Composiciones de Equipo TFT con Mayor Tasa de Victoria
Esta tabla muestra las composiciones de equipo de TFT con las tasas de victoria más altas, ayudándote a identificar las composiciones más exitosas para subir en clasificatoria. Composiciones de double-up campeones del Set 17: Contendiente (99.3% WR, 1.7 avg), Pícaro (97.9% WR, 1.7 avg), N.O.V.A. (97.8% WR, 1.8 avg). Contendiente/N.O.V.A. lidera con 99.26% de win rate y 1.71 de placement promedio. Pícaro sigue con 97.86% de win rate. Analizando 100 composiciones de double-up campeones con estadísticas de rendimiento en tiempo real.
Primary | Champions | Builds | Avg | Top 4 | First | Contested Risk | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.71 Avg Place | 99.26% Top 4 Rate | 49.07% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
1.66 Avg Place | 97.86% Top 4 Rate | 55.61% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
1.83 Avg Place | 97.80% Top 4 Rate | 51.79% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
1.80 Avg Place | 96.97% Top 4 Rate | 54.55% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
1.62 Avg Place | 96.03% Top 4 Rate | 66.40% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
2.26 Avg Place | 95.46% Top 4 Rate | 32.15% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
2.04 Avg Place | 95.20% Top 4 Rate | 44.72% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
2.27 Avg Place | 95.04% Top 4 Rate | 32.23% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.38 Avg Place | 94.26% Top 4 Rate | 29.50% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.27 Avg Place | 93.97% Top 4 Rate | 31.16% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
2.39 Avg Place | 92.65% Top 4 Rate | 24.93% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.31 Avg Place | 92.61% Top 4 Rate | 31.71% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.37 Avg Place | 92.42% Top 4 Rate | 33.71% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.14 Avg Place | 92.22% Top 4 Rate | 42.45% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.47 Avg Place | 92.06% Top 4 Rate | 28.97% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.14 Avg Place | 91.52% Top 4 Rate | 46.49% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.45 Avg Place | 91.39% Top 4 Rate | 29.59% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.20 Avg Place | 91.30% Top 4 Rate | 44.80% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.25 Avg Place | 91.24% Top 4 Rate | 45.62% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
1.98 Avg Place | 91.00% Top 4 Rate | 57.67% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
2.52 Avg Place | 90.38% Top 4 Rate | 26.97% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
2.42 Avg Place | 90.13% Top 4 Rate | 33.54% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.55 Avg Place | 89.60% Top 4 Rate | 25.87% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.91 Avg Place | 89.30% Top 4 Rate | 15.72% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
2.64 Avg Place | 89.00% Top 4 Rate | 27.61% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
2.64 Avg Place | 88.91% Top 4 Rate | 24.64% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.68 Avg Place | 87.92% Top 4 Rate | 25.75% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
2.54 Avg Place | 87.70% Top 4 Rate | 32.20% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
2.76 Avg Place | 85.47% Top 4 Rate | 31.83% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.81 Avg Place | 84.04% Top 4 Rate | 32.53% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.07 Avg Place | 83.74% Top 4 Rate | 16.56% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
2.88 Avg Place | 83.61% Top 4 Rate | 21.58% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
2.98 Avg Place | 83.60% Top 4 Rate | 18.20% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
2.84 Avg Place | 82.86% Top 4 Rate | 27.24% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
2.92 Avg Place | 82.80% Top 4 Rate | 24.01% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.91 Avg Place | 82.32% Top 4 Rate | 26.29% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.13 Avg Place | 81.76% Top 4 Rate | 12.79% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
2.95 Avg Place | 81.54% Top 4 Rate | 24.86% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.10 Avg Place | 81.35% Top 4 Rate | 12.30% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.19 Avg Place | 81.05% Top 4 Rate | 16.49% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.10 Avg Place | 80.65% Top 4 Rate | 18.21% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.98 Avg Place | 79.95% Top 4 Rate | 24.70% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.18 Avg Place | 79.86% Top 4 Rate | 20.49% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
3.23 Avg Place | 79.36% Top 4 Rate | 12.06% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
2.99 Avg Place | 79.29% Top 4 Rate | 26.43% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.22 Avg Place | 79.28% Top 4 Rate | 13.81% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.25 Avg Place | 79.28% Top 4 Rate | 12.29% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.27 Avg Place | 79.14% Top 4 Rate | 17.27% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.40 Avg Place | 78.75% Top 4 Rate | 11.30% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.27 Avg Place | 78.65% Top 4 Rate | 16.34% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.18 Avg Place | 78.25% Top 4 Rate | 18.31% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
2.95 Avg Place | 77.73% Top 4 Rate | 27.50% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.18 Avg Place | 77.70% Top 4 Rate | 17.88% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.08 Avg Place | 77.54% Top 4 Rate | 23.19% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.17 Avg Place | 77.53% Top 4 Rate | 22.15% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
3.17 Avg Place | 77.46% Top 4 Rate | 24.10% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.29 Avg Place | 77.34% Top 4 Rate | 15.71% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.29 Avg Place | 77.08% Top 4 Rate | 19.48% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.13 Avg Place | 76.66% Top 4 Rate | 25.21% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.32 Avg Place | 76.43% Top 4 Rate | 16.25% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.26 Avg Place | 76.38% Top 4 Rate | 20.70% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.29 Avg Place | 76.14% Top 4 Rate | 14.05% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
