[Request] Weapon swap during combat [Merged]

[Forum Moderator.3074]

Hey'all I would like to remind you all to please keep things civil and constructive.

[draxynnic.3719]

16 hours ago, Panda.1967 said:

That is NOT why toolbelt skills were made. Toolbelt skills were made because every profession has a class mechanic to interact with. Warriors have Adrenaline and Bursts, Mesmers have Shatters, Necromancers have Death Shroud, Rangers have Pets, Guardians have Virtues, Elementalists have Attunements… Engineers were given Toolbelt as their class mechanic way back before the first alpha test.

Profession mechanics aren't designed in a vacuum - they're part of the overall design of a profession. We can't say with absolute certainty without the original developers coming in (and people would probably question if they were who they said they were even then), but there is a clear chain of cause and effect there. Engineers don't have weaponswap because kits perform that function. This means that taking kits means having fewer utility skills, and any non-kit utilities have to compete with kits. The toolbelt smoothly addresses both problems - if you take a kit you have the associated toolbelt skill that's effectively a utility, and if you take a regular utility skill, it's a two-for-one deal. Meanwhile, mechanist signets which don't have toolbelt skills are so powerful that people have been calling them out since release. I don't think any of that is coincidence.

19 hours ago, SoulGuardian.6203 said:

Thanks for this marvellous long essay, when we already established from page one, that weapon swap would be for core engineers only, and restrictions to one weapon kit only.

That way, it would max at 4 weapons, counting sword/pistol and pistol/shield, bow or rifle, and 1 weapon kit.

5 if you use sword and pistol twice, but you'd have skill cd to consider.

So, after all that long essay, what exactly is the advantage here, or all that panic over possible nerfs?

And let's get one thing clear here once and for all.

"Nothing is set on stone."

ESPECIALLY, not with Arena Net, as we have had the experience countless times throughout the years.

It doesn't matter if this is my OP.

Could have been someone else's... I would still state the same thing.

But it seems it's all or nothing for some people.

No middle ground, no happy medium.

There is always a middle ground.

The suggestions people made so far to apply weapon swap to core only, and restrict weapon kits seems logical and reasonable enough. 

Furthermore, they have been said that the option would be there, but they don't have to use it.

The contradictions seem more like dictatorships to me, rather than trying to reach a solution through democracy.

The lengths people go to, in order to reinforce their own preference is amusing.

You might have noticed that this thread was merged with another, and that there was another 'give engineer weaponswap' thread on the front page when you made this one (it might have slipped to page two now) that was half a dozen pages long. Part of the reason people have been saying things along the lines of 'we just had this conversation' is that we really had.

The post you quoted was specifically responding to the post I quoted. Unless you'd made an argument that engineer should get weaponswap because revenant did (an argument that could be made with elementalist, incidentally, but I've had people argue with me that elementalist was a special case despite probably suffering from lack of weaponswap more), that post didn't apply to you.

FWIW, weaponswap on core might well be workable. Now, ArenaNet has mostly abandoned elite spec tradeoffs as a design principle, and that would be a pretty big one, but some special things for being core still remain and weaponswap could work. Alternatively, a future elite spec could have weaponswap, kind of like a reverse bladesworn. Unlike the initial GW2 release when having weaponswap would have meant choosing between offhand pistol or shield (that, or running p/p and p/sh), there are enough weapons to back it up now.

But I'd be willing to bet a substantial amount of gold that if either of those compromises happened, there'd be a thread demanding weaponswap on the existing elite specs within a year. Particularly since the impetus behind the last thread seemed to be basically 'shortbow is bad and feels like a kit, so to use it we'd need to be able to swap to a regular weapon as well' - but shortbow being a support weapon means that it'd be scrapper or mechanist that you'd want to be doing that with.

