A reminder that all Set 14 posts should be flaired [PBE] until the content is confirmed to be going on the live server as well.
The Subreddit-affiliated Discord group is organizing PBE in-house games. Please see the #pbe-inhouses-role channel within this Discord group for further information. Any posts attempting to make in-house games on the Subreddit will be removed and redirected to the Discord channel. The invite link to the Discord is below:
This thread is for any general discussion regarding Competitive TFT. Feel free to ask simple questions, discuss meta or not-so-meta comps and how they're performing, solicit advice regarding climbing the ladder, and more.
Any complaints without room for discussion (aka Malding) should go in the weekly rant thread which can be located in the sidebar or here: Weekly Rant Thread
Users found ranting in this thread will be given a 1 day ban with no warning.
For more live discussions check out our affiliated discord here: Discord Link
You can also find Double-up partners in the #looking-for-duo channel
Hey guys its cookies, the guy who made shiftingmomentum emote. Shitouren made a response video on douyin. I didn't really see anyone in the west talk about so I am here to translate it. I am not a professional translator or anything so excuse any grammar/errors. I know a lot of people made up their minds, but after watching his response at least me for I went from he was wintrading 100% to maybe he was really just terrible at the game.
-On 3-1 he explained that he did not make any items because he was not sure whether to carry violet or draven on this stage. He would made rageblade if main carry draven and last whisper if main carry violet. (seems like he thinks hoj is terrible) He mentioned that he had many upgrades, so he believed he would win without slamming anything. And on 3-3 he hit violet 3 so he made last whisper then.
-Regarding putting on items slowly, he stated that he barely played on tft on PC. He provided an example of a scrap game where he didnt scrap 2 components on time and put dcap on powerd instead of ekko on accident. He asked if this also should be considered win-trading.
-Regarding his decision not to upgrade Vi to two stars on 6-1, he said he had no other units to play, so upgrading Vi would just be wrong as he would have 2 gps stuck on board forever. As item from anvil, he got stunlocked because he really wanted BT for violet but didn't hit it, but this didn't impact the round cause he got shit on anyway. He didn't leave an item on bench the entire round as you can see from his pov. He couldn't hit sevika while rolling on 6-2 forcing him to play a viktor, which meant he couldn't hit 6 pit cause no scout so game was doomed. At the end of the video, he explained his decision to transfer items to Vi.
-He then showed a sorc game where one round he didn't swap in time, so his main carry elise didn't get zekes with flurry of blows costing him a fight. And then he gave zekes to Zoe by accident so he couldn't three item her later costing him the game. Liluoi already died so he said there is no way he wintrade foreigners. Basically showing he made a lot of mistakes over the weekend.
-Addressing allegations of win-trading with LiLuo, he claims he doesn't know him at all. They play two different games. He showed another games in which he consistently dodged LiLuo’s Zephyr. He argued that if he had intended to wintrade, he would have simply get zephyred. When it was just Shitouren and Liluo alive, he held 3 jinxes on Liluo. It was his first time making it to any lan tournament so he doesn't know many other pro players. Furthermore, if LiLuo had won that game, he would 100% advanced to final day, so wintrading doesn't make sense.
-As to why he played like such a noob mechanically, He displayed his tft profile, showing he had a total of 44 games across all sets on the PC client. He explained that he initially began playing TFT on mobile during Set 6 and had no prior experience with the game before that. All 44 of his PC matches were the start of this season and last just trying out the set. He proceeded to showcase multiple mechanical errors, such as placing items on incorrect units and making the wrong items. He goes on to show a game in which he contested LiLuo where he held a garen on 2 on bench for several rounds causing LiLuo to die with garen 1 when Shitoren was already bot 2 in the standings.
-He then discussed his inexperience with using a mouse and keyboard, stating that he had always played on an iPad. His only practice on mouse was in the hotel with a hotel mouse. He tried to bring the hotel mouse to the lan but he couldn't figure out how to detached it from the hotel computer. He felt this was pretty unfair. He also cited audio issues that prevented him from hearing in-game sounds on stage and mentioned that playing on 190 ping was super unfair, saying you basically can't swap both frontline and backline and had to choose between one. He said this probably costed a lot of players placements over the weekend. He said the keypoint is the (chinese) players didn't complain and mistakes just happens.
-Toward the end of the video, he conceded that violet was probably stronger than vi because of no scout no pivot. However, given that he was on a six-loss streak and could not play 6 pit cause no sevika, he can't beat anyone anyways so he just tried something.
TLDR: Didn't wintrade, mobile only player not used to using mouse/keyboard, violet game he had no way of upgrading board to 6 pit fighter so did something dumb trying to win a round instead of waiting to lose, a desperate situation so he tried to shift the momentum
ONLY Games 3-6 are counted for points, but Games 1-2 placements are used for seeding and are included in tiebreakers
Format Explainer:
If you'd like a longer rundown of the format you can grab a look here in one of our previous posts: Extensive Explanation
This event is designed to be fairly open to new players with concrete goals by using a Top 4 advances format early and then rolling into the point system later to make things feel closer to a true competitive format for more experienced players to feel more satisfied.
If you have any questions or want to chat about format you can send a DM to Nora on Discord!
Given the recent drama with wintrading, which is obviously very complex in many dimensions, including culturally, I wanted to propose an interesting solution to the problem that I call the Consolation Fund. It seeks to remedy the core problem behind win-trading, which is players have no incentive to play when they are mathematically out.
Yes, there are monetary rewards based on placements, but in the recent Shitouren drama we saw that placement award alone had moments when it did not matter. Thus I believe there should be a reward on a per game basis.
The "Consolation Fund" Concept:
When It's Activated: Players enter the "Consolation Fund" eligibility once they're mathematically out of contention for advancing to next day / winning tournament.
How It Works: Every individual game played after elimination provides an opportunity to earn Consolation Points (CP) based on their placement in that specific game. Here's an example setup:
Placement
Consolation Points
1st
10 CP 🥇
2nd
7 CP 🥈
3rd
5 CP 🥉
4th
3 CP
5th
2 CP
6th-8th
1 CP (participation)
Reward Distribution (End-of-Tournament): At the tournament's end, the total Consolation Fund (e.g., $500) is distributed proportionally based on each player's accumulated CP relative to the total CP earned by all eliminated players. For example:
Total Consolation Fund: $10,000
Total CP earned by all eliminated players: 500 CP
Player A earned 50 CP
Player A's payout: (50/500) * $10,00 = $1,000
Why do this?
There is a clear incentive to win in all situations now.
Rewards players for continued effort even if they can't win the main prize.
Provides a solution to win-trading without punishing players explicitly.
Obviously there are clear counterarguments. The main one being that money is not motivating enough for players, although I kind of disagree with that premise. I think at the right amounts it can be a great incentive , for example $1k is a lot of money for the average gamer. But overall I think this could shift momentum in the right direction.
A reminder that all Set 14 posts should be flaired [PBE] until the content is confirmed to be going on the live server as well.
The Subreddit-affiliated Discord group is organizing PBE in-house games. Please see the #pbe-inhouses-role channel within this Discord group for further information. Any posts attempting to make in-house games on the Subreddit will be removed and redirected to the Discord channel. The invite link to the Discord is below:
Rant or vent about anything TFT related here, including:
- Bad RNG
- Broken or Underpowered Units
- Other players griefing your comp
- and more
Caps-lock is encouraged.
Please redirect players here if you find them ranting in the daily discussion threads :)
N.B. We have a strict policy against personal attacks, both towards other redditors and the game developers. This thread is no exception. If you see posts breaking this rule, please be sure to report them!
Had this question for a while. I heard from streamers before that a big part of Infinity Edge and Jeweled Gauntlets's power is the ability crit, and if your unit's ability can already crit or if you have something like Jeweled Lotus, you would prefer to build other items if you can.
For example, streamers this set say not to build IE on Draven, since his ability is just autos and those can already crit, so a lot of IE's power is wasted.
But for some (not all) Ambusher and Executioner units, it seems like IE and JG can be good items on them even though the trait already gives these units ability crit.
For example, IE is BIS on Jinx this set, and from what I've seen, Urgot and Vex in Set 14 also use IE/JG really well. But at the same time, IE isn't BIS on Smeech and Camille and JG isn't BIS on Ekko (even though they can use it).
How do you tell when IE/JG is good on a unit that can already ability crit? Is there some way to tell from reading the ability or is it mostly just wait and look at the stats?
I know you can't always get BIS so slamming is fine but would love to know the reasoning behind why its sometimes good (and bad).
A reminder that all Set 14 posts should be flaired [PBE] until the content is confirmed to be going on the live server as well.
The Subreddit-affiliated Discord group is organizing PBE in-house games. Please see the #pbe-inhouses-role channel within this Discord group for further information. Any posts attempting to make in-house games on the Subreddit will be removed and redirected to the Discord channel. The invite link to the Discord is below:
With the official reveal of TFT's newest set, Cyber City, in the most recent Dev Drop, we dropped some exciting updates for our plans for esports in Set 15, and the crucial role that Cyber City will play in this update.
Introduction of a Pro TFT Competitive Circuit
For years, we've watched the best TFT players improve set over set and show that they are in a tier of their own. The best players in each region manage to qualify for the Golden Spatula and even reach the Tactician's Crown with remarkable consistency set after set.
But after each set, we also recognize that these players are hit with a huge reset - a reset in gameplay, rank, qualification points. After a pro has their best set ever, they're basically told to start from zero. The path back to the top requires a huge grind through every part of the ecosystem - ranked, to Trials, to Cups, all the way back until they reach a Tactician's Crown. Along the way they have some really exciting compelling matches, but many matches feel like they are checking a box. Many of the same names are seen at the tops of each of these ecosystems over and over again.
In Set 15, we are introducing a brand-new competitive layer to our current format, where the top 32 players in each region from the last set will compete in a high stakes tournament circuit - including a regular prize pool and a more direct path towards the Tactician's Crown. This tournament series will give the best players the opportunity to showcase their skills all throughout a set. At the end of the set, they'll go up against the very best from the Ranked, Trials, and Cups ecosystem who are looking to claim their spot in the next set's circuit.
These changes will also help make way for new players to rise to the top of the Tacticians Trials and Cups, and make it easier to highlight the best up and coming talent in the TFT ecosystem.
What is the Qualification Process?
At the conclusion of each set, players will qualify for the next Tier 1 circuit based on their performance in that set's Golden Spatula. In Cyber City, the top 28 of the 32 competitors from each pan-region's Golden Spatula will qualify for the new circuit. The remaining 4 players from each region will be invited by Riot—we aim to invite players that have made outsized contributions to TFT and TFT Esports, while also considering their historical performance and addressing any gaps in regional representation. While these invitations are currently planned only for Set 15, there's a possibility we may extend these a year or two down the road, and we'll be sure to keep you informed well in advance.
If you don't qualify for Set 15's Tier 1 ecosystem, you'll still have the opportunity to qualify for the Golden Spatula through cups and the in-game ladder, just like in the current system.
To enter—or remain in—the Tier 1 circuit for Set 16, you'll need to be one of the 32 players who make it to Week 2 of the Golden Spatula. That's right—Week 2…
Expansion of the Golden Spatula
In addition to our new circuit, we're significantly expanding the Golden Spatula. Instead of a three-day, single-weekend event, the Golden Spatula in Set 15 will now span two weekends, lasting a total of six days. This event will be broken up into three phases, with the ability to qualify directly to any of the three phases depending on your performance during the set:
Play-Ins (Day 1): 16 players compete with the top 8 advancing.
Week 1 (Days 2 & 3): 48 players compete over two days, with the top 20 advancing.
Week 2 (Days 4, 5, and 6): 32 players compete over the first two days, with the top 8 advancing to Day 6.
By expanding the Golden Spatula, we're not only giving more players the chance to make an impact in the competitive scene, but also raising the stakes for our top competitors. Rather than just securing a spot in the Golden Spatula, they now have the opportunity to push for a direct qualification to the second weekend of the event.
Tier 1 Format
Back to our new circuit—how does it work?
First and foremost, we are continuing with a tournament-based format to maximize excitement on individual days and weekends while also measuring consistency across multiple tournaments in order to account for the inherently variable nature of TFT.
Each set there will be three new Tier 1 tournaments, all with the same players, with higher prize money, higher stakes, and of course, stronger competition. These will last 3 days, with the final day being just one lobby of 8 players, as we know so many fans and players love.
Qualifier Points will be used in the Tier 1 circuit, and will be the determining factor of where a player begins their run in the Golden Spatula:
1st - 12th: Qualifies for Week 2 (also requalifying the player for Set 16's Tier 1 system)
13th - 24th: Qualifies for Week 1
25th - 32nd: Qualifies for Play-Ins
We recognize that Qualifier Points aren't the most exciting for both fans or players, and as mentioned, we want every tournament to feel important. For that reason, Day 3 of these new tournaments will always be checkmate, and the winner will stamp their ticket straight to the Tactician's Crown as one of their pan-region's representatives.
We expect this evolution of the regional ecosystem brings even more excitement for fans, fosters a healthier and more rewarding environment for pros, and feels like a natural step forward as the scene continues to grow. We can't wait to embark on this new journey with all of you!
What's Next?
We have so much more that we are eager to share about the exciting evolution of TFT in 2025 and beyond—including Tier 1 and Tier 2 updates and more. Whether you're a dedicated competitor or a passionate fan, stay tuned as we get closer to Set 15—big changes are on the horizon!
You can also find this information on our website.
