Flaylock was never OP. CCP over reacted. It was useful in it's niche, and that is all. (True, AR* users would just close distance and subsequently get killed, just like they do with shotguns, knives, anything that is niche really. AR* users don't recognize niches, and think the AR* should be at least even odds no matter the circumstances) The submachine gun has always been the sidearm of choice, even during the great Flaylock panic of AR users.

There should be no generalist weapon in Dust. The very existence of generalist weapons is one of the primary factors that has dumbed down dust, reduced tactical options, and made the game boring. All weapons should be niche weapons, it's as simple as that, unless you like the current AR 514* where there's just one infantry role, one infantry weapon, and one infantry tactic (barring those that people choose just because they'd rather not be sheep, but are certainly a disadvantage). To me, that's the definition of a subpar game and a cookie cutter effort at best.

I'm not super concerned with your measure of what constitutes credibility. The hitscan weapons do need to be toned down, or Dust needs to get billed as another mindless twitch shooter, as is the case currently.

*AR 514 - medium to long range, hitscan weapons, capable of very high dps and virtually no short range deficits, i.e EZ mode.

I've highlighted the important parts. First off, it doesn't really matter now, but I still stand by my statement - the Flaylock was never OP.

When you mention that the flaylock user dominated short to medium range encounters this is only a small piece of what actually happened. First off, flaylock users didn't dominate any area, they were however useful at short range, not medium range.

Now, they did dominate short range encounters where AR players just stupidly played "run and gun" and just closed to extreme close range with their trusty AR. This is because the AR (and now it's new cousins) are in fact, so OP, that AR users never learned any tactics. They were, and are still, used to running in to any situation and expecting their AR to win the game for them. This is why a subset of the playerbase believes that the flaylock dominated - because it dominated them, in it's preferred niche, based on poor counter tactics. This is how it should be - sidearm or no.

Now, even during the height of it's popularity, the flaylock was less used, less destructive, and less easy than the sidearm of choice - the SMG - which, like the other hitscan weapons can dominate in too many niches.

That's the problem with generalist weapons, they are either OP or worthless. They can't be properly balanced against niche weapons. Furthermore, they cause players to fail to learn tactics precisely due to the generalist nature of the weapon. This is why, we have a Dust with generally OP hitscan weapons, and Dust has lost most of it's initial promise as a "thinking man's shooter".

The generalist weapons kill diversity, and cause players to expect them to always win. Then, said players, insist that anytime they are killed consistently by another weapon, even in that weapon's niche, that the other weapon is OP, when in fact, it is the generalist weapon that is OP and hurting Dust.

In short - your first highlighted part is wrong due to the inclusion of medium range. Flaylocks have a projectile travel time, making them harder to score a hit with than any hitscan weapon at any range, regardless of a small explosion or not. Also, your conclusion is wrong due to your viewpoint being myopic from the point of view of someone who expects a single weapon (AR*) to always dominate, or at least be even vs any other weapon. This, by design, is bad.

AR* - Again I mean high dps, hitscan, med to long range powerhouses with little or no short range drawbacks or drawbacks in general.

I'll tell you what. Let's just agree to disagree.

The HMG should beat a flaylock in short range, of course. I contend, though, that this was never due to the flaylock being OP. I contend that it was due to the HMG being UP. The HMG has been UP for quite some time. Now saying that, a heavy is also a pretty good target for a weapon like a flaylock. What makes the flaylock hard is it's short range combined with projectile travel time. Obviously, a relatively slow heavy would be bit easier to hit with such a weapon.

I will say if said "run and gun" AR users are trying to get so close that the flaylock user damages themselves, well, then, they're doing it wrong. This might be an OK strategy for a heavy with a lot more HP, but the AR user has the vast - vast- advantage against a flaylock user at anything OTHER than extreme short range, and thus closing like an idiot is just that. Maybe not for a heavy though. Even with a heavy, this might not be a very good idea, but I haven't played heavy in quite a while.

As an aside, the HMG has suffered just like all the other niche weapons at the hands of the AR hegemony.

I'd say at least it's not monthly anymore... it will be quarterly FOTM here on out. :P