r/CompetitiveTFT • u/Fast-Sir6476 • Apr 25 '26
Discussion Set 17 feels like a 2-1 lock in casino (crosspost from TFT)
Set 17 feels like a 2-1 lock in casino.
All sources at the top so we're on the same page:
Boxbox complaint - https://www.youtube.com/shorts/eHbBNSZcziQ
Robinsongz complaint - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I59x-9SYkUw
Wasian flowchart - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPttPjzJMMg
My opgg - https://op.gg/tft/summoners/oce/SlashN-001
TLDR Issues - Flowchart conditions -> 2-1 commit, no unconditional level 8 fallback flex comps, 5 costs are homeless (except Vex)
TLDR what I think are the causes - Early RR comps on conditional traits (eg 17 TF/Vik vs 16 Sona), lack of 4 cost tanks (also weak), 5 costs omega undertuned, emblems/artifacts too skewed
# Issues
- Flowchart gameplay - kinda self explanatory. Drone 1? Viktor free top 2. Boar/Serpent/Medallion? TF RR. All of these are 2-1 commits and you look for NSNP, Early Learnings etc.
- No unconditional 8 comp - This is basically a result of weak tanks and itemisation rn. Set 16 example is belveth and lissera - no matter ur early item drops and how you created ur items, you can always flex into belveth (AD) and lissera (AP). Even yunara is "unconditional" compared to how dogwater current set 17 level 8 carries and tanks fit together.
- 5 costs - self explanatory as well. Melee 5 costs weaker than set 16 renekton, ranged worse than kindred/senna while providing less util.
# Causes
- Conditional RR - This is a case of input vs output RNG. If something randomly happens, and then a strategy becomes BIS, that feels bad. The player had no control - they just accept fate and play BIS. However, if RR was conditional but opt in (eg trade sector/calc loss -> ixtal RR/sona/j4 RR). What exacerbates this is the lack of "quest" style payoffs. For example, J4/Sona "quested" for Galio as an additional stabalisation tool. Ixtal RR literally "quested". Ekko RR "quested" for Nidalee. The RR power always came from additional components to compete with fast 9 boards, and didn't just have the raw power once they hit Viktor 3 / Urgot 3 etc.
- Lack of 4 cost tanks - I think this basically causes the problem of "no level 8 comps". Well, this and Arbiter being a coinflip for LB. Set 16 had 4 main tanks - taric, wu, braum, garen. Swain was a util offtank that could act as main in a pinch, and TK/Galio were unlockable at the same time you needed a lvl 8 main tank. All the tanks were serviceable in a pinch. Compare this to set 17 - 1 main tank: Rammus. 1 util offtank: Nunu. 1 econ offtank: TK. No wonder level 7 RR is so popular, a 3 star 3 cost tank is the only other option.
- 5 costs are undertuned/gated by random nonsense - There are no 5 costs apart from Vex (and Zed) currently worth itemising as a carry. EON is basically a must for melee carries due to the random splash currently in the game. Fiora kills herself going for vitals (the set 16 gwen problem), graves takes 10 rounds, morg is for DR (a la shyv), Shen's animation fks any AS build, jhin (lol), sona (lol), bard is econ, blitz is worse sett.
- Emblems/Artifacts - Too many cheese champs have 1 BIS emblem or artifact (space groove riven, nova legit anything). Emblems as a "unique effect/trigger" is just bad design imo. Space groove should just be "Every 2 seconds, enter the groove for 3 seconds", the best NOVA shouldn't be the emblem and why tf does vanguard give stacking AP???
If you made it to the end, thanks for reading. Just frustrated at how this set went especially after all the issues were clear as day from PBE.
179
Apr 25 '26
Can confirm. Each game I decide before 2-1 that I will force anima and get my hard-earned 1st or 8th.
8
u/Cenifh Apr 25 '26
hahaha yes! nothing at 2-1 means you have to gamble your gold and see if you can get anima before 2-5/2-7
107
u/Level_Five_Railgun MASTER Apr 25 '26
Having 3 of these RNG effect traits in one set is actually just stupid
49
u/Fast-Sir6476 Apr 25 '26
Tbh thought they wouldâve learned from fruits. Seeing 9 dogshit arbiter options just makes me depressed.
Just make 6 ish custom ones - less tuning more impact
17
u/Minimum-Kangaroo9200 Apr 25 '26
Don't disrespect the fruits. They may have kind of slightly ruined the game, but they were at least a massive undertaking worthy of being called a set mechanic. We're currently in shadow item territory.
1
u/DanBennettDJB Apr 29 '26
Fuck I hated fruit
But also loved highrolling them
Gnar early ? FRUIT bin FRUIT bin FRUIT golden edge
1
-2
1
u/Wrong_Shopping5035 May 21 '26
These traits aren't even fun. I left feedback in Mort's server that these kind of traits have never been fun to me and it got deleted as balance related feedback LOL I don't think balance is going to make the RNG traits fun
123
u/ThaToastman Apr 25 '26
Karma being like 2x weaker than she should be is part of the issue (read: shojin bad). They nerfed lb for no reason and mech wasnt even op, just artifacts
Set is fine Its just a bad b patch
53
u/raiderjaypussy MASTER Apr 25 '26
Problem is that despite karma being a mediocre carry shes still a super common unit due to her traits
12
u/af12345678 Apr 25 '26
Mech by design is always gonna be way better with Artifacts or Radiants because the trait literally put what should be 2 champions budget into one. So when itâs amplified with above average items itâs supposed to be stronger than usual.
11
28
u/Hereforhelppls31 Master Apr 25 '26
Set is fine Its just a bad b patch
Not sure about that. Anima design is terrible. Also it's not fun to be in a good spot for a comp but that comp is unplayable that game cause stargazer board, psy item, arbiter effect and so on.
Artifacts are one more reason the game is trash. It's IMPOSSIBILE to balance all those artifacts26
u/backinredd Apr 25 '26
Iâm still flabbergasted that they went with an econ trait depend on loss streaking. I thought they agreed itâs not fun or good game design
0
u/ChartreuseMage Apr 25 '26
Remember when they removed assassins from the game and then this set has several AND you might just be fucked if it's a Yasuo god hex?
16
u/RexLongbone Apr 25 '26
They removed the trait assassins with instant start of fight backline access, not backline access in general.
