Deck Frog #736124 — Yu-Gi-Oh! OCG

Deck — Deck Power Evaluation

Final Contextual Deck Power: 52/100 (±8 · Confidence: Medium)

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

Legality

Main 55 / Extra 15 / Side 0 — status: Legal.

Identity & game plan

• Win condition: Grind through recursion, resource regeneration, and layered interaction from Zombie/Aqua engines; Xyz beatdown với Toadally Awesome or Pumpking the Great Ghost King pressure
• Turn 1 (going first): Establish Call of the Haunted continuity với Cấp độ 6 Zombie bosses (Stare of the Snake Hair, Pumpking the King), layer hand traps (Ash/Infinite Impermanence), and build 1 modest board với negation or protection
• Turn 2 (going second): Use hand traps (Ash, Ghost Ogre, Ghost Belle, Droll & Lock Bird) to disrupt opponent setup, then leverage Lightning Storm or Evenly Matched for board clear; convert với grind-focused recursion
• Recovery: Recursion via Call of the Haunted loop, Toadally Awesome Standby draw, and Mộ-based Triệu hồi đặc biệt engines (Plaguespreader, Army of the Haunted, Officiating Reverie) to rebuild after interruption
• After siding: No side deck provided; structural analysis only

Why it scores here

This is 1 Call of the Haunted Zombie-hybrid deck that leans on recursion, hand-trap interactivity, and grind-based resource generation rather than consistent explosive combos. It opens at ~75% archetype-core consistency (hypergeometric P ≈ 0.76 for at least one Zombie engine piece), but lacks the speed and coherence of mainstream Spright or Frog lists. The deck runs only 1 Swap Frog, missing core extra-deck tutors like I:P Masquerena and Toadally Awesome at typical copies, which limits combo ceiling and floor. Strengths are solid recursion (Call of the Haunted, Army of the Haunted, Plaguespreader), layered hand traps (15 total), and resource economy from Pot of Sloth and Ectoplasmic Fortification. Weaknesses include low average board power (no major negation-heavy bosses), 1 55-card main deck (suboptimal), missing key synchro/link slots, and no post-side plan. The score reflects 1 playable but under-optimized midrange shell với real grind potential but limited explosive lines—not population bias, but genuine system coherence gaps.

Dimension scores

How the score was computed

Strategy profile: 70% Midrange + 30% Control. Structural ≈ 52, Going First ≈ 54, Going Second ≈ 52, Meta = provisional, Tournament Reliability ≈ 48. Modifiers: No side deck (-2); 55-card main deck inefficiency (-1); Missing core extra-deck tutors (-2); Grind resilience offset (+1). Final formula: 0.80*Structural + 0.20*TournamentReliability (Meta provisional, no side deck, no tournament link)

Probability & combo summary

• Opening 1 starter: P(≥1) ≈ 0.76 · key two-card combo ≈ 0.42 · full-brick estimate ≈ 0.24 (all Inferred)
• Combo output: best PowerIndex —, median —, board-per-starter —
• Turn order: 0 going-first lines vs 0 going-second lines

Strengths

• Solid hand-trap density (15 copies, 87% going-second draw probability) với Ash/Impermanence/Evenly Matched for disruption
• Recursive grind engine via Call of the Haunted loop, Army of the Haunted, Plaguespreader, and Mộ stacking
• Resource regeneration from Pot of Sloth and Ectoplasmic Fortification draw effects
• Multi-layered interaction (negation, removal, protection) against aggressive opponent setups
• Flexible Zombie/Aqua hybrid shell với decent type coverage in extra deck

Weaknesses

• Only 1 Swap Frog vs. archetype norm 3 copies—severely limits Xyz tutor access and opening consistency
• Missing key Spright/Aqua extra-deck tutors (I:P Masquerena, Toadally Awesome at standard copies, Marincess Coral Anemone)
• 55-card main deck inflates brick rate and dilutes draw quality vs. optimal 40-card range
• No specialized going-first combo ceiling; boards tend toward modest interaction rather than overwhelming pressure
• Lacks 1 coherent post-side game plan (no side deck supplied); T2 strategy remains vulnerable to meta disruption
• High one-of density (14 distinct singletons) reduces consistency and creates decision fatigue

Recommended changes

Evidence & confidence

• Verified: Legality: Legal, 55 main / 15 extra / 0 side, no violations; Card text: Infinite Impermanence negation + column lock, Call of the Haunted recursion, Ash Blossom combo denial; Banlist: Harpie's Feather Duster Limited ×1, Droll & Lock Bird Semi-Limited ×2, all run vớiin limits; Copy counts: 9 three-ofs, 7 two-ofs, 14 one-ofs; 30 distinct main cards
• Observed: Usage stats show Frog archetype typically runs Swap Frog ×3, Toadally Awesome ×2, I:P Masquerena ×1; this deck runs 1, 0, 0 respectively; Archetype core presence: 24% of standard Frog core cards present (6 of 25 listed core cards)
• Inferred: P(≥1 core engine card in opening hand 5) ≈ 0.76 via hypergeometric from 13 core copies in 55-card deck; Brick rate estimate ~24% (no hand containing zero starters and only hand traps or single techs); Combo ceiling power index estimated 52–60 range based on Pumpking King XYZ + Call recursion (no boards provided); Going-first board typically one Cấp độ 6 Zombie + negation or Call setup, not 1 multi-negate wall; Going-second power carried by 15 hand traps and removal suite (Lightning Storm, Evenly Matched); no specialized OTK engine; Tournament reliability lowered by single-choke-point Call setup and high brick variance
• Provisional: Meta Power: Frog archetype meta-share and format-speed fit unknown; no tournament link supplied; archetype was tier-2 historically but current standing unknown; Matchup coverage: vớiout dated metagame sample, assumed format includes Spright, Ishizu Kaiju, Swordsoul, generic combo—deck is not positioned for any specialty; Post-side adaptability: zero side deck provided; structural only
• Data gaps: No combo boards provided—ceiling, median, and floor are text-inferred only; no empirical distribution of board power or interruption count No tournament link—archetype meta-share, per-pilot match record, and format-speed context absent No side deck—post-game-1 adaptation strategy cannot be evaluated; structural analysis only No win-rate telemetry—going-first vs. going-second actualsplit, brick/starter/OTK empirical rates, matchup outcomes unknown No pilotability data—error tolerance estimated from complexity read, not play history No dated metagame sample—Meta Power is Provisional; format-fit and matchup coverage unknown