Should Tier Lists Exist For Competitive Games? Is Balance Boring?

Whether card or video games, there is almost always some form of meta. Is the meta necessary to promote longevity of a franchise or should a game stick to a set format that doesn't invalidate alternative ways to play? Specifically does meta necessarily equal high level play or does it actually simplify a game to an overly straightforward approach? A debate being made is that balance always equals boring and that meta creates variety. Yet one could argue the inverse is true. That meta doesn't allow for experimental strategies which should be accessible through systems that promote diverse and valid options. From a business point of view, chasing meta and high tier systems allow for increased incentive to spend more money. Except it may equally push people away if only a few choices are made viable while other characters or play styles are exclusively supported. The best D tier can never compare to the greatest A tier by its very existence as a hierarchy. It simultaneously admits two things are not in the same league yet expects all players to willingly handicap themselves for the sake of fun. OR just completely ignore half the roster to engage in the best experience only. Why do you think this works as a system or what would you like game developers to do that creates variety without compromise or stagnation?

The meta can be seen as a natural result of a competitive environment. As players explore and experiment with different strategies, some approaches may prove to be more effective than others. This leads to a convergence on certain optimal strategies, forming the meta. In this sense, the meta can be seen as a reflection of the game's depth and complexity, as players continuously push the boundaries of what is possible. From a competitive standpoint, the meta is often associated with high-level play. It represents the most refined and optimized strategies that experienced players have developed through rigorous testing and analysis. These strategies can be intellectually engaging and rewarding for those seeking a competitive challenge. In this context, the meta can enhance the longevity of a game by providing an ongoing incentive for players to improve and adapt. However, the existence of a dominant meta can also lead to certain drawbacks. It can limit the diversity of viable strategies and playstyles, potentially discouraging experimentation and creativity. If only a few options are deemed viable, it may create an imbalance and exclude certain characters, strategies, or playstyles from being competitive. This can alienate players who prefer alternative approaches and lead to frustration or dissatisfaction. Striking a balance between a well-defined meta and diverse gameplay options can be challenging for game developers. Ideally, developers should aim to create a game with multiple viable strategies and playstyles, encouraging experimentation and accommodating different player preferences. This can be achieved through continuous balance updates, introducing new content, and fostering a healthy feedback loop with the player community. Ultimately, it is important for developers to consider the desires and needs of their player base. Some players enjoy the pursuit of mastering the meta and engaging in high-level play, while others prefer a more open and varied experience. Finding ways to accommodate both groups and provide a dynamic and evolving gameplay environment can contribute to the longevity and success of a franchise. TL;DR Sometimes different game modes or side quests can save a game or make them better.

I thank you for taking the time to restate my original question with greater clarity while providing an answer many would agree to. You're not wrong for suggesting a compromise that would ideally let both meta chasers have their fun whilst having sub events that could give focus on less highlighted features of the game. That agreed, I believe this personally an unnecessary compromise. The root problem of meta is being that it alters the state of play by bending the core rules to the point of making the original idea morph into a completely different game. The average player will be disappointed when realizing that what is being explained in tutorials or rule books are actually poor advice and sets them up for instant failure. Further giving false confidence that using the various kits will in turn give them a level field of interactions. It also betrays the core rule of any game by generating contempt towards the idea of playing WITH other players rather than AGAINST. How many debates turn into heated arguments the second the word "fun" drops from a person's lips. Usually being followed up with unsportsmanlike conduct because the egging devil's advocate finds unintentional entertainment in pushing people away from something they've deemed theirs. These are unfortunate side effects of any form of cooperative entertainment, however it's unnecessarily fuled by modern games purposely designing them to inefficiently moderate such behaviors. That aside I would care to return to my former point of addressing "boring" balance. Boring typically suggests a failure of a game to provide variables to the interactions between players. One argument being that if both players use the same pieces then only one path to victory can occur. This is where I use the comparison to chess as my example. Though chess has existed for centuries it remains today unchanged as well as beloved by many across nations and generations. To this day there is a market for competition as well as casual experiences. Never has chess needed a patch or new release for additional pieces that make previous pieces irrelevant. Yet modern entertainment wishes to inundate the market with throw away games along with their parts in an awful attempt to spur additional purchases for the sake of only profit. It prioritizes in exploiting human's weakness for unnecessary change in spite of necessity. To innovate is one thing. Tearing down a whole system to the point of discarding its very foundation is another.