Enneacraft Deck #771602 — Yu-Gi-Oh! OCG

Deck — Deck Power Evaluation

Final Contextual Deck Power: 58/100 (±8 · Confidence: Medium)

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

Legality

Main 54 / Extra 0 / Side 0 — status: Legal.

Identity & game plan

• Win condition: Pendulum Summon the 3000-ATK Enneacraft Pendulum monsters (Atori, Asta, Atil, Aiza, Archa; 12 copies total) and convert the board with their destroy effects and attacks; Enneapolis E.C. Counter damage (900 per counter removed at End Phase) as chip damage and a finisher
• Turn 1 (going first): Set up two Pendulum Zones with Enneacraft scales via the Pendulum Flip searchers, then Pendulum Summon a 3000-ATK boss and use its destroy effect against the opponent's monsters
• Turn 2 (going second): Use Enneacraft Reset or Enneapolis to negate and disrupt the opponent's first board, then rebuild with Pendulum Summons from the hand and Deck
• Recovery: Enneacraft Release and Enneacraft Reverth recur archetype cards from the Graveyard, and Enneacraft Reset can be activated from the Graveyard to negate
• After siding: Not available: the deck runs no Side Deck (side_count 0), so there is no post-side plan

Why it scores here

The deck reliably opens into its engine: all 34 archetype-core copies are present, and the hypergeometric estimate of at least one core card in a 5-card opening hand is about 0.995 (Inferred). The 17 searcher-text cards and 26 Pendulum monsters give it several ways to start a Pendulum sequence, but no combo boards were supplied, so the floor and median output are scored from text only. Its closing power comes from the twelve 3000-ATK Enneacraft Pendulum monsters with destroy effects, and its interaction comes from 34 removal-text cards, 13 negation-text cards and Solemn Judgment. The score is held back by the absence of a Side Deck, the Dimensional Fissure floodgate conflicting with the deck's own Graveyard recursion, and the lack of any tournament or matchup evidence. Archetype popularity did not earn points, and card scores were not averaged into the deck score.

Dimension scores

How the score was computed

Strategy profile: 100% Combo profile (Midrange noted as the secondary strategy; the Combo profile is used as the primary profile). Structural ≈ 63.6, Going First ≈ 62, Going Second ≈ 60, Meta = provisional, Tournament Reliability ≈ 54. Modifiers: No Side Deck (-2); Engine conflict: Dimensional Fissure (-2). Final formula: 0.80*Structural + 0.20*TournamentReliability + ContextModifiers (Meta provisional); 0.80*63.6 + 0.20*54 = 61.7, then -4 modifiers = 57.7, rounded to 58

Probability & combo summary

• Opening a starter: P(≥1) ≈ 0.26 · key two-card combo ≈ — · full-brick estimate ≈ 0 (all Inferred)
• Combo output: best PowerIndex —, median —, board-per-starter —
• Turn order: 0 going-first lines vs 0 going-second lines

Strengths

• Core archetype presence is complete (13/13 usage core cards) with a 0.995 core-in-hand estimate
• Twelve 3000-ATK Pendulum monsters with destroy effects give a strong closing and endboard
• Broad interaction (34 removal-text and 13 negation-text cards) plus Solemn Judgment
• Recovery routes via Graveyard recursion and 17 searchers

Weaknesses

• No Side Deck, so no post-side adaptability
• Dimensional Fissure floodgate conflicts with the deck's own Graveyard recursion
• No combo data, tournament data or guides, so floor and median output are unmeasured
• 18 off-archetype copies (66.7% exact-name purity) dilute engine coherence

Critical choke points

• Opening with two Pendulum-capable Enneacraft cards is needed to start the engine; a hand without a searcher or a Pendulum monster is dead (Inferred)
• Dimensional Fissure can shut off the Graveyard recursion that the deck relies on for recovery (Inferred from text)

Recommended changes

Evidence & confidence

• Verified: Legal OCG list: 54 main, 0 extra, 0 side, Solemn Judgment at 1 copy (Limited); Core presence 13/13 and archetype purity 66.7%; Twelve 3000-ATK Pendulum monsters in the main deck
• Inferred: P(≥1 core card in hand5) ≈ 0.995 and P(≥1 searcher in hand5) ≈ 0.26 from hypergeometric estimates; Interaction density from removal and negation text; Going-first and going-second plans from card text
• Provisional: Meta Power (null, no dated metagame sample); Matchup and format fit (D13); Median output (D4)
• 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 for going-first, going-second, matchup or brick rates Meta Power is provisional without a dated metagame sample Pendulum scale values are reported as 0 in the evidence export, so scale-based scoring cannot be verified