Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

In every FLGS, there is usually a metagame. You know, that one type of army EVERYONE seems to have (ex. lots of Horde armies, lots of MEQ armies). So, do you prefer to play with the metagame or against it?

I'll start off by noting that my metagame is MEQ CC and I prefer to play against the metagame, using Tau and Eldar (soon). (Plus Dark Angels, but I don't use them often; I mainly collected them because AoBR minis were available cheaply so I could start an army on a budget)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, if I have misdefined metagame, I apologize. This is the context it is used in at my LGS, but if it's different here I apologize for the confusion.

Nah, you got it.

Can there be a fourth choice, in that you don't pay attention to the metagame and just run your lists? I don't care if I'm staring down 3 tables of Green Tide, by god I'm running my Lascannon Predator!

Also, inb4 Dash's META.

I like to go against it. I'm the guy that fields armies with no vehicles whatsoever just to mess with people

Hard for me to say I guess. My local meta is just me and my friends (I didn't really go to my LGS that often, since it was more fun to play against my buddies, and they couldn't really go in there with their printouts and cardboard cut-outs).

We have 1 'nid horde/MC player, 1 CC Daemons/MC player, 1 Mechdar player, and 3 MEQ shooty players (1 CC, 1 Mixed, and 1 shooty).

So other than the MEQness we are pretty balanced in terms of armies. I guess i sorta go with it since I'm one of the MEQies, but all six of us play very differently.

feth the metagame. I play what I want to play and give the stinkeye to anybody who dares make a stupid comment about it.

Right, I'm with darkhound. I make my lists on what I think is best, regardless of if it's popular or not. In my case, I do what isn't popular, but not BECAUSE it's not popular.

Ailaros's post sums up mine. I build what I think works.

Alphapod wrote:In every FLGS, there is usually a metagame.

I'm pretty sure that's not what metagaming is. In fact here is a definition, "Metagaming is a broad term usually used to define any strategy, action or method used in a game which transcends a prescribed ruleset, uses external factors to affect the game, or goes beyond the supposed limits or environment set by the game. Another definition refers to the game universe outside of the game itself.

In simple terms, using out-of-game information, or resources, to affect one's in-game decisions."

This term gets used incorrectly more in relation to warhammer than almost anything else apart from maybe WoW...

Well I use Elysians so my combat style is way diffrent from common IG armys people field.

People where I play tend to know each others lists pretty well, and it's considered fairly acceptable to change things up. I take a base list with some modularity to give me a chance against different armies.

I see you have made a clarification, in that case I play against the "norm". I love having an army that people have never seen and don't know what to do with

I play what I like. I am working on my Eldar army right now, and just when my buddies get around to tailoring their forces against it, I will drop Marines or Dark Eldar against them just to keep them off balance. And I will be building my Tau and Orks to keep everything instantly switchable.

From a personal gamer standpoint, I have a single "take-all-comers" list for each army that I play. That list, and my use of it are capable of taking down anyone's army - to wit, I'd say that playing to the "metagame" is for amateurs.

From a Professional 40k Player standpoint, I'd tell you that understanding the META of your local scene, and out-METAing the local META is the only kind of METAgame to practice. I traditionally play Orks and Dark Eldar, but my META has zoomed so far ahead of everyone elses' META lately that I passed 6-10th edition META, circled back around to 1st, just hit second, and am currently in 3rd edition META about to lap everyone. Yep. That's how advanced my META game is.

Thus, I play Necrons now.

Dashofpepper wrote:From a personal gamer standpoint, I have a single "take-all-comers" list for each army that I play. That list, and my use of it are capable of taking down anyone's army - to wit, I'd say that playing to the "metagame" is for amateurs.

From a Professional 40k Player standpoint, I'd tell you that understanding the META of your local scene, and out-METAing the local META is the only kind of METAgame to practice. I traditionally play Orks and Dark Eldar, but my META has zoomed so far ahead of everyone elses' META lately that I passed 6-10th edition META, circled back around to 1st, just hit second, and am currently in 3rd edition META about to lap everyone. Yep. That's how advanced my META game is.

Thus, I play Necrons now.

I don't care what no one says, THAT'S talent.

