AXM Pai retweeted
New Client Rant😡🤬😡
TL;DR It largely feels unfinished and breaks a lot of cardinal sins for me as a vibe coding UX designer. The good news is chat is now more than 2 rows so pauses are easier to spot, and the game does feel smoother somehow. I still don't like it. Here's why:
1. Navigation in general is a pain in the ass and relies on clicking very small icons in the far corner of screens. Expect a lot of scrolling that also requires dragging because we don't do buttons, or main header tabs and we don't use space well.
2. The old client for all its flaws was at least compact, the new one while in windowed mode has an ugly OS frame. If you adjust the client size it also adjusts the ingame size, you cannot separately adjust. And while full screen mode you get no notification for que pop if you are tabbed out, but if you try to do a smaller client to, you know to accept que, you then have to change it back to full-screen in game. I feel like I'm being punished because I play on desktop. This is by far the worst change.
3. Got T1 arena, first time I equipt it tells me that VFX are missing... It should tell me that in Treasure Realm c'mon, I was pretty annoyed to spend my tokens on something and then get told it might be missing features which you don't even know which ones are missing. The wrench icon is only visible on preview but not in mythic screen, and there will be alot of users that first encounter it when equipting to loadout. In game the VFX missing feature is my items flicker every 5 seconds😅... making me pretty sick mid-game. I can't even use this item after saving up for it.
4. Mythic Item Screen is deisgned to require scrolling when it clearly could be scaled into the same screen. Like why? This is where you plan to make most of your money, why would you design a page that doesn't fit and require the user to go to the far right and click on a 7 pixel scroll wheel...Full viewport containment is not a design concept. The one thing they did scale was make the spalsh art of your chibi smaller in loading screen, the thing you pay for in the game to see. Again why?
5. The way you choose your loadout is painfully cumbersome. It's a separate screen and then when you click something it takes you to another collection screen. I'm not a fan of this design because it eliminates your ability to match to the rest of your loadout(this is actually even more incomprehensible since you have a close up of the chibi in que), and in general I don't enjoying going x2 screens deep with no awareness of the rest of client. Simple fix is loadout should be a transparent popup similar with to "Play" and clicking a part of the loadout should open a side tab to let you browse your collection while having your selections visible. Collection should be its own section and not require you to access through loadouts. I'm actually surprised this isn't an obvious design choice since we literaly monetize the game through your cosmetic collection and there isn't a button to view your collection on the main screen in one go, that's mind boggling.
6. Related to load out, while in game que, you can quickly click to change chibi and arena going to collection, but to change Booms and Portals you still need to access Loadout screen. The philosophy seems to be the more screens you have to jump through the more you will appreciate the client.
7. The filters in your collection are not finished. You have one option: Recently Purchased. No rarity, no favorites, No Unleashed filters. Again, try clicking on a 7 pixel scroll wheel and hold it down while dragging to browse... oh and when you scroll your collection bugs and covers search terms.
8. Reading the patch notes still requires jumping out of the client to a website. Well I guess I don't need to type in the search bar anymore, but this is not what people meant by "reading patch notes in client"
9. Buying RP froze the client and never worked. Probably maintence issue.
10. Post Game screenshot cuts off at 7-and-a-half units. This is actually just diabolical. I thought the point of a post-game is to see a summary at a glance, but no, you now have to click expand to see the full board. I guess this is because bots only play 5 units on board.
11. You get flashed banged by 2 expanding and very bright Hexagons when choosing game modes, previews and end-game screens. Let me turn this off, please.
I don't know man... It just feels unfinished.
Balance changes randomly getting reverted literally every patch has to be a set mechanic atp
AXM Pai retweeted
Think you can stand up against giants?
Introducing the Monolith Cup, our very first TFT tournament!
Players of any rank may compete for a share of the ₱35,000 prize pool. Open to SEA players only. Sign up on our website before slots run out.
Your adventure begins here ⚔️🌿
AXM Pai retweeted
As one of the original Riot defenders during pbe, asking people to give Riot time to transition to the new engine, this is really saddening to see.
Obviously, I have no idea what actually goes on at Riot, nor am I knowledgeable enough about software engineering to understand how an engine switch affects the development process, etc. But I can't help but wonder: how hard is it actually for the game to go through a basic QA process?
18.3 B-patch – "Inadvertent rollback"
18.4 patch – "Critical bugs and rollback"
Major Polymorph – Disabled when the simple fix would be to just make it do what its description says.
Bramble Vest – 3.5 AVP on its Radiant version for four patches without raising any eyebrows.
Nidalee and Brambleback – Both had the same bug where their armor ignore inversely scaled with AP, yet when Brambleback was fixed, Nidalee remained bugged for another patch.
And there are many more examples of miscommunication and obvious mistakes that made it into live patches, many of which could have been easily caught through basic QA.
Many of you may know me or follow me because of the Set 15 Rammus pissing doc. Obviously, since then, I have grown as both a person and a player.
What I am about to share are my observations, criticisms, and questions directed at the TFT team, coming from a player who, like many others, shares a passion for TFT and wants to see the game in its best possible state.
The following discussions will be lengthy, so bear with me.
1. QA
How have there been two instances of inadvertent rollbacks within the first four patches of the set? It feels like even a simple check to ensure that the numbers matched the intended changes could have prevented these issues.
Yet here we are, just days before Trials, an event where players hope to see their hard work finally pay off, with a game that doesn't even have a functioning ranked queue.
I would like to ask for greater transparency regarding the QA process. How are mistakes like these slipping through testing and making it onto live servers? What measures are currently in place to prevent them, and why have they seemingly failed on multiple occasions?
I understand that mistakes are inevitable in game development, and I don't expect every patch to be perfect. However, repeated issues of this nature raise legitimate concerns about the effectiveness of the current QA process. I believe the community deserves an explanation, as well as greater accountability and clearer steps toward preventing similar mistakes in the future.
2. The New Client
I know I've previously advocated for giving the team time to adjust to the new client during PBE, and I still stand by what I said back then. However, at what point do we consider pulling the plug and putting it back in the oven?
Obviously, as an outside observer, I have no idea what the costs in terms of manpower and resources would be to revert to the old League client, where we all played as eight kaisas with ghost. However, being told to "bear with us" every single patch, while game breaking bugs continue to pile up to the point where players have seemingly given up complaining about them, raises the question: is this really the right direction for the game?
I understand that the team wants Vegas to be played on the brand-new client, and I can appreciate the ambition behind that goal. However, in my opinion, having a functional older product is far better than pushing forward with a newer one plagued by game-breaking issues that make the game less about skill and more about how well players can navigate or avoid bugs.
Whether it's neutral rounds disappearing, games failing to load, or units simply refusing to cast, these issues directly undermine the competitive integrity of TFT.
I'm not suggesting that reverting to the old client is necessarily a simple or even feasible solution. However, I do think it's fair to question whether continuing to push forward with the current client, despite its ongoing issues, is genuinely in the best interest of the game and its competitive players.
3. Player Count and the Long Term Health of TFT
Due to the myriad of issues this set has faced, whether it's balancing, bugs, lag, or problems with the new client, many high-level players I know, myself included, have gradually lost motivation to play the game.
I would imagine this problem could be even more significant among casual players, who generally aren't as committed to improving at the game as competitive players are, and therefore have fewer reasons to stick around when the experience becomes frustrating.
With the public reception of the last five sets seemingly being largely negative, with the exception of Set 16, I can't help but worry about the long-term health of TFT. While I don't have access to the actual player count or revenue figures, I'm concerned that the game could be heading toward a downward spiral that may eventually become difficult to recover from.
Fewer players could mean less revenue, which could lead to reduced investment in the game, further worsening the player experience and driving even more players away. It's a cycle that, once started, can be incredibly difficult to reverse.
