Deck Power Level Thread

User avatar
TheAmericanSpirit
Supreme Dumb Guy
Posts: 2194
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: he / him
Location: IGMCULSL Papal Palace

Post by TheAmericanSpirit » 1 year ago

OneOfThoseBeebles wrote:
1 year ago

I'll try to find that case study. Sounds interesting!
Welcome aboard! The church of IGMCULSL welcomes you as well!

You shall find what you seek among Dirk's threads, there's a few pretty zany attempts not to punch down among them.
There's no biscuits and gravy in New Zealand.
(Except when DirkGently makes them!)

User avatar
OneOfThoseBeebles
Posts: 7
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Contact:

Post by OneOfThoseBeebles » 1 year ago

Thanks for the welcome @Rumpy5897! Also thanks for clarifying. Also thanks a lot for sharing your thoughts about improvements!

I know I'm in danger of repeating my primer to a degree, and it's getting a bit late here, but here are a few clarifications FWIW:
- The EDH Landscape model is meant to describe the different ways EDH can be interpreted. Its main goal is to describe and inform. I'm very happy with that one for what it's trying to do (there's already a lot of community feedback that went into that one ;)). Anyone reading that should have a pretty good understanding of the different ways our format is played, if they don't mind reading through it.
- The newer one (Alignment guide) can help an individual understand what to ask for in a pre-game talk instead of a power level number. Basically it's to ask the 2 questions that the axes represent, with the tiers representing possible answers. I found the tier-structure to be easier to grasp for the user than for example plotting threat win turn on a scale. I actually had such number-scales in my first version back in December (like this one does), but those seem to imply a level of accuracy that's actually not realistic for most players to know.

I also deliberately chose to present both models in a way that resembles the existing paradigms to easier match the frame of reference most players have. That sort of was my design constraint. Yes, that does lead into bias, but I think it's important people learn that there is no right or wrong way to play EDH. Only a more or less appropriate way given the expectations of the players at the table. I haven't explored removing that paradigm, but it's a very interesting idea to let go of the structure of those earlier model. Probably not one I'll attempt anytime soon though... But I'll think about it.

I personally don't think that the main metric of stopping power is that nebulous tbh, especially in the alignment guide: "How much can decks impact the ability of opponents to play their game?" is rather easy to grasp and observe (I find it easier to observe than the average threat win turn). It's also rather easy to share up to what tier you prefer to play at. But for operationalizing that with a number? Yes that would be more more nebulous compared to when you can reliably threaten a win without help (note that those interaction slots are meant as a secondary metric for when you have no clue).

Anyway, I'm glad the tools were useful in your discussion so far, and I don't want to be hijacking this thread any further :? . If you want to give me some more feedback about my efforts, check out the tappedout primer or my Reddit posts.
Last edited by OneOfThoseBeebles 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
motleyslayer
Posts: 1127
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Contact:

Post by motleyslayer » 1 year ago

I feel that it's super tough judging decks by power level based on a 1-10 scale, mostly because people may view power differently and may not have been exposed to cEDH levels of power. It's also hard without some form of base level that a group agrees upon.

That being said, this thread can help me open my view on power levels and how to discuss them

User avatar
TheGildedGoose
HONK HONK
Posts: 1473
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: any/all
Contact:

Post by TheGildedGoose » 1 year ago

Since I'm the one who originally derailed the thread, I'll try to be the one to get it somewhat back on track.

What power level is Erebos, God of the Dead? Use whatever metric you feel comfortable with.

You don't have to read the whole thread. A good breakdown is that the deck seeks to run opponents out of resources while slowly accumulating its own until it culminates in a massive Torment of Hailfire, Exsanguinate, or a recurred Gray Merchant of Asphodel. I'm able to resolve a turn 3 Erebos in well over half of my games and typically follow it up with multiple disruptive spells over the following turns while also drawing cards with Erebos. I don't really know what my average win turn is, but I'm often able to render opponents irrelevant by turns 9 or 10. The game may not be officially over, but my opponents just don't know they're dead yet.

