Disclaimer: you must understand that this subject is a hot one for me, please do not get too annoyed by what I've posted here, my intent is to benefit your knowledge of the game. Also, please bear with this wall of text. Most of it is quotes which you may have already read. Let my rant and comments begin.

Quote:

**ricklessabandon**:

resistances *do* work on diminishing returns. whenever you gain another point of armor, each point of armor is worth less damage reduction. this is why each point of penetration gives a larger damage increase as you penetrate closer to zero.

if resistances didn't have diminishing returns, every 'ehp' guide ever would say 'always buy mitigation because diminishing returns don't exist.' it's very silly to see people write 'armor doesn't have diminishing returns, but you should stop buying it at this point and buy health instead because the armor becomes less valuable.'

The reason people tell you to buy mitigation and health at different times has been discussed before, please *read*. The gain in EHP when you buy resists or HP is affected by your current HP and resistances, hence it varies when buying resists or HP is optimal.

As has been said before, playing with the *percentages* makes you go down the wrong path. *Of course* the more armor you buy, the less dmg reduction %s you get, else you'd get to 100% dmg reduction quite fast.

Quote:

**Cute Riolu**:

What I think he's trying to say with regards to EHP is that every point of armor/mr gives the same amount of EHP. While every successive point of armor gives less of a % increase, it gives the same *flat* increase.

Exactly, well done Riolu. I have linked the post before where I've gone through these same things, but I'll repeat myself again... EHP is what keeps you alive. Every point of additional resistance gives you the same flat bonus EHP. Do *NOT* every single time confuse yourself and others by reciting the same verse about the dmg reduction %-gain getting lower, the increase in survivability is still constant and linear!

Morello made a mistake. Please do not confuse even more people with your red posts here, I'm tired of thinking the same thing over again and repeating myself to people who see a single mathematical relation and think they know it all right away.

Quote:

**Trion Porra**:

Each point increased in the % is worth the same in terms of EH, not each point increased in Armor/MR itself.

Can you see those downvotes you have got? There's a reason for it. *EVERY* point in *RESISTANCES* is worth the same in terms of EHP, not the percentage, as you said.

Quote:

**ricklessabandon**:

i understand the common argument. the problem with it is that it's like saying that i'm going to convert 'mitigation' into 'kittens' and that there are no diminishing returns for that conversion. the oversight is that it doesn't matter that there aren't diminishing returns in that isolated kitten vacuum because once you start reintroduce 'kittens' to all the other factors that mitigation was involved with, 'kittens' would then have diminishing returns again.

Every point of added resistance gives you a flat bonus amount of kittens. The more there are kittens, the longer you survive. The amount of added kittens per added resistance is constant, hence there are no diminishing returns. When you reintroduce kittens to all the other factors, you still have no diminishing returns. There is just the same remnant of a fool's thought; that the constant amount of kittens added is always a smaller % of the total amount of kittens. *This*, however does not indicate diminishing returns.

Quote:

**H911Reiver**:

rick I disagree

Each point of armor increases your EHP by the exact same amount, by your argument AD has diminishing returns too.

This is the *exact* same thing I've said in my linked post. People still go on and on about diminshing returns simply cos they can't read or think enough.

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'.

*ETC. ETC. ETC. useless examples*

I CRY ABUSE! For the sake of professionalism, why do you keep confusing people even further? You're a RED poster! Think more, please!

>>

__You are confusing the maths behind EHP with maths behind the optimization of your use of gold between resistances and HP__. I have gone through all this in the aforementioned post, please *READ*! I repeat: you buy armor and HP at different times because they give different benefits when you have different amounts of HP and resistances already. All this is covered in my earlier response post's link!

Quote:

**Joru**:

Measuring mitigation gained with each successive point of armor in percentage points isn't much less meaningless than measuring it in kittens, because "percentage points" are not a consistent, linear unit of measurement. You're reading the whole situation completely wrong.

If my base damage is 100, and I spend 1650 gold on a B.F. Sword, my damage increases to 145. That's a 45% increase. If I then spend another 1650 gold on a second B.F. Sword, my damage increases from 145 to 190, which is a 31% increase. Attack damage doesn't have diminishing returns; each additional sword provides the same 45 damage: a linear benefit. It's just that you're converting the gain into percentage points, which are not linear *units*.

Suddenly there are lots of people who understand this! Yay for you! Again, this is the same thing I said in the post, which proves that Morello's statement was wrong in the patch preview, but which he never wanted to correct.

Quote:

**guhnosis**:

I think maybe a better argument for armor falling off is this:

Say a champ has 2000 HP and 0 armor. They buy an item that gives them 100 armor. Their effective HP is now doubled, giving them 4000 Hp against physical damage.

So say they buy another 100 armor. They gain the same flat 2000 EHP, bringing them up to 6000; but that's now a 150% increase in EHP, as opposed to doubling it.

And then they buy another 100 armor. Another flat 2000 EHP, they're up to 8000, but it's only a 133% increase in EHP. And so on.

As you buy armor, you get the same flat amount of EHP, but the relative chunk that your increasing your TEH by diminishes. 2000 extra HP at 10000 effective health is not as compelling as 2000 extra HP at 2000 effective health. Thus armor is 'better' at lower values as it makes a more noticeable impact on your TEH.

Exactly, as I said before, if you use the same flawed logic behind "diminishing returns", you'll end up with diminishing returns in every single stat. have 1.00 AS? buy 0.5 more, then you'll have 1.5 AS, that's 50% more! Buy +0.5 AS? Now you have 2.00 AS, but that's only a 33% increase! Eek it's the diminishing returns-monster!

Quote:

**DreamyDays**:

I had a long wall of text here about how armor and HP doesn't give diminishing returns....

Yeah I have it right here. I apologize to everyone who had the patience to read through this, but this thing must be settled once and for all, and I cannot stress it enough!

Quote:

**chumbler**:

Ricklessabandon, diminishing returns is not "Something else becomes more effective." It is "The more you have of something, the less effective getting more becomes."

If I can plant one ton of seed and get one ton of yield from that seed, but two tons of seed only gives one and a half tons of yield, then the seed has diminishing returns because additional seed produces less yield, which is the relevant metric. The second ton has yielded less than the first ton. That is diminishing returns. Armor does not work that way.

As I have said in my posts for the last month! I sincerely hope the reds realize they're wrong, and stop balancing champions based on flawed logic.

EDIT: Also. please refrain from upvoting reds just because of their color. If their facts are wrong, downvote to set things straight.

EDIT2: I just re-read the thread... It's kind of sad how ricklessa tries to appear media-sexy by using the words "kitten" and "cookie". Don't they give PR-training there at Riot's?

TL;DR: It is not too long to read. Take your time.