Do You Prefer Class Based BG Metas? Or Miss the Old Style of Metas.

Nemesis_17

So for the past few seasons of battlegrounds we’ve had class based metas with attacker buffs, where a specific class gets some type of boost (usually in damage) to increase their effectiveness throughout the meta. Before this, we had just a set of nodes with no class based benefits or attacker buff at all. Obviously any set of nodes will benefit certain champs just by the nature of the nodes, but there was no additional factor encouraging you to use a certain class of champs.

So as the title suggests, which do you prefer? Have class based bonuses made bgs more or less enjoyable? Has it improved or worsened the balance of metas? Or does it not matter to you either way? Interested to hear what the community’s opinion is about this.

Bayle The Dread

No I liked the old style of metas

Most fun I’ve had was the electric defense power burn meta.

Nemesis_17

No I liked the old style of metas

Vito Scaletta said:

Most fun I’ve had was the electric defense power burn meta.

I unfortunately came back to the game too late so I missed that meta, but I’ve had quite a few others tell me it was their favorite meta as well.

willrun4adonut

Yes I prefer the class based metas

Oops, I selected the wrong one.

ItsClobberinTime

No I liked the old style of metas

The armor burn meta will forever be my favorite meta, I wish we got more restrictive metas like that one that aren't class based.
I got to use champs I never would have used like Thor or Vulture, best meta by far imo.

Emilia90

Indifferent

The class nodes don’t do too much. Battlegrounds has always had a majority nuke ratio but I’d also like to see more restrictive metas

PantherusNZ

No I liked the old style of metas

Imagine a meta with Safeguard on the defenders...DoT champions and multiplie-immunities would rule

Nemesis_17

No I liked the old style of metas

PantherusNZ said:

Imagine a meta with Safeguard on the defenders...DoT champions and multiplie-immunities would rule

Kate would go brrr

Rayven5220

Indifferent

I prefer a variety of both.
Class based for a season or 2, then non class based for a season or 2.

Zuro

No I liked the old style of metas

All these attacker buffs do is just promote using the same champs over and over again. I prefer the old metas, as the weren't as many must-draft champs. For example this current GC meta, Onslaught, sunspot, and Bishop are must drafts

captain_rogers

Yes I prefer the class based metas

I was a Newbie TB when powert burn armor up meta was up. Good ol times. My 5* colossus was the most banned at that time.

captain_rogers

Yes I prefer the class based metas

I like class based metas, as thry provide balance in rosters, but this season is awful. The prowess should be passive instead of a buff

SirGamesBond

Indifferent

Metas are metas.
You like some, you don't like some.
And thats how they should be.

All metas incentives us to rankups some long lost champs which becomes useful.
Good for all around progression.

Emilia90

Indifferent

Zuro said:

All these attacker buffs do is just promote using the same champs over and over again. I prefer the old metas, as the weren't as many must-draft champs. For example this current GC meta, Onslaught, sunspot, and Bishop are must drafts

There’s always been must draft champs though? Hulkling and Galan during the power burn meta were pretty much insta-wins. And the champs you mentioned benefit more from their ability to convert stuns to passive more than the node

Priyabrata

No I liked the old style of metas

I prefer these over class based metas because there's little room to find some surprise matchup or ability interaction.

Take for example the
POLKADOT POWER & POWER SHIELD meta
Imo it was one of the most fun metas to ever exist for me. Sneaky immunities, Alternate strategies, champion interactions, Nodes like that are very fun to play around compared to the generic class based ones that are just boring.

Here are some ideas for metas that could be fun

- Power shield + Life Transfer
- Dash vulnerability + Foresight
- Poison Vulnerability+ Toxican't? Toxican!
- Invade + Critical interruption
- Do you bleed? + Invade ( seems random but do you bleed allows block damage so bleed immunity or inability to apply bleed shouldn't be a limiting factor)

Nemesis_17

No I liked the old style of metas

Zuro said:

All these attacker buffs do is just promote using the same champs over and over again. I prefer the old metas, as the weren't as many must-draft champs. For example this current GC meta, Onslaught, sunspot, and Bishop are must drafts

Yea my sentiments exactly, all 3 of those champs would’ve been great this meta without the attacker buff anyway. Onslaught and bishop replace any shrugged stuns, and sunspot gains power when an incinerate is shrugged just making him even faster. The prowess though is so overkill, I’ll ban and have banned a rank 3 6* sunspot since I dont have him and he just goes crazy.

Zuro

No I liked the old style of metas

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

All these attacker buffs do is just promote using the same champs over and over again. I prefer the old metas, as the weren't as many must-draft champs. For example this current GC meta, Onslaught, sunspot, and Bishop are must drafts

There’s always been must draft champs though? Hulkling and Galan during the power burn meta were pretty much insta-wins. And the champs you mentioned benefit more from their ability to convert stuns to passive more than the node

I never said must-draft were never a thing prior, but it was WAY less common than it is now. Plus your second point is just not true, Sunspot/Onslaught/Bishop benefit greatly from the node as they get tons of prowess from having their debuffs purified. I've literally taken r3 sassys with a r1 sunspot in 50 secs lol

Emilia90

Indifferent

Zuro said:

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

All these attacker buffs do is just promote using the same champs over and over again. I prefer the old metas, as the weren't as many must-draft champs. For example this current GC meta, Onslaught, sunspot, and Bishop are must drafts

There’s always been must draft champs though? Hulkling and Galan during the power burn meta were pretty much insta-wins. And the champs you mentioned benefit more from their ability to convert stuns to passive more than the node

I never said must-draft were never a thing prior, but it was WAY less common than it is now. Plus your second point is just not true, Sunspot/Onslaught/Bishop benefit greatly from the node as they get tons of prowess from having their debuffs purified. I've literally taken r3 sassys with a r1 sunspot in 50 secs lol

I disagree. There have always been champs that have been broken for the meta and it hasn’t become an increasingly common thing or anything. That DoT meta we had heavily favored champs like Werewolf who could kill any champ in 30 seconds flat as a r3 6* lol. Plus we’ve had other metas with attacker boosts and none of them have been game changing (like the tech one).

Zuro

No I liked the old style of metas

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

All these attacker buffs do is just promote using the same champs over and over again. I prefer the old metas, as the weren't as many must-draft champs. For example this current GC meta, Onslaught, sunspot, and Bishop are must drafts

There’s always been must draft champs though? Hulkling and Galan during the power burn meta were pretty much insta-wins. And the champs you mentioned benefit more from their ability to convert stuns to passive more than the node

I never said must-draft were never a thing prior, but it was WAY less common than it is now. Plus your second point is just not true, Sunspot/Onslaught/Bishop benefit greatly from the node as they get tons of prowess from having their debuffs purified. I've literally taken r3 sassys with a r1 sunspot in 50 secs lol

I disagree. There have always been champs that have been broken for the meta and it hasn’t become an increasingly common thing or anything. That DoT meta we had heavily favored champs like Werewolf who could kill any champ in 30 seconds flat as a r3 6* lol. Plus we’ve had other metas with attacker boosts and none of them have been game changing (like the tech one).

You're contradicting yourself, the only reason why werewolf was so OP that meta was because of the attacker buff giving him all those vicious passives. People were literally bringing in 5 star werewolves to their rosters and doing 30 sec fights, that has literally never happened in old metas besides maybe the shank one with Ghost. Nowadays it is becoming a much more common thing, which isn't healthy for bgs imo.

SirGamesBond

Indifferent

Zuro said:

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

All these attacker buffs do is just promote using the same champs over and over again. I prefer the old metas, as the weren't as many must-draft champs. For example this current GC meta, Onslaught, sunspot, and Bishop are must drafts

There’s always been must draft champs though? Hulkling and Galan during the power burn meta were pretty much insta-wins. And the champs you mentioned benefit more from their ability to convert stuns to passive more than the node

I never said must-draft were never a thing prior, but it was WAY less common than it is now. Plus your second point is just not true, Sunspot/Onslaught/Bishop benefit greatly from the node as they get tons of prowess from having their debuffs purified. I've literally taken r3 sassys with a r1 sunspot in 50 secs lol

I disagree. There have always been champs that have been broken for the meta and it hasn’t become an increasingly common thing or anything. That DoT meta we had heavily favored champs like Werewolf who could kill any champ in 30 seconds flat as a r3 6* lol. Plus we’ve had other metas with attacker boosts and none of them have been game changing (like the tech one).

