Deck | Creator | Record | Best Finish |
---|---|---|---|
Azorius Tempo | elalbertoski | 1-1 | None |
Azorius Omniscience , Azorius Tempo , Bant Tempo , Dimir Tempo , Esper Oculus , Izzet Monument , Mono Blue Tempo , Simic Terror , Unknown Archetype
Haughty Djinn ranks #278 out of approximately 339 cards in raw efficiency (top 82%).
Blue average: 58.7%
Performance compared to other Blue cardsBased on our comprehensive multi-metric analysis, Haughty Djinn is an underperforming card in the current meta.
Recommended number of copies: 1
Performance Efficiency: 11.11 (Win rate × Top 8 rate ÷ Mana value)
At 3 mana, the average win rate in the format is 69.2%. Haughty Djinn has a win rate of 50.0%, making it 27.7% worse than other 3-mana cards.
Card Name | Type | Deck Count | Win Rate | 1st Places |
---|---|---|---|---|
Malicious Eclipse | Sorcery | 5 | 72.3% | 2 |
Bitter Triumph | Instant | 6 | 60.2% | 1 |
Loran's Escape | Instant | 21 | 56.9% | 3 |
Beza, the Bounding Spring | Legendary Creature — Elemental Elk | 10 | 56.6% | 3 |
Loran of the Third Path | Legendary Creature — Human Artificer | 38 | 55.4% | 10 |
Unsummon | Instant | 211 | 49.1% | 45 |
Destroy Evil | Instant | 121 | 48.9% | 27 |
Go for the Throat | Instant | 9 | 48.9% | 3 |
Cut Down | Instant | 14 | 48.5% | 3 |
Silent Hallcreeper | Enchantment Creature — Horror | 15 | 47.1% | 2 |
Cards that perform better with Haughty Djinn 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 |
---|---|---|---|
Azorius Tempo | 384 | 96.5% | 42.5% |
Dimir Tempo | 7 | 50.0% | 34.3% |
Esper Oculus | 6 | 46.1% | 56.1% |
Unknown Archetype | 3 | 1.0% | 50.0% |
Mono Blue Tempo | 3 | 33.3% | 43.8% |
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.