PalworldCenter

Mono-Red Midrange

Midrange: No single plan stands out: a mid-curve list without a ramp, control, combo or aggro signature.

Player games and simulated bot games together. A simulated game counts a quarter of a player game. · 11 player games · 32,826 simulated · last 7 days

Mono-Red Midrange

4 published decks · no new decks

39%

win rate

Share
4% of published decks
Rating
33%
Length
7.32 turns
Mulligan
—
On the play
40%
On the draw
38%
Games
1,146

How it wins

Damage 95% · Decking 5%

Key cards

What Mono-Red Midrange decks run

Head to head

Matchups

Mono-Red Midrange against the field, best matchup first. Bars run right where it is favoured and left where it is not, from a centre line at 50%. 1,146 games played.

Decks

Mono-Red Midrange decks that have played

  1. 1
    Reptyro – Ore Gorger
    Suzaku – Hellfire Wings
    Ragnahawk – Emberwing Striker
    Kitsun – Wyrmbane Fangs
    Arsox – Burning Spoils
    Rating
    37%
    Win rate
    46%
    Games
    448
    Length
    7.32 turns
    Play / draw
    46% / 46%
  2. 2
    Reptyro – Ore Gorger
    Jormuntide Ignis – Savage Lava Dragon
    Suzaku – Hellfire Wings
    Grizzbolt – Rumbling Tank
    Gobfin Ignis – Blazing Hothead
    Rating
    27%
    Win rate
    36%
    Games
    360
    Length
    7.01 turns
    Play / draw
    37% / 36%
  3. 3
    Jormuntide Ignis – Savage Lava Dragon
    Suzaku – Hellfire Wings
    Blazehowl – Hellflame Defender
    Ragnahawk – Emberwing Striker
    Foxparks – A Toasty Hug
    Rating
    22%
    Win rate
    31%
    Games
    338
    Length
    7.66 turns
    Play / draw
    34% / 28%

4 published decks in this archetype. All archetypes

How these numbers are made

Two kinds of games. Player games are finished online, friendly, private and tournament matches between people. Simulated games are bot-versus-bot games on published decks, played on our own machines with the same rules engine as the game. The Combined view counts a simulated game as 0.25 of a player game; Players and Simulated show each on its own. Practice games against a bot are not counted as player games.

Share and trend. Which pairings get simulated is decided by our scheduler, not by players, so simulated games say nothing about popularity. Share of play therefore uses player games only. Where there are none, we show the share of published decks instead and say so; its trend is how many decks were created in the last 14 days against the 14 before.

Rating. The win rate a record can defend: the lower end of a 95% confidence interval, so a long record counts for more than a lucky streak. Draws count as half a win.

Small samples are hidden, not rounded. An archetype shows a rate from 30 games, a pairing from 12, a deck rating from 15, a card win rate from 30. On-play and on-draw need 15 games each way. A dash means not enough games. Simulated on-play, on-draw and mulligan figures also need the simulator to pass its calibration check, and say why when they are hidden.

Archetypes are read from the list. Nobody writes their plan on the tin, so the label comes from the 50 cards: the colour pair, then a role. Ramp: 6+ cards that add souls or discount gear. Control: 7+ that remove, sweep or stun Pals. Combo: 14+ that search the deck or recur from the graveyard. Aggro: an average cost of 3.9 or less. Anything else is Midrange. It is a heuristic, and it can disagree with what a deck's author calls it.

Length is turns per player, not counting the opponent's. Simulated bots never concede or run out the clock, so a simulated “how it wins” can only split damage from decking. Simulated win rates are against the decks we schedule, which favours well-known decks.