Fire RileTier 2

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.

The 12 public Fire Rile decklists from this event, ordered by final placement — click a pilot for the full list.

• DeanS 85 cards · placed #2
• Dal157 85 cards · placed #4
• Hades 83 cards · placed #6
• TimB 83 cards · placed #7
• WhiteBread 85 cards · placed #10
• Bhop 83 cards · placed #11
• Shielder 85 cards · placed #12
• Genki 79 cards · placed #13
• VoXieL 85 cards · placed #15
• Alec 82 cards · placed #17
• AzNat 85 cards · placed #18
• NynjaTurtle 83 cards · placed #21

In 14 mirror matches (2 draws excluded), 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).

Winners more often ran: Evercurrent Raider, Blanche, Sheltering Saint, Excalibur, Cleansing Light. Losers more often ran: Embercrypt Burn, Fiery Interference, Spirit of Fire.

↑ Played more by winners

Evercurrent Raider

Winning decks ran 3.9 copies on average, losing decks 2.5.

Of 14 mirrors: the winner ran more in 9, the loser ran more in 0, both ran the same in 5.

Blanche, Sheltering Saint

Winning decks ran 1.1 copies on average, losing decks 0.4.

Of 14 mirrors: the winner ran more in 6, the loser ran more in 0, both ran the same in 8.

Excalibur, Cleansing Light

Winning decks ran 0.9 copies on average, losing decks 0.3.

Of 14 mirrors: the winner ran more in 5, the loser ran more in 0, both ran the same in 9.

Backup Charger

Winning decks ran 0.8 copies on average, losing decks 0.4.

Of 14 mirrors: the winner ran more in 6, the loser ran more in 1, both ran the same in 7.

Thieving Cut

Winning decks ran 1.3 copies on average, losing decks 0.4.

Of 14 mirrors: the winner ran more in 5, the loser ran more in 0, both ran the same in 9.

Turbo Charge

Winning decks ran 0.4 copies on average, losing decks 0.1.

Of 14 mirrors: the winner ran more in 4, the loser ran more in 0, both ran the same in 10.

↓ Played more by losers

Embercrypt Burn

Losing decks ran 1.7 copies on average, winning decks 0.0.

Of 14 mirrors: the loser ran more in 6, the winner ran more in 0, both ran the same in 8.

Fiery Interference

Losing decks ran 2.0 copies on average, winning decks 0.8.

Of 14 mirrors: the loser ran more in 8, the winner ran more in 2, both ran the same in 4.

Spirit of Fire

Losing decks ran 0.8 copies on average, winning decks 0.5.

Of 14 mirrors: the loser ran more in 4, the winner ran more in 0, both ran the same in 10.

Fire Resonance Bauble

Losing decks ran 0.3 copies on average, winning decks 0.0.

Of 14 mirrors: the loser ran more in 4, the winner ran more in 0, both ran the same in 10.

Wind Resonance Bauble

Losing decks ran 0.3 copies on average, winning decks 0.0.

Of 14 mirrors: the loser ran more in 4, the winner ran more in 0, both ran the same in 10.

Spellward Scepter

Losing decks ran 0.4 copies on average, winning decks 0.1.

Of 14 mirrors: the loser ran more in 6, the winner ran more in 2, both ran the same in 6.