TFT NEEDS to grant an identical number of items to all players.

Shinjusuke·Jul 17, 2019·82 votes·15,155 views

There's a reason all the other Autochess games do this.

There is no way for the game to be a strategy game when I've literally, I'm not exaggerating, gone into games where I end round 3 with the single item granted by the champion you pick up in the first draft while my opponent has SIX items.

I genuinely do not understand why this decision was made. The game is RNG enough by its nature in many, many forms. Massive item discrepancies turn it into little more than a coin flip.

38 Comments

RaiderofAnusesJul 17, 20198 votes

Agreed shits random luck

JanakinJul 18, 20194 votes

The authors don't realize the scale of impact of items. It seems like they believe an item is worth of a few golds.

MarshbouyJul 18, 20191 votes

Neither do members of the forums, apparently.

IllabetheAug 3, 20191 votes

It really is just worth a few gold in many occasions. Gold interest and snowballs are what decide who is level 7-9 by the end with the best synergies. If you are a chronic reroller with 6 items, who spends all coins 10-14 rounds in a row trying to finish something, you are going to lose 90% of the time.

Pika FoxJul 17, 20192 votes

It doesnt matter much. Even with fewer items, you can still place top 4 easily.

And you really shouldnt be putting items on champions immediately.

CTDM golemJul 17, 201912 votes

doesn't matter if u have a good comp when ur opponent has 3 times your items

Pika FoxJul 17, 20191 votes

It matters a lot. Comp is far more important than items. And your goal is 4th or better, not first.

CHODES AND LOADSJul 17, 20199 votes

how the fuck do you not see the problem with the fact that actual strategy can only get you into the top 50% and the rest of the game is a coin flip

Pika FoxJul 17, 20191 votes

There is zero problem, because over many games the variance evens out and proper strat can get you into the top 3 over 50% of the time.

hoganftwJul 17, 20198 votes

[{quoted}](name=Pika Fox,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=gowwUb5m,comment-id=00010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-17T19:23:59.516+0000)

There is zero problem, because over many games the variance evens out and proper strat can get you into the top 3 over 50% of the time.

And the key difference in 1st and 2nd and 3rd is usually item difference. Nobody plays this game just to reach top 4. I'd rather have the same chances as everybody else to get good items than be lucky in a few games and be extremely unlucky in others.

Pika FoxJul 17, 20193 votes

Thats not even remotely true and you know it.

The difference between the top 4 is generally composition differences. Who has the better, more cohesive composition that they pulled and has enough HP to back up their statistical advantage.

Champion RNG is heavily dependent on user input, as you have the option to reroll your picks as well as taking champions entirely out of the draw pool, meaning going for a unique composition is adventageous.

Player skill is by far and wide the deciding factor in the game, and top 4 is a victory.

Janna Me FiddleJul 18, 20193 votes

{quoted}

And the key difference in 1st and 2nd and 3rd is usually item difference. Nobody plays this game just to reach top 4. I'd rather have the same chances as everybody else to get good items than be lucky in a few games and be extremely unlucky in others.

False statement considering top 4 is considered winning.

Some of the most popular TFT streamers regularly emphasize how top 4 finishes are wins and should be treated as such.

Also item count balances out over the duration of the match, if someone got 4 items early, later on they will come to a round where they get little to nothing. Not to mention, not every drop is useful to every comp, nor does everyone know what to do with the drops.

I've seen people stacking cursed blades thinking it's a good idea....it isn't. because all the enemy team has to do is slip a Blitzcrank in, position to pull that unit and that unit gets dogpiled.

I've seen people stack Shivs, also countered by ionic spark

I've seen people try have several redemptions, countered by Morellos and Red buff.

Everything and I do mean everything is counter-able.

Fact of the matter is this, Items are great, economy is greater, if that 1g gives me early pirates and/or early interest, I'm in with a good chance of winning by using my economy to outscale them.

Never underestimate what that single lowly gold early in the game can snowball into.

hoganftwJul 19, 20191 votes

[{quoted}](name=Janna Me Fiddle,realm=EUW,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=gowwUb5m,comment-id=0001000000000000000000000001,timestamp=2019-07-18T08:40:39.360+0000)

False statement considering top 4 is considered winning.