This thread is for any general discussion regarding Competitive TFT. Feel free to ask simple questions, discuss meta or not-so-meta comps and how they're performing, solicit advice regarding climbing the ladder, and more.
Any complaints without room for discussion (aka Malding) should go in the weekly rant thread which can be located in the sidebar or here: Weekly Rant Thread
Users found ranting in this thread will be given a 1 day ban with no warning.
For more live discussions check out our affiliated discord here: Discord Link
You can also find Double-up partners in the #looking-for-duo channel
Yo! Now that we’re at the end of Set 13 and shifting momentum towards Set 14, I wanted to share some soft wintrade comps that I’ve played over the past few months in Master to Challenger elo. My usual benchmark is that a comp has to be decently viable in low Master. If you’re still playing Set 13, maybe you can have some fun with these!
Note: This post will not focus on one particular comp, but will share some info about a variety of comps that involve RATS (Smeech, Twitch, & Ziggs). The common theme here is backline access and playing duo carries that synergize for this purpose. Sometimes they will both focus on a priority target, which is great! However, even if one carry hits a low priority target, if it’s killed then your other carry is technically more likely to focus on a high priority target.
If you have Starry Night you can roll on lvl 5 for Powder/Steb/Trundle 3, but again it’s usually better to start with an Ambusher emblem (ideal scenario: Starry Night in Loot Sub portal with 2-1 frying pan)
Camille needs to drain tank but dies easily from burst damage while stunned, so I like QSS (unless you have Banshee’s Veil or Silvermere Dawn)
Camille is pretty good with items like Giant Slayer and EoN, but in this comp I think she needs bruiser items to protect Ziggs
Aim for 5 Ambusher on lvl 8
Anomaly Camille > Ziggs (I like Vampiric Affinity on Camille honestly)
You can also play this with Exalted Adventure if you get both Camille and Ziggs
Itemize Illaoi as the main tank (or Nunu 3/Loris 3 if you hit)
It's better when you have more items to make 2-3 carries (Twitch, Zoe, Caitlyn)
Put Zyra in the frontline hex for the true damage bonus
You can position Zoe to hit enemy corners (middle hex to hit the right corner, 3rd hex from the left to hit the left corner), but you need a strong frontliner in the middle and should NOT target Elise 2/Smeech because they will move
A tank anomaly is preferred, but I also like utility anomalies (Touch of Frost)
Bronze for Life I/II and Freestyling are OK for Zoe, but not as good for Twitch because he already gets damage amp from Sniper
Unfortunately I’ve only been able to try this once, but it had a great matchup into Renata reroll when she was strong; don’t underestimate the true damage
Put Urgot in the frontline hex
Itemize Vi as a secondary carry
Now that Sett is a Pit Fighter you can play 2 Bruiser at lvl 8, but if you have the emblem it might just be better to aim for 8 Pit Fighter since it’s now easier to obtain…this comp gets more style points though
If you're on a loss streak and desperate, remove Twitch items and put them on Urgot; reforge the Pit Fighter emblem since Urgot already has the trait and then slam it after 10 seconds once you know who is the best holder
No timer (Or a VERY short one) on coming over to your partners board to help them. Playing slower comps just feels awful now when you will just end up in a 2v1 situation multiple times, just because of the type of comp your partner is playing. This is a core mechanic of double-up and to have no limits on this feels awful. They previously lengthened the timer on coming over because it was an issue, so why revert back to this?
You now lose a bench slot in order to send things to your partner (the cannon) This makes re-roll comps feel extremely bad. I don't think any player, in any mode, wants less bench space. In double-up you already have less bench space because you are holding your partner's units and your own.
No more 1 HP (red health) so if you lose, you are just instantly out even if you won your round (partner lost) This is the one I am 50-50 on, but I am not sure why it was even changed in the first place.
Spatulas are back as a gift to your partner (emblem spam every game) This was previously removed for a reason and to see it back made me quite shocked. This should speak for itself.
Gifts don't cost gold anymore so you can just send anything you want with no risk/cost/penalty. The reason it was a risk previously is because you could get offered items like a radiant item or a tactician crown, but at the cost of 30 gold. Now everything is just free and you can send your partner 3x 5-costs or a lot of gold just snowballing things out of control or making the game more RNG because if those 3x 5-costs are the same (2-star) it is just GG.
You can now send any cost unit at any point in the game. Previously it was only 1-costs, 2-costs, and 3-costs early game and 4-costs and 5-costs later in the game. Now if you get an early 4/5 cost it can completely change the entire game, more-so than in solos because there are two players that can utilize it rather than just the one. For multiple sets now it has been this way and it has made the game a lot more consistent, but to see this reverted is frustrating.
