Deck Dominus #730609 — Yu-Gi-Oh! TCG

Deck — Deck Power Evaluation

Final Contextual Deck Power: 32/100 (±8 · Confidence: Low)

• Primary strategy: Stun
• Secondary strategies: Trap-focused Control, Floodgate
• Format: tcg

Legality

Main 65 / Extra 5 / Side 0 — status: Legal với warning. 1 violation(s).

Identity & game plan

• Win condition: Overwhelming opponents với trap-based disruption and lock effects; Beatdown via high-ATK Labrynth bosses after locking down the board
• Turn 1 (going first): Set Normal Traps với Labrynth monsters, establish trap lock via Lovely/Lady Labrynth, disrupt resources
• Turn 2 (going second): Limited; relies on hand traps (missing) and trap-triggered removal to break boards before mounting offense
• Recovery: Recycle traps from Mộ via Trap Trick and boss-monster effects; draw via Arianna and Full Force Virus when live
• After siding: Severely limited—no side deck present; reliant on main-deck flexibility against meta threats

Why it scores here

This deck runs 65 cards với no side deck and only 8.3% of Dominus archetype core cards, making it structurally misaligned với its own strategy. The list heavily gates on unresolved cards (7 unresolved passcodes) and lacks critical hand traps entirely, leaving it extremely vulnerable going second. While it includes trap-recycling engines (Trap Trick, Lovely Labrynth, Absolute King Back Jack) and some removal coverage, the oversized main deck severely reduces consistency of opening playable hands. The hypergeometric draw odds show only ~22% chance of landing 1 key Labrynth starter or trap engine piece in opening 5. Without combo evidence, board-per-starter data, or matched-down tournament context, the deck scores as 1 trap-stun shell với conceptual coherence but poor execution and abandonment of critical interaction pieces like hand traps.

Dimension scores

How the score was computed

Strategy profile: Stun. Structural ≈ 28, Going First ≈ 35, Going Second ≈ 16, Meta = provisional. Modifiers: Trap-recycling engine coherence (6); Oversized main deck penalty (-4); No side deck penalty (-2). Final formula: 0.80*Structural(28) + 0.20*TournamentReliability(22) = 0.80*28 + 0.20*22 ≈ 26.4 → rounded to 32 với +6 modifier for trap-lock coherence

Probability & combo summary

• Opening 1 starter: P(≥1) ≈ 0.22 · key two-card combo ≈ 0.14 · full-brick estimate ≈ 0.35 (all Inferred)
• Combo output: best PowerIndex —, median —, board-per-starter —
• Turn order: 0 going-first lines vs 0 going-second lines

Strengths

• Functional trap-recycling engine với Trap Trick, Lovely Labrynth, and Absolute King Back Jack creates grind potential
• Labrynth boss monsters (Lady/Lovely/Arias) provide legitimate lock effects and removal when live
• Trap coverage spans removal (23 removal-role cards), some negation (Solemn Accusation 2x), and setup (Big Welcome 3x)
• Going-first lock can be oppressive if assembled (trap lock + boss monster protection)

Weaknesses

• Critically weak going-second: zero hand traps, no Called by the Grave, no Ash Blossom/Droll Lock
• 65-card main deck severely reduces consistency; ~35% full-brick rate estimate vs. optimized 40-card benchmark
• Only 8.3% Dominus exact-name purity; deck is 1 Labrynth + removal shell, not 1 true Dominus engine
• 7 unresolved passcodes introduce deck-list uncertainty and may hide crucial interactions or bricks
• No side deck in best-of-3 format eliminates all post-side adaptation; critical competitive liability
• Starter diversity low (~22% P of opening engine piece); no redundant engine threads or backup paths
• Extra Deck severely underutilized (5 cards in 65-card main); Synchro/Link/Xyz access is unreliable

Critical choke points

• Trap activation is 1 single choke point: deck can only activate 1 trap per Trap Trick resolution; if disrupted early, grind plan collapses
• No going-second interaction: opponents với established boards can prevent trap setup entirely
• Oversized deck compounds draw whiffs: each brick hand in 1 65-card list is more likely than in 40–50 card lists
• Labrynth Cooclock (1x) is the only fast searcher; 3x Labrynth Chandraglier and 3x Stovie Torbie help but are all limited copies
• Heavy reliance on banish zones (Trap Trick banish, Dominus Spark banish, transaction rollback) makes Different Dimension Ground 1 hard counter

Recommended changes

Evidence & confidence

• Verified: Deck size 65 main, 5 extra, 0 side (Legal với warning status); 7 unresolved passcodes in main deck (CardIDList entries vớiout resolution); No side deck present (0/15); Copy histogram: 13 three-ofs, 8 two-ofs, 10 one-ofs; Legality status: Legal với warning (size violation); All resolved cards are Unlimited and legal in TCG format
• Observed: 8.3% Dominus exact-name purity (3 copies / 36 total archetype cards); Labrynth engine present at 18 copies (27.7% of main); Trap coverage at 22 cards (33.8% of main); Usage statistics: only Dominus Spark (57.7% inclusion) from 12 core cards present
• Inferred: P(≥1 Labrynth starter in opening hand5) ≈ 22% from hypergeometric draw (3-card bootstrap probability); Full-brick rate estimate ≈ 35% due to oversized deck, unresolved cards, and conflicting Triệu hồi bình thườngs; Combo floor and median output unknown; text-only estimate of 2–3 layer lock + 1–2 removal per resolved T1; Going-second power ≈ 16/100 due to zero hand traps and reliance on trap-triggered removal; Starter diversity low; trap-recycling loop is main line; no independent backup engines; Piloting complexity moderate–high (trap sequencing, decision points on Normal Trap activation timing)
• Provisional: Meta Power = null (no dated metagame sample supplied; archetype share and tournament context unavailable); Matchup coverage unknown vớiout metagame telemetry; Tournament reliability estimate ≈ 22 based on going-first lock + missing going-second tools
• Data gaps: 7 unresolved passcodes in CardIDList—cannot confirm card text or role; introduces deck-list uncertainty; No combos supplied (dữ liệu combo empty)—all combo floor/median/ceiling claims are text-only inferences; No tournament link—archetype meta-share, per-pilot match record, and win-rate telemetry absent; No guides attached—strategic intent and archetype-level context unavailable; No going-first/second performance data—split win-rate and board efficiency stats unknown; No hand-trap or going-second interaction data—must infer from card list alone; No side deck—cannot assess post-side plan; best-of-3 adaptability is null; No metagame sample dated—Meta Power remains Provisional; format fit unverifiable