It’s that time again. WMCQ just wrapped up and we’ve got a load of data to work with. Some of you may remember the last time I did this. I’m still working (in my free time) on a web interface for doing my analyses, but for now I’ll just share the results of me manually running the programs.
WMCQ didn’t offer much data. With only 72 decks, no archetype had a super significant number. The biggest archetypes put up around 5 copies, which is not statistically significant enough to make these proportions or these aggregates particularly accurate.
To that end, I’d also like to take this opportunity to ask this community what might be a good solution to the current “wild west” of data we have now. Plenty of sites have their means of acquiring decklists (however sketchy), and plenty of tournament organizers publish deckslists. But none of this is in an automation-friendly format. It’s nearly impossible to consistently collect decklists without using possibly illegal scraping techniques that break whenever any HTML is changed. Having a central database would be incredibly useful. But I’m not sure what an adequate solution would be.
Anyway, without further ado, here are the decklists, in order of popularity.
- GR Valakut (7)
-
Dredge (6)
Interestingly, Dredge produced two versions that were remarkably similar. The reason the algorithm separated them was that two people played Tome Scour, requiring a completely different manabase.
- Dredge (4)
- Tome Scour Dredge (2)
- Affinity (5)
- Jund (5)
- Abzan Midrange (3)
- Infect (3)
- Knightfall (3)
- Bant Eldrazi (2)
- GR Moon (2)
- Merfolk (2)
- Living End (2)
- Instant Reanimator (2)
- Burn (2)