So to clarify what is the Mid Meta? Well it is sort of splitting the levels of competitive lists into three different categories (or two different plus everything else).

So the tiers of the meta you have

• Top Meta: Basically this is the list that is all across the internet as winning worlds or being in the top 8 at GenCon. Everyone knows what they are (Fat Falcon, Skilled Phantom, Tie Fighter Swarm), a few hate them others love them. They are copied, discussed, analysed, and talked about on the podcasts.
• Mid Meta: These although have yet to win a regional, are still solid builds and can hold their own against other builds or those that copy Top Meta list but play them ineffectively. These are builds that you occasionally hear about such as Six Sigma, Buzzsaw or Doom Shuttle, 3 Firesprays, or the XXBB lists. They can win local tournaments and qualify for the regionals, but they don't take top spots.
• Low Meta: If you could call them the meta at all. These are more of a gimmicky lists that aren't competitive but can be fun. Stuff like fully loaded Tie Bombers or Mass Ion Lists. Stuff you might see going for achievements in League but will not be winning any seriously competitive formats.

Me, well I sort of play low meta, occasionally I play a Mid meta list and try to copy a Top Meta but put my own personal touch which drops it back to low (like a list used to lower agility with Wedge and Arvil + Intimidation.) A few times I tried the mid Meta but my collection isn't enough to experiment with all the builds (like Six Sigma). I'm still trying to keep up and get one of each pack but I still have to pay the rent and other bills.

Yet I think the Mid Meta is the most interesting, you have solid strategies but there appears to be more variance then the Top Meta. That's not to say there is no variety in the Top there numerous different tournament winning Fat Han lists out there. It isn't like there is a single squadron list that dominates all.

So what tier of meta do you perfer to play?

Going to be honest with myself...

Low.

But I'm usually able to fly what you label as "low meta" into "mid meta".

Depends. I play to match my opponents really.

Most of my LGS plays "low meta" going by this, so i'll likewise take fun stuff against them. Sometimes i go for mid meta, and if specifically asked or if my opponent says he'll be trying full on (like when we do tournament practice) i break out the full level Top Meta shenanigans.

It honestly just depends on what kind of game we fancy.

Is a Tie Fighter swarm still top meta? ^^

But I like your categories ^^

Is a Tie Fighter swarm still top meta? ^^

But I like your categories ^^

Good question, the examples I given for Top Meta are more from Wave 4 which was at the last worlds. Of course the list and builds are going to change with every release and with Wave 5 bulging in and wave 6 on the way what is considered Top for 2015 is definitely going to change from what was top in 2014.

Is a Tie Fighter swarm still top meta? ^^

But I like your categories ^^

of course the tie swarm is top meta. it beats 90% of the lists out there most of the time, especially in timed games.

Low Meta.

I play what I have fun with, as do my friends.

-Cal

What category would this be:

Wedge + R2D2 + VI

3 x Blue

Mid? Low?

Those guys ripped my swarm apart in the last tournament ^^. I had some unlucky rolls, though.

What category would this be:

Wedge + R2D2 + VI

3 x Blue

Mid? Low?

Those guys ripped my swarm apart in the last tournament ^^. I had some unlucky rolls, though.

Definitely be at least at Mid level although there were a couple of 4 ship composition of X&Bs squadrons in the top 8 at Gencon and Worlds. So Rebel 4 ship X/B builds straddles that line between Top and Mid depending on what build it is.

The lines can easily be blurred a little like most thing, however there are still those squadron lists clearly in the top. Likewise the lines between mid and low can be blurred as un-competitive squadron builds can still win games. But in general categories the lists that are in the top of the charts are competitive and since they win or place top in global tournaments they are considered Top Meta. If a list was not meant to be a competitive build it is clearly in the Low category. All other competitive list that don't follow the Top Meta can be settled in the Mid category.

Personally, I ignore Meta and fly what I want- what looks fun but is still competitive. I don't give a S*** what Paul Heaver (or whoever) ran at Worlds... they don't play at my LGS and I have no expectation of competing above Regional (as if I have the time or money available to make a go at THAT!).

Some of my successful squads do resemble what others have used in high-level competition(ex. Named B-wing + Blue + X + X) but that is coincidence, the concepts and choices were mine but are logical ones others have used, if not in the exact combinations I have chosen. Still, I guess you could fit them into your three categories. So... I guess you could say (for competitions) I fly Mid-Meta...

... mostly...

... sorta...

In my friendly games it's generally mid or low. In tournaments it's been high of late. My last few friendlys were 2 lambdas and a decimator and was trying to get that list to work against a super dash and coran but couldn't quite pull it off. I decided to take RAC and whisper instead and didn't even play a single dash but I did get to play the only othe imperial list which was a very similar list to mine

Low, mid at best.

I feel like top meta is too talked about, people are going to see a top meta list and go "oh, I know how to counter that". I'd rather wander off the beaten path and get eaten by a grue than wear the rut any deeper.

Just maybe one of these days I'll discover a waterfall or something.

So, what if I say I like to play the 'canon' Obsidian Squadron on tournaments (because I like it fluffy) with Howl, Night Beast, Winged Gundark and 4 x Obsidian? Still top-meta even Winged Gundark and Night Beast are low-meta?