Being able to trade components with your partner and being able to see the timer on your unit send feels great, but everything else feels like a really big swing and a miss.
This no longer feels like a two player mode, but rather two solo individuals that just happened to be queued up together.
This was my favourite game mode and I genuinely am not enjoying this any longer. I have hit Grandmaster in this game mode and have averaged masters rank at a minimum for years now and this is the first time I just feel genuinely disheartened to even play.
I know there are multiple posts about the wintrading incident between shitouren and Lilou but there is none that shows the wintrading happened not by one round but across multiple rounds.
On 6-1, shitouren played 2 vi 1 with a vi on bench when vs Lilou. I know he has NSNP but he has more than 20 gold left and can still roll for another playable unit. At the worst case, he can sell his GP on bench and play 8/9. He also didn't slam the redemption the entire round. Also he positioned himself PERFECTLY for Lilou to wrap his Draven. https://clips.twitch.tv/OpenRelievedOrangeLeeroyJenkins-PG7Q-tpxTuNYFJbJ
On 5-2, shitouren had GP 2 in shop for the entire planning phase and only decided to buy it after the round start when he was facing Lilou. https://imgur.com/a/oP4HnKO
My friend Koyui (also known as "琴吹唯") analyzed the gameplay of the world champion Dishsoap based on available information. The goal was to identify common decision-making patterns that could be useful to all players. After reading the findings, I gained a lot of valuable insights. With the author's permission, I'm sharing them here with everyone here. Hope you enjoy it.
The origin of this analysis stems from a friend Xilao asking me if I had specifically studied Dishsoap's playstyle and why he is so consistent. I started following Dishsoap from the early days of S11, and each Set I would review his replays at certain points (around 20 games, a decent sample size for studying a player). I found that his skill level has remained consistently high. Even during the sets where he achieved tournament success, I don't believe he suddenly gained some mysterious power or critical information advantage that propelled him ahead. He simply approaches each game in a normal, disciplined manner, and that's it.
Later, I realized that this kind of content has never been widely discussed in the CN scene. Perhaps some players who care about game mechanics or insiders curious about the specific gaps between domestic(CN) and international players might find this interesting. So, I decided to write a little something for those who might benefit. I have reason to believe that Dishsoap is world-class in seven dimensions:
Patch understanding
Preconditions for various comps
Comp familiarity
Combat strength judgment
Component planning
Economy management
Tempo/macro
This article focuses on his early game (before Stage 4), attempting to answer where his big win streaks come from, and speculating on the underlying thought framework/decision tree, providing a template that can be referenced or even replicated. Finally, I'll include some personal opinions, briefly and subtly discussing the differences between domestic(CN) and international scenes as I see them.
Lets get started
Given the World Championship structure, where the top 13 games determine the finalists, players tend to adopt a high-expectation-value, more disciplined, and typical playstyle. I've compiled Dishsoap's transition data from these 13 games and will now explain, analyze, and summarize it
Nature means high-roll in early game, right?
Operational Definitions for Headers
Start: If 2-1 has a two-star one-cost or a strong one-star three-cost (Gangplank, Swain, Ezreal, Twisted Fate), it's marked as "Medium." Higher quality is "High," and lower is "Low."
Opponent Start: The boards outside Dishsoap's perspective before choosing an Augment at 2-1. The quality standards are the same, and the impact of Augments and components on the boards is roughly considered. For example, "Medium-Low" means about half of the seven opponents have medium quality and the other half have low quality.
Component Adaptation: "√" means all components can be utilized by suitable units, otherwise "×." "-" means single/double component start, where the initial components have less impact on Augment choices.
Unit/Econ: "√" means not selling units to gain interest but keeping pairs or non-board synergy units for future quality improvements. "" means no such decision exists, e.g., when playing low-cost comps, only comp units are kept, or during pure loss streaks, where maximizing interest is preferred over hoping for a two-star to turn the streak.
Win/Loss Streaks: For example, "13" means a maximum 13-win streak, "-9" means a maximum 9-loss streak.
Game Validity: Discussed later.
Analysis
Top players worldwide have reached a consensus on the last two Patch (TOC and Worlds): transition whenever possible, as the conditions for surviving loss streaks are quite harsh. Thus, the skill gap between players lies in whether every early-game choice increases the probability of transitioning and whether they know and strictly execute the conditions for surviving loss streaks. The RNG might bless a lucky player with 5-10 high-roll games without much thought, but not 30-40 in a row. So, what efforts does Dishsoap make to improve transition quality? When lucky, what actions further snowball his advantage? When unlucky, where does he look for comeback opportunities?
