1 hour ago, Joe Censored said:

A meta is just what lists you're likely to face at whatever venue you play, so it exists as soon as you play your first game, and is defined by what people bring.

So, my local meta currently consists of:

Triple Tie Advanced; Porkins, Dutch & Hobbie; 2 StarVipers & 2 Jumps (all naked); Fenn Rau, Talonbane, & Zuckuss; RAC & QD; Heff, Norra, & Biggs; 4 StarVipers; Ketsu & 2 Quads; and, best of all, 10. Cartel. Marauders. On the same table!

Our challenge: to come up with something even sillier for next time!

(Can you tell which lists were for tournament practice?)

11 hours ago, Stoneface said:

I've heard it described as "THE GAME within the game". Yeah, I know it sounds stupid, but think about it for a sec. X-Wing is "the game". The casual, beer and pizza, kitchen tabletop miniatures game. Or in my case, Wednesday night in the basement. Fly what you want, playing is fun, and if you win, even better. This "game" doesn't change much from Wave to Wave.

The Meta is "The Game". The builds you see at competitions. The most points efficient squads that can be built. Normally something a casual player wouldn't build or spend money on. For instance, buying enough Tie expansions to field a Tie swarm or picking up a Rebel Transport for just R3-A2. Or three Jumpmaster 5000.

The evil geniuses that put together these hyper efficient squads, along with new releases, define or help define The Meta. This "GAME" changes rapidly either due to new releases or from being "nerfed". Or both. Turrets helped change the Meta from Swarms. Autothrusters helped move away from PWTs. The triple Jumpmaster builds were such a BIG jump in Meta squads that they got nerfed.

As for serving one up to you on a plate, that's easy. Go to YouTube and search for X-wing world finals. You'll see what changes were made from year to year.

The "meta" is actually "the game outside the game".

Squad building is part of the game, and just optimizing on efficacy is one posible strategy within that.

Meta-gameing is using things like knowing that your opponent favors a particular list or starting position and using that knowledge to make batter play choices than you would be capable of without that information."The Meta" is juts that applied more generally to the popular lists/strategies rather than the preference of a singel opponent.

If the game is a plate, actually, take that back, if the game is a dish, of some type, doesn't matter, then the meta is the bland protein shake, effective and bland. Non meta is the other, more flavourful food, less technically efficient, but much more, well, variable.

Dude, how can the meta be real if our eyes aren't real?

4 hours ago, Turtlewing said:

The "meta" is actually "the game outside the game".

Squad building is part of the game, and just optimizing on efficacy is one posible strategy within that.

Meta-gameing is using things like knowing that your opponent favors a particular list or starting position and using that knowledge to make batter play choices than you would be capable of without that information."The Meta" is juts that applied more generally to the popular lists/strategies rather than the preference of asteroids singel opponent.

I've heard the term "Meta Gaming" used in reference to RPG games where the Player (you or me) uses information for decision making that is unavailable to his character. In this case I'll accept you definition of "the game outside the game". X-wing is a little different.

There is no hidden information in X-wing. All the opponent's info is readily available for inspection as is yours. When you sit down across from your opponent, you know two things off the bat even before lists are exchanged. His squad is limited to 100 points, assuming he can count, and he's bringing 3 obstacles. This part is very much like chess. The placement of obstacles and initial formations is the first move of a chess match.

Unlike RPG games, in X-wing, your pilots "know" what you know and they also "know" the enemy. It surprises no-one that Vader can perform two actions or Horn can double tap.

I also disagree with how you define meta gaming in relation to my opponent. If I face a player for the first time then, according to you, there will be no meta-gaming. Before X-wing we called this a cold read and used game theory, psychology and simple observations to "get inside the head" of your opponent. In poker it's reading a tell.

With so many different games and each with their own vocabulary it's no wonder there's no real agreement on certain definitions.

On 7/29/2017 at 0:35 AM, Stoneface said:

I've heard the term "Meta Gaming" used in reference to RPG games where the Player (you or me) uses information for decision making that is unavailable to his character. In this case I'll accept you definition of "the game outside the game". X-wing is a little different.

