I'm saying it's not unfair, in a team-based combined arms game, for one unit to be strong as long as it is counterbalanced by another unit being weak. As the VS is the faction that overperforms as infantry and in the meta, they should be the target for balancing. This could for example take the form of a nerf like "Orion/Betelegeuse has been given 0.5 bloom like the rest of the weapons in their category". But for the sake of flavour and fun the TR and NC maxes could rather be given a buff, in order to slaughter the VS heavies instead. This is not the logic the devs follow no but the logic players have in selecting their loadouts, weapons and approaches to best acheive said game objectives. Naturally asymmetric balance may lead to some whining, like calls to nerf/remove AI ESFs, infiltrators or C4. I call it whining because most of these comments come from an HA-centric perspective and fail to consider the interaction between different categories of units and weapons. Instead of "should, and if so, how can the HA get an easier time countering the shotgun MAX?" it becomes "even with the Orion/Betlegeuse I can't run straight into the room anymore and slaughter everyone plz nerf the MAX". In fact this is what was done 2 years ago, before that the Mattock could actually 1-shot a standard nanoweaved soldier, 2 years after there is whining when it takes 2-shots?! As it is now it is impossible for the NC max to mix and match arms to suit the engagement like the other factions can. It is either double Scattercannons or no 1HK. This leaves the other weapons: Grinder, Hacksaw, and Mattock, without any purposeful role on the battlefield. In this sense revitalizing the Mattock might not be a bad move.