You're contradicting yourself, the only reason why werewolf was so OP that meta was because of the attacker buff giving him all those vicious passives. People were literally bringing in 5 star werewolves to their rosters and doing 30 sec fights, that has literally never happened in old metas besides maybe the shank one with Ghost. Nowadays it is becoming a much more common thing, which isn't healthy for bgs imo.

5* Ronan wants to talk.
5* onslaught cooked on D when he was released. Heck I saw people die to 5* photon when she was released.

Zuro

No I liked the old style of metas

SirGamesBond said:

Zuro said:

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

All these attacker buffs do is just promote using the same champs over and over again. I prefer the old metas, as the weren't as many must-draft champs. For example this current GC meta, Onslaught, sunspot, and Bishop are must drafts

There’s always been must draft champs though? Hulkling and Galan during the power burn meta were pretty much insta-wins. And the champs you mentioned benefit more from their ability to convert stuns to passive more than the node

I never said must-draft were never a thing prior, but it was WAY less common than it is now. Plus your second point is just not true, Sunspot/Onslaught/Bishop benefit greatly from the node as they get tons of prowess from having their debuffs purified. I've literally taken r3 sassys with a r1 sunspot in 50 secs lol

I disagree. There have always been champs that have been broken for the meta and it hasn’t become an increasingly common thing or anything. That DoT meta we had heavily favored champs like Werewolf who could kill any champ in 30 seconds flat as a r3 6* lol. Plus we’ve had other metas with attacker boosts and none of them have been game changing (like the tech one).

You're contradicting yourself, the only reason why werewolf was so OP that meta was because of the attacker buff giving him all those vicious passives. People were literally bringing in 5 star werewolves to their rosters and doing 30 sec fights, that has literally never happened in old metas besides maybe the shank one with Ghost. Nowadays it is becoming a much more common thing, which isn't healthy for bgs imo.

5* Ronan wants to talk.
5* onslaught cooked on D when he was released. Heck I saw people die to 5* photon when she was released.

First off those champs were new, that was the only reason why people ever brought them in since hardly anyone knew how to fight them yet. Secondly, in those metas you can just ban those few exceptions if you really wanted, meanwhile with these recent attacker buffs it's whole classes that become OP and you can't ban them all, so it is just the same matchups over and over again which is boring.

SirGamesBond

Indifferent

Zuro said:

SirGamesBond said:

Zuro said:

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

All these attacker buffs do is just promote using the same champs over and over again. I prefer the old metas, as the weren't as many must-draft champs. For example this current GC meta, Onslaught, sunspot, and Bishop are must drafts

There’s always been must draft champs though? Hulkling and Galan during the power burn meta were pretty much insta-wins. And the champs you mentioned benefit more from their ability to convert stuns to passive more than the node

I never said must-draft were never a thing prior, but it was WAY less common than it is now. Plus your second point is just not true, Sunspot/Onslaught/Bishop benefit greatly from the node as they get tons of prowess from having their debuffs purified. I've literally taken r3 sassys with a r1 sunspot in 50 secs lol

I disagree. There have always been champs that have been broken for the meta and it hasn’t become an increasingly common thing or anything. That DoT meta we had heavily favored champs like Werewolf who could kill any champ in 30 seconds flat as a r3 6* lol. Plus we’ve had other metas with attacker boosts and none of them have been game changing (like the tech one).

You're contradicting yourself, the only reason why werewolf was so OP that meta was because of the attacker buff giving him all those vicious passives. People were literally bringing in 5 star werewolves to their rosters and doing 30 sec fights, that has literally never happened in old metas besides maybe the shank one with Ghost. Nowadays it is becoming a much more common thing, which isn't healthy for bgs imo.

5* Ronan wants to talk.
5* onslaught cooked on D when he was released. Heck I saw people die to 5* photon when she was released.

First off those champs were new, that was the only reason why people ever brought them in since hardly anyone knew how to fight them yet. Secondly, in those metas you can just ban those few exceptions if you really wanted, meanwhile with these recent attacker buffs it's whole classes that become OP and you can't ban them all, so it is just the same matchups over and over again which is boring.