There is no hidden information in X-wing. All the opponent's info is readily available for inspection as is yours. When you sit down across from your opponent, you know two things off the bat even before lists are exchanged. His squad is limited to 100 points, assuming he can count, and he's bringing 3 obstacles. This part is very much like chess. The placement of obstacles and initial formations is the first move of a chess match.

Unlike RPG games, in X-wing, your pilots "know" what you know and they also "know" the enemy. It surprises no-one that Vader can perform two actions or Horn can double tap.

I also disagree with how you define meta gaming in relation to my opponent. If I face a player for the first time then, according to you, there will be no meta-gaming. Before X-wing we called this a cold read and used game theory, psychology and simple observations to "get inside the head" of your opponent. In poker it's reading a tell.

With so many different games and each with their own vocabulary it's no wonder there's no real agreement on certain definitions.

The rules do not provide you perfect knowledge of your opponent's list while you are building your own list, but that does not make it impossible to have knowledge about what your opponent will choose to field. And no, it doesn't need to be personal. Even juts knowing what lists did well at the last tournament can help narrow down what to expect this time. As well as knowing things like: "TIE swam is powerful and often does well, but it's taxing to play so rarely seen competitively" or "In this store there's a guy who always plays TIE swarm, so I expect to face TIE swarm and lists that counter TIE swarm".

When you make a decision like "I'm not going to take X because Y counters it and is really popular" that's meta-gaming. You didn't choose not to take X because it was point inefficient, because it didn't achieve a goal you had, or because you wanted a different ship more. You chose not to take it because you know it's counter is popular in the meta and therefor X is a bad choice because it will get countered often. Same with "I see so many people playing Y I'm going to build a list to counter them.", or "I suck at list building so I'm going to hit the forums copy a flavor of the month list and focus on learning how to fly it really well."

The main difference between X-wing and RPGs is the nature of X-wing means that meta-gaming has little to no stigma attached to it as it doesn't come into conflict with any intent of the rules of the game. But it is still fundamentally a matter of using knowledge outside the game to influence your choices while playing the game.

How do we know @Shadow345 is real?

Can you show me one on a plate?

3 minutes ago, Smutpedler said:

How do we know @Shadow345 is real?

Can you show me one on a plate?

Dammit I was coming here to post that exact thing.

On 2017-07-28 at 3:54 AM, Shadow345 said:

Is it tangible?

Could you show me one on a plate?

Because it's a wargame with competition/tournament. There are soooo many things we cant see be we know exist.... like broken logic :-)

4 minutes ago, Thormind said:

Because it's a wargame with competition/tournament. There are soooo many things we cant see be we know exist.... like broken logic :-)

Or... trolls!

On 7/28/2017 at 6:10 PM, Turtlewing said:

The "meta" is actually "the game outside the game".

Squad building is part of the game, and just optimizing on efficacy is one possible strategy within that.

Meta-gameing is using things like knowing that your opponent favors a particular list or starting position and using that knowledge to make batter play choices than you would be capable of without that information."The Meta" is just that applied more generally to the popular lists/strategies rather than the preference of a single opponent.

This is what I believe the proper definition of the "metagame" is. It's everything that is not directly part of playing a match. The X-Wing "game" is the match you play when you sit down with any list to play an opponent with any list. The stuff that happens inside of that game is tactics along with a dose of deception and perception to figure out what "hidden" options will be used and when. The meta is everything else that happens before the match even begins as well as the things you do after your match in anticipation of further matches.

If you are aware of X-Wing and do any kind of planning before you play you ARE taking part in the meta. While I'm not even sure it would work the only way I can think of that might eliminate the meta is if a person came into a match with no knowledge of what they would be playing or even how some of the pieces work.

On 7/28/2017 at 1:54 AM, Shadow345 said:

Is it tangible?

Could you show me one on a plate?

26 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

This thread can be closed now...