People always say rock-paper-scissors like it's a bad thing, but it isn't. The problem is simply thinking in absolutes.
Let's take for example Team Fortress 2. There are lots of counters in that game. Pyros shut down spies, demomen squash sentry nests, scouts eat demomen for breakfast, medics can actually make an attack from a pyro an advantage for their team since the fire helps him build ubercharge. There's all kinds of rock-paper-scissors style balance going on. And yet, in every single one of those encounters the "countered" class can come out on top, because it ultimately comes down to the skill and strategy of the attacking player, and the interactions between the players on each team.
AO isn't a two-dimensional game, you don't just select your bureaucrat and attack-move toward the enemy team. Even in a BS that's full of twinks on one side and medsuit-wearing characters on the other, I've seen stunts pulled like someone going out and looking vulnerable then leading the bloodthirsty twinks into the range of a waiting anti-personnel turret. Even when the BS shifts fully into mechs-vs-turrets, you have people deploying at strategic times and in unusual locations, and lots of juking and feinting. Some people may not like that gameplay, but you can't deny that there's a lot of strategy potential to it.
The rock-paper-scissors analogy really doesn't apply to AO at all.