steves

I know I'm arriving at this party very late (because I didn't see it until now...) but nobody is trying to 'not answer' anything and there are no 'difficult questions' - there are only questions that some moderators may not know the answer to as they're not privy to all information. I'll say this: I'm sitting next to the guys that are writing the DAM... It's a thing.

I applaud your use of  "line end effects" rather than "arrowheads."
It is so 1980s to think in terms of just arrowheads. As with other still-missing features, I very much hope that the reason for the delay is that the Affinity team has something far better in mind than the prevalent conventional wisdom.
Those who also follow Gravit Designer's (rapid, but sometimes too rapid) development know that it has been under a similar "must have" outcry for "arrowheads," and that it was just recently added. I have high regard for Gravit's  nobel effort to restore what has been for too long abandoned in vector drawing programs: interface elegance. But its obviously rushed-out-the-door arrowheads treatment is possibly the poorest I've ever seen. I sure don't want to see Affinity go that way due to unrelenting user pressure.
Paths have strokes and paths have ends. Nowadays, everyone expects (and rightly so) vector-based path stroke features to be far more elaborate than just the archaic basic color, weight, and end caps settings. Sadly, Illustrator's Pattern, Art, and Scatter Brushes (despite their needlessly overblown interface and lack of integration with other features) leads that functionality and is one of the really very few true advantages of that program.
All the while expecting more sophistication for path strokes, there seems to be a prevalent fixation on the archaic single-purpose use of "arrowheads" as path ends. Yes, arrowheads are a common need. But they are just a pointy-shaped vector graphic positioned at the end of a path and rotated to maintain tangency with the path's stroke. Thinking of "arrowheads" as a distinct feature needing its own interface is as archaic as thinking of dashes as something worthy of a standalone interface entirely distinct from other path strokes.
Even the conventional treatment of "brushes" misses the elegance mark. It's an example of how the typically-strained "natural media" metaphor breaks down. Like Illustrator, most programs have come to treat "Brushes" as an attribute. But in the physical media metaphor, a brush is not an attribute; it's a tool. A brush applies strokes, just as a pen or a pencil applies strokes.
Paths have strokes and paths have ends. Path ends should be every bit as versatile as path strokes (including so-called brushes). Both represent opportunity to exceed the functionality and disconnected non-integration with the rest of Illustrator's cumbersome, scattered, and grab-bag-like interface. Powerful as they can be when used with a little ingenuity, Illustrator's brushes are hamstrung by their stand-alone nature:
You can't simply use a Symbol as the "end tile" of a Pattern Brush. Why? You can set an option on or off to "Scale Strokes and Effects" for any ordinary object(s) in the document, but you can't set that for Symbols, strokes contained in Art Brushes, or strokes contained in Tiles of Pattern Brushes. Why? You can't simply assign a Symbol as a path end. Illustrator has its archaic separate Arrowheads setting. You can create custom Arrowheads, but to do so, you have to open a separate Arrowheads file, draw your custom "Arrowhead", and store it in that separate document as--wait for it--yes, a Symbol! You then quit the program, re-launch the program, re-open your document and now your "Custom Arrowhead" is available in the stupid separate Arrowheads popups of the Attributes panel. Arguably (albeit a stretch), Adobe may have somewhat of an excuse for this convoluted nonsense in that it is a very, very old program, so certain archaic aspects have to be perpetuated for the users' old files. But Affinity is new; it should be free of such backward constraints. I'll say it again: Market share be hanged. Adobe Illustrator IS NOT the program for anyone to emulate in creating a far better drawing program.
Nowadays, most programs provide a symbols feature. Path ends should be integrated with symbols. Any symbol should be able to be applied as a path ending. The interface for applying a symbol as a path end should include these options:
Setting the rotation angle of the symbol, and whether that angle is relative to the page or to the path. Setting the scale of the symbol (relative to how it is stored) and whether changing the path's stroke weight correspondingly affects the scale of its ends. Setting for whether or not strokes contained within the symbol's artwork are scaled. Most programs treat paths as having two primary attributes: stroke and fill. But they really have three: stroke, fill, and ends. It's way past time for someone to provide a modern, powerful, and elegantly integrated treatment of path ends.
JET

Agreed!  
I think we have been quite patient waiting for this feature. Moreover, I have recommended to others that Affinity be considered on many occassions. For some reason, this feature request keeps getting put off and I have nearly lost all faith amd trust in this company. I can no longer recommend this product.
 
I recall one developer saying arrowheads was a complicated feature. Well, if preview can do arrowheads, I do not understand why we cannot have a basic arrowhead in AD. Maybe management needs to think about hiring a new developer? Or instead of trying to implement arrowhead utopia, they could just give us what we can get with Preview. For heavens sake, its already baked into OSX.
 
Similar to your situation, my use case involves a lot of technical and marketing illustrations and arrowheads are required in nearly everything I do. And likewise, I never seem to be abe to use AD for anything useful. In fact, I use Autodesk Graphic for all my illustrations these days. Apologies for the criticism.

Lets be honest with each other here and stop with all this "fake news". There is currently no viable workaround for arrowheads in Designer. The so called "workarounds" mentioned are not in anyway useful or acceptable. Moreover, anyone who thinks these so called workarounds are useful has either no use for arrowheads, does not use arrowheads or is being dishonest to try and prioritize their own feature requests. It's about time Serif addressed this long standing feature request.

Lets be honest with each other here and stop with all this "fake news". There is currently no viable workaround for arrowheads in Designer. The so called "workarounds" mentioned are not in anyway useful or acceptable. Moreover, anyone who thinks these so called workarounds are useful has either no use for arrowheads, does not use arrowheads or is being dishonest to try and prioritize their own feature requests. It's about time Serif addressed this long standing feature request.

Ok, I am going to pipe in here facitiously... forget the dang iPad app for heavens sake. Besides, there is a viable workaround ... use a mac!
 
Now, lets get on with the arrowheads!

Lets be honest with each other here and stop with all this "fake news". There is currently no viable workaround for arrowheads in Designer. The so called "workarounds" mentioned are not in anyway useful or acceptable. Moreover, anyone who thinks these so called workarounds are useful has either no use for arrowheads, does not use arrowheads or is being dishonest to try and prioritize their own feature requests. It's about time Serif addressed this long standing feature request.