Personally, on the generally accepted 1-10 scale, I'd give it an 8. It can't hang with cEDH decks, but I would consider it a damn near ideal expression of mono-black control in the format. I think it has a tremendous advantage over the common types of power level ≤8 decks you most often find in EDH that are midrange-y and creature-reliant. I almost feel like a pubstomper sometimes when I play it, but I generally tell people something like, "It's mono-black control, so hold on to your butts," to indicate that I'm playing a highly disruptive deck. By the time I become archnemesis, it's often too late, as my opponents are low on gas and I can produce nine mana with four cards in hand and a board full of disruptive permanents.

User avatar
Rumpy5897
Tuner of Jank
Posts: 1854
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Rumpy5897 » 1 year ago

I fed your deck through the power formula that got linked, with the following values:
  • average mv 3.08
  • draw 3
  • tutors 5
  • ramp 11
  • interaction 24 (ballparked it with partial credit for discard/pillow fort)
This yields a score of 7.85, which is not out of ten - a cEDH deck is shown to get 13.75. This is somehow less than my "proper" decks, which range from 7.99 for Daxos to 9.51 for Patron. I have pitiful interaction, but more draw. Yet I think in practice I'd lose to this Erebos quite often, as I'd get caught under lock pieces I'd have trouble answering.
 
EDH Primers (click me!)
Deck is Kill Club
Show
Hide

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6276
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 1 year ago

formula is useless for anything below tryhard decks. Once you start talking synergy all the goodstuff ranking ideas go out the window.

If you run any of my decks through it's likely to take you an hour to figure out how to classify things and you'll wind up with some bizarre rankings because of how high draw and ramp are figures in--do you count Living Death as a draw spell? Is it not a ramp spell because it's more than 2 mana? Is Expedition Map a ramp spell or a tutor or both?

Is Trinket Mage a ramp spell or a tutor? In maelstrom wanderer it ramps significantly harder than Arcane Signet because it gets lotus but we don't even count it.

Fundamentally formulas like that are of dubious utility because they require too much judgment. They're not objective and they don't cover anywhere near the spectrum.

The only question that formula will answer is if you're playing cedh or not. And charitably whether you are going really hard but not quite cedh.



(I'm starting to lean toward a normalized curve score that I think would be a potential objective measure.)
Normalized curve that corrects for ramp decks:

1. 4 point each per 0 and 1 cmc spell
2. 2 points per 2 drop
3. 1 point per 3 drop

Ephara is 60+36+7 == 103
Maelstrom wanderer is 87
Breena is 89
Pako is 77 which is a little low maybe but it's fairly accurate in terms of etb rate
Varina is around 120
Feather 130

All things considered these numbers are very close but miss out on commander power and combo finish. But interestingly are fairly accurate in terms of what my critical turn is. Feather and Varina are usually winning on turn 6 and most of my other decks are slower.

Got to noodle on this a bit more but it's close :)

User avatar
duducrash
Still Learning
Posts: 1198
Joined: 3 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Brazil

Post by duducrash » 1 year ago

TheGildedGoose wrote:
1 year ago
What power level is Erebos, God of the Dead? Use whatever metric you feel comfortable with.
I think Erebos (and all good midrange/control decks) is near the top tier of EDH before cEDH decks that is still ok to play against most decks arround without stomping everything. If I were to put in numbers I'd say it's a high 7 low 8 or something close. It is really hard to estabilize against 3 other decks. but you run a variety of different ways to disrupt stuff. I do think you may be a bit to vulnerable to graveyard decks. You have like 2 ways of dealing with the yard, right? Also a well timed counterspell seems like it can fold the plans. Any particular reason not run something like Boseiju, Who Shelters All?

