In less than a couple of months, rotation will be upon us and new decks will emerge in the meta. Before that happens, I felt it appropriate to write about how I tend to evaluate decks and choose which to spend resources on. I typically have neither time nor temperament to brew decks, so I tend to borrow off other people’s work and modify stock lists according to how I feel the meta is shaping up. In doing this, I consider four dimensions of deck quality as measures of how good a deck is. Many of us know that a deck can be aggro, tempo, midrange, combo, control, or a combination of such archetypes. My evaluation of a deck is focused on how well it fills the role or roles that it purports to fill; the underlying premise being that a deck that is able to fulfill its role best maximizes its win rate in a given meta. The concept encapsulated by each dimension is in no way original, but I believe that limiting the number of dimensions to consider to these 4 is sufficient. In particular, the four dimensions that I speak of are Speed, Value, Consistency, and Inevitability.

Speed

Like the gun duels of old, a huge element of magic is speed. This makes it come as no surprise that a format is defined by the typical number of turns before someone emerges a victor. Modern is a 4-turn format, Legacy a turn 2-3 turn format, and so on. The speed dimension of a deck simply refers to how quickly a deck is able to get to do what it wants to do. The average mana cost of cards in a deck is a good metric of speed (provided there are no outliers). Aggro decks are expected to be faster than midrange or control decks. Good tempo decks need to be fast at enacting their plan. They may take more turns to kill an opponent, but their tools slow the progress of the opponent as they forward theirs. However, control decks can also be “fast” in terms of being able to control the game very early on. The nature of control decks needing more colors to cast more powerful spells naturally slows them down. If this restriction was taken away and everything else is left the same, control decks can become too powerful. This is why there are no 2-mana unconditional, single-color (yes, blue) counter spells anymore in standard. Thus, an aggro deck needs to be fast to win but a control deck that is faster than an aggro deck is unfair.

Value

Value is an often touted key to winning in a game of magic. This is often true, as many magic games come down to a game of value. Value as a dimension refers to the density of cards in the deck that are worth more than one card. Cards such as Risen Reef, Experimental Frenzy, or Treasure Map, any rare/mythic Planeswalker and many of the uncommon ones are value cards. When two midrange decks battle it out, it is typically a battle of value, with each player trying to maximize the number of cards that each card in his or her hand is worth in the game. The player who is able to amass more resources on the battlefield and/or more cards in hand wins. Aggro decks often lack value as they are designed to win quickly with small creatures that are not worth more than a card each or burn spells that are not even worth a card when aimed to the face. That is why when an aggro deck gets access to cards that have immense value generating ability like Experimental Frenzy, they break a format for at least some period of time.

Consistency

Consistency refers to how focused a deck is in doing what it wants to do. Of course, the consistency of a deck is directly related to the number of things it wants to do as well as the number of colors it runs. The more roles it wants to fill, the less consistent it becomes. Consistency is the biggest issue that a midrange deck needs to consider, which is natural since a midrange deck wants to fill at least two roles: be the beatdown when facing control, be the control deck when facing aggro/tempo. However, each role requires cards that are bad for the other roles. That’s why for Esper Hero, a hand with multiple cast downs and that one Kaya’s Wrath you so brazenly included in the main is great when going up against Jund Dinosaurs but is horrible, horrible, oh so horrible when you’re up against Esper Control. Of course, the strength of any midrange deck is also it’s consistency post sideboarding, where it can the be tuned specifically to the single role that it wants to fill versus a specific opponent.

The success of a combo deck is highly dependent on how consistent it is, which is why combo decks have very few slots available for removal. Each card in a combo deck is dedicated to getting it closer to the combo. However, control-combo decks are decks that are mainly control decks but plan to finish the game instantly with a combo. When a combo requires so few cards that a control deck can be built as its shell, it breaks the format (Jeskai Saheeli in Kaladesh Standard) or becomes its years-long gatekeeper (URx Splinter Twin).

Inevitability

Finally (and inevitably?), we have inevitability as the fourth dimension. Inevitability refers to the relative quality of a deck to be eventually unstoppable by opposing decks in the meta. It is part of the quintessential question: “ who is the beatdown? ” That is, if you are the beatdown, it means the other guy typically has inevitability. If you let the game go long, you will lose. Thus, if on the other hand, you have inevitability, then it is in your best interest to play defensively until that inevitability is realized. Control decks need to have inevitability in order for them to be good. In a meta where inevitability is possessed by other decks that are not control decks, control decks become very bad. Before RNA, main decks of Jeskai Control did not run enchantment removal (Te5eri can -3 it away but that still usually does not end well for the control player). As such, RDW possessed inevitability through Experimental Frenzy. This is another reason why that period was the deck’s heyday. The reprinting of Mortify in RNA changed this dynamic a bit, enabling Esper Control to have a better chance of stifling RDW's inevitability. RDW Frenzy’s predecessor, Ramunap Red, likewise had inevitability through its namesake land which earned the deck insane win rates (and the banhammer). Lesson: when you give aggro decks inevitability, the proverbial **** hits the fan.

Application the theory to identify good decks, bad decks, and most importantly, broken decks

As I mentioned previously, while the 4 dimensions can be used as guidelines in brewing, I myself have used them mainly to pick out decks that are clear winners in a given meta. When a deck is high in dimensions that it is supposed to be high in, the deck is good. When a deck has that, and also has high levels in dimensions it is not supposed to be high in, that’s the only deck you want to be using (if your intention is to win games). Ramunap Red was an aggro deck that was fast and consistent and had inevitability. UW God Pharoah’s Gift was a fast combo deck that also had a lot of value since I could recur cats and nagas and just hard cast the angel and the namesake artifact later in the game. Scapeshift is a combo deck that is consistent and fast, but it also has inevitability tacked into it in that if I just play my lands, I’ll eventually reach 7 different ones with Field of the Dead as a win condition that most decks would not be able to remove.

Conversely, when a deck is low in the dimensions that it is supposed to be high in, those are decks that you do not want to be playing as they will be frustratingly bad most of the time.

The above example shows an aggro deck that is not fast because its creatures are 1/1 flyers, and is not consistent because in order for it to be able to increase its damage output, it has to draw a good mix of 1/1 flyers and anthems in its opening hand. It also runs a huge creature that makes its flyers indestructible, but casting it within a reasonable amount of time requires tapping 3 flyers, disabling them from attacking on that turn. It has too few tools to be a tempo deck, and too awkward draw spells to generate value. Sure, the deck will win a game here and there, but then so will the decklist below.

40 Rat Colony

20 Swamps

The dimensions can also be used to determine if it is time to switch decks. When an aggro deck gains inevitability, you do not want to be playing control decks. When there is a very fast combo deck that ignores most removal/interaction (and then locks you in a loop where you just watch your opponent play magic without you), you do not want to be playing midrange/control decks unless you can be very confident that the game will turn to your favor after sideboarding. When control gains the ability to slow down opponents by forcing them to attack 3 cmc walkers while siphoning some life from such attacks with 3 cmc enchantments, you want to avoid playing aggro decks. When a combo deck gains inevitability, playing control decks is not where you want to be.

Finally, when choosing between two decks that fill the same role (for example, RDW or Mono White during GRN were both popular aggro decks), measuring them up on each dimension is also useful. Mono White is faster just by the average cmc of its cards not including the ones with convoke , but RDW has inevitability with Frenzy. So if you gauge that control/midrange decks are fast enough to deal with either deck, you want to go with RDW which can steal beat them with a resolved frenzy.