Originally Posted by ricklessabandon
so, look, you're just repeating stuff you're heard before because you saw the words "crit damage" without actually thinking about what's being asked here. the op never asked about armor penetration.
the question being asked was whether crit.ch or crit.dam is better. i actually answered the question properly and thoroughly. you ignored it.
and if you really want to get into which runes are better, then it depends on your team, your champion, and your item build. if you isolate runes from everything else, then armor penetration > crit.ch > crit.dam as you've said. however, there is a point at which armor penetration runes do nothing. there is a point at which crit.ch runes do nothing. there isn't a point at which crit.dam runes do nothing. also, there are very limited ways to get crit.dam as a stat. if you plan on hitting the effective caps for armor penetration and crit.ch, then crit.dam runes are the way to go. this is a very specialized edge case (namely a hard carry trynd or critplank on a team with rammus, nasus, corki, taric, karthus, black cleavers, etc), but it does exist.
if the op was asking which marks are best to get for physical dps, then the correct answer would be:
armor penetration in almost every case.
crit.ch in very specific cases.
crit.dam in the rarest of cases, worth mentioning only for understanding how damage works.
I'm not repeating some random stuff that I've read somewhere; I'm repeating stuff I've WRITTEN before. Don't accuse me of being some random forum idiot who just spews back stuff they've read elsewhere. I've done the math, I've made the excel charts, I've tested mechanics in game, I know what I'm talking about. Look up some of the old crit chance vs. crit damage vs. armor pen threads; I helped contribute with many of those.
The OP (who hasnít returned btw) asked a general question about crit chance and crit damage runes, presumably to maximize a champions physical dps, others brought up that armor pen runes (which you just agreed are better in almost every case) are better than both. I joined the discussion and expanded on why they are better, more specifically why they are better than crit damage runes. You didnít understand (and still donít?) that crit damage runes are actually less effective with IEís passive, so I tried to explain why.
Crit damage runes may do more damage in that fringe case of extremely late game with 100% crit chance and enemies with zero/subzero armor, but how did you get to extreme late game with runes that do absolutely nothing until you get there? Even in this far-fetched case, I would still rather have armor pen or crit chance runes. Runes are much better at giving you an early game advantage than late game dominance. Remember, this game snowballs very quickly.
Originally Posted by ricklessabandon
also, it's pretty satisfying to be so much more right than others that they have to resort to downvoting. you can't argue math when done correctly, kids
Wow, way to inflate your ego.
What math? Iíve done the math, I didnít see you do any number crunching.
Protip, the way to win an argument is not by blatantly stating your inflated sense of superiority.
It appears though, that even after this heated debate, it appears that we both agree that armor pen runes are the runes of choice for physical dps characters (with a few exceptions)
The only place I think you were really incorrect was thinking that IE's passive does not affect the strength of crit damage runes, because it does.
I think its time to let this thread die, nothing has been brought up that hasn't been mentioned in other threads on this topic.