Alright, I think I have a first draft for my version of the power level calculator.
GoalThis formula is not supposed to give an accurate representation of power level, it's just an estimate. However it should get pretty close. A deck that gets a score of about 8 should be able to go toe-to-toe with an approximately 9 deck. Decks at 6 and 5 should be able to have fun with each other, and so on. The formula does this by using a combination of discrete variables and categorical variables. A discrete variable is something you can put a precise number on; average CMC of the deck, number of ramp cards, etc. A categorical variable is one that you need to give a self-rating for; for example, how well does the deck combo? How strong is your land base? Here's the formula:
Discrete variablesA: Average CMC of the deck. Technically this is a continuous variable, but whatever, it works all the same.
D: Number of draw spells in the deck.
I: Number of removal, boardwipes, counterspells, and protection spells (not stax).
R: Number of ramp cards in the deck.
S: Number of stax cards in the deck. Count mass land destruction as stax.
T: Number of tutors in the deck.
Categorical variablesI based these off of the
powertable made by Judaspriester and dexflux, with slight modifications based on comments made in that thread. Each statement has a number linked to it. If that statement is true for your deck, you use that number in the formula.
C: Combo strength of deck0 - no (infinite) combos.
1 - janky multiple card combo(s) without redundancy.
2 - janky multiple card combo(s) with redundancy, or a combo that is hard to setup.
3 - typical combo wins without redundancy and are harder to setup (
Pili-Pala +
Grand Architect).
4 - typical combo wins with redundancy and are easy to setup (e.g. Kiki-Jiki combos,
Worldgorger Dragon).
5 - Strong combo wins that's easy to setup (e.g. Dramatic Scepter with commander as a outlet).
L: Strength of land base1 - basics/taplands/utility lands.
2 - basics/taplands/few untapped nonbasics.
3 - basics/taplands/many untapped nonbasics.
4 - None, or next to no lands that enter tapped unconditionally.
Y: Non-combo synergy of cards0 - essentially just a bunch of cards with no effects.
1 - the barest minimum of synergy - cards hardly interact with each other at all.
2 - useful synergies, but relatively harmless (e.g. blinking
Mulldrifter).
3 - less harmless (e.g. repeated blinking of
Mulldrifter,
Deadeye Navigator synergies).
4 - dangerous (e.g. Brago blinking the board for five triggers or more per turn).
5 - extremely dangerous (e.g.
Doubling Season into planeswalkers).
Justification for weightsEach variable has a weight attached to it. You're probably wondering how I got these numbers. Simple: I inserted the values for each of my decks in an excel sheet, and then played with the numbers until I got power level values that were close to what I would expect for those decks. That does mean that these values are largely arbitrary, and have a massive bias to them. To help fix this a little, I included some precon decks to give representation to the lower limit.
In case it matters, the order for most relevant to least relevant is:
Combo potential
Synergy
Average CMC
Tutors
Draw
Stax
Mana ramp
Interaction
Land base
Flaws with this formula- You'll notice that individual card strength is not taken into account. A Swords to Plowshares contributes just as much as Assassin's Strike, even though we can all tell which of these cards is trash.
- Choice of commander has little effect on the discrete variables.
- Numbers are very much based on my decks, and a few precons. Has a heavy bias in this sense. Like, you'll notice that all my decks have a "4" rating for their land bases. I really hate lands that enter tapped.
- You'll have to use your judgement depending on your deck. Should every high-cost card in Jodah, Archmage Eternal just have a CMC of 5? Does everything that can sacrifice itself count as card draw for Korvold, Fae-Cursed King? It's up to you to decide.
- Graveyard synergies are not taken into account. Try to use your judgement on these things. If someone has a good way of incorporating graveyard strategies into this formula let me know about it.
- Color identity of the decks are not taken into account. Obviously mono-green is going to have a much easier time with color fixing than 5-color. Conversely, 5-color has a much wider selection of cards to use. I'm not sure how I can get the formula to take both of these into account.
- For some bloody reason Mishra still ranks really high. Seriously, it's a really crummy deck. The entire deck hinges on Possibility Storm and then luck. It's really not good. Might need to fix up the combo and synergy sections to get a more accurate rating.
- In line with this, the precons seem a little high, but that might just be because I'm used to people giving them ratings of 2 or 3. That and their card choices are rather weak, which this formula does not take into account.
- I only graded two stax decks, both of which are way outdated. Not exactly a good representation.
Next stepsThis has been a fun weekend, but now it's over. Once again I've added a template attached to this post. It will calculate the power of your deck for you. If you feel like it, put your commanders into the equation, and see how their power comes out. I've included spots for 10 commanders to be inserted at once, but you can get more if you know how to copy and paste. Let me know if you have any feedback that you'd like to give about this.