Metawatch article highlighting the total lack of balance

[Greybeard86]

In my case, what was frustrating reading the article is that the current imbalances were acknowledged by Warcom lad and guest:

For example:

Quote

Steve: The Seraphon are a powerful faction at the moment, with multiple strong units and abilities. Seraphon Fangs of Sotek builds combine the magical dominance and long-range mortal wound output of Lord Kroak with the ranged damage of large units of Skinks (standard or Chameleon), Terradons, and Salamanders.

But there wasn't a single word on whether they find the current imbalance acceptable, or whether they are onboard with the whole concept of "metas".

In fact, the whole "meta watch" series reads like a company embracing that side of the hobby. But not just the "competitive element", rather, the "meta" side of it. And for a lot of us, the whole concept of "metas" in a miniature game is bad, for reasons already explained to death in this thread.

So, to sum it up, burn the meta, support properly competitive play (good interesting rules, lateral upgrades, use the data from competitive to balance better the game, etc.).

[Beastmaster]

Maybe for people who mainly enjoy the list building/tinkering/optimizing aspect of the game, a constantly changing meta that you have to be aware of and adapt actually helps keeping things fresh and moving. 
At the very least, the ever changing Meta drives the majority of discussions about the game, it seems. Much more than actual tactics or narrative aspects.

A bit like fashion trends for boys. Just as insane as buying a new winter jacket instead of wearing the completely serviceable one from last year, just because someone decided that this style won’t cut it any longer.

And it really won’t. You won’t make the impression you want to make with the clothes from last year. Which is, let’s face it, just as important or unimportant as winning a miniature game. So you either go with the flow, enjoy the trend watching and keep on buying, or you are out.

Edited October 29, 2020 by Beastmaster

[Greybeard86]

3 hours ago, Beastmaster said:

Maybe for people who mainly enjoy the list building/tinkering/optimizing aspect of the game, a constantly changing meta that you have to be aware of and adapt actually helps keeping things fresh and moving. 
At the very least, the ever changing Meta drives the majority of discussions about the game, it seems. Much more than actual tactics or narrative aspects.

I think so, I do think that GW keeps this in mind when making balancing decisions. Very likely, because interest translate to sales.

I'd prefer sales to be driven by new models providing variety (not a new meta!), and people deciding to expand their collections. In that way, no one's collection feels "dated" or "not playable".

But I do understand that it is hard to do so, and to keep producing new miniatures, and cheaper to "recycle" old ones via a changing meta.

Anyway, I think I got off my chest my bit over the course of the thread.

[whispersofblood]

5 hours ago, Greybeard86 said:

In my case, what was frustrating reading the article is that the current imbalances were acknowledged by Warcom lad and guest:

For example:

But there wasn't a single word on whether they find the current imbalance acceptable, or whether they are onboard with the whole concept of "metas".

In fact, the whole "meta watch" series reads like a company embracing that side of the hobby. But not just the "competitive element", rather, the "meta" side of it. And for a lot of us, the whole concept of "metas" in a miniature game is bad, for reasons already explained to death in this thread.

So, to sum it up, burn the meta, support properly competitive play (good interesting rules, lateral upgrades, use the data from competitive to balance better the game, etc.).

I don't think this is possible rules aren't even the number one driver of a meta. The meta exists because of economics, and preferences primarily, rules is a distant third.

[Fairbanks]

1 hour ago, whispersofblood said:

I don't think this is possible rules aren't even the number one driver of a meta. The meta exists because of economics, and preferences primarily, rules is a distant third.

Local meta yes, national/global metas it’s completely the other way around.

Otherwise 17 players would not have had an OBR list ready for LVO/CanCon. If rules didn’t push the meta, KO, DoT, and Lizzies wouldn’t be a head and shoulders 1-2-3. They’d be down with the rest of the 1-2 First Place Armies.

[whispersofblood]

17 hours ago, Fairbanks said:

Local meta yes, national/global metas it’s completely the other way around.

Otherwise 17 players would not have had an OBR list ready for LVO/CanCon. If rules didn’t push the meta, KO, DoT, and Lizzies wouldn’t be a head and shoulders 1-2-3. They’d be down with the rest of the 1-2 First Place Armies.

It's obviously not the case or we would be seeing the same TTS lists in live play. That when the circumstances of finances, effort and actual real ownership are introduced these lists vanish. 

Also there are many very competitive lists of around 200 models that have never seen competitive play.

