Full composition
Item combos — main carries (top 10)
| Combo | Avg placement |
|
2.96 |
|
2.25 |
|
3.74 |
|
3.00 |
|
4.08 |
|
3.31 |
|
3.62 |
|
2.85 |
|
3.69 |
|
2.83 |
| Combo | Avg placement |
|
2.95 |
|
3.17 |
|
4.03 |
|
4.41 |
|
3.40 |
|
2.73 |
|
2.91 |
|
3.35 |
|
3.94 |
|
1.67 |
Seen on the TOP ladders
EUW
Skipaeus#9232
GRANDMASTER
437 LP
1
EUW
br0ken99#HR1
GRANDMASTER
423 LP
1
EUW
yatora1#wawa
GRANDMASTER
334 LP
1
EUW
Monroeff#00000
MASTER
162 LP
1
EUW
ZBROJS0N#EUW
GRANDMASTER
158 LP
1
EUW
MKOI Dalesom#EUW2
MASTER
157 LP
1
NA
VP Mariss#Maris
GRANDMASTER
428 LP
1
NA
Nik#0283
GRANDMASTER
366 LP
1
NA
KBM Toddy#tftbr
GRANDMASTER
233 LP
1
NA
Kiyoon#NA2
MASTER
91 LP
1
BR
koke#four
MASTER
67 LP
1
BR
Alberoni#TFT
MASTER
31 LP
1
KR
Miss The Rage#TFT
CHALLENGER
528 LP
1
KR
작은거인#SOOP
GRANDMASTER
514 LP
1
KR
슬슬버스타볼까나#KR1
GRANDMASTER
441 LP
1
KR
Roll Some Mo#KR1
GRANDMASTER
231 LP
1
KR
정따정#KR2
MASTER
227 LP
1
KR
더 높이 올라갈 녀석#again
GRANDMASTER
221 LP
1
KR
크 앙#HANAE
MASTER
219 LP
1
EUW
whyyoumadpro#EUW
CHALLENGER
1053 LP
2
Matchups vs
Board variants
Baseline
21% of games
4.48 avg placement
6% of games
3.10 avg placement
4% of games
2.00 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
3.10 avg placement · 38 games
+1 unit (10 total)
Lux
1.67 avg placement · 6 games
Alune
3.75 avg placement · 4 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.
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.