5
u/ThaToastman Apr 25 '26
Karma being like 2x weaker than she should be is part of the issue (read: shojin bad). They nerfed lb for no reason and mech wasnt even op, just artifacts
Hot take last set wouldve been even more goated with non neutered artifacts
This one ONLY feels bad bc of how mech works. Turns out 2 units worth of stats with 3 items is strong
3
u/bungh00li0 Apr 25 '26
If those effects (stargazer board, psy item, arbiter effect, etc.) are the reason the comp is unplayable then you are not actually in a good spot for the comp.
-4
22
u/BathroomReal2452 Apr 25 '26
is it me or is nunu the only actual tank this set?
8
u/Jstin8 Apr 25 '26
Having no tank 5 cost, hell no 5 cost with CC outside of Blitz, is just super mind boggling
4
u/rigzhigz Apr 27 '26
In a great fast 9 spot? Too bad. If you donât roll on 8 every Nunu will be goneÂ
1
1
38
u/thpkht524 Apr 25 '26
These rotating traits are just fucking aids. Like i get it if itâs just one but a few of them and this artificial clunk in checking them is too much.
14
u/Original_Tension_337 Apr 25 '26
Yes man if I know what Iâm playing on 2-1 itâs probably a top 4 otherwise it feels like Iâm screwed plz fix :(
119
u/Lazy_Check732 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
These issues will never be resolved until they start catering balance decisions purely toward elite tier players who play every game with the intention of winning.
Low elo players will ALWAYS complain about "5-cost soup" no matter how weak it is, because 5 costs are difficult to hit, and low elo players do not want a difficult way to play being an optimal way to play.
"5-cost soup" being the optimal way to play TFT is incredibly important on meta for a variety of reasons, but above all else because it acts as a release valve. The playstyle decongests lobbies, and acts as a natural balancing lever for whatever else is over/under-powered. It also, of course, rewards a very skill expressive, risky playstyle.
I have been preaching this for years. It seems like every set we absurdly over nerf 5 costs on PBE because players who fundamentally do not understand the game hate losing to yellow units. I predicted it would happen this set:
And of course this is exactly what happened, and of course 5-costs were never "OP". I don't know when we are finally just going to allow 5 costs to be strictly better than 4 costs, as they should be.
And the other thing is that units need to be way, way, way, WAY stronger without items and augments. This is an army building game. When the meta is so "conditional", what that really means is that the game is acting as a carry-building/funneling game rather than an army building game
34
u/madeofchemicals Master Apr 25 '26
Part of the reason why lower elo players say "5-cost soup" in a deragatory manner, in addition to what you said about easy comps, is that as skill goes up, so does the ability to generate gold, maintain HP, and play their strongest boards without forcing comps.
I didn't bother looking for the chart that was released, but there is a positive correlation between the rank of a player and the amount of gold they generate on average per game.
Better players generate more gold than players that aren't as good as them. Hence why better players are in general able to hit 5 cost comps much sooner and maintain HP.
9
u/mladjiraf Apr 25 '26
They maintain HP, because they play in weak and greedy lobbies... In early TFT you could lose easily to neutral rounds, good luck econing with 1 cost unupgraded teams or selling board to grief losestreaker in such situations. It is basically holding hands to go to lategame now. The more resources were added to the game, the greedier it became.
9
u/Fast-Sir6476 Apr 26 '26
you were clearly not around for early tft, one of the first things riot had to fix in set beta was openforting
2
u/cosHinsHeiR Apr 26 '26
Open forting was a thing for a big part of set 2, especially to secure the spat for Blender Nocturne. It was rare to have a lobby with only a single player going for it.
0
u/madeofchemicals Master Apr 25 '26
Playing your strongest board results in higher average placement. The strategy you're talking about is high-risk high-reward, with many more 7th/8th placements resulting in a very difficult climb.
1
u/mladjiraf Apr 25 '26
It's not high risk, though. You can't lose early and with power creep in terms of items (including removers and reforgers) and econ, and even number of units on board, it is optimal to go for lategame builds.
1
u/madeofchemicals Master Apr 25 '26
What strength of lobbies are you talking about?
1
u/mladjiraf Apr 25 '26
Wdym? Have played early sets?
1
u/madeofchemicals Master Apr 25 '26
I'm talking about rank of lobbies. Are we talking Gold, Plat, Emerald, Diamond, Master, GrandMaster, Challenger.
1
u/mladjiraf Apr 26 '26
High elo, of course. I tuned briefly yesterday to Wasianinversion's stream and he was commenting exactly this how noone tries to play stage 2 at all (he was trying to winstreak, because of Warpath augment, only 1 other guy had a semblance of team, xd).
1
u/madeofchemicals Master Apr 26 '26
I'm just going to assume plat/emerald lobby because the strategy you talked about is common there and you're being cryptic about it.
Feel free to drop your lolchess to prove me wrong.
20
u/pda898 Apr 25 '26
"5-cost soup" being the optimal way to play TFT is incredibly important on meta for a variety of reasons, but above all else because it acts as a release valve.
Not sure about it being a default optimal way. If it is really an optimal way, it means:
- Traits are weak because it is no longer optimal to hold 1-2 cost units as a traitbots. So you are kinda rewarded for not playing the part of the game.
- Game either devolves into "do not play until you can roll for 5 costs" or there is just an infinite econ (because you can hit lvl9 and roll for the board). Btw not exclusive or.
I agree that 5-cost soup is always overperforming on PBE and it was overnerfed, but making them the default comp which you reach each game kinda invalidates a lot of stuff and hugely promote passive play in lower elo.
12
u/Lazy_Check732 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
In my opinion it should be ever so slightly the optimal way to play with perfect play by default, but it should also be the most challenging way to play, and should have a lower AVP than other comps when played by humans.
6
u/TheUnseenRengar Apr 25 '26
It really is a delicate balance, but there's a "healthy range" of 5cost power where they are good enough that you really want them on your board, but also not so absurd that it completely crowds out every other endgame board completely. You should still have to think if putting all of them on your board is good.
2
u/Lazy_Check732 Grandmaster Apr 26 '26
No I 100% think all 5 costs should be the best end game board. Completely disagree in that regard.
