Manage deck versions
What you’ll accomplish
Deck versioning helps you understand whether a change actually improved a list. By the end of this workflow you can save versions intentionally, compare them with analysis (not just card diff), and treat your testing history as a record you can learn from instead of a write-only stream.
Before you start
- A target deck with at least one analysis run — see Build decks and Analyze decks and scores.
- A change you want to try (a ratio shift, a tech swap, a side deck rebuild, a post-banlist update).
Steps
-
Snapshot before you tinker
The moment you decide to test a change, save the current list as a version. Naming matters —
v2 more starterstells future-you what you were testing;v2 testdoesn’t.Good version names explain intent:
v1 importv2 more startersv3 locals side planv4 post-banlistv5 budget cut, sub Pot of Greed
Small typo fixes or card-name corrections don’t need a new version — they’re not decisions, they’re hygiene.
Screenshot pending /img/docs/versioning/version-history-list.pngFuture-you reading this in three months will thank present-you for the labels. -
Run Quick Analysis on both versions
After making the change in a new version, run Quick Analysis on both versions. The point is the comparison — a single analysis tells you the current state but not whether the change helped.
Screenshot pending /img/docs/versioning/version-quick-analysis-A.pngAlways analyze both versions before drawing a conclusion. One analysis is a number; two analyses are a delta. -
Compare side-by-side
Open the Compare view with both versions selected. The page shows:
- Strategic takeaways at the top — “starter density up”, “answer density down”, “brick risk increased”
- Coverage delta — the 5-dimension change visualized
- Simulation delta — observed-rate changes
- Raw card diff — at the bottom
Read top to bottom. The takeaways are the conclusion; the raw diff is just the evidence.
Screenshot pending /img/docs/versioning/version-compare-view.pngStrategic takeaways first. The raw card diff is for confirming the read, not forming it. -
Keep or revert
The change improved structure → archive the old version with a note explaining why, promote the new one to active.
The change hurt → revert. Keep the failed version around with a note about WHY it failed; future-you may have the same idea and need the receipt.
The result is ambiguous (small numerical change, simulation noisy) → leave both, test in play, decide afterwards.
Screenshot pending /img/docs/versioning/version-quick-analysis-B.pngNumerical noise: a 2% simulation rate change inside a 10K-hand sample is often signal you can't lean on.
What success looks like
The deck’s version history reads as a coherent story — each version’s name explains why it exists, and any reverted versions have a note saying what didn’t work and why. Six months from now you can answer “why did I take this card out?” without re-deriving the reasoning from scratch.
Going deeper
Versioning interacts with readiness — a new version may have different shortage shape than the old one. The acquisition plan respects whichever version is currently active. Coverage and simulation deltas use the same model documented in Scoring model.
For the recommended cadence (when to version, when to just edit), see Recommended workflow.
For the field-by-field reference of the versioning surface — timeline, intent labels, compare picker — see Deck versions (reference).