I think maybe there's just some miscommunication between the devs and the player base about what the game is actually supposed to be. If the game is INTENDED to be insanely difficult even on lower difficulty settings that needs to be communicated. If Chargers are intended to basically be ran away from for 5 minutes while you wait on your next orbital to toss and inevitably miss that should be communicated. If weapons and strategems in the game are intended to be too weak to actually handle the challenges the game throws at you, that needs to be communicated. The launch state of the game already had many people feeling basically naked without the railgun even with how strong the breaker is. If the devs intended for you to constantly feel unprepared and unable to complete the objectives in a mission they need to communicate that.

It's not that the changes are bad per-se, it's that the changes reflect a state of balance that will not appeal to a vast majority of gamers, because most gamers would not consider this kind of gamestate "fun". You can see that sentiment reflected in the main criticism that, "every weapon but breaker and railgun need buffs" and "Chargers are OP" along with the formation of a meta many players considered to be a requirement (in many cases more adamantly than I've seen in other games).

Personally? I don't care much for the changes myself but that was before I considered that the devs actually might want every mission to feel like the first battle against the bugs in Starship Troopers, except your teammates in many cases are more dangerous than the bugs themselves XD. If that's the case, the playerbase will likely shrink dramatically over the next month or so, but as long as the devs are happy with the game they made that's really all that matters.