Yup.  Imagine what happens when we don't win 100% of the games we play together. 

Karl - I don't think we are going to cover any new information here and neither of us appear all that interested in listening to the other. 

Are you playing her much on SR or are you mostly doing Dom games now, bryff?  I'm actually a bit surprised that she would be a good pick on dom. 

Back to my exciting ash crit rune jibber jabber - so, the crit dmg % is actually 38% + 5% from masteries - so a total of 43% additional crit dmg.  The rune page setup I'm using is 38% crit dmg + 13 armor.  The lack of scaling MR was actually a bit of a bitch in 1 game.  I was hit with an ez ult that normally would not have killed me and I thought I would be safe, but it hit like more of a truck without those scaling mr runes... so, another fall back to running the crit dmg setup.  Now, if I substitute the crit blues for scaling mr, I end up with 33% crit dmg, 13 arm, 24 mr at level 18.  That seems to make decent sense, but I'm not sure yet.  It's only a loss of 5% crit dmg.  so (skipping armor mitigation and including the 5% from masteries), if I do 200 base damage, with no crit runes, I'd do 600 dmg.  With 38% crit, I'd do 676.  With 43%, I'd do 686.  Based on that, its likely better to sub in the scaling mr.  300 dmg w/ 38% crit = 1014 dmg.  300 dmg w/43% = 1029.  So, not a big enough difference to justify...

Now... some math with ie.  This gives me 250% crit dmg + whatever crit dmg additions.  So, 200 dmg + 255% crit (no runes - just masteries) = 710 dmg.  200 dmg + 288% crit = 776.  200 dmg + 293% crit = 786. 

Last set - 300 dmg + 255% crit = 1065.  300 dmg + 288% crit = 1164.  300 dmg + 293% =  1179. 

Conclusion - the dmg % gain at having blues as crit runes is not exceedingly worth it.  If I had 100% crit rate and 100% armor pen, I'd only be doing an extra 10 or so dmg per hit.  While scaling mr might actually have a real impact on keeping me alive..

OK... so I continue my exciting analysis.  What if I used just crit dmg % reds and built everyone else normal style - eg yellow arm, scaling mr blue, ad quints, and red crit dmg %.  This results in a 20% crit dmg increase (+5% for masteries, so 25%).  So, at 200 dmg with no crit bonus, I'd do 600 dmg.  At 200 dmg w/ 25% crit bonus, I'd do 650.  with 38%, it was 676, and 43% it was 686. 

And the 300 dmg output deal with no ie - 0% crit = 900 dmg.  25% = 975; 38%= 1014, 43% = 1029.  So, the difference here between 20% and 38% is 54 dmg.  Nothing insanely substantial.  300 dmg + ie and 25% bonus = 1125

2nd conclusion - The crit dmg difference becomes much more apparent once IE is factored in.  with ie, no crit runes, and 300 dmg, thats 1065 per crit.  With the max based on my setup, I'd have done 300 dmg + 293% crit, its 1179.  A gain of 114 dmg per crit. 

All of this points me to another thought which seems pretty obvious, but crit damage is incredibly strong.  I'd normally be hitting for 300 dmg a shot.  1 crit and I could instantly do 1179 to character that typically has around 2300 hp.  A high crit rate with that level of dmg output is sick.

All that jibba jabber aside, I think I'm going to swap in blue scaling mr.  25% crit rate still seems like it might be acceptable, but not sure. 

Current setup after math = 33% crit dmg, 24 mr at 18, + 13 armr

@crit runes:

Are you sure those numbers are correct?

Let me math this out for you:

+33% Crit damage versus 15 AD (pure crit reds + quints versus pure AD reds + quints) 

Base Case (no runes at all):

300 damage + 255% crit == 765 (it is 300 * 2.55, not 300 * 3.55)

Crit Runes:

300 damage + 288% crit == 864 (~100 damage gained per crit)

AD Runes:

315 damage + 255% crit == 803 (~38 damage per crit, +15 damage per normal)

At this (rather arbitrary) damage point, if you have a crit chance of > 25%, you'll do more damage (4 normals @+15 ~= 1 crit @+60). 

