Just gonna throw this out there

[AliamRationem.5172]

Just now, Obtena.7952 said:

Well, no offense but ... yeah ... because the 'discussion' here isn't new and we know what the result is anyways. The "hey, 3 classes are meta, FIX IT" isn't exactly a message that's going to have much energy ... and you know why right?

I did elaborate on that for a few posts before you showed up, but at this point the discussion is long dead.  Again, because of you.  So, let's just lock this thread now, shall we, mods?

[Obtena.7952]

13 minutes ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

I did elaborate on that for a few posts before you showed up, but at this point the discussion is long dead.  Again, because of you.  So, let's just lock this thread now, shall we, mods?

I read those posts ... I get you want more competition at the meta level. But things don't compete there ... they are meta or they aren't. So complaining something is meta to get a buff to non--meta builds to 'compete'  but not necessarily be meta doesn't make sense. Hence, this fallacy between the relationship between meta and balancing triggers the metapushing alarm. 

Likewise, complaining some builds are OP and need a nerf BECAUSE they are holding meta positions ... another non-starter because it establishes meta as a standard for balancing. In short, you will LIKELY see me in any thread that attempts to justify game change based on meta. 

It would almost be better if people just stopped beating around the bush and said "Hey, I want class X to be meta now ... here is why" ... but no one does that. I can only suspect it's because they already suspect the same things I do .... Anet doesn't engineer what is meta. 

Edited January 17, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[Forum Moderator.3419]

Hello Everyone,

I'm locking this thread as it has turned into bickering.

Regards.