It's not because of the metas.
There was a ghost meta, every single fight was 19 seconds.
Last meta it was symbiote supreme with 20 second fights outside mutants. I don't like mutant metas, as I don't have couple obvious ones as 7*. My three bans have been, domino, sunspot and 6* Wx for week 1 and 2. But it matter not "FOR ME", my rankups are all based towards week 3 and 4 GC.


"so it is just the same matchups over and over again which is boring"

This exact thing I brought up with my mates 2 seasons ago.
Every single defender was onslaught, bulls eye, photon, maestro including the the couple obvious ones.
There was no fun with same repeated fights.

Now we have serpent added to this list of defenders.
People will draft him no matter what.

Metas keep changing and the difficulty is same for everyone in a given season. But people are not going to draft old defenders.

The meta shift is not because of the nodes, its the result of new defenders.

Real_Madrid_76_2

No I liked the old style of metas

Polka dot, power shield meta was my favourite one. Got to use so many annoying defenders or even duds as attackers. I literally put a sunspot on defense and still won the match

Zuro

No I liked the old style of metas

SirGamesBond said:

Zuro said:

SirGamesBond said:

Zuro said:

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

All these attacker buffs do is just promote using the same champs over and over again. I prefer the old metas, as the weren't as many must-draft champs. For example this current GC meta, Onslaught, sunspot, and Bishop are must drafts

There’s always been must draft champs though? Hulkling and Galan during the power burn meta were pretty much insta-wins. And the champs you mentioned benefit more from their ability to convert stuns to passive more than the node

I never said must-draft were never a thing prior, but it was WAY less common than it is now. Plus your second point is just not true, Sunspot/Onslaught/Bishop benefit greatly from the node as they get tons of prowess from having their debuffs purified. I've literally taken r3 sassys with a r1 sunspot in 50 secs lol

I disagree. There have always been champs that have been broken for the meta and it hasn’t become an increasingly common thing or anything. That DoT meta we had heavily favored champs like Werewolf who could kill any champ in 30 seconds flat as a r3 6* lol. Plus we’ve had other metas with attacker boosts and none of them have been game changing (like the tech one).

You're contradicting yourself, the only reason why werewolf was so OP that meta was because of the attacker buff giving him all those vicious passives. People were literally bringing in 5 star werewolves to their rosters and doing 30 sec fights, that has literally never happened in old metas besides maybe the shank one with Ghost. Nowadays it is becoming a much more common thing, which isn't healthy for bgs imo.

5* Ronan wants to talk.
5* onslaught cooked on D when he was released. Heck I saw people die to 5* photon when she was released.

First off those champs were new, that was the only reason why people ever brought them in since hardly anyone knew how to fight them yet. Secondly, in those metas you can just ban those few exceptions if you really wanted, meanwhile with these recent attacker buffs it's whole classes that become OP and you can't ban them all, so it is just the same matchups over and over again which is boring.

It's not because of the metas.
There was a ghost meta, every single fight was 19 seconds.
Last meta it was symbiote supreme with 20 second fights outside mutants. I don't like mutant metas, as I don't have couple obvious ones as 7*. My three bans have been, domino, sunspot and 6* Wx for week 1 and 2. But it matter not "FOR ME", my rankups are all based towards week 3 and 4 GC.


"so it is just the same matchups over and over again which is boring"

This exact thing I brought up with my mates 2 seasons ago.
Every single defender was onslaught, bulls eye, photon, maestro including the the couple obvious ones.
There was no fun with same repeated fights.

Now we have serpent added to this list of defenders.
People will draft him no matter what.

Metas keep changing and the difficulty is same for everyone in a given season. But people are not going to draft old defenders.

The meta shift is not because of the nodes, its the result of new defenders.

It is not a mutually exclusive thing, attacker buffs AND new annoying defenders encourage players to constantly draft the same champs over and over again. Magic thief meta had me constantly having to stick with x-magica champs, this meta has me constantly sticking to mutant champs, the list goes on. It just ruins the uniqueness of battlegrounds.

Asher1_1

Yes I prefer the class based metas

I like it because it balance out each class and force me to rank some underrated champs of each class.

