We have one matchup for each of the monocolored decks facing the white-blue deck, so five data points, and we have six data points for meta share analysis. As an example: A player runs a white-blue deck and faces a monowhite, monoblue, monoblack, monored, and monogreen deck. If a player runs a League with a less popular deck, we likely have win/loss information on five of its matches, but it constitutes only one entry when it comes to the meta share. When a deck has little metagame share, we often get comparatively more of its matchup information. Nonetheless, we believe the data may help highlight overall trends in the world of Pauper. Despite our sample size, averaging almost 52 matches a day, it is still only part of what happened on Magic Online during this time. Pauper Leagues in that month ranged from 300 to close to 400 players. This neither comes from nor has any affiliation with Wizards of the Coast, and it does not offer a full picture of the metagame. After everything was done, we had 1,597 matches to analyze. This means removing duplicate entries when both players send their results, dealing with naming conventions, et cetera. I received everyone's data and was tasked with the merging, organization, and treatment of it. This data set was crowdsourced via players in the Pauper Leagues of Magic Online from January 1 to January 31, similar to the famous Challenge Projects of Vintage, Legacy, and Pauper. There I list the cards normally seen in each deck and discuss some of the naming conventions, things like why Boros instead of R/W. You can find clarifications on the naming of archetypes in Appendix 1: Deck Dictionary at the end of the article.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |