Quote:

**ricklessabandon**:

it's a wording thing. it's silly.

even within an 'ehp' system there are diminishing returns if you do *all* of the math, which is why health and mitigation take turns being more valuable.

we can even use a common example:

-a champion has 2000 health, and 0 armor.

-for the sake of math, we'll say that 10 health and 1 armor have the exact same gold cost.

-since we're examining the potential of diminishing returns on armor, we'll use the '10 health' purchase as a basis of comparison for effectiveness. we'll call the effectiveness gained from purchasing 10 health '1 cookie'.

in this example, our first purchase option looks like:

10 health = 10 ehp

1 armor = 20 ehp

1 armor = 2 cookies

cool, so given a choice between 1 cookie or 2 cookies for the same price, we want 2 cookies so we'll purchase armor.

since armor isn't supposed to have diminishing returns according to the 'ehp' model, we'll make this decision 99 times more.

let's look at our 101st purchase option with 2000 health and 100 armor:

10 health = 20 ehp

1 armor = 20 ehp

1 armor = 1 cookie

so, um, weird. it looks like purchasing armor would be half as effective as it was before... that doesn't make any sense if we're using 'ehp' but we'll pick armor again since it doesn't have any diminishing returns in that model.

let's look at our 201st purchase option with 2000 health and 200 armor:

10 health = 30 ehp

1 armor = 20 ehp

1 armor = 0.66 cookies

and look at that--armor is worth even less after stacking more of it! 'ehp' why have you failed us?!

so, it's pretty obvious that whether you're using 'ehp' or the actual numbers being used in league of legends, armor becomes less effective as you stack it.

you never see that in a post defending 'ehp' though because all they're focused on is the '1 armor = 1%' bit which is only one part of what needs to be evaluated.

To get a stronger look at the ACTUAL diminishing returns from "1 point of armor":

Going from 10 armor to 11 armor:

10 armor = 9.0909% reduction (suffer 90.909% damage)

11 armor = 9.9099% reduction (suffer 90.090% damage)

**11 armor suffers 99.099% as much damage, or a .911% decrease in damage taken.**
Going from 200 armor to 201 armor:

200 armor = 66.666% reduction (suffer 33.333% damage)

201 armor = 66.7774086% reduction (suffer 33.2225914% damage)

**201 armor suffers 99.667% as much damage, or a .3321% decrease in damage taken.**
So by 200 armor, it has gone down by about 2/3 of it's effectiveness.

At the same time, armor and health are impacting each other. So if going from 150 armor to 200 isn't worth it when you have 2000 health, but you pick up a warmogs, suddenly it is going to be worth it to make the 150->200 armor upgrade instead of getting more health.

HOWEVER, another way to look at it that looks more at the big picture...

If you have a pair of champions with 100 armor and 300 armor, both with 2000 health:

100 armor = 50% reduction = 4000 eHP = 2000 bonus eHP.

300 armor = 75% reduction = 8000 eHP = 6000 bonus eHP

**100 armor is giving 20 eHP per point of armor.**

300 armor is giving 20 eHP per point of armor.
What's that? NO diminishing returns? That's right Kiddos, I have just proven Rickless

*RIGHT AND WRONG* at the same time.

Careful. Don't open the box, as Schrodinger has shown us that as long as we don't actually look, this CAN occur naturally.

*So what's going on?*

Well, what's actually happening is that while armor IS providing diminishing decreases in damage taken, it actually continues to provide non-diminishing increases in effective HP.

But at the same time, the more damage reduction you have, the bigger a bonus you get from ACTUAL health items.

So its actually not a case of diminishing returns, but rather a case of simple interdependence.
**TL; DR**
Armor does give diminishing returns, but at the same time, the actual RESULT of those diminishing returns has non-diminishing returns.

But stacking just armor or just MR is still sub-optimal because you get MORE eHP out of health items as your MR/armor increase.

Edit: Downvoted? Can anyone explain WHY they'd downvote this post? Or just hating that it makes you feel stupid?