SirGamesBond

Indifferent

Zuro said:

SirGamesBond said:

Zuro said:

SirGamesBond said:

Zuro said:

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

All these attacker buffs do is just promote using the same champs over and over again. I prefer the old metas, as the weren't as many must-draft champs. For example this current GC meta, Onslaught, sunspot, and Bishop are must drafts

There’s always been must draft champs though? Hulkling and Galan during the power burn meta were pretty much insta-wins. And the champs you mentioned benefit more from their ability to convert stuns to passive more than the node

I never said must-draft were never a thing prior, but it was WAY less common than it is now. Plus your second point is just not true, Sunspot/Onslaught/Bishop benefit greatly from the node as they get tons of prowess from having their debuffs purified. I've literally taken r3 sassys with a r1 sunspot in 50 secs lol

I disagree. There have always been champs that have been broken for the meta and it hasn’t become an increasingly common thing or anything. That DoT meta we had heavily favored champs like Werewolf who could kill any champ in 30 seconds flat as a r3 6* lol. Plus we’ve had other metas with attacker boosts and none of them have been game changing (like the tech one).

You're contradicting yourself, the only reason why werewolf was so OP that meta was because of the attacker buff giving him all those vicious passives. People were literally bringing in 5 star werewolves to their rosters and doing 30 sec fights, that has literally never happened in old metas besides maybe the shank one with Ghost. Nowadays it is becoming a much more common thing, which isn't healthy for bgs imo.

5* Ronan wants to talk.
5* onslaught cooked on D when he was released. Heck I saw people die to 5* photon when she was released.

First off those champs were new, that was the only reason why people ever brought them in since hardly anyone knew how to fight them yet. Secondly, in those metas you can just ban those few exceptions if you really wanted, meanwhile with these recent attacker buffs it's whole classes that become OP and you can't ban them all, so it is just the same matchups over and over again which is boring.

It's not because of the metas.
There was a ghost meta, every single fight was 19 seconds.
Last meta it was symbiote supreme with 20 second fights outside mutants. I don't like mutant metas, as I don't have couple obvious ones as 7*. My three bans have been, domino, sunspot and 6* Wx for week 1 and 2. But it matter not "FOR ME", my rankups are all based towards week 3 and 4 GC.


"so it is just the same matchups over and over again which is boring"

This exact thing I brought up with my mates 2 seasons ago.
Every single defender was onslaught, bulls eye, photon, maestro including the the couple obvious ones.
There was no fun with same repeated fights.

Now we have serpent added to this list of defenders.
People will draft him no matter what.

Metas keep changing and the difficulty is same for everyone in a given season. But people are not going to draft old defenders.

The meta shift is not because of the nodes, its the result of new defenders.

It is not a mutually exclusive thing, attacker buffs AND new annoying defenders encourage players to constantly draft the same champs over and over again. Magic thief meta had me constantly having to stick with x-magica champs, this meta has me constantly sticking to mutant champs, the list goes on. It just ruins the uniqueness of battlegrounds.

How can you contradict yourself with uniqueness when every season the metas are a unique set of champs. How is it unique when we get to use the same champs in each and every meta?
Get ready to deal with it for 6 more seasons.
Cuz the saga thingy is already decided.

In 4 days, week 3-4 GC you won't have to focus on mutants only and you can use any champ. That's half a season without forcing a class.

One thing I can agree upon is bringing AW tactic in BGs is lazy design.
But then again it comes once every three season. It rewards players upgrading tactic champs for AW.

You can either like or dislike a meta, and that's upto you. Preferences are personal, so some will enjoy it and some won't.

Zuro

No I liked the old style of metas

SirGamesBond said:

Zuro said:

SirGamesBond said:

Zuro said:

SirGamesBond said:

Zuro said:

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

Emilia90 said:

Zuro said:

All these attacker buffs do is just promote using the same champs over and over again. I prefer the old metas, as the weren't as many must-draft champs. For example this current GC meta, Onslaught, sunspot, and Bishop are must drafts

There’s always been must draft champs though? Hulkling and Galan during the power burn meta were pretty much insta-wins. And the champs you mentioned benefit more from their ability to convert stuns to passive more than the node

I never said must-draft were never a thing prior, but it was WAY less common than it is now. Plus your second point is just not true, Sunspot/Onslaught/Bishop benefit greatly from the node as they get tons of prowess from having their debuffs purified. I've literally taken r3 sassys with a r1 sunspot in 50 secs lol

I disagree. There have always been champs that have been broken for the meta and it hasn’t become an increasingly common thing or anything. That DoT meta we had heavily favored champs like Werewolf who could kill any champ in 30 seconds flat as a r3 6* lol. Plus we’ve had other metas with attacker boosts and none of them have been game changing (like the tech one).

