Only 31 Enemys in the Top 8. Bloody Brits only ran three.

dont bring 3 enimies to a 4 enemy fight.

We only need three. We're just that good.

...ok

That's high grade funny, now watch Ian win with it like Alec Ruden did with his two Secret Origins substitutes!

Well, I don't see a single genuinely bad matchup in the Top 8, so here's hoping :)

but secret origins is the "i aint got no lunch money" card

And a bug won $2500 with it. Alec Ruden, 10K Detroit 2006 Champion.

2 Enemy, 2 Secret Origins.

Broke the Donkey 10K Domination too.

Booyah.

he got lunch money now

"Only 31 Enemys in the Top 8. Bloody Brits only ran three."

But we don't know if the 2 best decks of the day ran any. What was in the top 2 decks of day 1? The top 8 decklist is a misnomer, they are the decks played by the best 8 overall combined Constructed and Sealed players, not the best decks in the field.

The 2 best decks in the field tanked it in limited.

Did Fate Squad or the Glock build run any Enemy?

And for the record, I still think mono team decks are great, and look forward to people adding splashes in golden JUST to play EomE. Betrayal and lack of reinforcement is going to eat them alive in golden.

The Yugioh analogies are real. It's not to say VS has the same level of problem, but that VS is taking big steps towards the "best of" direction and to see the comparisons between the two should be heeded as a strong warning.

As it is today, mono teams are at a significant disadvantage to dual team or rainbow team decks.

EoME is an amazing card in concept/theory and great in application. I just don't think UDE fully foreseen how it would be abused.

And when I think of the 2 drop Surfer coming up, it just makes it more towards Yugioh. I can see Dr. Light abusing that one pretty badly to get Fate Has Spoken or Reign. Heh, in the "Wish for" thread, I had wished they'd make the Dr's effect limited to printed EE. :)

But I do have faith that UDE's R&D will be thinking of ways to at least bring some balance to the mono-multi issue. I think it's noteworthy that UDE released cards to combat some of the recent top decks -- Absolute Dominance, Removed from Continuity, Bizarro Worlds no life gain, Fatality, etc.... But they need to be a little more leery towards such powerful non team stamped effects.

I strongly disagree with the "becoming YGO" argument. I don't see any "best of" decks. All I see are decks that have a purpose, and use characters of different affilliations for their different abilities to do a specific thing. "Best of" implies something along the lines of (in MtG speak atleast): turn one Kird Ape, turn 2 Scab-Clan Mauler, turn 3 Serindib Efreet (or Hypnotic Specter I know), turn 4 Rumbling Slum etc. When I built my 4 color combo deck in (old) extended format that ran 4 city of brass, 4 gemstone mines and many dual lands, did that qualify as a "best of" deck?

I'm not sure if I'm missing something here, but since when does EomE kill your opponent? A generic tutor card that ecourages running multiple teams? I think it's great. I don't own any, but either way it's great. The card doesn't win the game, it only helps to smooth out a deck. It's a support card that requires the rest of the deck to do something with it.

When every deck starts playing the same win condition, then maybe it's time to worry, but until I see 8 copies of 8 drop Captain Marvel in the top 8, I'm really not gonna worry about it.

The new decks that showed up in SF weren't exactly unbeatable. JLoA actually has gaping holes, but those players showed up to play in a metagame that didn't expect them or prepare for them, so they did well. I think that's great. Correctly guessing the meta at a big tourny is part of being a good pro-level player, and that's all those guys did.

One of the best decks at the PC is what I consider "cherry picking" deck. FTN's deck is nothing but cherry picked best drops across 11 teams to make the most aggressive deck possible. Sure, it has a theme - do as much damage as fast as possible. That's the most basic theme a deck can have in this game. It picks the best characters available to make that happen. It doesn't care what team affiliation a character has (except for the MK's for Wild Rides to help ensure drops are hit). If that's not cherry picking, then it will never occur in VS.

Cherry picking does also mean "best card for this tournament". You can bet that if there was no Killing Joke deck to tech against that there'd be no Sage in FTN's deck. Sage just happened to be the right cherry for that meta.

Sure, there are plenty of other decks that do team up or use team synergy to be effective. As long as they are as competitive as cherry pickers, I'm happy. I'm very happy with diversity, and we've got plenty of that. I just don't want a diverse field of nothing but various cherry picking decks to be the best way to play this game.

The stats from the Top 8 still gives an indication of the popularity of a card (i.e. how powerful it is). Furthermore, check the feature match reports from day 1, you'll notice that EoME is played in every single match except one (Kim Caton Vs Scott Hunstad and we know Kim had them in her deck).

If we look at Magic The Gathering, we saw a similar trend with an infamous card that went by the name of Skullclamp. Back before Skullclamp was banned, people made the argument that the metagame was better after Skullclamp entered the cardpool and that it encouraged diversity and offered card drawing to colours which had none. And it certainly was true that there were a number of different viable deck archetypes (as seen from various Top 8's), the card was nonetheless banned. Why? Because it was so good, it was everywhere and players were either trying to abuse it or prevent their opponents from abusing it. Even if there is diversity in the metagame, a card can still be too good even if everyone can use it.

Now some people will argue that it EoME helps a number of affiliations which they would feel otherwise completely unplayable due to a lack of character search. The problem is that while EoME is nice for such affiliations, powers which can be used for good will inevitably be used for evil too. While it's nice for options to exist with the lesser Vs affiliations, the better decks also gain options. And at the end of the day, it's the better, more broken Vs decks that will do better and be more popular competitively. I dread the next combo deck to arise in the metagame, as it will almost assuredly rely on four EoME to supply its consistency.

There is also a second issue in the cost of acquiring a playset of EoME. I don't see how it is good for the health of the constructed side of the game (and consequently, the overall health) if new players need to invest hundreds of dollars in only a few cards if they wish to play competitively. The game needs to maintain some degree of accessibility to new people otherwise you will see the number of players dry up.

Hopefully something will be done to reduce the popularity of EoME (whether it is banning, errata or hosing) at some point in the near future. While I know many of you who own copies of EoME fear the losses of having your hard fought for cards depreciate in value, I think it is still better in the long run (for all players) that something is done about EoME.

your opinion would be wrong.

I started this thread, not because I hate enemy, if you read any of my posts I love enemy, I love the diversity it brings to the game, I love my sinister syndicate deck, and my x-men secret six deck that enemy enables. I love the wide open metagame that enemy brings.

However, it seems to me that many people don't and thats why I started this thread, because I was curious as to other realmers opinions on this fantastic and earth shattering card. So far I've heard very valid arguments on both sides and this thread has been a very interesting read which still has not turned into a flame war. Good stuff guys keep it up!!!