User avatar
TheGildedGoose
HONK HONK
Posts: 1473
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: any/all
Contact:

Post by TheGildedGoose » 1 year ago

duducrash wrote:
1 year ago
TheGildedGoose wrote:
1 year ago
What power level is Erebos, God of the Dead? Use whatever metric you feel comfortable with.
I think Erebos (and all good midrange/control decks) is near the top tier of EDH before cEDH decks that is still ok to play against most decks arround without stomping everything. If I were to put in numbers I'd say it's a high 7 low 8 or something close. It is really hard to estabilize against 3 other decks. but you run a variety of different ways to disrupt stuff. I do think you may be a bit to vulnerable to graveyard decks. You have like 2 ways of dealing with the yard, right? Also a well timed counterspell seems like it can fold the plans. Any particular reason not run something like Boseiju, Who Shelters All?
Well, the reason I give it an 8 is because it's probably closer to cEDH than it is to a precon.

Three graveyard hate pieces: Bojuka Bog, Erebos's Intervention, and Leyline of the Void. But you're right about being a bit soft to dedicated graveyard decks; I had a nasty game against Meren that my one-shot exile wasn't enough to disrupt the value engine, which is when I added the Leyline. I'm on the fence about potentially adding Dauthi Voidwalker. It's an obviously ridiculous card, but this deck is so anti-creature that I worry it won't be reliable.

As for countermagic, you'd be surprised at how effective the discard suite is at disrupting incidental interaction. Sure, a dedicated control deck will likely have one counter in the tank precisely to counter my Torment of Hailfire, but Thoughtseize and Imp's Mischief are uncommon yet useful tutor targets that I use to fight control. There's also Yawgmoth's Will to recur my win conditions, which I use to great effect due to my mana production. Boseiju, Who Shelters All only affects a small percentage of my spells and while some of those spells are game winners, the vast majority of the deck makes it into a terrible Ancient Tomb a significant portion of the time.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6276
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 1 year ago

I don't believe a nonblue monocolored deck is capable of being an 8 unless it's general is part of a two card combo. I'd rank that Erebos a hard 6.5.

Heliod, the most powerful nonblue monocolored cedh deck, struggles to win games against most of my decks. And most of them are (what I would consider) 7s and 8s (breena 6).

The numerical ranking system has a lot of shortcomings and trying to rank a monocolored deck without counterspells is one of the most egregious. Or decks without counterspells in general.

The big issue really is that decks that are running free counter magic make up (roughly) 8, 9, and 10 on the power level charts. Decks that want to compete with even a moderately strong blue deck need to be doing insanely degenerate things in the command zone.

Interestingly, Most nonblue cedh decks are meta busters that often fall apart against tryhard decks because they can't handle the volume of removal that they play.

I don't mean this harshly at all. It is just the reality of the format.

User avatar
TheGildedGoose
HONK HONK
Posts: 1473
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: any/all
Contact:

Post by TheGildedGoose » 1 year ago

On a compressed scale, I agree. If we push precons down to, say, 3, I think a 6-7 is an appropriate ranking. Blue is just far and away the most powerful color in the format, obviously, so decks without blue are severely disadvantaged. I don't think mono-black can hang in the highest echelons, and I think K'rrik kombo is a more competitive deck.

If I tuned it for more competitive play I would include more mana denial. Ironically, Winter Orb, traditionally the bane of mana hungry black decks, is surprisingly good if you have the Coffers and artifact mana to break parity.

User avatar
duducrash
Still Learning
Posts: 1198
Joined: 3 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Brazil

Post by duducrash » 1 year ago

Not to derail the thread but I think the best mono color in cedh is actually red. I constitently see Magda, Brazen Outlaw and Godo, Bandit Warlord . Birgi, God of Storytelling // Harnfel, Horn of Bounty was also the flavour of the moment for a while.

pokken wrote:
1 year ago
I don't mean this harshly at all. It is just the reality of the format.
Yeah, I think we get really into our creations and take offense sometimes. But a decks powerlevel being lower ins't anything bad. it has its place and its suited to specific styles of play. MTG has a bit of a rock papers scizor to it too, another thing that the numeric scale no scale is perfect if we think about it. so we gotta run with whatever works for us when choosing a specific scale we should treat like socialism whatever lands we have in standard atm, maybe it isn't the perfect system, but it's the best we got

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6276
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 1 year ago

duducrash wrote:
1 year ago
Not to derail the thread but I think the best mono color in cedh is actually red. I constitently see Magda, Brazen Outlaw and Godo, Bandit Warlord . Birgi, God of Storytelling // Harnfel, Horn of Bounty was also the flavour of the moment for a while.
I'm not sure any of those generals are better than mono blue Canadian Highlander but they certainly are not competitive with jvp, urza stax, teferi stax, or even kefnet turns.

