{"ops":[{"insert":"I started my Magic: The Gathering journey around "},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"2002"},{"insert":", playing with friends, building decks on my own, and organizing small local tournaments and casual meetups within the local community. From the very beginning, Magic was about creativity, experimentation, and social play rather than strict competition.\nAfter many years, I’ve fully transitioned to the "},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Commander format"},{"insert":", which made me rediscover the game almost from scratch. Commander brought back the same sense of freedom, deckbuilding identity, and table interaction that originally got me into Magic — but with a much deeper strategic layer.\nToday, I enjoy refining decks, exploring synergies, and finding the balance between "},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"power, flavor, and fun"},{"insert":".\n\nI've recently created my own Commander deck evaluation framework called "},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"C.E.P.S. — Commander Evaluation & Potential System"},{"insert":". You can find a full C.E.P.S. breakdown in the primers attached to my decks.\nInstead of reducing every Commander deck to a vague “power level 7,” C.E.P.S. evaluates how a deck actually functions across ten categories:\nDeck identity and strategic cohesion"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Mana, tempo and mana curve"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Card advantage and resource engines"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Consistency, redundancy and overall floor"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Interaction and disruption"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Resilience and recovery"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Win conditions and closing power"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Speed and threat window"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Mana base reliability"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Meta fit and flexibility"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"Each deck receives a "},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Current Power score out of 100"},{"insert":", based on its present construction, as well as an "},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Upgrade Ceiling"},{"insert":", showing how strong it could become without abandoning its intended identity.\nC.E.P.S. also includes:\na "},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Turn Profile"},{"insert":", describing the deck’s development from the early game through its main threat window and late game;"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"a "},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Salt Index from 0 to 5"},{"insert":", measuring how oppressive or socially risky its play patterns may be;"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"a "},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"Pilot Difficulty score from 1 to 5"},{"insert":";"},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"an assessment of the deck’s strengths, bottlenecks, flex slots and most valuable upgrade paths."},{"attributes":{"list":"bullet"},"insert":"\n"},{"insert":"The main question behind C.E.P.S. is not simply, “What power level is this deck?” It is:\n"},{"attributes":{"bold":true},"insert":"How quickly does the deck begin executing its plan, how consistently does it do so, how difficult is it to stop, how effectively can it stop other decks, and can it reliably convert an advantage into a win?"},{"insert":"\n"}]}