[SoulGuardian.6203]

3 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Profession mechanics aren't designed in a vacuum - they're part of the overall design of a profession. We can't say with absolute certainty without the original developers coming in (and people would probably question if they were who they said they were even then), but there is a clear chain of cause and effect there. Engineers don't have weaponswap because kits perform that function. This means that taking kits means having fewer utility skills, and any non-kit utilities have to compete with kits. The toolbelt smoothly addresses both problems - if you take a kit you have the associated toolbelt skill that's effectively a utility, and if you take a regular utility skill, it's a two-for-one deal. Meanwhile, mechanist signets which don't have toolbelt skills are so powerful that people have been calling them out since release. I don't think any of that is coincidence.

You might have noticed that this thread was merged with another, and that there was another 'give engineer weaponswap' thread on the front page when you made this one (it might have slipped to page two now) that was half a dozen pages long. Part of the reason people have been saying things along the lines of 'we just had this conversation' is that we really had.

The post you quoted was specifically responding to the post I quoted. Unless you'd made an argument that engineer should get weaponswap because revenant did (an argument that could be made with elementalist, incidentally, but I've had people argue with me that elementalist was a special case despite probably suffering from lack of weaponswap more), that post didn't apply to you.

FWIW, weaponswap on core might well be workable. Now, ArenaNet has mostly abandoned elite spec tradeoffs as a design principle, and that would be a pretty big one, but some special things for being core still remain and weaponswap could work. Alternatively, a future elite spec could have weaponswap, kind of like a reverse bladesworn. Unlike the initial GW2 release when having weaponswap would have meant choosing between offhand pistol or shield (that, or running p/p and p/sh), there are enough weapons to back it up now.

But I'd be willing to bet a substantial amount of gold that if either of those compromises happened, there'd be a thread demanding weaponswap on the existing elite specs within a year. Particularly since the impetus behind the last thread seemed to be basically 'shortbow is bad and feels like a kit, so to use it we'd need to be able to swap to a regular weapon as well' - but shortbow being a support weapon means that it'd be scrapper or mechanist that you'd want to be doing that with.

I think that I commented in that said thread too, and concur, it was mostly about short bow being more a kit weapon than a main.

If they made those changes, it would be all nice and dandy.

I think that what engineers really needed as a weapon is an off-hand melee weapon, like a mace, which they very much lack of.

I even made a thread requesting one and giving ideas how that weapon would function. 

If there was an official sign up request thread, that would be great.

I don't know how much devs read this, at late.

So one can only hope.

I'm a bit disappointed that trade offs, a concept they were so excited about was completely abandoned. 

I don't know for what reason.

Either lack of resources, ideas, or something else.

I like this bow now, it's not bad, despite needing tweaks, here and there.

But imagine you having it equiped.

The only close range weapon you can use is flame thrower. Which is fine in a squad.

But if you're in a small group and face a few melee experts, you Automatically become useless, unless you're on a holosmith.

Which I personally don't use.

I'm sorry, but I just don't like a lot about it.

Which leaves me with mechanist, which has no toolbelt skills, and once your mech is gone, you're totally vulnerable holding a bow.

Or scrapper, which you can go the coward way and make a runner, while your team mates get decimated. Unless you could swap to hammer or sword and pistol.

So to recap.

Move bow into utilities and give engies a offhand melee weapon.

Or, Allow weapon swap in core engie, and perhaps on mechanist too, which have been stripped of toolbelt skills.

 

As you said, whether engineers were meant to have wrapon swap from the beginning or not.

We may never know for sure. 

I understand people used to it not having so feel that there's no need for it, despite me mentioning several times that it would be optional, and people don't have to use it if they don't want to.

It's not a forced mechanic shoved down your throat. Just like the latest set of weapons.

People just simply don't equip a second set of weapons, and as you were.

Nothing changes.

Most people who are against the idea probably don't even play core engineer to begin with, or mechanist.

In my xp, scrapper and holos are the most used in WvW.

There was a mech hype when they were first released, but soon squads started getting fed up of seeing a mountain of green scrap floating around them and began kicking mechs out of squads... for many other reasons.

I personally wouldn't mind mechs being further nerfed to gain weapon swap.

They are only useful for the first few seconds in a squad vs squad scenario anyways... and in wvw altogether. 

They walk up to too many necro whells, they're gone.

They wont attack if you're up on a wall.