I honestly cannot reasonably describe how critical free countermagic is.

Failing that I can see arguments for various mono red builds over heliod, selvala and yisan. But you're really far down the list past like, baral and nezahal before any nonblue generals are viable.

User avatar
PrimevalCommander
Posts: 872
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by PrimevalCommander » 1 year ago

I'm looking at the average mana value across all my decks, and while avg MV and power tends to work at the extremes, where my strongest deck is lowest average MV and my most casual deck is near the highest, it does fall a bit short on the rest. I have strong ramp and graveyard decks in the 3.6-3.8 avg mv and weaker midrange decks at 3.1-3.2 average mv. This might speak to my desire to hit at a certain power level, where under 3 average is a low curve for me. Adding this average mana value to the "critical turn" where the deck starts to take steps to close the game seems to be two values that is a bit easier to quantify and could help build a pod where everyone has a fighting chance.

Couple things that don't account would be heavy control decks with late critical turns after turn 9-10, but modest average MV but still using very strong cards and synergies. But if your building a hard control deck, you know it and if that is concealed to pad the power level, it is more social issue than deck issue.

User avatar
duducrash
Still Learning
Posts: 1198
Joined: 3 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Brazil

Post by duducrash » 1 year ago

Potentially dumb question, but if you run some Delve cards or alternative costs, how do you fit them in the MV equation?

User avatar
BaronCappuccino
Posts: 246
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Quiet Corner

Post by BaronCappuccino » 1 year ago

duducrash wrote:
1 year ago
Potentially dumb question, but if you run some Delve cards or alternative costs, how do you fit them in the MV equation?
I typically factor cost reducers like Delve (or similar mechanics a la Blasphemous Act ) as half cost.
I typically factor regular X spells as 1 CMC higher than my highest CMC.

User avatar
PrimevalCommander
Posts: 872
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by PrimevalCommander » 1 year ago

duducrash wrote:
1 year ago
Potentially dumb question, but if you run some Delve cards or alternative costs, how do you fit them in the MV equation?
My current calculator takes self-reducing spells at face value, and X-spells as their standard MV where X=0. It may move the needled a couple tenths here and there not counting for the average mana cost paid in-game, but in some cases they cancel out. I'm not trying to be super strict on average MV, just looking at some trends since excel makes calculations like that easy.

Now my mono-blue deck plays Dig Through Time and Treasure Cruise with no X spells, so that deck I mentally adjust the mv down a couple points. Taking those two cards down to their fully reduced cost of and drops my avg mv down 0.2, which is a decent adjustment.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6276
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 1 year ago

I believe an adjusted curve formula that only counts mv 0-3 cards and just ignores weird outliers can be tuned to be largely correct.

The problem ramp and reanimator decks pose is that they have usually tons of very expensive cards if they are good decks they tend to have a lot of cheap ramp and enablers. So factoring in only the volume of cheap cards seems the right track there.

The exception would be weird decks that just play aggressively curved horrible cards, which I think a cost factor would fix.

Fairly sure an objective formula that gets close is out there, without requiring any subjective measurements.

User avatar
Rumpy5897
Tuner of Jank
Posts: 1854
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Rumpy5897 » 1 year ago

The formula from the link is not perfect. However, for the most part, I am quite happy with how it weights things and how it's placed decks relative to each other in my calculations. One of the guys in the group loaded up a CLB precon lately, and it's been wreaking havoc on our potato bracket, and this backs it up. That deck clocked in at ~5.6, which is on the higher end of said potato bracket (with my pertinent decks doing 5.1-5.7).

