It is my first game so maybe it is new just for me:
But I don't understand player who just copy top meta lists. If I attend at tournaments of course I want to win, but I want to win with my list and creation. For me it is the most fun of the game to create lists which can be competitive also against top meta lists. I really have no joy to win with a super list every third person is using at a tournament. I would also say it is a bit embarassing for me using e.g. Paratanni/former Uboats etc at a tournament. Because I know my hidden reaction and thoughts about the player when I see Paratanni or similar.
At the last Open, everybody was cheering at the guy with the rebel swarm list. He was a monster player! Unfortunately he lost to Paratanni (or it was Palp-Defenders I am not sure anymore) and we in our group were like "meeh". Again a special list won, not the player. Nobody was interested and happy about the Paratanni or Commonwealth guy winning tournaments.
It is not whining, I just want the know the psychology behind player using/copying top meta lists.

Thing is, you can't actually do that much in X-Wing and have it be good. Sure I can play Soontir with Daredevil, Norra with Expert Handling, Hobbie instead of Biggs, but there is a reason why that won't work anywhere near as well as the established builds. Once these building blocks crystalize it becomes increasingly likely players come up with the same lists. Sometimes the building blocks are so strict that there is no room for variation at all - like with Parattanni. Want to run Mindlinked Fenn, Assaj, Manaroo? Well, there is no other sane combination of these ships that isn't Parattanni. At least there was. Maybe you could have justified Tactician in a different meta, but that wasn't the case.

Some people want to have fun, some people want to win

Some people can create, some people can not

sometimes you create a list of your own only to find out others have the same list and its META now

There are also a lot of players out there that don't want to fully commit to the game and only want to buy enough product to play in a tournament. so they will only buy what they need to make a list. often its a list that other have won with "This Game looks fun. Wow that list just won, what do I need to buy to fly that".

There are many reasons why people copy others. I use to hate it but I just accept it now and smile as I know when I take one of my own list I will all my games

As a competitive player and a SC2 guy: You can always play funky lists, but you need to know all the good top tier lists to be considered champion level possibility. In the midpoint, part of the game is not just list building, but picking up a meta list that you ENJOY playing and learn to play it really well. Yes it feels even better to do this with your own homebrew, and its very possible, just gotta be really good.

2 hours ago, IG88E said:

But I don't understand player who just copy top meta lists.
It is not whining, I just want the know the psychology behind player using/copying top meta lists.

Have you ever used a cooking recipe? I thought so. Case closed.

Quote

But I don't understand player who just copy top meta lists.

Sometimes people want an advantage and have more confidence in the combined experience of the internet than their own. For others it's a case of time: developing and testing a tournament viable list from scratch isn't a quick job.

Then you throw prizes into the equation and people are going to maximise their chances as much as possible.

Here's another example:

Olympic freestyle swimming races allow you to use any stroke you want, within limits, which is why it's called freestyle. But every competitor, and I mean every single one, chooses to use the front crawl in the freestyle race. No-one complains.

Why does no-one complain there? Why is x-wing different?

The answer is a mix of "(1) Because many x-wing players aren't fundamentally 100% win-focussed or (2) using a janky list gives me an excuse for losing"

Copying a list and knowing how to fly it effectively are two different things as well. I can copy a winning (pre-nerf) Dengaroo list, but if I fly Manaroo right smack into Range 1 of the enemy, I'm probably not going to win.

While there is a desire to win involved, you can't discount taste as well. I took Parattanni to a Tournament recently because I loved two out of the three ships used, and the third ship makes the other two easier to fly. Knowing the list was proven to do well was an added bonus, but still not the main point for me.

That's the reason

If you're a Johnny then you probably won't understand a Spike. That does not mean that one is superior to the other, but of course you can argue that one requires a broader/different skill set than another one.

Sometimes when you come up with a list all on your own it turns out to be a top tier list, because (as someone mentioned above) there are certain building blocks that work well and go together really well.

Also, just because a lost is top tier doesn't mean it can't also be fun to fly. When the defender titles came out, sure there were a lot of people flying triple defenders because it was a powerful list. But for every one player like that I bet there were two more players who were flying defenders because one of their favorite ships was now fixed and could be flown competitively again. For them, it was fun to fly that list, regardless of whether or not anyone else was flying it as well.

The ideal would be to be the guy that people cheer AND brings home the prize.

And then everyone will copy your list.

Two big reasons people copy the top tiers

1) It won, so it must be good. I want to win, dont care how.

2) I cant see the synergies on my own to make my own lists.

There are 2 people in my area that are the latter. They are absolutely horrible list builders, EVERYTHING they have come up with has been abysmal and not even "fun" since it got flattened in 3-5 rounds to a normal non-meta list. But when theres a tournament around theyre flying the meta lists and magically theyre winning most if not all of their games.

14 minutes ago, Vineheart01 said:

Two big reasons people copy the top tiers

1) It won, so it must be good. I want to win, dont care how.

2) I cant see the synergies on my own to make my own lists.

There are 2 people in my area that are the latter. They are absolutely horrible list builders, EVERYTHING they have come up with has been abysmal and not even "fun" since it got flattened in 3-5 rounds to a normal non-meta list. But when theres a tournament around theyre flying the meta lists and magically theyre winning most if not all of their games.

Your case 2 players are still good players as they are winning.

You wouldn't blame a footballer for not using their own unique kicking technique. Why do you use "magic" for one case and not the other? A good workman knows knows to use good tools ...