So they are useless most of the time. 

Players will target you not them, so they can hardly even be condidered tanks.

Ranger pets pursue foes until they're out of action.

These oversized green tins of baked beans spend more time walking up and down the passarelle as if they are modeling, than they do attacking.

Like they're gps is screwed up.

Probably mechs do need weapon swap.

 

 

Edited March 24 by SoulGuardian.6203

[Sobx.1758]

On 3/23/2024 at 3:28 PM, Panda.1967 said:

That is NOT why toolbelt skills were made. Toolbelt skills were made because every profession has a class mechanic to interact with.

Kits in combination with toolbelt which doubles heal/utility/elite skills are rather clearly made with no weapon swap being available in mind. Engineer is doing well in all modes, demanding weapon swap while simulaneously keeping weapon swap substitutes doesn't make much sense. If you want weapon swap, you have 7 classes to pick from.

[Panda.1967]

3 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Kits in combination with toolbelt which doubles heal/utility/elite skills are rather clearly made with no weapon swap being available in mind.

The toolbelt was devised as the class mechanic under the concept that every tool in an engineer’s toolkit is can be used in multiple ways. Toolbelt skills act as the alternative use of each utility skill.

3 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

If you want weapon swap, you have 7 classes to pick from.

That is a Bad faith argument. Every class is fundamentally different from one another. Those of us who want weapon swap on engineer WANT TO PLAY ENGINEER. Also, it being capable of performing well doesn’t automatically make all the problems with the profession and many of its ability types go away. Engineer has a fundamental problem because of its lack of weapon swap. If you don’t play holosmith and you don’t slot a weapon kit, you are at a fundamental disadvantage in almost all content. Engineer is the ONLY profession where this problem exists. Elementalists always have attunements available, Bladesworn always have their gunsabre available, and Holosmiths always have their photon forge available. What do all other engineers have? The option of being forced to slot a weapon kit in place of a utlity… Believe it or not, there are plenty of players who love what the engineer has to offer but hate kits and want to be able to play the class to its fullest still. Weapon swap is a necessity to achieve that.

[Sobx.1758]

6 hours ago, Panda.1967 said:

The toolbelt was devised as the class mechanic under the concept that every tool in an engineer’s toolkit is can be used in multiple ways. Toolbelt skills act as the alternative use of each utility skill.

Maybe I misunderstand what you're trying to say here, but I don't see how this is supposed to be negating anything I wrote?
And it's not really "alternative use", it's an "additional use".

6 hours ago, Panda.1967 said:

That is a Bad faith argument. Every class is fundamentally different from one another.

What's a "bad faith argumnet" is a demand that "this class should get it because other class/es have it". As you noticed in the very next sentence, the point of classes is for them to be different, feel different and play differently. When a class (like engi or ele) has their class specific mechanics rather clearly aimed at substituting weapon swaps then suddenly demanding adding weapon swap while keeping those weaponswap substitutes is a bad idea.

6 hours ago, Panda.1967 said:

Engineer has a fundamental problem because of its lack of weapon swap. If you don’t play holosmith and you don’t slot a weapon kit, you are at a fundamental disadvantage in almost all content. Engineer is the ONLY profession where this problem exists. Elementalists always have attunements available, Bladesworn always have their gunsabre available, and Holosmiths always have their photon forge available. What do all other engineers have?

If you play a class and don't use what that class brings then you might indeed be at a disadvantage, which is equally true for any other class. Which still isn't a reason for adding "what that other class has whenever I don't feel like using parts of what my class brings". Even if you refuse to equip kits, you still have toolbelt doubling your heal/utility/elite skills. You're free to make your choices in that regard -and that's even if we forget about engi still being able to do fine without slotting kits.

Edited March 25 by Sobx.1758

[draxynnic.3719]

I'd also observe that part of the issue kitless engi has seems to stem from turrets having been left in the trash for nearly a decade. If you look at the core utilities other than kits, there's a clear trend: elixirs provide boons, gadgets provide utility, turrets contribute to damage. Except that turrets contribute so little to damage in practice that people only bring them for their toolbelt skills.

