7 replies to this topic

[Sargon X]

One of my recently-developed pet peeves is the frequent use of the term "meta" when talking about video games. It seems like its usage has become significantly more widespread over the past few years and half the time I have no idea what the intended meaning is. I just finished listening to the most recent No Guts No Galaxy podcast and I lost track of how many times the term was used. I have a software development background, so I understand concepts like metadata, but I fail to make the connection when someone refers to something like the "current meta" or a "meta mech". Can anyone explain what exactly this means???

[Gremlich Johns]

http://www.urbandict...p?term=metagame

an extract:

The highest level of strategy in many complex games, metagame refers to any aspect of strategy that involves thinking about what your opponent is thinking you are thinking.

Edited by Gremlich Johns, 03 March 2014 - 04:18 PM.

[Sargon X]

So if "meta" is just short for "metagame", I can follow that, but what about a "meta-mech"? Would I be correct in assuming that a meta-mech is a mech with a loadout strategically designed based on the previously defined metagame? Meta-mech just seems like an odd term to me. If something isn't a meta-mech, wouldn't that mean that it is a non-viable (or altogether dumb) loadout?

[Alaskan Nobody]

Sargon X, on 03 March 2014 - 04:24 PM, said:

If something isn't a meta-mech, wouldn't that mean that it is a non-viable (or altogether dumb) loadout?

For a lot of them, they either wish to give this impression (Thus getting the nerfs/buffs they want)
Or they honestly believe that.

The meta builds may be the most efficient (in the current meta-game) - but the difference is frequently quite small.
IE: when the meta was referred to as "LRMAgeddon" the "meta-mechs" were easily countered by intelligent scouting, good use of terrain, and getting within that 180meter minimum range.
If any other builds were non-viable, they would have been putting LRM on any mech with a missile slot - and they very much were not.
IE you did not see LRM Commando or Raven or Jenner despite LRM being the "Meta" choice - those mechs frequently did without missiles at all!
IE LRM had the same weaknesses they do now - they just caused more damage due to a damage-transfer bug

As for it being an awkward term.... it is kinda, but it's easier to type/say than "build for this chassis based off of the current meta-game"

Edited by Shar Wolf, 03 March 2014 - 04:34 PM.

[TygerLily]

I think a "meta-game" is the game outside of the game...(ie paying 12 vs 12 is the game...but battling over a giant map would be the meta-game).

But people usually say "meta" to mean min/maxing, basically. It's somehow related to "meta-game" but it's just an evolution of words the gaming community. Presumably, that reference is that outside of the 12v12 there is another game which is building and tweaking your Mech.

I think "meta" also implies that everyone is using that same, exact build...that's why some people say "Oh no, this __________ is the new meta."

Are "meta-Mechs" better than other mechs? Discounting individual skill, yes.

And in my jaded commentary: people who play it min/max builds to optimal efficiency (which is fine) but also min/max based on inherent unbalances in the game numbers...and then cop out by saying they are "competitive"...

Edited by TygerLily, 05 March 2014 - 11:30 AM.

[Dramborleg]

Shar Wolf, on 03 March 2014 - 04:31 PM, said:

For a lot of them, they either wish to give this impression (Thus getting the nerfs/buffs they want)
Or they honestly believe that.

The meta builds may be the most efficient (in the current meta-game) - but the difference is frequently quite small.
IE: when the meta was referred to as "LRMAgeddon" the "meta-mechs" were easily countered by intelligent scouting, good use of terrain, and getting within that 180meter minimum range.
If any other builds were non-viable, they would have been putting LRM on any mech with a missile slot - and they very much were not.
IE you did not see LRM Commando or Raven or Jenner despite LRM being the "Meta" choice - those mechs frequently did without missiles at all!
IE LRM had the same weaknesses they do now - they just caused more damage due to a damage-transfer bug

As for it being an awkward term.... it is kinda, but it's easier to type/say than "build for this chassis based off of the current meta-game"

"Balance is perfect, there is no reason to complain, you'd have more fun if you were skilled but you're a scrub so you don't deserve to have fun."

The real balancing factor on the monotonous metagame isn't "git gud," it's that everyone running one of a couple dozen viable builds floats to the top of the Elo stew, while people who want to enjoy the game bob around the middle. In short, the playerbase plays around lazy and unfocused balancing, as they have done since this game was made.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Sorry Dramborg - you are still on ignore

Edited by Shar Wolf, 11 March 2014 - 11:10 AM.

[Dramborleg]

Shar Wolf, on 11 March 2014 - 11:09 AM, said:

Sorry Dramborg - you are still on ignore

I forgive you