Aurora Mid 14.24

About Damage Comparison

• Highest Damage Value highlighted with pink
• Everything tested with Sorcerers Shoes
• Runes that don't deal damage, except Minor Runes (AS + Adaptive Force), as it wouldn't have altered the results by much and only would have made testing more difficult
• Everything tested with AP and level values representative of a real game scenario each other
• Tested on 2 Dummies as Main Target + 1 additional Dummy that get hits by R - Noted Damage Value is average of the 2 Main Dummies
• If you were to hit only 1 Person in each scenario damage values would be nominally change: lower for BFT, especially in late game; higher for LC (unrealisitc however because you already proc LC with R normally; no change for ML
• Dummies at 50 MR/Armor for everything, except Full Build Test (60 MR/Armor)
• No Items that alter Damage Values in a non linear way (e.g. Stormsurge, Shadowflame)
• Cannot account for AH or MS
• Can also not account for the Items mentioned prior (would probably just widen the already existent nominal gap between the items, and either not much or not at all alter the relative position or relative gap of Damage Numbers.
• Cannot account for enemies moving out of ML Field
• For BFT: did not recast Q, waited for automatic recast for prolonged Burn

General Trends in Test Enviroment

• Full Combo: ML always best
• Full Combo (+additional QE): BFT best, only overtaken by LC at exactly 2 Items
• QE: BFT best, only overtaken by LC at exactly 2 Items
• LC: only winning in rare scenarios - exactly 2 Items OR Single Target R + 2 QE Rotations even then not by much
• ML: best if only Full Combo with no additional QE Rotation
• BFT: best in every other scenario

When to build what

• Blackfire Torch: IF, More than just Full Combo (R-Q1-E-Q2) => Build if, prolonged fights for any reason (e.g. Tanks, not a specific target to burst) or assuming you want to target backline - you'd need more than Full Combo to kill Backline, even with ML
• Malignance: EITHER for Full Combo with no additonal casts + enemy can't instantly leave burn field (counterexample: Ezreal, Ahri etc.) OR want R CD for frequent Roams/Scirmishes => Build if, only task is to OS Backline with one Full Combo OR you value R CD for frequent Roams/Scirmishes
• Ludens Companion: never - very unrealistic that LC applies on backline instead of frontline

Theory about Winrate on Stat Sites

• Malignance WR is always skewed downwards because of common Liandries (LT) 2nd (ML+LT low WR because, ML is followed by LT 50% of the time, which implies that it's not just built vs. tanks, which it should be - wrong 2nd Items choice => low WR)
  • If LT WR is not included ML matches LC WR
• ML WR in not higher than LC, as better Aurora players tend to build LC (is implied by Item Pick Rates and too commonly built LT), which skews the LC WR upwards.
• BFT WR may not match the actual value of the item because either one or all of the following apply:
  • Players are building BFT in the wrong scenarios
  • Players aren't adapting the combos and playstyle to the item
  • The champion was not made for melting frontline (which is the only scenario in which most people would even consider BFT), which also can be seen by looking at 2nd Item WR, assuming BFT is built first - Low LT WR, high Stormsurge and Shadowflame WR

"The results are skewed towards BFT because of testing Damage on 2 dummies instead of 1."

• That is correct. My test increased the Damage of BFT, however not by much.
• I tested it again and - for example with only BFT+Boots my QE would deal 4 Damage less if I were to only hit one dummy.
• The results are skewed, but the test favors LC way more than BFT (see my next response).

"LC is better for Laning and Poke than ML."

• That is correct. However, in regards to laning value, the comparison was never between LC and ML, As my previous test results already indicated that LC was better for Damage if you did not account for R.
• The comparison one would have to make instead would be LC and BFT.
• In my previous tests BFT slightly outdamaged LC for QE (and that was in a testing environment heavily favored for LC, as explained in General Clarifications/Revisions).
• In my updated tests BFT far surpasses LC in every regard.
• Best Case realistic Laning Scenario, without mind-controlling the enemy (explained in General Clarifications/Revisions below) conclusions:
  • For Laning: BFT > LC > ML

"Aurora is supposed to be played by poking with QE and then all-ining with R after they are low enough, therefore the Full Combo damage values should be less accounted for in determining the value of LC."

• Most was already said in the previous point.
• I just wanted to mention that BFT gives you way more poke than LC. Additionally, it gives you more Ability Haste, which also increases the amount of times you can All-In.
• If we agree, that this is how Aurora should be played, BFT is better than LC.

"It is unrealistic that the enemy stays in the ML Field for the whole 3 seconds."

• ML doesn't apply for the full 3 seconds - that is correct, as I acknowledged that this was a weakness of my test environment.
• The comparison between ML and LC only makes sense in a scenario where you Full Combo without any additional spell rotations, in any other instance BFT would be better than ML/LC. So that's the only scenario I'm going to look at:
  • In a realistic teamfight scenario LC applies only on the frontline, which is typically not the target you'd want to burst.
  • ML always applies to the target you want to burst (even if only in part), whereas LC only applies in niche scenarios.
  • My conclusion is that in a realistic fight ML outvalues LC in most scenarios.

"LC looks worse than it actually is because I did not build PEN items (Stormsurge, Shadowflame)."

• As I already said in my Guide: Pen only increases the nominal Gap between items, not the relative gap.
• Shadowflame: Same thing here, as it's a percentual Damage Increase.
• Stormsurge: 2 More Damage with LC, compared to BFT.

"One of the values of LC is, that you have more burst - therefore you can get out more quickly after One-Shotting the enemy carry and get your W reset."

• I don't understand. BFT and/or ML have more damage in every scenario, even if over time.
• DPS is not a valuable metric /something one should value if the enemy doesn't have something to counter your Combo that relies on reacting to the Damage (shields, Zhonyas etc.). And even that relies on the assumption that your enemy is bad enough to not be able to just react to just your QEQ.

General Clarifications/Revisions:

New Damage Test:

• Only tested QE in early Game as the main criticism of many was, that the main strength of LC (which I supposedly misrepresented) lied in laning and poke.
• MR Values:
  • 40 for 1st Item only.
  • 50 for 1st Item + 85 AP.
• Only damaged 1 Dummy in BFT test.
• Ludens - QE Test:
  • Hit 1 Dummy first and apply LC.
  • LC bounces on 2 additional Dummies and also the enemy champ.
    • The additional Dummies represent minions in a normal game.
• Damage Notation explained: Amount of Damage in single Dummy Test [Amount of Damage in realistic laning scenario].

Conclusions/further thoughts from additional testing:

• LC is even worse than I initially thought and should never be built.
• For Laning QE: BFT > LC > ML.
• For isolated QE (again - highly unrealistic): LC > BFT > ML.
• One Rotation Full Combo (realistic): ML >> BFT >> LC.