There have been times when kitless engi has been fairly strong, though.

And let's be real: kits ARE the weaponswap. Yes, they cost a utility slot, but engineers get two-for-one on utilities as it is, so it evens out in the end. If you say you like engineer but there's really no kit that you want to take, that's kinda like someone saying they like mesmer but greatsword is the only weapon they enjoy playing. If anything, the real problem seems to be the lack of updates to kits to make them more attractive.

Seriously, though, in terms of features to substitute for weapon swapping, engineer feels like the kid that's being held up in the swimming pool meme... while elementalist is drowning off to the side, and beta revenant was the skeleton chained to the bottom. (Seriously, there was no realistic chance of making THAT work short of a complete redesign of all of the weapons except mace/axe.)

[haattila.5974]

I used to be against weapon swap for engi.


But let's face it kit are mostly bad. Not because piano build or whatever. Let's just take any Power build it always use the nade kit and you have no choice because you are lacking a weaponswap and therefore without a kit you'd lack filling in your rotation. Yet said kit brings nothing but damage 0 utility be it boon CC or mobility. So yeah i'd trade a nade kit for a weaponswap to either rifle or hammer everytime and even without the toolbet kit i'm pretty sure i wouldn't be losing any DPS and yet it would open a slot for another utility wich could give engi some adaptability in PVE encounter.

Engi's promise was a jack of all trade thanks to kit when compared to weaponswap at release. Nowaday it's the total opposite they bring no mobility no cc no boon and definitly doesn't give you a situational advantage on some encounter.


The medkit is a special case kinda since it's a healing spell and not a utility one.

[draxynnic.3719]

23 hours ago, haattila.5974 said:

I used to be against weapon swap for engi.


But let's face it kit are mostly bad. Not because piano build or whatever. Let's just take any Power build it always use the nade kit and you have no choice because you are lacking a weaponswap and therefore without a kit you'd lack filling in your rotation. Yet said kit brings nothing but damage 0 utility be it boon CC or mobility. So yeah i'd trade a nade kit for a weaponswap to either rifle or hammer everytime and even without the toolbet kit i'm pretty sure i wouldn't be losing any DPS and yet it would open a slot for another utility wich could give engi some adaptability in PVE encounter.

Engi's promise was a jack of all trade thanks to kit when compared to weaponswap at release. Nowaday it's the total opposite they bring no mobility no cc no boon and definitly doesn't give you a situational advantage on some encounter.


The medkit is a special case kinda since it's a healing spell and not a utility one.

That's a problem with kits having been left in the dirt for so long. There are several kits which could support a power build, but they're in such a poor state, and grenade kit so overtuned in comparison when running Explosives, that the other kits just don't get a look in.

[Jerus.4350]

1 hour ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

That's a problem with kits having been left in the dirt for so long. There are several kits which could support a power build, but they're in such a poor state, and grenade kit so overtuned in comparison when running Explosives, that the other kits just don't get a look in.

 Buff Acid Bomb! 😁

[SoulGuardian.6203]

Maybe upgrade the weapon kits as an alternative. 

Elixir gun is outdated, and imho was never that good to begin with.

 

Why not call it link gun or shock rifle, or a fusion of both, and change their skills?

1. A continuous auto rapid fire that shoots green plasma.

2. Shoots a continuous solid but flexible beam that seeks enemies.

This skill can also fix wvw gates, walls, sieges, and when linked to a friendly player, boosts up their attack stats + or by a %

3. Shoots a solid powerful beam.

This skill has a +10% chance to critical hit.

Critical hits have a 1% chance to one shot kill while using this rifle.

4. Shoots seeking lightning spheres.

Skill 3 can explode these spheres, causing wider damage.

5. Hold to charge a massive shot that explodes on impact.

 

Improve grenades with a grenade launcher weapon.

Functions similar to mortar, but much lower ranger, but shoots faster.

Skill effects remain the same.

 

Replace barrels, with another weapon.

This time a melee weapon.

Equip special combat gloves.

You can now use punching as an alternative.

Each skill have the effects of barrels.