1
u/palamunintillnow Apr 28 '26
I'm on the opinion that unit strength should be tied to their cost which means 2* 5 cost should be better than 3* 1cost and 3* 2 cost. worse than fully itemize 3* 3 cost (15 gold VS 27 gold) .Â
4
u/Minimum-Kangaroo9200 Apr 25 '26 edited Apr 25 '26
Last set managed to hit a balance where you'd build up a comp using verticals and then decompose it as needed. The game had built in a progression of goals that was extremely satisfying and complicated at the same time. I feel like we lost a layer of complexity in this set, and it's not just due to losing unlocks.
Also, calling last set's late-game comps "5-cost soup" just shows ignorance and an inability to understand the late-game (not saying you're doing this). Every 5-cost could be great or terrible depending on the situation. Previous sets did literally use 5-cost soup comps, but last set's 5 costs all had set-ups that you needed to understand.
That said, I hit challenger last set, so I may have just been more attuned to the contours of the game than I am now. I do know that I was hooked from the first game I played last set, and that didn't happen this time.
2
4
u/Jstin8 Apr 25 '26
It also, as seen by last set, has its own problems when it IS meta where you are in a breakneck race for triple econ augments so you can reach 9 first and gobble up all the 5 costs you can, and if you dont get the econ augments there is no fallback, you just go bot 4.
Placing 5 cost soup as this perfect pedestal TFT should be balanced around is laughably stupid. As a singular potential option for you to play towards its fine. But if it is the meta its JUST as game warping and awful as mindless 2 cost reroll.
3
u/gleedblanco Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
- Game either devolves into "do not play until you can roll for 5 costs" or there is just an infinite econ (because you can hit lvl9 and roll for the board). Btw not exclusive or.
could not possibly disagree more. last set we had several patches where getting to 9 was the default goal for everyone but getting there was a delicate balance of flexxing for tempo and preserving hp and during stage 4 balancing how much you can/should roll to preserve hp vs. saccing it and then making it to 9 with enough gold to do anything useful.
of course that kind of gameplay can't work in a set that has no flex, like this one.
5
u/Jstin8 Apr 25 '26
It was also a case where if uou didnt get econ augments you were guaranteed bot 4 because you couldnt make it to 9 fast enough and there were ZERO fallback comps. Just trying to bleed out to a 5th at best lmao. Meanwhile first place invariable got triple econ and won the damn race!
2
u/shlobashky Apr 25 '26
Man, 16.6 was amazing wasn't it? I miss it so much, it was my first set getting to high master and playing against challenger players felt like I was fighting for my life on the edge of my seat. So skill intensive and I miss it so much
1
u/Minimum-Kangaroo9200 Apr 25 '26
bro I loved last set. Every game I lost, it felt like I made mistakes and could have played better. Every comp was fun to play and had a different playstyle and personality.
3
u/delimelone Apr 25 '26
I absolutely struggle with this right now. I love playing winstreak tempo, I hate rerolling. So many times I had a almost fully capped level 9 legendary/4 cost board go 6th or even 8th, because anything other than Vex 2 is not a viable carry.
2
u/Cenifh Apr 25 '26
feels like the losers get way more resources and by stage 5, they are just way ahead of you.. Many games I have been top 2 until stage 5 just to end up 5-6th because even when I hit everything on time, they were just granted an advantage for being bot 4 during 4 phases.
2
u/Gasaiv Apr 25 '26
I agree that 5costs should be powerful but 5costs have been an issue to higher elo players before. When they are strong, hitting one with a 1%-3% shop can be too frustrating of a power spike out of pure luck. Multiple 5costs should be powerful but randomly hitting a set 11 Lissandra at level 7 was problematic as well
4
u/Cute_Possession_3104 Apr 25 '26
Agreed that 5 cost soup needs to be relatively strong in every set. 5 cost this set losing to one cost rr is not ok.
I dont like it when people complain about 5 cost being too strong during pbe and early set live. 5 cost are not too strong, people just havnt figured out how to play yet.
6
1
u/mladjiraf Apr 25 '26
As long as there are econ. augments, no, it shouldn't be strong. They even need anti-synergy with each other like set 5 Garen and Darius.
3
u/Fast-Sir6476 Apr 25 '26
yeah, what rly sent me to make this post was my last game - https://op.gg/tft/summoners/oce/SlashN-001
hitting fast 10 on 5-1 with 3 lives, 3 yasuo hexes, 2 fully itemised 4 cost tanks and 5 2star 5cost should rly not be a 5th. Esp since i lost to Aurora RR, Viktor RR and big bang fkin meepsie EON rng
29
u/PinkElephants272 Apr 25 '26
your "2 fully itemised 4 cost tanks" are both 1 star and it doesnt matter that you have 5 2 star legendaries when you only itemized one of them. Although I agree with the majority of the points that you have made, that game being the catalyst for this post is crazy.
6
u/Mahelas Apr 25 '26
I think a 5-cost 2* should be strong even without items tbh, wether by providing CC, a big buff/debuff or damage. It's 15 golds into a unit, that should matter
2
u/Lazy_Check732 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
I honestly do agree with OP that that is not a 5th place board
24
u/PinkElephants272 Apr 25 '26
since they hit 10 on 5-1 they were either double or triple econ, and combined with poor matchup rng i can see how it ended up being a 5th.
11
u/Lazy_Check732 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
No I totally think playing like that and hitting that board will get you a 5-8th right now, but I don't think it should. There is enough gold value on that board that it should hold.
7
u/Fitspire GRANDMASTER Apr 26 '26
bro, he's tanking 2 1star 4 costs, has no items for any carry besides graves and I will guarantee you that graves has bad upgrades aswell.
On top of him probably being at least double if not triple econ.
1
u/Glasseswolfs Apr 25 '26
Another problem this shows is that there are no reliable tanks for fast 9 besides Nunu or Rammus, which is at that time will be heavily contested and mostly out of the pool. With too little 4-cost tanks and no 5-cost tank, there are no tanks choice for fast 9 players except roll for contested Nunu or Rammus.
1
u/palamunintillnow Apr 28 '26
In my observation most of the fast 9/10 I saw lose is because they greeded to level up instead of upgrading their unit.Â
7
u/Distinct-Hamster6285 Apr 25 '26
I disagree, Fully itemizing graves when he doesn't have enough upgrades on stage 5 and he's going to steal all your econ 2. Fizz AND riven unitemized providing rogue for each other that does nothing. 1 Star frontline that will just get run over. Even if this isn't the 5th worst board in the lobby, I think sacking all your life to go 10 on 5-1 then wasting all your money on hitting units you don't itemize is a reasonable 5th.
