Deck | Creator | Record | Best Finish |
---|
Goblins , Gruul Delirium , Jund Delirium , Jund Roots , Temur Cauldron , Unknown Archetype
Afterburner Expert ranks #412 out of approximately 413 cards in raw efficiency (top 100%).
Green average: 65.9%
Performance compared to other Green cardsBased on our comprehensive multi-metric analysis, Afterburner Expert is an underperforming card in the current meta.
Recommended number of copies: 1
Performance Efficiency: 4.17 (Win rate × Top 8 rate ÷ Mana value)
At 3 mana, the average win rate in the format is 74.0%. Afterburner Expert has a win rate of 25.0%, making it 66.2% worse than other 3-mana cards.
Card Name | Type | Deck Count | Win Rate | 1st Places |
---|---|---|---|---|
Vivien Reid | Legendary Planeswalker — Vivien | 5 | 59.2% | 2 |
Rona, Herald of Invasion | Legendary Creature — Human Wizard // Legendary Creature — Phyrexian Wizard | 5 | 59.2% | 2 |
Llanowar Elves | Creature — Elf Druid | 19 | 51.8% | 7 |
Burnout Bashtronaut | Creature — Goblin Warrior | 5 | 50.8% | 0 |
Searslicer Goblin | Creature — Goblin Warrior | 5 | 50.8% | 0 |
Dropkick Bomber | Creature — Goblin Warrior | 5 | 50.8% | 0 |
Tranquil Frillback | Creature — Dinosaur | 35 | 50.3% | 9 |
Molt Tender | Creature — Insect Druid | 7 | 49.4% | 2 |
Rundvelt Hordemaster | Creature — Goblin Warrior | 6 | 47.9% | 0 |
Krenko, Mob Boss | Legendary Creature — Goblin Warrior | 6 | 47.9% | 0 |
Cards that perform better with Afterburner Expert than they do on average. A positive synergy score indicates stronger performance together.
Card Name | Type | Mana | Decks | Win Rate Together | Win Rate Apart | Synergy Score |
---|
Archetype | Deck Count | % of Archetype | Win Rate |
---|---|---|---|
Gruul Delirium | 38 | 24.7% | 38.5% |
Jund Delirium | 9 | 64.3% | 47.8% |
Temur Cauldron | 7 | 87.5% | 46.3% |
Goblins | 6 | 18.2% | 47.9% |
Unknown Archetype | 5 | 1.4% | 38.3% |
Statistic | Description | Formula |
---|---|---|
Win Rate Impact | How much this card increases or decreases the win rate of decks that include it, compared to the average deck in the format. | (Win rate of decks with this card) - (Average win rate of all decks) |
Top Table Win Rate | A weighted win rate that gives more significance to performance in higher tournament placements. First place finishes count for 2x, with diminishing weight down to 8th place. | ∑(wins × placement_weight) / ∑((wins + losses) × placement_weight) |
Meta Trend | Shows if the card is performing better or worse in the most recent period compared to earlier periods. Positive values indicate improving performance. | (Win rate in recent half of time period) - (Win rate in earlier half of time period) |
Confidence Factor | A measure of statistical reliability based on sample size. The progress bar indicates how confident we are in the statistics (with larger sample sizes providing higher confidence). | log10(Number of decks + 1) |
Average Copies | The average number of copies of this card included in decks that use it. | ∑(Copies in each deck) / (Number of decks) |
Card Synergy Score | Measures how well this card performs with other cards compared to their individual performance. | (Win rate together) - (Average of individual win rates) |
Raw Efficiency | Win rate points per mana invested. Higher values indicate better returns on mana investment. | (Win rate) / (Mana value) |
Relative Efficiency | How efficient this card is compared to the average card of the same mana value. | ((Win rate) / (Format average win rate for same mana)) / (Mana value) |
Performance Efficiency | Combined metric that accounts for win rate, tournament success, and mana investment. | (Win rate × Top 8 placement rate) / (Mana value) |
Game Impact Factor | A measure of how much this card affects game outcomes, based on win rate adjusted by its deviation from the format average. | Win rate × (1 + (Win rate - Format average) / 100) |
Color Differential | How this card's win rate compares to the average win rate of other cards of the same color. | Win rate - Average win rate for same color |
All statistics are calculated using tournament data from the selected time period. Sample sizes below 10 decks may not provide statistically significant results.