Eg, explosive punch. 

 

These are just some ideas as an alternative to weapon swap.

Even though I would still prefer weapon swap.

[Jerus.4350]

6 minutes ago, SoulGuardian.6203 said:

Maybe upgrade the weapon kits as an alternative. 

Elixir gun is outdated, and imho was never that good to begin with.

 

Why not call it link gun or shock rifle, or a fusion of both, and change their skills?

1. A continuous auto rapid fire that shoots green plasma.

2. Shoots a continuous solid but flexible beam that seeks enemies.

This skill can also fix wvw gates, walls, sieges, and when linked to a friendly player, boosts up their attack stats + or by a %

3. Shoots a solid powerful beam.

This skill has a +10% chance to critical hit.

Critical hits have a 1% chance to one shot kill while using this rifle.

4. Shoots seeking lightning spheres.

Skill 3 can explode these spheres, causing wider damage.

5. Hold to charge a massive shot that explodes on impact.

 

Improve grenades with a grenade launcher weapon.

Functions similar to mortar, but much lower ranger, but shoots faster.

Skill effects remain the same.

 

Replace barrels, with another weapon.

This time a melee weapon.

Equip special combat gloves.

You can now use punching as an alternative.

Each skill have the effects of barrels.

Eg, explosive punch. 

 

These are just some ideas as an alternative to weapon swap.

Even though I would still prefer weapon swap.

Or just tweak some numbers here and there instead of completely reworking things that are being used?  Like there are skills that could use reworking (glob shot), but a lot of what’s in kits is perfectly fine and what needs changing is more numbers than how they work, though I’m still praying for faster cast time on box of nails.

 

Engi doesn’t need major reworks to it’s core, just some love to the lesser used skills.

[draxynnic.3719]

I think engineer could use some new weapon kits, but not at the expense of those that already exist, especially ones that are being used - eg elixir gun in support builds. Continuing that example, elixir gun actually used to be a pretty good ranged plus a bit of self-sustain option, with the glob and the acid pool being strong power attacks. It's just that kits have been left behind.

[SoulGuardian.6203]

3 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

I think engineer could use some new weapon kits, but not at the expense of those that already exist, especially ones that are being used - eg elixir gun in support builds. Continuing that example, elixir gun actually used to be a pretty good ranged plus a bit of self-sustain option, with the glob and the acid pool being strong power attacks. It's just that kits have been left behind.

That, and turrets.

How many times has been requested that turrets need upgrading.

More than I can count.

There has even been some really cool and neat ideas, such as giving them mechanical legs, like spiders, or some can hover, and they follow you around...?

Then the F toolbelt skills need to be exactly related to the turret you have equipped. 

EG, the flame turret has a Fskill blast fireball that creates a ground fire field.

Put the imagination at work, and call them mini bots instead of turrets.

 

Another thing is the engineers have way too many nets.

A net turrets, net toolbelt, net on elite turret, nets underwater.

Surely there are so many other skills that can be used other than nets.

Even the rifle has a net.

Why not change the rifle, and just slightly alter it to  crippling shot?

A normal bullet that cripples or immobilises?

 

But I still think that weapon swap should be given to mechanists.

They have no toolbelt skills, and only have 3 mech fskills.

But you spend just as much time fighting without it as with it.

In a wvw scenario, when you're fighting another team, the mech isn't that useful to begin with.

I've seen some really good 1vs1 mech experts, true.

Using knockdown skills, but it's an entire different story in squad vs squad.

Mechs could definitely do with having weapon swap.

[draxynnic.3719]

Eh, mechanists are powerful enough that not being able to leverage their strengths as well in WvW is not, I think, a justification to give them weapon swap in all modes.

[Ravenwulfe.5360]

On 4/1/2024 at 9:25 PM, draxynnic.3719 said:

Eh, mechanists are powerful enough that not being able to leverage their strengths as well in WvW is not, I think, a justification to give them weapon swap in all modes.

Not sure what this is arguing. I mean if you want to directly compare and contrast then I would say... Firebrand books then which are toolkits in all their functions and utilities.

