Aggro Deck #766028 — Yu-Gi-Oh! Rush Duel Sevens

Created by: YGO Mod (20517634)

Created On: 10/15/2026

Power to Weave Hope
 
 


Official AI Deck Power Analysis
TempoConfidence: Low
43± 12/ 100
Power Score
Structural 46
Reliability 45
Going First 44
Going Second 42

Deck — Deck Power Evaluation

Final Contextual Deck Power: 43/100 (±12 · Confidence: Low)

Overall score Value
Structural Deck Power 46.4
Going First 44
Going Second 42
Meta Power provisional
Tournament Reliability 45
  • Primary strategy: Tempo
  • Secondary strategies: Midrange
  • Format: rush-duel-sevens

Legality

Main 38 / Extra 0 / Side 0 — status: Legal with warning.

Identity & game plan

  • Win condition: Early aggressive board presence converting high-ATK attackers into direct damage (archetype label and guide text; no card names resolved); Unknown; no resolved card text to identify a second plan
  • Turn 1 (going first): Open with the 3-copy core (each ~35% to appear in a 5-card hand) and begin attacking the turn after a live starter; cannot be confirmed without card text
  • Turn 2 (going second): Six-card hand gives each 3-copy core card ~41% odds to appear; pressure through the first turn is the intended route (Inferred)
  • Recovery: Unknown; no recursion, search or resource text was resolved
  • After siding: No side deck is registered, so there is no post-side plan

Why it scores here

The deck is scored as a 38-card Main Deck system with 16 distinct passcodes, nine of them running three copies and all sixteen present in the archetype core list. Hypergeometric odds of at least one copy of a 3-copy card in a 5-card opening hand are about 35% and about 41% in a 6-card hand, so the opening is consistent in aggregate but any single starter is far from guaranteed. No card names, card text, or recorded boards resolved, so the ceiling and median scores (D3, D4) are text-free estimates and are kept near the middle of the scale. Interaction, resilience and side-deck scores are low because no hand traps, floodgates, or side cards were identified. Popularity and the guide's Tier 1 claim were not used to raise the score, and card scores were not averaged into the deck score.

Dimension scores

# Dimension Score Evidence
D1 Engine Accessibility & Consistency 55 P(>=1 3-copy card in 5-card hand) ≈ 0.35, P(>=1 in 6-card hand) ≈ 0.41; 16 of 16 core cards present; the 2-copy and 1-copy cards are not individually verifiable (Inferred)
D2 Opening-Hand Quality & Brick Management 50 Copy histogram 9×3, 4×2, 3×1; no bricks identified because card text is unresolved, so the score stays neutral (Inferred)
D3 Combo Conversion & Ceiling 40 No recorded boards and no resolved card text, so no combo ceiling can be measured (Provisional)
D4 Combo Floor & Median Output 40 combos_evidence is empty ('no parseable boards'); median output cannot be measured (Provisional)
D5 Interruption Resilience & Route Redundancy 45 16 distinct cards offer some redundancy, but no recursion or second-line evidence was resolved (Inferred)
D6 Resource Economy, Recovery & Grind 45 No resource, float or search text was resolved; aggro resource spend is assumed and not measured (Inferred)
D7 End-Board & Interaction Quality 35 role_tag_counts shows 0 hand traps, 0 floodgates and 0 negation or removal hints, but this reflects the unresolved list rather than confirmed absence (Inferred)
D8 Going-Second & Board-Breaking Power 45 No going-second split is available and no board-breaker text was resolved (Provisional)
D9 Offensive Pressure & Closing Power 55 Guide text describes high-ATK attackers and the archetype label is Aggro, but no ATK values were resolved (Observed in guide text; Inferred)
D10 Main Deck Efficiency & Flexibility 60 38 Main Deck cards is within the 30–60 rule with 16 distinct cards (average ~2.4 copies); compactness is reasonable but cannot be checked by name (Inferred)
D11 Extra Deck Efficiency & Coverage 40 Zero Extra Deck cards are registered; the rubric has no evidence for an Extra Deck engine, so the score is low-neutral (Inferred)
D12 Side Deck Adaptability 35 Zero side cards are registered, so there is no post-side adaptability (Verified from export)
D13 Matchup Coverage & Format Fit 50 No tournament context and no dated metagame sample; the guide's 'Tier 1' remark is not a sample (Provisional)
D14 Pilotability & Error Tolerance 60 Aggro play with a small number of decision points is typical, but the combo steps are unknown (Inferred)

How the score was computed

Strategy profile: Balanced (default; no resolved card text to justify a strategy profile). Structural ≈ 46.4, Going First ≈ 44, Going Second ≈ 42, Meta = provisional, Tournament Reliability ≈ 45. Modifiers: unresolved card identity (-3). Final formula: 0.80*Structural + 0.20*TournamentReliability + ContextModifiers (Meta provisional; 0.80*46.4 + 0.20*45 - 3 = 43.1)

Probability & combo summary

  • Opening a starter: P(≥1) ≈ 0.35 · key two-card combo ≈ — · full-brick estimate ≈ — (all Inferred)
  • Combo output: best PowerIndex —, median —, board-per-starter —
  • Turn order: 0 going-first lines vs 0 going-second lines

Strengths

  • Consistent core: all 16 distinct cards are archetype-standard (100% inclusion)
  • Compact 38-card Main Deck within the 30–60 rule with no size warning
  • Copy counts concentrate on 3-copy cards that raise the chance of drawing the core

Weaknesses

  • No resolved card names or text, so the plan and interaction suite cannot be checked
  • No Extra Deck and no side deck, giving no late-game or post-side flexibility
  • Each 3-copy card has only ~35% chance to appear in an opening hand, so the starter is not reliable on the first turn

Critical choke points

  • Reliance on a single live starter in the opening hand; if no starter appears, there is no evidenced recovery route
  • Unresolved passcodes mean the starter set itself is unidentified
Priority Remove Add Reason
1 None (cannot judge individual cards without names) Resolve the 16 passcodes in the deck export (name, type, text, ATK) Without names the evaluation cannot assess the starter or interaction suite; this is the main gap.
2 None Add a 1–2 card side deck, or confirm the format's side-deck rules A zero-side deck leaves the post-side score at its floor.

Evidence & confidence

  • Verified: Main Deck is 38 cards, within the rush-duel-sevens 30–60 size rule; 16 distinct passcodes with copy histogram 9×3, 4×2, 3×1; Zero Extra Deck and zero side cards are registered; Hypergeometric draw odds 0.3532 (3-copy, 5-card hand) and 0.4120 (3-copy, 6-card hand)
  • Observed: All 16 cards show 100% archetype-core inclusion in usage_statistics
  • Inferred: Opening-hand consistency is moderate on the starter set; Aggro pressure is the intended plan, based on the Aggro label and guide text; Interaction and resilience are low because no hand traps or floodgates were identified
  • Provisional: Meta and matchup fit: no dated metagame sample and no tournament link; Going-first and going-second splits: no win-rate telemetry; Guide claim that the archetype is a Tier 1 candidate
  • Data gaps: All 16 passcodes resolved to no name, type or text, so the starter, interaction and banlist checks are based on the count-only export No combos supplied; combo floor, median and ceiling are not measurable No tournament link; archetype meta-share and match record absent No win-rate telemetry (going-first, going-second, brick, starter or matchup rates) Meta Power is Provisional without a dated metagame sample Deck title is null, so no name-based identification is possible

More Rush Duel Sevens Info

Aggro

Aggro Breakdown

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 
https://metaduelist.com/
Top