Full composition
Item combos — main carries (top 10)
| Combo | Avg placement |
|
3.90 |
|
4.00 |
|
2.00 |
|
3.75 |
|
3.75 |
|
4.00 |
|
4.67 |
|
3.00 |
|
3.00 |
|
2.00 |
| Combo | Avg placement |
|
2.38 |
|
3.57 |
|
4.25 |
|
2.50 |
|
2.00 |
|
5.00 |
|
3.00 |
|
4.33 |
|
4.00 |
|
4.33 |
| Combo | Avg placement |
|
1.00 |
|
3.00 |
|
3.00 |
Seen on the TOP ladders
EUW
Paran01d#002
MASTER
188 LP
1
NA
KBM Toddy#tftbr
GRANDMASTER
233 LP
1
NA
salty#ate6
MASTER
74 LP
1
KR
MidnightChess#TFT
GRANDMASTER
382 LP
1
EUW
Meshade#TFT
MASTER
170 LP
2
NA
满船清梦压星河#cyy
MASTER
204 LP
2
KR
pad0#파 도
GRANDMASTER
321 LP
2
NA
ACAD Dishsoap#NA3
CHALLENGER
827 LP
3
NA
KocLV#FREE
MASTER
73 LP
3
BR
Ney4i20#4i20
MASTER
1 LP
3
KR
슬슬버스타볼까나#KR1
GRANDMASTER
441 LP
3
KR
토라오니#253
GRANDMASTER
356 LP
3
KR
필통이#KR1
GRANDMASTER
190 LP
3
EUW
MKOI ODESZA#000
MASTER
366 LP
4
EUW
para#liv
MASTER
235 LP
4
KR
백승민#agent
CHALLENGER
703 LP
4
KR
이리스#3331
CHALLENGER
509 LP
4
KR
서은지#롤좀하는가
GRANDMASTER
426 LP
5
KR
Miss The Rage#TFT
CHALLENGER
528 LP
7
KR
세훈에몽#KR11
CHALLENGER
538 LP
8
Matchups vs
Board variants
Baseline
10% of games
3.57 avg placement
9% of games
4.38 avg placement
2% of games
4.00 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
Not enough games with exactly this board, no add-ons
Not enough games with an extra unit for a reliable signal.
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.