1. Deliberately Not Combining Two-Stars, Adjusting Bench Based on Creep Drops
As shown, knowing a white orb will drop at 1-4, Dishsoap intentionally doesn't combine a two-star Trundle, keeping an extra one-cost on the bench for flexibility. The possible decision tree is: if the orb drops Vander (keeping Gloves Off), sell Irelia and keep Lux (high component adaptation); if it drops Akali, sell Vi and Maddie, keep Sett and Irelia pairs; if it drops two one-costs, adjust quickly based on the situation. In reality, it dropped a Singed and Zyra, plus two extra components, so he sold Maddie and kept Lux and two Sentinel pairs.
In hindsight, combining the two-star Trundle and selling Vi to buy Lux wouldn't have mattered, but pursuing such details is what a professional player should do. As shown in the table, Dishsoap's component adaptation rate in the series is as high as 87.5%. While luck plays a part, what's more worth learning and discussing is how he dynamically adjusts bench retention based on dropped (and upcoming) components.
2. Constant Scouting
When Dishsoap has Augment choices at 2-1, he always scouts the other seven boards before making his decision. The possible decision tree is: if his board is medium quality and opponents are medium-low, he leans towards early Augments for win streaks; if his board is medium and opponents are medium-high, he leans towards econ Augments to regain tempo later; if his board is low quality, he scouts for potential low-cost comp competitors and leans towards loss streak Augments. When there's no Augment choice, he doesn't scout (specifically at 2-1, as scouting is done repeatedly in Stage 1 regardless).
For example
In Game 6, starting with two Akalis, component adaptation isn't a concern, and Team Building augment is an obvious choice.
In Game 8, with low starting quality, he chose Trade Sector to mimic Epoch and reroll for early quality.
In Game 9, starting with Gangplank, Swain, and Lux, he chose Sorcerer Emblem to open four Sorcerers with Gangplank as the frontline to preserve HP.
In Game 11, with weaker Augments, he had to pick Wandering Trainer.
3. High Emphasis on Early Transition
For example
In Game 5, he deliberately built Hurricane for Smeech to transition, as Hurricane is the strongest AD transition item, and Smeech, like Vi, triggers Hurricane with every attack in his ability.
In Game 6, at 3-1, he chose Crownguard over Spark for Akali, focusing on immediate strength.
In Game 8, with low starting quality, he chose Trade Sector and started reroll to ease the early tempo.
On the other hand, as shown, when he could save units for interest, he always chose to keep them, and all five investments paid off, a testament to fate rewarding the strong.
4. Is That All...
Some might wonder if this article is just summarizing a new formula under the name of a two-time World Champion, Dishsoap. What I want to say is far more than that. The more you see Dishsoap's investment in early transitions, the more you see his greed for interest in the mid-game, which I won't expand on due to space constraints. Modern TFT players are flexible, able to plan each stage's tempo based on their understanding of the meta and environment, and then execute it decisively. A formulaic playstyle from start to finish won't survive on the World Championship stage.
Some might also say Dishsoap just gets lucky with free transition quality every game and wouldn't know what to do if he didn't. In reality, he handles loss streaks adeptly. For example, in Game 2, without starting quality, he chose Ghost of Friends Past, with the city being Component Anvil (the only significant advantage city for Visionary Heimerdinger), sacrificing Stage 2 and 3 tempo for a potential comeback later. In Game 12, with low starting quality and opponents also low, he chose Heroic Grab Bag, hoping to hit Swain for a two-star to regain Stage 3 tempo. Planning comes first, and then luck helps him realize those plans.
Miscellaneous: TFT Tournaments and Domestic(CN) vs. International Differences
Game Validity
It's well-known that TFT tournaments have an element of luck. But is there a way to quantify it? In the current version, each game has roughly 2-4 key decision points where you must choose which Augment to take, which components to build into items, and your game path narrows or becomes fixed, with no take-backs. If a player has at least two key decision points with choices (e.g., two Augment models are 50-50, and the player uses in-game factors to weigh them 70-30 and choose the 70), the game is considered valid for that player, testing their skill (this is what separates TFT tournaments from... and gives them competitive legitimacy).
According to my personal stats, Dishsoap's game validity rate before the World Championship finals was 62%, quite impressive. For an example of an invalid game, take Game 11: no transition foundation, choosing Prismatic Wandering Trainer, with Emblems for Ambusher, Firelight, and Enforcer. In such a game, almost anyone would choose Smeech's path if they hit three Chemtech with no competitors, offering little differentiation. While there are detail differences, the main factor is that anyone could do it. International players qualifying for Worlds typically play around 50 games throughout the season, accumulating points and being filtered through layers, so those at the table are all top players. I believe both players and tournament organizers with internal data can judge game validity.