Some of the most popular TFT streamers regularly emphasize how top 4 finishes are wins and should be treated as such.

Also item count balances out over the duration of the match, if someone got 4 items early, later on they will come to a round where they get little to nothing. Not to mention, not every drop is useful to every comp, nor does everyone know what to do with the drops.

I've seen people stacking cursed blades thinking it's a good idea....it isn't. because all the enemy team has to do is slip a Blitzcrank in, position to pull that unit and that unit gets dogpiled.

I've seen people stack Shivs, also countered by ionic spark

I've seen people try have several redemptions, countered by Morellos and Red buff.

Everything and I do mean everything is counter-able.

Fact of the matter is this, Items are great, economy is greater, if that 1g gives me early pirates and/or early interest, I'm in with a good chance of winning by using my economy to outscale them.

Never underestimate what that single lowly gold early in the game can snowball into.

Top 4 by game standards is winning, but nobody just says "I got top 4 that's it I don't care or feel like trying anymore". I'm personally going to continue playing the game out normally, trying to do all the right things to see that mole and emote victory screen.

One gold pales in comparison to an actual item. Yeah, one gold could turn into much more if you're smart. But an actual item could let you coast for more rounds, impact the game from the get go, and give you those early win bonuses which are just as powerful if not more so than just early pirates or interest. You can get an economy from an item advantage and you can also have the power advantage while doing so. You can't have an item advantage when you have no items and having less or no items at all puts you at a disadvantage regardless of how you see it.

I mean half of your analogies were literally x item counters y item, with the exception being "maybe they could just play dumb and not reposition their unit after seeing the blitz the first time".

LeetriJul 18, 20192 votes

In my own games the position in top 4 usually comes down to positioning and composition, not items. Doesn't matter how many items you have if you're running say gunslingers and the enemy is all assassins. You don't even get to use your items before your carries are dead.

0megonJul 18, 20191 votes

[{quoted}](name=Pika Fox,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=gowwUb5m,comment-id=00010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-17T19:23:59.516+0000)

There is zero problem, because over many games the variance evens out and proper strat can get you into the top 3 over 50% of the time.

Well that is fine for ranked games and ladder. If you play a lot of games the variance gets negated, but if they want to make esport out of it they will have to face the fact that the RNG needs to be minimal. Nobody has time to watch players play dozens of games just to even out the variance and nobody wants to watch esport ruled by RNG if they get to play like 2-3 games.

Pika FoxJul 18, 20192 votes

They dont need to minimize RNG for it to be competitive. It just has to be fun to play and fun to watch, with enough skill expression for it to be primarily a test of skill, which it is.

JanakinJul 18, 20192 votes

Can you stop commenting already? Just look at your downvotes in pretty much every post you write... It is painful to read what you say -_-. I already know you, so I can easily ignore your posts, but spare the others who don't.

Pika FoxJul 18, 20192 votes

Sorry if i burst your bubble in that tft is skill based and not rng based.

ShinjusukeJul 18, 20192 votes

It is absolutely not.

Your champion options are random. Your item options are random. Your number of items is random. Your opponents per round are random and you have no way to know who you're fighting next until there's only 2 left. Your champion attack priority is random. Your draft options are random.

If you genuinely, non-trolling, think TFT is not RNG-Based, there is no other way to say it any nicer than "You outright lack the ability to comprehend the game you're playing".

Pika FoxJul 19, 20191 votes

What card options you get in hearthstone is random, what order you draw is random... Yet its undeniably a skill based game

ShinjusukeJul 19, 20191 votes

There is a COLOSSAL difference in player agency there.

You seriously can't tell the difference? Like, unironically, you legitimately think these are comparable ideas?

That is amazing.

Pika FoxJul 19, 20191 votes

Youre right; you have MORE agency in tft. Sorry.

ShinjusukeAug 3, 20191 votes

Not sure why you're apologizing for being literally objectively and demonstrably wrong, but I suppose the courtesy is commendable.

IllabetheAug 3, 20191 votes

He's not wrong :S

IllabetheAug 3, 20191 votes

All that may be random.

What's not:

Your decision to abandon one build and move to the second build you sidelined. Your decision whether or not to include tanks or not. Your decision to put gunslingers in the back row where they can be pulled, instead of a Cho Gath or something that is really nasty to pull. Your decision to spend gold rather than keeping it in the some 20 rounds you play without losing the game where you may lose HP in exchange for interest income. Your decision whether or not to be last pick or first pick on Carousels. Your decision to continue building the same champs as 3-4 other people. Your decision to not get grievous wounds when people are obviously going to have healing. Your decision not to craft disabling items, but use the same components to build something weaker.

P.S. your champion attack priority is NOT random. If you read the board you would know exactly who they are going to encounter and in what order.

jujulianJul 19, 20191 votes

I agree with Pika Fox that items ALONE do not change the outcome of the game as there are other RNG variables to take into account like champions offered, if a certain comp perk procs (e.g. demons, gunslinger, ranger, yordle etc).

I really don't think all players should be given the exact same amount of items though. I feel like that would take away the chance for a player who got given bad champion options to still have some hope. Although I understand this can work in conjunction with other bad RNG to create a game that feels unwinnable, it can also do the opposite and work with good RNG where a player has great champion picks and many items to facilitate a win. And I think that's fine.

TFT is a game-mode where you've got to be extremely flexible, think miles ahead and even be ready to sell your entire team to change comp if your comp is countered by another or just to transition successfully. (now I personally can't do these things I am a very stubborn rigid player but somehow it works ok for now).

I think normalising the amount of items drops per players would make the game-mode more boring, as it will become more predictable and too much predictability simply means less surprises which leads to more boredom.

Yes it can be annoying when you're on the receiving end of bad RNG but you're just as likely to be on the receiving end of good RNG (this is relatively simple math if anyone wants to provide mathematical proof).

I just take it like I take normal games of League: 20% of the time there is nothing I will be able to do (due to other players or bad RNG) and I will lose the game for sure, 20% of the time whatever I do it's probably a win (due to other player or good RNG) even if I make many mistakes, 60% of the time the win or the lose will be dependent on me and the choices I make etc. That way, when I overwhelmingly lose it helps to lessen the loss knowing there are times when I will overwhelmingly win effortlessly.

Now if you feel like you're always on the bad side of RNG and barely ever on the good side of RNG then you have to change the way you think because it is simple math, after just a few games it is possible you have been dealt a bad hand, but after enough games there is no way you've been more often dealt a bad hand than a god one. If you think this is the case (and I don't say this to insult anyone I've been there too) you may be shifting the blame from your skill level to RNG a bit too often because probability states otherwise.

I think riot has made a great step towards lessening the effects of item number differences between players by adding possible gold rewards instead of items.

ShinjusukeAug 3, 20191 votes

You're assuming a best case scenario: Where the player with weaker champion picks gets better items. But the system does not work like that, the two systems have no bearing on each other. It's entirely possible for the guy who got four 3*s is the same guy who had 6 items by round 3. There's nothing that pushes the guy with weaker champions to get more items whatsoever.

Not to mention, there aren't really "better" champion picks until you get to the rounds where there's the possibility of getting the ideal 5-stars you need for a comp. Even then, whether that champion matters for your comp is the deciding factor, not the objective strength of the champion themselves. If you're running a comp with no gunslingers and no pirates, getting a Miss Fortune in your selection does absolutely zero for you.

Items aren't the only factor and I never claimed as such. They are, however, the only universally useful thing given out in random values. EVERYONE can make use of more items, which means more items is an outright significantly larger increment of power for everyone involved. If you're building a Wild team with no Sorcerors it doesn't matter if you managed to find enough Veigars to get a 3-star Veigar because you haven't been buying Veigar. But no matter what item you get, you can always use the item. They need to be identical in number for all players so the power level of opposing players is based on their composition, placement, budgeting, and how they choose to use the items at their disposal. Item amount discrepancies are just "free power", So items need to serve as a power baseline for everyone, otherwise it's literally just "X player has a higher chance to win due to something that involved literally zero decisions made by that player except having a team that can get through the neutral rounds".

gravityjuiceJul 18, 20192 votes

If I had a dollar for every time I've been in the top three with 2 completed items, while the other two have 6+ completed items.