I genuinely love TFT, and the last thing I want is to see a game that I've invested so much time and passion into slowly fizzle out.
4. Balancing Through Numbers
I remember Mortdog mentioning in one of his walk the dogs that the developers don't have a "magical calculator" that can simply tell them the correct numbers for balancing (not trying to throw him under the bus here), and I've always wondered: why not?
At its core, TFT is a game built around numbers: AD, AP, attack speed, whatever. While I understand that balancing a game as complex as TFT involves far more than just comparing raw stats, I strongly believe that a more systematic, mathematical approach to evaluating the relative value of different traits, units, and mechanics could help prevent many of the balancing issues we regularly encounter.
For example, I've seen Chinese Bilibili creators break down the numbers behind 6 Juggernaut this set and demonstrate just how overstatted it is relative to what one might expect from a 6-piece trait. My question is: why can't similar analyses be conducted internally before a patch goes live?
I'm not suggesting that a mathematical model could perfectly predict the strength of every composition. Obviously, factors such as unit synergy, positioning, itemization, and the broader meta introduce complexities that can't be fully captured by raw numbers alone. However, surely there is value in establishing a quantitative baseline for what a unit or trait should reasonably provide at a given investment level.
The most recent patch is a particularly frustrating example. Many players were already aware of how strong 6 Juggernaut was, yet the trait went untouched. As a result, its play rate surged, significantly shaping the meta, with Amumu reaching a play rate of over 3.7, one of the highest numbers I've seen for a 4 cost.
This raises a broader question about the team's balancing methodology. How much of the process relies on mathematical modeling and internal simulations, as opposed to live performance data and subjective evaluations? Because to put it bluntly and quoting other players, it feels like the team is "using ai to balance the game".
Once again, I genuinely believe TFT is one of the greatest games ever created, but seeing it in such a broken state saddens me and makes me deeply concerned about its future. For the first time since I started playing, I've taken a set-long break, and I sincerely hope TFT can make a strong comeback in time for Vegas.
We’re disabling ranked while we clean up the current issues.
For some context on what happened... 18.4 was the first patch since Set 18 launched where we shipped from the latest shared version of the game (what we call main) whereas for the first few patches of the set we were creating each patch from the one before it, so 18.2 was built from 18.1. While that live line of release was happening everything after 18.4 (patches, Set 19, modes etc) were being built in main. That meant devs had to work twice as hard and ensure they were making the same fixes in multiple versions, which was a messy process and made it harder to keep everything in sync.
This sucks and we should have told you ahead of time that this patch had a higher chance of being unstable. Not communicating this risk is on us and this patch experience is on us. This was a big hump to get over for our release process and we should have shared what was going on.
Patches going forward will be deployed from main again like it was for years. This should ensure we get back to the consistent patch-to-patch experience you expect and we need to deliver.
AXM Pai retweeted
This patch launched with accidental reverts to 18.2B + INFINITE crashes, and lags. People are playing for snapshots and losing LP to crashing games. What the fuck are we even doing? how can every patch just get worse and worse?
@TFT
AXM Pai retweeted
🌿 MENTOR REGISTRATIONS ARE OPEN! 🌿
Mentor registrations for Mentors' Torments: Into the Wild are open from September 28 – October 4(EOD)!
Let's go Into the Wild and share your skill like a beast 🐐
🔗 Register here: forms.gle/dkL97Di3MSGfYJeT8
#TFT #IntoTheWild #HaveFunPo
🌿 MENTORS' TORMENTS: INTO THE WILD 🌿
Have the chance to be coached by the best players in PH 🇵🇭
Learning this set is going to be WILD 🔥
🧑🏫Mentor Registrations: 9/28 – 10/4
🧑🎓Mentee Registrations: 10/10 - 10/17
More details below HaveFunPo!🍃
#TFT #IntoTheWild #HaveFunPo
This has to be ragebait @enjoyGLOBE. Waited 2 weeks for my internet to be installed tapos wala pa 1 week disconnection issues na agad? Hello? Gg trials tomorrow.
AXM Pai retweeted
Lmao love this blog by @koyuiTFT on Vision’s 4v4 run
Apparently Koyui started his TFT journey as a ragebaiter in Flancy’s chat flaming him each tournament
…then 3 years later became teammates and won EWC 😂
AXM Pai retweeted
🏆Feedback on @TFT's Tier 2 Circuit v2 🏆
The goal of this post is to share my thoughts on what the ideal T2 circuit is prior to S18 launch while also inviting engaged members of the community to add their thoughts, feelings and pain-points both on the current circuit as well as on my proposal. The aim is to assist Riot in better understanding the needs of the T2 playerbase to continue improving the product going forward(taking special advantage of the delay for S18 start and potentially allowing additional wiggle-room for implementation of feedback still).
To contextualize the post for those who don't know me, I have been involved with TFT as an esports caster since Set 6, and have worked closely with Riot on essentially every single major tournament broadcast since then, as well as behind the scenes in different capacities focusing on esports narrative/format/player relations. I also enjoy competing, and since the cancellation of official broadcasts for regular season tournaments I have shifted my focus to competition the last two sets, competing in the Tier 2 Trials/Cups and making it to TC day3 and peaking around 1.4k LP on ladder, just to say I have direct experience as a competitor with the T2 circuit.
To preface, Riot has announced preliminary dates regarding Set 18’s T2 circuit(image linked below). There may or may not be further announcements regarding other tournaments in EMEA further integrating with the major/minor or club systems, so I am not directly criticizing Riot’s decisions regarding T2 as I don’t think we have the full picture outside of Trials dates(I have faith Riot will announce some changes outside of the current overlap with TPC solve, especially considering continuous feedback throughout the last few sets).
Goals of T2 🥅
Find the optimal balance between competitive inclusivity, opportunity and reward for those truly engaged players who aspire to improve their game in a structured competitive circuit.
🫂 Inclusivity: I think the current pool of aspiring competitors is close to perfect(players above cut for trials week1) and requires no changes. No lottery systems, fair time/commitment/skill requirements for qualification. 9/10
🏆Opportunity: The competitive T2 circuit is too short. Ladder snapshots end too soon, and there are only two cups. This issue is further impacted by the issue of balance in TFT on average being considerably worse at a start of a set compared to the end of the set(Set 17 presented the most drastic example). With the bulk( or totality in some cases) of ladder snapshots and tournaments taking place during the first half of a set, this further compounds the issue of opportunity. Even if players are eager to engage with the circuit at a set’s peak, they lack the opportunity to do so with any meaningful incentives on the line. T2 is the large majority of the competitive scene from a numbers standpoint. It’s the base of the pyramid, not just with competitors but also engagement in viewership(including tpc/regionals) in the esports ecosystem. 5/10
💎Reward: Improvements have been made regarding rewarding the best players each set, and a balance has been met between Riot’s desire for rewarding single tournament performances(spiking a single trial tournament) and rewarding consistency(addition of QP qualification). I think further changes can/should be made to provide an even more consistent/rewarding T2 experience, and I will outline the details in my proposals below. 7/10
Set 17’s circuit + Qualification Routes 🗓️
Set 17 launch: April 15th
Trials 1 Week1 start: May 2nd(17 days after launch)
Trials 2 Week1 start: May 23rd(38 days after launch)
Regionals Qualification (EMEA) 🚪
Playins: 29th-32nd TPC(4) + Trials Top 4QP(4) + 5th-10th EUW Ladder(6) + 1st EUNE & TR(2)
Week 1: 17th-28th TPC(12) + Top 8 TT1(8) + Top 8 TT2(8) + 1st-4th EUW Ladder
Week 2: 1st-16th TPC(16)
My proposal for S18 💡
Add a 3rd cup, extend ladder snapshot, extend regional ladder snapshots accordingly.
Qualifier Points Path: Qualifier points will take into account 2 out of 3 best results. Best individual tournament result is a tiebreaker if needed.
This proposal extends the season while simultaneously allowing players flexibility in missing a tournament due to work/studies/travel or lowrolling/variance mitigation without sacrificing the qualification route entirely.
Set 18’s announced circuit 🗓️
Set 18 Launch: August 26th
Set 18 Trials 1 Week 1: Sept 19th(24 days - 118 days since final day of T2W1 from Set17)
Set 18 Trials2W1: October 10th(45 days)
Proposed Regional Qualification 🏆
Playins: 29th-32nd TPC(4) + 5-10EUW(6) + 5-10QP(6)
Week1: 17th-28th TPC(12) + Top4EUW(4) + Top4 TT1/2/3(12) + Top4(QP)
Week2: 1st-16th TPC
In EMEA, this proposal removes direct qualification routes for rank 1 TR/EUNE while still giving qualification slots directly to Week2 of trials from both servers. I personally think slots 9/10 of either EUW ladder or QPs are more competitive than TR1 and possibly also EUNE. For EUNE in particular I don’t think there is a meaningful server difference or ping difference for which a truly serious aspiring competitor would prefer competing on EUNE over EUW, outside of specifically easier qualifications to trialsweek2(which remains so) and easier qualification to regionals. This also avoids wintrading issues in lower pop/easier to manipulate matchmaking servers which has been an issue in the past on multiple smaller EMEA servers. Please correct me if I am wrong or ignorant on the subject matter.
This proposal also makes regional qualification much simpler and easier to understand.
Top4 in any path -> Week1Day1
Top5-10 -> Playins
All paths are treated equally, further rewarding consistency(QPs) over single tournament spikes and adding even more stakes to the final game 7 of Trials(only top 4 makes regionals instead of all 8).
If adding a 3rd cup forces overlap once again with TPC for some weekends, I think the majority of competitors would agree it’s a worthwhile sacrifice as opposed to no-overlap but only 2 cups(please chime in below if you agree/disagree). This is the only real negative imho outside of slightly higher budget concerns for T2 due to the addition of a 3rd cup and potentially strangling out other for-fun/non-main circuit tournaments as two more weekends per set will be occupied with main circuit competition if trying to fully avoid TPC. I even think it would be plausible for overlap to specifically target W1 of Trials, which for the most part has a less relevant field of players in terms of established pros and players who make content. In edge cases, I think a similar solution to Set 17’s trials/TPC overlap which at least in EMEA was having Trials at 10 AM on Saturday morning and TPC in the afternoon as usual.
I can't really prove feasibility for a 3 cup circuit because I am not privy to the behind the scene schedules Riot is has to work around but even with publically availble info it seems doable:
Trials1 W1: Sept 12th start instead of 19th(No overlap)
Trials1 W2: Sept19th(TPC overlap)
Trials2 W1: October 3rd(TPC overlap)
Trials2 W2: October 9th(No overlap)
Trials3 W1: October 23(No overlap)
Trials3 W2: October 30th(No overlap)
Action Points for T2 competitors ✍️
Tier 2 Circuit preference?
1) A 2 cup Tier 2 circuit with no overlap with TPC
2) 3 cup Tier 2 circuit with an additional ladder snapshot, prioritizing an extra tournament even if that means overlap with TPC due to weekend limitations(ideally just week1’s and can avoid overlap with full day schedule)
Regional Qualification Routes breakdown preference?
1) The qualification system used in Set17(rewarding individual tournament spikes over consistency
2)My S18 proposed qualification system, shifting value towards QP over spiking tournaments
Please share your opinions below and any additional feedback you may have on the issues I discussed or any other issues that have come up for you as a T2 competitor. Thank you for taking the time to thoroughly read the post. If you are a part of any competitive TFT communities feel free to share the tweet for visibility/competitor input+suggestions.
tags for vis.
@max_wish @LauraMarieGG @Naturesbf @CompeteTFT
AXM Pai retweeted
My time at Riot and on TFT as a Game Designer has come to an end. Just under 10 years, and to be honest I thought it was going to be longer, but sometimes things change.
-------------------------------------------------
I’m so grateful for what I was able to be a small part of, and able to accomplish in the last decade. It’s been a dream career, and I have got to do so much thanks to Riot. Even trying to list it all feels insane what I managed to do in this time. And the crazy 7 years on TFT where I got to design, balance, teach, lead, and more for my job, but then also build a community, stream, cast, go to events…it’s just been amazing. Ending on stuff like the Unlock system and a couple other things…I’m heading out proud.
To everyone I worked with over the years, thank you for letting me be a part of everything we accomplished. I hope I managed to teach you something or bring you joy in some way. I genuinely hope our paths cross again in the future.
To everyone who supported TFT or me over the years, you have no idea what it means to me. I cherish all the moments over the years, and they’ll keep me going. I am so blessed to have been a part of your lives and thank you for letting me bring some fun into your world.
-----------------------------------------------------
So…what’s next for me? I’m trying to figure that out.
First off, since I was on sabbatical and am terrible at relaxing/not working, I have been making my own small indie game. I’m about 2 months into development and have already had folks playtesting some early builds. I’d say the game is like 20-30% done, but my goal is to release it as a full game. It’s been fun keeping my skills sharp in a different space, and I hope to share it with you all someday.
Beyond that, I’m keeping my eyes open for other opportunities. I’ve had a few conversations here and there already during my Sabbatical. It’s a brutal industry right now, so I’m taking one day at a time and figuring out what’s next for me, whether it’s working on another studio’s game or even my own thing.
And I’d love to find a space to do some content creation and be able to share my knowledge of game development. But that may take some time to figure out how to do it right.
-------------------------------------------------------Again, thank you for everything these last 10 years. It’s a big change and I’m nervous but hoping it all works out. Until next time, take it easy!
-Mort
AXM Pai retweeted
Disappointing to see the the game's balance devolving to this state on 17.3, I really don't understand the idea behind nerfing every single reroll to the point they are essentially unplayable when imho they were the saving grace of the set until now allowing for 3-4 extra playable lines under the right conditions and variety/flexibility game to game and especially leaving Corki entirely untouched.
Yes, in some edge cases Leona was out of line, then simply nerf the edge cases. Why did teemo get a big nerf? Was teemo really the issue? Why was Primordian completely gutted, especially Belveth who was no at all a problematic unit in the line. Why nerf both the main tank and the main carry of every reroll line like Jax + TF?
Why are traits like Space Groove not worth considering at all for most of the playerbase for two patches in a row? An entire vertical? A comp/unit/emblem is either slightly out of line for less than a patch or misconstrued for being problematic/strong at the start of the set and they are basically removed entirely from the equation for 2 patches(Space groove +1, Nova Emblem & Vertical, Viktor RR, Xayah too weak, Leblanc too weak + inconsistent w/ arbiter balance)
Why is there so much disparity in emblems when certain traits are so disappointing to vertically index into(Challenger, Sniper) or when the emblems make so little sense with how the traits work Anima with 3/6 breakpoints, Stargazer in half of the constellations, Arbiter in all but 1% of situations.
And the cherry on top is the addition of augments like Timestream where any direct comparison to past augments such as Hefty Rolls would show it is objectively one of the worst augments ever added to the game that doesn't directly hinder the player. How can an augment be introduced to the game with these numbers in Set 17? Shouldn't there be a better benchmark for augment power at this point, especially when it's stat-based by nature?
Why are we tripping over the same stone again and again?
Patch 17.1 -> Just Hit, Max Build removed due 3 star 4 cost yet again becoming an overwhelming problem
17.2 -> Pandora's Seat added as a God offering?
Really hoping this set moves into a better state in the next few patches, regardless of balance this patch is simply frustrating to play even in contrast to 17.2b which was by baseline already not a great patch with the entirety of AP flex being so weak and the Master Yi dominance but at least the reroll options were there.
