I think people keep using the word diverse, either for, or against. I'm not sure everyone is using that word the same way.
I think the Meta is diverse when the exact same list isn't used. So, even though a 'fat turret' might make up ~%50 of the 'top' lists out there, there's a lot of 'diversity' in those Fat Turrets. I don't think Han+Talas is the same as Chireneau+Fel or Dash+Corran - that there alone is diversity.
I would say that the Meta is diverse in that if you consider INDIVIDUAL lists, not just archetypes, the options available in the Top 8 is MILES AND MILES better than it was before. There's somewhere between 16 and 20 different winning lists. That's a lot, and I'd consider that Diverse.
Someone above said that there's only like 4 archetypes. I think that's a poor understanding of diversity. Of course there are only a few archetypes, but inside those archetypes is where the diversity is found. At this point, people are just arguing out of what seems like crankiness against the percieved 'fat turret problem.' We get it, some people aren't happy about a lot of Fat Turrets being flown out there. Stop claiming that things aren't becoming more diverse because you're cranky and look at the data objectively. For goodness sakes - an EXX list just won a regional!
Jacob
Edited by jkokura