So... from what I got "Diff the Ender"'s theorycrafting on RoG leaves a fuckton to be desired. Now if somebody had some time on his hands (or some love for maths) I wouldn't be against a proof-read of the proof-read I did of his
Liandry article.
As in I got asked my opinion on it on another forum and went all "But TL didn't tell me yet what to think of it
" then wasted 80 minutes doing maths and copypasting numbers on a post.I'll start with his conclusion:
Very rarely will you land a perfect burst where Liandry's only procs 3 seconds and not 5 or 6 seconds. This favours Liandry's even more. If you're wondering what two extra seconds of Liandry's tick would do (at 2% per tick) -- it would turn the "Lux not slowed" graph into what looks like the "Lux 4% per tick graph".
Liandry's deals anywhere from around 25% to 200% more damage per spell depending on which spell and which enemy. Even more if it's a DoT spell like Malzahar's Malefic Visions.
If your champion has any sort of damage over time ability or a reliable movement inhibiting CC (slow/stun/suppress/snare etc), always build a Liandry's over a Void Staff when presented with the choice (obviously both is better).
He obviously has no idea that Liandry's ticks once every
half-second for 1%, starting 0.5s after the spell damage, and is reset every time spell damage is applied, which results in most DoTs "eating" ticks until the last of their own.
It also means if you cast a spell a second or less after the previous one, you'll only get 1 tick at most out of it (the 0.5s one), which destroys most of his arguments regarding "It doesn't matter that you burst harder because you don't click fast enough so you have extra ticks".
Now if you look at the breakeven points then look back at your full burst, most of the time on the left half of the graph, you will actually end up killing the enemy.
Another one of his "arguments": when Void Staff is better you 100-0 the enemy anyway so all those cases don't count.
Except he says absolutely nothing about the inane cases that work for his opinion, like the 3000 HP 40 MR that obviously works better for Liandry's. It almost sounds like he biases his article on purpose, which would greatly annoy me for a guy claiming he gets theorycraft requests from pro players.
Let's look at an example - if you land a Lux E, that's the AoE glowy thing that slows and you can detonate after, on a target with 50 MR and 1500 HP currently, you will deal roughly 25% more damage with a Liandry's than a Void Staff. I repeat - 25% more damage. And if they get slowed by someone else for the 3 seconds Liandry's ticks, then that becomes 50% more damage.
Here's where I need proof-reading: I did some maths myself, based on his 22.8 flat, 8% MPen vs 1500 HP + 50 MR setup using Lux's E as damage. My results differ from his so much that I need to be sure I'm doing it right, because either way one of us screwed up heavily.
+ Show Spoiler [My maths] +240 + 0.6 AP against 50 MR + 1500 HP. With a Void Staff (70 AP), we get 282 damage reduced to 263.3.
With Liandry's (50 AP), 270 reduced to 219, then Liandry's ticks for 72 damage getting to 291.
1st tick : 1500 - 219 = 1281; 1% = 12.81 reduced to 10.39 -> 1270.
2nd tick : 1270 -> 10.31 -> 1260.
3rd tick : 1260 -> 10.22 -> 1250.
4th tick : 1250 -> 10.14 -> 1240.
5th tick : 1240 -> 10.06 -> 1230
6th tick : 1230 -> 9.98 -> 1220 (1219.86).
-> ~61 more damage.
I then realized Diff probably talked about 1500 HP when Liandry's starts ticking, so I redid the maths and ended with around 72 more damage.
The 61 more damage case gives 280 damage total, meaning ~6% more damage for Liandry's, the 72 more damage case results in 291 total damage meaning ~10.5% over Void Staff. I calculated the "slowed for 3 seconds" case assuming 1500 HP before the spell and it went from 61 damage to 120, meaning 339 total damage from Lux's E and a 28.7% damage increase over the Void Staff case.
Not that those numbers are insignificant (6% wouldn't be much but 10.5% is relatively high), but... Diff got 25% when I get at most 10.5%, and 50% when I get what I assume would be ~40-45% at most.
Finally:
I experimented with various values and realised that your current AP actually does not result in a significant difference in damage when comparing Liandry's to Void so I could eliminate that variable and purely use the values of Liandry's AP and Void Staff's AP to calculate the damage differences.
I calculated that with a 0.6 AP ratio you get around 8-9% of your AP more damage (post-mitigation) with a Void Staff compared to Liandry's, and it improves as the ratio raises (Void Staff doing up to 13% of your AP more damage (post-mitigation again) on a 0.9 AP ratio spell against 150 MR targets), that's
far from non-significant, dammit. With 300 additional AP (deathcap+masteries+almost any AP item on top of your Liandry's or Void Staff) that's ~30 more damage when your spells do 280-330 damage to your high MR targets, that's like 10 fucking % additional damage and he calls that "not significant" before gloating over Liandry's 10% "increase".