Because they still fly like crap and make really dumb decisions, the meta lists are just strong enough to let them win anyway because the dice didnt go cold on them. For instance one guy was flying the typical Dengaroo build and he kept having Manaroo right behind Dengar, negating LW which he did actually take. He still won because he just happened to never need LW and every time his crappy flying caused a bump or hit a rock it didnt punish him nearly as hard as it should have (either the rock or lack of tokens)

A good player can adapt to new situations or tweak his/her list if something isnt working right. Even when they use these meta lists ive crushed them by bringing something completely off-the-wall nonmeta that shouldnt by any rights work but it does anyway because they fly right into my hands and never notice the massive weakness in my list.

16 minutes ago, Vineheart01 said:

Because they still fly like crap and make really dumb decisions, the meta lists are just strong enough to let them win anyway because the dice didnt go cold on them.

There's different aspects - gameplay, list building, reading the opponent, and many others. A player cn be strong and weak in each of those separately. But they're only a part of the win/loss stat, which is the stat that actually matters.

You say these "bad" players are winning most of their games. I say that's how you define a good player. Basically. it doesn't matter how smart a player thinks he is. If he can't win, he's not good.

People play this game for many reasons and enjoy different aspects of it. No reason is better than another and no aspect is the best.

You'll never understand all the why's, so don't try to. Focus on your preferences, don't judge, and don't accept judgement from anyone else on your preferences and we can all enjoy the game the way we like.

As for me, I have an originality complex that makes it very difficult to copy a list exactly. I might take an archetype like Dash/Lothal but build it my own way--I can't stand playing traditional Super or Rainbow Dash, so I run it differently.

But I understand my deviations from the most efficient builds will have consequences, and I fully accept them. If I get beat, it is due to my list building and play; not the fault of my net-listing opponent. I won't put the responsibility of my choices on them.

If you play the game how you prefer it, you can still enjoy the experience, win or lose.

12 minutes ago, Sekac said:

People play this game for many reasons and enjoy different aspects of it. No reason is better than another and no aspect is the best.

You'll never understand all the why's, so don't try to. Focus on your preferences, don't judge, and don't accept judgement from anyone else on your preferences and we can all enjoy the game the way we like.

The sooner one accepts this, the better one's gaming experience will be.

I know from experience

The fact is, no one really gives a **** when somebody wins a big event with a meta build. Oh, some guy won the Regional flying Triple Torp Scouts? The discussion is about how bull Triple Scouts is (read: was), or how it needs to be nerfed, or what can be done to beat it. No one really gives a ton of attention to the winner of the even, because honestly who cares? There were twenty Triple Scout players there, and the list has already been proven to be a capable Regionals winner, so it's not terribly unlikely or interesting to see it win for a twelfth time. So that's the curse of flying meta: no one really takes note even if you pull off a win.

But, people fly meta because not everyone is a Jeff Berling who can always seem to find some weird freaky fun list that no one else has ever thought of and do well with it.

You only have a limited time to unveil a new crazy build. Like Old Para succeeding with Parattani. When you're a creative trend-setter that can find something new that works, it blows people's minds once, and then the forums and podcasts go nuts analyzing it to death, and then the very next tourney you've got two dozen copy cats flying the same basic list and before long somebody wins another big tourney with it, and the reaction isn't "Wow, Player X is a great player!" but instead it's "Another f'in win for Parrattani....blah blah blah"

To some, building their own list is a big part of the game and what makes it fun. Some of these players don't care about winning.

To others, winning is a big part of the game and what makes it fun. Some of these players don't care about list building.

There are some players in between who care about listbuilding and winning, and others who don't care about winning or listbuilding. People play the game for different reasons. I used to get frustrated with netlisters, but I've come to the conclusion I should just be happy they are playing at all and a piece of the puzzle that is Xwing.

Whenever I copy a list I see online, it's usually because of one driving thought:

"Oh, that looks fun!"

Like at the Hanger Bay, I flew a slightly modified Heragator/Ahsoka combo (replaced 3PO with Nien Numb, added Autoblaster to Zeb). I'd seen it online, and it looked like a blast that also scratched my deep and abiding love for flying Ghosts with Hera.

11 hours ago, Moppy said:

Have you ever used a cooking recipe? I thought so. Case closed.

At my core, I want to refute this statement as incorrect. . .but I cannot find a way. Great comparison.

11 hours ago, Moppy said:

Here's another example:

Olympic freestyle swimming races allow you to use any stroke you want, within limits, which is why it's called freestyle. But every competitor, and I mean every single one, chooses to use the front crawl in the freestyle race. No-one complains.

Why does no-one complain there? Why is x-wing different?

The answer is a mix of "(1) Because many x-wing players aren't fundamentally 100% win-focussed or (2) using a janky list gives me an excuse for losing"

That not a very apt analogy.

Tht would imply that there is one single X wing list to rule them all, which is not the case.

9 minutes ago, BlodVargarna said:

That not a very apt analogy.

Tht would imply that there is one single X wing list to rule them all, which is not the case.

Also, I don't really buy reason number 2 at all. First, it pretty clearly falls under reason 1 so I don't get it as a separate scenario. Second, I doubt the reason for jank lists is as a fail-safe for ego. You might prefer a specific mechanic, a certain ship, a character you've always liked or whatever else; but a ready made excuse for not winning? I don't think so.