What are META classes at the moment after the patch?

Hi All,

I was just wondering what the META classes are at the moment in kind of tier list format.

According to metabattle, it would mean if your not one of 3 your out!

One them rhymes with sand, and requires the expansion with the most sand.

D:

Same as they were before. Mirage and Deadeye got the worst of it but both are still strong roamers. Soulbeast is still absurd as is Scourge, Firebrand, etc. Gyro Engi got a nice buff with that too long stealth but not enough to make it prime meta.

Most of the buffs are still largely useless.

What is the place of ele and rev at the moment?

Meta still seems to be FB, Scourge, Herald. Support scrapper/tempest are both very strong, and are quite common in guild groups. Other classes like staff weaver, or spellbreaker can still be very useful, but arent really considered meta. Metabattle is still pretty accurate, with most guilds running variations of the "meta" and "great" builds.

@kins.3294 said:What is the place of ele and rev at the moment?

Ele is still played but due to its root mechanics it is basically a crappy version of a Scourge or a watered down Firebrand. Rev is meta particularly Herald.

What is meta?It's a difficult question to answer since there is no solid definition of what meta implies for GW2 WvW. Traditionally, the "meta-game" has been what exists above a game. This can be knowledge, organisation or outside resources. Take Metabattle.com for example, it ticks all boxes, it is an outside resource that concerns organisation of player groups and serves as a help guide or knowledge base.

However, within that span meta can be regarded as many things (same as expressions like ganking, roaming, raiding, zerging and blobbing; people bend the definitions to suitable situations and purposes). I'd say the two most common perspectives is to see it as either something for new players or a common accepted foundation. In either case it is a build that you create for someone else rather than for yourself and that is reflected by that the best or most experienced players in a squad rarely plays meta builds nore do competetive guild groups, they play outside of the meta or ahead of the meta, a super-meta of sorts. A common mistake there is confusing what is easy or common with what is best.

Depending on how you see that you can consider the meta on several levels. Another important factor that comes from a completely different angle is the amount of a certain class or role (build) that is needed to fullfil the basic necessities of a group. Some builds are extremely important to a group but you don't need many of them. Meta thus also have a dimension of weighed amount. There are also differences between importance and power, where one is relative to your own group and the other is relative to opposing groups (or classes). A common mistake here is confusing the importance of a function with the overall power or stacking-potential of a class in its role.

If you look at the old meta it was generally discerned something like this:

1. Firebrand, important and stackable (mobility, heals; support)
2. Revenants, powerful and stackable (damage, specialist mobility/support)
3. Scourge, powerful and stackable (anti-mobility/support, damage, slightly higher skill floor)

*

4. Spellbreaker, important but in limited amount (anti-mobility/support)
5. Mesmers, important but in limited amount (specialist mobility/support)
6. Weaver (Eles), Revenant option with higher barrier of entry / skill floor (damage)
7. Scrapper, important but in very limited amount (specialist mobility, heals)*
8. Daredevils, powerful but with a much higher skill floor (damage)
9. Druids, possible Scrapper-option but with higher skill floor (specialist mobility/heal/support)
10. General havoc builds (Soulbeasts, other Thieves etc.), lines really blur somewhere around here

So you can consider the first group only meta, or the first two or the first three or some other perspective or conception of meta. A new player would generally be guided towards the first or first role/build or in the first group. A common player could play anything from the first two groups and an experienced player will generally make anything useful.

If you're looking at the changes with the Claw and the balance patch that came with it:We can't really tell yet as a meta has not settled but we can see trends and make assumptions. It is likely to see melee classes rise in popularity (Spellbreakers, Scrappers possibly even Daredevils). Scourges will possibly drop a little bit both directly from changes and indirectly from other classes rising. Revenants do not really lose anything from melee classes rising. Havoc classes are likely to drop even more due to less spread leading to fewer targets and because melee classes previously sitting between in-squad and off-squad roles now being given more slots in a squad (ie., the Spellbreaker changes makes the Spellbreaker worse in a havoc role and better in a melee role). Daredevils could be an exception to that, we'll have to see. However, the most dramatic changes in popularity ought to be between Scourges, Spellbreakers and Scrappers. That is my estimation, but we'll have to see.

Can confirm that atm me on rifle berserker is meta

Same as before the patch, as always...

Firebrand, Scourge, Revenant, Scrapper.

A Tier: Scourge/Firebrand/Herald/Scrapper

B Tier: Spellbreaker/Weaver/Chrono/Daredavil/Tempest/Renegade

All are good in WvW.A Tiers are stackable classes.B Tiers are good in low numbers.

@"subversiontwo.7501" said:What is meta?It's a difficult question to answer since there is no solid definition of what meta implies for GW2 WvW. Traditionally, the "meta-game" has been what exists above a game. This can be knowledge, organisation or outside resources. Take Metabattle.com for example, it ticks all boxes, it is an outside resource that concerns organisation of player groups and serves as a help guide or knowledge base.

However, within that span meta can be regarded as many things (same as expressions like ganking, roaming, raiding, zerging and blobbing; people bend the definitions to suitable situations and purposes). I'd say the two most common perspectives is to see it as either something for new players or a common accepted foundation. In either case it is a build that you create for someone else rather than for yourself and that is reflected by that the best or most experienced players in a squad rarely plays meta builds nore do competetive guild groups, they play outside of the meta or ahead of the meta, a super-meta of sorts. A common mistake there is confusing what is easy or common with what is best.

Depending on how you see that you can consider the meta on several levels. Another important factor that comes from a completely different angle is the amount of a certain class or role (build) that is needed to fullfil the basic necessities of a group. Some builds are extremely important to a group but you don't need many of them. Meta thus also have a dimension of weighed amount. There are also differences between importance and power, where one is relative to your own group and the other is relative to opposing groups (or classes). A common mistake here is confusing the importance of a function with the overall power or stacking-potential of a class in its role.

If you look at the old meta it was generally discerned something like this:

1. Firebrand, important and stackable (mobility, heals; support)
2. Revenants, powerful and stackable (damage, specialist mobility/support)
3. Scourge, powerful and stackable (anti-mobility/support, damage, slightly higher skill floor)

*

4. Spellbreaker, important but in limited amount (anti-mobility/support)
5. Mesmers, important but in limited amount (specialist mobility/support)
6. Weaver (Eles), Revenant option with higher barrier of entry / skill floor (damage)
7. Scrapper, important but in very limited amount (specialist mobility, heals)*
8. Daredevils, powerful but with a much higher skill floor (damage)
9. Druids, possible Scrapper-option but with higher skill floor (specialist mobility/heal/support)
10. General havoc builds (Soulbeasts, other Thieves etc.), lines really blur somewhere around here

So you can consider the first group only meta, or the first two or the first three or some other perspective or conception of meta. A new player would generally be guided towards the first or first role/build or in the first group. A common player could play anything from the first two groups and an experienced player will generally make anything useful.

If you're looking at the changes with the Claw and the balance patch that came with it:We can't really tell yet as a meta has not settled but we can see trends and make assumptions. It is likely to see melee classes rise in popularity (Spellbreakers, Scrappers possibly even Daredevils). Scourges will possibly drop a little bit both directly from changes and indirectly from other classes rising. Revenants do not really lose anything from melee classes rising. Havoc classes are likely to drop even more due to less spread leading to fewer targets and because melee classes previously sitting between in-squad and off-squad roles now being given more slots in a squad (ie., the Spellbreaker changes makes the Spellbreaker worse in a havoc role and better in a melee role). Daredevils could be an exception to that, we'll have to see. However, the most dramatic changes in popularity ought to be between Scourges, Spellbreakers and Scrappers. That is my estimation, but we'll have to see.

Excellent post.