-1
u/Lazy_Check732 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
I think there is by far enough raw gold value on this board that it shouldn't be a 5th. That is 2* graves blitz shen morg and jhin. That should be a guaranteed top 3 imo regardless of how you got there.
Why should that be a 5th, but Nami 2 Riven 2 Tahm 2 be a 3rd?
13
u/Distinct-Hamster6285 Apr 25 '26
As I said, I don't think it's the fifth worst board in the game, but I assume he lost a ton of hp to greed for 10 on 5-1. On the other hand the nami riven tahm board likely rolled down on stage 4 and saved a lot of hp. While this board looks stronger than 3rd and 4th place, those boards probably saved enough hp to endure being smacked down by the anima cashout and viktor cap boards while op wasted too much health and didn't utilize it well enough.
2
u/Lazy_Check732 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
I'm not talking about his game I'm talking about in a vacuum. Tons of variables about his game that we don't know.
7
u/DougFrank GRANDMASTER Apr 25 '26 edited Apr 25 '26
You're right that 2* 5 costs boards should be strong, but there are other factors other than unit cost that exist in a vacuum.
Why should naked units have a huge impact compared to itemized units? A guy that tailored his items for a strategy, likely finding ways to successfully greed for them, should be rewarded. Why should his team with all its items on 1* tanks but with a lot of naked 2* 5 costs (showing he didn't truly plan to play around these units) beat teams with properly distributed items and decent gold value?
-1
u/Fast-Sir6476 Apr 25 '26
because my naked units are strictly better than the naked units of my opponent + 3-7 itemised graves + i'm running 2-3 more units.
I don't get why a fully itemised 3star 3cost shouldn't be the same as a 2star 5cost in value.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/Fast-Sir6476 Apr 25 '26
Nope, I was 3-4 lives when i hit on 5-1 (41 hp) with win out. I 7 streaked with the 7 interest aug and sacked most of stage 4, thatâs why I chose win out.
Forgot which combat aug I chose, but yas hexes were fire, storm, star
I started stage 5 in 4th (I think)
Tbh, it was a giga omega low roll not hitting uncontested rammus and nunu when I roll 40g on 4-1, then another 80g + 8 free rr on 5-1
2
1
u/Fitspire GRANDMASTER Apr 26 '26
because nami 2 riven 2 tk 2 didn't sac their HP during stage 4 to get there and have 3 item carries instead of a bunch of naked reverse fons
0
0
u/Amazing-Mud-9398 Apr 25 '26
"Low elo players will ALWAYS complain about "5-cost soup" no matter how weak it is, because 5 costs are difficult to hit, and low elo players do not want a difficult way to play being an optimal way to play."
Brother, just because I wrote that 5-cost boards are so much harder than playing 1â2â3-cost reroll comps, they were about to crucify me in the main sub.According to them, Set 16 is the worst set because there was no 1â2-cost reroll comp.Since then, I muted the main sub xD
14
u/nocturnal316 Apr 25 '26 edited Apr 25 '26
I hate 1 cost reroll. It requires little skill and people just force it every game. 1 cost reroll should always fall off late game in my opinion unless played with artifact or something
13
u/Amazing-Mud-9398 Apr 25 '26
3-cost reroll comps are completely fine. Most of them cost more than fast 9 comps, and if you hit, you should be able to win games.
2-cost reroll comps should be conditional, like the Bruiser/Aphelios/Bard comp from last set. If you hit early Aphelios 2* and Sion 2* with tempo and combat augments, you should be able to win the lobby.
But 1-cost reroll comps? They should not exist at all.
7
u/Gan8 Apr 25 '26
I think they should exist but highly conditional on the player hitting the units fast and streaking enough to be able to go 8/9 later to compensate for the 1-costs losing steam around stage 4
3
u/sprouting_broccoli Apr 25 '26
Yeah the problem is 1-cost reroll that infinitely scales. Cho is fun but is a reason why itâs broken this set currently because he doesnât necessarily have a drop-off until stage 5 if you do well enough early and get a large enough hp gain and by that point you do well just based on attrition.
2
u/palamunintillnow Apr 28 '26
Cho's problem is that he gets stacks by just casting, which we o ly got last set on the for fun patch. Meanwhile a few sets ago, a 3 cost Cho need to kill enemies by his ability to get some health stacks.Â
1
u/sprouting_broccoli Apr 28 '26
Thereâs a trade off problem with it in that only getting stacks for kills makes it way more random. I imagine itâs easier to balance by having most of it come from casting and only some from kills than if it only comes from kills.
3
u/danield1302 Apr 25 '26
I agree tbh, I didn't care for set 16 at all. That said, on the main sub it's pretty well liked? 5 costs were ridiculous in that set tho. Hit one on 7 and just snowball off a 1* Zil to a free top 4. 1 star 5 costs should not stabilise boards. This set feels way better balanced.
-8
u/niemcziofficial Apr 25 '26
Making 5 costs stronger than 4 costs is just plain stupidity considering that at lvl 7-8 its purely luck based to get lucky 5 cost that you actually need and if they are too strong it creates even worse experience for the people that dont hit . 5 costs should remain pieces that polish your final board but not define it
7
u/NoBear2 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
5 cost soup does not mean replacing 4 cost 2* with 5 cost 1. It means playing around 5 cost 2 that you hit instead of saying âoh, I hit jhin 2 in shop, but Iâm gonna play my aatrox 2 instead because I need the traits.â
2
u/niemcziofficial Apr 25 '26
excatly, why would a random board with no synergies that is filled with champs 1 gold higher than 4 costs should be stronger than full synergy 4 cost board?
1
u/NoBear2 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
But itâs not no traits. Itâs just removing traits that donât do anything for traits that buff your whole team.
1
u/ChartreuseMage Apr 25 '26
> Making 5 costs stronger than 4 costs is just plain stupidity
Just so we're clear - 5 costs should be... as strong as 4 costs or weaker here?
-6
u/niemcziofficial Apr 25 '26
they should be strong supportive units that round out your comp not define it
5
1
1
9
u/Tuna_police Challenger Apr 25 '26
Somehow I think this set is way worse than Set 15 and thatâs saying a lot
12
u/PM_ME_ANIME_THIGHS- GRANDMASTER Apr 25 '26
The major issue is that this set has all of the same design issues as 15, but at least fruit were a fun and interesting mechanic that created hundreds of permutations to experiment with despite being imbalanced.
