Well at the very least, everything that was good to great at M4 should still be viable. Its true M10 should make the game more difficult, and reduce build and gear versatility - but what worked very well at M4 should still work well now. At game release (M3), the Cutsman was insanely strong, Torgue shotguns worked god-tier on Fl4k, Lyuda was a beast, Maggie was a BiS for mobbing. When M4 came out - all these things held true, its just that weaker stuff (like Vladof pistols/ARs) got found out and became less viable. This sort of scaling makes sense.
But at M10, suddenly 90% of what of was good or great at M4 suddenly perform very mediocrely. And what remains viable weren’t the top dogs of M4, but rather new weapons introduced with M2.0, DLC3 and DLC4. This is what I mean that GB killed their diversity.
And clearly while it is not officially stated, GB is clearly trying to get most guns to be viable at M10 - lack of diversity is clearly a concern given the countless hotfixes they have spent since M2.0 trying to bring everything up (18 weapons were buffed yesterday). This thread isn’t a critique on GB bringing everything up, just that the way they are doing so is extremely haphazard and goes against good game design, and thus a more systematic method is recommended.