Has the Meta Stagnated? (Podcast)

Hey guys! Thanks a lot for the review, its very much appreciated 💪 especially the little shoutout in the transition from your main topic to a list you wouldn't see at every tournament 😄 I still have time to change the list, but I don't think I will, at least not essentially:) I will tell you though how it went and if I made any last minute changes, until then, keep up the good work😎

So I tend to lean towards Matts POV.... Here is what I've seen and experienced, I've top tabled and podiumed at 7 of my last 12 tournaments and I've taken both "meta" lists, AND funky combo lists and done equally good and bad with them. There is a blunt reality and maybe this is harsh but more often than not the competitive players play and often sink into the "I have to play top table in order to have a competitive game", mindset. I consider myself to be a competitive player and I have had upsets happen, and as a competitor, I LOVE THAT. if I am winning ALL OF THE TIME, the game will absolutely get stale. Id say in regards to meta stagnation, its really up to the players to fix meta, I play wacky lists all of the time and have been able to find ways to beat "meta" lists... Again to be blunt I think that in and of itself finding a way with something less than ideal is what makes a player, "good" at this game. id rather a challenge than a breeze through.... I don't think we need meta lists in order to top table. This is just my thoughts for what they are worth but this is where I sit.

As Mik’s opponent in the final game at the little event he mentioned where took the fun Mordor list i can agree that these sorts of lists really make it interesting. Both for the player and the opponent. We had a great game that came down to the final dice roll which not only determined the game but also the event winner I believe. I do find these smaller non gbhl type events attract more varied, less ‘meta’ lists and sometimes that just means worse but sometimes also throws in a curve ball to figure out that you didn’t plan for. It is difficult though as lots of people do have more fun when they win a few games than when they lose them all so they tend to want to take stronger lists and then that just escalates.. There is definitely a saturation of over efficient models which lead to too many similar lists as it becomes hard to justify bringing the obviously worse option.

I agree with Matt’s point. “Traditional” armies of shield lines and cavalry and archers aren’t boring. I find them fun. If you find it boring to play against strategic armies in a strategy game maybe you need to find a new game that you might enjoy?

Regarding your main topic, setting up the tournament and adding extra perks seems like a viable option. A friend of mine for example organized a tournament and based on the current meta/nr. Of tournament certain factions&LL win we had something like a list of 7 levels of competitiveness, where you would get a small amount of bonus points at the end of all games if you play a less favoured type or army. Another thing I thought would be super fun, is a doubles tournament of 600-800p, where you and your mate can elect one hero upto 99p to be your main hero. Essentially, you have something going on like the Shagrat-Gorbag rivalry where the one with less kills get an extra re-roll in duels. But you can even extend this by doing things like little random missions that you need to do with your selected hero in the game, which brings you points in end of all games. People can have fun with the heroes they really like and its only up to mid-tier heroes to not make a i.e. Thorin, King of Erebor even stronger. A next level could be even (but thats probably to complex to add, rather keep this in a seperate tournament idea) adding something like the Bolg-kill streak idea in a light version to your selected hero (like re-roll 1s, terror, or similar but nothing crazy like mighty hero). Also only for heroes upto 99p and then have 3 categories like heroes upto 59p start already with a simulated kill count of 2 (so at first bonues already i.e. re-rolling 1s) and stronger mid tier heroes of 80-99p start with a kill count of -2, to even that out a little bit.

I think the meta has stagnated a bit but I've seen a lot of players purposely avoiding the "meta" lists for that reason. Locally we have a couple of players who specifically don't bring their Dragon Emperor anymore to avoid being a boring game. I have been trying to purposely find some off the beaten path lists that may not win events but provide a change of pace while still being good. Currently I am workshopping this and would love some feedback: 650 points | 35 models Mordor, The Easterlings Gothmog, Lieutenant of Sauron: Warg, Shield (145) 11x Morannon Orc: Shield (88) 4x Orc Tracker (20) Rutabi, General of the Dragon Legion: (110) 1x Easterling Warrior: Banner, Pike, Shield (34) 12x Easterling Warrior: Pike, Shield, Black Dragons (132) 1x Easterling Warrior: Bow (8) Easterling Dragon Knight: (65) 3x Easterling Kataphrakt: Black Dragons (48) The idea is to have double master of battle with a tough D6 battle line that cannot be shifted easily. I'd love to hear your thoughts!