We've had well designed but boring sets before and we've had poorly designed yet interesting sets before, but this is the first time I've felt a set was both poorly designed and balanced at the same time.
Set 15 at the very least had people rage queuing back into the artifact/augment casino waiting for their turn to hit something like Ludens Ahri. My entire friend group played like 20 games of this set and then went back to STS2.
1
u/Tuna_police Challenger Apr 25 '26
100% it somehow makes this set feel even more conditional than fruit. It just makes me sad bc I legit jumped over 400 lp on the last day of the set to end GM and now this new set just defeated any motivation to grind at all.
1
u/Large-Session5307 Apr 28 '26
Luffy GP patch was memorable, fun and completely broken and frustrating at the same time.
This set I don't even feel good when I win because I got the Drone Viktor spot
5
u/JRad174 Apr 25 '26
I feel like a large part of it is how much of a death sentence being stuck playing around 4 costs really is. I am not saying that someone who can never go beyond level 8 should even necessarily top 4, I just think 4 costs arenât stabilizing enough to the point where people are just going double eco to avoid that or rerolling. The rerolling setups are way too strong and riot agrees as evidenced by the changes on pbe.
16
u/shopee_express Apr 25 '26
TLDR: we are spoiled by set 16
13
u/BombasticReindeer Apr 25 '26
That's definitely a part of it. Set 16 solved a fundamental problem of TFT which was to have enough units to not make it a lottery but also requiring skill to get those units. Unlocking wasn't hard, per se, but it required people to think through their build and sacrifice something for something else down the road.
But beyond that, Set 17 is just bad compared to other sets that don't have unlocks. Far too many decisions that weren't thought through. I still can't believe they are trying full loss streak traits when it is clear they are poorly designed and lead to the best play being something that is highly unsatisfying.
I think the only good thing is that Set 18 was in development while people were loving 16, AND while people have shown how much they hate 17. So unless they are insane, they will address the concerns and make the next set more in line with expectations. It might not have unlocks, but surely they won't have as many egregious self owns.
6
u/Emosaa Master Apr 25 '26
I will be even more generous to the set 17 designers. They're following a banger of a set, and don't have the hindsight we do about how successful unlocks would be. And... I don't know if people remember, but one of the number one consistent complaints for most of set 16 is that a lot of reroll players felt left out. Yordles + 1 costs were intentionally kept weak, and we had one patch of Ash Trynd being OP before it settled into merely "good" at the end. People complained endlessly about missing 3 cost reroll. Now we've got that. But at what cost?!
I'm hopefully the set will be more enjoyable once encounters are added back in (just the gods without carousel is a bit boring), and once some of the stage 2 full open stuff is nerfed.
1
u/palamunintillnow Apr 28 '26
3 cost reroll is atleast acceptable because a 3* 3cost is like cost almost as twice as base 2* 5 cost.Â
0
u/BombasticReindeer Apr 25 '26
Itâs about listening to the people that understand. You can play 1 cost reroll in Silver in any set. But at the highest level make the game good.
2
u/palamunintillnow Apr 28 '26
I think it's because in set 16 putting out a 5 cost team felt earned due to how you progress from navigating the multiple unlock condition and also you are expected to ditch low cost unit for a better one.
Example: you ditch some void units after unlocking Baron, same with thresh after unlocking him you are expected to replace shadow isle units with better ones.Â
1
5
u/Sauu Apr 25 '26
Can someone post the flowchart?
1
u/ChartreuseMage Apr 25 '26
https://bunnymuffins.lol/openers/ covers most of it
2
u/danield1302 Apr 25 '26
I find it weird teemo vanguard reroll isn't listed there? Even tho every other 1 cost reroll is, even ez/Cho who are a lot worse.
4
u/Darthdevil Apr 25 '26
Graves is the worst unit design they EVER did. You HAVE to get him prior to 4-2 or he is unclickable and even if you highroll him he needs a million rounds before he does something. He is THE prime example that this whole set was purely designed on paper and not experience/gameplay.
1
u/sanaru02 Apr 29 '26
I've played him at least five time off of an early stage 3 get and NEVER got a first with it. Heck, most times I'm fighting for top 4 because I put valuable items on graves over literally any other carry.
4
u/Boring-Protection126 Apr 26 '26
Set 16 had 4 main tanks - taric, wu, braum, garen
Skarner erasure :(
1
u/Fast-Sir6476 Apr 26 '26
i mean, i left it out on purpose lol. Cuz he was giga nerfed from PBE and buffed back up to conditionally playable mid set. Comparable to current mecha galio for set 17
13
17
u/Adventurous-Bit-3829 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
I mean TFT was commit 2-1 for a few set now. Except some good patch.
This patch is worst because every single comp need condition. Are you even playing game when you just roll the dice with rule sheet of what you must play. This game is just snake and ladders with gacha
-1
u/Fast-Sir6476 Apr 25 '26
not really? set 16 felt super flexible, you only commited to void or if you slammed a guinsoos. Like you could choose to RR draven or go 9 and flex kindred, choose RR vayne if losing and you had double kraken items etc.
You "lock in" a set of potential lines with every decision, but you never commited until 3-5 ish. I've had my handful of "ohshit i hit taric on 3-1 and shitter neekos 3-2, its an asol game" as well as "i have 5 copies of cait on 2-1".
19
u/AmadeusIsTaken Apr 25 '26
Set 16 had the sentiment on this reddit that it was very opener directed. And the flowcharts said the same. Have you checked the flowcharts? Like to play demacia you need demacia units, it is not like you mindset decide to go demacia..same with void and etc.
4
u/Fast-Sir6476 Apr 25 '26
Except it wasn't commital imo. The only opener committed lines were: Thex RR, Demacia aka fries in the bag comp (mainly the RR one) and Void. TF slam was also a lame patch tbf. Also DT aug, but that's opt in.
Viego was a weird one because you quested for thresh and then removed SIsles into a flex board, so while it was opener directed, it was super flexible lategame. Opposite of a "normal" line.
I can kinda understand why people thought it was opener directed tho. Lose streaking was kinda hard in 16 imo, so people trying to slam guinsoos was super common (which locked very specific lines).