I'm not arguing good rules are not important, I'm saying on the table top they are the least important of a set of very important factors. This has always been the case in competitive whfb and continues to be the case in AoS.

The very fact that the my second point is true is a defining characteristic of the meta and therefore shapes what else is good. What people seem to always forget is that the meta such as it is, determines what is good. We know this because if we change the release order around certain armies would be terrible at launch and the reverse. 

Edited October 30, 2020 by whispersofblood

[Greybeard86]

1 hour ago, whispersofblood said:

It's obviously not the case or we would be seeing the same TTS lists in live play. That when the circumstances of finances, effort and actual real ownership are introduced these lists vanish. 

That's true, TTS is a different world.

1 hour ago, whispersofblood said:

I'm not arguing good rules are not important, I'm saying on the table top they are the least important of a set of very important factors. This has always been the case in competitive whfb and continues to be the case in AoS.

The point stands, meta armies become more prevalent. Just because we don't see some of the TTS horrors in true table top, it does not mean that the following isn't true.

Quote

Otherwise 17 players would not have had an OBR list ready for LVO/CanCon. If rules didn’t push the meta, KO, DoT, and Lizzies wouldn’t be a head and shoulders 1-2-3. They’d be down with the rest of the 1-2 First Place Armies.

 

[whispersofblood]

15 minutes ago, Greybeard86 said:

That's true, TTS is a different world.

The point stands, meta armies become more prevalent. Just because we don't see some of the TTS horrors in true table top, it does not mean that the following isn't true.

 

There are no just "becauses" in analysis. Either you know the reason or you don't know. But there is an underlying discoverable logic. 

Prevelant meta builds are a creation of expression of the meta not the meta itself. You can look at these builds and make inferences about what the meta is. But it includes a whole lot more and is influenced by more abstract elements then "rules". Many of these factions that are highly rated have other circumstantial similarities and core strengths in their designs before we even get to the rule stage.

Specific Faction and waracrolls rules are how players interact with the core rules, and the circumstances that create the meta. But what is a strong or good rule is in relation to the meta.

[Greybeard86]

1 hour ago, whispersofblood said:

Specific Faction and waracrolls rules are how players interact with the core rules, and the circumstances that create the meta. But what is a strong or good rule is in relation to the meta.

I think this is getting to "meta" for me, as a discussion.

Some factions have rules that make them stand out from the crowd, those factions are more prevalent in LVO. That's the extent of the comment you cited and I think it is quite clearly true (we even linked the LVO lists).

[whispersofblood]

5 minutes ago, Greybeard86 said:

I think this is getting to "meta" for me, as a discussion.

Some factions have rules that make them stand out from the crowd, those factions are more prevalent in LVO. That's the extent of the comment you cited and I think it is quite clearly true (we even linked the LVO lists).

This definition doesn't account for why armies, builds and factions tend to becomes less "stand out" over time. 

Your desire to simplify the situation and accurately identifying the situation in this case, as in most cases, is mutually exclusive. 

The bolded is clearly not true because when you isolate all other factors you end up in a completely different (almost to the point of unrecognizable) situation. That is how you test a theory...

 

[Greybeard86]

1 hour ago, whispersofblood said:

That is how you test a theory...

Well, I think our positions are clear. Just wanted to support what the other poster said, which I do not think is invalidated by anything you are saying.

[Sonnenspeer]

22 hours ago, Beastmaster said:

...

A bit like fashion trends for boys. Just as insane as buying a new winter jacket instead of wearing the completely serviceable one from last year, just because someone decided that this style won’t cut it any longer.

And it really won’t. You won’t make the impression you want to make with the clothes from last year. Which is, let’s face it, just as important or unimportant as winning a miniature game. So you either go with the flow, enjoy the trend watching and keep on buying, or you are out.

The mature man does not follow fashion trends. He sets his own standards 😉
Like the experienced player who always beats me with LoN, completely ignoring they are bottom tier. 😑

[whispersofblood]

8 minutes ago, Greybeard86 said:

Well, I think our positions are clear.

As your username suggest you are a man of faith and tradition. 🤣

It's all cool. 

PS. Please don't creatively snip people's posts.

[Greybeard86]

1 hour ago, whispersofblood said:

As your username suggest you are a man of faith and tradition. 🤣

It's all cool. 

PS. Please don't creatively snip people's posts.

Didn't mean to snip to aggravate, just took your last sentence.

Either way, no hard feelings from me...it won't go in the book 🙄