TBC vs. LW: Sims keep putting TBC ahead

[quote=lifebaka][quote=DuffTime] ^ Garbage. [/quote] ^This. At only 200 armor, I'm getting [img=http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/2600/lwvstbcdiscrete200armor.png] using my model (and average AD carry stats--which I got by averaging the stats of all AD carries--ArP reds and AD quints for both, and all possible AD and ArP in masteries for both). LW is in red, TBC is in blue.[/quote]

[quote=DuffTime]Well in my opinion that's also a semi useless graph, because you shouldn't mix them like that lol. Do it for ARP reds/quints and TBC vrs AD reds/quints and LW and then you're gonna have a graph that shows when to use what.[/quote]

[quote=lifebaka][quote=DuffTime] Well in my opinion that's also a semi useless graph, because you shouldn't mix them like that lol. Do it for ARP reds/quints and TBC vrs AD reds/quints and LW and then you're gonna have a graph that shows when to use what. [/quote] Changing the runes does have a measurable effect, but doesn't really change the fact that LW remains clearly better. Again at 200 armor. [img=http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/3871/forduff.png] Testing around a little, it seems that the tipping point between LW and TBC, for those rune setups, is around 180 armor.[/quote]

[quote=DuffTime]Yeah and well, if your opponents aren't going to be building even 150, then TBC shits on it and ArP TBC are the slam dunkage, because you're also going to have to keep in mind that there's an attack speed factor as well.[/quote]

[quote=Pranzatelli]@Lugignaf Neither Vampirism nor Havoc will alter which stats we want to use. Everything gets multiplied together. And when modeling damage for a carry, we can change the equation multiple times to encompass different mastery sets. @Dufftime Runes are another part of the program. We've been trying this out with different slot limitations (two items, four items) and options for full rune sets. What we're trying to figure out is if LW with AD runes (or any other rune page, or any weird combination of items) is better than any combination with TBC. @Lifebaka Wow. That's a fantastic idea. Thank you so much! I'm definitely going to use this. I've already added weird terms for Madred's and a few different passives, and I guess I'll have to add this to the equation ;D I'm really impressed, though! Great idea! Ignoring utopus. Oversimplifying the matter.[/quote]

[quote=utopus]oh right sorry ginge's graph is factoring other attack speed & damage items from his build. my bad[/quote]

[quote=lifebaka][quote=utopus] oh right sorry ginge's graph is factoring other attack speed & damage items from his build. my bad [/quote] No, I was using the fairly standard AD carry trifecta of IE, PD, and BT, plus Bez Greaves (which leaves one slot for either LW or TBC and one slot for a GA). Ginge's graph appears to just be wrong. EDIT: Ginge's graph is just wrong. Some simple calculations put the two becoming equal, for Ginge's specific build and TBC's debuff fully stacked, at 256.801 armor. Still high enough to justify it in a lot of cases, but nowhere near 650 armor.[/quote]

[quote=utopus]Well Keep in mind that Ninjaginge's guide is a twitch guide. Twitch's [[ambush]] actually gives a significant amount of attackspeed (+70%). That MAY make a difference in his damage per second graph hahaha; Of course, the 650 armor in hindsight still seems ludicrious[/quote]

[quote=lifebaka][quote=utopus] Well Keep in mind that Ninjaginge's guide is a twitch guide. Twitch's [[ambush]] actually gives a significant amount of attackspeed (+70%). That MAY make a difference in his damage per second graph hahaha; Of course, the 650 armor in hindsight still seems ludicrious [/quote] I'd forgotten to account for that. You're right, it does make a difference. It brings the armor value where the two become equal [i]down[/i] to 229.841. Which is to say that the bonus AS is better for LW than for TBC. EDIT: In my boredom I played around with the comparison a little, and found a few interesting things. [list] [*]LW is more sensitive to AD and AS than TBC is. Raising either of these numbers makes LW better faster than it makes TBC better, lowering the armor value where they're equal. [*]TBC is more sensitive to all forms of armor penetration and armor reduction. Raising these numbers makes TBC better faster than it makes LW better, raising the armor value where they're equal. [*]CrC and CrD are irrelevant when discussing LW and TBC. Changing these numbers works exactly the same on both; the armor value where they're equal doesn't change. So we can actually ignore them when doing models to compare LW and TBC, and only look at the other stats on items that give them. (Meaning that IE can be modeled as just 80 AD, for example.) [/list][/quote]

[quote=DuffTime]Zzzzz lol. There's nothing to find out. TBC with ArP is the right combo vrs squishy targets when auto attacking. It IS the right combination. LW with AD everything runes IS the right combo vrs heavy resistance stackers. It IS. It actually blows my mind that people are so stuck on this. And the truth is that top laners don't have the luxury to choose late game set ups over early game set ups, and junglers need clear speed and early game strength, so top laners/junglers will almost never build TBC unless it's to help their AD carry deal better damage. Not to mention, melee champions tend to have the better spells for damage, meaning that LW makes more sense regardless. So really what we're discussing is the viability of TBC on ranged carries, and the answer is YES. It is viable. NO, it is not always better. When multiple targets are liable to break 150 armor or so, or you know you're going to need to be able to hurt the tank with right clicks, buy the LW. Otherwise if it's full softees, buy the TBC and use ArP runes. DONE, CAN WE MOVE ON!?[/quote]