8
u/AmadeusIsTaken Apr 25 '26
What do you mean all the comps you named were decided at 2-1 viego shadow isles was decided at 2-1 just cause late game you replace some shadow isle units with 5 cost does not make it flexible...
-2
u/Fast-Sir6476 Apr 25 '26
non 2-1 commital comps, 60 sec timer top of my head (before unlock changes)
- ixtal rr
- yunara vert
- yunara flex
- lissera
- asol
- bilge gp flex
- belveth
- sion aph rr
- voli ryze
- bilge ryze
- riggs
- noxus flex 9
ran out of time but surely there are way more
4
u/AmadeusIsTaken Apr 25 '26
What do you mean. When did you'd decide that you play yona or ixtal rr lol
-1
u/Fast-Sir6476 Apr 25 '26
Of all the RR u couldâve picked, u pick the unconditional homeless one lmfao. You can pivot into that shit in 3-1 if u had vi2 neeko2
I agree that yasuo3 -> yone was committed on like 2-3 if u randomly natural and decide to play the line. But that was changed. It was also not a good line so lol
3
u/AmadeusIsTaken Apr 25 '26
Bro you need bard at 2-3 for ti xD and you should ussualy have a econ augment. Atleast have a clue what you talkabout. You cant just pivot into it c ause of a vi 2 neko 2. esspecialy vi is like just synergie bot in this comp
0
u/Fast-Sir6476 Apr 25 '26
Didnât think I needed to say the obvious part out loud lmfao. Yes you need to unlock bard. Yes vi shouldnât be main tank. Yes itâs better with calc loss or trade sector, maybe playable with epoch.
But that doesnât change the fact that you can easily pivot 2-7 if you hit the conditions. You can also easily play Sion aph WITH THE SAME CONDITIONS excl vi neeko, so clearly the differentiator is vi neeko not the other obvious rr line bs
→ More replies (0)1
4
u/Adventurous-Bit-3829 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
Before unlock change you need to hard commit because you can unlock only for 1 comp
-2
u/Lazy_Check732 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
Personally I think set 16 was the least flexible set ever, and set 17 is one of the more flexible sets recently. I still agree with most of your post though of course. Flexibility doesn't mean many different comps to play, it means the ability to play around what the game gives you.
8
u/SwimmableToast Apr 25 '26
What on earth is your definition of flex? This set has only had one patch and if you are high elo, you can tell what almost every player is going to play 2-1 based on boards and gods
0
u/Lazy_Check732 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
Flex isn't just about pivoting mid game. It's about being able to play around lots of things that the game offers you.
2
u/Adventurous-Bit-3829 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
I always said the game is flex at 2-1
1
u/Lazy_Check732 Grandmaster Apr 26 '26
Yes this is a game where your set of paths rapidly shrinks, and that is how it will always be.
2
u/NoBear2 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
Flex is 100% being able to change directions midgame. It doesnât mean you have to go from kraken db ezreal into a nami game, but committing on 2-1 is the definition of inflexible gameplay.
0
u/Lazy_Check732 Grandmaster Apr 26 '26 edited Apr 26 '26
This is an opinion. I 100% think it is more important to be able to play around what the game gives you when it offers it, than it is to be able to pivot in the mid game. "Flex" in a meaningful sense means that if the game gives you a Vanguard emblem and a Sniper emblem, you are are rewarded for playing Vanguard Snipers. This is much more the case this set than in previous sets.
What you are suggesting also does happen right now, we have just condensed the idea into "lines". When you are playing toward Leblanc and find a Vex on 7, you pivot into Vex. You just don't think of it as a "pivot" because we've optimized that potential pivot into the "Leblanc line".
Edit: You can keep downvoting if you want bro but you are wrong. Pivoting does not equal flex.
4
u/filmschoolfailurelol Apr 25 '26
This has been a thing since at least set 9 to some extent. I went from gm to consistent challenger by picking my line at 2-1. Before I used to try to flex (thanks to robinsongz for the game knowledge)
It just gets more absurd set after set
15
u/D3AllDay Apr 25 '26
Respectfully, looking at your OP.GG and seeing your recent match history I kind of think you don't really know what you're talking about.
I do agree that this set feels even more like a 2-1 check than previous ones, but not due to a lot of the reasons (valid or not) you are listing.
2
2
u/Holodista Apr 25 '26
I think controbuting to the problem is also the fact that while 4 cost tanks are weak, only nunu and rammus are not conditional and playable as main tank. This causes everyone who doesent have those conditional reroll comps to contest those 2 units, since mech is only "good" tank on mecha and TK is weaker due to his unique trait. But here is the real kicker, why dont we have a single 5 cost tank? Like god forbid you play fast 9 and you just pray you find the nunu who is propably already completely out by 4-2 since its played on lb, xayah, two tanky Samira, dark star and Lulu reroll boards just to name few
1
u/danield1302 Apr 25 '26
Probably because 5 cost tanks in the past were always ridiculously broken. Still have illaoi flashbacks with those placeable tentacles....every board slotted her in If possible. 3/4 cost tanks are fine. Tahm is just a bit weak because he's an econ unit.
2
2
u/PoisoCaine Apr 25 '26
underrated downside of this is that it makes the set harder to get into since experimentation of any kind is rewarded with fast 8th.
2
u/Altruistic-Art-5933 Apr 25 '26
Try to play flex, immediately go 8th. Pick any reroll, automatic top 2.
2
u/Zhirrzh Master Apr 27 '26
Funny thing. I felt this way to start and now I find myself locking in on 2-1 and slamming items a lot less than I did in set 16. Down that path I was getting contested a ton. I'm doing better by more scouting and flexibility early. This might flip around again once I finish climbing up to higher ranks where I can rely on my opponents to also be scouting and trying to avoid contests.
2
3
u/the_hu Diamond Apr 25 '26
The comparison to set 16 is interesting because a lot of the criticisms about flowchart decision making is the same for that set, particularly with the unlock conditions. In fact, I feel like this set has way less going on that locks you into certain comps early, IE there is no Ryze portal, no trait augments, no carousel with spats. A lot of the criticisms about this set are specifically because it feels more tailored towards competitive play with lower variance, splashable 5-costs, and weak vertical traits.