Horses are usually 5pts . . . unless you're Citadel Guards or Rangers of the North (who I get are heroes, but Beregond is basically the same and doesn't have to pay that much). #JusticeForCitadelGuards

Hoping you guys are going to clash on the coast this year with 70 slots that are filling up for the GT quickly

To keep players on their toes what if you changed the points limit each round? I’m thinking you have a pool of point values for each round and roll for which one to use. Of course you will have to have players send in the list they will play for each points value.

Guess I'll shoot my two cents down here in the comments since I wasn't able to make it to this recording (this is Alisher by the way). To answer the broader question of "has the META stagnated" the answer is unequivocally yes. As a person who goes to a lot of tournaments, I see the same things over and over again The questions after that are A, is this a problem and B, can anything be done about it (in absence of getting a new supplement which obviously we will be soon). I do not necessarily think that META stagnation at tournaments is a bad thing. I personally do not like playing against the same thing over and over again at events (I faced four Last alliance themed/structured lists and two azogs legion lists at adepticon) but there's nothing overtly wrong with this. If tournaments are a place where people want to compete, then I cant fault people for doing that. My experience at Adepticon also proved that "META" lists do not translate to tournament wins one for one. I think the real underlying element, which Matt touches on really well, is that for many people tournaments are the only place where they are getting games in. Like Matt I routinely change what I play in practice games and at small local tournaments because otherwise the game would become boring. I also make a deliberate point of getting these types of game days/events on my hobby schedule to ensure that I am having fun with the game. On another broader note, I honestly prefer the current state of this META than others before it. Elite armies, that focus on resistance to magic, fight value, courage, shooting, etc... have really pushed the heavy magic/angmar armies out of reliable top table contention. I cant speak for others, but I prefer grinding out games than experience the demoralisation of my heroes getting permanently locked up/killed (though of course there's nothing wrong with taking magic heavy armies). To answer the question of "can anything be done about it?" of course the answer is yes- play different things and stop worrying about winning all the time. The more I play this game, the more I am driven by playing good, competitive games that rely on strategic thinking then always getting the win.

I’m happy you said what you said Matt. Always been of a fan of running more of a historical army with mid tier heroes and have positioning and warriors doing the work. And how do you guys few about nova being 1k and only being two and a half hours what do you guys think will be brought and do you think most people will rely too much on shooting

Simply, yes.

It has stagnated as a consequence of the introduction of LL’s and an increasingly restrictive alliance matrix. Wheter by design or chance GW has shoehorned the listbuilding into an increasingly more unified meta. Well Im doing this next; any comments? Warband 1 6/15 Eorl the Young (LEADER) 2 Rohan Outrider with Horse; 4 Son of Eorl ---- Warband 2 10/12 Erkenbrand, Captain of Rohan with Horse; 6 Helminga with Throwing Spears; Shield; Axe 4 Rohan Royal Guard with Throwing Spears; ---- Warband 3 10/12 Elfhelm, Captain of Rohan with Horse; 4 Rohan Royal Guard with Throwing Spears; 6 Rohan Outrider(Walker) ---- Warband 4 12/12 Grimbold of Grimslade 5 Helminga with Throwing Spears; Shield; Axe 1 Helminga with Banner; Shield; Axe 6 Rohan Royal Guard with Throwing Spears; ---- 800/42

Short Answer: Yes. The game is horrifically stale at the moment. Defence of the North really did a number on the Meta