Evaluation is tricky. One of the cornerstones of Magic finance is evaluating which cards are undervalued and are likely to be worth more later, and even veterans have issues with card evaluation. Deck evaluation can be the difference between a Top 8 and a disappointing finish out of the money after a day spent with poor matchups and dead sideboard cards. Sometimes, it can be easier to evaluate someone elseâs deck than it can your own pile, and thatâs something Iâve encountered a lot doing this series.

Imagine my surprise when I was sent decks from people who embraced the 75% philosophy when they saw it or who came to some of the same conclusions on their own that I felt were underpowered and could do with a bit of buffing. Overwhelmingly, people were concerned with having their decks not appear to be too overpowered or consistent. Itâs good to approach the game with that in mind if you want to play with the same group and that group is fairly casual. Having a deck that the group can handle, that doesnât annoy anyone, that can winâbut not too oftenâand is fun for everyone is important, and itâs one of the reasons I started this project.

Really, though, itâs only half of it. A 75% deck is much harder to build than a 50% deck because anyone can build a fair deck that wins 1 Ã· X games and doesnât feel oppressive. However, in order to be a true 75% deck, you have to be able to beat tougher decks from players who arenât necessarily playing with fairness in mind. Remember that weâre trying to win at least 1Ã· X games in a tougher setting. This requires a little bit of finesse on our parts, and it is among the main reasons weâre not going to accomplish our goals by making a strong deck weaker. If you do that, youâre not going to have the capability of making strong plays against strong decks. When playing scaling cards like Bribery to beat opponents at their own game fails, how do we make our decks competitive?

It was with this in mind that I looked at a deck submitted on reddit by /u/-33rpm, which I can only assume is a reference to playing records backward to hear hidden messages. Again, I failed to submit my questionnaire in time to receive responses to the specific questions I usually ask, but I wanted to audible into this deck because it inspired the entire preamble. People are growing better at sending me descriptive introductions to the decks when they submit them, so I can paraphrase a bit. Letâs get there.

How long have you played this deck?

I haven't played it for long. I've got in about eight games, maybe nine.

Are you winning roughly 1 out of every X games, where X is the number of players?

I won two of them, but it was by virtue of taking a back seat and letting other players duke it out while picking off key threats with Vhati when I had the chance. In the games in which people werenât head-to-head against each other, I didnât do so wellâ.â.â.â

Could the deck be stronger and still be fair?

One of the weaknesses is I'm a bit too all-in on removal and a bit light on win cons!

Heâd also said earlier:

I don't really know how I am winning (other than, I hope, having an empty board to swing my creatures into!), so that definitely needs improvement. I just can't work out how or where to put a couple of key win conditions.

I have tried to avoid +1/+1 counters both for thematic reasons and because there's a chance it might become a little confusing. Also, despite infect having a strong -1/-1 theme to it, I have left it out of the deck, as I am not sure it fits in with the 75% mentalityâalso, at this stage, I have no idea how well it will go down in the store I play at. I haven't seen anyone play infect there.

That was a bit to go on, but I decided to receive a bit more insight by checking the description he had for the deck on TappedOut.net.

Iâm seeing a real disconnect between the description of what the deck is capable of and the results. Letâs not invite a tangent about the poisonous Kool-Aid that is results-oriented thinking, and letâs concentrate on what I said about evaluation. Itâs clear he knows the deck could be stronger, which is excellent. Not knowing how you are winning can let you know that it may be a fluke or help you realize you need to concentrate on a âthing.â It seems there is plenty of synergy and power; the deckâs greatest sin seems to be that it may have shied away from consistency too much. Is there a way we can shift the scales back in the right direction? Here is his list as it stands.

Right away, it appears that it is dialed in correctly in terms of building on a theme, but it could use some help in the category of winning 1 Ã· X games against strong decks and/or people who know better than to leave me alone.

I think itâs time to revisit how we feel about tutors.

Some other cards I considered and did not have room for were Soul Snuffers, Weed-Pruner Poplar, Horobi, Death's Wail, and Trading Postâbecause Trading Post should be in decks.

Quillspike s will often have trouble connecting, and wiping the board with a two-creature combo can feel bad, but if you lack a way to capitalize that turn, you may wish you werenât the only one with creatures still alive.

I took out a few cards he may very well put back in. I think Spike Cannibal is cute and can prevent opponents from having their creatures with +1/+1 counters survive your shenanigans, but I think utility trumps cute. I cut Rancor as well because it didnât seem very good. Iâd jam it back in if I ran Horobi. I am not sold totally on Melira, Sylvok Outcast, but I at least know what itâs trying to accomplish. The only issue is that itâs a bit of a nonbo with cards like Grim Poppet, and I love Grim Poppet to pieces in this deck.

I added a few cards I was surprised werenât in already, such as Caustic Crawler and Thrashing Wumpus. I realize the intention is to use -1/-1 counters to finish creatures off, but I feel that Thrashing Wumpus and Staff of Nin have more utility than to just finish of the creature you target with Vhati. A Pestilence might not go amiss.

I donât like that I have to include so many nonbos. Itâs fun to win the game with infinite Elf tokens from Flourishing Defensesâthat is, if you didnât already play Night of Souls' Betrayal. Still, the deck has so many interactions that youâre bound to trip up a bit. Just watch your sequencing, and have fun with it. Youâre shooting to win 1 Ã· X games anyway.

So what will help it more? Jamming some more games can certainly help. Playing against good decks to see if we can get there 1 Ã· X games against strong decks will help us see if the deck is truly 75% material. However, if what we aim to do is have a fun, themed deck to play against the people from the local game store, and this was doing that already, maybe we donât need to tune it up a ton. I do know that face-up tutors are okay, infinite combos provide a way to end games, and if Staff of Nin is good enough for Vintage, itâs good enough for my Commander decks.

Thanks for tuning in! Next week, I hope to add another bullet point to our list of principles and tackle my toughest challenge yet: the deck that launched the series. I hope Iâm ready! Leave your comments below, and remember that the best way to evaluate a deck is to play with it.