Edited By
Nicolas Dubois
A growing number of people are challenging a recently released weapon tier list, which places certain popular weapons at lower ranks. The division among players highlights differing opinions on effectiveness and balance within the game.
In the gaming community, particularly among weapon enthusiasts, a tier list serves as not just a guide but a discussion starter. Recently, one has ignited strong opinions, especially surrounding the placements of the J358 revolver and QQ9 SMG. Comments indicate that many feel the rankings misrepresent weapon abilities.
Players are questioning the decision to rank the J358 below the .50 GS, arguing that it can eliminate enemies without requiring headshots. Responding to these claims, one commenter stated, "The revolver doesnโt need headshots to 1-shot" showing clear frustration with the analysis of the weapon's power.
The QQ9 has also stirred emotions; some fans were perplexed by its C-tier ranking. One enthusiastic player exclaimed, "Why qq9 at C man, that's my fav smg. I even named mine 'meta destroyer'!" This reflects a broader concern about how personal favorites match up against community consensus.
Many called into question the apparent bias toward so-called meta weapons. A comment pointed out that certain weapons are treated unfairly, suggesting a wider systemic issue with how weapon strengths are perceived. "It should not be in C, their opinion is pretty bad," noted one user, capturing the sentiment of frustration.
"The J358 doesn't get the credit it deserves!"
๐ฅ Many users express dissatisfaction with the tier placements, particularly for the J358.
๐ A notable portion of comments reflect passionate defense for the QQ9, calling it underappreciated.
โ๏ธ The current dialogue indicates issues in weapon balance, suggesting it may need reevaluation by the developers.
As this debate continues, the community remains engaged, with players voicing their opinions on forums and user boards. The tier list seems to reflect deeper sentiments within the game about favoritism and balanceโtopics likely to be revisited in future discussions.