已归档赛季： 这些阵容来自云顶之弈第16赛季，已不再属于当前赛季。显示的数据来自该赛季活跃期间。
按选择率排名的最受欢迎云顶之弈阵容
此表显示基于选择率的最常使用的云顶之弈第16赛季阵容，展示当前版本趋势和流行策略。 顶级 9英雄Set 16阵容：护卫 (72.9% 胜率, 3.3 均), 黑暗之女 (73.7% 胜率, 3.2 均), 护卫 (45.1% 胜率, 4.6 均)。 护卫/狙神以72.88%胜率和3.30平均排名领先。 黑暗之女以73.67%胜率紧随其后。 实时分析55个9英雄阵容的性能数据。
Primary | Champions | Builds | Avg | Top 4 | First | Contested Risk | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
- | 3.30 Avg Place | 72.88% Top 4 Rate | 22.99% First Place | Low Contested | |||
3.24 Avg Place | 73.67% Top 4 Rate | 27.56% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
4.65 Avg Place | 45.05% Top 4 Rate | 3.07% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
5.54 Avg Place | 37.50% Top 4 Rate | 4.17% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.55 Avg Place | 82.61% Top 4 Rate | 31.88% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.51 Avg Place | 71.91% Top 4 Rate | 15.30% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.26 Avg Place | 73.06% Top 4 Rate | 23.94% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
- | 5.52 Avg Place | 28.16% Top 4 Rate | 4.21% First Place | Low Contested | |||
- | 3.41 Avg Place | 73.19% Top 4 Rate | 16.53% First Place | Low Contested | |||
3.01 Avg Place | 77.17% Top 4 Rate | 31.08% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
4.49 Avg Place | 45.89% Top 4 Rate | 5.70% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.00 Avg Place | 77.43% Top 4 Rate | 26.57% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.01 Avg Place | 76.88% Top 4 Rate | 30.40% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
4.63 Avg Place | 48.77% Top 4 Rate | 6.13% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.96 Avg Place | 59.66% Top 4 Rate | 15.87% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.97 Avg Place | 79.39% Top 4 Rate | 27.43% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.52 Avg Place | 72.30% Top 4 Rate | 11.95% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.04 Avg Place | 77.18% Top 4 Rate | 27.51% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.10 Avg Place | 78.61% Top 4 Rate | 22.08% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.35 Avg Place | 71.15% Top 4 Rate | 25.52% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.43 Avg Place | 71.58% Top 4 Rate | 20.00% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.00 Avg Place | 90.67% Top 4 Rate | 45.33% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.29 Avg Place | 71.79% Top 4 Rate | 18.75% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.80 Avg Place | 80.92% Top 4 Rate | 33.06% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.39 Avg Place | 78.12% Top 4 Rate | 12.46% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.42 Avg Place | 74.27% Top 4 Rate | 19.69% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.87 Avg Place | 83.57% Top 4 Rate | 22.91% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.05 Avg Place | 86.36% Top 4 Rate | 22.73% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
4.12 Avg Place | 58.39% Top 4 Rate | 11.19% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.01 Avg Place | 80.71% Top 4 Rate | 22.55% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.43 Avg Place | 86.00% Top 4 Rate | 38.51% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.25 Avg Place | 72.32% Top 4 Rate | 24.40% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.73 Avg Place | 81.19% Top 4 Rate | 34.02% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.37 Avg Place | 71.85% Top 4 Rate | 22.52% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.90 Avg Place | 78.85% Top 4 Rate | 31.07% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.41 Avg Place | 71.15% Top 4 Rate | 15.38% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
4.36 Avg Place | 50.27% Top 4 Rate | 7.47% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
4.03 Avg Place | 62.42% Top 4 Rate | 10.09% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
4.95 Avg Place | 36.71% Top 4 Rate | 5.70% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.92 Avg Place | 78.50% Top 4 Rate | 31.06% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.33 Avg Place | 75.99% Top 4 Rate | 21.11% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.54 Avg Place | 89.70% Top 4 Rate | 29.09% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.45 Avg Place | 72.73% Top 4 Rate | 13.64% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.36 Avg Place | 71.90% Top 4 Rate | 22.77% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.01 Avg Place | 78.82% Top 4 Rate | 25.12% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.43 Avg Place | 89.84% Top 4 Rate | 30.90% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.54 Avg Place | 91.30% Top 4 Rate | 31.88% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.37 Avg Place | 93.19% Top 4 Rate | 23.47% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.56 Avg Place | 91.88% Top 4 Rate | 24.35% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.12 Avg Place | 73.65% Top 4 Rate | 30.39% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
- | 3.23 Avg Place | 76.36% Top 4 Rate | 20.00% First Place | Low Contested | |||
4.51 Avg Place | 50.52% Top 4 Rate | 7.22% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
2.98 Avg Place | 77.21% Top 4 Rate | 33.46% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.59 Avg Place | 68.62% Top 4 Rate | 15.99% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.15 Avg Place | 74.29% Top 4 Rate | 26.33% First Place | Low Contested | ||||
