At FIRST, congrats to the winner. Really. Now that's over, I can say that in the near past I've said to my fellas: "Beware Polish players."
What happened DOES demonstrate our theory, actually: the winner deck, as far as I know, is an anti-empire built (willingly or not). Someone told me that it can be stopped by other decks but it's strong against Empire.
We have to meta-game guys: 8 italian players which I consider PRO as polish ones, at least. 7 of 'em went through the TOP 16...The 8th went out for a rule-mistake.
Anyway, 3 of 'em went trhough the top 8 and the other got 3rd.
In the final, 2 anti-empire decks.
With all due respect, I didn't see lots of competitive decks in the world championship (and, as I said before, I don't like the winning deck...I told that I really liked the OTHER winning deck of Timoty, but not this one, that's extremely under the actual competitive decks nowadays).
About europe...Numbers confirm what we told: we have good playtesters with good decks...I don't know how many players were there, exactly, but it's pretty clear that it's quite ABSURD having basically the SAME deck in 8 copies through the finals.
Grats to the winner, as I said, but remember: from a player perspective, the winning of dwarves is a good sign, and I guess we ALL agree on that...But from a strict metagame point of view, the situation will actually change when NOONE will have to build a deck specifically against the MAIN deck.
Empire is still on the top, guys. Anti-Empire Dwarven deck was unexpected, but SERIOUS metagaming consideration cannot be done with a single tournament but on a 4-5 months of playtesting (that's how a card game is developed, created and played competitively), because if we do that, we should say that DARK ELVES are the strongest archetype, but THEY'RE definitely NOT.
If we consider just the winning deck, avoiding any other number, we're not making a metagame analysis.