Pretty sure you guys either saw or thought of this:
The current Meta of MvC:I
The question here is simple: Is the current Meta something to be concerned about? Or is it too early to question the Meta if things are still being discovered?
Didn't make a post about it when I posted the link originally but this post is hella knee jerk and is just very ill-informed. So I am just going to elaborate.
Nevermind that this is week 1-2, let's just talk about the main points covered in the video.
*One of the first points that is brought is that the Tag system makes moves too safe. I don't know what VS games these guys have been playing but ever since assists were in the series, that's what this series has been all about. You throw out assists to keep yourself safe or you throw your moves to keep your assist safe. This is the core part of the VS series when these mechanics were added. Tag system is merely an extension of that and it's not even that safe because people are still getting their point characters punished after a tag system. This is an invalid criticism of the game's meta especially when compared to previous VS games.
*There is some comments about no zoning or trap based teams. Did they not watch the same SCR that we did? FChamp won most of top 8 by zoning with Dormammu in many tight situations. Now this game does not have the traditional form of zoning where one character just sits at the corner of the screen and keeps throwing stuff while covered by an assist... the zoning in this game is far more dynamic. I would go as far as to say that this game at the highest level or in optimized team will not have full zoning teams or full rushdown teams... you need to be playing both fluidly. Champ zones with Dorm and then he uses the zoning hits to convert into real damage with Ultron. Or he zones, they blocks and Ultron gets mix ups. This is how the game is played at a high level and good teams need some zoning to check the opponent and to set up offense.
The same thing applies for "trap" based teams with Rocket Raccoon seemingly already dominating in the East coast. Rocket is also a zoner/trap based character and he uses that to set up an offensive character like Jedah. If those guys had actually watched the previous tournaments then they will know how wrong it was to call out that the game doesn't have trap-like playstyle. I don't even know what else to say about this other than the fact that they didn't do enough research about the actual meta.
*Of course Reality stone is brought up as being strong. Yea it's strong... but it's not dominating the high levels of tournaments. And by that I mean people who are actually winning tournaments. Who won big tournaments recently? FChamp won SCR with Space and Sonic Fox won CEOtaku with Time stone. Reality stone as Richard Nguyen put it is the "scrub killer" of the game where teams with poor zoning/durability and bad mobility will get punished by it but better teams will just not care much about it. Don't get me wrong, it's still a strong stone with the surge being a bit overtuned but in the grand scheme of things it's still not that far ahead of the curve.
*Then there is some talk about character variety and tiers. This is not some unique phenomenon that is happening with MVCI.. people are gravitating towards the easy, obvious top characters/stones week 1. This happens with every game. Being "concerned" that Dante and Dormammu are common this early is just short sighted. People are also likely to play the characters that they played in Marvel 3.
*Thorns was brought up and most of the community seems to agree that it's too good. However, the video did not bring up the escapes against it or possible counter play. In fact, that's the general overview of the video... complaining about stuff seen on screen without much cross referencing, foresight or counter analysis. It's teetering on stuff you see on Twitter and Stream chat where they just spam memes about something being too good.
*There was no real mention about stuff like Captain Marvel or other bugs in the game that is actually a bigger problem than stuff like Reality stone or Dante being used too often.
*They mentioned that it's a problem that characters have to be paired with others for optimum game play. Meaning you can't just use any two characters you want. Like no shit, I don't know what they were expecting but this is generally how every team game works. In a game where tools are so varied, you need to have a team that can cover the maximum amount of situations and match ups as possible. That means that you can't just play two characters that do the same thing. It's like complaining that you can't pick 5 carries in a MOBA game. This game is honestly more freeform than I expected in that just picking two characters you want is enough to get something going but as always people aren't going to experiment with their duos themselves, they are going to watch tournaments online and complain that Dormammu is being used more than once in a top 8.
*How can you even start to talk about the meta without some idea of a tier list? Who is even good in this game and who is bad? Is the whole analysis of the meta based on watching one tournament? What about communicating with other players, doing lab work and checking up potential character tech?
There is probably some validity in the points brought up and there could be long term issues... but their evidence or analysis backing up the points was practically non-existent. There is no big picture analysis of the meta, it's mostly just talking about stuff seen in tournaments.
The people right now who are most qualified to talk about the meta are people like FChamp, Flash and Viscant. Mostly because these players will be hunkering down in training mode, having real discussions and checking up on various techs to formulate an opinion on. And even these people can be wrong as they have been in the past. I brought up Flash and people are probably like "huh? he is not really much of a Marvel player" but this guy was right on a lot of Vanilla Marvel 3 predictions when most people were way off base. He saw the potential of characters like Joe, Trish, Morrigan, MODOK, Doom in Vanilla Marvel 3 when people were still nutting over She Hulk. That's because he actually does a lot of research before making comments or posting videos about the "meta".
As far as actual stuff to be "concerned" about which is what the video is about. Let's just talk about stuff that we know now that might be concerns:
*Bugs like Captain Marvel's armor, Dante's Stinger overhead, Gamora's guns are a problem that should be fixed sooner rather than later. These are not BALANCE changes but rather bug fixes so this is not me asking for nerfs to change up the meta, these shouldn't exist in the game period. Also stuff like Ghost Rider's interaction with Power stone (ie. it doesn't work) should be looked at as well.
*Dorm's 3C is probably the only thing in the game that is for sure "too good" especially in the long term. It's definitely top of the list, I don't think anything else in the game right now that isn't a bug is as good. Like people are all hyping up Dante and Dorm but that team is going to drop a ton if you nerf that one move, same for Dorm + Ultron. In fact, every Dorm team takes a hit if that move is nerfed where he would go from best support character to just a good support character.
*Ryu and Chris are obviously bad, they need a buff. There are some things that you don't need a year of game play to figure out, this is pretty easy to figure out.
*Mind Stone's power level is a concern right now, it's the weakest stone by a margin. But this still needs more time to figure out so I don't think people should be jumping on it. Some of the DLC characters might be busted with meter so who knows.