← 北部地區賽

SlimesTier 1

at 北部地區賽

decks
22 (27.8% of field)
matches (non-mirror)
98 44-41-13
overall winrate
51.5%
ELO-adjusted winrate
52.0% avg ELO +0.7 per match
expected value
50.6% share-weighted (raw)
EV (ELO-adj)
51.8% share-weighted (skill-controlled)
Pilot Skill · average
mean ELO 1261 · median 1295 · range 996–1481 (22 pilots with an ELO rating)
975 Q1 1166 Q3 1363 1591
14% of pilots are in the field's top quartile, 27% in the bottom.
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
Wind Shadowstrike 26.6% 31 14-14-3 50.0% 50.0% 52.5% +0.9
Fire Crux Hybrid 10.1% 14 7-6-1 53.6% 52.8% 53.0% +1.2
Fire Aggro 5.1% 5 1-4-0 20.0% 33.3% 42.0% -4.6
Fire Luxem Assassin 5.1% 11 4-3-4 54.5% 53.3% 52.8% +1.2
Wind Allies 5.1% 10 5-3-2 60.0% 57.1% 55.7% +2.5
Water Ravishing Mill 3.8% 5 5-0-0 100.0% 77.8% 73.8% +13.7
Wind Beast 2.5% 1 0-1-0 0.0% 40.0% 42.4% -12.2
Wind Crux Lorraine 2.5% 2 0-2-0 0.0% 33.3% 34.0% -15.3
Fire Erupting 1.3% 0
Fire Lorraine 1.3% 4 0-3-1 12.5% 31.2% 41.5% -5.5
Fire Slimes 1.3% 0
Water Allies 1.3% 3 2-1-0 66.7% 57.1% 54.8% +3.6
Water Crux Mage 1.3% 2 2-0-0 100.0% 66.7% 61.9% +11.4
Wind Astra Arisanna 1.3% 1 1-0-0 100.0% 60.0% 54.5% +7.1
Wind Crux Hybrid 1.3% 3 0-1-2 33.3% 42.9% 41.2% -6.6
Wind Neos Tonoris 1.3% 3 3-0-0 100.0% 71.4% 64.2% +10.6
Wind Umbra Ranger 1.3% 3 0-3-0 0.0% 28.6% 27.5% -16.8
Decklists · 22 from this event
Mirror Analysis

In 13 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: Baby Blue Slime, Blanche, Sheltering Saint, Ethereal Slime. Losers more often ran: Beastbond Ears, Hymn of Gaia's Grace, Verdant Slime.

Played more by winners
Baby Blue Slime
Winning decks ran 3.5 copies on average, losing decks 2.5.
Of 13 mirrors: the winner ran more in 5, the loser ran more in 1, both ran the same in 7.
Blanche, Sheltering Saint
Winning decks ran 1.3 copies on average, losing decks 0.7.
Of 13 mirrors: the winner ran more in 5, the loser ran more in 1, both ran the same in 7.
Ethereal Slime
Winning decks ran 3.9 copies on average, losing decks 3.7.
Of 13 mirrors: the winner ran more in 4, the loser ran more in 1, both ran the same in 8.
Reprogram
Winning decks ran 2.5 copies on average, losing decks 2.0.
Of 13 mirrors: the winner ran more in 6, the loser ran more in 3, both ran the same in 4.
Slime Eruption
Winning decks ran 3.7 copies on average, losing decks 3.3.
Of 13 mirrors: the winner ran more in 4, the loser ran more in 1, both ran the same in 8.
Slime's Blessing
Winning decks ran 1.3 copies on average, losing decks 0.8.
Of 13 mirrors: the winner ran more in 6, the loser ran more in 3, both ran the same in 4.
Played more by losers
Beastbond Ears
Losing decks ran 0.8 copies on average, winning decks 0.4.
Of 13 mirrors: the loser ran more in 5, the winner ran more in 0, both ran the same in 8.
Hymn of Gaia's Grace
Losing decks ran 1.8 copies on average, winning decks 1.0.
Of 13 mirrors: the loser ran more in 6, the winner ran more in 2, both ran the same in 5.
Verdant Slime
Losing decks ran 0.5 copies on average, winning decks 0.0.
Of 13 mirrors: the loser ran more in 4, the winner ran more in 0, both ran the same in 9.
Engineered Slime
Losing decks ran 0.8 copies on average, winning decks 0.5.
Of 13 mirrors: the loser ran more in 5, the winner ran more in 2, both ran the same in 6.
Green Slime
Losing decks ran 0.8 copies on average, winning decks 0.3.
Of 13 mirrors: the loser ran more in 5, the winner ran more in 2, both ran the same in 6.
Viridian Protective Trinket
Losing decks ran 0.2 copies on average, winning decks 0.0.
Of 13 mirrors: the loser ran more in 3, the winner ran more in 0, both ran the same in 10.
Show all 40 cards with non-zero signal (raw numbers, including 20 held back from the grid above)
Card Edge In winner In loser Same Direction
Beastbond Ears -0.38 0 5 5
Baby Blue Slime +0.31 5 1 7
Hymn of Gaia's Grace -0.31 2 6 4
Blanche, Sheltering Saint +0.31 5 1 3
Verdant Slime -0.31 0 4 0
Ethereal Slime +0.23 4 1 8
Engineered Slime -0.23 2 5 1
Green Slime -0.23 2 5 0
Reprogram +0.23 6 3 4
Slime Eruption +0.23 4 1 8
Viridian Protective Trinket -0.23 0 3 0
Slime's Blessing +0.23 6 3 2
Ordinary Bear -0.23 1 4 0
Vampiric Slime +0.15 4 2 5
Slimeshield +0.15 3 1 9
Beastbond Boots +0.15 3 1 7
Tera Sight -0.15 3 5 4
Quicksilver Grail -0.15 0 2 11
Blissful Calling -0.15 2 4 1
Grand Crusader's Ring +0.15 2 0 0
Resolute Stand +0.08 3 2 7
Beastbond Paws -0.08 0 1 1
Dungeon Guide +0.08 1 0 12
Slime King +0.08 5 4 0
Lustrous Slime -0.08 4 5 4
Gaia's Songbird +0.08 5 4 4
Turbo Charge -0.08 1 2 10
Mechanical Hare +0.08 4 3 4
Verdant Scepter +0.08 2 1 10
Twilight Slime -0.08 2 3 2
Morgan, Soul Guide -0.08 0 1 0
Fast Cure -0.08 0 1 0
Crimson Protective Trinket +0.08 1 0 0
Nullifying Lantern +0.08 2 1 1
Meadowbloom Dryad -0.08 0 1 0
Scavenging Raccoon +0.08 1 0 0
Young Beastbonder +0.00 1 1 0
Bestial Frenzy +0.00 3 3 3
Escape the Wreckage +0.00 3 3 7
Seeking Shot +0.00 2 2 0

JSON: /api/events/7297/archetypes/Slimes