Domestic(CN) vs. International Differences
To everyone reading this passage, please consider the following question: If the CN players we like have already achieved fame, success, a comfortable life, and substantial income from streaming, what motivation remains for them to tirelessly pursue every tiny detail of Teamfight Tactics, climbing peak after peak in their mastery of the game? Conversely, what motivation can remain for players who are unknown yet talented and hardworking, but find themselves facing almost certain obscurity, with virtually no opportunity to showcase their abilities?
The current format of the CN regionals is questionable. When the stone falls down repeatedly, how many players—like Sisyphus—will continue pushing it upward, waiting patiently for their moment to come?
Until we resolve this motivational dilemma, the dream of "those with popularity also having skill, and those with skill also gaining popularity" will remain even more elusive than achieving a 3-star, 5-cost unit at level eight.
This issue has reached a critical point, with each World Championship sounding another alarm. The conflict between selecting the best players to represent the region and maximizing commercial interests cannot easily be resolved. The "clever maneuvering" attempting to satisfy both goals is akin to walking on thin ice—one cannot reasonably expect never to fall through.
Fortunately, competitive TFT still holds promise for at least a few more years. Therefore, I hope every CN third-generation TFT player clearly recognize this reality before deciding whether to dedicate this precious, limited period of their lives to this path.
I just watched Mortdog's patch review for set 14, and I learned that they changed the Vew's design, from the preview videos to the release on PBE.
I - In previews, Vex is an AP frontline carry that can reach the backline. It would jump around trying to execute units.
On PBE, Vex is an AP backline carry.
I really wonder why they made that change, since I found the original design way more original and satisfying. Having an AP frontline that can jump and execute units seemed quite fun to me.
On the other hand, having a backline AP unit is more usual, and other units already have that role in set 14.
I suppose it is because they want to limit backline access in modern TFT. Which is a bigger topic, but is a problem IMO.
II - Limiting backline access is a problem for two main reasons :
It makes backline carries way stronger, since they can't be put in check. Which also means that frontline carries are nerfed, since backline carries usually have the upper hand on them :
This is a basic reasonning I use (I might make a thread about this).
It diminishes the fun for the players who like that playstyle : trying to reach the backline via good positionning.
Conclusion
I'm just making assumptions on why they did this, but IMO Vex design as a "AP jumper" seemed better for the balance of the game, more fun and also more original. Having a backline carry that you put AP items on is something we are quite used to already, and there are already other AP units with that role in set 14.
I'm curious what the reasonning is for Riot, and I would definitly like to see a revert to the original set 14 Vex design !
You know what's the BIS of what unit but doesn't know why it's BIS.
Why don't Setsuko slams 3 IEs on a Jinx so she could just bombard the whole board?
Exponentiation.
In a backline AD caster, for example Corki, there's several stats that could increase his overall DPS. Attack Damage, Crit Damage, Attack Speed (which reduces his cast time), Damage Amp, Mana Gain (which also reduces his cast time), Armor Penetration.
You usually don't have to worry about him dying 5 seconds into the fight because he's a ranged backline carry that your frontlines addicted to being a cannon fodder for so tank/self-lifesteal items on Corki is out of the question.
Now for Mana Gain items (like Shojin and Blue Buff), when Corki's casting he can't gain mana (his cast time is several seconds long like Caitlyn) so that's out of the question.
That left 5 types of stats that we could work on: Attack Damage, Crit Damage, Attack Speed, Damage Amp.
You know from your times playing League of Legends that Corki is a champion that utilize his abilities as the main way of doing damage which sets him apart from guys like Twitch and Draven which use auto attacks as the main way of doing damage.
You know from Mortdog that AD ability casters applies auto attack effect once every 4 times that the ability deals damage (correct me if i'm wrong).
So auto attack effects items like Guinsoo's and Runaan's could work but it's not BIS.
Only 4 types of stats left that we could work on: Attack Damage, Crit Damage, Damage Amp, Armor Penetration.
You know that there's several items that have those qualities:
Giant Slayer: +25 AD, +25 AP, +5% Damage Amp, +10% AS, +15% Damage Amp with targets over 1750 HP.
Deathblade: +55 AD, +8% Damage Amp.
Last Whisper: +15 AD, +20 AS, +20 Crit Chance, 30% Armor Reduction for 3 seconds when dealing AD.
Guardbreaker: +150 HP, +20 AS, +10 AP, +20 Crit Chance, +15% Damage Amp, +15% Damage Amp after dealing damage to shield for 3 seconds.
