Top Performing Decklists
| Deck | Creator | Record | Best Finish |
|---|---|---|---|
| Red Deck Wins | luffydochapeudepalha | 9-1 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12765769 |
| Gruul Aggro | mogged | 9-1 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12769892 |
| Gruul Aggro | mogged | 8-2 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12765784 |
| Red Deck Wins | kablewire | 8-2 | 2nd in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12769892 |
| Red Deck Wins | numberonenoob | 8-2 | 2nd in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12769907 |
| Red Deck Wins | latorretta | 7-2 | 1st in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12769073 |
| Gruul Aggro | mogged | 7-1 | None |
| Rakdos Lizards | platinum-mythic rank player | 6-0 | 1st in Traditional Standard Ranked Decklists: April 14, 2025 |
| Red Deck Wins | pedrastone | 7-2 | 2nd in MTGO Standard Challenge 32 #12769073 |
| Red Deck Wins | pokerswizard | 6-2 | None |
Performance Stats (Last 14 Days)
Win Rate Impact
Top Table Win Rate
Meta Trend
Sample Size
Tournament Results
Average Copies
Archetypes Using This Card:
Boros Aggro , Boros Auras , Boros Burn , Boros Mice , Gruul Aggro , Gruul Cauldron , Gruul Counters , Gruul Leyline , Izzet Aggro , Naya Aggro
Meta Performance Analysis
Rockface Village ranks #407 out of approximately 406 cards in raw efficiency (top 100%).
Game Impact Factor
Color Differential
Colorless average: 63.4%
Performance compared to other Colorless cardsBased on our comprehensive multi-metric analysis, Rockface Village is an underperforming card in the current meta.
Recommended number of copies: 1
Win Rate Timeline
Card Efficiency Analysis
Raw Efficiency (Win Rate/Mana)
Relative Efficiency
Performance Efficiency: 40.23 (Win rate × Top 8 rate ÷ Mana value)
At 0 mana, the average win rate in the format is 74.4%. Rockface Village has a win rate of 72.8%, making it 2.2% worse than other 0-mana cards.
Top Performing Partners
| Card Name | Type | Deck Count | Win Rate | 1st Places |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flowstone Infusion | Instant | 5 | 100.0% | 5 |
| Loran of the Third Path | Legendary Creature — Human Artificer | 6 | 83.3% | 6 |
| Crumb and Get It | Instant | 13 | 82.7% | 9 |
| Heritage Reclamation | Instant | 11 | 79.2% | 5 |
| Surrak, Elusive Hunter | Legendary Creature — Human Warrior | 5 | 77.4% | 2 |
| Leyline of the Void | Enchantment | 33 | 73.7% | 9 |
| Cunning Coyote | Creature — Coyote | 7 | 72.0% | 3 |
| Hearth Elemental | Creature — Elemental // Sorcery — Adventure | 9 | 69.6% | 2 |
| Break the Spell | Instant | 17 | 69.3% | 10 |
| Tersa Lightshatter | Legendary Creature — Orc Wizard | 53 | 69.2% | 16 |
Card Synergy Analysis
Cards that perform better with Rockface Village 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heritage Reclamation | Instant | 2 | 11 | 77.5% | 74.0% | +3.5% |
| Might of the Meek | Instant | 1 | 14 | 78.4% | 75.5% | +2.9% |
| Pyroclasm | Sorcery | 2 | 41 | 78.0% | 75.5% | +2.5% |
| Soul-Guide Lantern | Artifact | 1 | 5 | 75.0% | 73.3% | +1.7% |
| Monastery Swiftspear | Creature — Human Monk | 1 | 35 | 77.5% | 76.2% | +1.3% |
| Shock | Instant | 1 | 15 | 78.1% | 77.7% | +0.4% |
| Case of the Crimson Pulse | Enchantment — Case | 3 | 65 | 73.3% | 73.0% | +0.4% |
| Hired Claw | Creature — Lizard Mercenary | 1 | 94 | 72.9% | 72.8% | +0.0% |
| Questing Druid | Creature — Human Druid // Instant — Adventure | 2 | 34 | 74.7% | 75.0% | -0.4% |
| Manifold Mouse | Creature — Mouse Soldier | 2 | 112 | 72.9% | 73.4% | -0.4% |
Top Archetypes
| Archetype | Deck Count | % of Archetype | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gruul Aggro | 1919 | 92.4% | 47.4% |
| Red Deck Wins | 1311 | 95.2% | 53.7% |
| Boros Burn | 237 | 60.5% | 53.3% |
| Rakdos Aggro | 37 | 54.4% | 56.8% |
| Gruul Leyline | 21 | 11.1% | 49.9% |
Statistics Explanation
| 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.