Trap
NormalOjama Duo
Archetype:
Ojama
View:
3893
Special Summon 2 "Ojama Tokens" (Beast/LIGHT/Level 2/ATK 0/DEF 1000) to your opponent's field in Defense Position. These Tokens cannot be Tributed for a Tribute Summon, and each time 1 is destroyed, its controller takes 300 damage. During either player's turn, except the turn this card was sent to the GY: You can banish this card from your GY; Special Summon 2 "Ojama" monsters with different names from your Deck.
Ojama Duo — Power Evaluation
Final Score: 62 ± 5 · Confidence: Medium
- Intrinsic: 61 · Deck: 63 · Meta: provisional
- Primary role: Floodgate/Control · Secondary: Searcher/Tutor
Why it scores here
Ojama Duo is a field-locking trap that excels in control strategies and Ojama mirrors by clogging opponent Monster Zones and recurring from GY to search Ojama monsters. The card's strength lies in splashability across 52 archetypes with minimal deck cost and multi-turn resilience via recurrence, but its power is constrained by trap-card vulnerabilities (negation exposure), lack of forward board building, and negligible damage output. The token-locking strategy converts disruption into field denial rather than winning advantage.
Axis scores
| Axis | Score | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Accessibility | 60 | Normal Trap requiring draw or searchers; widely included in 230 decks across 52 archetypes with 1.98 avg copies suggests moderate accessibility despite no inherent searchability. (Observed) |
| Combo & Conversion | 35 | Summons tokens to opponent's field and can recur from GY to search Ojama monsters; no combo evidence supplied; text-only inference indicates token generation supports field disruption, not board building. (Inferred) |
| Resource Economy | 40 | 1-card token generation costs 1 slot for field disruption; GY recurrence searches 2 Ojama monsters (delayed advantage); negative/neutral immediate draw, positive delayed refuel. (Inferred) |
| Effect & Interaction | 65 | Token-locking provides hard zone denial in Ojama mirrors and field-lock strategies; soft interaction in non-Ojama homes; 300 damage per token is negligible. (Verified) |
| Material Utility | 5 | Trap card cannot serve as Synchro/Xyz/Link/Fusion material; zero material utility. (Verified) |
| Resilience & Flexibility | 70 | GY recurrence enables multi-turn field locks; tokens persist across turns; trap negation is the primary vulnerability, but recurring from GY provides resilience. (Inferred) |
| Deck-Building Efficiency | 80 | Splashable across 52 archetypes with no deck restrictions; Ojama decks run 2-3 copies; widely used as tech suggests near free-roll cost. (Observed) |
Calculation
Weight profile: 0.7 Floodgate/Control + 0.3 Searcher/Tutor. Intrinsic ≈ 61, Deck ≈ 63, Meta = provisional. Modifiers: none. Final formula: 0.40*Intrinsic + 0.60*Deck
Strengths
- Splashable across 52 archetypes with minimal deck-building cost and no garnet/brick risk
- GY recurrence provides multi-turn field-lock value and searchable Ojama monster synergy
- Hard zone denial in Ojama mirrors and control matchups; tokens persist across turns
- Can be run at 2-3 copies safely (trap card, not monster)
Weaknesses
- Trap card: vulnerable to negation (Solemn Strike, Ash Blossom, Solemn Judgment)
- Token generation is field disruption (opponent-facing), not forward board building
- 300 damage per token is negligible; not a realistic damage/win condition
- No combo evidence supplied; impact on combo decks and combo conversion is unclear
- In non-Ojama homes (52 archetypes), inclusion drops significantly (Armed Dragon 4.8%, ABC 4.8%)
Counters / choke points
- Solemn Strike, Solemn Judgment (negate trap activation before tokens resolve)
- Ash Blossom & Joyous Spring (negate GY effect search)
- Cards that force token destruction on opponents' terms or bypass zone locks
- Decks that generate advantage despite locked Monster Zones (Xyz, Synchro-heavy, hand-based plays)
Best use
Floodgate/Control (field-lock via zone denial) + Searcher/Tutor (GY recurrence). Decks: Ojama (primary home, 41.3% of sample), Armed Dragon, ABC, Unchained, Melffy (secondary homes).
Evidence & gaps
- Verified: Card text complete: Special Summons 2 Ojama Tokens (Beast/LIGHT/Level 2/ATK 0/DEF 1000) to opponent's field in Defense Position; tokens cannot be Tributed; token destruction deals 300 damage; GY effect: banish from GY to Special Summon 2 Ojama monsters with different names from Deck (active next turn onwards); Normal Trap from Ojama archetype; included in 230 decks; Distribution: 1 copy (30%), 2 copies (42%), 3 copies (28%); avg 1.98; Appears in 52 distinct archetypes (far above average splashability); Top 5 partners are all Ojama monsters (Yellow, Green, Black, Blue, Red); Ojamagic and Ojama Country also 60%+ co-deck rates; Assumed unlimited copies (no banlist token supplied)
- Observed: Ojama archetype decks account for 41.3% of sample (3 distinct Ojama archetype IDs: 606, 283, 435); Appears across Control (48.7%), Combo (26.5%), and Aggro (24.3%) gameplay types; Appears in Armed Dragon (4.8%), ABC (2.6%+2.2%), Greed (2.6%), Unchained (2.6%), Melffy (2.2%) as secondary tech; Partner synergy strongly Ojama-centric: Ojama Emperor (51.3%), Ojama Knight (50.4%), Ojama King (48.3%), Ojama Pajama (48.3%)
- Inferred: GY recurrence (banish, Special Summon 2 different-name Ojama monsters) is the card's primary source of delayed card advantage and multi-turn value; Token-locking (2 tokens occupy Monster Zones, block Tribute Summons) functions as field disruption via zone denial, not board advantage for controller; 300 damage per destroyed token is negligible scaling (2 tokens = 600 max damage); field lock is the primary effect, not damage; High inclusion rate across 52 archetypes and 1.98 avg copies indicate low deck-building cost and minimal opportunity cost; Trap-card status limits accessibility (not searchable by most generic searchers; vulnerable to trap negation) despite high deck adoption
- Data gaps: No combos supplied (0 appearances, 0 starters/searched/material/payoff entries); combo conversion impact is text-only inference No guides supplied (0 guides); no human context on role prioritization or usage patterns No banlist token; assumed unlimited (3 copies) across TCG/OCG/MasterDuel; actual restrictions not verified No usage statistics (StatisticsCard); archetype inclusion percentages inferred from 230-deck sample only; broader historical trends unknown