3.30
Avg Place72.88%
Top 4 Rate22.99%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.24
Avg Place73.67%
Top 4 Rate27.56%
First PlaceLow Contested
4.65
Avg Place45.05%
Top 4 Rate3.07%
First PlaceLow Contested
5.54
Avg Place37.50%
Top 4 Rate4.17%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.55
Avg Place82.61%
Top 4 Rate31.88%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.51
Avg Place71.91%
Top 4 Rate15.30%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.26
Avg Place73.06%
Top 4 Rate23.94%
First PlaceLow Contested
5.52
Avg Place28.16%
Top 4 Rate4.21%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.41
Avg Place73.19%
Top 4 Rate16.53%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.01
Avg Place77.17%
Top 4 Rate31.08%
First PlaceLow Contested
4.49
Avg Place45.89%
Top 4 Rate5.70%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.00
Avg Place77.43%
Top 4 Rate26.57%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.01
Avg Place76.88%
Top 4 Rate30.40%
First PlaceLow Contested
4.63
Avg Place48.77%
Top 4 Rate6.13%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.96
Avg Place59.66%
Top 4 Rate15.87%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.97
Avg Place79.39%
Top 4 Rate27.43%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.52
Avg Place72.30%
Top 4 Rate11.95%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.04
Avg Place77.18%
Top 4 Rate27.51%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.10
Avg Place78.61%
Top 4 Rate22.08%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.35
Avg Place71.15%
Top 4 Rate25.52%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.43
Avg Place71.58%
Top 4 Rate20.00%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.00
Avg Place90.67%
Top 4 Rate45.33%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.29
Avg Place71.79%
Top 4 Rate18.75%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.80
Avg Place80.92%
Top 4 Rate33.06%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.39
Avg Place78.12%
Top 4 Rate12.46%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.42
Avg Place74.27%
Top 4 Rate19.69%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.87
Avg Place83.57%
Top 4 Rate22.91%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.05
Avg Place86.36%
Top 4 Rate22.73%
First PlaceLow Contested
4.12
Avg Place58.39%
Top 4 Rate11.19%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.01
Avg Place80.71%
Top 4 Rate22.55%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.43
Avg Place86.00%
Top 4 Rate38.51%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.25
Avg Place72.32%
Top 4 Rate24.40%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.73
Avg Place81.19%
Top 4 Rate34.02%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.37
Avg Place71.85%
Top 4 Rate22.52%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.90
Avg Place78.85%
Top 4 Rate31.07%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.41
Avg Place71.15%
Top 4 Rate15.38%
First PlaceLow Contested
4.36
Avg Place50.27%
Top 4 Rate7.47%
First PlaceLow Contested
4.03
Avg Place62.42%
Top 4 Rate10.09%
First PlaceLow Contested
4.95
Avg Place36.71%
Top 4 Rate5.70%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.92
Avg Place78.50%
Top 4 Rate31.06%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.33
Avg Place75.99%
Top 4 Rate21.11%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.54
Avg Place89.70%
Top 4 Rate29.09%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.45
Avg Place72.73%
Top 4 Rate13.64%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.36
Avg Place71.90%
Top 4 Rate22.77%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.01
Avg Place78.82%
Top 4 Rate25.12%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.43
Avg Place89.84%
Top 4 Rate30.90%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.54
Avg Place91.30%
Top 4 Rate31.88%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.37
Avg Place93.19%
Top 4 Rate23.47%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.56
Avg Place91.88%
Top 4 Rate24.35%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.12
Avg Place73.65%
Top 4 Rate30.39%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.23
Avg Place76.36%
Top 4 Rate20.00%
First PlaceLow Contested
4.51
Avg Place50.52%
Top 4 Rate7.22%
First PlaceLow Contested
2.98
Avg Place77.21%
Top 4 Rate33.46%
First PlaceLow Contested
3.59
Avg Place68.62%
Top 4 Rate15.99%
First PlaceLow Contested
云顶之弈第16赛季阵容常见问题
TFT 第16赛季中最好的TFT阵容是什么？
TFT 第16赛季中最好的TFT阵容是护卫/耀光使，以佐伊作为主C，达到93.2%胜率和2.37平均名次。这个阵容对爬分有效，能持续进入前四。
如何玩护卫/耀光使阵容？
玩护卫/耀光使时，专注于以佐伊为主C。尽早寻找佐伊和辅助单位，优先选择与主C协同的装备，目标在7-8级达到战力巅峰。这个阵容的选取率为0.1%，相对来说不太被抢。
TFT 第16赛季中哪些阵容适合爬分？
在TFT 第16赛季中稳定获得LP，斗士/护卫提供最佳平均名次2.00。其他可靠选择包括护卫/耀光使 (2.37 avg)和铸星龙王/护卫 (2.43 avg)。稳定的阵容最大限度减少下四名，提供稳定的爬分体验。
最简单的TFT阵容是什么？
护卫/耀光使对于寻求轻松爬分的玩家来说是个好选择。胜率93.2%但选取率仅0.1%，您不太可能被抢，使游戏更容易进行。低争抢意味着您可以自然找到单位而不必强行转型。
在TFT 第16赛季中什么时候应该强玩阵容vs灵活转型？
在TFT 第16赛季中，山隐之焰/远古恐惧的选取率为1.0%，意味着被大量抢夺。如果您看到其他人玩这个，考虑转型到护卫/耀光使等替代方案。当您早期命中单位和装备，或者阵容没人抢时强玩。当2+玩家争抢相同单位时转型。
TFT 第16赛季当前的TFT版本趋势是什么？
TFT 第16赛季版本由山隐之焰/远古恐惧主导，选取率1.0%, followed by 护卫/德玛西亚 at 0.5%。高选取率阵容定义版本但经常被抢。对于不被抢的游戏，考虑像护卫/弗雷尔卓德 (0.1% pick rate)这样不太热门的替代方案。
在TFT中应该避免玩热门阵容吗？
不一定。像山隐之焰/远古恐惧（1.0%选取率）这样的热门阵容热门是有原因的——它们很强。但是，当多个玩家争抢同一个阵容时，每个人的名次都会受影响。尽早侦察对局。如果2+玩家强玩同一阵容，转型到替代方案以避免争抢单位。