I usually pick units/models that are cool and mesh well with whatever fluff or theme the army has, then find the best way to play them.

I guess in other words I don't really care either way about meta, I take what I think is cool, and avoid what I think isn't. So, leman russ vanquishers and no melta for everyone (imo its just a lame weapon fluff wise)

Dash - wheres the infinite META you have to reach first? Then back to -Infinite META and then onto 3rd

OOh, transcendental META!

I play the list I want to play, regardless - I find having a list you enjoy playing far beats out any "meta" considerations

I haven't used meta (switching armies or using a popular net list) and neither does anybody I know of. So, I chose that I go against the meta, because in my eyes, it's just something that tournament goers rant about on the net instead of having fun and playing the game.

The greatest mis match in my group would be my brother among his friends, no army has more than two meltas and he runs double landraider logan wing at 2000 points. He stomps em everyfreaking time...

Anyways our local metagame is termy heavy, so I always bring at least three Plasma Cannons and usually between 4 and 7.

All this talk of Metagame is bending my brain, I should never have read Dash's article...the electric yellows got me by the brain banana!

I guess I...erm...I'm still not sure what Metagame means!

Jihadnik wrote:All this talk of Metagame is bending my brain, I should never have read Dash's article...the electric yellows got me by the brain banana!

I guess I...erm...I'm still not sure what Metagame means!

As far as I know META stands for some type of gaming style that is widely accepted by the majority regardless of what people actually play. For me, I run lists I enjoy. I win, cool. If not, tweak it to work.

Not really sure where Necrons fit in the META terminology as they work as an army different from others but that would explain why people wishlist for them transports...

Jihadnik wrote:I guess I...erm...I'm still not sure what Metagame means!

It means looking at what kind of army you are most likely to face and designing your own army with that enemy in mind, instead of making a take-all-comers list.

So if your friends like lots of Terminators, you build an army optimised for killing Terminators.

AlexHolker wrote:

Jihadnik wrote:I guess I...erm...I'm still not sure what Metagame means!

It means looking at what kind of army you are most likely to face and designing your own army with that enemy in mind, instead of making a take-all-comers list.

So if your friends like lots of Terminators, you build an army optimised for killing Terminators.

That's list tailoring.

Eh, I can't say for sure what the Metagame is at our club. Most of the younger players muck around with Space Marines, the older players tend to lean towards guard. If that's the case I am also in the Metagame crowd, but only becuase I honestly think Vostroyans a really, REALLY cool.

Kurgash wrote:

AlexHolker wrote:

Jihadnik wrote:I guess I...erm...I'm still not sure what Metagame means!

It means looking at what kind of army you are most likely to face and designing your own army with that enemy in mind, instead of making a take-all-comers list.

So if your friends like lots of Terminators, you build an army optimised for killing Terminators.

That's list tailoring.

Not necessarily, if you know that your friend is likely to field terminators (as he either loves them or has nothing else) then you can anticipate what he will field, and aim to counter it. List tailoring I think implies that you actually have to have their list on you, or at least an extensive knowledge of what his army consists of.

Well if you pick an army based on meta you are succumbing to the meta... if he picks x they I take y but his z counters my y so I take a, but that dies to b so I take c as well...

It's circular and a mental head screw. I just make an army with flexable elements and then adapt as I play since no plan survives contact with the enemy!

Winning because you took max meltas vs a mech list is almost as bad as loosing because you took the same list against horde nids ...

Phototoxin wrote:Well if you pick an army based on meta you are succumbing to the meta... if he picks x they I take y but his z counters my y so I take a, but that dies to b so I take c as well...

It's circular and a mental head screw. I just make an army with flexable elements and then adapt as I play since no plan survives contact with the enemy!

Winning because you took max meltas vs a mech list is almost as bad as loosing because you took the same list against horde nids ...

What if you win against the Nids?

Then you've won based on skill rather than army list. Often in tournaments you could pick the top 3-5 lists and basically pilot them which is sad.

What's the metagame?

Who won this years 'Ard Boyz?
Another Chimera Wall IG list? Or something else this time?

Samus_aran115 wrote:What's the metagame?

I'm not sure if it's the list that every seems to play, or the army that everyone seems to play. Either way, apparently everyone plays it.