ShinjusukeJul 18, 20191 votes

I'm not saying it's not possible, I'm saying it's inherently massively imbalanced, it's poor design, it negates a significant portion of player agency, and to be honest it's less "fun" to not have items and custom "builds" for characters.

Sure you can still place, but I'd be willing to bet if you're placing top 3 with 2 items, you'd be winning or close to winning if you were working with 6+.

Factually speaking that is a massive difference in team power.

IllabetheAug 3, 20191 votes

It's poor balance for a 2 Star draven to beat a full noble team with 6-7 items because he has a successful knight wall in front of him. Yup. No Counterplay for those 6-7 items...

CevradJul 18, 20191 votes

{quoted}

There's a reason all the other Autochess games do this.

There is no way for the game to be a strategy game when I've literally, I'm not exaggerating, gone into games where I end round 3 with the single item granted by the champion you pick up in the first draft while my opponent has SIX items.

I genuinely do not understand why this decision was made. The game is RNG enough by its nature in many, many forms. Massive item discrepancies turn it into little more than a coin flip.

Autochess didn't until its huge overhaul... Give them time to copy the new features, they just copied the old ones.

ShinjusukeJul 18, 20191 votes

Sorry, to clarify I meant "Autochess-like games" since they're all clones of each other. To my knowledge TFT is the only one that doesn't understand how colossally detrimental it is in terms of basic player-to-player balancing to not grant everyone the same number of items.

prozak82Jul 18, 20191 votes

yeah whoever made this call is an idiot. I have no idea why rito has so much of a hardon for rng. it is always THE WORST aspect of any competitive game and there will still be PLENTY of rng in the game even if you normalize the amount of items. also, having to fucking click to pick up items now is a completely r%%%%%ed change too. just a pointless hassle.

BarkleyJul 18, 20191 votes

I dont understand why its just not a shop that costs a scaling amount of gold per component. 5 gold for first item, and 5 more for every item afterward. Spatulas are always 25 gold.

That, or I don't understand why they don't just do it like Underlords does it, where you get to pick between 3 items at the end of every creep round.

The way they implemented it makes literally zero sense. And you know what the worst part is?

THEY HAD IT RIGHT ON PBE! THEY WERE GONNA DO IT!!

And at the last second before the patch hit, some clown pulled the plug on it and said "Nah give them gold instead."

Whoever that guy was, fire him immediately.

ShahamutJul 18, 20191 votes

The game would become to item "meta" if everyone got to pick items via purchase.

What items you get being random often makes you rethink your comp/strategy.

I won a game with almost no items, sitting on a giants belt with 5 glacial, because my last carasole got me a Yasuo + spatula...

Still salty about not finding Anivia, but meh.

ShinjusukeJul 18, 20191 votes

There's a number of pretty obvious changes that should've been implemented on release that would maintain the inherent "randomness" of the game mode without making the strategic element completely irrelevant.

For example, with regards to items, there's no reason you couldn't have a system where there's an exchange rate.

Trade in 2 items for any other item, or 3 for 1 spatula.

With equal items among players, this would allow for player agency and important player decisions.

"Do I want to trade in a finished item's worth of items to get that one Recurve bow I really need or try to work with what I have?"

Honestly I do not understand how so many things are missing that should've been brought up during the concept phase.

TimoSRJul 19, 20191 votes

Underlords have solved this issue perfectly. Feels perfectly balanced! Giving all 1 for global buff/Item option every neutral round :D

IllabetheAug 3, 20191 votes

Nah. Coins are often more valuable than the items, but most players don't seem to realize why.

Getting to +13 coins/round faster and getting stars out faster influences the game far more than the items do, unless someone wins the lottery and gets shop pages with 2-3 of the champs they are leveling per round without rerolling (Can happen, but is pretty rare overall) while also getting items.

The biggest decider of who wins: Who spends 10-14 rounds struggling to keep more than 10 Coins. If you cannot get streak/coin incomes, you are going to lose. If you get them, you're more likely to complete synergies and win.