Okay. Well I'm not asking you about stats, or Bungie's justifications for nerfs. I'm not asking you of your opinion on traits of "skilled" or "unskilled" players who use Hunter's. I do not care of your opinion on the Symbiote. I'm genuinely curious on your views on PvP dominant subclasses. I'm asking [b]you[/b] what makes you think Warlock's & Titans don't have fantastic subclasses for PvP. I don't care about stats or nerfs or Bungie. I know it's hard for a lot of people on these forums, but I want [i]your[/i] input. Not someone else's. I'm just very curious to know why you don't think Titans & Warlock's don't have dominant subclasses in the Crucible. Because all 6 are [b]fantastic[/b]. There's not one that's 'bad'. So I'm asking you what makes your opinion that Hunter's are the only class w. 3 good PvP subclasses.

So when statistics back up someone's words, it's time to let loose the facts and go after opinions instead? That doesn't even remotely make sense. They use the stats to make their decisions, if those stats show that gunslinger is already the best performing pvp subclass, why would they need to buff it by giving their super a 33% extra chance to kill more people than it already does? If there were many cases where the super doesn't 1-shot people, I'd say yea, give it the duration, but it's an instant kill both short and long range on anything not named foh and nova. Yea the exotic doesn't have much of a place in pvp, that doesn't mean it should be buffed so that the subclass becomes even stronger in pvp than it already is. I'd rather see that exotic maintain the 3shots it already has and just have the exotic perk give it a longer duration instead, but 4 instakill shots on that super is simply very very strong, hence why alot of people were solely using that headpiece during year 1 crucible, same reason why the ram got toned down.