You're contradicting yourself, the only reason why werewolf was so OP that meta was because of the attacker buff giving him all those vicious passives. People were literally bringing in 5 star werewolves to their rosters and doing 30 sec fights, that has literally never happened in old metas besides maybe the shank one with Ghost. Nowadays it is becoming a much more common thing, which isn't healthy for bgs imo.

5* Ronan wants to talk.
5* onslaught cooked on D when he was released. Heck I saw people die to 5* photon when she was released.

First off those champs were new, that was the only reason why people ever brought them in since hardly anyone knew how to fight them yet. Secondly, in those metas you can just ban those few exceptions if you really wanted, meanwhile with these recent attacker buffs it's whole classes that become OP and you can't ban them all, so it is just the same matchups over and over again which is boring.

It's not because of the metas.
There was a ghost meta, every single fight was 19 seconds.
Last meta it was symbiote supreme with 20 second fights outside mutants. I don't like mutant metas, as I don't have couple obvious ones as 7*. My three bans have been, domino, sunspot and 6* Wx for week 1 and 2. But it matter not "FOR ME", my rankups are all based towards week 3 and 4 GC.


"so it is just the same matchups over and over again which is boring"

This exact thing I brought up with my mates 2 seasons ago.
Every single defender was onslaught, bulls eye, photon, maestro including the the couple obvious ones.
There was no fun with same repeated fights.

Now we have serpent added to this list of defenders.
People will draft him no matter what.

Metas keep changing and the difficulty is same for everyone in a given season. But people are not going to draft old defenders.

The meta shift is not because of the nodes, its the result of new defenders.

It is not a mutually exclusive thing, attacker buffs AND new annoying defenders encourage players to constantly draft the same champs over and over again. Magic thief meta had me constantly having to stick with x-magica champs, this meta has me constantly sticking to mutant champs, the list goes on. It just ruins the uniqueness of battlegrounds.

How can you contradict yourself with uniqueness when every season the metas are a unique set of champs. How is it unique when we get to use the same champs in each and every meta?
Get ready to deal with it for 6 more seasons.
Cuz the saga thingy is already decided.

In 4 days, week 3-4 GC you won't have to focus on mutants only and you can use any champ. That's half a season without forcing a class.

One thing I can agree upon is bringing AW tactic in BGs is lazy design.
But then again it comes once every three season. It rewards players upgrading tactic champs for AW.

You can either like or dislike a meta, and that's upto you. Preferences are personal, so some will enjoy it and some won't.

The fact we have to wait half a season so we don't have to focus on mutant champs is a problem in itself imo. There have just been too many metas recently that have been overly reliant on the attacker buffs, and as result BGs can get repetitive doing the same fights over and over

SirGamesBond

Indifferent

Man, why are you still pissy when the meta is literally taking a backflip in your favor in 4 days.
At this point buddy you are kinda finding any reason to complain. Which is fair, If you don't like it, you don't like it, simple. But it doesn't imply that everyone else "hates" it.
It looks more like you have problem with mutants, I do too. My mutants suk. But what are we gonna do.

Despite the meta, people still are using the champs they want to. Not everyone owns every top mutant upgraded. And people are doing fine.
I won matches without a single mutant draft plenty of the times and I'm damn sure you did too.

Zuro

No I liked the old style of metas

SirGamesBond said:

Man, why are you still pissy when the meta is literally taking a backflip in your favor in 4 days.
At this point buddy you are kinda finding any reason to complain. Which is fair, If you don't like it, you don't like it, simple. But it doesn't imply that everyone else "hates" it.
It looks more like you have problem with mutants, I do too. My mutants suk. But what are we gonna do.

Despite the meta, people still are using the champs they want to. Not everyone owns every top mutant upgraded. And people are doing fine.
I won matches without a single mutant draft plenty of the times and I'm damn sure you did too.

Saying I'm pissy when I've kept the conversation civilized this whole time is hilarious. Plus when did I even claim everyone else hates it? I've stated MY own opinion this entire time. Lastly when you play at the top of the competition, everyone pretty much does have all the top mutants.

