically, the not-a-sabre is closer to an oodachi than a katana, despite its misleading artwork.

Edited July 24, 2022 by Fueki.4753

[Zekent.3652]

56 minutes ago, Fueki.4753 said:

 

3. Because they didn't want to spend too many resources on creating a new posture or new animations for Warrior. And technically, the not-a-sabre is closer to an oodachi than a katana, despite its misleading artwork.

Rama holds it with 1 hand
 

 

[Fueki.4753]

1 hour ago, Zizekent.2398 said:

Rama holds it with 1 hand
 

 

And that's not an actual ingame combat, with the not-a-sabre being much smaller than the one players use.

If you look at 1:37 in the video, he two-hands it and it is closer in size to what players use.

But even without that, Rama is a special case (like Minister Li). He's build especially for that weapon. He's not bound to the same limits as player Warriors.

[Infinity.2876]

14 minutes ago, Fueki.4753 said:

He's not bound to the same limits as player Warriors.

What? How can this be? 

We can have to be out classed by an npc?

 

I think it should have been like a light saber from star wars.

You hold it with two hands to put extra force into your blocks and attacks but it's not necessary

Not to mention the fact that the color text when you hover over the trait line clearly says you've mastered it not your some young kid holding a knife that he's never used before

Edited July 24, 2022 by Infinity.2876

[DanAlcedo.3281]

23 hours ago, Geoff Fey.1035 said:

1: Weapon was designed as a kit, therefore not stowable. Animation for Rama is NPC only

2: Depends on what you mean:

• Damage - Overcompensating cooldowns due to ammo design. Overfocus on Dragon Slash over Gunsaber with regards to damage.
• Utility - Unknown; assumed to be a lack of developers' understanding of Warrior, whereby Warrior weapons provide damage & utility and utility skills provide sustainability & "stat bonuses", unlike most other professions where weapons are damage, Utility are utility & sustainability, and Traits are stat bonuses.
• Mechanically - Attempted to make it a "weapon" but it is effectively a weapon kit. Does not allow interaction with current "weapon" coding of GW2. F1 co-opted to get around this to provide a "kit instead of burst" instead of simply providing weapon kit.

3: Easiest copy/paste. No additional coding, animation, or processes required. Similar to many re-used animations for all EoD Elite Specs.

While your answer is true, its maybe not the answer players want to hear.

Its like , if a person asks why they dont get a living wage and you answer "Because your boss is greedy".

 

[itspomf.9523]

3 hours ago, Fueki.4753 said:

3. Because they didn't want to spend too many resources on creating a new posture or new animations for Warrior.

 

Meanwhile, Specter gets warrior Axe 1 animation chain ... gg Anet a real swell job /s

[Fueki.4753]

2 minutes ago, itspomf.9523 said:

 

Meanwhile, Specter gets warrior Axe 1 animation chain ... gg Anet a real swell job /s

Now we need more Sceptres that look like axes.

[Geoff Fey.1035]

48 minutes ago, DanAlcedo.3281 said:

Its like , if a person asks why they dont get a living wage and you answer "Because your boss is greedy".

Sorry, I was trying to take opinion out of the response so I didn't clutter things with my normal ramblings.

ANet really hasn't sat down and provided reasoning for why they developed the Gunsaber the way they did. I would say there are arguably better ways it could have been implemented but I honestly don't know--I assume it was largely due to trying to shoehorn that into GW2's spaghetti-code.

We can infer a lot of stuff but the biggest assumption is that it was less resource intensive to just co-opt largely what stuff was already in game and just apply them to the new Elite Specs. When HoT was released ANet made sure to create an entirely new animation for the Daredevil staff fighting because the original was... awful (magic fidgetspinner stance).

From what I've seen, nearly all Elite Specs of the EoD just re-use animations already in-game or at most have 1-2 new animations for 1-2 skills?