Find ur own meta!

What is meta?

When we talk about Dota2 or actually other MOBA-genre games
aswell we end up talking about the "current meta"
Im trying to get a definition of this word, because in the end
i might think this is a very risky word to use.

I ask around among players and fans, and they all seem to agree that
meta is a way of describing the current game. Which general rules that applies.
How lanes are made perhaps, or what heroes are picked. THen someone says "You cant really play
Meepo, because its not really a good hero for this meta" and i get really frustrated.

Why is that?

Meta is really more of something like flavour of the month. But this coming from topteams. Let me try to explain.
If a team considered top-notch picks something new, or make something new strategywise, this effects the meta. Many people
have claimed that riki couldnt be played in this meta. Now Alliance picked it and i guess its "a nice hero for this meta"  now. Or a workable hero. Because what really this meta-thing does is make it harder for teams which arent really in the top to reach there.

If you think about it, meta means "playing kinda like the top-teams-plays" And many teams follow this meta. Not gonna call any out but some teams are just strictly following the 3-1-1 (or one in forest) and a special hero pool which is suited. The picks are fairly easy to guess, and there is a certain order. Ofcourse this will always be like this. But especially for teams which
arent top 10 the word meta is just a dangerous word. Because this stops teams from finding their own playstyle when it comes to moba-gaming.

There are heroes and strategies which has been tested out and teams have realised its just not working. But the number of heroes are few, and the strategies are also not many. For example one could claim that going as 5 from level1 is impossible. So we can call this outside the meta. But other from that almost any strategy or hero is viable in the current gameplay. Icefrog has made an amazing work with balance, and i would even say that 100% of the heroes are viable in the current state of the game.

"Yeah, but heroes like X really doesnt work in a tri-lane and they arent really good for soloing either"
Again. Who says tri-lanes is a must? Heck i even saw (The impossible) 2 melee-heroes with chen in the forest playing offensive lane versus a "meta-trilane" and winning like it was a pub. The team? Kaipi. The heroes? SB and DS.

"Okey sure, you can do two-lanes, but then the enemys will also remake their lanes and.."
Yeah. Your changing the meta. Your deciding the meta for your team.

"Well, sure. Still heroes like bristleback is just trash, you cant do much with him"
Have you tried combinging him with a Zeus? Or a omniknight? Not in a game? So how can you know its really not viable? You cant, you have to try it. And perhaps for your team this is much more viable then typical tri-lane strats.

This is also why alliance have won so many games. Definently why Kaipi is so strong. They just do what they want to do. Sure
when you look at the total hero pool these teams might not be changing up so much. But they have created their own meta.

You should do the same for your team.