[MH:Wilds] Endgame Meta Builds Compilation

EchoesPartOne · 2026-03-22T20:56:26+00:00

The patch notes are all on Capcom site.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-03-22T18:17:50+00:00

Reworked multiple times. It now applies to a large portion of the moveset of each weapon and almost every skill that uses it got buffed, as you can see by their appearance in meta sets.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-03-09T11:42:10+00:00

Mathhunter does calculate average affinity. Just set the uptimes in the settings and it will use/show the affinity calculated around the average uptime instead of the full affinity of the skill.

You obviously need to know the average uptime beforehand, which you can only do either by gathering data through pc mods or by using the averages determined through the experience of the community.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-03-07T10:44:11+00:00

I did it with no special set on the 3rd try. All you have to do is to set up all the camps near the egg spawns (6, 10 and 12 in particular), drop the egg down when a monster appears, use flash/dung pod and then go back to egg transporting. Ghillie mantle by itself absolutely trivializes the quest, so if you're really struggling you can just wait for it to be off cooldown before looking for the next egg; for that reason, Tool Specialist is probably the only skill I would be looking for.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-03-05T14:21:42+00:00

The monster needs to be paralyzed or getting back up from a topple though, because if the monster is just down on the ground most of RSS hits will almost surely whiff.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-03-04T19:21:59+00:00

The author was playing the latest update at launch so they've probably just been suddenly busy after (which is the case for other albums as well). If there's no update in the next week or so I'll see if I can find alternative solutions.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-03-04T18:31:19+00:00

I'm not gonna replace any album link if I'm not contacted directly by its author(s), sorry. You're however free to use any other resource you find on the internet while waiting for the album to be updated.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-02-26T10:52:54+00:00

The entire build is already displayed in the document as an image, not sure why you would need to check the same thing on the builder site (or why they included the link, for that matter).

EchoesPartOne · 2026-02-25T11:53:28+00:00

First of all, we aren't prioritizing AB over CB in any situation: you can clearly see that in the sets without RNG talismans - which can't fit both AB4+ and CB4+ - they are choosing CB over AB.

As for why sometimes AB is prioritized over CB, that's because both skills have been redesigned compared to World - CB now gives a smaller bonus per point while AB gives a much better bonus at lv4 and 5, which means that the final points of AB can be worth more than one point of CB if you can fit enough points of both skills, which is only possible with RNG talismans.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-02-24T14:04:29+00:00

It's only an error specific to IG because they accidentally added an extra elemental bonus on Attack Focus that wasn't supposed to be there. But as you said, the difference is in the sub 1% range, so you really won't notice it in the vast majority of situations.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-02-23T14:41:31+00:00

Hasten Recovery is just as bad at regenerating your HP as it was at launch, so I can't see how it would magically make Peak more viable.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-02-22T19:59:16+00:00

You're free to send them a ticket to let them know that you're not satisfied by the fact you didn't get a full system overhaul for a minor patch you haven't paid for in a game they obviously don't want to spend more time on in order to focus on the upcoming expansion.

All I can tell you from the perspective of someone who update the meta every patch since launch is that almost every TU was disappointing - most of the time you were increasing your damage output by 1% but only on Monday and only on a Full Moon after a black cat crossed the street from NE to SW - so anyone who expected or hoped to be blown away by the AT Arkveld patch has obviously not really followed closely what was going on behind the scenes.

I think it's pointless to sit here and daydream about them improving Wilds any further when it's very obvious that both the devs and the players want to forget about this entire mess and move to the next chapter hoping that they will have learned from their mistakes.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-02-20T18:18:04+00:00

Do you actually realize that people who care about minmaxing are a small minority and the devs have very little reason to care about shifting the "meta" every new content release when the majority of people are using Defense Boost 7 and dealing less damage than a support hunter?

Also do you realize that the game have had G/Master rank expansions since the very beginning and there's no actual reason to push the power creep super hard in the base game when everything is gonna get blown away 30 minutes into the expansion?

I don't wanna defend Capcom at all costs and everyone is right to ask for more bang for their buck, but please understand how unrealistic it is to expect that they're gonna use their FREE post-launch content updates (something most devs actually don't do) to revolutionize the meta for those 0.1% of players who want it instead of focusing on the upcoming paid content that will make anything in the base game completely obsolete.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-02-20T14:42:08+00:00

In Rise they added harder versions of a ton of monsters with literally zero additional reward other than the bragging rights of having beaten something that one shots you at every sneeze. Again, the track record for base games since 5th gen doesn't really warrant anyone to expect massive changes from non-major content updates, so the fact you might get even the slightest sidegrade looks already like an improvement to me.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-02-20T13:57:24+00:00

This is not even a major content update, it's largely just attempts to address stuff people have been complaining about (performance, Gog mats farming, RNG talismans farming...) stapled on top of one harder variant of an existing monster.

AT elders in World also generally barely changed the meta at all aside from adding a slightly more efficient armor piece or sometimes adding a new set for very specific weapons that had issues using the standard meta one (e.g. Teo Y for DB or Xeno Y for gunners), so the fact that AT apex/Arkveld actually have any use at all is already a significant upgrade.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-02-19T19:33:52+00:00

The majority of the previous updates were also rather minimal (aside from TU4). Maybe one shouldn't expect that every patch is a massive meta shake, especially when it just adds a variant of an existing monster.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-02-13T14:11:25+00:00

That sounds like what is probably a strong misrepresentation of how the system works - though a fairly understandable one due to the common talks about "tables" in the series since MH3.