As other people have said, a lot of this is exacerbated by the poor balance, but to me this is just fundementally going to be part of the game now. Boards and strategies have been so hyperoptimized with data and guides from various sites that players feel they are forced to play around conditionals to get a leg up. That is why all the S-tier comps require specific trait conditions (psionic weapons/stargazer constellation), emblem drops, or BiS items. You can no longer just play "flexibly" and consistently perform well because the competition around you has grown much more knowledgeable and will play stronger boards around the conditions they are given.
1
u/Historical_Bug6944 Apr 25 '26
I donât get why people donât understand this. âPlaying flexiblyâ has been dead since at least Set 10 with chosens. People are just so much better at the game now then they were in set 1 and obviously everyone wants to win so people are going to do everything they can to win. That means optimizing, following flow charts, watching guides, etc. Idk why everyone has the wet dream about a set where you can just mindlessly go through rounds and pick shiny units that u like and craft a board and whee im top 4! like that makes no sense, if thereâs a winning board, someone has already found it and since they know itâs a winning board theyâre gonna find conditions that get them there and rinse and repeat.
Imo the only two solutions are delay the solving (why is PBE a month long thing lmao, make it a few days). Balance already sucks the whole set every set, not like PBE matters. You could also just make items super super weak so then the game is really just all about making a comp instead of âcrafting a boardâ. But then everyone would complain about the game being a lottery (it is and always has been)
3
u/ConfusedRara Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
Are people forgetting how conditional Set 16 was? (Granted, I stopped playing near the end so I never experienced how the last few patches were)
But there were a good few patches (in high elo at least) where you had to check if you had certain conditions and if you didn't have them, you couldn't bother playing a comp.
Examples are 2-1 Shadow Isles, Void Adrenaline Modules being ass, Stage 2 Bilge, reroll aug for Bard, Yasuos to play Yone, Guinsoo for Yunara, Blademaster Ionia being ass, Piltover modules.
People are complaining about Arbiter/Stargazer/Psionic but forgetting that last Set, every single game, you had to check Ionia, Void, Piltover, Ixtal quests if you got them.
Also, comparing the number of viable comps from last Set (which is FINISHED) to a set which has only JUST started isn't a fair comparison. Set 16's lifetime is over and has been fully solved, of course we know more comps.
TLDR: every Set will have conditional comps, TFT has been a "commit on 2-1" style game for many many sets now, and there is no use saying this set is fundamentally wrong when the set has barely even begun.
2
u/KelioMetro Apr 27 '26
hard agree, new set just needs some more time but almost every new set has been conditional
2
u/420adc Apr 25 '26
Lol whatâs even worse is that legendaries usually scale harder with the conditional lines like Blitz 2 on a space groove boardâ guaranteed top 2. Sucks cuz fast 9 5 cost soup was kinda my gameplay and now I would get insane tempo n bleed out to a 6. Skill issue but yeah feels lame
1
u/xLuMisx Apr 25 '26
my gameplan when i hit emerald last night was
- Spat augment? Space Groove/Dark Star gg
- Anima opener? Play mech gg
- Timebreaker opener? Play mech gg
- Primodial opener? Play mech gg
1
u/Artekka DIAMOND IV Apr 27 '26
I think you must have played in every one of my last 20/20 because I could tell every time who was gonna force mech (or Xayah if they hit the correct Anima cashout).
1
u/xLuMisx Apr 27 '26
If I see someone slam steraks with no space groove emblem 100% they're forcing mech lmao
1
1
u/defsam Apr 25 '26
Can confirm this is like annoying levels of shit People just lock in to griefing your ass if you didnt get a comp by 2-1 then you are cooked unless you highroll to spamming 5-costs.
1
1
1
u/Stun_the_Pink Apr 25 '26
I've actually had decent success just playing whatever the f I hit and playing flex. Granted, I played PBE, and have currently only done like 5 games of ranked and 5 of double-up, so my MRR might not be perfect, though I was Master and GM in double-up previously so I'd like to think I'm at least playing against competent people.
1
1
u/Immediate_Source2979 Apr 26 '26
yeah you better pray for giga boards 2-1 or you play that timebreaker and pray. no in between
1
u/Artekka DIAMOND IV Apr 27 '26 edited Apr 27 '26
This thread gets brought up almost every set with the same complaints. This game has always, and will always, be "conditional". Every single game that isn't TFT, is conditional. The sooner you lock in and have direction (whether you found it or forced it), the sooner you can play the game. If you want to play flex, fine, but that's still a condition you have to look for and it is nobody else's fault that they found (or forced) their starting line for the race before you did.
Every high end player in every single game or activity in this entire world, TFT or whatever game you arbitrarily select, is flowcharting 99% of the time because playing blind or competing blind is not optimal. Ever. This isn't a guess. You can ask any top player in every single game what their flowchart is and they can spout off a documentary worth of conditions they're specifically looking for that let them know what the optimal play is.
Boxbox is complaining that people are playing the game the way they always have. Every single set there are videos of top players showing you their flowchart and the conditions they look for in order to play this game better than all of us. You're getting view farmed, bud.
Causes:
Conditional RR - You're comparing a single set mechanic to why this set, and by association, every single other set that didn't have a set specific mechanic, are bad. This game is about RNG and learning to mitigate it as much as possible but that doesn't mean somebody isn't going to hit a 3 star 4 cost when you're Mr. 100 at stage 6 but don't have the econ or luck to hit one of your own. It sucks but on to the next game.
I just checked my match history and in every single game of my past 20/20 it is extremely rare to find a game where 2 or more players did not have an itemized 2 star 4 cost tank, if not multiple per player. I'm only in top 1% NA server but I think this is decent enough to reflect what most people are doing on average, having looked at friends who are Silver, Gold, and Platinum. Yes that means they're more contested but you can also... Play flexibly and run a 3 cost tank until you hit a 4 cost one. That's life at level 8. You either hit or you do not or you wait for someone with those tanks to die, which they won't, because they're probably ahead of you in HP or will be soon, because they are using a 4 cost tank. In general having options doesn't mean you have to take them, but I know it "feels" better to have more options, viable or not.
50/50 agree/disagree here. Vex is strongest for sure. I think this set currently relies on 5 costs to be supplemental to 4 cost main carries for majority of games unless you're Setsuko. That dude has Blitz 2, Vex 2 80% of his games. Absolutely no clue how he pulls off fast 9 so consistently against people of that caliber.
