This article is pretty long overdue and may be a bit dated when it comes to assessing just how inane some of the effects and engines are in the modern state of the game, but in the event that they aren't so hilariously unbalanced to the point where decks are homogenous piles of the same cards, then this piece will at least retain some merit. If not, then let it serve as a snapshot in surveying and reflecting on one of the fundamental aspects of deckbuilding with a more measured outlook for this alternative format's previous eras.
Full disclosure: Since I can't upload articles directly to this site, this is going up as a deck profile with the article attached. Anyone who has the capability of uploading articles for Trinity feel free to canabalize this piece and reupload at your leisure. I will unlist this in the event that transpires. Just remember to give credit. ^^
Trinity Format's take on being a psuedo-Highlander format invites a lot of creativity when it comes to deckbuilding concepts that can be borrowed from other highlander formats but explored much more heavily in its own right. For example: being able to run additional copies of the same impactful card or intentionally increasing the deck size not because it's optimal but because it's required for the deck's composition to be legal are just some of the ways to recognize a Trinity deck from its other Highlander counterparts.
Looking at these capabilities, one might think it's best to simply jam in as many pointed cards and duplicates as they see fit until the deck is completely bloated and you reach the 60 card maximum for decks in the format; however, this isn't always best (and in-fact, shouldn't necessarily be the go-to option, even though it often winds up topping in the end--- though I do suspect that such a reality largely is the consequence of the game having an abundence of powerful silver bullets and low-effort engines that can steal games rather it being attributed to statistical foresight.
We'll go over each of the categories of compositions to paint a better picture of the probability and benefits associated with each size. I'll do my best to make things digestible and not bore you with numbers if you aren't a super numbers-oriented individual. For a quick-reference to everything ahead of time, here's a table that's provided in the official server that highlights the odds associated with a single card being the focal point in any given scenario.
Deck Size | % Chance opening Trinity | % Increase | % Chance not opening Trinity | % Decrease
30 | 16.7% | 16.7% | 16.7% | 16.7%
35 | 26.8% | 10.1% | 14.3% | 2.4%
40 | 33.8% | 7% | 12.5% | 1.8%
45 | 38.6% | 4.8% | 11.1% | 1.4%
50 | 42.3% | 3.7% | 10% | 1.1%
55 | 45.1% | 2.8% | 9.1% | 0.9%
60 | 47.4% | 2.3% | 8.3% | 0.8%
The Benefits of Smaller Compositions
30-40
If your strategy would benefit from seeing specific combinations of cards and lacks any real Garnets or has insanely high OTK/FTK potential, then this is the number range to generally shoot for. While 30 seems really appealing for seeing the most consistent combinations of specific cards in hand, handtraps, or side deck bombs, it's generally not considered to be optimal unless your strategy benefits specifically from having as little cards as possible within it. The reason for this stems strictly from the fact that the Pointed Card list exists and in such list, there exists cards like Pot of Greed, Extravegence, and Prosperity that can actively help hand-fix and also serve as a means of getting additional power cards that would otherwise be a boon for the deck as a whole. If such cards weren't on the list or the disparity between having pointed card bombs (or even just another duplicate) wasn't so noticeable, then 30 would be considered ideal in a lot of cases. Since it isn't, 35 is considered to be the smallest deck size that is both compotent and competitive to run with and honestly a lot better than people give it credit for.
Strategies that fall under this category are decks like Thunder Dragon, Gem-Knight, and OTK Pendulum where combination of specific cards (or types of cards) is generally more valuable than seeing individually swingy and powerful cards!
40's a pretty decent middle ground; however, you are only afforded 2 points with it so it's only really great when it comes to strategies that are consistent enough out of the gate and just need additional copies of their primary playstarter. Strategies like Lunalight, Tenyi, and Ancient Warriors fit in this category. Due to this boon and existence of the Pointed List; however, it is pretty easy to lean further into the next composition...
The Golden Ratio (In my Opinion)
45
Funnily enough this number affords us 3 Trinities while also only being 5 cards over the standard TCG deck minimum. This allows us to see any one single playstarter (at 3 copies in total) nearly 40% of the time, ignoring the hyper consistency of a good chunk of strategies in finding said starter without the need of duplicates like Orcust, Cyber Dragon, and Myutant. Taking those things into consideration, you'll find said starter much more often in your opening hands to the point where you'd be capable of stuffing the deck with more techs, answers, disruptions, and handtraps because of the consistency being in your favor. Addtionally, in matches, you'll find that while you won't be able to see the side deck nearly as often as a 30-40 list, you'll still see it more often than our 50+ (and especially our 60) opponents which comes up more often than one might think as Games 2-3 when prepared for correctly tend to be longer than Game 1 which usually favors the person who simply drew better.
In the event that you're not capping out on maximizing the copies of a card, that's still ideal in the case of 45 as even with just running 1 extra duplicate, you're still increasing your odds of opening said playstarter on top of being able to pull cards from the Pointed List and see said cards from that list more often than the bloated 50+ card decks would be able to, especially in margins that are more noticeable in tournament settings.
These reasons are why I always recommend shooting for 45 to start out when deckbuilding and judging if you need to go higher or cut lower. You do give up a lot of consistency for decks that feature more Garnets with their engines; however, if you're on strategies that demand duplicates, certain power cards, or running Garnets (but never wanting to draw them) then the next composition is ideal.
The Benefits of Larger Compositions
50-55
If you've browsed the Tournament topping list, it isn't too uncommon to see a lot of decks falling under this category (or just being 60 cards in general). This is usually because of banlist oversights and certain cards being valued way lower than they should be and being included for generously free wins in bracket or simply because a pilot's comfortable with navigating more cursed hands because they'd rather elect to running specific power cards and having the chance of drawing them, even if they may be lower than most or rarely seen during their Swiss matches. Assessments of such ideas aside, the premise of the larger composition is simple: abusing the point system without reducing hand quality to utter rubbish (sometimes)!