Here is your more basic formula for the average base damage of an autoattack (so we are ignoring ArP, AS, etc) - and frenzy

Base AD + (Base AD * (2 + (crit damage)) * crit %)

For example, 100 base AD with a 10% chance to crit and only the crit mastery:

100 + (100 * 2.05 * 0.10) == 120.5 average

DPS gained from crit runes 

ad + (ad * (2.05 + 0.33) * crit %) w/o IE -> ad (2.38 * crit % + 1) if you simplify

ad + (ad * (2.55 + 0.33) * crit %) w/ IE

DPS gained from AD runes 

(ad + 15) + ( (ad+15) * (2.05) * crit %) w/o IE

(ad + 15) + ( (ad+15) * (2.55) * crit %) w/ IE

Break even point (0 <= y <= 1) - assuming no auto-crit for your first autoattack

x ( 2.38y + 1) == (x+15)(2.05y + 1)

x ( 2.88y + 1) == (x+15)(2.55y + 1)

Your item thresholds:

63 (+15 for runes) - level 1, Dorans, +3 AD mastery

76.4 (+15 for runes) - level 6, Dorans, +3 AD

135.7 (+15 for runes) - level 11, Dorans, BFS, Zeal/PD, +3 AD mastery

175 (+15 for runes) - level 16, Dorans, IE, PD, +3 AD mastery

221 (+15 for runes) - level 18, Dorans, IE, PD, LW, +3 AD mastery

236 (+15 for runes) - level 18, IE, PD, LW, BotRK, +3 AD mastery

Other stuff:

AD buff from Sona (+4 - +20)

AD buff from Baron (+40 @ 18)

AD buff from Red Pot (+15)

Before IE:

If you solve for the inequality (so that crit runes are better than AD) - again, assuming no auto-crit for your first autoattack:

1- it is always worse at AD levels lower than 138 (even with 100% crit rate)

2- After 138 AD, the amount of crit you need to break even starts dropping very quickly, then rounds off

    @150 you "only" need 80% crit

    @175 you only need 55% crit

    @200 you only need 42% crit

    @250 you only need 30% crit

After IE:

1- it is always worse at AD levels lower than 161 (even with 100% crit rate)

2- After 161 AD, the amount of crit you need to break even starts dropping very quickly, then rounds off

    @175 you "only" need 77% crit

    @200 you only need 54% crit

    @250 you only need 34% crit

That said, everyone knows AD runes fall off, they are for last hitting. If you want scaling runes, you go ArP - and not going to do that calculation because that is freaking hard. So it isn't a surprise that crit % outscale AD. 

Now what about the first auto-crit? This makes the formula somewhat more complicated:

x*(critdamage) + (number of shots)*(old formula) 

Before IE:

1- It is always worse at AD levels lower than 93 (2.38x > 2.05(x+15))

2- After 93 AD, it is always better with 1 shot.

3- How about multiple shots?

General rules (since this is a complex multi-variate and difficult to see trends):

   less shots -> favors crit since the upfront burst is higher and the flat AD has to "catch up" with non-crits 

   more AD -> favors crit, since the initial crit is larger and adding 15 to 200 is less significant than adding 15 to 100.

   more crit -> favors crit (obviously), since more crit -> more crit damage

   2 shots:

      @100: Always worse

      @150: Always better

      @200: Always better

   3 shots:

      @100: Always worse

      @150: must have 30% crit (kind of random though because 2 shots with 33% crit can still not-crit then you're behind)

      @200: Always better

   5 shots:

      @100: Always worse

      @150: must have 55% crit (less random because with 4 shots and 55% crit you'll probably crit twice)

      @200: must have 18% crit

  10 shots:

      @100: Always worse

      @150: must have 69% crit 

      @200: must have 31% crit

After IE:

1- It is always worse at AD levels lower than 116 (2.88x > 2.55(x+15))

2- After 116 AD, it is always better with 1 shot

3- How about multiple shots?

   2 shots:

      @150: must have 33% crit

      @200: Always better

      @250: Always better

   3 shots:

      @150: must have 83% crit

      @200: must have 4% crit

      @250: Always better

   5 shots:

      @150: Always worse

      @200: must have 29% crit

      @250: must have 9% crit

  10 shots:

      @150: Always worse

      @200: must have 43% crit

      @250: must have 23% crit

Evaluation:

Though, predictably, they scale better than AD reds, your midgame is very badly hurt if you don't rush IE first, and your level 1 is not as good as you think it is. 

