It sure does rely on a lot of rng and luck. Nothing tactical about getting your 6th olaf or 3rd amumu while your opponent doesnt even have a 2star champ because the random selection given to him every round didnt provide what he needed.
The official name is incomplete. Realistically speaking - it's called "TFT:RNG"
Don't blame Riot for your lack of climb. In fact, don't blame Riot, they're never wrong.
I'll just point out this again: Stretegy is about planning, tactics is about reacting. Tactics actually does usually rely on RNG as that forces you to analyse the newly presented situation you didn't plan for before and adapt to it. This doesn't mean the gamemode is good, I was among the first who complained how effortless it is, just pointing out.
For example, imagine game where an enemy may attack from four directions and you have 0.5 second to dodge to opposite of that direction to counter-strike. It has to be RNG what direction the enemy attacks from, as you are supposed to react tactically, not remember strategically that the guy gonna go up, up, down, left.
Another example is Civ, where with production you must declare what you produce and the Production Per Turn is accumulated towards it, so If you learn 5 turns later Montezuma wants war and producing Archer would have been better than the Monument you chose, you chose strategically worse thing (not forseeing that Montezuma lining up his Eagle Warriors near your border means trouble) and are punished for it as you may have 30 Production towards Monument but you'd start the Archer from 0. Opposite of that is Gold Per Turn piling up in Treasury and you may just purchase the Archer (for double its Prod cost) instantly nontheless, tactically deicing that based on the sudden turn, it's good for you instead of purchasing another plot or building.
Better example, imagine card game where each card is equal in power and usage and each round you are presented with four randomly chosen cards of which you pick one to get into your deck. Provided the game is extremly well balanced, this is good because you never feel cheated that the opponent gets better cards and each of you has to tactically adapt to situation newly presented each round.
The problem is you barely ever see actually well balanced tactical game, with TFT's systems being rather far from that despite its regulators, so it's better avoided If possible. But nearly all game devs are so obssesed with FrESh aND UniQue experience it brings, especially since it allows them to cover terrible balance - like people legit use excuse 'Otherwise people would run the same comp every game' as If they weren't outright claiming this bad design covers another bad design.
EDIT: Also I'll note that those things that are Tactical in TFT are mostly what champs you are being served (in terms of what comps you can run), what items drop and what are your enemy's comps. The Tier system being highly RNG dependent and the 'x% chance of applying effect' are just purely lazy designs that don't even fit the tactical sphere, especially since you cannot really tactically change something once the battle begins based on whether the enemy gets to permastun you or not. It's just the only way you can implement something remotely approximating to unique effects in AutoChess.
