Ludia Forums

Definition of latest update - Can we already describe meta 1.7?

#1

Folks,

Have we seen the fully impact of meta 1.7 or is it to early to say?

What’s the pros and cons?

For sure we know all the problems last 2 weeks.

But anything good, or something players have applied in the daily rutins?

Or haven’t we got something EXTRA that keeps us motivated?

As a community we asked for more variation, have the arena changed?
Or same dinos this meta again?

If we refere to last meta 1.6, we have some comments:

Refere to meta 1.5, we have some comments:

Meta 1.4

Meta 1.3

And also som expectations before the release:

#2

I would like to give the developers of animation A HUGE BOOST !
The new animations of the new dinos are AMAZING! :smiling_face_with_three_hearts:

5 Likes
#3

Referring to my post about 1.6 -

Ludia proved me wrong.

2 Likes
#4

If stat boost hadn’t implemented this way they surely have led to a greater variety of creatures used in battle (which i think was their main purpose). The result, however, was completely the opposite.

3 Likes
#5

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

4 Likes
#6

Do you think L wanted more variation in the arena?

If they gave us new dinos who mostley was build of exclusive dna?

Or would it be a new challenge for players?

Better to release dinos of dna we already have much of?

#7

I like the new creatures and moves, it brought more variety which we were in dire need of. The addition of dinos should increase incubator rewards accordingly. Thankfully 1.7 darting was short lived and fixed. I had hoped alliance tools would be implemented. The new tournament idea was good outside of dividing the player base which has decreased on its own due to, well you know what…

#8

Is it a trend that L want us to play with same dinos in the arena?

Maby L makes the problem WORSE by letting us having to few dinos from the start?

If more dinos was good, players could have more variation and the competition in arena could have more variation aswell.

If more dinos was good = no need of stat boost?

#9

If we don’t talk about the Boost, 1.7 is great.
The update has brought us more creatures, improved existing creatures, more dinos are viable. e.g. Dioraja and Tuora.
However, with the introduction of boost, all these good things are ruined. Even with better moves, people just boost their teams. More boosts, more wins. They just put boosts on Thor and DC, that’s enough to wipe off opponents’ whole team. The effort of buffing lesser dinos is wasted, and all the time and effort every player has put as well. Together with St. Patrick’s event, some player got Uniques at their basic L21 and cannot level them up because the ingredients are not at L20 yet, they can boost them up using boosts to beat L26 dinos.

6 Likes
#10

What is 1.7?

Boosted Thoradolosaur.

7 Likes
#11

This, this, this this. The game is effectively ruined because it’s all I see. Bigger Thor just wins.

5 Likes
#12

They are gonna have to do something to put Thor in check, and soon.

It’s usually the fastest thing on the field, and usually the most boosted.

It also usually gets to go first two turns in a row regardless of any speed debuffs it might recieve on turn 1, so it pretty much makes superiority strike, thag, slowing impact, etc, etc, a joke.

It’s almost impossible to stop it. I love mine (26) as well so im not a thor hater, but I really think boosts + instant charge is game breaking.

5 Likes
#13

I think that stat boost should have a way lower impact. The main goal should remain to farm to level up your dinos, not improving them with boost: with this system, buying some boost allows you to reach a similar level of improvement with much less effort. I see stat boost like a compensation, they should allow you to improve your dino in base to what you have, what you need and what you like speaking about team composition. And the only way to do that is CAPPING BOOST PER CREATURE AND NOT PER STAT. And not with this impact (to me, for example, speed boost should improve speed by 3 points for each tier, for a max of 30 points, a way more reasonable number in my opinion).
If we don’t consider stat boost, 1.7 is the BEST update so far in terms of arena balancing: dioraja is meta now, grypo too, tuora has been improved, megalosuchus too, vexus now can have some niche use, the new hybrids are fantastic (spyx and purru above all) and most of all anything got heavily nerfed. There are so many available options now to have a diversified meta, but this kind of system, and with this impact, leads you to boost the dinos that have other invariable stats already strong, and at the moment the best is Thor’s 40% crit chance: the higher the damage, the higher the damage with a crit.
I would prefer a stat boost system that had less impact but that kept alive the main features that the game has had so far, something that what we have now does not.

1 Like
#14

Meta already lost their name no more tank, dodgy, bleeder and it hasn’t gone counter striker. It was Tyrant must haves. With Ludia putting new creatures in that list and removing some.

But boosts even when Ludia balance them out a bit. Let players keep a really good Dino and boost it to just as Tyrant as anything in meta. It’s just uses less resources to boost current tyrants into match winners.

#15

This might have worked, if Tiers had a boost limit that scaled down, the higher up you go.

For example, (numbers will change, but…)

Say you could only boost a Unique 10 times in total, then you would get like 12 boosts for a Legendary, 14 for an Epic, etc etc.

I’m starting to think Ludia didn’t intend boosts to be used for non-relevent dinos, as you can take relevent dinos much farther stat wise.

Seems like if they wanted people to be able to use non-relevent dinos, then boosts would have gotten all dinos to the same place when done.

Of course some dinos would have been a lot more expensive to get there then others.

Yeah boosts were just whale fan service, imo.

5 Likes
#16

I know Ludia won’t stop selling boosts. But it’s the easiest fix to the unfairness.

#17

Ludia like to controll the meta far to much to let everything be viable… they maintain a small pool of better then everything else and rarely just add to it without atleast something comming out.

More options means less chance youll rush out buy coins to level the stuff… if your old stuff is still viable less pressure to do that…

#18

New meta is “pay as much as you can and try to have fun in this dead game”

2 Likes
#19

1.6 meta according to Metahub

TYRANT:
Tryko
Erlidom
Dilora
Magna
Dracocera

HIGH APEX:
Monosteg
Procera
Spinota
Tenoto
Thor
Utasino
Utarinex
Indo

What has changed in 1.7 meta apart from boosts?

Erlikospyx is probably new Tyrant. Many top players use it underlevelled, that is a good indication. It hasn’t impressed me, but I have only met newborns and one-shotted them.

Thor is probably Tyrant now after buff. Excellent Dracocera killer.

Monosteg is nerfed and is sent down the ranks to maybe mid Apex? Still works.

Dioraja is buffed, but hasn’t impressed me overly. Where is it now? High Apex maybe?

Turara is buffed, but still not relevant at higher ranks I guess.

Anything else?

#20

I think you sum it up very well!

If the boosts will stay, I want to add TRYO, who is brutal in the arena!

In general this small buffs to the creatures was good!

But I’m not sure what will be needed for the playes to inspire them and keep them motivated to invest in other dinos…

Will anyone ever boost other stuff then what’s on the list?