Tenpai Dragon Deck #768991 — Yu-Gi-Oh! OCG

Deck — Deck Power Evaluation

Final Contextual Deck Power: 30/100 (±8 · Confidence: Low)

• Primary strategy: Toolbox
• Secondary strategies: Combo, Midrange
• Format: ocg

Legality

Main 55 / Extra 15 / Side 0 — status: Illegal. 3 violation(s).

Identity & game plan

• Win condition: Synchro and Link boards from Tenpai Dragon and Sangen monsters, with Black Chaos and Magician of Dark Chaos as ritual pressure (structural read, Inferred); Extra Deck Synchro/Link beaters such as Sangenpai Transcendent Dragion and Super Starslayer TY-PHON - Sky Crisis (Inferred)
• Turn 1 (going first): Open on Tenpai Dragon engine searchers and Sangen Summoning/Kaimen to reach a Tenpai Dragon Synchro or Link, protected by Ash Blossom and Droll & Lock Bird (Inferred)
• Turn 2 (going second): Hand traps (Ash Blossom, D.D. Crow, Artifact Lancea, Nibiru, Kuriboh) interrupt the opponent's opening, then Mulcharmy draw effects refill the hand (Inferred)
• Recovery: Mulcharmy recursion and Tenpai Dragon Fadra revival of Level 4 or lower FIRE Dragons from the GY (text-based, Inferred)
• After siding: Not evaluable: side count is 0, so there is no post-side plan

Why it scores here

The deck is scored on the system, not on an average of its cards. Its Tenpai Dragon core is only 6 of 70 copies by exact name (8.6% purity), spread across Mulcharmy, Sangen, Light and Darkness Ritual, Bystial, Charmer, Hieratic, Dominus, Greed and Kuriboh, so engine coherence is weak. The deck does have real interaction density: 13 hand traps and about 6 negation-text cards give it a credible going-second game, which is why D7 and D8 score in the 60s. Hand quality is poor, with only about a 25% chance of a given 3-copy starter in a 5-card opening hand (Inferred), and Heat Wave and the Mulcharmy empty-field conditions conflict with the rest of the list. Legality is Illegal (three cards over their OCG copy limits, and Bystial Magnamhut at 2 copies against a limit of 1), so the score is capped at 30 and is structural-only. Popularity and archetype usage stats were not used to raise the score.

Dimension scores

How the score was computed

Strategy profile: Toolbox primary, Combo secondary (informational only; the Toolbox profile is used for the arithmetic). Structural ≈ 48.7, Going First ≈ 46, Going Second ≈ 52, Meta = provisional, Tournament Reliability ≈ 35. Modifiers: banlist_exposure (-7); engine_conflicts (-5). Final formula: No reliable metagame: 0.80*48.7 + 0.20*35 = 46.0; modifiers -12 gives 34; capped at 30 because the list is Illegal

Probability & combo summary

• Opening a starter: P(≥1) ≈ 0.25 · 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

• Dense interaction: 13 hand traps and about 6 negation-text cards
• Multiple searchers (14 searcher-text cards) support consistency
• Varied Extra Deck with Synchro and Link finishers at 2900-3000 ATK

Weaknesses

• Illegal list: three cards over copy limits and Bystial Magnamhut at 2 against a limit of 1
• Weak archetype coherence: 8.6% exact Tenpai Dragon purity across 9 sub-archetypes
• No side deck, so no post-side adaptability
• Heat Wave and the Mulcharmy empty-field conditions conflict with the rest of the list

Critical choke points

• Tenpai Dragon Sangen search and Sangen Summoning/Kaimen, all single-copy Limited cards
• Summons blocked by Heat Wave and by the deck's own Effect Monster requirements

Recommended changes

Evidence & confidence

• Verified: Legality: Illegal, three cards over copy limits, Bystial Magnamhut at 2 against a limit of 1; Main 55 and Extra 15 are within the OCG size rules; Side is 0; Exact Tenpai Dragon purity 8.6% (6 of 70 archetype copies); Hypergeometric probabilities from the evidence pack (0.2529 for a 3-copy card in a 5-card hand; 0.907 for the archetype core group); Card text for hand traps, searchers and recursion as quoted in the evidence
• Inferred: Engine consistency and brick-risk estimates from the probabilities; Going-first and going-second read from hand-trap and negation density; Toolbox strategy classification from role counts and composition; Interaction quality from role tags and card text
• Provisional: Meta Power (no dated metagame sample); Matchup and format fit (D13), with no tournament link
• Data gaps: No combos supplied: combo floor, median and ceiling are text-only inference No tournament link: archetype meta-share and per-pilot match record absent No win-rate telemetry: going-first/second, matchup and brick/starter rates are Inferred or Unknown Meta Power is Provisional without a dated metagame sample Side count is 0, so D12 and any post-side plan cannot be evaluated