Wind Luxem ZanderTier 2
at Ascent Seattle
Pilot Skill ↑ top
Head-to-Head Matchups
Winrates vs every other archetype, sorted by the opponent's field share. Mirrors excluded. Shrunk WR uses a Beta(2, 2) prior so a 1-0 cell doesn't read as 100%; it feeds the EV calc above. Adj WR is the skill-controlled view: derived from per-match ELO deltas (0.5 + avg ELO Δ / K=32, same shrinkage), so it tells you what would have happened on equal-rating play. A faded Raw WR means under 10 matches — lean on the Shrunk WR column there.
| Opponent | Their share | Matches | W-L-D | Raw WR | Shrunk WR | Adj WR | ELO Δ/match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Water Fractal | 20.8% | 18 | 11-5-2 | 66.7% | 63.6% | 67.8% | +7.0 |
| Fire Aggro | 6.6% | 4 | 3-1-0 | 75.0% | 62.5% | 53.2% | +2.1 |
| Fire Firebloom Burn | 6.6% | 5 | 4-0-1 | 90.0% | 72.2% | 68.6% | +10.7 |
| Fire Suzaku | 6.6% | 5 | 3-2-0 | 60.0% | 55.6% | 50.4% | +0.2 |
| Fire Crux Mage | 4.5% | 1 | 0-1-0 | 0.0% | 40.0% | 38.3% | -18.7 |
| Wind Shadowstrike | 4.5% | 2 | 1-1-0 | 50.0% | 50.0% | 44.4% | -5.4 |
| Water Genbu | 4.2% | 1 | 1-0-0 | 100.0% | 60.0% | 53.9% | +6.3 |
| Wind Astra Cleric | 3.8% | 1 | 1-0-0 | 100.0% | 60.0% | 64.6% | +23.4 |
| Fire Exia | 3.5% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wind Allies | 2.8% | 3 | 3-0-0 | 100.0% | 71.4% | 58.6% | +6.5 |
| Wind Seiryuu | 2.8% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Fire Tera Diao Chan | 2.4% | 2 | 1-0-1 | 75.0% | 58.3% | 61.9% | +11.4 |
| Water Allies | 2.1% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Water Tera Cleric | 2.1% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wind Byakko | 2.1% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Fire Cinderbloom Combo | 1.7% | 2 | 1-1-0 | 50.0% | 50.0% | 49.7% | -0.3 |
| Wind Luxem Assassin | 1.7% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wind Razorgale | 1.7% | 1 | 1-0-0 | 100.0% | 60.0% | 57.7% | +12.4 |
| Fire Luxem Assassin | 1.4% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Water Penguin Mill | 1.4% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Water Ravishing Mill | 1.4% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Water Seiryuu | 1.4% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Fire Arcane | 1.0% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Slimes | 1.0% | 1 | 1-0-0 | 100.0% | 60.0% | 54.6% | +7.4 |
| Water Crux Mage | 1.0% | 1 | 0-1-0 | 0.0% | 40.0% | 39.7% | -16.5 |
| Fire Seiryuu | 0.7% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Water Luxem Assassin | 0.7% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wind Diana | 0.7% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wind Luxem Tamer | 0.7% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wind Slimes | 0.7% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Fire Allen | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Fire Neos Tonoris | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Fire Ravishing Mill | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Fire Triskit | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Fire Umbra Ranger | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Water Astra Cleric | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Water Dawn of Ashes | 0.3% | 1 | 1-0-0 | 100.0% | 60.0% | 59.8% | +15.7 |
| Water Diana | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Water Diao Chan | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Water Neos | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Water Tera Diao Chan | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Water Tera Kongming | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Water Umbra Diana | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Water Umbra Ranger | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wind Arcane | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wind Arcane Rai | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wind Crux Lorraine | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wind Crux Mage | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wind Kongming | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wind Lorraine | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wind Neos | 0.3% | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Wind Wakeup Combo | 0.3% | 1 | 0-1-0 | 0.0% | 40.0% | 38.0% | -19.2 |
Decklists · 4 from this event
The 4 public Wind Luxem Zander decklists from this event, ordered by final placement — click a pilot for the full list.
Mirror Analysis
In 1 mirror match, here are the card-count differences that most often separated the winning deck from the losing one. Staples (cards both decks run at the same count) are filtered out — only flex slots show up below. Cards whose count only differed in fewer than 3 mirrors are also held back as too sparse to call a pattern (still visible in the raw table further down). Small sample warning: 1 mirror is borderline; treat these as suggestive, not conclusive.
No card-quantity differences observed in the mirrors — every mirror used an identical decklist.