The current simplicity hides a bit of depth behind it. Yeah, you can work in more factors like cost or whatever, but the simple five-point input ends up yielding a pretty reasonable estimate that captures things theoretically beyond its reach. There's currently nothing assessing the quality of your mana base, which cost would do to an extent. However, if you're stuck jamming crappy tap lands, then you won't rock as much draw as you're constantly a bit behind on mana. And this the formula will pick up. I also get the limiting of the ramp to cheap cards, as those will meaningfully accelerate you in early turns of the game. So if you're running a lot of those, then you're trying to get an early leg up, indicating speed, indicating power.

My Patron is sporting a 3.54 curve, but is also jam packed with ramp, draw and tutoring. As a result, it ended up at 9.5. By contrast, my Eutropia had a 1.96 curve, a bit more draw and quite a bit more interaction, but got tanked to 7.3 by tutoring and ramp.

I guess more robust/inclusive category definitions would help. The author recommends counting Top as draw in the comments, which is not something that makes intuitive sense to me from reading the post.
 
EDH Primers (click me!)
Deck is Kill Club
Show
Hide

User avatar
Treamayne
Posts: 591
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Treamayne » 1 year ago

duducrash wrote:
1 year ago
Potentially dumb question, but if you run some Delve cards or alternative costs, how do you fit them in the MV equation?
Also, delayed costs (like Pact of Negation). . . count as 0 or 5?
pokken wrote:
1 year ago
I believe an adjusted curve formula that only counts mv 0-3 cards and just ignores weird outliers can be tuned to be largely correct.
So, do you think a trimmed mean would be appropriate, or actually calculating for outliers and removing them from the average
SPOILER
Show
Hide
Where Trimmed Mean is the average of the center 80% of values, ignoring the bottom and top 10% where outliers would appear

vs

lO<Q1-1.5(IQR) and uO>Q3+1.5(IQR)
V/R

Treamayne

User avatar
BaronCappuccino
Posts: 246
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Quiet Corner

Post by BaronCappuccino » 1 year ago

Treamayne wrote:
1 year ago
duducrash wrote:
1 year ago
Potentially dumb question, but if you run some Delve cards or alternative costs, how do you fit them in the MV equation?
Also, delayed costs (like Pact of Negation). . . count as 0 or 5?
pokken wrote:
1 year ago
I believe an adjusted curve formula that only counts mv 0-3 cards and just ignores weird outliers can be tuned to be largely correct.
So, do you think a trimmed mean would be appropriate, or actually calculating for outliers and removing them from the average
SPOILER
Show
Hide
Where Trimmed Mean is the average of the center 80% of values, ignoring the bottom and top 10% where outliers would appear

vs

lO<Q1-1.5(IQR) and uO>Q3+1.5(IQR)
Pact counts as 5 because that's what you're really paying. Force counts as 0 because that's what you're really paying. Fortunately, most decks that want one want both, so you rarely have to adjust your cmc. 5 pretending to be 0 and 0 pretending to be 5 balances out.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6276
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 1 year ago

Treamayne wrote:
1 year ago
pokken wrote:
1 year ago
I believe an adjusted curve formula that only counts mv 0-3 cards and just ignores weird outliers can be tuned to be largely correct.
So, do you think a trimmed mean would be appropriate, or actually calculating for outliers and removing them from the average
SPOILER
Show
Hide
Where Trimmed Mean is the average of the center 80% of values, ignoring the bottom and top 10% where outliers would appear

vs

lO<Q1-1.5(IQR) and uO>Q3+1.5(IQR)
maybe! It's a problem for someone more mathy than me. But that sounds close. I was just thinking that a straight mode would tell you a lot so a trimmed mean seems rational if I understand it right.

I suspect if you took the most common mana value in your deck, that would tell you the power level very close to accurately. Something like 10/( 1 + log Mo) as a starting point tells you a ton for most decks (except where 0 is the most common heh, but outliers).

I would be very interested in how your function views decks in this thread though for sure. When I have some non phone computer time I'll try to look at that.

