Best TFT Comps by Placement
This table ranks TFT Set 17 team compositions by their average placement finish, showing which comps consistently achieve top placements. Top 8-champion Set 17 compositions: Rogue/N.O.V.A. (77.6% top 4, 3.07 avg place, 706 games); Replicator/N.O.V.A. (75.8% top 4, 3.10 avg place, 2,248 games); Challenger/N.O.V.A. (69.8% top 4, 3.62 avg place, 476 games). Rogue/N.O.V.A. leads with a 77.6% top-4 rate and 3.07 average placement. Replicator/N.O.V.A. follows at 75.8%. Analyzing 49 8-comp compositions with real-time performance statistics.
Primary | Champions | Avg | Top 4 | First | Contested | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Avg Place 2.18 | Top 4 82.35% | First Place 33.61% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.81 | Top 4 80.79% | First Place 29.80% | Severe Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.01 | Top 4 77.01% | First Place 18.23% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.06 | Top 4 76.17% | First Place 15.73% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.07 | Top 4 77.60% | First Place 21.88% | Severe Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.10 | Top 4 75.81% | First Place 26.54% | Severe Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.15 | Top 4 65.51% | First Place 18.60% | Severe Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.20 | Top 4 63.13% | First Place 19.73% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.34 | Top 4 72.53% | First Place 13.18% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.45 | Top 4 72.25% | First Place 12.87% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.47 | Top 4 62.82% | First Place 11.76% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.47 | Top 4 60.82% | First Place 15.76% | Severe Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.50 | Top 4 64.77% | First Place 11.76% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.58 | Top 4 66.77% | First Place 17.96% | Severe Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.59 | Top 4 66.97% | First Place 16.95% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.61 | Top 4 64.62% | First Place 18.69% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.62 | Top 4 61.71% | First Place 9.97% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.62 | Top 4 69.84% | First Place 8.44% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.70 | Top 4 52.11% | First Place 9.02% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.83 | Top 4 55.47% | First Place 8.82% | Severe Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.85 | Top 4 63.83% | First Place 8.65% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.88 | Top 4 61.73% | First Place 8.47% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.14 | Top 4 50.92% | First Place 9.22% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.27 | Top 4 54.56% | First Place 12.95% | Severe Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.35 | Top 4 50.89% | First Place 4.09% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.44 | Top 4 48.94% | First Place 8.71% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.50 | Top 4 45.95% | First Place 13.87% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.70 | Top 4 48.82% | First Place 7.76% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.72 | Top 4 46.75% | First Place 5.16% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.84 | Top 4 44.95% | First Place 7.26% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.90 | Top 4 47.96% | First Place 4.97% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.92 | Top 4 43.62% | First Place 5.39% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.93 | Top 4 44.69% | First Place 7.64% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.04 | Top 4 42.40% | First Place 4.30% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.25 | Top 4 43.09% | First Place 5.54% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.34 | Top 4 37.41% | First Place 4.88% | Severe Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.36 | Top 4 34.73% | First Place 3.55% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.45 | Top 4 33.72% | First Place 5.60% | Severe Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.45 | Top 4 36.20% | First Place 2.73% | Severe Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.54 | Top 4 37.29% | First Place 4.27% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.55 | Top 4 30.92% | First Place 1.32% | Severe Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.74 | Top 4 28.86% | First Place 6.70% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.77 | Top 4 26.74% | First Place 3.03% | Severe Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.82 | Top 4 35.19% | First Place 4.97% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.91 | Top 4 33.51% | First Place 4.37% | Severe Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.94 | Top 4 30.21% | First Place 3.69% | Moderate Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 6.27 | Top 4 25.30% | First Place 3.55% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 6.31 | Top 4 29.40% | First Place 3.84% | High Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 6.40 | Top 4 20.51% | First Place 2.35% | Low Contested Risk | |||
The Best Comps, Right in Your Game
The Recommended Comps overlay shows the strongest meta comps matched to the traits and units you're already running — with win rate, average placement, and 1st-place odds — without ever leaving TFT.
- Meta comps without alt-tabbing
- Matched to your current traits
- Win rate, avg place & 1st odds
Help us maintain accuracy! If you notice incorrect stats, missing data, or any issues, your feedback directly improves the quality of our data for the entire community.
TFT Set 17 Comps FAQ
What is the best TFT comp in TFT Set 17?
The best TFT comp in TFT Set 17 is Party Animal/Dark Star with Aurelion Sol as the primary carry, finishing top 4 in 82.3% of games with a 2.18 average placement. That consistency is what climbs ranked.
How do I play the Party Animal/Dark Star comp?
To play Party Animal/Dark Star, focus on building around Aurelion Sol as your main carry. Look for Aurelion Sol and supporting units early, prioritize items that synergize with your carry, and aim to hit your power spike by level 7-8. This comp has a 0.1% pick rate, making it a relatively uncontested option.
What comps are good for climbing in TFT Set 17?
For consistent LP gains in TFT Set 17, Party Animal/Dark Star offers the best average placement at 2.18. Other reliable options include N.O.V.A./Brawler (2.81 avg) and N.O.V.A./Brawler (3.01 avg). Consistent comps minimize bottom 4 finishes and provide steady climbing.
What is the easiest TFT comp to play?
Party Animal/Dark Star is a good pick for an easier climb: it finishes top 4 in 82.3% of games but only 0.1% of players pick it, so you are unlikely to be contested and can find your units without forced pivots.
When should I force a comp vs flex in TFT Set 17?
In TFT Set 17, Replicator/N.O.V.A. has a 5.0% pick rate, meaning it's heavily contested. If you see others going for it, consider flexing into alternatives like Party Animal/Dark Star. Force a comp when you hit early units and items, or when it's uncontested. Flex when you see 2+ players competing for the same units.
What is the most consistent TFT comp in TFT Set 17?
Party Animal/Dark Star has the best average placement at 2.18, making it the most consistent comp for climbing. N.O.V.A./Brawler follows at 2.81, and N.O.V.A./Brawler at 3.01. Lower average placement means fewer bottom 4 finishes.
Is average placement better than win rate for climbing?
For consistent LP gains, average placement is often more reliable than pure win rate. A comp like Party Animal/Dark Star with 2.18 average placement minimizes big LP losses from bottom 4 finishes. High variance comps might win more lobbies but also 8th more often. For climbing, consistency usually beats coinflip strategies.