Also, IE + PD/SS completely neglects LS, and you have no LS in your quints. So if you do have a bad trade...

fug it - i did the test - here's the ss.  I ran support runes/masteries, so no crit bonus of any sort.  My base dmg is 59.  So, if its just a flat 100% bonus, then I'd expect to see 118 dmg.  If its 200%, then I'd expect to see 59+59+59 = 177.  Both numbers would be a little lower due to armor mitigation.  For instance, my build takes 22% less dmg from aa.... hmm...

actually smeh.... I did 105 dmg on a creep taking 11% less dmg.  That number backs up the flat 100% dmg bonus... not sure how I got mixed up. 

anyway, proper math is, AFAIK (base dmg x 100% crit).  So, you'd just dbl your base normally (50 + 50 = 100 dmg).  Working formula is (base dmg x (100% base crit + bonus crit dmg %)) + base dmg. 

though you should totally try out Sword of the Divine. Zeal > IE > SotD. Might work with your build. 4 crits all in a row.

And Volley lets you keep up your DPS a bit more.

reading over your math after determining the proper crit dmg formula.

Well, I don't think that my level 1 (outside of level 1 teamfight, mind you) is really all that amazing.  An ash running to try to land that guaranteed crit is usually pretty easy to dodge at the start of laning.  And if you are on blue side, well, you are likely at a very low crit rate after doing dbl golums, so no guaranteed bonus damage.  Mid/Late game, imo, is where her passive currently shines.  Eg I have a base crit chance of 55% or so, that quickly rises to 100%.  Or I'm guaranteed to return to lane with 100% crit chance.  That said, I oddly find it fairly easy to last hit with her on this setup. 

I'm still sticking with completing pd or perhaps ss and then going for ie.   I actually think the lower damage is just fine with the kiting potential being there... and the higher mobility from boots of swiftness + pd/ss.  You might be spot on and that I should just get the zeal + boots and rush IE at that point.  Once that IE is finished, I'm pretty well melting the enemy adc.  Prior to ie, my burst damage is a complete joke and its just about kiting and sustained dmg.  Nice if I hit a crit, ofc, but not terrifying unless I hit like 2-3 crits in a row.  I think the build really shines at mid game where I can kite and completely out damage the enemy. 

Anyway, even with ashe, crit rune dmg is rot early and then very strong mid and late.  Another thought - there's only 1 item that you can buy that increases crit dmg.  But there are a few options for increasing armor pen.  As long as you are going an adc that will be working on crit chance and sustained ad, it still seems semi viable. 

I've been getting botrk as a last item and tossing a vamp scepter into my build as needed.  Not having lifesteal until late is a problem with the build, but I'm always picking up a few red pots when I shop for sustain to handle any bad trade. Also of note, even on a bad trade, I'm still effectively trading most of the time due to the slows/kiting. 

I think I will do this.  I'll prob try in a bot match to get a feel for the activation of sotd. 

regarding the new Hunter's Machete (since everyone seems to think it is a nerf???)

They are changing the 10 true damage on autoattack to 10 magic damage.

This is a buff, not a nerf. True damage is not affected by % damage increases (Havoc, Executioner). Magic damage is. So the +10% damage passive on Machete will also apply to that 10 magic damage.

In addition, jungle monsters don't have MR, and some actually have negative MR. 

So they are increasing it to like 11-12 magic damage per auto.

The only time it is a "nerf" is against epic monsters like Dragon and Baron who actually have MR. Which is mostly irrelevant because you should have more than a Machete by then.

And, they also may be trying to nerf level 3/4 dragons by Nasus/Vi/Nunu by making the machete do a little less damage anyway.

HP5 quints are better for Irelia 

AD is probably better for marks.

AS is obviously going to be more damage assuming you get to stand on people and autoattack them (and Irelia does this better than other champs). But AD is still better burst and helps you with Bladesurge last-hitting.

lol what?

photoshop. 

Congrats!  Can't seem to find my deathcap for cutie pie pic atm. 

So... make with the basic blahblah?  Did it take forever to go from gold 1 to plat?  low lp?  etc?

Promo Series/Gold I:

i won my promo into Gold I on Friday, so i got into Plat pretty quick. i really didn't have much clamping (my first 2 wins got me to 52 LP). i got into my first promo Saturday night, lost it, got back into Promo Sunday, then completed promo last night.