Well I create new lists to try and make them competitive, so I'd say low-mid meta. I don't really follow the meta though, if high agility ships, aren't "in", I fly them anyways, etc.

So, what if I say I like to play the 'canon' Obsidian Squadron on tournaments (because I like it fluffy) with Howl, Night Beast, Winged Gundark and 4 x Obsidian? Still top-meta even Winged Gundark and Night Beast are low-meta?

I think I'll contest NB being low meta, amazing Tie for the points.

• Mid Meta: These although have yet to win a regional, are still solid builds and can hold their own against other builds or those that copy Top Meta list but play them ineffectively. These are builds that you occasionally hear about such as Six Sigma, Buzzsaw or Doom Shuttle, 3 Firesprays, or the XXBB lists. They can win local tournaments and qualify for the regionals, but they don't take top spots.

XXBB has taken top spots. Ask Mr. Heaver about that.

Meta is changing while we're talking about it.

The fact that NB don't get a free focus when clearing stress makes him low-meta.

By the OPs definitions, Top/Mid.

Until recently I found myself struggling when building Tier 1 lists, because for me to want to fly them, they have to fulfil the following criteria:

1. Be fun to fly.

2. Be thematic.

3. Be my own list.

I detest Fat Han (and Rebel scum in general) and Phantoms are glass cannons. And somehow, I did manage to take 2nd place at a Nationals event using Kath and a Mini-swarm.

Edit: spelling

I've never really flown a top tier list I don't think, definitely not competitively anyways.

I've had several mid tier lists for both casual and competitive play.

Lately I'm trying several that might be more bottom tier lists just to have some fun with all the stuff that's available now.

i prefer to play against Top meta. I do play top and mid meta myself, normally leaning towards mid meta for tournaments aswell. I do not really like the word meta, because i normally take lists to metagame what others are playing in my area or that i expect.

Low, maybe lower mid meta. I don't want to run the same old thing, even if it wins a lot. I'd rather try my own way.

for what it's worth, there is probably no word thrown around more on this board than "meta". I wonder if a real meta even exists anywhere other than worlds?

Is the meta a myth for most of us? I can tell you that it is for me, and it seems to be for the folks I get to play with, for the most part at least. I'm not a top teir competitor by any stretch. I like to play, and of course i like to win.

To me, i'd almost rather play well and lose than "play cheap" and win. now that is only my opinion, and I would be the first to say, legal is legal and fly what you want to. There is one guy at the store I play at who always flies dual YT-1300s. I have never seen him fly anything else. he often wins (of course) but to me, it's sort of "flying cheap." Yes, he won, but there isn't all that much to crow about when that's how you won.

I don't get much pleasure out of winning like that, but if I can take him down, that is worth it.

i like to build my own list. i certainly learn a lot from these boards and incorporate some of those ideas in my own list, but if I win with someone else's super polished honed list it just does not feel like I am the one who won.

all of these are probably reasons that I lose more than i win, that, and I don't get ot play a lot of games.... low meta for me, that's where it is fun!

All. Low for silly games. Mid for own attempts at building. High for learning to get better. I'm going to play more high.

Mid-meta is basically where I live. No one saw Ibtisam coming at Monroeville Regionals!

• Mid Meta: These although have yet to win a regional, are still solid builds and can hold their own against other builds or those that copy Top Meta list but play them ineffectively. These are builds that you occasionally hear about such as Six Sigma, Buzzsaw or Doom Shuttle, 3 Firesprays, or the XXBB lists. They can win local tournaments and qualify for the regionals, but they don't take top spots.

XXBB has taken top spots. Ask Mr. Heaver about that.

Sure, a year ago. Probably wouldn't happen at a big tournament today. (Haven't you heard that the X-Wing is the worst ship in the game now? =P)

The problem with the game, if any, is that there's a "meta" at all. If a handful of builds are so successful that other lists start at an inherent disadvantage, that is poor for the game's health. I like to think most of that advantage is perceived and the numbers skewed by a larger swath of less creative types that copy other players lists, so I don't really give a rat's ass about the meta. I just play what I want and do just fine. I find I have way less fun when I even think about the meta, much less hear constantly about the netlist theorycrafting that tries to poison the meta into becoming something it shouldn't become, which is stale, repetitive, and limited.

Overall, I have way more respect for people who are consistent winners with creative lists and innovative strategies like Hothie, Sable Gryphon, and Kinetic Operator than someone who rolls out the same old formulaic lists built off the "meta" rather than their own inspiration, strategy, tactics, and strengths as a player.

Everyone would be significantly better off if the analysis of the "meta" was discarded in lieu of actual discussion of tactics and strategy, but it's much easier to deconstruct than to create.

I don't fly net lists as a rule I build my own, I will try other people's defender based lists though.

Not to rebel against the "tiers" concept as defined, but I do play by Waves.

I do this mainly as I play against enough other folks that have little or no experience with the game, and reducing the sheer variety of options is helpful, especially if they are not seasoned mini's gamers. I simply pull out the Core Set and extra X-Wing & TIE/F models (so there are enough to build 50 or 100 point squadrons) for those entirely unfamiliar.

Quite honestly, it is fun to "go back" to running without all those extras from time to time - I enjoy the challenge. As a player gets more comfortable and begins to build their own squadrons, I end up pulling out the subsequent waves.

RogueMorgan