In the end I simply stated my thoughts and you came to argue with me, I'm not "finding any reason to complain." I'm just gonna leave this at agree to disagree

SirGamesBond

Indifferent

Zuro said:

SirGamesBond said:

Man, why are you still pissy when the meta is literally taking a backflip in your favor in 4 days.
At this point buddy you are kinda finding any reason to complain. Which is fair, If you don't like it, you don't like it, simple. But it doesn't imply that everyone else "hates" it.
It looks more like you have problem with mutants, I do too. My mutants suk. But what are we gonna do.

Despite the meta, people still are using the champs they want to. Not everyone owns every top mutant upgraded. And people are doing fine.
I won matches without a single mutant draft plenty of the times and I'm damn sure you did too.

Saying I'm pissy when I've kept the conversation civilized this whole time is hilarious. Plus when did I even claim everyone else hates it? I've stated MY own opinion this entire time. Lastly when you play at the top of the competition, everyone pretty much does have all the top mutants.

In the end I simply stated my thoughts and you came to argue with me, I'm not "finding any reason to complain." I'm just gonna leave this at agree to disagree

I didnt mean disrespect if it came out that way. My bad. I have been told communication is not my strong trait.
With no disrespect, it did look like you were complaining about mutants being too strong.
I couldn't agree because it's not just a mutant specefic case.
Same thing happened during science meta about 6 months ago, It was way too op, I hated it.
And then there was a skill meta round the same time, and I preferred it.

And without arguing I respectfully disagree for having a tunnel vision blaming metas alone.

You play at the top so you are aware enough to know every meta favours some champ more than others. And in this instance its mutants, which will change to a different meta in couple days.
....

I also belive kabam decides their metas so that the newer champs looks more lucrative to acquire.
And I can't blame a company to capitalise on it.
Let's hope for everyones sake next meta is not a mutant meta because of Northstar.

Zuro

No I liked the old style of metas

SirGamesBond said:

Zuro said:

SirGamesBond said:

Man, why are you still pissy when the meta is literally taking a backflip in your favor in 4 days.
At this point buddy you are kinda finding any reason to complain. Which is fair, If you don't like it, you don't like it, simple. But it doesn't imply that everyone else "hates" it.
It looks more like you have problem with mutants, I do too. My mutants suk. But what are we gonna do.

Despite the meta, people still are using the champs they want to. Not everyone owns every top mutant upgraded. And people are doing fine.
I won matches without a single mutant draft plenty of the times and I'm damn sure you did too.

Saying I'm pissy when I've kept the conversation civilized this whole time is hilarious. Plus when did I even claim everyone else hates it? I've stated MY own opinion this entire time. Lastly when you play at the top of the competition, everyone pretty much does have all the top mutants.

In the end I simply stated my thoughts and you came to argue with me, I'm not "finding any reason to complain." I'm just gonna leave this at agree to disagree

I didnt mean disrespect if it came out that way. My bad. I have been told communication is not my strong trait.
With no disrespect, it did look like you were complaining about mutants being too strong.
I couldn't agree because it's not just a mutant specefic case.
Same thing happened during science meta about 6 months ago, It was way too op, I hated it.
And then there was a skill meta round the same time, and I preferred it.

And without arguing I respectfully disagree for having a tunnel vision blaming metas alone.

You play at the top so you are aware enough to know every meta favours some champ more than others. And in this instance its mutants, which will change to a different meta in couple days.
....

I also belive kabam decides their metas so that the newer champs looks more lucrative to acquire.
And I can't blame a company to capitalise on it.
Let's hope for everyones sake next meta is not a mutant meta because of Northstar.

Im not blaming metas alone I'm solely talking about attacker buffs. There's a big difference between metas so happening to favor certain champs (Ronan cheese, etc.), and Kabam actively boosting whole classes/tags/etc. In the former scenario, you can just ban Ronan as he is just one champ. Meanwhile in the latter scenario, if whole classes are getting super boosted you either have to ban the super OP attackers and deal with the influx of insane defenders or vice versa. It just makes the mode repetitive at times.

I don't even hate the new metas that much as I get along just fine, I just still prefer the old ones🤷‍♂️