Ninja Deck #773953 — Yu-Gi-Oh! Master Duel

Deck — Deck Power Evaluation

Final Contextual Deck Power: 57/100 (±6 · Confidence: Medium)

• Primary strategy: Midrange
• Secondary strategies: Toolbox, Stun
• Format: master-duel

Legality

Main 44 / Extra 15 / Side 0 — status: Legal.

Identity & game plan

• Win condition: Ninja searcher and Ninjitsu Art chain into Fusion/Synchro/Link boards (Meizen the Battle Ninja, Yaguramaru, Albion, Draco Berserker, Ecclesia and the Dark Dragon) that present 2500-3000 ATK bodies; Fallen of Albaz / Fallen of the White Dragon fusion route into Extra Deck bosses, with Ninjitsu Art Duplication and Iron Digger as attrition
• Turn 1 (going first): Normal Summon a Ninja (Tobari, Mitsu or Hanzo) to search or recycle a Ninjitsu Art card, set Dancing Leaves or Duplication, and keep one hand trap (Ash Blossom, Ghost Ogre, Impermanence) up for the opponent's first activation
• Turn 2 (going second): Open a hand trap (Ash, Ghost Ogre, Impermanence, Nibiru, Maxx C) to answer the opponent's first Summon or search, then use Hanzo, Mitsu or Green Ninja to rebuild a board and Fusion or Link into a 2500+ ATK body
• Recovery: Ninja searchers (Hanzo, Hidden Village, Iron Digger, Incredible Ecclesia) and Mulcharmy draw effects refill the hand; Ninja Grandmaster Saizo and Ninjitsu Art cards re-set from the Deck
• After siding: None: the deck runs an empty Side Deck (Side Deck size 0), so there is no evidenced post-side plan

Why it scores here

The deck reliably opens a Ninja starter: 24 archetype-core copies give about 0.99 chance of at least one in a 5-card opening hand, and three Ninja monsters (Tobari, Mitsu, Hanzo) plus Green Ninja and Kagero supply repeatable Special Summon and search lines. Its interaction is the strongest part of the system: 9 hand traps and 8 negation texts (Ash Blossom, Ghost Ogre, Infinite Impermanence, Nibiru, Maxx C) give about 0.77 chance of at least one hand trap in a 6-card going-second hand, which is what carries the Medium-confidence case for going second. Conversion is credible on paper, since searchers and Ninjitsu Art cards feed Fusion and Link bosses at 2500 to 3000 ATK, but no recorded boards exist, so ceiling and median are text-only inferences. The score comes from consistency, interaction, and resource recovery on the list as a whole, not from averaging card scores, and not from the archetype being popular: the guide snippet and the usage statistics confirm the list is real and accessible but earn no points by themselves. The deck is held down by an empty Side Deck, a low exact-name archetype purity (33.9%) with Mulcharmy empty-field draw effects conflicting with Ninja field play, and three Limited cards run at full legal count.

Dimension scores

How the score was computed

Strategy profile: Midrange. Structural ≈ 62.9, Going First ≈ 64, Going Second ≈ 69, Meta = provisional, Tournament Reliability ≈ 56. Modifiers: Banlist exposure (-1); No side deck (-3); Engine conflict (-2); Hand-trap density (2). Final formula: 0.80*Structural + 0.20*TournamentReliability (Meta provisional) + ContextModifiers(-4) = 0.80*62.9 + 0.20*56 - 4 = 57.5, rounded to 57

Probability & combo summary

• Opening a starter: P(≥1) ≈ 0.99 · key two-card combo ≈ — · full-brick estimate ≈ 0.01 (all Inferred)
• Combo output: best PowerIndex —, median —, board-per-starter —
• Turn order: 0 going-first lines vs 0 going-second lines

Strengths

• Starter density: 24 archetype-core copies give near-certain opening access (Inferred from hypergeometric)
• Interaction breadth: 9 hand traps and 8 negation-text cards cover both turns (Verified card text, Inferred strength)
• Resource recovery: 7 searcher-text cards plus Mulcharmy and Maxx C draw effects (Verified text, Inferred grind)
• Extra Deck bosses at 2500-3000 ATK give a real closing route (Verified stats)

Weaknesses

• No side deck: no post-side plan and no answer to a metagame shift (Verified legality)
• No recorded boards, so combo ceiling and median are unmeasured (Verified absence)
• Low exact-name archetype purity (33.9%) with Mulcharmy empty-field conflicting with Ninja field play (Verified composition, Inferred conflict)
• Three Limited cards at full copies and Semi-Limited Fallen & Virtuous at 2 leave no room for re-runs (Verified banlist)

Critical choke points

• Hanzo or the Ninjitsu Art searchers as the only route to a Fusion boss; losing the Ninja monster early removes the card-advantage path (Inferred)
• Single-copy Extra Deck bosses (Draco Berserker, Ecclesia and the Dark Dragon, Albion) mean one negation or banish stalls the closing route (Inferred)

Recommended changes

Evidence & confidence

• Verified: Legal: 44 main cards within 40-60, 15 Extra within 0-15, copy limits met for Limited and Semi-Limited cards (legality block); Hand traps 9, negation text 8, searcher text 7, removal text 8 (role_hint counts); Archetype core 24 copies; exact-name purity 33.9% (composition); No combos recorded and no tournament link (combo data, tournament data)
• Observed: Usage statistics show 100% inclusion for the core Ninja cards (usage statistics)
• Inferred: Starter consistency from hypergeometric draws (0.986 core in hand5; 0.77 hand trap in hand6); Hand-trap and negation coverage read from card text; Midrange profile and secondary Toolbox/Stun reads; Mulcharmy empty-field conflict with Ninja field play
• Provisional: Meta Power (null) and D13 matchup/format fit (no dated metagame sample)
• Data gaps: no combos supplied, so combo floor, median and ceiling are text-only inference no tournament link, so archetype meta-share and match record are absent no win-rate telemetry (going-first/second, matchup, brick/starter rates) — those signals are Inferred or Unknown Meta Power is Provisional unless a dated metagame sample is supplied usage statistics marks Millennium-Eyes Restrict, Yaguramaru, Meizen, Mirrorjade, Ultimate Great Insect, Draco Berserker, Ecclesia and the Dark Dragon, Super Starslayer, Ninja Grandmaster Saizo, Cross-Sheep and Albion as in this deck=false, but the cards list has them in zone extra; the Extra-deck flags look wrong and core-card presence (56) is likely understated; the cards list was treated as authoritative deck.title is null, so no deck name is available