[strangewayes.2509]

I personally find it annoying when I'm using a full melee build out in the world, and there's something ranged that everyone can shoot at, but I'm stuck taking damage, or using a long cooldown just to hit it, when I have a rifle sitting there doing nothing. I know its a hotly debated topic, but that's all I'd really use it for.

[ArgothCZ.6420]

45 minutes ago, strangewayes.2509 said:

I personally find it annoying when I'm using a full melee build out in the world, and there's something ranged that everyone can shoot at, but I'm stuck taking damage, or using a long cooldown just to hit it, when I have a rifle sitting there doing nothing. I know its a hotly debated topic, but that's all I'd really use it for.

Yeah! Exactly. This is why I would be more for the weapon swap being available when not using weapon slot skills for a few seconds when in combat...even for ele.

And also improve some weapon kits for engi to bring them into current days.

[draxynnic.3719]

On 4/9/2024 at 9:01 AM, Ravenwulfe.5360 said:

Not sure what this is arguing. I mean if you want to directly compare and contrast then I would say... Firebrand books then which are toolkits in all their functions and utilities.

Toolkits don't draw from a limited, shared resource. If the page mechanic was removed altogether and tome skills were limited purely by their own cooldowns (even if those cooldowns were increased), then you could make that comparison.

[Ravenwulfe.5360]

24 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Toolkits don't draw from a limited, shared resource. If the page mechanic was removed altogether and tome skills were limited purely by their own cooldowns (even if those cooldowns were increased), then you could make that comparison.

If the page system was restrictive I would agree, but you also forget that the tomes give free buffs as well. You are kind of tunnel visioning your view of things, where toolkits don't give such benefits, and the buttons you want with them aren't exactly on short CDs to begin with. The toolkit benefits are very narrow comparatively, and in many situations some are just slotted just because there is nothing better in the slot, and if it's not doing anything then it's not really helping. Where as a tome if it's not doing anything it's still providing a passive benefit.

The more they keep adding weapons the less the excuse of "EnGiNeEr HaS tOoLkItS" is becoming a viable excuse anymore, especially when firebrand has essentially the same things that also provide passive buffing. And let's not even begin to get into how limited toolkits are in their viability these days. And let's not forget that the shortbow has already brought the case, this weapon on its own is no good but if it was a swap weapon it might be useful. I know people try to force that square peg into that round hole in their builds, but frankly the shortbow will never be more viable or provide better utility than mace/shield in its current state. It just won't.

[Jerus.4350]

5 hours ago, Ravenwulfe.5360 said:

 

 And let's not even begin to get into how limited toolkits are in their viability these days. 

Or we get into that conversation instead of fundamentally changing how Engineer plays.  If we have legitimate gaps in the profession that toolkits should be filling, let’s change that.  Feeling like you need to have rifle on swap for range?  What if rifle were just not crap to begin with?  
 

Nothing is fundamentally wrong with how Engi plays, it’s different and that is intended.  
 

 

and short now is fine.  Not taking the default support weapon slot but there are plenty of reasons to take it.  Apparently in an interview they stated that they wanted to give Engi something similar to Ele support Staff, and I think shortbow is that or better..  Still would like something on the auto and a look at cooldowns though.

[Ravenwulfe.5360]

22 minutes ago, Jerus.4350 said:

Or we get into that conversation instead of fundamentally changing how Engineer plays.  If we have legitimate gaps in the profession that toolkits should be filling, let’s change that.  Feeling like you need to have rifle on swap for range?  What if rifle were just not crap to begin with?  
 

Nothing is fundamentally wrong with how Engi plays, it’s different and that is intended.  
 

 

and short now is fine.  Not taking the default support weapon slot but there are plenty of reasons to take it.  Apparently in an interview they stated that they wanted to give Engi something similar to Ele support Staff, and I think shortbow is that or better..  Still would like something on the auto and a look at cooldowns though.