At this size, hands are exceeding random in nature barring the occasional appearance of the one playstarter or duplicate that is largely responsible for the 50-55 angle in the first place. Fundamentally, this would give strategies like this an Achilles' Heel to aim for; however, modern deck building intrinsically builds around this issue by way of exploring engines and powerful filler cards that can often win games as an unintended back-up option rather than the focal point. Piloting a larger pile without much conhesion or familiarity with the deck is often a daunting task and not recommended for newer players or people trying out cards they've never even read nor touched before simply because the hands just won't be the same or close to the same each time. You will have to deal with an oversaturation of handtraps or answers sometimes and you will be forced to sometimes play an OTK deck like a midrange deck until you're able to find the correct pieces over the course of the duel. If you're interested in going down this route but still prefer consistency above all else, I strongly recommend playing strategies that feature numerous ways of accessing premium cards, such as Dragon decks, HERO, and the upper echelon of the more complex Zombie and Plant decks. If you've got Garnets galore but combos a-plenty, then this is the range to shoot for most of the time.
Now all that leaves is... oh, Holactie--- no!
The Consequences of the Pile
60
For being the absolute maximum deck size and attributing someone the point cap of six points (which is honestly more impactful than one might think), the returns often aren't worth it for players not jamming loads of engines, duplicates, nor cards that do well in interacting with one another regardless of what's in the opening hand. The reason I consider this composition to be a trap is mostly because of two really important things to consider:
1) Hand Quality
Hands are entirely random and do not often feature the same openers barring some obvious outliers with strategies that feature support so consistent you would find said openers in 180 card decks. Given that this is still highlander at it's core, you would find so many hands that feature your singles more than your duplicates, so the importance and worth of the individual is put on display here more than anything. Combinations of cards still have relevance in some capacity, but again, barring the aforementioned circumstances of the 180 card deck, you really should be expecting to look at each hand between games and gauge how to navigate things like a puzzle until you find what you need to close the game out. If you find that individual card with its near 48% chance of being attained in your opening hand, then you should likely consider ways of playing around it further to help convert that high probability into a consistent turnover of a victory. This is usually done with less consistent decks by way of running more staples and disruption as the space needed to fill in the blank spots to add up to 60 (and still be expected to draw disruptions on a regular basis) is often pretty flexible.
2) Side Decking
This issue is pretty related to the first in that it's mostly considered with regards to opening hands and draws-over-time; however, due to this being the absolute maximum that one can take into a tournament setting, you must understand that anyone (including your opponent) on this count should not be realistically favored to see their main deck side board in any capacity unless they're slotting in several cards that feature similar effects. While technically bad practice, it's honestly fine to disrespect the sideboards from these players during the opening turns if the consequences wouldn't be so dire as to end the game immediately; however, if you're the pilot of said strategy on a 60 card composition then I strongly recommend siding Extra Deck answers and cards instead. The reason for this primarily is done to treat the Extra Deck like a second hand that you can access (usually) without much issue nor demand and due to the insane effects on some monsters, you can probably steal games as well! For example, being able to side in cards like Crimson Blader or Abyss Dweller would be much more effective and accessible for decks that can summon said cards instead of middling with their already-suffering hand quality and risking dead-er draws in the main deck with similar tech choices. If your strategy can't afford the Extra Deck spaces or simply cannot make them; then your next best option is to side in engines that get the job done effectively. The most prominent of these that can honestly be overbearing or too swingy at times being Timelords, with Zaphion, Maiden, and Kamion often being sided in decks that run Foolish Burial or Level 1 support to utilize Maiden effectively, thus increasing the odds of seeing her substantially over just any 1 individual side board card.
-
Now, if you're curious as to which decks I personally think don't mind being at the 60 card count, I honestly can't say for certain. Decks that benefit from taking advantage of Unbound cards can find value here since they improve hand quality; however, those decks also benefit from smaller deck sizes as well. If a deck is running so many Garnets that 60 is considered optimal solely for that purpose, then the deck likely can be reassessed and edited to be smaller and more consistent with less or the same number of Garnets. 60 honestly is a composition for those who either can't be bothered to cut cards or would rather see what would happen if you were capable of combining several engines in Highlander and seeing how they would interact with one another over the course of a game or match. Barring those examples, it is probably optimal and worth considering the 60 composition with strategies that are hyper consistent, blatantly broken, and/or features a fount of bombs that can win the duel regardless of whatever else exists in your hand at the time. While Trinity likely isn't designed to cater to that last example's PoV (as it wouldn't really be that interesting to observe from a spectator's side of things) and often times the strategies that abuse these qualities are often struck by the community banlist either immediately or overtime anyway.
Veterans and champions of the format alike have proven that the 60 card composition can and does work throughout the many years that this format has existed, so take my criticisms more so as a means of insight rather than solely as a metric to keep you away from experimenting with said card count; however, if you're finding yourself bricking with your build then consider sacrificing that extra point or two and reducing the cards in the main deck to a composition that better caters to your desired playstyle!
Hopefully this article was insightful. My word isn't at all absolute and half of the explanations do come from a place of opinions; however, this conversation often isn't had when it comes to introducing newer players to the game and it's a shame because it's one of the cooler parts to consider when taking advantage of what makes Trinity different. I hope that you (regardless of your own experience) take away something from this read that you can experiment with in the Format or use as an advantage against opponents belonging to a specific composition bracket.
Thanks for reading!
enjoy the random deck profile
120
450
870
480
