Dominus Deck #772419 — Yu-Gi-Oh! OCG

Deck — Deck Power Evaluation

Final Contextual Deck Power: 25/100 (±10 · Confidence: Low)

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

Legality

Main 57 / Extra 15 / Side 0 — status under the rules at evaluation time: Illegal. 2 violation(s).

Identity & game plan

• Win condition: Link Monster board pressure from Maliss, Dominus and Bystial link and Extra Deck threats (Link ATK 2300 to 2500 at the top end); Bystial and Mulcharmy card advantage and grind through Link Monsters and hand-trap interaction
• Turn 1 (going first): Open on a searcher or Maliss starter, then build a Link board with Maliss and Cyberse support while holding hand traps for the first opposing summon
• Turn 2 (going second): Use hand traps (Ash Blossom, Ghost Ogre, Droll and Lock Bird, Nibiru) to break the opposing starter, then Link Summon through the remaining board
• Recovery: Recover from the GY through Maliss recursion and the Link Monsters' GY effects; recovery depends on the Archetype Core Group, which is only 31% to be opened in a 5-card hand
• After siding: Not evaluable: the deck runs no Side Deck, so no post-side plan exists

Why it scores here

The deck is illegal as built: it runs three copies each of Ash Blossom and Dominus Impulse against an OCG limit of two, so its score is capped and the figures below are theoretical and structural only. Structurally it reliably gets its interaction online: about 10 hand traps and roughly 29 removal-text cards give strong interaction density, and the going-second hand-trap odds (about 70% for at least one) support a real second-player plan. Its engine is less coherent: the archetype-purity check finds only 8.3% exact-name Dominus, with the 57-card Main Deck spread across Maliss, Mulcharmy, @Ignister, Bystial, Forbidden and Code Talker. The 4-copy archetype core is opened in about 31% of 5-card hands, so starter access is inconsistent. No combo boards, tournament results or win-rate data exist, so floor, median and ceiling are text-only inference and popularity earned no points. The score was built from the deck as a system, not by averaging card scores.

Dimension scores

How the score was computed

Strategy profile: Midrange. Structural ≈ 50, Going First ≈ 45, Going Second ≈ 55, Meta = provisional, Tournament Reliability ≈ 30. Modifiers: banlist exposure (-8); engine conflicts (-4). Final formula: Normal formula: 0.80*Structural(50) + 0.20*TournamentReliability(30) + Modifiers(-12) = 34; Illegal deck capped to 25 (theoretical/structural-only). Meta Power provisional.

Probability & combo summary

• Opening a starter: P(≥1) ≈ — · 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: about 10 hand traps, 10 negation-text cards and 29 removal-text cards
• Strong going-second hand-trap coverage (about 70% at least one in a 6-card hand)
• Link-heavy Extra Deck of 15 with varied materials and ATK 2300 to 2500 closers

Weaknesses

• Illegal as built: Ash Blossom and Dominus Impulse each run 3 copies against a limit of 2
• Low engine coherence: 8.3% exact archetype purity across six sub-archetypes
• No Side Deck, so no post-side adaptability
• Several Limited cards, with copy-count risk for each

Critical choke points

• Archetype core is opened in a 5-card hand only about 31% of the time
• Limited Terraforming and Gold Sarcophagus provide the only card-advantage or search lines beyond the searcher text, so they are single points of failure

Recommended changes

Evidence & confidence

• Verified: Illegal status: Ash Blossom and Dominus Impulse exceed the OCG copy limit of 2 (3 copies each); Main 57, Extra 15, Side 0; size rules satisfied; Banlist statuses: 6 Limited and 3 Semi-Limited cards in the deck; Exact archetype purity 8.3% (6 of 72 archetype-named copies); Link Monster ATK values from card data
• Inferred: Archetype core opens in about 31% of 5-card hands (hypergeometric); At least one searcher in about 71% of 5-card hands (hypergeometric); About 70% at least one hand trap in a 6-card going-second hand; Interaction density is high from text (about 29 removal, 10 negation, 10 hand traps); Engine coherence is weak given the spread across six sub-archetypes
• Provisional: Meta power and format fit: no dated metagame sample or 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 record absent No win-rate telemetry exists in YGOVN (going-first/second, matchup, brick and starter rates), so those signals are Inferred or Unknown Meta Power is Provisional unless a dated metagame sample is supplied No Side Deck, so post-side performance cannot be assessed Deck title is null, so the deck is identified by its archetype only