It's a rather baffling statement when you not only just try to downplay or alter what I am saying, and cut out everything, but also try to imply rifle is some how some super weak weapon, by this statement you are implying even weaker than the bow. maybe the major probalby is also the over reliance on the toolkit meta as well since there are huge chunks of the engineer kit that have no place in any game mode. This idea you would be changing the fundamental design of the engineer is just baffling bizarre take that is smacking hard against the line of being pretty close to outrageously disingenuous.

[Jerus.4350]

25 minutes ago, Ravenwulfe.5360 said:

It's a rather baffling statement when you not only just try to downplay or alter what I am saying, and cut out everything, but also try to imply rifle is some how some super weak weapon, by this statement you are implying even weaker than the bow. maybe the major probalby is also the over reliance on the toolkit meta as well since there are huge chunks of the engineer kit that have no place in any game mode. This idea you would be changing the fundamental design of the engineer is just baffling bizarre take that is smacking hard against the line of being pretty close to outrageously disingenuous.

Adding weapon swap to Engi would be a fundamental change to its gameplay and I don’t understand how that is confusing.  
 

and rifle is bad, it’s always been bad, yes even when it was the 3 shot auto.  Its dps is pathetic compared to hammer or sword/pistol.  Rocket jump and the push back are the only reasons it should ever be taken from a functionality standpoint and those situations are rare.  Shortbow is just a tad worse than mace/shield in many situations and better in others.

[Shadowpeixera.2918]

The day Anet buffs/rework kits into something actually decent, besides FT/Grenades, is the day this discussion dies.

Let's be honest, most people want weaponswap because most kit options are subpar. Fix that issue, and the whole point is moot. Of course, i'm sure it'll come together with the turret rework...in Guild Wars 3.

[draxynnic.3719]

18 hours ago, Ravenwulfe.5360 said:

If the page system was restrictive I would agree, but you also forget that the tomes give free buffs as well. You are kind of tunnel visioning your view of things, where toolkits don't give such benefits, and the buttons you want with them aren't exactly on short CDs to begin with. The toolkit benefits are very narrow comparatively, and in many situations some are just slotted just because there is nothing better in the slot, and if it's not doing anything then it's not really helping. Where as a tome if it's not doing anything it's still providing a passive benefit.

The more they keep adding weapons the less the excuse of "EnGiNeEr HaS tOoLkItS" is becoming a viable excuse anymore, especially when firebrand has essentially the same things that also provide passive buffing. And let's not even begin to get into how limited toolkits are in their viability these days. And let's not forget that the shortbow has already brought the case, this weapon on its own is no good but if it was a swap weapon it might be useful. I know people try to force that square peg into that round hole in their builds, but frankly the shortbow will never be more viable or provide better utility than mace/shield in its current state. It just won't.

The page system is restrictive enough that you can't stick in a tome indefinitely without effectively afking, so tomes can't replace weaponswap in functionality, unlike kits (used to be possible with Tome of Justice as long as you kept scoring kills, but no longer). The page system also means that using one tome impacts your ability to use other tomes, unlike kits. You also don't have half a dozen tomes to pick from in order to complement your weapon and build, unlike kits, you're stuck with what you have regardless of whether it's useful or not. The passive buffs you're saying I've forgotten about are just the core guardian traits continuing to function (mostly), and I don't see anybody here proposing to trade engineer's toolbelt for a weaponswap (not to mention that if you take the right traits, you CAN get something similar for kits).

Like other people have said, and I've said a few times myself, the underperformance of kits should be resolved by improving the kits. Kits and turrets are supposed to be the main features of engineer - problem is, kits have been left to rot for years, and turrets have been in the dirt since 2015. Being more direct, the problem was that we had a balance lead for years that just didn't like kits, and the new team doesn't seem to have got around to rectifying that.

The whole "shortbow feels like a swap" (many people I've talked to have been even more direct and said that it feels like a kit) is why I floated the thought earlier about whether it would be reasonable for engineer to get another kit in lieu of another weapon. Because kits can be designed to be used alongside at least one other weapon, would have the potential to be something really exotic rather than having to be squeezed into a concept that fits within the established list of weapons, and a new kit probably would be just as significant for engineer as a new weapon would be for another profession.