Kinnan · case study 001

Find the best 99.
Show the evidence.

We compare complete Commander decks in repeatable simulations, diagnose why their cards and combo paths work, and promote a new list only when the data holds up.

Enter the results lab Understand the method

2,000strict-valid games

20.25%assembled by T4

10.90%attempt by T4

3.80%protected attempt by T4

Turn four is the scoring horizon—not the target. Earlier protected wins always rank higher.

Choose your depth

Start simple.
Go as deep as you want.

The overview stays readable. Every technical claim now has a dedicated place to inspect it.

Explore results

Filter deck, pod, card and package evidence. Change metrics and export the rows.

Open the 99s

Inspect every tested deck, its full 99 and the retained run stats beside each card.

Trace combo paths

Follow directed engines into mana, compatible outlets and deterministic finishes.

Audit the method

Configure a sample comparison, understand the score and expand the technical detail.

A repeatable learning system

Watch the lab
think.

Select a stage to see how a deck idea becomes a defensible recommendation.

Active stage

Define the question

Choose a commander, legal pool, objective, opponent pods and the pilot policy that plays the games.

Commander + 994 pod profiles4 seat positions

DefineRunLearnImprove

Bigger than one deck

Kinnan is the first workload.
The framework is the product.

Commander + legal pool + objective + opponent pods

Recommended 99
with confidence and limitsSee the reusable framework

Find the best 99.Show the evidence.

Start simple.Go as deep as you want.