My LP gains were all in the mid 20s, except the last 3 wins on Saturday to get into my promo which were +15, +6, +7. Luckily i was only losing 5 - 7 LP a loss.

i went like 7W/2L Friday/Saturday so it wasn't too much of a struggle in terms of number of games played. That said, my games aren't exactly super easy. One of my games had 3 diamonds and 2 plats on the enemy team. Luckily, 2 of the Diamonds were awful. About 1/3rd of my games i was the only gold on both teams. This is probably what contributed to my fast-climb.

Climbing Gold:

My most difficult tier was getting into Gold I (it took 3 promos because i had a 4v5 disconnect every promo series on my way up). From Gold V to II i was gaining mostly +30-35, -12-15 LP a game so most my matches were promos.

The most frustrating tier to play in was definitely Gold I. People ARE REALLY REALLY ANGRY.

People will start a new game on-tilt, and whine about the previous game and start blaming people before the game starts. People get really pissed if you make any mistakes and it is generally pretty aggravating. Plats on the other team will talk in /all "stay in gold noobs" which makes sparks fly. The pressure in general really puts people off, and everyone thinks they are already plat and you are the noob taking their plat away.

i think the only tier that was like this was Silver II (Silver I wasn't so bad). Everyone there thinks they are tough shit and deserve to be gold and will AFK if you don't do what they want.

Observations:

ADCs get significantly better starting Gold III then at lower levels. Although the occasional weak ADC does show up, nearly every game you see high CS numbers and generally good farming ability and lane positioning. Though they are total douchebags, supporting usually isn't a "waste of talent".

Splitpushing is executed way better starting Gold II. i've won several games with pure split push - though sometimes people get really impatient and scream OMG LETS GROUP even when we'd lose teamfights. Tops that are merciless splitpushers are better team assets.

That said, people don't use Shen very well in my expierence (i went 7-0 against him in Gold). In Silver, Shen's sustain + shield makes him a brick in lane, but Gold seems better about punishing him early and preventing his teleports.

People actually call support a lot. Mid generally has 2-3 people wanting to play it (as normal).

Invasions are much more common, in particular double-golem invades (always explorer ward tri).

Assassins are OP in Silver and the best way to climb to Gold (though i used TF). Tanks are OP in Gold (Sej/Naut/Hec are permabanned 4 lyfe). 

Even though people usually are stronger in lane, their teamfights are not always great and people misposition a lot and get caught. Baron is still a giant noob trap.

My game plan:

Most people generally agree that playing your best champ/role is the best way to climb. The problem is mid is a (very) popular lane, so it's difficult to get it more than 40% of the time. From what i've seen the least popular roles are Support, Jungle, ADC.

Obviously, If you're playing champs that are frequently banned or contested picks, that reduces how often you can play them. The exception to this is if you've been playing someone for awhile and then they became ban-worthy. 

So, my opinion is you should be playing T1.5 champs - the ones that are just barely unpopular enough that they aren't banned or picked very often but are still really strong. These champs are also sometimes really high skill cap champs (TF is pretty hard at higher Elos - he's ez pz at Silver because no one reacts). 

But don't play "sleeper OP" champs that might be really strong but are so hipster that people don't know how to play with them. For example, Nami or Viktor. 

Playing champs that are generally considered to be weak tend to lower team morale unless you have an awesome skin.

In Silver, my champs were Nocturne and TF. 

Anyway, so i decided to play Anivia and Sona thru Gold.

Sona is super OP, everyone knows how to play with her, she wins lanes, and carries the shit out of everything. Never banned. (Though i stalled out with her in Gold I and think i 0-3'd with her - switched to Leona). 

Anivia is super strong midgame, people know what she does, farms well, awesome teamfight and sieging. Never banned, never picked.

Alternates were Leona/Volibear/Renekton. All simple characters that are strong, since top in particular is a weak lane for me.

Supporting is fine after Gold III in particular. Just need to actually practice the role and be good with it. If supporting is your 2nd best role, you can play either your 1st or 2nd best roles like 80% of the time. 

Mark it on your calendar folks... I shall be returning to regular people hours and League universe on June 1st.  Hope to see y'all then.

you should see his platinum ults.  huehuehue

I enjoyed myself yelling platinum ult every time hedgie ulted I'll have you know.