User avatar
folding_music
glitter pen on my mana crypt
Posts: 2236
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: they / them

Post by folding_music » 1 year ago

I liked the chart on the first page urging you to describe your deck's approach rather than its power level - i'm less interested in your vibe-y numerical deck categorization than whether you're gonna play cards as they come or tutor for a big win asap. I know consult + thassa's oracle is the big scary win and shorthand for high-end games, but if your deck always plans to find itself winning with ANY consistent combo I don't really want to play it, even if it's horse trading less commonly used ramp/dig/draw/tutoring etc

User avatar
Treamayne
Posts: 591
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Treamayne » 1 year ago

pokken wrote:
1 year ago
I would be very interested in how your function views decks in this thread though for sure. When I have some non phone computer time I'll try to look at that.
Here are the deck stats as I calculated them:
Assumptions and Definitions
Show
Hide
  • Costs are based on the highest possible mode (e.g. Mizzix's Mastery uses the Overload cost for MV)
  • Color Weight uses all non-exclusive costs on the card, not just casting costs (e.g. Mystic Retrieval has a color weight of and , but Mizzix's Mastery uses the higher Color Weight of )
  • Mean uses the whole deck (for comparison to all other calculations)
  • Trim Mean uses the non-land cards (since the large qty of 0 will skew calculations)
  • Outlier Calculations use the non-land cards
  • Lower Outliers stop at MV
ItemCalculation
Land35
Weight71%
Source Min25
Source Qty30
Weight55%
Source Min19
Source Qty20
Mean1.68
Non-Land Average2.55
Median2
Mode2
Trimmed Mean (TM)2.33
Lower Quartile (Q1)1
Upper Quartile (Q2)3
Interquartile Range (IQR)2
Q1 Mild Outlier0
Q2 Mild Outlier (MO)6
MO Average2.35
Q2 Extreme Outlier (EO)9
EO Average2.6

Of course, I just have formulae in Excel - so I add the data and let it do the work.
V/R

Treamayne

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6276
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 1 year ago

Treamayne wrote:
1 year ago
pokken wrote:
1 year ago
I would be very interested in how your function views decks in this thread though for sure. When I have some non phone computer time I'll try to look at that.
Here are the deck stats as I calculated them:
Assumptions and Definitions
Show
Hide
  • Costs are based on the highest possible mode (e.g. Mizzix's Mastery uses the Overload cost for MV)
  • Color Weight uses all non-exclusive costs on the card, not just casting costs (e.g. Mystic Retrieval has a color weight of and , but Mizzix's Mastery uses the higher Color Weight of )
  • Mean uses the whole deck (for comparison to all other calculations)
  • Trim Mean uses the non-land cards (since the large qty of 0 will skew calculations)
  • Outlier Calculations use the non-land cards
  • Lower Outliers stop at MV
ItemCalculation
Land35
Weight71%
Source Min25
Source Qty30
Weight55%
Source Min19
Source Qty20
Mean1.68
Non-Land Average2.55
Median2
Mode2
Trimmed Mean (TM)2.33
Lower Quartile (Q1)1
Upper Quartile (Q2)3
Interquartile Range (IQR)2
Q1 Mild Outlier0
Q2 Mild Outlier (MO)6
MO Average2.35
Q2 Extreme Outlier (EO)9
EO Average2.6

Of course, I just have formulae in Excel - so I add the data and let it do the work.
I think there's some real interesting numbers there. I imagine an automated tool that applied those stats to a big pool of decks would probably coalesce on which numbers are the most meaningful.

Might be a request we could Get @Feyd_Ruin to add to the stats page for deck tags? Probably fairly cheap calculations

User avatar
Rumpy5897
Tuner of Jank
Posts: 1854
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Rumpy5897 » 1 year ago

If you wish to fiddle with stuff, I'd like to propose my Patron and Eutropia lists as reasonable candidates for making the algorithm look past MV alone. The shunned formula was able to do so.
 
EDH Primers (click me!)
Deck is Kill Club
Show
Hide

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Commander”