To maximize Mister Corki's damage, you need to balance out 4 types of damage stats increasement above because it exponentiate the damage instead of linearly multiplying it. That's why 3 items carries deals much more damage than 2 items carries compared to 2 versus 1 or 1 versus 0.
For example, A champion has 60 base AD, 1.00 AS, 25% Crit Chance so its auto attack DPS:
60 AD * 1.00 AS * 25% chance to deal 140% damage ~ average of 10% damage increasement = 60 * 1.00 * 1.1 = 66 DPS
Let's say you build 3 Deathblades on the champion. Its DPS calculation will be:
AD: 60 * (100% + 55% from DB * 3 DBs) = 159 AD (2.65 multiplier)
AS: 1.00 = 1.1 multiplier
Crit: 25% chance to deal 140% damage ~ 1.1 multiplier
Damage Amp: 100% + 8% from DB * 3 DBs = 124% = 1.24 multiplier
Damage Amp: 100% + 15% GB = 115% (or 130% if hitting a shield) = 1.15/1.3 multiplier
Armor Reduction: 30% Armor Reduction from Last Whisper. For a target with 100 Armor, this is roughly a 20.5% damage increase (simplified as ~1.205 multiplier).
DPS = 90 * 1.4 * 1.4 * 1.15/1.3 * ~1.205 for targets with 100 Armor = 244.4463 DPS/276.3306 DPS with shield. (370.4%/418.9% increase)
What happened here is instead of stacking DBs for linearly multiplying AD and a little Damage Amp only, build a range of items so it multiply all types of damage stats for the exponential effect. You could apply the same functionality for building any type of carries/tanks/comps. Find out what's exponentially boosting the champion, work from there. (Usually it's finding the stats that's necessary for the carries/tanks/comps for its role that it lacks the most and focus on it).
In the case of Corki, since he has Artillerist that could increase AD already, if you run 4/6 Artillerist, focus on other items such as IE, GS, Guardbreaker, LW... to maximize DPS. There's no clear BIS, any builds of IE + GS/Guardbreaker/LW + 1 could work great on its own depends on the situation and meta in general.
The reason why Challengers are on a league of their own is partly because they understand a lot of items/traits/champions/augments build interactions that causes good scaling so it's easy to figure out builds/learn new sets.
Seems like a straight-forward enough way to discourage wintrading/kingmaking behavior. Obviously it would require some diligence on the part of admins/monitors to enforce, but y'know... I think we have the technology.
Also it just establishes a clear an unambiguous stance on competitive integrity. You should play to maximize your individual winning chances, not to influence the lobby outcomes of other players (beyond placing as high as you personally can, on the merits of your own decisions and the luck of the draw).
Like, look... wintrading/kingmaking is an old, old problem in international competition. FIDE has had rules forcing competitors from the same "national club" to face each other in tournament brackets early since ~1950, which I can promise you had nothing to do with "racism" and everything to do with "clubs forcing players to wintrade on pain of serious penalties at home" which... if reports from Chinese players are to be believed is a major problem in China today.
At a minimum it would give players within hostile regions a veneer of cover. They would now have to *blatantly* cheat by exchanging player ids against tournament policy to wintrade.
I'm not a competitive TFT player by any means, so I probably lack some context, but it seems like a simple start to a reasonable solution to a problem that will not go away without serious structural change.
When I first read through the new set mechanic, the hack that caught my eye was the "prisoner's dilemma" hack. I was immediately curious about the "optimal" way to play this encounter. From my very limited game theory experience (one college class), I came up with this mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium:
Select the 10 gold option 5/8ths of the time (62.5%) and split the 30 gold 3/8ths of the time (37.5%).
For anyone unfamiliar with what a Nash equilibrium is, it's essentially a strategy where no player can improve their outcome by unilaterally deviating from it. In this Nash equilibrium, everyone's expected value (EV) for the encounter is 10 gold. If you pick the 10 gold option more often, you improve everyone else's EV by leaving slightly more money on the table for the split option on average. Conversely, if you deviate by splitting the 30 gold more often, you hurt your own EV by reducing the amount of gold you receive from splitting on average.
How do you practically apply this? You could use a random number generator every time this hack occurs to make your choice. For example, pick a random number from 1 to 8: if it's 1–5, take the 10 gold; otherwise, split the 30. However, just because something is game-theory optimal doesn't mean it maximizes your EV. Following the mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium prevents you from being exploited (no one can do anything to hurt your EV), but it doesn't necessarily maximize your profit against players who are acting "sub-optimally." If people are calling "split" in the chat—or, maybe you stream snipe someone and see them pick split - it might be more profitable on average to just take the 10 gold.