Would probably be better to keep that out of the "changes" thread, and move it to a new one. :) So I'll leave it at that.
I just don't understand.. why would we need Pistol support?
I feel that while yes, we should be able to adequately Mimic other professions, it shouldn't be a complete copy. Even assuming that it's possible to give Agents support for near every weapon option (and I can assure you that it's not), do you want to be an exact copy of the "real deal"? Surely, if you wanted to play a real Bureaucrat you'd roll one..
So, alternative weapon options sure, if we can provide Funcom with a good reasoning as to the why/how we want them. Pulling a "James Bond uses Pistols!" doesn't really suffice, he also uses Grenade Launchers, Assault Rifles, exploding watches, timebombs, etc - asking for all of that isn't realistic.
Now, an example for Bow support reasoning would be: bows are a silent weapon. No heat signature, no light, no "bang". This fits right in with assassination/sniping in a hostile environment.
Ranged Energy? Laserbeams hello, where oh where would the Agent be shooting from? :p
SMG? Noisy, easy to spot where the fire's coming from, lots of recoil, usually inaccurate..
It is also crucial to focus. I can tell you right now, there's no way we're going to "get it all" and become some sort of uberprofession. When you think up suggestions you HAVE to stay realistic, and asking for 5 new weapon options to be supported doesn't fall under realistic for me.
How come not? Seems there's something grossly wrong when an Artillery profession is getting consistently outdamaged by things like Doctors.. as well get beaten up by a little white rabbit.. oh, wait. :p
I know we've had this discussion before, but could you please just explain why you feel detaunts are needed if we don't have the damage to take aggro?