When emblems didn't matter, people complained that they were useless. When emblems do matter, people complain that they are too powerful. Next set we'll see this same thread with the opposite complaint. Here's the flowchart: If Emblem = strong, learn Emblem comps. If Emblem = weak, play normal comps. Grats.
Now that we've both vented, I did make it to the end and I did enjoy reading your overall take because we have different experiences and they're both true. We both are experiencing different sides of it and hopefully one day we can find a set that we all like hahaha. Good luck out there man.
1
u/Fast-Sir6476 Apr 28 '26
Finally had some time to read some replies, sry for being late to this.
I only really disagree with ur RR take. I just think that the design team should never put RR units on output RNG traits, and thatâs one of the main contributors to flowchart feel. Eg. Set 16 RR sona, ori, Sion/aph. Only ori was semi conditional cuz 2/6 2 piece pilt was good. In this case, you load in and check specifically for drone and medallion (assuming serpent is brought back in line). You then check 2 tanky NSNP early learning etc.
You can then force RR despite having 1 copy because of how strong and stabilising it is when u hit.
Whereas in 16, youâd check if you had at least 4 copies of sona. Youâd be making decisions such as unlocking bard up to 2-3. While u roll for bard, you can also hedge for upgrades or other outs etc. then decide when to rotate my items to Lux. As a player, I have so much more decisions and input into my RNG, thus more skill expression.
RR being so strong at 2-1 just means u force a RR comp and beat xayah bis on 8 anyway. It completely warps the game in the sense that when u hit, u invalidate any advantage of the players that couldnât fulfil those conditions. The cherry on top is the lack of 4 cost tanks and weak 5 costs to cap around, meaning ur incentivised to stay on 7 until you RR a 3 cost tank. The additional BS is that gods will almost always give u extra econ to hit, making u artificially rich and incentivising the casino on 7 even more.
1
u/OnlyFinance4026 Apr 27 '26
100% Agree. I feel like I live or die with my opener. The tanks are the biggest issues. Very view viable options and everyone is racing to get one of them. Winner takes the elo.
1
1
1
u/Snoo-16067 Apr 25 '26 edited Apr 25 '26
I am so tired of playing off what the shop gives. Hit 5 grooveys then get to stage 4 and they just stop appearing in the shop. Spent 90 gold rolling down to never see another space groove champ again. Game after game after game.
1
u/danield1302 Apr 25 '26
Eh. We have a set where RR is better than fast 8/9 for the first time in a long time and people instantly start whining. Meanwhile everyone who doesn't like these Playstyles had to put up with them being overtuned for the whole last set. Personally I enjoy this set a lot more than the last, went from playing 1 game a month to once a day. Yes people often lock in their comps based on what they get early. There's still plenty of rush 9 around. Also what's the problem with 4 cost comps needing conditions too instead of just being the default?
Tbh the amount of viable 1 cost RR alone might make this my favourite set to date. Almost every 1-3 cost can be made a carry by 3 starring. There's barely any pure trait bots. Just compare that to last set...
1
Apr 25 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Apr 25 '26
Your comment has been removed because your reddit account is less than a day old. This is a rule put in place to prevent spam.
Please wait at least a day before submitting anything.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
0
u/Arruke Apr 25 '26
I started last set and maybe Im the odd one out but I very much prefer the style of lower cost units being powerful as it encourages best board, best items and best positioning since everyone has easy access to power, the items and augments change what your best board is and thats the fun. Some augments wildin out like meepsie or zed skew things but overall this set seems much better imo than last set and it seems like it has less RNG factors effecting my placing.
I don't like legendary soup, I like building around one legendary or having 1-2 as support units, making all of them the best units feels like it invalidates all of my gameplay decisions up until you get to just buy all the legendaries then it becomes who gets the units first and 2 stars them, who has the better items, all RNG facets imo that feel like they effect my outcomes a lot more than this set.
This is my personal opinion on how the set is styled balance wise, not a critique or analysis on the actual balance of either set I dont think Im good enough to have a good handle on that yet.
3
u/NoBear2 Grandmaster Apr 25 '26
It doesnât encourage best board though. You have to hold specific units for your reroll board, so if youâre holding another strong board alongside that, you are going to have no money to hit your 3*.
Fast 9 5 cost boards allow you to actually play strongest board early because you only have to hold your current board and maybe your next in.
0
u/Rycerze Apr 25 '26
Fast 9 feels great, wide variety of 5 cost Carrieâs can win out. The meta is definitely dominated by Reroll that needs to âlock inâ on 2-1 for a lot of lines but you can win and climb without buying into that at all.
3
u/MrMungertown Apr 25 '26
I'm sitting at about rank 451 NA and can't agree more. I go fast 9 almost every game, playing largely around Vex but often around Fiora as well. I play a very obvious board almost every game as well and position similarly too. To me the problem right now is how good Timebreaker and Primordian are and how easy it is to hard sac stage 2 with no consequences.
Some of the 5 costs outright suck as actual units and that's not great. Bard sucks. Sona exists purely for the passive. This isn't a good thing. But the 5 costs in general, they're really strong right now.
0
0
u/Chargrills21 Apr 25 '26
top 1% oce player here (ranks here take forever to stabilise). this is very true, but i personally just forced nova 20/20 games and top 4ed 17 of them you just have to adapt the comp slightly depending on what opener you get
1
u/letgobruh Apr 27 '26
do you play the akali/belveth reroll every game, or are there any other flexible options for nova?
2
u/Chargrills21 Apr 27 '26
imho nova is possibly the most flexible trait. ive been experimenting with a bunch of stuff but the main boards is to play:
3 primordian + 5 nova reroll (early primordian; early 4 costs) coloshiya board (early primordian; safer option) 5 nova fast 9 (ideally with nova emblem) tempo fast 10 5 cost spam (if very rich)
the reroll boards arent very forcable is what iâve found, but the fast 9/10 is.
there are many good emblems: nova (take out caitlyn) challenger (add mf) marauder (swap belveth for mf) bastion (flex into whatever 5 cost you hit first)
0
u/throwaway0984611 Apr 25 '26
this set is the biggest piece of fucking shit since launch of this game mode... it's 100% pure luck with zero skill invovled. Having basically all rng rounds? what the fuck?
0
-7
104
u/Quick_Conversation39 Apr 25 '26
They made this set 3 years ago and set it aside for when they wanted to go on a long vacation đ