Bro u literally stole this from someone else. He had a Facebook post with this exact same text.

[b]INTRODUCTION[/b] ➝ While I love what this game is trying to be, the reality of it is harsh when experienced against my expectations. The concept for the game is great, but until its potential has come to pass it will always be a figment of the imagination. I will identify and offer solutions to major issues that plague this game. I will try to be as concise as possible to minimize the burden of effort on the part of the reader. However, keep in mind the density of the information being addressed. [b]WEAPON BALANCING[/b] ➝ First and foremost, weapon balancing is a major issue. Even a few dead flies can ruin a perfume, as it says in Ecclesiastes. These issues don't need to exist in great volume, but it's that they exist at all. These few broken mechanics have sufficient potency to destroy PVP. The identification of these problems and their solutions are as follows… [b]Snipers[/b] ➝ Final Round should be removed from all Snipers – past, present, and future. The capacity to kill a target with a single sniper shot to the body is too extreme. [b]Shotguns[/b] ➝ Shot Package and Range Finder should be removed from all Shotguns – past, present, and future. The range of a shotgun with these perks is too extreme. [b]Exotic Hand Cannons[/b] [b] Thorn[/b] [u]Generally[/u] ➝ The Impact and Range should be reduced. [u]Breakdown[/u] ➝ Its primary feature should be the ability to poison a target. This prevents them from regenerating health and can effectively remove them from participating in an engagement. It also increases the window to attack an injured target for both the individual and their teammates. [u]Peak Efficiency[/u] ➝ A 3 shot minimum to kill if at least 2 shots are headshots. [u]Application[/u] ➝ This should primarily be a close range weapon, but it should be efficient at medium range. Past medium range there should be a sharp damage fall off. At medium range it should be less accurate. This can be accomplished by increasing the spread of the weapon and balancing it with appropriate target acquisition. This way the target acquisition will become less effective as the spread becomes greater over distance. [b]Hawkmoon[/b] [u]Generally[/u] ➝ The lucky shots should be spread between individual rounds. [u]Breakdown[/u] ➝ 2 shots are roughly 1/6th of the magazine and 3 lucky shots would translate to roughly 1/4th of the magazine. The fraction of the magazine used within 2 shots is less than the fraction of the magazine that would provide a lucky shot on average. This means 2 shot instances would not always be guaranteed and some lucky shots would be rendered useless as they are expended in circumstances where a regular shot would have been sufficient. This would balance the power of the perks against the impact of the weapon. [u]Peak Efficiency[/u] ➝ A 2 shot minimum to kill only if both shots are headshots and one of them is a lucky shot, or both body shots are lucky shots. [u]Application[/u] ➝ It should remain powerful and accurate over great range. [b]Last Word[/b] [u]Generally[/u] ➝ This weapon is broken and should be removed from the game, or replaced with an alternative weapon design. I see no viable solution that does not effectively transform the weapon into a primary sidearm. If the weapon does remain in the game, the headshot glitch responsible for the extremely low TTK occurrences should be fixed – at the very least. [u]Breakdown[/u] ➝ The philosophy “if you can’t beat them join them” does not validate what you associate with as beyond reproach. It merely sounds clever at face value and attempts to place one who disagrees in a defensive position by requiring a sufficient counter-argument. Theoretically, if the Americans could not have defeated the Germans should they have joined them? If one truly takes issue with something they must be willing to suffer for the sake of opposing it. The guarantee of an ideal outcome – to be victorious in one’s opposition – should not be a prerequisite to the act of opposition. ➝ Having said that, the fire rate of the weapon is grossly endowed and is partially responsible for the weapon disrupting the integrity of gameplay mechanics. We are, after all, seeking a level playing field to provide a medium for competition. While the existence of such weapons are realistic, the priority would be a level playing field. Not all mechanics that are realistic are suitable for the pursuit of a level playing field, nor are they all desirable in a general sense. Weapon jams occur in reality, but would we welcome them to occur in-game? Realistically, if I shot an individual in the legs with a shotgun they would not be able to walk, let alone jump, if they survived. ➝ If you analyze the primary weapons almost all of them provide sufficient magazine size to theoretically kill between 3 and 5 targets on average. This is if the peak efficiency is combined with 100% accuracy. While the Last Word does not exceed this average, it is the TTK of the weapon that is a broken mechanic. The extreme rate of fire reduces the need for “fluid accuracy” – the dynamic accuracy required to hit a moving target. If it takes me 3 shots to kill a target with, for example, a Thorn, because of the lower rate of fire the TTK is increased. This means my target has more reaction time and with that a greater capacity for distance to travel. Since my target has more time to move, and therefore travel, I must reacquire the target at a greater level of efficiency with each shot. Due to the Last Word’s extreme fire rate, the necessity for fluid accuracy is minimized as a target’s reaction time and distance to travel are diminished. One can simply spam bullets in the general area of the target, which would remain roughly the same, at the beginning of the engagement. ➝ Lowering the rate of fire alone could potentially allow this gun to exist without disrupting the integrity of the game, but what then would be unique in its application outside of automatic fire? Why not use a Thorn or Hawkmoon? If the impact of the weapon was greatly increased with an extremely low fire rate and range as to provide a 2 shot kill in close quarters, why not just use a shotgun then at that point? ➝ Lowering the impact alone in such a way as to resolve the TTK problem would result in a weapon that could not kill more than perhaps 2 people at most with 1 magazine at peak efficiency with 100% accuracy. Constantly having to reload, the weapon would become useless in engaging multiple targets in a consistent manner. Increasing the magazine size would then be the only solution, but this would only transform the weapon into a primary sidearm. Perhaps that’s what it should be. [u]Peak Efficiency[/u] ➝ At present design, a 4 shot minimum to kill if at least 3 shots are headshots. If it is altered to become what is essentially a primary sidearm, then it should require as many shots as is necessary to balance its TTK against other weapons. [u]Application[/u] ➝ The range of the weapon should accurately be reflected in its performance capability. While it may not be the most accurate over a great distance, it definitely is powerful over a great distance. It can also be shot in a semi-automatic fashion to retain reasonable accuracy in longer range situations. There seems to be almost no damage fall off. The weapon should only be efficient at close to barely medium range, but if the TTK problem persists it would still be overpowering in nature. In Elimination game modes it would still provide the vehicle for a broken mechanic to destroy the integrity of the game.