@AsuMagic - This bit first: Thing is, Asu, I can't actually see much in your second list that doesn't (one way or another) fall under the category of "support builders and knights" (which is something you've failed to define anyway--i.e. you need to tell us the exact things archers do when they are "supporting"); so I'm a little unsure what you're complaining about. As I said above, you've not defined what "support" entails, so this sentence is useless. Additionally, you're stating your opinion (which is fine; people are allowed to have opinions) as fact without any kind of reasoning to back it up (not fine; without supporting facts/reasoning opinions are just one person's point of view). Imagine a world where an archer cannot ever hurt a shielding knight. Well done. You've invented a world full of un-fun where archers have even more reason to be campy fuckers. GG. So, basically, you're upset that a skilled archer--who has to flirt with instant death by daring to get that close--can manage to force you to waste a precious bomb (which, as we all know, are very expensive and hard to obtain) to obliterate him so you can go on and kill/pillage/coin-and-flag get/etc. while he has to spend the next 15sec respawning? Wait, how is this bad again? Seriously, when playing against a skilled opponent (knight, archer, builder) it often becomes mandatory to bring along a few... surprises... to help level the field. And in this case, your bomb is a hard counter against the archer (bc, srsly, if they're in cqc with you, then there's little chance they're going to be able to escape unless you're asleep!), whereas the archer doesn't really get a hard counter against you, the knight. Basically, it seems you dislike the fact that a skilled opponent forces you to change your play-style; which is silly, imo--being able to play the same way against everyone is a recipe for making things boooooooring. Stop and thing about how this would play out. I know, I know. You really dislike cqc. But just stop and think through how this would work: Shotgun is nerfed at close distance. Archers now have zero reason to get closer to the enemy. Shotgun is 'modified' (i.e.: 'buffed') to keep it useful at a distance. Archers now have extra reason to stay as far away from the enemy as possible. Profit (i.e.: Archers now have every reason to be utterly campy fucks, with literally no incentive given them for not hiding for whole games behind bridges [and, actually, some incentive not to stop camping, bc close-range is now nerfed]). Can you not see how thing would just be a recipe for bland gameplay and more stalemates?