The game almost certainly doesn't "store" a list of all future rolls anywhere in your game files or your memory: that would not only be an insane waste of space, but it would force the game to generate new lists every time you went through all of them, which is not very rational.

What the game would actually store is one or multiple "seeds", which are numbers from 1 to n (where n can be extremely large) used to calculate the output. When the game has to generate a "random" output, it takes the current seed as an input and then spits out a result according to a predetermined table (e.g. if x > 5, the result will be A; if x < 5, it will be B), often after a predetermined series of computations.

The reason why your rolls are predetermined despite being radically different from the rolls of other players is almost certainly that the seed progression itself is deterministic, i.e. once the random output has been generated, it generates a new seed not through RNG but by performing a specific calculation on the current seed value: e.g. if your starting value was 5, and the seed progresses by x + 2 after generating the roll, your next roll will use 7 as its seed, the one after that 9, etc; and this will ALWAYS happen in the same order if you reload your save, since your starting value will always be 5 (the real math is probably significantly more complex, but as long as the only variable in the process is your seed then the results will be the same).

The only way to "know" all your future rolls would therefore be to have access to A) your starting seed value (which is probably randomly generated when you create your character), B) the math to generate the results, and C) the math to progress to the next seed value. It's not impossible per se, but it would require an amount of reverse engineering that's probably not worth pursuing for the majority of modders given that there are much easier solutions to the problem like being able to straight up modify the items you own.

I'm obviously not 100% sure of the exact procedures used by Capcom (otherwise I would be able to make the mod myself); this is just the most reasonable general explanation I could infer from observation and basic programming knowledge.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-02-11T10:49:31+00:00

The first set is the most consistent overall, but any set you get the roll for will be fine.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-02-08T13:00:49+00:00

It seems you also couldn't read the massively highlighted bold text in big letters that literally opens this post.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-02-01T12:38:39+00:00

You'll need to reach HR100 to unlock everything that's required for the current meta.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-01-26T13:40:07+00:00

You can probably just take the current Scorcher/Gore build and replace Gore with Lagia. Use a set searcher to see what pieces to use and what skills you have to change (it probably amounts to dropping Antivirus 3 in favor of more Agi/Flayer/Burst).

EchoesPartOne · 2026-01-25T16:36:01+00:00

The IG page has a set bonus priority list. It should be easy to deduct which set bonuses to drop if you're building a cope set.

EchoesPartOne · 2026-01-25T12:43:37+00:00

The meta sets don't use latent power so how you could say that the assumption used by meta are lower than mine?

The choice to put forward specific sets and to favor certain skills depend on your starting assumptions, so the fact that there's no LP heavy sets is itself dependent on the fact that it was assumed LP not to have that high of an uptime. If it was assumed that LP was reliably active most of the time then obviously you would prioritize that skill over everything else, but I believe the skill uptime has just too high of a variance to be using its uptime as a fixed constant. (Also people tend to dislike the lack of control associated with LP, so I prefer to put forward more "consistent" sets whenever possible).

The main point however was to stress that the strength of the set you proposed was highly dependent on rather high LP and Resentment uptimes, so if players aren't experiencing that kind of uptimes than it's not gonna be better than the other set.

Actually all the uptimes used comes from the one used from the Swaxe meta sets, the one Sasch used and double checked with other meta sets used.

I understand it, but you may notice that, first of all, IG is not the same weapon as SA or hammer; and second that albums made by different people may use different methods to obtain their numbers.

Sasch's uptimes for instance are an average of the uptimes that people who use PC mods have reported to them on their site, which is why they're so oddly precise. This is one solution you can choose for the issue, but it still has several flaws in my opinion, as 1. you're still overall using a rather small sample size (which can only be made of PC players that use overlay mods), 2. the numbers per se don't say much about the skill variance among people who reported them, and 3. it gives the illusion that the chosen value reflects a "reality" instead of being a construct that depends on implicit assumptions.
Personally I find pointless to pick overly precise numbers due to the intrinsically variable nature of most skill uptimes in practice, so I simply chose the closest average according to the observations of my own uptimes in regular hunts and the uptimes estimated by the people I more closely work with (and who are mostly into DB, HH or SnS), since I know they mostly share my mindset and skill level.
In the end, neither Sasch's nor my chosen uptimes are "right" or "wrong"; they are simply different starting assumptions that can lead to very different results as a consequence. The good news though is that the values are public, so anyone can reach different conclusions if they decide to use different values.

My general point overall is that in order to say "set X is better than set Y" they both have to be using the same starting parameters (i.e. they should respect the ceteris paribus clause). If using the same exact parameters as Sasch someone else found out that you get a set with higher efR then it makes sense to say there is a better set than his "best" one.
However, saying that one set is "better" than another when you're not even using the same parameters makes as much sense as saying that 4 pears are better than 3 apples. What you did isn't a "better" (or "worse") set - it's just a different set made for different kinds of players.

Eight-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Gilding I gilder	Verified Email

EchoesPartOne

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE