Quote:

**Lorifel**:

Exactly. Because 2 + 2 = 100 in bijective numeration. Or 11 in trijective numeration. It all depends on the numeral system, bro! =)

Yeah, you got me there. I don't even know what kind of numerical system some of these guys have in their heads.

Quote:

**FORTRAN 77**:

Say you have 1000 HP and 100 armor, then increasing HP by 1 is a .1% increase in EHP while increasing armor by 1 is a .5% increase in EHP. The 'diminishing returns' will be that increasing armor by 1 again will be a slightly smaller percent increase. By the time you have 150 armor, another point of armor would only be a .4% increase.

I have defined returns in a way that armor does have diminishing returns

Quote:

**ricklessabandon**:

there aren't legitimate diminishing returns on mitigation.

Oooh, you just contradicted a red, wuzzah.

Okay, on to the matter now, this time seriously...

You just defined that the damage resistance percentage has smaller returns with every additional point of resistance. Talking about missing the point, we've discussed for a long time about *survivability* here. For the hundreth time, when you buy resistances, you will gain as much survivability as you got from the last point of resistance. Getting more resistances or penetrating more of the enemy's resistance is equally powerful and valuable for every added/subtracted point of resistance. There is nothing meaningful gained in taking a number that increases slower and slower every time you add something to another number. Period.

Quote:

**Asgrim**:

Level 1. Buy a BF Sword or a Zeal, which gives a larger return? BF Sword.

No. The bigger return depends on the current AD, ASPD, Crit Chance and Crit Damage. With very high current AD and a low ASPD the Zeal might return more.

Quote:

**Asgrim**:

Just want to point out, no one brought gold optimization into this.

...

Mixing stats has absolutely nothing to do with gold optimization.

...

EDIT 3: WHOH! I thought of an even simpler way to explain it!

Now we have a BF Sword. What do we buy next? Well, mathematically it would still be a BF Sword, so let's go with that. Oh ****! Were above 125 AD! What do we buy next?

Oh wai- all of a sudden attack speed would give us more DPS then more damage. Mathematically, given NON-DIMINISHING returns, the return of a SINGLE STAT (in this case, AD) would remain most important.

But it doesn't! The return given from AS has suddenly increased, and the return for more damage, while metrically the same, has decreased!

First of all, the return given from AS increases as AD increases, yes, but the return from more AD does not decrease. It only decreases in respect to, for example, AS, AND when you factor in gold optimization. The stat itself gives the exact same benefit.

You're repeating the mantra "this has nothing to do with gold optimization". However, do you realize you cannot even begin to compare the two stats if there is no value-binding factor between them, i.e gp, gold pieces. If I first got 500 AD, and then considered if I should get ASPD, the answer would be no, since I can have all the AD I want. In your "example" you're saying that "all of a sudden attack speed would give us more DPS than damage". You're not even defining numerically *how much* ASPD would give more DPS than *what* amount of damage. The return to DPS from ASPD rises when you get AD, sure, but the only governing reason you would switch from AD to ASPD is gold optimization. There is no incentive to switch to ASPD if you can get the same damage from acquiring more pure AD, that you would have gotten from acquiring ASPD. The phenomena of gold optimization has for some odd reason changed to "diminishing returns" in your explanations. You're ranting about "diminishing returns", when in face you're, all the time, referring to gold optimization. This is a very tiring trait in your arguments.

Quote:

**Asgrim**:

2. AD carry has 200 damage. Increase to 260, or attack 30% faster? 260 damage does more only if a fight lasts less then 6 seconds (assuming a starting 1.0 attack speed).

Even if the fight lasted for 10 seconds or 500 seconds the damage would stay the same.

6 second-long fight:

200 damage, 1.300 ASPD = 1.3 * 6 * 200 = 1560 damage

260 damage, 1.000 ASPD = 1.0 * 6 * 260 = 1560 damage

10 second-long fight:

200 damage, 1.300 ASPD = 1.3 * 10 * 200 = 2600 damage

260 damage, 1.000 ASPD = 1.0 * 10 * 260 = 2600 damage

500 second-long fight:

200 damage, 1.300 ASPD = 1.3 * 500 * 200 = 130 000 damage

260 damage, 1.000 ASPD = 1.0 * 500 * 260 = 130 000 damage

You seem to have difficulties even grasping such a simple term as DPS.

Quote:

**Asgrim**:

Just for a last, humiliating example for Stimraug:

"However, the ingame situation is far more complex of course, and because of this a much higher AD is many times more beneficial"

If this WAS the only thing that mattered, people would run 6 Bloodthirsters with 800-900 damage. They would also never get there, because they would move 60% slower then everyone else, have no survivability, and ultimately do **MUCH LESS** damage then a carry who built for crit, some damage, attack speed, AND pen.

Maybe you should read my whole sentence again, and better yet, quote it fully. I clearly meant, that when my calculations suggested that you should start buying Crit Chance after getting 125 AD, you should use discretion when following this, because ingame the situations are much more complex than just simple calculations, and there are a plethora of situations where a higher AD than 125 is more optimal than getting Crit Chance instead. I never meant

__anything__ your demeaning rant tries to communicate to the reader.

Quote:

**Asgrim**:

I don't know if I put that simply enough to prove people wrong, but I hope so.

Actually you put it quite ineffectively and with poor construct.

Quote:

**Asgrim**:

And I will **calmly** explain why gold optimization does not factor into this at all.

...

WHAT!? It's DIMINISHED!? AHHHHHHHH!!!! THE WORLD IS CRUMBLING!!!!!! AHHHHHHH!!!!!

Self-explanatory.