Full composition
Item combos — main carries (top 10)
| Combo | Avg placement |
|
4.12 |
|
4.84 |
|
4.46 |
|
4.57 |
|
3.92 |
|
4.62 |
|
5.45 |
|
3.84 |
|
3.90 |
|
4.24 |
Seen on the TOP ladders
NA
wovencord#NA1
MASTER
122 LP
1
BR
eusouolucas#1212
CHALLENGER
602 LP
1
BR
HIGH Hatsu#3030
MASTER
136 LP
1
BR
koke#four
MASTER
67 LP
1
KR
서은지#롤좀하는가
GRANDMASTER
426 LP
1
KR
김준민보고떨굼#KR1
MASTER
184 LP
1
EUW
MIH bensac#WTB
GRANDMASTER
418 LP
2
EUW
Higa#gmgn
GRANDMASTER
345 LP
2
EUW
winner takes all#ABBA
MASTER
226 LP
2
EUW
ttv yuta1z#123
MASTER
181 LP
2
EUW
ttv yuta1z#123
MASTER
181 LP
2
NA
MrBombastic#NA1
MASTER
134 LP
2
BR
ego illusions#ego
CHALLENGER
739 LP
2
BR
eusouolucas#1212
CHALLENGER
602 LP
2
KR
오박사#Dr OH
GRANDMASTER
483 LP
2
KR
여쩌리#KR1
GRANDMASTER
359 LP
2
KR
REDDICE#KR11
GRANDMASTER
226 LP
2
EUW
MIH bensac#WTB
GRANDMASTER
418 LP
3
EUW
MIH TarteMan#QLF
GRANDMASTER
398 LP
3
EUW
Renekten#EUW
MASTER
250 LP
3
Matchups vs
Board variants
Baseline
32% of games
5.06 avg placement
10% of games
3.03 avg placement
7% of games
5.26 avg placement
Real versions of this comp's final board: which exact group of champions shows up together, how often, and the average placement of those games. Not a game-by-game history (Riot only exposes the end-of-game board, never how it got there): a comparison of builds, not a timeline.
Board add-ons (9th/10th unit)
Base board — 9 units
3.03 avg placement · 74 games
+1 unit (10 total)
Morgana
2.00 avg placement · 3 games
The main board above stops at 9 units: reaching a 10th slot needs level 10, which on its own already correlates strongly with a good placement. Below, the average placement of games with this base board plus one or two extra units, shown as a correlation to interpret, not a causal recommendation.
Incomplete attempts grouped here
Emerald Zyra
8 units
67 games · 4.39 avg placement
These comps share a strict subset of the units above (never an extra one) — likely attempts at this same comp, stopped partway rather than distinct archetypes.
Augment path
Data unavailable. Riot's API doesn't populate the augments field for this set — verified directly on the collected sample (the "augments" field doesn't even appear in the response, across 23,000+ real participants checked). The field does exist in the official schema and worked on older sets, so this probably isn't permanent — this section will activate automatically as soon as it fills in again.