3.01 Avg Place | 76.08% Top 4 Rate | 33.63% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
3.22 Avg Place | 75.80% Top 4 Rate | 23.20% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.29 Avg Place | 75.39% Top 4 Rate | 16.87% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.45 Avg Place | 74.75% Top 4 Rate | 15.03% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.52 Avg Place | 74.58% Top 4 Rate | 12.41% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.34 Avg Place | 74.47% Top 4 Rate | 18.24% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.22 Avg Place | 74.02% Top 4 Rate | 25.47% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.22 Avg Place | 73.93% Top 4 Rate | 25.57% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.41 Avg Place | 73.89% Top 4 Rate | 17.52% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.25 Avg Place | 73.75% Top 4 Rate | 18.15% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.32 Avg Place | 73.63% Top 4 Rate | 18.75% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.46 Avg Place | 73.54% Top 4 Rate | 13.57% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.24 Avg Place | 73.53% Top 4 Rate | 17.91% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.34 Avg Place | 72.98% Top 4 Rate | 22.46% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.45 Avg Place | 72.80% Top 4 Rate | 14.76% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
3.52 Avg Place | 72.20% Top 4 Rate | 12.08% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
3.30 Avg Place | 71.20% Top 4 Rate | 23.73% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.54 Avg Place | 71.12% Top 4 Rate | 13.55% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.74 Avg Place | 71.06% Top 4 Rate | 7.72% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.41 Avg Place | 70.77% Top 4 Rate | 21.03% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.55 Avg Place | 70.03% Top 4 Rate | 14.54% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.67 Avg Place | 69.93% Top 4 Rate | 11.15% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.48 Avg Place | 69.26% Top 4 Rate | 23.75% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
3.71 Avg Place | 68.58% Top 4 Rate | 11.03% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.75 Avg Place | 67.05% Top 4 Rate | 8.24% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
3.75 Avg Place | 66.95% Top 4 Rate | 11.76% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.64 Avg Place | 65.71% Top 4 Rate | 21.55% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.77 Avg Place | 65.31% Top 4 Rate | 16.15% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
3.66 Avg Place | 65.12% Top 4 Rate | 19.63% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.78 Avg Place | 64.84% Top 4 Rate | 14.84% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
3.94 Avg Place | 64.09% Top 4 Rate | 5.79% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
3.64 Avg Place | 62.99% Top 4 Rate | 28.89% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
3.92 Avg Place | 61.30% Top 4 Rate | 16.09% First Place | Severely Contested | ||||
4.03 Avg Place | 61.02% Top 4 Rate | 6.66% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
3.96 Avg Place | 58.72% Top 4 Rate | 20.64% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
4.09 Avg Place | 57.03% Top 4 Rate | 17.84% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
4.15 Avg Place | 56.52% Top 4 Rate | 14.35% First Place | Highly Contested | ||||
4.15 Avg Place | 56.39% Top 4 Rate | 11.11% First Place | Moderately Contested | ||||
¡Ayúdanos a mantener la precisión! Si notas estadísticas incorrectas, datos faltantes o cualquier problema, tu retroalimentación mejora directamente la calidad de nuestros datos para toda la comunidad.
Comps de equipo TFT - Set 17 FAQ
¿Cuál es la mejor composición de TFT en TFT Set 17?
La mejor composición de TFT en TFT Set 17 es Contendiente/N.O.V.A. con Maestro Yi como carry principal, logrando una tasa de victoria del 99.3% y un promedio de posición de 1.71. Esta composición es efectiva para subir de rango y consistentemente queda en el top 4.
¿Cómo jugar la composición Contendiente/N.O.V.A.?
Para jugar Contendiente/N.O.V.A., concéntrate en construir alrededor de Maestro Yi como tu carry principal. Busca Maestro Yi y unidades de soporte temprano, prioriza objetos que sinergicen con tu carry, y apunta a alcanzar tu pico de poder en nivel 7-8. Esta composición tiene una tasa de selección del 0.1%, haciéndola una opción relativamente no disputada.
¿Qué composiciones son buenas para subir en TFT Set 17?
Para ganancias consistentes de LP en TFT Set 17, Bestia fiestera/N.O.V.A. ofrece el mejor promedio de posición con 1.62. Otras opciones confiables incluyen Pícaro/Meeple (prom. 1.66) y Contendiente/N.O.V.A. (prom. 1.71). Las composiciones consistentes minimizan las posiciones de bottom 4 y proporcionan una subida estable.
¿Cuál es la composición de TFT más fácil de jugar?
Contendiente/N.O.V.A. es una gran opción para jugadores que buscan una subida más fácil. Con una tasa de victoria del 99.3% pero solo 0.1% de tasa de selección, es poco probable que te disputen, haciendo el juego más fácil de navegar. Baja competencia significa que puedes encontrar naturalmente tus unidades sin forzar pivotes.
¿Cuándo forzar una composición vs ser flexible en TFT Set 17?
En TFT Set 17, Replicador/N.O.V.A. tiene una tasa de selección del 1.9%, lo que significa que es muy disputada. Si ves que otros la juegan, considera pivotar a alternativas como Contendiente/N.O.V.A.. Fuerza una composición cuando encuentres unidades y objetos temprano, o cuando no esté disputada. Sé flexible cuando 2+ jugadores compiten por las mismas unidades.
¿Qué composiciones tienen las tasas de victoria más altas en TFT Set 17?
Las 3 composiciones con mejor tasa de victoria son: 1) Contendiente/N.O.V.A. (99.3%), 2) Pícaro/Meeple (97.9%), y 3) N.O.V.A./Duelista divino (97.8%). Estas representan las composiciones más fuertes para maximizar LP en partidas clasificatorias.
¿Por qué importa la tasa de victoria para las composiciones de TFT?
La tasa de victoria muestra qué tan seguido una composición logra top 4, lo que da LP en clasificatorias. Composiciones con alta tasa de victoria como Contendiente/N.O.V.A. (99.3%) rinden consistentemente bien en muchas partidas. Sin embargo, también considera la tasa de selección—composiciones muy disputadas pueden rendir mal en tus partidas si varios jugadores las fuerzan.