Feedback talk:User/Copper Legray/Dual Wielding for Rangers

unless i read your post to quickly and didn't get the point - rangers can duel wield axes

Yeah, you didn't get the point x). He's promoting that rangers should be able to dual wield swords and daggers, not just only axes. --Eclipse143 23:17, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Is it a little easier to read now? Copper Legray 01:11, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from with this, its very logical to assume that if you can dual weild axes, then why not swords? But I dont think Anet designed it that way purely based on that logic. If they did then 1) the weapon combinations for each proffession would become less unique 2) they would have let every proffesion that can dual weild one weapon do it for any single handed weapons they can use 3) this would addmore skills to the game which requires more balancing and moves a bit further away from the goal they had for skills in GW2, which is to have a smaller range of skills, but have them all good skills; quality over quantity. --Jimmer123 11:41, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I see the logic too, but Anet made rangers use daggers in their offhand because they use them as throwing weapons, and the sword is for fast, quick strikes. You cant do that with dual wielding swords, not as effectively.--Neithan Diniem 03:59, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

you know, the way anet have created gw2s skill/weapon system they could add new weapons and skills to existing professions with relative ease. yes it would take balancing but would still be a lot less balancing then the original game. maybe when they release an expansion with a new race/profession they could also add an additional weapon to existing professions who would then need that expansion to gain access to the new weapon/s via a quest.--Nevermind 13:12, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

I like this. I think it's kinda silly that mesmer gets to dual swords, while ranger, which in most games (see DnD) are masters of dual wielding. Githyan 15:16, 13 June 2012 (UTC)