moved

The_Brosteen · January 2018

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

Danikat wrote: »

mesmerizedish wrote: »

"Most Effective Tactic Available" is a backronym. In this context, meta originated as an abbreviation of "metagame" in the first sense you've listed. Then at some point someone thought they'd be clever and coin the expansion as in your second sense.

But why are you posting this?

Agreed.

In a normal, non-meta game scenario you pick skills, stats etc. from what's currently available to you, based on what seems best overall, then go into each encounter and try to work out how to win using the tools (skills and stats) you've got available.

Meta-gaming is 'playing' the game outside of the game - you find out what you're going to be facing, what's the best way to beat it and how to get those stats and prepare in advance. Not necessarily for each encounter but at least for major or very common ones.

Until a few years ago I'd only heard it applied to PvP - finding out what tactics/teams/builds were currently popular and planning ways to beat them before the match even began. I'm not sure if that's where it started or just where I first heard it. But either way it seems to have spread to being used as a term for all types of currently popular builds.

This is false. You determine the meta game by playing the game. You try out sets and stats until you find the optimal combination. It has nothing to do with what's popular.

It has everything to do with what's popular. There's no literal best in pvp, performance has so many variables to it that a "meta build" essentially means whats cool at the moment.

For example, I've been using the same basic setup on my stamsorc for over a year and still kill other stamsorcs using various meta builds over this time frame. I don't believe I'm good enough to truly just outplay "the most optimal setup available". I think a 'meta' gear setup tends to be what works for an individuals playstyle and it gets cookie cutter'd because they call it the meta. Hardly anything is truly optimal for everyone.

logarifmik · January 2018

Motherball wrote: »

I always thought Meta is the opposite of Micro. Instead if micro managing resources and units in the game, like in a RTS, you are meta managing a class build as part of a group; you are the unit.

Perhaps I am wrong because the above has little to do with efficiency, in which, unless implied, other posts here are more convincing.

Probably, you mix up word "meta" with "macro".