Obligatory rank: https://lolchess.gg/profile/euw/Lunar%20Blade-EUW/set17
If anyone regulars this subreddit, they already know of a post that came out commenting on Meta websites ruining "flex" play but I think an issue with this comment is that people can hardly define the definition, it means something different to everyone.
So the first thing I want to do is define what it means to me, so there's an actual foundation of conversation to play off.
Flex Play
The adaptation of strategy dependant on variables provided by the game environment.
We have systematic variables:
- Champions
- Augments
- Set Mechanic
And we have behavioural variables:
- Contested Units
- Lobby Tempo
- Board Placement (vs specific players)
When talking about flex play, I believe people are usually addressing the first pillar which are systematic variables. The issue I have with this however is the notion that the removal of stat sites will change this in anyway
>The collection of stats is an arms race; pros, study groups and high elo players will always track their analytics and use them to gain a competitive edge; the removal of stat sites slow the arms race, but it does not remove it.
And it never will; these strategies will trickle down into lower elos and you would have the same issues.
Systematic variables are always going to be optimised, there will always be "the best comp", "the best opener", "the best god choice"
As many have echoed and I totally agree with, it's the line selection that's a core skillset and it's what separates a gold player (no offense guys) from reading a guide & a masters+ player
So what's the point of this post?
I wanted to talk a bit more about behavioural variables because this is where you could argue TFT is lacking but an area where there's far more opportunity for depth.
League of legends for example is evergreen in terms of unique experiences because you're always adapting what you're doing relative to the 4 members on your team and the 5 other enemies.
In TFT we don't really have that; what your enemy plays bares little to no consequence to you outside of being contested, the tempo they're playing at & their positioning
>The element that's missing to these unique experiences are players
(who cannot be optimised)
What I'd consider real "flex" is the reactiveness to what others are playing & having specific units/trait designs unique to countering other compositions
Thereby causing you to be reactive to the people you're actually facing, and taking measures that actively boost your chances against them.
The downside
Designing something like this is at odds with the nature of TFT since it's an 8 man FFA, not a 1v1 or a 4v4 so I doubt we'll ever see flex in this form. (see old set assassin positioning to understand why this is so frustrating)
But it's an interesting design challenge nevertheless; if I load up ranked and have to adapt far more to the decisions my opponents are making, you would hit an evergreen spot of matches being far more different and perhaps, would finally solve the endless flex whining...
How this all looks in the world of though TFT? No idea :]